No abstract

In 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic forced probation departments to change their practices overnight. The phenomenon presented many challenges for probation departments but also opened avenues for innovation and changes in attitudes toward supervision practices. We surveyed adult and juvenile probation departments in the entire state of Texas, specifically targeting management and supervisory personnel, officers with caseloads, including court officers, and information technology personnel ( N = 1,353). Our goals of this research included not only obtaining information about operational changes made because of the pandemic but also gauging attitudes toward these changes and the future of probation. We understood operational changes were inevitable, thus findings of significant operational changes were not surprising. We found that probation personnel were open to changes in operational procedures and that the pandemic spurred innovation and widespread acceptance in the use of technology for a variety of activities going forward that may not have been accepted prior to the pandemic.

No abstract

Prior research regarding probation officer roles and tasks has included statutory analyses, time studies, and computation of daily tasks in relation to risk level of offenders. However, there is limited research investigating specific proportions of probation officer tasks by officer caseload type. The current study builds on existing literature by providing an initial investigation into the daily tasks of adult probation officers of a medium-sized, tri-county probation department in a Southwestern state. For all officers, only 26% of tasks involved face-to-face contact with probationers. While regular caseload officers had the largest caseloads, specialized officers were more likely to supervise high-risk individuals. Court officers had the lowest proportion of face-to-face contact with probationers among the three groups. There were some significant differences in tasks observed between specialized and court officers and no statistically significant differences between regular officers and specialized officers. Recommendations for changes in probation practice are provided.

The use of pretrial and bond supervision commonly referred to as supervised release has increased over the last several decades due to burgeoning jail and prison populations. Much research has been conducted on these release mechanisms but has yet to examine the effects of types of technical violations on pretrial failure. The current study examined the effects of technical violations committed by individuals under a felony “bond” supervision program, which included both pretrial releasees and individuals being supervised on bond awaiting a probation revocation hearing, in a large metropolitan area. The results demonstrate while technical violations are associated with pretrial failure, the effects vary by violation type. Furthermore, the findings illustrate differences in risk factors for technical violations while on pretrial/bond supervision. Relevant policy implications of the research are provided.