Revalidating the salient factor score: A research note

In conjunction with a system of explicit decision-guidelines, the United States Parole Commission uses an actuarial instrument as an aid in assessing risk of recidivism. Known as a “salient factor score,” the instrument currently employed by the Parole Commission was constructed on a sample of federal prisoners released in 1970, and initially validated on two samples of federal prisoners released in 1971 and 1972. Since the power of any predictive instrument may change over time, periodic revalidation is essential. In this note, revalidation of the salient factor score, using a sample of federal prisoners released in 1976 (N = 1260), is described.     

Screening for risk: A revised salient factor score (SFS 81)

Since 1972, the United States Parole Commission has used an actuarial device as an aid in assessing parole prognosis in conjunction with explicit decision guildelines. This article describes the most recent revision of the actuarial device used by the commission. This device (SFS 81) is examined and compared with the device previously used (SFS 76) on five dimensions: validity, stability, reliability, simplicity, and ethical concerns.     

Twenty years of operational use of a risk prediction instrument: The United States parole commission's salient factor score

Although empirically-based recidivism prediction instruments were developed as far back as the 1920s, the adoption of the Salient Factor Score by the federal parole board in 1972—as part of a system of explicit parole decisionmaking guidelines—marked the first time that such an instrument was used in a way that had a definite, measurable impact on paroling decisions. The Salient Factor Score has been used in federal parole decisionmaking continuously for the past twenty years. It is axiomatic that a prediction instrument, particularly an instrument used in actual case decisionmaking, be revalidated periodically to ensure that it has retained predictive accuracy. In this article, the predictive accuracy of the Salient Factor Score over time is examined using data on three, large random samples of federal prisoners released in 1970–1972, 1978, and 1987. In addition, the relationship of the Salient Factor Score to the Criminal History Score of the new federal sentencing guidelines—which apply to defendants convicted of federal offenses committed on or after November 1, 1987—is discussed.     

Supervision Intensity and Parole Outcomes: A Competing Risks Approach to Criminal and Technical Parole Violations

Recent scholarship about parole supervision indicates that higher supervision intensity is associated with an increased risk of parole violations. However, parole violations can take many forms—some minor and some serious—and theory suggests that supervision intensity might have differential effects depending upon the type of violation. We use “competing risks” survival models to identify supervision effects on five types of parole violations among 79,082 individuals released from prison in California: absconding, technical violations, drug use, violent offenses, and sexual offenses. We find that supervision effects are strongest for absconding violations. Past sexual offending also triggers significant supervision effects for technical violations, drug use violations, and violent violations. We conclude that parole violation patterns are influenced by parolee behaviors, the amount of attention the state is paying to those behaviors, and official markers of criminal dangerousness that are attached to particular parolees.     

Salient factor score validation—A 1972 release cohort

In October 1973, the United States Board of Parole adopted an actuarial device, termed a “salient factor score”, as a risk assesment aid. This device was constructed and initially validated on a sample of 1970 releases utilizing a two year follow-up period for each case. However, as the utility of a predictive device depends upon its a ability to predict to prospective samples, periodic validation is required. This paper describes the application of the salient factor score to a subsequent validation sample of prisoners released during 1972 and discusses the effects of using various outcome measures.     

Parole: How it is working

This paper presents some relevant information on parole and on several determinate sentencing proposals. Guidelines formulated by the United States Parole Commission demonstrate that release decisions can be structured to (1) enhance equity, (2) facilitate the explanation for decision variance, and (3) expose decision policy to public evaluation and debate. Empirically, parolees have a higher success rate or lower proportion of new convictions than those released in other ways. In contrast, the determinate sentencing proposals merely displace discretion to other areas of the criminal justice system where it is less visible and, hence, less subject to control.     

Retributive Whisper: Communicative Elements in Parole

The aims of retributive or nonutilitarian sentencing are said to conflict with parole as part of a determinate sentencing framework. In this article, we claim that a nonutilitarian approach to punishment does not necessarily conflict with parole. In particular, by adopting core elements of Duff's framework of communicative sentencing, we argue that parole inherently holds a communicative meaning in the form of retributive whisper and can thus be reconciled with a nonutilitarian approach to punishment. In addition, we explore a way to enhance the communicative potential in the parole process and suggest that by recognizing and further incorporating the inherent communicative message in parole we can increase or maximize the board's communicative potential. Finally, we discuss some benefits that can emerge from adapting a communicative sentencing framework to the parole process.     

Salient factor score and releasee behavior: Three validation samples

This paper provides an opportunity to observe the application of an actuarial device, used by the United States Parole Commission as an aid in parole selection, to three separate validation samples—each exceeding 1000 cases. Follow-up data for this study were provided through the cooperation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In addition, evidence is presented which may shed light on the conflict in the literature regarding whether or not the rate of unfavorable outcome of released prisoners at risk actually declines substantially after the first year (i.e., whether or not the first year after release is really the most critical).Adapted from Report Fifteen, United States Parole Commission Research Unit, August 1977.     

