An Assessment of Texas Juvenile Intensive Supervision Programs (original) (raw)
Related papers
Intensive Supervision Probation: Assessing Texas Programs
This paper identifies effective practices for Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) programs and assesses the extent to which Texas ISP programs use those practices. Effective ISP practices are derived from a review of criminal justice and ISP literature. The effective JSP practices identified in the literature are organized into five categories: mission and goal statements, target population and selection criteria, treatment and control activities, program integrity, and community justice. Twenty-three ISP programs are assessed for their use of effective practices in all five categories. All programs are funded primarily by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Community Justice Assistance Division (TDCJ-CJAD), and operated by local probation departments. The sample has some unique characteristics. The assessment was originally designed to use survey research as the primary source of evidence, and content analysis or telephone interviews as a secondary source. Multiple sources of evidence were meant to increase data validity in each case. A low survey response rate resulted in using content analysis and telephone interviews as primary sources for a large number of programs. Data coding was not consistent across all sources of evidence, so the number of cases varies for each item. Texas ISP programs, In general, meet the criteria for providing need-based treatment services and including long-term outcomes in their program goals. Texas ISP programs did not have clearly written mission and goal statements unique to the program. Programs did not adhere to criteria that place offenders who will do best into their programs. Regular program audits are the only tool in place to ensure program integrity. Special staff training and program evaluation did not take place in any of the programs. Finally, programs have not implemented community justice concepts to any recognizable extent. Local departments that operate the programs and TDCJ-CJAD, the agency that funds the programs, can implement changes to move ISP toward the known effective practices. Local departments should develop clear missions and goals, adhere to selection criteria identified in the literature, implement processes to assist in adhering to these criteria, require ISP-specific training, evaluate programs, and implement community justice concepts. TDCJ-CJAD should: re-name ISP programs that are operating as "specialized caseloads", establish a training curriculum for ISP based on the American Probation and Parole Association's curriculum, evaluate programs, validate the risk assessment instrument currently used by departments, and promote the principles of community justice when funding ISP programs.
Implementation of an enhanced probation program: Evaluating process and preliminary outcomes
Evaluation and program planning, 2015
Supervision, Monitoring, Accountability, Responsibility, and Treatment (SMART) is Kentucky's enhanced probation pilot program modeled after Hawaii's Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE). SMART is proposed to decrease substance use, new violations, and incarceration-related costs for high-risk probationers by increasing and randomizing drug testing, intensifying supervision, and creating linkages with needed resources (i.e., mental health and substance use). SMART adopts a holistic approach to rehabilitation by addressing mental health and substance abuse needs as well as life skills for fostering deterrence of criminal behavior vs. punitive action only. A mixed methods evaluation was implemented to assess program implementation and effectiveness. Qualitative interviews with key stakeholders (i.e., administration, judges, attorneys, and law enforcement/corrections) suggested successful implementation and collaboration to facilitate the pilot program. Quantitative ana...
Journal for applied juvenile justice services, 2020
Using administrative data collected by an urban juvenile probation department between January 2007 and August 2016, this study compared the impact of the Community Connections (CC) program to a matched sample of youth who received intensive supervision probation (ISP) on six time-to-event variables (i.e., time to second program, detention, out-of-home placement, another offense, violation of court order, and days in program). The study included youth who were assigned to court-ordered post-adjudication community supervision and who were deemed to have a high risk of re-offending by the department's risk and needs assessment. CC and ISP youth were matched using propensity score matching that created a final sample of 381 youth in each program. When examining the program effect of CC vs. ISP on the time-to-event variables the findings were mixed. However, across both programs, the analysis revealed that youth who remained in the programs longer and youth with a successful program discharge generally experienced better long-term outcomes than their peers.
Beyond probation: Juvenile corrections and the chronic delinquent
Children and Youth Services Review, 1980
criteria whereas only 10 to 30% of the control group members successfully met the criteria. The major value of the study is its focus on behaviors that support appropriate individual social behavior in the work environment. Chapter 10, by Yates, Haven and Thoresen differs from the other Chapters. Its focus is the cost effectiveness of the program as opposed to simple outcome variables. A model for evaluating cost effectiveness is introduced which analyzes both costs and effectiveness, but at a level of specificity and sophistication that is uncommon for reports of behavioral intervention. One can only hope that the models put forth by the authors will be utilized by others who are attempting to evaluate the cost effectiveness of their programs. Overall the book is a useful volume. It clearly shows that the dismal treatment outcomes which are common in programs for delinquents need not continue.
Drivers of the Sentenced Population: Probation Analysis
2013
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. • Between 1993 and 2011, an increasing proportion of felony probationers in Illinois were accounted for by females, whites, Hispanics, and older probationers. • The majority of felons discharged from probation were successfully terminated from supervision throughout the period examined. The proportion of felons discharged from probation as a result of a revocation of probation for either a technical violation or a new offense remained stable, and relatively low (at or below 10 percent statewide), throughout the time period examined. • Success on probation can mean less reliance on prison, but failure on probation can result in commitment to the Illinois Department of Corrections. Individuals who had their probation revoked or were reconvicted of a new crime while on probation accounted for roughly 15 percent of all those sentenced to prison, a proportion that remained relatively stable through the time period examined.
28 Federal Sentencing Reporter 231
The crescendo against overincarceration continues as the costs-financially but also societally-mount. In addition to the 2.3 million people who are incarcerated, another 4.7 million people are under supervision of the correctional system. 1 Most of them-almost 3.9 million-serve a probationary sentence. In the federal system, the number of probationers is very small, 2 especially compared to the number of those on supervised release. 3 The ratio is almost the opposite from the overall correctional population, where probationers make up about 80 percent of those under community supervision. 4 Despite years of neglect, the problem of what to do with the non-incarcerated correctional population is too big to ignore. This Issue looks at various dimensions of noncustodial supervision-including probation and post-confinement sanctions such as supervised release and parole-in the states and at the federal level.