Community-Based Corrections, 9th Edition Leanne Fiftal Alarid Cengage Learning prepared by Barbara Belbot Chapter 1 An Overview of Community Corrections: Goals & Evidence-Based Practices

The Correctional Dilemma U.S. crime control policies over last three decades have led to a steady increase of convicted offenders in the correctional system Approximately 7 million people, about 3% of the total adult population, are currently under some form of correctional supervision Recent economic troubles causing states to reduce their correctional population and shift resources away from prisons to community corrections

Community Corrections Any sanctions in which offenders serve a portion of or their entire sentence in the community Seek to repair the harm the offender caused the victim or the community and to reduce the risk of re-offending in the future Can be imposed either pre or post- adjudication of offender’s guilt

Variety of Community Sanctions Probation Intensive supervision probation Restitution & fines Community service Substance abuse treatment Day reporting House arrest & electronic monitoring Halfway houses Boot camps Prisons and jails

Probation Most common form of community supervision The release of a convicted offender under court imposed conditions for a specified period during which the court retains authority to modify the conditions or resentence the offender if they violate the conditions Most other community sanctions are programs or conditions of probation

Recent Government Statistics As of 2010, 4.2 million offenders were on probation, and over 819,000 on parole 2.4 million offenders were incarcerated in jails & prisons

Indeterminate Sentencing: 1930’s – 1970’s The primary sentencing philosophy; parole boards determined readiness for release Concerns raised in the 1970’s regarding the effectiveness of rehabilitation and fairness of indeterminate sentencing Robert Martinson in 1974, concluded that “with few and isolated exceptions, the rehabilitative efforts that have been reported so far had no appreciable effect on recidivism.” The American Friends Service Committee urged repeal of indeterminate sentencing laws in 1976 so that offenders convicted of similar crimes would serve roughly equal terms in prison

Determinate Sentencing In 1979, David Fogel proposed determinate sentencing in “. . . We Are the Living Proof . . .”: The Justice Model for Corrections Sentencing.” Fogel urged limiting sentencing & parole discretion, abolish parole boards, & flat-time sentences for each offender category Maine was the first state in 1975 to adopt determinate sentencing

Examples of Determinate Sentences Mandatory minimums for certain types of offenders Truth in sentencing requires offenders serve at least 85% of sentence Three strikes laws for third felony convictions Sentencing guidelines for judges to follow when sentencing

Sentencing Guidelines A matrix for a judge to use based on the offender’s prior criminal record & the current conviction Some are suggestive; others are mandatory Proponents contend guidelines decrease judicial disparity & potential for discrimination Federal sentencing guidelines have been revised to allow judges to exercise more discretion Many states use a mix of indeterminate and determinate sentencing

The Paradox Correctional policy shifts between what we can afford, changes in public perception, & what is important to vocal constituents Maruna & King (2008) note a shift away from expert- driven policy to policy based on emotion and politics, with public opinion influenced by biased, sensationalist media reports about crime and criminal justice Consequently, the public is not well informed

Strategies to Increase Public Support for Community Corrections Convincing the public that people are redeemable if given the tools & means to change Experts suggest the media must present broader, more accurate view & not concentrate on atypical cases Informing the public about diverse sentencing options with adequate information

Prison is Expensive Correctional funding is driven by public tax dollars Incarceration is far more costly than community supervision – growing consensus that prison should be reserved for most dangerous offenders & community options expanded About $0.18 of every correctional dollar goes to community corrections to supervise more than 70% of all people under correctional supervision

In Response to the Current Fiscal Crisis Legislators and correctional administrators have considered a variety of options: Decriminalizing lower level violent & drug felony offenses to Class A misdemeanors Repealing mandatory minimums Using more community graduated sanctions Increasing parole rates Changing probation & parole policies for responding to violations Closing existing housing units within a prison or closing existing prisons altogether

