CCa.pdf Michael Hallstone, Ph.D.

Michael.hallstone@asu.edu

Community Corrections
Sources:

Bureau of Justice Statistics [BJS] website multiple years

Clear, Todd R. and George F. Cole

2000 American Corrections. West/Wadsworth: Belmont, CA. Fifth Edition.

Schmalleger, Frank
2001 Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the Twenty-First Century. Upper Saddle New Jersey:
Prentice Hall. Chapter 11
Inciardi, James A.1
1999 Criminal Justice. Sixth Edition Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Chapter 17.

Introduction
After a judge sentences a convicted criminal, s/he enters the third phase of the criminal justice
system: “corrections.” (One will recall the first two are “policing” and “courts.”) Criminals who
receive incarceration as a part of their sentence obviously go to jail or prison. Those who receive
probation (or those that go to jail for a while and then are released on parole) are released into the
community with restrictions on their behavior. Being out of jail or prison but being under supervision
of the corrections system is typically called “community corrections.” Obviously, being spared
incarceration like this is far less restrictive and expensive to the government. One text book author
describes it, “Community corrections can be best defined as the use of a variety of court-ordered
programmatic sanctions permitting convicted offenders to remain in the community under conditional
supervision as an alternative to active prison sentences…(it) includes a wide variety of sentencing
options, such as probation, parole, home confinement, the electronic monitoring of offenders, and
other new developing programs” (Schmalleger, 2001: 411).

Probation
This is probably the most basic form of community corrections. Instead of being incarcerated, the
sentence can be conceptualized as a sort of “conditional release” or “suspended sentence” (it is not
really a suspended sentence). The general idea is the person is released into the community but
with some conditions – the promise to “be good and not commit any other crimes.” Inciardi provides a
more formal definition, “A sentence not involving confinement that imposes conditions and retains
authority in the sentencing court to modify the conditions of sentence or to resentence the offender if
he or she violates the conditions” (Inciardi, 1999: 532 sidebar). So the person is released into the
community under some conditions; as long as those conditions are not broken the person will not be
locked up and will be “free” after they serve the amount of time specified.

Probation is, by far, the most commonly used criminal sentence in the US. This has probably been
true for many years, but I’ve only found data back to 1980 where it’s consistently more than half.

So for example, since 2000 probation has comprised roughly 60% [58%] of the corrections
population. Probation is the most widely used criminal sanction or penalty in the US. For example
BJS statistics show that, while they may oscillate yearly the following percentages are roughly the
same in 1999 and 2018 [latest avaiable]:

Correctional Populations in US
1999 2008 2018

Probation 58% 58% 55%

Prison 22% 22% 23%

Parole 12% 11% 14%

Jail 10% 11% 12%

(percentages do not total 100% due to rounding)

2
Philosophy Behind and History of Probation
The basic idea that guides probation is many criminals are not dangerous and do not present a threat
to society; thus they do not need to be separated from society (i.e. confined or incarcerated).
Essentially the offender is given an opportunity to prove that, given a second chance, they will
“straighten up.”

John Augustus is the Father of Probation

Probation was really started in Boston, Massachusetts in the early 1800’s by a philanthropist by the
name of John Augustus. Augustus was known to the Court and judges would often defer sentencing
and release common drunkards into Augustus’ custody. If after 3 weeks time the person had
“changed his ways,” the judge would merely impose a small fine. Augustus is important because he
developed concepts that are still used today: presentence investigation, supervision conditions,
social casework, reports to the court, revocation of probation, and he first coined the term “probation”
(Clear and Cole, 2000: 169).

Philosophy Behind Probation

One pair of text book authors suggest that, while John Augustus certainly started probation with a
strong humanitarian orientation that focused on rehabilitation or reformation, other schools of thought
have competed with this view (Clear and Cole, 2000). As probation developed many ex-police
officers became probation officers. They tended to focus upon surveillance and close controls on
behavior. A social worker orientation has followed more in the footsteps of John Augustus; this camp
has tended to stress providing supportive services to meet the offender’s needs and help them
become rehabilitated.

