The effectiveness of probation supervision towards reducing reoffending: A Rapid Evidence Assessment

Abstract

In response to the lack of universal agreement about what works in probation supervision (Trotter, 2013) we undertook a Rapid Evidence Assessment of the empirical literature. Our analysis of research into the effect of probation supervision reducing reoffending included 13 studies, all of which employed robust research designs, originating in the USA, UK, Canada and Australia, published between 2006 and 2016. We describe the papers included in our review, and the metaanalyses of their findings. Overall we found that the likelihood of reoffending was shown to be lower for offenders who had been exposed to some type of supervision. This finding should be interpreted cautiously however, given the heterogeneity of the studies. We suggest future research and methodological considerations to develop the evidence base concerning the effectiveness of probation supervision.

The marketisation of rehabilitation: Some economic considerations

“…There is both evidence (e.g. Smith et al 2018) and theory (e.g. Weaver 2012) that supports such an approach.…”

Does correctional supervision of amphetamine users reduce the risk of re‐offending?

“…Correctional supervision is a common response to cases of alleged or proven offending, being variously used as a condition of bail, as an alternative to receiving a custodial penalty and as a condition of release on parole. The nature and conditions, under which supervision occurs, however, vary widely from one jurisdiction to another [8]. Given the wide variety of circumstances in which and offenders with whom supervised is used, it is not surprising to find little consistency among studies examining the effect of supervision on re‐offending.…”

“…Smith et al . [20] conducted a meta‐analysis of the probation studies conducted between 2006 and 2016 and concluded that the likelihood of re‐offending was lower for offenders who had been exposed to some type of supervision. Finally, Drug Court programs, which combine offender supervision and with rehabilitation, generally result in lower rates of re‐offending than prison [21].…”

Are risk-need-responsivity principles golden? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of community correction programs

“…Analytical studies of recidivism rates among probation offenders have shown that recidivism rates are lower for offenders who have participated in some programs designed based on RNR principles. However, due to high heterogeneity, no credible conclusions exist on the structure of what occurs other than that factors such as type and frequency of supervision, and offender characteristics may influence recidivism rates (Smith et al, 2018 ). A more detailed systematic review suggests that RNR-based rehabilitation effectively reduces recidivism rates, but considerable variations occurred in program type, implementation, and so on (Lipsey & Cullen, 2007 ).…”