No abstract

Currently, there are more than 4.5 million Americans under some form of community supervision. Much of the experience of traditional community supervision relies on face-to-face interactions. Individuals on supervision often require treatment or services typically delivered in face-to-face settings. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced community corrections' agencies to quickly rethink how they do business, with limited existing research on how to adapt supervision protocols in the midst of a global pandemic. Using surveys of directors of community corrections' agencies across the United States, the goal of the current study was to examine how community corrections' agencies have adapted traditional supervision processes to address disease prevention and containment in addition to supporting client needs and community safety as a result of COVID-19. Changes implemented during the pandemic may have implications for the future landscape of community supervision. Understanding how and what agencies prioritize in a time of global crisis can provide a foundation for identifying sustainable changes as well as understanding future impacts on system and client-level outcomes.

Growing empirical research finds that a correctional system devoted to punishment is ineffective and can produce criminogenic effects. As a result, justice organizations, including probation, are encouraging managers and staff to adopt evidence-based practices (EBPs), supported by scientific evidence, such as validated risk and needs assessments and cognitive-behavioral therapies. Implementation of EBPs falls heavily on street-level workers, such as probation officers (POs) as they implement policy, yet little attention examines whether and how EBPs align within the traditionally authoritarian justice environment. Using over 1,000 hr of observation and interview data with probation staff, the present study examines how probation staff understand and use EBPs. Findings indicate that probation staff continue to make discretionary decisions regarding whom they can use EBPs with and situations in which EBP use is appropriate. Findings have significant implications for the acceptability, feasibility, and transportability of EBPs in criminal justice environments.

The advancement of evidence-based practices (EBP) and the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model suggests several key practices for probation agencies, including validated risk and needs assessments and appropriate treatment matching. Despite evidence supporting use of practices aligned with the RNR model to improve offender outcomes, research identifies significant implementation challenges in probation practice. Using 1,084 hours of ethnographic data, the current study sought to examine how probation staff implemented best practices aligned with the risk, need, and responsivity principles. Analyses suggest probation staff supervision practices misaligned with research evidence on RNR and associated agency trainings. Probation officers rarely used the risk and needs assessment to inform supervision decisions, creation of case plans, and referrals to treatment programs. Findings highlight the challenges associated with moving evidence on the RNR model to routine probation practice. Implications for policy and research are discussed, including a focus on perceived liability and implementation of best practices.

Risk and needs assessment (RNA) tools are well regarded as a critical component of a community corrections organization implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), given the potential impact of using such tools on offender-level and system outcomes. The current study examines how probation officers (POs) use a validated RNA tool in two adult probation settings. Using interview and observational data, this study explores how POs use an assessment tool during all facets of their work from preplanning, routine administrative tasks, and face-to-face case management interactions with probation clients. Findings suggest POs overwhelmingly administer the RNA tool, but rarely link the RNA scores to key case management or supervision decisions. These findings highlight some of the challenges and complexities associated with the application of RNA tools in everyday practice. Study implications emphasize the need to modify current probation practices to create a synergy between the RNA and related supervision practices. Findings from this study contribute to a better appreciation for how the new penology integrates risk management with client-centered case models to improve outcomes.

Growing evidence pointing to the ineffectiveness of control-oriented supervision practices has led to an emphasis on evidence-based practices (EBPs), or practices that are empirically tied to recidivism reduction. Research on EBPs in probation highlights the importance of case management-oriented supervision and provision of proactive, appropriate program referrals. Despite research support, challenges exist regarding implementing EBPs in real-world practice. Utilizing survey data from 813 adult probation officers across 43 agencies, the current study examined variation in use of case management and proactive referral practices. Findings highlight the important role organizational commitment plays in supporting implementation efforts. Implications suggest a need for probation agencies to promote and sustain staff commitment to their agency before embarking on significant reform efforts.

Sustainable, collaborative partnerships provide a dynamic and fluid environment for studying and implementing policy and practice in justice agencies. However, these relationships take work to develop, grow, maintain, and sustain. Bridging the gap between academics and criminal justice practitioners requires solid partnerships built on access, agreement, goal setting, feedback, and relationship maintenance. When these components merge, both groups benefit from a resilient partnership with the potential for dramatically improving outcomes. A researcher-practitioner partnership is a challenging and complex process requiring careful attention to detail and an endless supply of energy and determination. This paper highlights some of the many successful researcher-practitioner partnerships our research team at the Center for Advancing Correctional Excellence (ACE!) has with criminal justice agencies. We detail four specific partnerships with federal, state, and county criminal justice organizations spanning from probation and parole to problem-solving courts.

Community supervision agencies commonly use resource allocation models to identify the amount of monitoring and treatment to provide individuals under supervision. The risk-needs-responsivity model guides these decisions, suggesting the level of supervision should align with one's risk level, with fewer services provided to those at a lower risk of recidivism. However, probation officers often operate under a risk management model with perceptions of risk guiding decisions. Using qualitative data, the current study examined the implementation of a telephone monitoring system for low risk offenders. This research explored (a) probation staff perceptions of telephone monitoring, (b) probation staff adaptations of telephone monitoring, and (c) individual and external influences related to telephone supervision use. Findings suggest officer perceptions of risk and liability affect use of telephone supervision for low risk probationers. Results highlight challenges associated with implementing the risk principle given tendencies to oversupervise as a means to protect public safety.