CONTENTS
                                

CHAPTER 1:  INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
A CONTINUUM OF SERVICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
 A Victim's Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
THE CURRENT STATUS OF VICTIMS' RIGHTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
COMPONENTS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-BASED VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. . . . . .7
 The Role of Probation and Parole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
 Promising Victim-Related Probation and Parole Practices. . . . . . . . . 9
MAKING A COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENT VICTIM SERVICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PURPOSE OF THIS COMPENDIUM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10    
HOW TO USE THIS COMPENDIUM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

CHAPTER 2: IMPACT, NOTIFICATION, AND INFORMATIONAL SERVICES. . . . . . . 13
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
VICTIM IMPACT/INPUT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 Key Elements for Soliciting Victim Input/Impact. . . . . . . . . . . . .14
 Extending the Opportunity and Coordinating Services. . . . . . . . . . .15
 Methods of Delivery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
   Written Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
   Oral, Audio, Video Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
 Incorporating Victim Information into Agency's Management Information. .21
 Providing Training on Victim Impact Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
VICTIM NOTIFICATION AND INFORMATIONAL SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
 Key Elements for Victim Notification and Informational Services. . . . .23
 Extending the Opportunity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
 Information to Provide to Victims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
 Methods of Providing Notification and Informational Services . . . . . .24
   Written Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
     Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas . .24
   Toll-free Numbers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
   Automating the Notification Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
     Virginia Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
     Kentucky Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
     Tennessee Department of Corrections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
   Concerns to Address with Automated Callback Systems. . . . . . . . . .28
   Using the Internet to Provide Information and Notification . . . . . .28
 Educating Local and State Victim Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . .29
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

CHAPTER 3: RESTITUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
COLLECTION OF RESTITUTION -- AN AGENCY VALUE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
     Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas. .32
THE RESTITUTION PROCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 
 Coordinated Interagency Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
 Victim Involvement in the Development of Restitution Programs. . . . . .34
KEY ELEMENTS FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND COLLECTION OF RESTITUTION. . . . . . 35
ASSESSING AND DOCUMENTING LOSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
 Immediate Losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
   Medical Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
   Mental Health Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
   Funeral Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
   Time Off From Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
   Other Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
 Projected Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
 "To Be Determined" Restitution Orders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
 Assessing the Offender's Ability to Pay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
MANAGEMENT OF RESTITUTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
 Specialized Staff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
 Incorporating Restitution Strategies Within the Supervision Plan . . . .39
   Tarrant County CSCD, Texas -- Personal Budgeting Course. . . . . . . .40
   Tarrant County CSCD, Texas -- Employment Services Program . . . . . . 40
   Montgomery County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, 
	  Texas -- Offender Employment Program (OEP). . . . . . . . . . .41
 Establishing Offender Sanctions for Nonpayment of Restitution. . . . . .42
 Automating the Restitution Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
   Florida Department of Corrections -- Court-Ordered Payment System . . 43
   Utah Department of Corrections -- Offender Obligation System. . . . . 44
   Washington Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
     Westchester County Adult Probation Department. . . . . . . . . . . .47
 Restitution and Employee Proficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
RESTITUTION AND VICTIM COMPENSATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
IMPROVING THE RATES OF COLLECTION: STATE LAWS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COLLECTING RESTITUTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
 Civil Judgments, Attaching Assets, Garnishing Wages. . . . . . . . . . .50
 Forfeiture of Bond Money . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
 Restitution Centers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
 Collections in Institutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
 Acceptance of Credit Cards for Payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
 Rebate Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
 Converting Restitution Order to Community Service. . . . . . . . . . . .52
 Reimbursing Victims of Deceased Offenders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
 Parental Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
PROCESSING UNCLAIMED VICTIM RESTITUTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

CHAPTER 4: VICTIM-OFFENDER PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
KEY ELEMENTS FOR VICTIM-OFFENDER PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
 Practical Applications of Restorative Justice. . . . . . . . . . . . . .60
   Reparative Probation Boards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60
   Family Group Conferencing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61
   Circle Sentencing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62
   Offender Apologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
   Community Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63
   Staff Victimization and Restorative Justice. . . . . . . . . . . . . .63
VICTIM/OFFENDER MEDIATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
 Research on Victim/Offender Mediation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66
 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
   Policy Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
   Program Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68
"IMPACT OF CRIME ON VICTIMS" PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
 Course Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
 Instructor/Facilitator Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
 Resources to Develop the "Impact of Crime on Victims" Program. . . . . .70
VICTIM IMPACT PANELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
 Benefits for Offenders and Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
 Program Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
 Resources for VIP Program Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

CHAPTER 5: FAMILY VIOLENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
EXPLORATION OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
 Extent of Family Violence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
 Consequences of Family Violence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
 Impact on Victims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
KEY ELEMENTS FOR INTERVENING WITH VICTIMS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE . . . . . . 75
PROGRAM GOALS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
 Victim Protection and Empowerment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76
 Offender Supervision and Accountability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77
 Offender Behavior Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77
CASE ASSESSMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
 Victim Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78
 Offender Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83
OFFENDER SUPERVISION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84
 Maryland Division of Parole and Probation Family Assault Supervision Team. .84
 Case Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF RELEASE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
VICTIM SERVICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
ENFORCEMENT OF CONDITIONS OF PROBATION OR PAROLE. . . . . . . . . . . . .91  
TRAINED STAFF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95

