Electronic supervision for sex offenders: Implications for work load, supervision goals, versatility, and policymaking

Electronic monitoring strategies are being used increasingly for sex offenders across the United States. Despite this increased use, few researchers have considered the broader implications for probation and parole officers when these tools are used. In this study, attention was given to how the use of electronic monitoring for sex offenders is related to supervision goals, work load, the use of other supervision strategies, and state level policies. Findings showed significant differences in several areas. The conclusion focuses on community corrections policy implications.     

Educational Competency as an Indicator of Occupational Stress for Probation and Parole Officers

Probation and parole officers are assigned the responsibility of supervising convicted criminals in a community setting in such a way that the competing goals of punishment, public safety, offender rehabilitation, and deterrence are achieved. All the while, these tasks are accomplished within the confines of shrinking budgets, large case loads, increasingly high-risk offenders, low occupational prestige, and considerable political and public scrutiny. These competing demands often result in especially high levels of work-related stress. The point of this research is to consider the divergence in occupational stress among probation/parole officers and whether or not they felt educationally prepared for their job. The data for this study were collected during a two-month study period which began on March 15, 2005. Data were collected non-randomly through a national Internet based survey of active probation/parole officers. This study considers a sub-sample of 2, 364 officers from fifteen states. The results show probation/parole officers who feel educationally under-prepared are likely to experience higher levels of occupational stress and more likely to have negative manifestations of stress than those officers who feel well-prepared.     

Adultification in Juvenile Corrections: Examining the Orientations of Juvenile and Adult Probation and Parole Officers

Legislative activity, court decisions, and other activities have left open to question how distinct is the juvenile justice system from the criminal justice system. While several scholars have considered adultification of juvenile courts, no study has systematically examined the adultification of juvenile corrections. The present study assesses whether one type of juvenile corrections, probation and parole, has been adultified by comparing the professional orientations of juvenile and adult probation and parole officers. The study finds that juvenile probation and parole officers do differ from adult officers across several dimensions of professional orientation that are critical to the distinctiveness of the juvenile justice system. Specifically, our analyses show that compared to adult probation and parole officers, juvenile officers tend to more strongly adhere to ideals of treatment, welfare, and offender-focused probation and parole supervision.     

Probation Philosophies and Workload Considerations

Researchers have devoted a great deal of attention to understanding the punishment attitudes of different groups. Much of this research has focused on punishment attitudes of members of the public, while a few studies have considered how criminal justice officials perceive different sanctions. This study explores the justifications of probation rated by a sample of probation and parole officers. Attention is given to whether justifications are tied to the way officers rated the importance of different tasks as well as how much time officers reported their agencies devoting to different types of probation and parole activities. The results show some inconsistencies between justifications and work preferences/work activities. Implications are provided.     

Discretionary Justice: Decision Making in a State Juvenile Parole Board

The literature in Criminal Justice is replete with commentary on both the virtues and injustices associated with adult parole board decision-making. There has been far less attention paid to juvenile parole boards in part because so few of them exist. Institutional release decisions in most states still remain the purview of juvenile institutional staff members. This paper examines parole Authority decision-making in a citizen-dominated state juvenile parole board. The paper focuses on the conduct of hearings, dispositional guidelines, criteria used by board members in decision-making and the advocacy role of parole officers and institutional staff. The influence of deinstitutionalization and least restrictive policies on parole Authority decision making is also discussed. During recent years, the literature in criminal justice has become replete with commentary on the virtues and injustices associated with parole board decision-making. Consequently, many questions have been raised about disparate sentences, the criteria used by parole boards in making decisions, unstructured discretion, and the pressing need for guidelines and statistically accurate parole prediction instruments. The intent of this paper is to examine parole decision-making in a state juvenile parole board where individualized treatment and rehabilitation have been long standing goals. The paper focuses upon the criteria used by board members in decision-making, the conduct of hearings, the guideline system used to determine a recommended length of confinement and the advocacy role of parole officers and institutional staff. The influence of deinstitutionalization and least restrictive policies on parole board decision-making is also discussed. The author is presently completing the second year of a two-year appointment as a member of the Parole Authority under discussion. Since December, 1983, the author has continuously observed and participated in approximately 300 individual parole hearings over thirty-seven hearing days.     