The Role of Corrections at 3 Major Decision Points Discretion in the criminal justice system begins with victims & law enforcement Community corrections plays pivotal role at three major decision points that follow arrest: bail, sentencing, and reentry

Pre-trial & the Bail Decision Following arrest, defendants may be released on their own recognizance or required to post bail Pretrial supervision is correctional supervision of a defendant who is not convicted and… Accounts for defendant’s whereabouts Allows defendant to prepare for upcoming court appearances Allows defendant to continue working Keeps bed space open in jail for defendants who are not released

Sentencing Decision Vast majority of offenders can be punished in the community Intermediate sanctions offer graduated levels of supervision A full range of sentencing options gives judges latitude to select punishments that fit the crime and the offender

Reentry Decision The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967) introduced the term reintegration Today’s term is reentry 95 - 97% of prisoners will one day be released Reentry programs help offenders return safely to the community as law-abiding citizens Prisoner reentry applies to prisoners who are released on mandatory statutes and those released on parole

Prerelease Programs Minimum-security institutional settings for imprisoned offenders who & are nearing release Considered to be more treatment oriented than prison Examples: halfway houses, boot camps, prison in- prison therapeutic communities

Parole The discretionary conditional & supervised release of an offender prior to the expiration of their sentence Technical differences exist between probation & parole, but both involve supervision in the community

Theories Behind Community Correctional Goals Goals of Community Corrections: Punish offenders Protect the public Address victim’s needs Change offender’s attitudes & behaviors Theories Behind the Goals: Principles of effective correctional intervention Restorative justice Shaming

Protecting the Public Through Offender Supervision & Risk Assessment Major criticism of traditional probation & parole is its failure to protect the public from future crime This criticism can be addressed in several ways: Use appropriate risk assessment to select right offenders for right programs Offender supervision should include proper monitoring of compliance with conditions Take violations of supervised conditions seriously

Rehabilitating Offenders Through Effective Correctional Intervention Goal of correctional programming: to address inadequacies that contribute to offender’s criminal behavior Typical problems include: drug or alcohol addiction, lack of emotional control, inadequate education or vocational training, lack of parenting skills, mental illness & developmental disabilities

Rehabilitation, Cont’d. Principles of effective correctional intervention include: Early risk assessments Focus on high risk offenders Use of cognitive-behavioral treatment for at least 3-9 months Treatment interventions linked to needs related to criminal behavior

Addressing Victims Through Restorative Justice Victim-centered sanctions that emphasize offender responsibility to repair the injustice caused to their victims and community Techniques include community boards, mediation, offender-victim meetings Most effective for nonviolent crimes, juvenile crimes or first-time adult offenders Less likely at this time to be used for violent crimes

Deterrence Through Shaming Briefly stigmatize offender publicly To be effective, shaming must have 5 conditions: Offender must belong to an identifiable group The form of shaming must be sufficient to compromise the person’s social standing in the group The punishment must be communicated to the community The offender must fear being shunned Normally, there must be a method for the offender to regain social status

Evidence-Based Practices in Community Corrections EBP: using current best practices or interventions for which there is consistent & solid scientific evidence of success Assessment shows that practices work to meet intended outcomes & are open to periodic measurement, evaluation, & dissemination of practices & interventions EBP is not based on intuition, speculation, anecdotal evidence, or tradition (e.g., “that’s the way we’ve always done it around here”) Research methodology must be sophisticated & rigorous enough to determine what does and does not work

Outcome Measures The rate of recidivism is the most common form of measuring program or treatment effectiveness Recidivism is the return to criminal behavior, measured by: Rearrest Reconviction Reincarceration Different studies identify recidivism differently, making comparisons of program effectiveness difficult

Outcome Measures, Cont’d. Effectiveness can also be measured by: Amount of restitution collected Number of offenders employed Amount of fines and fees collected Number of community service hours Number of probationers enrolled in school Number of drug-free days Impact on reduction of institutional crowding