CHAPTER 6:  RESPONDING TO WORKPLACE VIOLENCE AND STAFF VICTIMIZATION . . 97
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
CORRECTIONS AND THE SCOPE OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
VIOLENCE IN CORRECTIONAL WORKPLACES:  CHARACTERISTICS UNIQUE TO
CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL WHO ARE VICTIMIZED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
KEY ELEMENTS FOR RESPONDING TO WORKPLACE VIOLENCE IN 
	  COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
DEVELOPING A MISSION STATEMENT, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES FOR POST-TRAUMA
	  RESPONSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
 Developing a Mission Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
 Developing Program Goals and Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
   Defining a Traumatic Incident. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
 Developing an Agency Policy to Guide Post-Trauma Response. . . . . . . 102
DEVELOPING AN AGENCY POST-TRAUMA PROGRAM PROTOCOL. . . . . . . . . . . .103
VICTIM RECONSTRUCTION: THE CHALLENGE FOR COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS . . . . .103
RESPONSES OF INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104
 A "Tough" Job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
 The Stigma of Victimization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
 Gender Bias. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
 "Business as Usual". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
 Involvement in the Criminal Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
 Worker Culpability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
 Workers' Compensation and Victim Compensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
APPROPRIATE TREATMENT FOR VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS OF WORKPLACE
VIOLENCE/VICTIMIZATON. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106
 Guidelines for Community Corrections Employees Who Are Victimized in the Line of Duty. .106
 Developing a Brochure for Community Corrections Staff. . . . . . . . . 107
 Confidentiality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
 Utilizing Victim Services in the Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
 Other Sources of Basic Support for Victimized Staff. . . . . . . . . . 109
PROVIDING APPROPRIATE MENTAL HEALTH REFERRALS AND ASSISTANCE . . . . . .110
 Lack of Knowledge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
 Lack of Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
 Should Post-Victimization Incident Review/Treatment Be Mandatory?. . . 110
 Employee Assistance Program Referrals for Victimized Staff . . . . . . 111
COORDINATING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PROSECUTION WHEN STAFF ARE
VICTIMIZED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112
DEATH NOTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113
 Immediate Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
 Rumor Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
 Death Notification Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
 Some Considerations to Develop a "Culture of Compassion" . . . . . . . 114
MEDIA COVERAGE OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115
 Consideration of Victims' Families and Friends . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
 Recommended Policy for Dealing with the Media During Critical 
	  Incidents of Staff Victimizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .117

CHAPTER 7: STAFF TRAINING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119
KEY ELEMENTS FOR DEVELOPING STAFF TRAINING ON VICTIM SERVICES. . . . . .119
TRAINING FORMATS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119
 Internal On-Site Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
 Professional Association Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
 Training-for-Trainers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
 Distance Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
GETTING STARTED: DETERMINING TRAINING PRIORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . .122
 Establishing Training Goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
 Internal Needs Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
 External Needs Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
 Developing Training Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
 Identifying Training Facilitators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
 Building a Resource Library. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
DEVELOPING TRAINING CURRICULA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126
 Principles of Adult Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
 Level One Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
 Victim-Specific Training Segments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
 Law and Policy-Related Training Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
 Training Program Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129

CHAPTER 8: COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND OUTREACH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131
KEY ELEMENTS FOR COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND OUTREACH ACTIVITIES . . . . . .131
INFORMING AND EDUCATING VICTIMS AND THE PUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . .131
 Written Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
   Brochures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
   Telephone Rolodex Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
   Informational Bulletins and Fact Sheets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
   Handbooks for Crime Victims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
   Posters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
 Audio and Video Educational Tapes and Slide Presentations. . . . . . . 134
 Promotional Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
 Television, Radio, and Print Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
 Open Houses and Public Forums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
 Presentations and Training Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
 Web Sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
 National Crime Victims' Rights Week. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
   Tarrant County (Texas) Community Supervision and 
	  Corrections Department. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
   California Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
   Oklahoma Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
ESTABLISHING ADVISORY COMMITTEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .137
 Pennsylvania Department of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
 Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas.138
 Texas Department of Criminal Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND ADVOCATING FOR VICTIM
RIGHTS AND SERVICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138
   Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction . . . . . . . . . . 139
   California Department of Correction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
   South Carolina Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services. . . . . . . . 140
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140

BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

APPENDIXES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
 Appendix A: Chapter on Supporting Crime Victims. . . . . . . . . . . . 149
 Appendix B: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .157 
    Sample Model Victim Impact Statement Forms. . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
    Sample Victim Information Sheet for Attending Parole Hearings:
	South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services. .171
    Sample Registration/Notification Request Card 
	(SC Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services). . . . 173
    Sample Victim-Sensitive Notification Letter. . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
    Vine Brochure:  Kentucky Department of Corrections. . . . . . . . . .175
 Appendix C: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
    Flow Chart: Resititution Process, CA State Board of Control. . . . . 177
    Restitution Policies and Procedures:  Tarrant County CSCD. . . . . . 179
    Budget Worksheet:  Tarrant County CSCD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .186
 Appendix D: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
    Reparative Probation Boards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
 Appendix E: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
    Sample Initial Victim Contact Letter for Domestic Violence Cases. . .197
    Sample Domestic Violence Safety Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .198
    Assessment Instrument and Classification System:
	Family Intervention Unit, Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
    Risk Assessment Form: Maryland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .206
 Appendix F: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
    Staff Workplace Violence Prevention Program Statement. . . . . . . . 207
    Factors to Consider When Developing Threat Incident Reports. . . . . 212
    Prototype Administrative Policy on Staff Victimization. . . . . . . .216
    Emergency Response Form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219  
    Summary of Victims' Rights When Dealing with the Media. . . . . . . .221
 Appendix G: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
    OVC Trainers' Bureau Fact Sheet and Application. . . . . . . . . . . 223
    Summary of NVRC and Other U.S. Department of Justice Resources. . . .225
    Roster of National Victim Service and Allied Justice Organizations. .232
    NCJRS Registration Form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
    Roster of Toll-Free Information and Referral Sources for Victims. . .237
 Appendix H: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
    Sample Brochure: Victim Services Program --
	CA Department of Corrections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .239
    Sample Rolodex Card from Ohio Department 
	of Rehabilitation and Correction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .247
Appendix I: Agency Contact and Resource Lists (by Chapter). . . . . . . .249
   
 
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office for Victims of Crime

Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole

American Probation and Parole Association
July 1999
NCJ 166606

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20531

Janet Reno
Attorney General

Raymond C. Fisher
Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General

Nol Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Kathryn M. Turman
Acting Director, Office for Victims of Crime

Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Homepage:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Office for Victims of Crime
World Wide Web Homepage:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/

For grant and funding information contact:
Department of Justice Response Center
1-800-421-6770

NCJ #166606

This document was prepared by the American Probation and Parole Association in Cooperation with the Council of State Governments, under grant number [96-VF-GX-K001], awarded by the Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U. S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U. S. Department of Justice.

