The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
intensity makes no difference to recidivism, and tends to increase the rate <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> technical<br />
violati<strong>on</strong>s (which can lead to returns to jail and further criminalizati<strong>on</strong>) due to the<br />
increased surveillance inherent in the process. However, we find several more recent<br />
studies that show more promising reducti<strong>on</strong>s in recidivism. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>se programs tend to focus<br />
more closely <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>tent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> supervisi<strong>on</strong>, which remains a largely neglected aspect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
probati<strong>on</strong>, rather than c<strong>on</strong>tact frequency and caseload size.<br />
We c<strong>on</strong>clude that the<br />
assumpti<strong>on</strong> that “more is better” does not necessarily hold true, and that it is more<br />
important to ask what probati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficers are expected to achieve during supervisi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Chapters 2 and 3 build <strong>on</strong> the findings from an experiment c<strong>on</strong>ducted with the<br />
Philadelphia Adult Probati<strong>on</strong> and Parole Department (APPD), in which the agency<br />
restructured supervisi<strong>on</strong> activities al<strong>on</strong>g risk-based lines. Sixty per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> APPD’s<br />
caseload was filtered into reduced-intensity supervisi<strong>on</strong> based <strong>on</strong> a statistical predicti<strong>on</strong><br />
that they were at low risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> serious recidivism. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> removal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> resources from some<br />
probati<strong>on</strong>ers has met with criticism, despite the l<strong>on</strong>ger-term goal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the project: to free up<br />
staff to work more closely with the dangerous <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders who increase the public’s fear <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
crime. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> goal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> these chapters is to provide a rigorous evaluati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> low-intensity<br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong> and the suitability <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the predicti<strong>on</strong> model, to ensure first that no serious<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders inadvertently receive too little supervisi<strong>on</strong>, and sec<strong>on</strong>d that reduced supervisi<strong>on</strong><br />
in itself is not criminogenic.<br />
While Chapter 1 shows no evidence that increased<br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong> prevents serious <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders from committing crimes, it remains important to<br />
show that reduced supervisi<strong>on</strong> does not lead to unfavorable outcomes. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> policy cannot<br />
work as a resource-saving strategy if agencies view it as too politically risky.<br />
xii