THE TASKS OF A PROBATION OFFICER RELATED TO THE MONITORING OF PERFORMANCE OF PROBATIONAL OBLIGATIONS DURING THE TRIAL PERIOD IN “O” CASES

The tasks of the probation officer who execute judgments in criminal matters, resulting from the Executive Penal Code, include, inter alia, control of the execution by the convict of probation duties imposed by a court judgment. Their aim is to educate and prevent the return to crime. In connection with the supervision of the performance of duties during the trial period without adjudicated supervision, probation officers have a number of tasks that are discussed in this article. It also addresses issues raised by probation officers in the scope in which the implementing provisions do not directly specify the obligations of this professional group.

COUNTERACTING MOBBING IN THE PROBATION SERVICE

This article discusses the issues related to the possible causes of mobbing in the professional group of probation officers and the issues of tasks and activities of the probation officer employer in situations related to the phenomenon of mobbing in the probation officer service. Due to the special position of probation in the administration of justice, the author focuses on the tasks of presidents of regional and district courts aimed at counteracting the phenomenon of mobbing. It refers to activities that seem advisable in the event of the initiation of appropriate proceedings and remedial actions in the event of confirmation of mobbing. The issue of mobbing in the probation service has not been covered by a broader analysis so far. The aim of this study was to indicate the tasks incumbent on the presidents of courts as persons performing the tasks of the employer towards the probation officer, related to counteracting the phenomenon of mobbing. It cannot be ruled out that the variety and specificity of tasks entrusted to probation officers, the nature of these tasks and the structure of the location of this group in the structure of the judiciary may cause doubts as to the implementation of tasks related to counteracting mobbing.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Positive Family Holistic Health Intervention for Probationers in Hong Kong: A Mixed-Method Study

Introduction: Probationers, offenders with less serious and non-violent offences, and under statutory supervision, have low levels of self-esteem and physical health, and high level of family conflict, and poorer quality of family relationships. This study examined the effectiveness of the existing probation service and the additional use of a positive family holistic health intervention to enhance physical, psychological, and family well-being in probationers and relationships with probation officers.Methods: Probationers under the care of the Hong Kong Social Welfare Department were randomized into a care-as-usual control group (CAU), a brief intervention group (BI) receiving two 1-h individual sessions [of a brief theory-based positive family holistic health intervention integrating Zero-time Exercise (simple and easy-to-do lifestyle-integrated physical activity) and positive psychology themes of “Praise and Gratitude” in the existing probation service], or a combined intervention group (CI) receiving BI and a 1-day group activity with family members. The outcomes were physical activity, fitness performance, self-esteem, happiness, anxiety and depression symptoms, life satisfaction, quality of life, family communication and well-being, and relationships with probation officers. Self-administered questionnaires and simple fitness tests were used at baseline, 1-month and 3-month follow-up. Linear mixed model analysis was used to compare difference in the changes of outcome variables among groups, adjusted of sex, age, and baseline values. Focus group interviews were conducted. Thematic content analysis was used.Results: 318 probationers (51% male) were randomized into CAU (n = 105), BI (n = 108), or CI (n = 105) group. CAU showed enhanced physical activity, fitness performance and psychological health, and family communication with small effect sizes (Cohen’s d: 0.19–0.41). BI and CI showed further improved physical activity, family communication and family well-being (Cohen’s d: 0.37–0.70). Additionally, CI reported greater improvements in the relationships with probation officers than CAU with a small effect size (Cohen’s d: 0.43). CI also reported greater increases in physical activity and family communication than BI with small to moderate effect sizes (Cohen’s d: 0.38–0.58). Qualitative feedbacks corroborated the quantitative findings.Conclusion: Our trial provided the first evidence of the effectiveness of probation service and the additional use of an innovative, relatively low-cost, theory-based brief positive family holistic health intervention. This intervention may offer a new model for enhancing probation service.Trial Registration: The research protocol was registered at the National Institutes of Health (identifier: NCT02770898).

Imposition of Restitution

Chapter 4 describes seven multimethod studies that look at the imposition of restitution from the state, multi-county, and single-county perspectives and that examine both legally relevant factors (e.g., offense type, prior record) and demographic factors (race, age, gender) in judges’ decisions. Across studies, restitution was more likely to be imposed when damages could be easily estimated and proved (e.g., property crimes) and when the victim was a business. A statewide analysis of sentencing decisions indicated that a law mandating restitution significantly increased the imposition of restitution. A subsequent survey study of judges, prosecutors, and probation officers indicated general support for restitution, and an analysis of statewide county-level sentencing data indicated that contextual factors relating to crime victims were also related to the imposition of restitution. Comparisons of counties with and without specialized collection units suggested that specialized collections units were less effective at collecting economic sanctions.

