Electronic Monitoring Around the World

Since its operational beginnings in the United States in 1982—where its prototypes were first experimented with in the 1960s and 1970s—the electronic monitoring (EM) of offenders has spread to approximately 40 countries around the world, ostensibly—but not often effectively—to reduce the use of imprisonment by making bail, community supervision, and release from prison more controlling than they have hitherto been. No single authority monitors the development of EM around the world, and it is difficult to gain fully comprehensive accounts of what is happening outside the Western and Anglophone users of it. Some countries are secretive. Standpoints in writing on EM are varied and partisan. Although it still tends to be the pacesetter of technical innovation, the United States remains a relatively lower user of EM, in part because the exceptional punitiveness of its penal culture has inhibited its expansion, even when it has itself been developed in various punitive ways. Interprofessional and intergovernmental processes of “policy transfer” have contributed to EMs spreading around the world, but the commercial bodies that manufacture and market EM equipment have been of at least equal importance. In Europe, the Confederation of European Probation (CEP), a transnational probation advocacy organization, took an early interest in EM, and its regular conferences became a touchstone of international debate. As it developed globally, the United Nations reluctantly accepted that it may be of some value even in developing countries and set out standards for its use. Continuing innovations in EM technology will create new possibilities for offender supervision, both more and less punitive, but it is always culture, commerce, and politics in particular jurisdictions which shape the scale, pace, and form of its development.

THROUGH OFFENDERS’ EYES: A PILOT STUDY ON EXPERIENCING SUPERVISION IN SERBIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Probation and parole are intended as alternatives to incarceration for eligible offenders. In various European jurisdictions research studies indicated the importance of the offenders’ perspective in supervision; however, the contribution of this factor is still unclear and underexplored. In the present study, we explored the offenders’ experience of the supervision process, based upon the experience of 22 convicts. To understand the offenders’ experience, we used the newly constructed tool, Eurobarometer, which measures eight core domains of offender supervision. The pilot study was conducted in Belgrade and was a part of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology initiative (COST) which was implemented in eight European jurisdictions. Results confirmed that the offenders’ perception of supervision can be significant in various domains of offenders’ life and that Eurobarometer can be significant in capturing that experience.

Improving the Wellbeing of Female Prisoners via Psychological Skills Training: A Feasibility Study

Prisoners display significantly higher rates of mental disorders and lower mental wellbeing than the general population. The integration of positive psychological interventions in offender supervision has received recent advocacy. The aim of the current pre-post pilot study was to determine the short-term effects of group-based resilience training on mental health outcomes for female offenders and explore intervention acceptability. Offenders ( n = 24) self-selected to partake in a multi-component psychological skill program based on positive psychology, cognitive–behavioural therapy, and mindfulness-based activities. The training was taught in nine sessions of 1.5 hr each. Baseline and follow-up measurements of mental wellbeing and psychological distress were collected and focus groups conducted to investigate participants’ experiences, acceptability, and appropriateness of the training. Moderate to large effect sizes indicating significant improvements were observed for wellbeing, g = 0.75 and distress, g = 0.56. Training was well received by participants and staff and was delivered feasibly within the prison context. The results are encouraging, and a future well-powered study using a rigorous controlled design is warranted.

The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA)

CSOSA is the agency that supervises residents on probation and parole in the District of Columbia. In 2017, it supervised 16,407 District residents. In that year, 90% of CSOSA's clients' technical violations came from drug use and drug testing violations, and these technical violations caused 10% of the agency's revocation to incarceration in 2017. CSOSA sanctions its clients by sending them to day reporting center and CSOSA performs home visits (an astounding 45,124 in 2017). Yet, to date, there is scant evidence showing any relationship between sanctions, or day reporting centers, or home visits and recidivism and public safety. It's true, there is no agreement among social scientists as to the number of studies needed to confirm that an intervention “works.” However, to date, none of the methods used by CSOSA have been shown to “work.”

Supervision Strategies and Their Correlates: An Empirical Study of Chinese Community Correctional Staff

While there are different approaches to dealing with offenders sentenced to community corrections, the three major ones are law enforcement (surveillance), therapeutic (rehabilitation), and crime opportunity prevention. Using the study of U.S. community corrections staff by Miller as a guide, the current study examined the supervision strategy used by Chinese community corrections staff in the Hubei province of China. Chinese community corrections staff were more likely to use the therapeutic and crime opportunity prevention approaches than the law enforcement model. Predictors of each of the three offender supervision approaches differed. The results from Chinese staff were similar in many ways to that found among U.S. staff reported by Miller but differed in some areas.

Sex Offender Supervision: Communication, Training, and Mutual Respect Are Necessary for Effective Collaboration Between Probation Officers and Therapists

Developed with the goal of preventing recidivism, contemporary sex offender supervision models focus on collaboration between probation officers and therapists. This exploratory study used focus groups to examine the working relationships between probation officers and therapists from two large U.S. urban probation departments. Overall, both probation officers and therapists were quite positive about their working relationships; they valued each others’ roles and agreed that regular, accurate, and timely communication occurred frequently. Not all relationships, however, were effective. Several probation officers and therapists expressed dissatisfaction with poor communication, conflicts between the goals of therapy and probation, a lack of resources, and deficits in the policies they needed to adequately implement components of their supervision model (the containment model). Our findings suggest ways to structure sexual offender supervision that integrate the distinct orientations of probation officers and therapists into a collaboration that promotes public safety and work well for all.

Experiencing offender supervision in Europe

The purpose of this paper is to describe and evaluate, as a potential research template, a pan-European quantitative survey, the Eurobarometer on Experiencing Supervision (EES). The tool was developed and tested across eight jurisdictions in order to evaluate its accuracy and utility with regard to comparative research. In addition, the paper illustrates the type of data this tool can generate and how this data can be used to improve supervision practices around the world. In brief, EES covers eight core domains of supervision: supervision as a human service, offender’s perception regarding the supervisor, the relationship between the offender and the supervisor, supervision and practical help, supervision and compliance, breach practice, supervision and rehabilitation and the offender’s involvement and participation. Overall, the tool is considered useful and promising. However, further research is required in order to demonstrate its full potential.