The Office for Victims of Crime is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

MESSAGE FROM
THE DIRECTOR

During the past two decades, the victim rights movement has made tremendous progress toward securing fundamental justice and comprehensive services for all crime victims.  Despite its progress, victim rights and services have still not become fully commonplace and routine practices.  Many crime victims not only have to cope with the trauma of the crime but also must cope with the treatment they receive from the criminal justice system (i.e., law enforcement, prosecution, courts, corrections, probation, and parole).  Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole focuses on the function of probation and parole agencies and how they can effectively serve crime victims.

Historically, probation and parole practices have been offender-directed and have ignored or passively responded to the concerns of crime victims.  While offender supervision strategies are aimed at protecting the public as a whole from further victimization, the interests of individual victims often are lost under the mass of paperwork and growing caseloads of offenders.  This document addresses ways probation and parole can change from simply offender-directed to a balanced approach, addressing the unique needs of each of the key players, including victims.  There is a need for probation and parole to look at victims as their clients whose needs should be served.  For example, probation and parole can inform victims of the offender's custody status and inform them that offenders will be held accountable for their actions.  These actions validate the trauma victims have suffered and contribute greatly to the healing process.

This document also acknowledges that in order for probation and parole to be more effective in its role to serve the crime victim and the public, an education process needs to take place within the community.  Often the public is only aware of probation and parole after an offender has committed a heinous crime while on probation or parole.  It is important for the public to hear about probation and parole programs that are committed to protecting public interests.  In addition, as demonstrated throughout this document, probation and parole agencies can, and often do, provide valuable services to victims of crime.  This document has collected many of the "promising practices" that contain elements all agencies should strive to implement in their own programs in order to provide more victim-related services.  OVC also hopes that when probation and parole agencies provide victim-centered services, the agencies will in turn develop partnerships with other criminal justice entities thus forging a collaborative approach to serving victims and communities.

As a result of OVC's commitment to improve the policies and procedures that serve crime victims, OVC provided funding for the project that identifies Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole.  This publication draws on the ideas and experiences of many community corrections and victim services professionals who provide services to victims of crime across the nation.  OVC commends the staff and consultants from the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA), in cooperation with the Council of State Governments for their contributions in the writing of this document.

Kathryn M. Turman
Acting Director
Office for Victims of Crime

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS			

OVC would like to offer special thanks to authors Tracy M. Godwin and Anne Seymour with Ann H. Crowe and Brett Macgargle for their contributions in writing this document. The staff and consultants from the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA), in cooperation with the Council of State Governments (CSG) designed and developed this document. 

This publication draws on the ideas and experiences of many community corrections and victim services professionals who provide services to victims of crime across the nation.  It would be impossible to acknowledge individually all who contributed; however, we would like to express our appreciation to all of those who sent in program materials, responded to APPA's Promising Victim-Related Practices in Probation and Parole application, and took the time to discuss their programs and answer numerous questions. 

The following individuals provided consultation in the review of this document.  Their contributions and support are greatly appreciated.

Ellen Halbert
Editor
Crime Victims Report
Austin, Texas

Carolyn Andersen
Senior Probation Officer
West Valley City, Utah

Emily Smith
Judicial District Manager, 15A
Division of Adult Probation and Parole
Burlington, North Carolina

Ed Mansfield 
Program Manager
Maricopa County Adult Probation Department
Phoenix, Arizona

Jim Sinclair
Assistant Director
Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department
Fort Worth, Texas

Special thanks and acknowledgments also are extended to Carl Wicklund, APPA Staff Director and Mistene Stuban, Administrative Assistant for their unwavering support and assistance throughout the development of this manual.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Historically, probation and parole practices have been offender-directed and have ignored or passively responded to the concerns of crime victims.  While offender supervision strategies are aimed at protecting the public as a whole from further victimization, the interests of individual victims often are lost under the mass of paperwork and growing caseloads of offenders.  Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole addresses ways probation and parole can change from simply offender-directed to a balanced approach, addressing the specific needs of each of the key players, including victims.

Probation and parole agencies are in a unique position to provide services to victims.  First, probation and parole agencies have access to both general and offender-specific information that could address victims need for information and concerns.  A victim would profit from understanding how probation and parole works; knowing an offenders custody status, and understanding that offenders will be held accountable for their actions either through payment of restitution or other supervisory conditions.  The payment of restitution is therapeutic; it holds offenders accountable for the harm they caused and assists in helping the victim reconstruct his/her life through monetary compensation.  Second, victimoffender mediation programs may be a helpful therapeutic agent in individual cases.  Involvement in mediation programs may help both the victim and the offender realize things about each other that can change their perspectives and assumptions (i.e., the offenders perception that no harm was caused, and the victims misconception of "offenders as demons").  Probation and parole agencies can provide the information that would lead victims and offenders to participate in restorative justice practices.  These actions validate the trauma victims have suffered and contribute greatly to the healing process.

While the primary goal for achieving justice may be through the provision of supervision and services to offenders, probation and parole agencies also can provide valuable services to victims of crime.  Some of the more common victim services include the following: 

 Assessment of victim impact.
 Victim notification.
 Restitution collection.
 Referrals to services.
 Victim protection.
 Education about probation and parole.

More innovative services now include victim/offender mediation, circle sentencing, and victim impact panels.  The need for training staff on the impact of crime on victims, related issues, and the need to identify ways to respond to probation and parole professionals who are victimized on- or off-the-job, are other areas that probation and parole agencies are beginning to address.

