The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk

make up the majority <strong>of</strong> APPD’s caseload. <strong>The</strong>ir overall propensity to re<strong>of</strong>fend at the
time <strong>of</strong> risk assessment is extremely low. Regardless <strong>of</strong> their past history, <strong>of</strong>fenders
predicted to be at low-risk <strong>of</strong> committing a serious crime respond just as well to a less
restrictive intervention as they do to a more intensive one. <strong>The</strong> less severe their history,
the more likely they are to improve their outcomes, even with minimal involvement from
the criminal justice system. Building such knowledge about the cases that make up the
majority <strong>of</strong> a probation agency’s caseload could be vital for the planning and allocation
<strong>of</strong> resources, and the ability to tailor supervision to clients’ needs and requirements.
Our analysis is somewhat limited because <strong>of</strong> the low prevalence <strong>of</strong> serious
<strong>of</strong>fending in the sample. With more data, it might be possible to shed further light on the
characteristics <strong>of</strong> low-level <strong>of</strong>fending to improve probation agency decision-making.
One useful line <strong>of</strong> inquiry would be to look at the escalation in serious <strong>of</strong>fending up to
the point <strong>of</strong> random assignment, and whether the timing <strong>of</strong> the serious priors has any
bearing on their interaction with supervision intensity. Our basic approach <strong>of</strong> examining
the presence or absence <strong>of</strong> serious prior <strong>of</strong>fending may mask differences between, for
example, an older <strong>of</strong>fender who was charged with a serious <strong>of</strong>fense twenty-five years ago
and has only committed a few minor <strong>of</strong>fenses since, and a younger <strong>of</strong>fender whose
earliest <strong>of</strong>fenses were trivial but whose career had started to escalate shortly before the
current probation term.
In addition, our measure <strong>of</strong> serious <strong>of</strong>fending is based on
charges, and as with any crime outcome measure there are numerous factors in the
decisions to charge an <strong>of</strong>fender, and to drop a charge or fail to convict, that are unrelated
to whether or not the <strong>of</strong>fender actually committed the crime.
This is a crucial
consideration in any discussion <strong>of</strong> the relationship between past and future behavior.
168