A comparison of punishment exchange rates between offenders under supervision and their supervising officers

Previous research revealed gender and racial differences in offender preferences for prison compared to alternative sanctions, in the amount of an alternative sanction offenders would serve to avoid prison, and in the severity ranking of criminal sanctions. Nevertheless, opinions of officers who supervised those clients have all but been ignored. In this study, this literature was extended by comparing perceptions of Kentucky probation and parole officers regarding the amount of alternative sanctions that offenders would serve to avoid one year of imprisonment to perceptions of the offenders whom they supervised regarding the same topic. Based on analysis of data from an electronic survey of approximately 230 probation and parole officers and approximately 600 probationers and parolees, results suggested that there were significant differences in “exchange rates” of officers when compared to those of offenders. Justifications for these findings and their implications for correctional policy and practice are discussed.     

Building bridges between the parole officer and the families of serious juvenile offenders: a preliminary report on a family-based parole program

Responding to a model of juvenile offender case supervision that called for a new intervention paradigm to guide the work of probation and parole officers, the present article reports on the use of a family-based parole initiative known as the Growing Up FAST program. Developed in part as a tool for use within this new intervention paradigm, the Growing Up FAST parole program targets serious youthful offenders who have been released from juvenile correctional facilities and their families. Based on elements contained within the "what works" literature and the Balanced and Restorative Justice model, this program recognizes the central role that field staff can play in rehabilitation efforts. Demographic information and formative data regarding the first set of families to participate in this program are presented, then program limitations and lessons learned as part of the initial offering of this parole initiative are discussed.     

A 21st Century Developmentally Appropriate Juvenile Probation Approach

Principles of adolescent development have accelerated positive changes to the juvenile justice system. These changes have been most pronounced in reducing reliance on incarceration and in approaches to sentencing of youth tried as adults. While juvenile probation has made some developmentally friendly adjustments, it remains an area that is fertile for reform. Many of the principles and goals in this paper have been endorsed by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), which “supports and is committed to juvenile probation systems that conform to the latest knowledge of adolescent development and adolescent brain science,” and which “recommends that courts cease imposing ‘conditions of probation’ and instead support probation departments’ developing, with families and youth, individualized case plans that set expectations and goals.” 1 NCJFCJ's July, 2017 resolution in support of developmentally appropriate juvenile probation services built on earlier NCJFCJ policies. From the time NCJFCJ adopted Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines in 2005, those policies have grown increasingly robust. 2     

Probation/Parole Officer Psychological Well-Being: the Impact of Supervising Persons with Mental Health Needs

Although supervising persons with mental illness can pose special challenges for community parole/probation officers (PPOs), few studies have investigated whether the number of supervisees on an officer’s caseload increases risk for poor mental health for PPOs and whether this link is due to emotional exhaustion. Using statewide survey data from 798 PPOs, we examine whether the number of supervisees on an officer’s caseload with mental health problems is associated with depressive symptoms reported the PPOs and whether this relationship is mediated by emotional exhaustion. In addition, we evaluate the potential mitigating role of both mental health services received by supervisees and officer training in mental health in the relationship between the number of supervisees on an officer’s caseload with mental health problems and emotional exhaustion experienced by PPOs. Findings reveal that PPOs with more supervisees on their caseload report significantly higher levels of depressive symptoms and that this relationship is completely explained away by emotional exhaustion. Neither mental health services received by supervisees nor officer training in mental health mitigated the link between the number of supervisees on an officer’s caseload with mental health problems and officer emotional exhaustion. This study underscores the importance of the psychological well-being of those on parole/probation for the emotional and mental health of the officers who supervise them.     