The purpose of this compendium is to identify elements of exemplary victim-related probation and parole practices and provide agencies with specific direction for the development and implementation of promising victim-related services and programs.  Topics to be discussed in the following chapters are --

 Victim impact and victim notification.
 Restitution management.
 Victim-offender programs.
 Family violence.
 Workplace violence.
 Staff training on victim issues.
 Community relations and outreach strategies.

It would be impossible to highlight the many different promising victim-related practices and programs that have been implemented in probation and parole agencies nationally.  A contact list for each chapter is provided in Appendix I.  Community corrections professionals are encouraged to share information and promote the promising strategies and programs they have implemented for crime victims and to obtain more specific and indepth information from other agencies in the field.

More and more, probation and parole professionals are recognizing the importance of placing the needs of crime victims on a level with the needs of offenders.  The victims rights movement continues to be a powerful force, and community corrections must respond to those needs by providing the important services victims require to further the healing process.

As a result of its commitment to improve the policies and procedures that serve crime victims, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), within the Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice provided funding for the project that identifies Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole.  The staff and consultants from the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA), in cooperation with the Council of State Governments (CSG) designed and developed this document.  This document, however, also draws on the ideas and experiences of many community corrections and victims services professionals who provide services to victims of crime across the nation.

Chapter 1
Introduction

Annually, about 2 million people are injured as a result of violent crime (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993).  In 1992, 23 percent of households in the United States were victimized by a crime of violence or theft (Rand, 1993).  In 1992, crime victims lost 17.6 billion in direct costs including losses from property theft or damage, cash losses, medical expenses, and amount of pay lost because of injury or activities related to the crime (Klaus, 1994).

While these statistics are alarming, mere numbers alone cannot fully capture the devastating effects of crime and violence on its victims.  Crime is intrusive.  It creates a pervasive fear and mistrust.  It holds people captive in their homes and negatively affects their overall quality of life - physically, psychologically, and economically.  Then, to compound the trauma many victims experience, they often are further victimized by a criminal justice system that continues to be ill equipped to meet or is indifferent to their needs. 

Significant strides have been made over the last two decades in addressing victims' rights and needs; however, the quest to instill victim rights and services as commonplace and routine practices - in all components of the criminal justice system in all jurisdictions - is a goal that has not yet been realized.  The challenge is daunting.  Yet, there is hope.  More and more community corrections agencies are stepping up to the plate and are responding to crime victims in their communities and across the nation by implementing promising victim-related practices within their jurisdictions.  Many of these ground breaking agencies and their victim-related practices will be highlighted, in varying degrees, throughout this compendium. Appendix I lists agency contact and resource lists according to chapter topics. 

The importance of establishing a continuum of victims' services will be discussed in this chapter, and the role of probation and parole in serving crime victims will be briefly examined.  Specifically, this chapter informs the reader about the following:
* Differences in the way offenders and victims are treated in the criminal justice system.
* Ten core elements that should form the foundation of a comprehensive corrections-based victim services program.
* The primary purpose of this document.

A Continuum of Services
To effectively implement the rights of and provide effective services to crime victims, policies, procedures, and programs cannot be created or implemented in a vacuum.  It requires a coordinated effort among all components along the criminal justice continuum (i.e., law enforcement, prosecution, courts, probation, corrections, parole).  The following fictional scenario illustrates the value and rewards that could be gained for victims and the criminal justice system if effective and efficient services to victims of crime were provided consistently throughout the criminal justice process. 

A Victim's Story
Seventy-nine-year-old Marie Harris had looked forward to a day of shopping for a long time.  She was recuperating from cataract surgery and now had been pronounced fit to drive her car again.  Marie had saved some money from the last few pension checks and planned to do Christmas shopping for her grandchildren early to avoid the crowds.

She headed out after lunch that day to the new mall where she hoped some advertised bargains would still be available.  Marie found upon arriving that a lot of others had the same plan; the mall parking lots were jammed with cars.  But being in good health, Marie felt it okay to park in a distant lot and take the walk to the store's entrance.

Marie knew something was wrong as soon as she pushed the door lock button.  Out of the corner of her eye she caught sight of a man running up fast behind her between the rows of cars.  Before she could turn around and assess the situation, this man had lunged, grabbed her, and with a powerful pull jerked her purse away.  Knocked off balance by the pull, Marie stumbled and fell hard to the pavement.  She heard the man's running steps diminish as he vanished with her purse and the shopping money within.  Trying to regain her feet, Marie felt a knifelike pain in her side and realized she had been seriously hurt.  She began to cry.  

Marie's cries alerted another shopper who was returning to her car, and she summoned  mall security to rush to Marie's assistance.  The city police and EMS soon followed.  Marie was transported to the hospital while the officers began the process of investigation.  At the emergency room, it was discovered that Marie had suffered two broken ribs and severe contusions in the fall, but she was expected to recover without complications following a few days of hospitalization.

Shortly after being treated in the ER and admitted to a room, Marie was visited by a field worker from the County's Victim Assistance Team (VAT). Team members, deployed in three shifts, make contact with crime victims at hospitals, homes, and offices as soon as possible after an offense.  They explain to victims, in general terms, what can be expected in the progression of a criminal case:  investigation, witness protocol, protection from retaliation, restitution and crime victim compensation to cover hospital bills. Easy-to-read guidebooks and pamphlets are also left for victims to use as references.  The VAT workers remain with the crime victim as long as it takes to answer all questions and to hear what the victim has to say.  

Marie felt somewhat assured after the VAT worker left her bedside, but she was still afraid of what might be in store as her assailant had not yet been caught.  Later, she thought of more questions and called the VAT's 24-hour help line to get a response.  Meanwhile, the VAT field worker who had visited Marie entered information on a laptop computer setting up a file in this case.  This data record was then transmitted to the VAT office, police department, district attorney, and presentence unit of the probation office.

