Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Community Correction
Community Correction
OFFENDERS
offenders in community. Therefore, to fulfil this this objective, the researcher consulted
various literatures sources from by various different scholars advocating CC and its role
offenders
Petersilia (2001) indicate that community corrections role is to treat behaviors that are
directly associated with the question why the offenders got into trouble in the first place
to reduce recidivism1. According to Taxman, Matthew, Perdoni and Harrison (2007) the
compared to correctional centers and that offenders who have been incarcerated in
correctional centers transition better when they are released with some supervision than
Community corrections are developed and regulated in accordance with legal mandates
and applicable standards (Coming and Buell, 1997). The reasoning behind community
1
Recidivism is a tendency to relapse into a previous condition or mode of behaviour; especially: relapse into
criminal behaviour. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recidivism
corrections related programs involve multiple factors. According to Haney (2001) the
indicates that even though many people may are of the view that the criminal justice
system is too lenient on offenders, one of the rationale for community corrections is to
limit the harshness of sentences imposed to offenders of minor crimes. Leanne (2016)
states that if correctional centre was the only option available to the courts, the court were
(2008) during sentencing the option to consider an offender for CC programs works for
both the offender and the community unlike the imprisonment which is not deemed to be
According to Braswell and Filler (2004) one of the major reasons why Community
Corrections form a large part of the CJS, is difficult to achieve rehabilitation by sending
the offenders in maximum security correctional centres. Parade (2009) indicates that
most offenders are diverted to some other categories of correctional settings such as
community correction programs for the purpose of their re-integration and rehabilitation.
based sentence during the time of sentencing or upon his conditional release, it is
practical to enlist the support already existing programs for the purpose of rehabilitation
and re-integration of offenders. Schools, jobs, mental health centres, clinics, and families
can all give a contribution to the treatment goals of offenders such as rehabilitation and
re-integration.
Gilman (2015) states that the division of non-custodial sentences or sanctions such as
parole and community service works hand in hand with the local CJS officials and the
provide offenders with opportunities to change their behaviours or situations which made
them to come into conflict with the law. Coming and Buel (1997) stressed that it is the
ensure the safety of the society by effectively dealing with those offenders who fail to
The white paper on correction South Africa (2013) indicates that community corrections
(2013) whenever an offender have been conditionally released from correctional centres,
either in the form of parole or probation and is required to perform a particular community
because through that community work, the offender will know that he or she paying back
to the community for his or her wrong doings. Whitehead et al (2008) indicate that the CC
also exposes the offender to skills and knowledge in work related matters.
According to Etter and Hammond (2003) the Kansas department of corrections2 division
have been used by the Kansas parole officers since 1995 in order to get rid of the
offenders of crime. Kansas parole officers had a goal in their minds of reintegration of
offenders of crime in the community. The main aim or purpose of this program was to
change the minds of offenders through community work so that they can no longer commit
further crimes.
Douglas and Hunninen (2008) provides that Community correction helps the offenders in
gaining experience and skills in work related matters with regard to the community
service, and they can use such experience and skill elsewhere as part of living. According
to Gleissner (2013) a person who have done a community work are less likely to reoffend
again in their part of living and it develops an offender to have self-esteem and have a
new direction in life. Lowenkamp, Holsinger and Latessa (2004) provides that people who
have gone through rehabilitation are less likely to commit another crime because such
person is taught to do certain work by himself, so when he or she goes back to the
community, he or she will be able to work and provide for him or herself and no longer
2
The Kansas Department of Corrections is a cabinet-level agency of Kansas that operates the state's correctional
facilities, both juvenile and adult; the state's parole system; and the state's Prisoner Review Board. It is
headquartered in Topeka. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_Department_of_Corrections
Importance of community correction in reintegration of the offender
White paper on correction South Africa (2013) provides that most offenders are required
offender to pay back what he have destroyed or harmed. Gleissner (2013) states that in
reintegration of offenders, Community corrections also have a major benefit in the part of
the offender due to the fact that it gives them another chance to start a new life in the
community and being accepted back by the community. According to Etter and Hammond
(2003) community corrections does not mostly focus on the offenders needs, but rather
focuses on the offenders responsibility to pay the damages and harm which he or she
have caused to the community or the victim. It also helps them to realize the harm which
developed on the understanding of risks which are associated with recidivism, the needs
of offenders to change and also the challenges which they face when they have been
released from correctional centre to the community. Travis (2000) indicates that re-
integration programs vary due to the risk factors and the types of social integration
mostly on the offenders need to change, such as drug addiction, young offenders,
Whitehead et al (2008) provides that Community corrections are important in the part of
the offender, the victim and the society as a whole. According to Alarid and Reichel (2008)
the victim benefit in the form of an apology which is made by the offender, the offender
benefit by the way of gaining skills and work experience through rehabilitation, and the
community benefit through the work which is done by the offender to the community and
Offender benefits
Gleissner (2013) pointed out that community corrections helps or benefit the offender in
such a way that, when the offender is given community sentence, he or she is being saved
from being used to the indoor life of the correctional centre, the inability of the person to
no longer cope or get used to the outdoor life of the correctional centres. He went on to
state that, Community corrections is also a privilege to the offenders who should have
been in correctional centres by the time when they are participating in the community
corrections in order for them to avoid confinement, they must work hard and comply with
the rules of the community supervisor so that they can be released in time.