Certainly, the underlying theoretical idea of probation is that the offender can be rehabilitated and
the community protected via close supervision. For example, one of the knocks against prison or
jail, is it places a criminal in an “extremely criminal environment.” Prisoners are regularly physically,
sexually, and emotionally assaulted while in prison. Thus, they learn to be more criminal while
locked up, not less criminal. So, it is questionable whether or not rehabilitation can occur in such an
environment. The argument suggests that if we want the person to be “integrated” into the
community, then it is best to try and accomplish that in the natural environment of that community.

3
The two schools of thought (cops vs. social workers) would merely differ on the best approach to
achieve reintegration into the community.

Economic Issues Make Probation Attractive

Economic issues have also begun to make probation an attractive sentencing option. There is
tremendous overcrowding in many prisons and jails. Many systems are under federal court orders
to reduce this problem. So probation can help there. Building more prison beds is costly.
Secondly, even when there is space in a prison, the costs of incarceration is much higher than
probation. Makes sense right? One text suggests that the costs of prison are approximately $30,000
a year (estimates vary by jurisdiction and whether or not prison building costs are included) while
probation costs less than one tenth of that (Inciardi, 1999: 533). In 2006 dollars Hawaii spends
approximately 30,000 per year per inmate to pay to lock them up – which translated to about 100
million dollars in that fiscal year. 100 million dollars and in 2006 we “only” had about 3500 imates!

Pre-sentence or Pre-Probation Report

Regardless of which agency administers probation, there is often a report commissioned to help
guide the sentencing procedure. The length and depth varies depending upon the jurisdiction, but
offender background information including personal and criminal history, potential risk to the
community, and a recommendation are included.

Conditions of Probation
The Standard Conditions

When a defendant is sentenced to probation, they are required to adhere to some typical conditions
such as: follow all laws, to work [or at least be actively looking for it], support dependents, maintain
scheduled contacts with probation officer, and to often stay in the geographical jurisdiction of the
court.

It is also not uncommon for the probationer to be referred to various services available in the
community such as job training, drug treatment, anger management, half-way houses or other semi-
institutional living situations etc.

4
 Some special conditions that are also allowed

Certain special conditions have been upheld by the courts and thus can be legally imposed by the
judge or the probation agency: drug treatment, abstinence from alcohol, submitting to a search by
probation officer, refraining from driving a motor vehicle, and payment of restitution; in the past twenty
years, it has also become common for the court to require that the probationer pay a fee for the
probation services provided (Inciardi, 1999: 535).

Intensive Probation
While not entirely new, intensive probation has become more popular in recent years. It helps reduce
the burden on the growing pains of a rapidly expanding corrections system. Due to its rapid and
tremendous growth, the corrections apparatus (especially prisons) are over-crowded and the whole
system is financially-strapped – even though their budgets have grown exponentially.

So intensive probation seeks to supervise a person much more closely and hopefully manage and
minimize risk to the community. This helps relieve over-crowding in the prisons, while still satisfying
(at least to certain degree) the public’s desire to see criminals sanctioned.

The basic idea is that defendants are under much closer supervision than with “normal probation.”
The case-loads of the probations are smaller, and the probationer has more contact and more
conditions of probation such as: frequent systematic contacts with the probation officer (PO),
mandatory employment, mandatory drug tests and/or treatment, mandatory curfews, etc. Certainly,
the conditions can vary, but simply imagine probation conditions and supervision that is much more
“intensive.”

Does intensive probation work?

The research so far suggests mixed results. Recidivism (via violation of conditions or further criminal
activity) does not seem to significantly differ between regular and intensive probation. There are two
positive results. Intensive probationers seem to feel they have a greater chance of getting caught,
and would then be punished more severely, if they violate conditions of their probation. Secondly,
intensive probation is much cheaper than incarceration.

5
 Revocation of Probation
If the probationer violates the condition of their probation, they can be incarcerated. Certainly,
depending upon the nature of their violation, the attitude of the probationer, etc a PO may decide to
overlook some minor violations. The PO truly has a tremendous amount of discretion here.
However, violating those conditions or being arrested for a new crime can result in revocation of
probation. While the PO can start proceedings by reporting violations to the court, in most states
only the court can make the decision whether or not to revoke probation.