To Marie's relief, detectives soon arrested a young man in connection with her robbery and assault.  Marie was immediately notified of the arrest and assured that if the defendant posted a bail bond, the magistrate would order him not to contact the victim in any manner as a condition of the bond.  Marie was given the phone number of the Crime Victim Protection Unit (CVPU) at the police department and was advised to call immediately should the defendant or anyone else threaten, harass, or attempt to harm her in connection with the case.  She also was given information about the State's automated notification calling system and how she could register to be called in the event of the defendant's release or escape from custody.  

A few days later, Marie was called by a Victim Services Specialist from the prosecutor's office.  The Specialist made an appointment to visit Marie, who was now at home recovering from her injuries.  Later that week, the Victim Services Specialist accompanied by a Presentence Investigator from the probation department arrived at Marie's house.  They spent several hours talking to Marie, briefing her again on the court process and gathering information to be used in the probation department's presentence report.  She was given a list of phone numbers and brief descriptions of agencies in the county which provided an array of services to crime victims such as counseling, transportation, short-term financial assistance, and emergency protective housing.  Marie was encouraged to call the prosecutor's office as often as she wished to obtain updated case information.  The Victim Services Specialist told Marie that if she wished, a case conference could be held with her by the assistant district attorney handling the case.  Marie said she would think about it.  Marie was also told that she would be contacted, informed, and given the opportunity to comment on any proposed plea bargain in the case.  Finally, she was advised that the county's VAT would provide her transportation to the courthouse should she desire to attend her attacker's trial.

Ultimately, Marie decided not to be present at sentencing; she had not objected to a proposed plea-bargain wherein the offender, who had one previous arrest for shoplifting, would receive an 8-year probated sentence.  Marie learned from the prosecutor that the offender would be ordered to pay her monetary restitution for all medical expenses and the stolen property.  This restitution would also be entered as a civil judgment against the man.  He also would be required to spend the first 6 months of his probation in a community correctional facility where an apparent drug abuse problem would be confronted.  The offender, Dan Johnson, was ordered not to have 
any contact with Marie whatsoever.  A further condition stipulated that he attend a Victim Impact Panel presentation through the probation department.  Marie was told that the probation department's Victim Services Coordinator would soon be in touch with her.

Within a week of the trial, Marie received a letter from the probation department advising her that Dan Johnson had indeed received an 8-year probated sentence.  Along with this letter, Marie got a copy of the conditions of probation and a crime victims' handbook from the probation department which explained in clear and simple terms how the probation process and supervision of offenders worked.  These  written materials were followed by a phone call from the department's Victim Services Coordinator, who encouraged Marie to phone as often as she wished regarding the status of Dan Johnson's probation.  She was also given again the names and phone numbers of victims' support groups in the area.  Marie was told that if Dan Johnson did not pay restitution as ordered, she would receive her payments from the State's Victim Restitution Reserve Fund, which guaranteed full restitution to crime victims if the offender failed to pay restitution as ordered.  

The Victim Services Coordinator also advised Marie that she would be contacted whenever a change occurred in Dan Johnson's supervision such as a new probation officer assigned, planned modification of the probation order, violation of probation proceeding to the court, possible revocation, petition for early release, or discharge from probation.  The Victim Services Coordinator also explained to Marie that if Dan Johnson's probation was ever revoked, a Victim Specialist from the State prison would be assigned to her case and would keep her updated on Johnson's prison term.  Later, if he was deemed eligible for parole, Marie would have  the opportunity to oppose that parole and to personally appear before the Parole Board.  Should Dan Johnson be paroled, the State Parole Office Victim Services Section would provide a full array of victim services to Marie, similar to those now being offered by the probation department.  No matter where he was in the system, Dan Johnson would still be responsible for restitution to Marie and would always be forbidden to contact her.  Finally, Marie learned that if at some time in the future she wished to participate in victim-offender mediation, that opportunity would be extended to her.

Marie recovered from her injuries in time to buy Christmas presents for her grandchildren.  Living alone as a widow, the crime has left her more afraid and nervous than before.  She feels that a lot of the peace of mind and security she had previously taken for granted has been stolen from her.  She knows now how vulnerable she can be to criminal victimization.  Her life has changed.  Yet, amidst the physical pain and lasting emotional hurt occasioned by the crime, Marie feels that her dignity as a person remained intact through obvious care and concern demonstrated by those professionals who guided her journey across the criminal justice system.  

From that first visit at the hospital by the Victim Assistance Team worker through her ongoing contact with the probation department's Victim Services Coordinator, Marie has concluded that a lot of people wanted to see good things happen to her in the wake of victimization.  Marie does not feel that her rights were trampled while Dan Johnson's were championed.  While the hurt and horror of the attack will remain, Marie thinks fondly of those who have helped her.  She does not think they were just doing a job!  It is nothing more really than humans extending care and comfort to others in need.  Marie tells her friends, "The system works."

The Current Status of Victims' Rights
"The system works."  This is not a common phrase heard by criminal justice professionals when listening to crime victims talk about their experiences in today's criminal justice system.  While the movement toward ensuring justice and healing for our nation's crime victims has made significant progress, much more still needs to be done.  

Crime victims are speaking out, and they are being heard by legislators and the public.  According to Susan Howley, Assistant Director of Legislative Services of the National Center for Victims of Crime (formerly known as the National Victim Center), all 50 States now have a wide variety of statutory rights for victims and, as of 1998, 32 States passed amendments to their constitution to protect the rights of victims of crime. 
 
A map indicating States that have passed constitutional amendments relating to victims' rights may be found in Figure 1-1.  There is a strong movement on the Federal level as well.  An amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been introduced that, if passed, would guarantee victims' participatory rights, rights to notice about significant case events, and restitution throughout the criminal justice process.  As of December 1998, the amendment had not been voted on by Congress. 
[Figure 1-1:  States with Constitutional Amendments Relating to Victims' Rights
States with VRAs:  Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Florida, Alaska, Hawaii
Source:  National Victims Center.]

