Broken Windows or Broken Logic? Supervising Offenders in the Community

Broken Windows Probation 3 Million In Our Midst – “Hundreds and thousands of violent crimes are committed each year by people on probation” – The public wants to reduce violent crime now 2/3 of probationers commit another crime within three years of their sentence – In 1991 (nationally), 6,400 murders, 7,400 rapes, 11,400 assaults, 17,000 robberies – Conditions not “rigorously enforced” – Absconders run amok

Why is Probation “Broke(N)?” Funding Levels – 2/3 of the people, 1/3 of the corrections dollar – $20-50K per year for prison, $200 for probation – Caseloads of offenders Bad Practices – Drug testing that is scheduled in advance – Supervision in Office (doesn’t manage risk) – Average of one contact per month

The Solution: Placing Public Safety First Supervise in neighborhood, not office – More “surveillance,” ability to monitor and control – “Meaningful” supervision occurs at all hours Rationally allocate Resources – Better risk and need assessment – Supervision based on Geography Enforce violations quickly/strongly – “Deterrent Effect,” Track down absconders

More Goals Develop partners in the Community – Work with police, victims, schools, neighborhood groups, inform public… – PO’s act like “C.O.P.s” (attend “neighborhood meetings, adopt “placed-based” supervision Establish “Performance Based Initiatives” – Good research with clearly measured outcomes

Structural Issues in Re-thinking Case Assignments, Job Responsibilities Job Description and Training Caseload, Resource, Technical Support Community Involvement and Support

Fixing “Broken Windows” General Criticisms: – Ignores single most consistent finding in probation literature: treatment works, surveillance and control does not “Community Supervision” – Publicity stunt to get funding Is this based on any evidence? – Short-term thinking

Improve Public Safety P.O.s should be asked to do LESS, not more – Cannot be held responsible for community safety—focus on offender Develop sanctioning strategies that do not result in a significant # of offenders in jail Treatment is the only known way to improve safety

Supervise in Community? Location, location, location only for houses – Any evidence this will work? (not really) – How monitor P.O.s? – “Supervision” becomes main role of P.O. “Monitor and Control” emphasis – Union/staff resistance to hours/job

Rationally Allocate Resources Council focuses on existing $ – Improve assessment? Cost of this? Treatment availability, cost, quality? – Shift (back) to “place-based” supervision Generalist vs. Specialist There are reasons for the “specialist”

Strong Enforcement of Conditions Past decade? Increase in number and type of conditions – Use better judgment with conditions – Develop system of graduated sanctions Council still relies on incarceration as a “general deterrent” to others…support for this is weak Probation Based “Absconder Units” – $ for this? What to do when we catch them? – Why do probationers abscond?

Partners in the Community Operation Night Light – Allows probation to appear more “police-like” – Appear “tougher” – IRONY can be pretty ironic sometimes COP envisions police acting as “resource brokers” Dumja Vu – Council claims that “ONL” reduced homicide Exaggerated claims unsupported by sound research Ends ($) justify the means (use crappy research as “evidence”

Final Comments on BW’s Council ignores the fact that over 70% of offenders placed on probation will complete their term without new arrest – More effective than: JAIL Prison Intermediate Sanctions Core technology of probation? Individual Offender Change

Supervision Models Casework Era Brokerage Model Justice Model “Supervision and Control” Integrated – Control and Treatment are not incompatible Pg. 117 = Martinson Blasphemy

Probation Officer Work Styles The “Law Enforcer” The “Time Server” The “Therapeutic Agent” The “Synthetic”

Caseloads and Workloads “Average Caseload” not that important – Most jurisdictions have different levels – Specialized Caseloads (sex offenders, drugs, etc.) – “Regular” Parole = 67 Probation = 124 – “Intensive” Parole = 38 Probation = 25 Assigning Cases: “workload standard”