Giving Compass
  • Sign In
  • About Us
    About Giving Compass How We Choose Content and Organizations Annual Reflections Our Newsletter
  • Getting Started
  • Learn About Issues
    Topic Guides
    Animal Welfare COVID-19 Criminal Justice Democracy Disaster Relief Education Environment Health Homelessness Immigrants and Refugees Racial Equity Women and Girls
    Curated Articles
    Partner Collections Giving Compass Selections See All Articles
  • Give to Causes
    Issue Funds & Intermediaries Projects Nonprofits
  • Get Involved
    Philanthropy Resource Directory Events Volunteer Opportunities
  • Partner With Us
    Nonprofits Authors Use Our Content Services Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
Sign Up
  • Get the Newsletter
  • Sign In

What We Don’t Know About Parole and Probation

Governing Magazine Apr 4, 2019
This article is deemed a must-read by one or more of our expert collaborators.
Click here for more.
What We Don't Know About Parole and Probation Giving Compass
  •  Share
  •  Save
Share

Giving Compass’ Take:

• Studies have found inconclusive or contradictory results when analyzing if parole and probation efforts are effectively reducing the number of incarcerated individuals. 

• One study in Ohio did find that field visits during probation reduce recidivism. However, researchers found field visits were not as effective in Minnesota. How can donors help tailor best practices for parole officers state-by-state?

• Read more about reaching goals in criminal justice reform. 


The unproductive hours parole officers spend driving to see rural clients, the stress and safety risks for officers, and the disruption to clients who have to take time off from work to meet a probation officer — well, all that’s worth it, right?

The truth is, we don’t really know. There has been precious little research and thus hardly any evidence to show that visits work or which visit components succeed, fail or, even worse, are counterproductive. Are unscheduled or scheduled visits better? Should the visits be at home or in the workplace? As bipartisan prison reform efforts reduce mass incarceration and funnel more people into supervised release, already-large caseloads could explode. It is both critical and urgent to get answers to these questions.

A recent study we did for the National Institute of Justice was one of the first efforts to look at home visits, quantitatively and qualitatively, to gauge their effectiveness.  The evaluation included data analysis, reviews of officer-visit checklists, interviews, and focus-group discussions. The results are promising but quite preliminary. And they raise as many questions as they answer.

That’s partly because the interaction between the officer and the client is a key factor in the value of a visit, and that interaction is hard to observe and evaluate. Aggravating matters, there’s no consensus definition of a field contact and what it entails. And results varied widely among jurisdictions. Was that because of the different contexts, different practices or a combination of the two?

To try to pierce through this fog, we partnered with the American Probation and Parole Association and community supervision authorities in Ohio and Minnesota. We also sent an online survey to corrections departments in all 50 states. The good news is that, overall, field visits did seem to reduce recidivism. In Ohio, individuals who received at least one field contact had a 47 percent reduction in the odds of returning to prison within two years and a 54 percent reduction in the odds of ever returning.

Read the full article about questions about probation and parole by  Sarah Jalbert,Holly Swan, and Walter Campbell at Governing Magazine

  •  Share
  •  Save
Share

Interested in learning more about Criminal Justice? Other readers at Giving Compass found the following articles helpful for impact giving related to Criminal Justice.

  • This article is deemed a must-read by one or more of our expert collaborators.
    Click here for more.
    Interventions Aimed at Helping Individuals Who Cycle Through Systems

    Giving Compass' Take: • The Laura and John Arnold Foundation discuss its efforts to help people tied to repetitive cycles in the criminal justice, healthcare, and social service systems. • What can we do to support evidence-based solutions in this area, as this post details? Are funders and organizations gathering the right data to inform interventions? • Here's how behavioral science can improve criminal justice. The Laura and John Arnold Foundation (LJAF) issued a request for proposals (RFP) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focused on testing programs to help people who repeatedly cycle through the criminal justice, healthcare, and social service systems in their communities. In particular, LJAF is interested in proposals to evaluate established approaches such as crisis intervention teams, assertive community treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy, short-term mental health crisis stabilization programs, and programs incorporating a Housing First approach ... Research shows that of the 11 million people who spend time in local jails each year, 68 percent have a substance use disorder, 64 percent have a mental illness, and 44 percent suffer from chronic health problems. Yet jail systems often lack the training or resources they need to respond to inmates’ substance use and behavioral health conditions. This has negative consequences for the individuals — the majority of whom are charged with low-level, nonviolent offenses — as well as society. Regular stints in jail often exacerbate defendants’ health and life challenges, and these same individuals frequently cycle through hospital emergency rooms and other emergency social service agencies. The uncoordinated care fails to address the underlying health and mental health issues that are driving people into these systems, perpetuating an ongoing cycle of costly and ineffective treatment. In fact, every year, taxpayers spend $22 billion on incarceration costs alone. “There is a great deal of interest in determining how best to use data to improve our nation’s criminal justice and health care systems,” LJAF Vice President of Data-Driven Justice Lynn Overmann explained. “The leaders of more than 140 communities across the country have shown a commitment to data-driven justice. Read the full article about helping people who cycle through systems at Laura and John Arnold Foundation.


Are you ready to give?

If you are ready to take action and invest in causes for Criminal Justice, check out these Giving Funds, Charitable Organizations and Projects related to Criminal Justice.

Loading...
Learn More
Connect

Loading...

Loading...

Learn More
Take Action

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Learn More
More from
Giving Compass
  • This article is deemed a must-read by one or more of our expert collaborators.
    Click here for more.
    U.S. Needs Bold Reforms to Transform Probation and Parole
  • This article is deemed a must-read by one or more of our expert collaborators.
    Click here for more.
    Correctional Control: Report Highlights Disparities in States’ Use of Parole
  • This article is deemed a must-read by one or more of our expert collaborators.
    Click here for more.
    The Myths about criminal justice reform
Follow Us
Newsletter

Become a newsletter subscriber to stay up-to-date on the latest Giving Compass news.

About Us
  • About Giving Compass
  • In The News
  • Contact Us
  • Content at Giving Compass
  • Partner With Us
Trending Issues
  • Environment
  • Homelessness
  • STEM Education
  • Equal Pay Act
  • Gender Equality

Copyright © 2021, Giving Compass, LLC

•
  • Privacy Policy
  • User Agreement

Sign in

Your personal information is confidential at Giving Compass. For more information, please visit our privacy policy. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use.