假释撤销条件比较研究

撤销假释是对假释犯不遵守假释条件的惩罚方式之一。罪犯在假释考验期内再犯新罪应当不分犯罪性质、罪过形式和刑罚轻重,一律撤销假释。在假释考验期内,发现罪犯尚有漏罪,不应撤销假释,而是应根据漏罪的具体情况,分别处理。对于假释期间违反应当遵守的假释条件一律撤销假释的规定是不合理的。只有对情节严重的违反假释条件的行为,才应当撤销假释。     

Women on Parole: Understanding the Impact of Surveillance

Research suggests that over the past several decades, the institution of parole has strayed from its original operating tenets of rehabilitation and reintegration and has increasingly become more focused on employing methods centered on surveillance and risk management. This article explores how a group of 43 women reentering their communities via parole understand the purpose of this institution. Through qualitative interviews, these women explain how they perceive parole as a tool intended to monitor their actions as opposed to assist them in getting back on their feet. The findings also demonstrate how this surveillance produces feelings of fear, anxiety, and powerlessness in individuals and how this affects women newly released from prison who are working to regain control over their own lives.     

The Role of Supervising Judges in the Granting of Parole in France: A Critical Evaluation

Since World War II, France has sought to decentralize and individualize its correctional system. The major change in the process was the creation of a new judicial role, that of Supervising Judge, who would incorporate both judicial and correctional roles. Until 1972, paroles were granted solely by the Ministry of Justice in Paris. But following legislative reforms in 1970 and 1972, Supervising Judges were given increased responsibilities in these matters. As a result there has been an increase in the total number of paroles awarded since 1972.

The hoped-for reforms met with strong opposition from correctional authorities, who perceived Supervising Judges as usurping their authority. The reforms were also opposed by some trial judges who saw them as interfering with the traditional role of courts, particularly in the sentencing of offenders. The ambiguous nature of the role itself, neither clearly administrative nor clearly judicial, has contributed to the problem in the development of the institution.

A major weakness in the present system is the lack of a strong administrative infrastructure which prevents Supervising Judges from operating effectively. Few judges are assisted by counselors, parole officers, or even clerks, who are a necessary part of carrying out such broad responsibilities. Supervising Judges have been the target of public criticisms for “coddling” criminals. Since they have little independence within the judiciary, their ability to function without government pressure is limited. There is, therefore, a temptation on the part of many to play it “safe” in order not to displease the public and the judicial hierarchy. While the survival of the role itself does not appear in danger, it may be limited by further legislative restriction of its authority.     

Justice by Other Means: Venue Sorting in Parole Revocation

We consider the factors that shape venue sorting, the process by which a legal case can be handled through different organizational arrangements with distinct procedures, institutional cultures, and sanctioning constraints. The empirical area for our investigation of venue sorting is California's parole revocation system, in which parolees accused of new crimes can be returned to prison by either criminal courts or the parole board. We find that seriousness of the alleged offense partially predicts the venue through which parolees are sanctioned. However, venue sorting is further explained by decision makers' perceptions of parolee threat, as well as concerns about organizational efficiency and legitimacy. We conclude by discussing how these findings may relate to the general phenomenon of venue sorting across a range of legal situations.     

Serious about Change: A Gendered Examination of the Impact of Offense Type on Parole Success

Female offender populations are growing at an unprecedented rate. The present study examines gender differences among a large sample of male and female offenders as related to seriousness of their offense and success on parole. Data analyzed were originally collected from a random sample of parole case files in California. Results revealed that although gender does significantly impact parole success, seriousness of the offense does not. Other significant factors include age at release on parole, criminal history, and measures of stability upon release. The need for wrap-around services, comprehensive treatment models, and funding for gender-specific services are discussed.     

Decentering Motherhood: Reentry Strategies for Women on Parole and Probation

As the population of mothers under state supervision rapidly increases, it is necessary to document and analyze their experiences. This research contributes to the literature by exploring the experiences of such mothers, highlighting narratives from mothers who transitioned to a halfway house as part of their reintegration. We analyze how such mothers define good mothering and how they construct and manage their own mothering in light of their histories of drug use and criminal justice involvement, which often lead to prolonged absences from their children. The discourses of priority and presence dominate the mothers’ narratives, supported by expectations from both probation/parole and the halfway house. Collectively our data suggest that mothers engage in a complex negotiation between state supervision and motherhood that reimagines the nature and practice of good mothering and adapts strategies for fulfilling state obligations.     

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.     

Parole survival and legislated change: A before/after study of parole revocation decision making

Past studies of juveniles' attitudes toward the police suggest a single-cause model that implicates personal interactions with the police. We propose that attitudes toward authority and agents of social control develop in a larger, sociocultural context. Specifically we hypothesize that juveniles' attitudes develop as a function of socialization in their communities' social environment, of their deviant subcultural “preferences,” and of the prior effect of these sociocultural factors on juveniles' contacts with the police. We conducted analyses addressing these hypotheses with a population of males sampled within stratified populations of known delinquents. We found that social background variables, particularly minority status, and subcultural preferences, particularly commitment to delinquent norms, affected juveniles' attitudes toward the police both directly and indirectly (through police-juvenile interactions). We consider directions for improving police relations with juveniles in the context of apparent sociocultural and experiential contingencies to attitude development.     

Integrated management decision-making: A futuristic model for police organizations

This study examines the theoretical issues concerning decision-making and advances a new and innovative model emphasizing the integration of the organization and environment. Political, economic, social, cultural, and other community factors are highlighted as major influences affecting the police arena. Finally, the model is discussed as a catalyst for change in current police management thinking. Futuristic concepts of organization-environmental learning, long-range planning, and strategic modeling are suggested as necessary improvements in police decision-making.