Testing probation outcomes in an evidence-based practice setting: Reduced caseload size and intensive supervision effectiveness

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 233-253

  Jalbert, Sarah Kuck ^a   Rhodes, William ^a   Flygare, Christopher ^a   Kane, Michael ^b  

^a ABT ASSOCIATES   (United States)

^b Crime and Justice Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

Evidence based practice; Probation caseload size; Probation outcomes; Regression discontinuity design

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951897236     PISSN: 10509674     EISSN: 15408558     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10509671003715987     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
2. Burrell, W. (2005). Trends in probation and parole in the states. In The book of the states, 2005. Council on State Governments, 37th edition.
3. Byrne, J. M., & Kelly, L. M. (1989). Restructuring probation as an intermediate sanction: An evaluation of the Massachusetts intensive probation supervision program: Final report to the National Institute of Justice. Lowell, MA: University of Massachusetts.
4. Clear, T. R. (1990). The new intensive supervision movement. Crime Delinquency, 36(1), 42-61.
5. Clear, T. R., & Hardyman, P. (1990). The new intensive supervision movement. Crime Delinquency, 36(1), 42.
6. Cromwell, P. F., & Killinger, G. G. (1994). Community-based corrections probation, parole, and intermediate sanctions (3rd ed.). Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
7. DeMichele, M., & Paparozzi, M. (2008). Community corrections: A powerful field. Corrections Today, 70(5), 68-72.
8. Farrington, D., & Welsh, B. (2005). Randomized experiments in criminology: What have we learned in the last two decades? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(1), 9-38.
9. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2000, Spring). Generating rational correctional policies: An introduction to advances in cumulating knowledge. Corrections Management Quarterly, 4(2), 52-60.
10. Glaze, L. E., & Bonczar, T. P. (2009). Probation and parole in the United States, statistical tables (No. NCJ224707). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
11. Joplin, L., Bogue, B., Campbell, N., Carey, M., Clawson, E., Faust, D., et al. (2004). Using an integrated model to implement evidence-based practices in corrections. Silver Spring, MD: International Community Corrections Association and American Correctional Association.
12. Lee, D., & Lemieux, T. (2009). Regression discontinuity designs in economics (NBER Working Paper No. w14723). Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1344703
13. Lowenkamp, C., Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. M. (2005). Increasing the effectiveness of correctional programming through the risk principle: Identifying offenders for residential placement. Criminology Public Policy, 4(2), 263.
14. Lowenkamp, C., Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. M. (2006). The risk principle in action: What have we learned from 13, 676 offenders and 97 correctional programs? Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 77-93.
15. Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 35, 22-54.
16. Noonan, S., & Latessa, E. (1987). Intensive probation: An examination of recidivism and social adjustment. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 12(1), 45-61.
17. Paparozzi, M. A., & Gendreau, P. (2005). An intensive supervision program that worked: Service delivery, professional orientation, and organizational supportiveness. The Prison Journal, 85, 445-466.
18. Pearson, F., & Harper, A. (1990). Contingent intermediate sentences: New Jersey's intensive supervision program. Crime & Delinquency, 36(1), 75-86.
19. Petersilia, J. (1999). A decade of experimenting with intermediate sanctions: What have we learned? Justice Research and Policy, 1(1), 9-23.
20. Rhodes, W. (1986). A survival model with dependent competing events and right-hand censoring: Probation and parole as an illustration. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2(2), 113-137.