Given these developments, it is clear to see that the victims' movement is strong and active and will continue to affect and shape the way the criminal justice system, including probation and parole, conducts its business. Therefore, if community corrections is going to flourish and, indeed, survive in the new age of guaranteed rights for victims of crime, it is imperative that concerted efforts be made to respond proactively to the needs of crime victim clients.

Why Serve Crime Victims?
Crime victims deserve rights and services throughout their involvement in the criminal justice system - from the time the crime is reported to the police through the criminal proceedings and the corrections process.  To achieve this goal, all agencies on the criminal justice continuum (i.e., law enforcement, prosecution, defense counsel, judiciary, probation, institutional corrections, parole) need to develop a comprehensive system of services that are "victim-centered."  In 1997, the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) Victims Committee - with support from the National Center for Victims of Crime's Promising Practices and Strategies in Corrections Project - developed 10 core elements that should form the foundation of a corrections-based (including probation and parole) victim services program (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997a, pp. 3-4):
 1. Incorporate victims' rights and needs into the overall agency mission statement and develop a mission/vision statement specifically for victim services.
 2. Designate a full-time staff person to plan and implement a comprehensive victim services program, and victim service representatives at institutions and regional offices to augment the agency's centralized victim services.
 3. Provide core services to victims of crime that include notification of offender status; protection from intimidation, harassment and harm; victim input into parole proceedings; victim restitution; and information and referral to supportive services in the community.
 4. Create a Victim Advisory Council (comprised of victims and practitioners from corrections, victim services, and allied professionals) to guide program and policy implementation.
 5. Establish written policies and procedures for victims' rights and services.
 6. Develop a public information plan and outreach program that describes the services and assistance provided to victims by the agency, including an informational brochure and training curriculum for victim service and allied justice professionals.
 7. Develop and utilize a training curriculum for orientation and continuing education for all agency staff on victims' rights and needs, agency services and related policies, legislative mandates, and national/State/community-based services for information and referral.
 8. Develop and implement policies, procedures, and protocols on how to respond to incidents when correctional staff are victimized on- or off-the-job.
 9. Implement the "Impact of Crime on Victims" program to help offenders understand the impact their crimes have on their victims, communities, and families utilizing the curricula and related resources available from the California Youth Authority.
10. Designate an agency representative to participate in local, State, and regional victim service coalitions and serve as the agency's liaison to the victim services community.

The Role of Probation and Parole
Historically, probation and parole practices have been offender-directed and have ignored or passively responded to the concerns of crime victims.  While offender supervision strategies are aimed at protecting the public as a whole from further victimization, the interests of individual victims often are lost among the burgeoning caseloads of offenders and the accompanying paperwork.  It is imperative for probation and parole agencies to transform these offender-directed practices into those that are also victim-centered. More importantly, perhaps, practices should be principle-centered and address issues common to all sides such as accountability, restoration, rationality, efficiency, and fairness.

In addition to being the "right thing to do," there are several practical reasons for making the provision of services to victims a priority within probation and parole agencies.  First, probation and parole have access to both general and offender-specific information that could address victims' informational needs and concerns.  Just knowing how probation and parole work, an offender's custody status, and that offenders will be held accountable for their actions (e.g., through the payment of restitution or other supervisory conditions) often is enough to ease the fears and frustrations of victims.  Additionally, probation and parole professionals are familiar with the services available within the community to address offender needs.  Victims have many of these same needs and could, therefore, benefit from this information.

Second, there is a continuing need for the profession to identify victims as consumers or clients of probation and parole services.  Often victims are seen as being at odds with probation and parole.  Agencies such as the Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, and the California Department of Corrections have implemented comprehensive victims' services and have come to recognize that victims' groups can be powerful allies of probation and parole if given the opportunity.  Once invited into the folds of the system and educated on the mission of probation and parole, victims' groups have, in fact, provided support for probation and parole services and spoken on their behalf in front of legislative bodies.

Third, victims' groups can be effective in educating the general public about the mission of probation and parole and, consequently, can enhance their public image.  The nature of the services provided by probation and parole, and the nature of the persons directly served are generally viewed negatively; probation and parole are not in the business of serving "deserving" constituents.  This often alienates probation and parole agencies, keeping them literally estranged from the majority of people to whom they provide the service of ensuring public safety.  Typically, the public hears about probation and parole only after an offender under community supervision commits a heinous crime.  Providing victim services increases awareness of probation and parole programs and demonstrates a true commitment to protecting public interests.

Fourth, in addition to being allies of probation and parole at a policy level, victim involvement may be a helpful therapeutic agent in individual cases.  For example, victim-offender mediation programs bring an offender and the victim together for a face-to-face meeting to discuss possible resolutions for victims' losses, such as a payment schedule for restitution, a letter of apology, or the performance of community service (Sinclair, 1994).  Involvement in mediation programs may help both the victim and the offender realize things about each other that can reduce their respective rationalizations (e.g., offenders' perception that "no harm" was caused, and victims' misconceptions of "offenders-as-demons").  The payment of restitution also is therapeutic; it holds offenders accountable for the harm they caused and assists in helping the victim reconstruct his/her life through monetary compensation.

Lastly, providing victim services will help probation and parole agencies develop partnerships with other criminal justice entities.  These partnerships can lead to enhanced credibility for probation and parole and a collaborative approach to serving victims and communities.  

As public service agencies, and a key component of the criminal justice system, probation and parole agencies should concern themselves with justice for all citizens.  While the primary avenue for achieving this justice may be through the provision of supervision and services to offenders, it does not have to be at the exclusion of serving others impacted by crime.

Promising Victim-Related Probation and Parole Practices
As demonstrated throughout this document, probation and parole agencies can, and often do, provide valuable services to victims of crime.  Some of the more common victim services within probation and parole agencies include the following: 
* Assessment of victim impact.
* Victim notification.
* Restitution collection.
* Referrals to services. 
* Victim protection.
* Education about probation and parole.