Juvenile participation in conversations with probation officers

Juvenile probation work comprises a mixture of repressive and empowering strategies, since probation officers need to control young offenders' conduct and at the same time help the offender to take responsibility and live life within the margins of society. This ambiguous nature of juvenile probation work may confuse the communication between probation officers and juveniles. Interviews with offenders of Moroccan origin and their probation officers in the Netherlands show that both parties are unhappy with the mutual communication. According to the youngsters, a restrictive policy is inevitable but might be more effective if this would go together with an empowering approach. Interactional analysis of the conversations shows that the lack of juvenile participation is caused by professional conversational dominance, as seen in topic control, poor role clarification, and a cross-examining style of the conversations.     

Organizational climate,work stress,and depressive symptoms among probation and parole officers

While work environment and stress are important factors for mental health, no studies have assessed whether these factors contribute independently to the psychological well-being of probation and parole officers (PPOs). Using statewide survey data from 825 PPOs, we examine the association between depressive symptoms, work stress, and work environment (using the organizational climate measures of role ambiguity, role conflict, role overload and emotional exhaustion/burnout). Findings indicate that organizational climate and work stress are important predictors of emotional exhaustion/burnout, and that these factors have both indirect and independent associations with depressive symptomotology. Together, models including organizational climate and work stress account for two-thirds of the variability in burnout. Moreover, models incorporating exhaustion/burnout, work stress, and organizational climate account for nearly half of the variability in depressive symptoms. Organization climate measures and work stress contribute to depressive symptoms through their effect on emotional exhaustion/burnout. In addition, emotional exhaustion/burnout, role conflict, and work stress are all directly linked to levels of depressive symptoms. This study demonstrates that organizational climate and work stress contribute substantially to the well-being of PPOs and reveals the potential mental health consequences of working in community corrections.     

Short‐Term Effects of Sanctioning Reform on Parole Officers' Revocation Decisions

Parole officials have traditionally been afforded considerable discretion when making sanctioning decisions to be able to tailor sanctions according to substantively rational concerns such as individuals' unique needs and situations. However, the application of substantive rationality in sanctioning can also generate unwanted disparities because sanctioning decisions may be based on extralegal factors that parole officials consider relevant. Concerns regarding disparate treatment of offender groups have prompted a number of states to consider adopting administrative violation response policies that emphasize formal rationality and uniformity by restricting parole officers' discretion and structuring sanctioning decisions according to legally relevant criteria. By emphasizing formal rationality in sanctioning, structured sanction policies present a dilemma for parole officers—uniformity versus individualized treatment. In 2005, the state of Ohio implemented an administrative violation response policy designed to reduce parole officers' reliance on revocation hearings and promote uniformity in sanctioning decisions. This study involved an examination of whether Ohio's shift to structured sanctioning coincided with differences in legal and extralegal effects on parole officers' decisions to pursue revocation hearings. Analyses of data collected before and after the implementation of the policy revealed a reduction in the number of revocation hearings officers pursued. Only modest increases in uniformity were observed, however, because there was little disparity resulting from officers' hearing decisions before the policy was put in place. These findings are discussed within perspectives on justice system actors' decision making.     

Detention Decision-Making in a Predominantly Hispanic Region: Rural and Non-Rural Differences

This study examines the implementation of juvenile detention policy by comparing decision making in two jurisdictions where Hispanics represent the numerical majority of the population. One jurisdiction is rural and the other is a jurisdiction with over 1000,000 population. Interviews with juvenile justice probation and parole officers and judges are combined with a quantitative analysis of official records from 1994. Detention decision making is different in these jurisdictions. There is more formal processing and detention of juveniles in the rural jurisdiction. This is attributable to a perception of the community as heterogeneous rather than homogeneous, and a lack of alternatives as compared to the non-rural jurisdiction.     

