NIJ Survey of Probation and Parole Agency Directors.

MENU TITLE: NIJ Survey, Probation/Parole                          
Series: NIJ Update
Published: May 1995
3 pages
6064 bytes

NIJ Survey of Probation and Parole Agency 
Directors

-------------------------------------
The National Assessment Program Survey

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) conducts
the National Assessment Program (NAP) survey
approximately every 3 years to identify the needs
and problems of State and local criminal justice
agencies.  The survey asks participants about
their workload problems and initiatives to solve
them as well as about special concerns and needs.
NIJ uses the results to plan its research,
evaluation, and demonstration programs. 

For the 1994 survey, questionnaires were sent to
more than 3,300 criminal justice professionals in
13 types of agencies in 411 counties nationwide. A
total of 211 counties having populations greater
than 250,000 were surveyed, along with a random
sample of 200 counties having populations between
50,000 and 250,000. Responses were received
between October 1993 and February 1994 from 2,585
people (for a response rate of 69 percent).

The complete report of the survey, National
Assessment Program: 1994 Survey Results, by Tom
McEwen, can be obtained free from the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), Box
6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000. Call 800-851-3420
or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.aspensys.com. Ask for NCJ
150856. Also available from NCJRS are individual
summaries of responses from the other following
groups: police chiefs and sheriffs; prosecutors;
probation and parole agency directors; judges,
trial court administrators, and State court
administrators; and wardens and State
commissioners of corrections.
-------------------------------------

"With resources remaining at a constant level and
caseloads increasing, the issue becomes one of
prioritizing limited resources and developing new
case management strategies." The difficulty of
balancing needs and resources was noted in the
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) 1994 National
Assessment Program (NAP) survey of probation and
parole agency directors. A total of 368 directors
of local agencies (67 percent of the 546 surveyed)
and 54 directors of State agencies (87 percent of
the 62 surveyed) responded. Caseload management
led the list of workload problems that the agency
directors said they faced.

Workload problems

Caseload management.  About 92 percent of the
responding probation and parole directors
indicated that they needed more field officers to
handle the increased caseloads. The primary reason
cited for the heavier caseloads was the increase
in substance abuse cases.

Drug treatment programs. The directors were
especially concerned about the adequacy of
substance abuse treatment programs in their
jurisdictions. A large proportion (87 percent)
reported having such programs, but 81 percent
indicated they needed improvement. Drug testing
was found to be almost universal (93 percent of
the directors said their jurisdiction had a drug
testing program), but the directors were divided
in their assessment of the value of these
programs. Whereas most considered drug testing an
effective tool in discouraging substance abuse,
some said it was too time-consuming or was relied
on too heavily to substantiate lawful behavior.

Agency initiatives

Alternative sanctions. More probation and parole
agency directors expressed concern about boot
camps than about other alternative sanctions.
Although 43 percent said their jusidiction had
boot camp programs, 45 percent of those who had
them said they needed improvement. Probation and
parole agency directors were much more likely than
other groups surveyed to say they did not want or
need them (42 percent, compared to an average of 7
percent of other respondents). They expressed
concern about the additional staff time required
to supervise boot camps when their effectiveness
has not been proven conclusively.  

Probation and parole agency directors also had
mixed opinions about work release centers.
Compared to other respondent groups, a much lower
percentage of directors had work release centers
in their jurisdictions (54 percent, in contrast to
more than 90 percent reported by other
respondents). And a much higher percentage of
probation and parole agency directors than other
respondents (32 percent, in contrast to less than
2 percent of other respondents) said they did not
want or need this option.  

Electronic monitoring, although widely available
in their jurisdictions (63 percent said this
option was currently available), was also felt (by
almost half the agency directors) to need
improvement. Of those who did not have this
option, a relatively small proportion (21 percent)
rejected it, saying they did not want or need it,
whereas 17 percent indicated they would welcome
electronic monitoring in their jurisdiction. 

Special issues

People with mental illness. Many probation and
parole agency directors said they felt responsible
for providing mental health services to
probationers and parolees who needed them. Because
many people who are mentally ill require more
intensive monitoring than most agencies are able
to provide, a large proportion of the directors
(82 percent) cited the need for better access to
mental health professionals. Of particular concern
were mental health services for sex offenders. Of
the directors who said they currently offered
treatment to sex offenders, 76 percent stated they
would like to see these services improved.
Research and evaluation priorities

Directors of probation and parole agencies
recommended alternative sanctions and dealing with
sex offenders as key topics for further NIJ
research and evaluation. Specifically, they said
they want to know the extent to which boot camps,
electronic monitoring, and day reporting are
effective. They also wanted to know how to
effectively treat and monitor sex offenders.