Economic Sanctions in Criminal Justice

Economic sanctions are court-imposed financial obligations aimed at punishing offenders (fines), funding the government (costs/fees, forfeitures), and compensating victims (restitution). This book examines economic sanctions in the United States, with a focus on the multilevel, multimethod research my students and I conducted in Pennsylvania. The 15 studies described in the book are multiplistic in terms of academic discipline (social psychology, criminology, law), levels of analysis (individual, county, state), actors within the system (victims, offenders, probation officers, district attorneys, judges), type of process involved (imposition, payment, rearrest), and research methods (analyses of state-level computerized archives, coding of county-level paper court and probation records, surveys of individuals, a field-experiment, and follow-up involving probationers). Most of the studies examined the imposition, payment, and effect of paying restitution. Research across methods indicated that offenders are often unable to pay their court-ordered sanctions, that restitution is generally not paid in full, and that both offenders and victims are responsive to procedural justice. Experimental results indicated that randomly assigned probationers delinquent in making payments who received letters informing them of the restitution amounts they owed were more likely to pay restitution and less likely to commit a new crime as compared to randomly assigned delinquent probationers who did not receive letters or who received letters giving them a rationale for payment. Three policy recommendations are made concerning what is fair and effective for victims, offenders, and society: (1) mandating restitution, (2) making fines contingent on ability to pay, and (3) ending the imposition of costs and fees.

Probation Officers, Discretion, and Participatory Management

Probation officers (POs) are perhaps the correctional workers with the greatest reach, since more people are under probation supervision relative to every other correctional branch (i.e., jail, prison, and parole). The individuals under probation supervision and the community-at-large depend on POs to do their job well. However, POs have a job that requires them to make numerous decisions within an organization with conflicting goals and ambiguous roles, often with great discretionary power and little oversight. This relatively autonomous discretionary power often produces racial disparities in probation outcomes, the misuse of evidence-based tools such as risk and needs assessments, and ultimately the inability of probation organizations to effectuate change. These effects have negative consequences for probation organizations, probationers, and POs themselves. Participatory management produces an organizing framework that calls for hierarchical organizations to take a balanced approach to decision-making by increasing information sharing throughout the organizational hierarchy. This organizational structure carries the potential to remedy these aforementioned problems. By increasing oversight and accountability for POs via participatory management, POs’ discretionary power may be managed without limiting decision-making. Participatory management may create additional benefits such as increasing the efficiency of probation organizations, improving client outcomes for probationers, and increasing occupational satisfaction for POs. There are numerous potential threats to participatory management and several solutions for overcoming them. The main solution calls on probation agencies to make participatory management as effective as possible by constructing an equal balance between a loosely and tightly coupled organizational implementation of policies and practices.

How probation officers understand and work with people on community supervision sentences to enhance compliance

This study aimed to explore, describe, and interpret New Zealand probation officers’ insights into supervisees’ non-compliance with community sentences. Seventeen probation officers participated in two focus groups. Probation officers viewed problems with cognitive skills as a key barrier to sentence compliance. They reported that these problems underpinned other factors linked to compliance, such as meeting basic needs and skill acquisition. Probation officers employed a number of social worker oriented evidenced-based strategies, including building high-quality relationships and being flexible, along with modification of sentence requirements to increase supervisee compliance, especially with supervisees who faced considerable obstacles when engaging with a community sentence.

“Yes, I can hear you now …” Online working with probationers in the Netherlands: New opportunities for the working alliance

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, online supervision has increased markedly, including within the Dutch probation services. In the present research, we systematically collected and analysed both clients and probation officers’ experiences of working online in the prior year. Although the clients were generally positive about remote supervision, some expressed that they missed the personal contact. According to most of the probation officers, remote working is flexible (efficient, saves time, travel costs), appropriate for certain phases of the probation process (especially at a later stage when a working alliance has been established) and particularly suitable for probationers with mild problems and low risk profiles. The general experience was that conversations are both more pragmatic and business-like, which, in turn, can produce both strengths and limitations. Once a foundation has been established, it appears to be possible to continue working remotely with clients, albeit the probation officers stressed that this depended on the type of client, type of offence and risk level.

Probationary Services in a Pandemic. Results from an empirical study in Austria

In March 2020 the first lockdown due to COVID-19 was imposed in Austria, forcing NEUSTART, the organisation providing probationary services, to adapt the way of interacting with their clients. An online survey was conducted examining how these changes affected the everyday work of the probation officers. Results indicated that they managed to stay in contact with their clients, although difficulties could be observed concerning specific groups. Further questions concerned areas such as domestic violence, strains due to the restrictions experienced as well as coping strategies used by the clients. Concerning the well-being of the probation officers, differences were found between residents of urban and rural areas respectively as well as between people living with or without children. The lack of personal contact with clients and colleagues proved to be the most important source of discomfort, while at the same time working from home entailed certain advantages.

Out with “Fine Time,” in with Financial Waivers: Recent Developments in Massachusetts Probation Fines and Fees Policies

The criminal justice system routinely imposes financial sanctions on probation clients. These fines, fees, and restitution debts often amount to more than what many clients can reasonably afford to pay. Until recently, Massachusetts courts have incarcerated clients solely for their inability to pay these debts in a practice known as “fine time”. In 2018, the state passed a landmark criminal justice reform bill that restricted the types of cases in which fine time can be ordered. Clients that can establish that payment would lead to financial hardship can now petition the court for a financial waiver accompanied by community service. The current study seeks to explore the implications of the recent reform efforts on probation services by analyzing surveys gathered from a sample of 121 Massachusetts probation officers in 2020. Descriptive findings of officers’ attitudes toward fines and fees, responses to nonpayment by clients, and the use of financial waivers are presented. Officers’ perceptions and practices align with the recent reform efforts, suggesting support among probation personnel for policies that limit punitive responses to nonpayment of legal debts by their supervisees. Possible directions for future research and policy development are discussed.