Walking the line: Specialized and standard probation officer perspectives on supervising probationers with serious mental illnesses

Specialized probation programs were developed to more effectively address the unique needs of probationers with serious mental illnesses. Probation officers are tasked with serving both law enforcement and rehabilitative functions, and officers play an important gatekeeper function in helping probationers with serious mental illnesses avoid long incarceration sentences. The purpose of this paper was to explore specialized and standard probation officers' work in supervising probationers with serious mental illnesses. Twenty-one probation officers (11 specialized and 10 standard) participated in semi-structured interviews. Qualitative analyses examined: 1 — beliefs on the relationship between mental illness and crime; 2 — purpose of specialized and standard probation units; and 3 — approaches to supervising probationers with serious mental illnesses. Implications for developing more effective probation supervision programs are discussed.     

Paraprofessionals in parole and probation services: Selection,training, and program evaluation

The use of paraprofessional personnel in parole and probation services has been increasing dramatically. With decreasing budgets and expanded calls for service, parole and probation agencies have been turning to the paraprofessional employee as a solution. Several variables which can be changed through implementation of a paraprofessional program are identified, including the differences between using indigenous and nonindigenous personnel. Through a survey of past hiring practices, qualifications of those hired, and justification of using a certain type of personnel, factors to be used in the selection of paraprofessionals are delineated. Training programs for paraprofessionals, especially indigenous personnel, are reviewed in conjunction with standard industrial training concepts and practices. Comments are made regarding the necessity of evaluating paraprofessional programs in order to document empirically their effectiveness within the parole and probation organization.     

Examining the Effects of Community-Based Sanctions on Offender Recidivism

Offenders who violate their conditions of release (parole violators) pose a threat to public safety and a unique challenge for parole officials. Historically, parole officers have simply revoked the parole of these offenders and returned them to prison; however, increases in state correctional populations have forced many jurisdictions to experiment with sanctions administered by parole officers in the community. Community‐based sanctions are sanctions administered by parole officers as consequences for noncompliance with release conditions that are ultimately intended to reduce parole violators’ odds of recidivism. Yet, the effects of these types of sanctions are still relatively unknown. Drawing from perspectives on formal and informal social control, this study involved an examination of the effect of community‐based sanctions on parole violators’ odds of recidivism. Findings revealed that formal controls such as community‐based sanctions that were applied with certainty, severity, and in a swift manner along with informal controls such as measures of offenders’ stake in conformity had effects on parole violators’ odds of recidivism and time to recidivism.     

The effects of job-related stress and job satisfaction on probation officers’ inclinations to quit

Current research indicates that job-related stress and job dissatisfaction are serious employment concerns among probation officers. In other employment domains, job stress and job satisfaction are commonly associated with employee turnover. Moreover, job turnover among probation officers is a serious but understudied problem. Survey data from a random sample of Florida correctional probation officers indicate moderately elevated levels of job-related stress and job dissatisfaction. Job satisfaction was significantly and inversely related to probation officers’ inclinations to quit, while job-related stress was indirectly related to such inclinations. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.     

Juvenile probation officer cynicism

This article addresses the question of cynicism among juvenile probation officers in Alabama. The findings reveal that Alabama juvenile probation officers are not as cynical as police and correctional officers have been found to be. It also reports that Alabama juvenile probation officer cynicism cannot be explained by the demographic variables of sex, length of service, and age.     

Variables affecting parole outcomes

A comparison of parole officers and parole violators perceptions on factors related to recidivism was conducted to provide information which could contribute to increasing parole effectiveness and the development of correctional treautment strategies. The total population of parole viotators from a medium security correctional institution, and a systmatic random sample of parole officers were selected to form the research sample. The study consisted of 54 parole violators and 50 parole officers. The study necessitated the construction of a questionnaire. The variables under study included police and courts, society, parole supervision, imprisonment selfcontrol, personal attitude, and employment. A oneway analysis was conducted to compare the perceptions of the sample of parole officers and parole violators. Analysis of the data indicated that parole officers and parole violators view factors related to recidivism in markedly different ways. The author expresses special thanks for assistance and support to Dr. Billy Bramlett, Dr. Greg Riede, Dr. George Beto and Dr. Rodney Henderson, all of the College of Criminal Justice Institute, Sam Houston University.