The extent to which these services are present varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; however, they have become more prevalent over the past decade.  More innovative services now include victim/offender mediation, circle sentencing, and victim impact panels.  Some agencies have developed specialized units for addressing crime victims' needs, while other agencies incorporate victim-related programs and responsibilities within the duties of generalized probation and parole officers.  Several probation and parole agencies around the country have recognized the special needs of victims of family violence and have developed programs and services designed to ensure their safety and to empower them.  An emerging trend is for agencies to make complete agency-wide paradigm shifts to a model of restorative justice with the primary concern being repairing the damage or harm done to victims and the community through victim involvement, mediation, and reparation (Bazemore, 1994).  The need for training staff on the impact of crime on victims and related issues, as well as the need to identify ways to prevent and respond to probation and parole professionals who are victimized on- or off-the-job, are other areas that probation and parole agencies are beginning to address.

Making a Commitment to Implement Victim Services
There are many elements and issues to consider when designing, developing, and evaluating an effective victim services program.  The process is challenging; however, it will yield many rewards if undertaken with the appropriate degree of thought, consideration, and effort.  

"The development of a comprehensive philosophy upon which agency programs and practices are based requires the examination of the following:
* Values inherent in the agency.
* The agency mission statement.
* Goals of the agency.
* Activities performed to accomplish the goals.
* Measures for determining how well the activities are being performed and what impact they are having" (Fulton, 1996, p. 32).

Alignment of these key organizational practices enhances an agency's chances for successfully involving and serving crime victims in a long-lasting and purposeful way.

Commitment from the leadership of the agency and buy-in and involvement of line staff are essential ingredients for the development and implementation of effective services for victims of crime within the agency's structure.  Failure to recognize victims as clients or lackadaisical support for the implementation and provision of victim services within the department will result in haphazard delivery of services and the continued frustration of crime victims with the probation and parole process.

A critical step to implementing victim-related practices within probation and parole agencies is to clarify and communicate agency values.  Values shape decisions, actions, and hence, results for individuals and organizations.  A probation or parole agency may have a mission statement that states it will, "provide assistance to victims to include keeping them informed of the status of their respective cases;" however, if the organization does not really value the victim's input, it will not be practiced.  Values serve as the motivating factor behind agency policies and practices, from the hiring of staff,  to the supervision of offenders, to monitoring and evaluation.  Establishing and expressing values convey a positive identity and promote an understanding about the beliefs and priorities of an organization - both to internal and external stakeholders (Fulton, 1996).

Once the new values are declared, they must be embraced by the organization and integrated into the way the agency staff perform their roles.  So, when initiating new programs and practices discussed in this compendium, especially those that may be different in nature from those typically or currently performed, agencies should set in place a mechanism for monitoring and evaluating the achievement of established goals, activities, and outcomes.  

Performance-based measures can be extremely useful in helping agencies determine if the services being provided to victims within their agencies are (1) being implemented as designed, and (2) meeting the information and other needs and interests of crime victims within their jurisdiction.  Simply stated, through the use of process and outcome measures, performance-based measures are designed to provide agencies with a mechanism for assessing what they do and how well they do it.  A performance-based strategy can also improve an agency's practices by offering the agency and staff a chance to define their true values and translate them into action and results.  They provide a basis for program modification and improvements and a mechanism for linking employee evaluation to the agency's mission (Boone and Fulton, 1995).  

More indepth information on the development and implementation of performance-based measures can be found in Boone's and Fulton's Results-Driven Management:  Implementing Performance-Based Measures in Community Corrections.  A chapter from that document on supporting crime victims is included in Appendix A.    

Purpose of This Compendium
Simply saying that a probation and parole agency provides the services mentioned above does not necessarily mean that the services they have implemented are truly promising or innovative.  Many times agencies may be only scratching the surface in the delivery of these services.  So, what elements should agencies strive to implement when designing programs and services for victims of crime?  This compendium is designed to identify elements of exemplary victim-related probation and parole practices and provide agencies with specific direction for the development and implementation of promising victim-related services and programs.   It is recognized that the extent to which probation and parole agencies will be able to implement the elements described within this document will vary according to statutory or local policy, procedural constraints, and resources.  Topics to be discussed in ensuing chapters include the following:
* Victim impact and victim notification.
* Restitution management.
* Victim-offender programs. 
* Family violence.
* Workplace violence. 
* Staff training on victim issues. 
* Community relations and outreach strategies.

Within this compendium, the term "community corrections" is used to connote probation and parole agencies. Much of the information, however, is also appropriate for other agencies that supervise offenders in the community such as those providing aftercare or sanction specific services. 

The agencies highlighted in this document represent only a small sample of the many initiatives in place across the country.  It would be impossible, within the parameters of this document, to highlight the many different promising victim-related practices and programs that have been implemented in probation and parole agencies nationally. In the quest to continue getting the word out about creative and innovative victim service programs, community corrections professionals are encouraged to take advantage of every opportunity to share information and promote the promising strategies and programs they have implemented for crime victims. 

How to Use This Compendium
When read in its entirety, this compendium outlines a comprehensive approach for serving crime victims in probation and parole.  However, it is possible to treat each chapter as a stand alone document.  Each chapter focuses on a different type of service that probation and parole agencies can provide to crime victims, thus, making it relatively easy for administrators or practitioners to identify what chapter will contain information to meet their specific needs and interests.

All chapters begin with identifying key elements to providing effective services within the specified topic area.  Then, where possible, points are illustrated by providing examples of probation and parole agencies that have implemented practices or strategies that relate to the identified key elements.  It is not possible to provide exhaustive information about each highlighted program's practices; therefore, a contact list for each chapter is provided in Appendix I.  Readers can obtain more specific and indepth information from agencies about strategies which interest them.  Appendixes also have been included which contain sample documents and helpful resources to assist jurisdictions in replicating or implementing practices featured.