Parole
This is the supervised early release of a defendant from incarceration. Essentially they are let out
before their sentence has expired with the promise to be good and to live by certain conditions very
similar to those described above for probation. A good way to conceptualize it is like “probation” after
incarceration. However, “while probation is a sentencing strategy, parole is a correctional strategy
whose primary purpose is to return offenders gradually to productive lives” (Schmalleger, 2001: 414).

Obviously, eligibility for parole depends upon the nature of the original sentence passed by the judge.
Some sentences to not allow for possibility for parole. Some jurisdictions have mandatory release
provisions where the inmate MUST by rule of the law be released to parole after earning a specific
amount of “good time credits” via work, various programs, good behavior, etc.

However, indeterminate sentences (recall those are a range of time like 2-4 years) do allow for parole.
Pretend someone has received an indeterminate sentence of 2-4 years. Assuming they do “good
time” for that minimum period (2 years in this case), they can be eligible for parole. Typically a
parole board meets in secret along with the inmate, a representative of the place where they are
incarcerated, and a note-taker to determine whether or not to release the prisoner on parole. If the
person is paroled, then they must abide by the conditions imposed by the paroling authority for the
remainder of their sentence. They are assigned some sort of parole officer to make sure they follow
the conditions of their parole.

Using the above example, if the person is paroled after 2 years, then they have to follow those
conditions for the remaining 2 years of the original sentence. If they violate the conditions of their
parole they can be returned to prison.

6
 Street Time v. Dead Time
One of the issues concerning revocation of parole is whether one’s time out of prison prior to the
parole violation (“street time”) should be counted as time served on the original sentence. For
example, pretend a person had a 5 year sentence, was released to parole after 2 years, served 2
years on parole, and then is sent back to prison. The question is, “How much time does the person
‘owe’ the state on the original 5 years?” If the person gets credit for “street time” (2+2=4)then s/he
owes only one remaining year to serve the 5 years. If s/he does not receive credit for the street time
(then that time on parole is called “dead time”), then s/he owes the state 3 years to add up to the
original 5 years.

Whether or not a person receives credit for street time differs by jurisdiction [and thus local law]. The
courts have consistently ruled that states are NOT required to give credit for “street time.”

Being released or “discharged” from parole

There are three ways to be discharged from parole: 1) if you add up incarceration and successful
parole time and it is all the time on your original sentence then you are “maxed out” and are released.
2) some states allow for discharge to be prior to the maximum expiration date if you successfully
complete an specified amount of time. For example in Ohio, the parole board can discharge
someone after one year of “good time” on parole. 3) get pardoned or a commutation of sentence by
the governor.

Other Kinds of Community Corrections: Work Release, Home Furlough, Study Release
Furlough is the basic term for releasing someone from a correctional institution for a particular period
of time. The idea is to let some one out for short spurts as a way of gradually re-integrating them into
the community.

Home Furlough
The prison is released from the jail/prison and allowed to go home for a period of time: usually like
over the weekend. They are allowed to seek employment, go to self-improvement programs,
maintain or strengthen family ties, etc. Eligibility varies by jurisdiction and conditions or criteria for
inclusion into a such a furlough program range from “highly specific to hopelessly vague” (Inciardi,
1999: 554).

7
 Work Release
The idea here is the prisoner is released to engage in work activity. Often times they are allowed to
leave jail/prison during the day for work and then have to return to spend the night. Some of the
potential benefits include: having a positive effect on a prisoner’s self esteem, allowing them to pay
fines, restitution, child support, or help pay the costs of their program – thus decreasing fiscal costs to
the state and taxpayers.

Study Release
The idea here is to be released to receive some sort of educational or vocational training.

Evaluating the “successfulness” of parole

There are mixed results with studies of parole. Certainly, results depend upon how you define
“success” and “failure,” but generally there are fairly high recidivism rates. Some studies in Hawaii
have shown that people with good work history or employment opportunities are more successful and
those with out such skills or history and drug addiction problems are far less successful. Due to the
high recidivism rates some states have abolished parole. Inciardi (1999) suggests, while there are
problems and issues, the evidence is mixed and it may be premature to abolish parole just yet.