Griffiths, Dandurand and Murdoch (2007) asserted that Community corrections programs
also facilitate many of the factors associated with the offender’s successful re-integration
into the community. Community corrections (2015) presented that offenders can be
released from correctional centres and taken to the community corrections in order for
the offender to perform a community service as part of reintegration so that such offender
can get used to the outside life of the correctional centre and also in order for the
community to accept such person back to the community in peace knowing that such
person have paid for the damages which he or she have caused to the society.
According to Alarid and Reichel (2008) Community correction helps the offender by
correcting some of the problems that are directly linked to criminal behaviour and
continued involvement in the criminal justice system which include substance abuse, lack
under the CC should participate in programs that address those issues while on
supervision with greater access to treatment programs than he or she would have had in
correctional centres.
Victim benefits
been mostly focusing on offenders of crime only and have been forgetting or ignoring the
concerns of the victims or those who have been affected by the crime. While community
supervision focuses on the society as a whole in protecting the victims of crime from
The victims of crime can benefit from the community correction by way of restitution 3 by
the offender (Ruback and Bergstrom, 2006). According to Marcus, 1996) through the CC
the offender may be ordered to pay for the damages and harm which he or she have
caused to the victim and by that ,the victim tend to benefit because what he or she have
lost during the commission of crime have been paid back or fixed. According to Bazemore
and Stinchcomb (2004) the victims tend to benefit the apology which is made by the
offender which helps to relieve the victim and also prevent vengeance or re-commission
According to Wemmers (2002) the victim can also benefit from compensation4 in the form
of monetary which the court orders the offender to pay for the damages or loss which he
or she has caused to the victim. Rex (2002) state that the court is the one which orders
the offender to pay the compensation to the victim, and the head of the correctional
services is the one which manages the payments of the offenders to the victim. According
to Burns (2001) whenever the offender does not pay the compensation to the victim, the
community correction is the one which makes sure that it is the one which report the
3
The term "restitution" in the criminal justice system means payment by an offender to the victim for the harm
caused by the offender's wrongful acts. Courts have the authority to order convicted offenders to pay restitution to
victims as part of their sentences. In approximately one-third of states, courts are required to order restitution to
victims in cases involving certain types of crimes, typically violent felony offenses, but sometimes other serious
offenses as well. http://victimsofcrime.org/help-for-crime-victims/get-help-bulletins-for-crime-victims/restitution
4
Compensation is a pecuniary remedy that is awarded to an individual who has sustained an injury in order to
replace the loss caused. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/compensation
matter to the court, the court will regard such failure to pay as a violation of a condition
and it will be the one which will take the necessary steps of sentencing the offender.
responsibility to repair the injustice that he or she has caused to the victim or victims.
victim impact panels, and volunteer mentoring, the offender remains in the community,
completes community service, and pays victim restitution (Alarid and Reichel, 2008).
According to Bazemore and Stinchcomb (2004) restorative justice is most effective for
offenders.
Community benefits
Taxman (1998) indicated that community corrections helps or benefit the community by
being saved by the reduction of recidivism rate of the offender and the community can
also benefit from the community work which is done by the offender in the community as
part of his sentence. According to Bazemore and Schiff (1996) the community also benefit
from the CC due to the fact that the offenders are held accountable of their crimes which
they have caused against the community, and by being held accountable of their actions,
they tend to receive treatment and education which later helps the offender to no longer
commit crime and it ensures a public safety in the society. Latessa and Smith (2015)
5
Restorative Justice is a theory and method in criminal justice in which it is arranged that the victim and the
community receive restitution from the offender. http://restorativejustice.org/restorative-justice/about-
restorative-justice/tutorial-intro-to-restorative-justice/#sthash.Ikg0ldog.dpbs
indicated that the community also benefit economically, the work which is being done by
the offender can be a work which can make a gain or income in part of the community.
According to Speiser (2015) the community can also be saved from the increase of the
tax, because while criminals have been convicted of an offence and taken to correctional
centres, such people rely on tax money of the community and whenever there is an
overcrowding in correctional centres, the government is the one who have to come with
the strategy of increasing money, and that is done through increasing tax money in order
to maintain the offenders and their needs within the correctional centres.
Community corrections provide the offender with social reintegration (Griffiths et al, 2007).
According to James (2015) social reintegration refers to the support given to the offender
during their re-entry into the community. Griffiths et al, 2007) asserted that offenders
offenders away from the criminal justice system to an alternative measures such as
restorative justice process or other treatment which can be suitable depending on the
crime and the circumstances of the case. This includes the imposing of community-based
to facilitate the social reintegration of the offender within the community rather than
subjecting the offender to the marginalizing and harmful effects of imprisonment. Altschul