Conclusion
The day when the needs of all victims of crime are adequately addressed within the criminal justice system, and more specifically probation and parole, has not yet dawned.  However, the number of probation and parole professionals that recognize the need to place crime victims on a "more even playing field" with offenders is increasing - after all, it is the "right and just thing to do;" albeit, it is not always the easiest thing to do.  The victims' rights movement continues to be a powerful force, and community corrections must rise to the challenge being presented or risk losing their credibility with the public as well as risk losing much needed resources.

Chapter 2
Impact, Notification, and Informational Services

Introduction
For many victims, the effects of crime are not short-term; the ramifications of the crime can be far-reaching, extending well beyond the trial phase of the crime.  While many details of the offender's version of the crime are heard by judges, juries, and paroling authorities when making sentencing and release decisions, less attention is paid to the victim's perspective.  By soliciting victim input and assessing victim impact, probation and parole agencies can "pick up the ball" and help ensure that victims' needs and concerns are heard and addressed. Victim input is essential to understanding the full magnitude of the criminal act and its detrimental effect on victims. 

Recognizing that the criminal justice system can be confusing and frustrating to the professionals who work in it, it is no surprise that it often is viewed as an enigma to the millions of crime victims who try to find their way through its intrinsic maze each year.  For many victims, information about the status of their case and the disposition of the offender(s) within the criminal justice system goes beyond their obvious interest in seeing that justice is served.  The type of information victims receive can play a key role in their mental and emotional reconstruction, as well as assist them in their efforts to put their lives back together in the wake of victimization.  

Issues related to the solicitation of victim input and impact information will be examined in this chapter, and strategies that can be employed to keep victims involved and informed throughout the probation and parole process will be discussed. This chapter will inform readers about the following:
* The type of information that should be provided to victims related to victim impact statements.
* Different methods for delivering victim impact statements.
* The type of information victims want and need throughout the probation and parole process.
* Ways the notification process can be automated.

Victim Impact/Input
By obtaining information from victims about the financial, emotional, physical, and psychological effects of the crime, probation and parole professionals can help ensure victim input is accounted for during sentencing and prior to any hearings relevant to the offender's release or community supervision.  In particular, this type of information can help determine the following:
* Victim-specific restitution.
* The length of sentence, probation, or parole for an offender.
* The need for any special release conditions (e.g., restraining orders) for an offender.
* The need for any victim/offender programs (e.g., mediation, conciliation, participation in treatment programs).
* Any recommendations to help protect the safety of the victim (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1992).

In addition, there is a continuing need for probation and parole professionals to recognize victims as "consumers" or "clients" of their services.  By soliciting input from victims in the form of victim impact statements, the victim's role in the criminal justice system is validated, and 
in part, may aid some victims' ability to reconstruct their lives in the aftermath of crime (Alexander and Lord, 1994).

In fact, research suggests that when victims are given the opportunity to provide information about the effect of the crime, it can improve their overall opinion of the criminal justice system.  For example, according to research conducted by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) in 1993, two-thirds of victims who were given the opportunity to present written victim impact statements reported that they were "satisfied" with the criminal justice system.  In contrast, three-fourths of those not allowed to submit a victim impact statement reported being "dissatisfied" with the criminal justice system as a whole (Alexander and Lord, 1994).

Key Elements for Soliciting Victim Input/Impact
First and foremost, effective solicitation of victim input and impact information requires a coordinated and collaborative effort for sharing of information among all the key agencies on the criminal justice continuum (i.e., law enforcement, prosecution, courts, probation, corrections, parole and victim services organizations).  Specific to probation and parole, characteristics and components of exemplary practices related to victim input and impact include the following:
* All victims (including children) should be offered the opportunity to submit or update victim impact information during the presentence investigation on the financial, physical, emotional, and psychological effects the crime had on them, their family members, or friends.  This requires that probation and parole agencies make a sincere effort (due diligence) to locate victims.  
* Different methods of delivering victim impact statements should be available to victims (e.g., written, audio, video, allocution, telephone, electronic). Probation and parole agencies should ensure that victim impact statement opportunities are culturally sensitive, age-specific, and accessible to non-English speaking victims.  
* Victim impact information should be incorporated into the agency's management information system; however, measures should be taken to ensure confidentiality of victim contact information (i.e., address, phone number) throughout the probation and parole process.
* Training or information should be provided to judges, paroling authorities, commissioners, administrative hearing officers, victim service providers, and victims on what type of information is helpful to courts and parole boards and when it is needed; how victim impact information is used; and who has access to the information.  Cross training between probation and parole and other criminal justice entities and victim service providers related to victim impact is also helpful. 

A comprehensive guide on victim impact statements, entitled Impact Statements: A Victim's Right to Speak, A Nation's Responsibility to Listen, has been developed by Alexander and Lord (1994).  Much of the information provided in this chapter on victim impact information is drawn from that report.  Copies of the report can be obtained by contacting the Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center at 1-800-627-6872.

Extending the Opportunity and Coordinating Services
To consider victim impact information, it must be (1) gathered from victims and (2) made available to judges and paroling authorities during the decisionmaking process.  Unfortunately, many times probation and parole officers often are too uncomfortable, ambivalent, or busy to collect adequate impact information from victims (Shapiro, 1988).  To add insult to injury, even when victim impact information is collected, the information may not be made available to the appropriate entities in a timely manner for use during sentencing and release decisions.

To prevent this from occurring, probation and parole agencies should establish policies and procedures that clearly delineate the probation and/or parole agency's responsibility for the implementation, distribution, and collection of victim impact statements. In doing so, these policies and procedures should provide for interagency cooperation in coordinating victim impact services with all key criminal justice agencies (Alexander and Lord, 1994).

By enhancing interagency coordination and collaboration, probation and parole agencies can avoid unnecessary overlapping and duplication of roles, as well as help ensure continuity of services.  For example, probation agencies need to develop a clearer understanding of the victim impact services being provided by the local prosecutor's office, and be knowledgeable about prosecution policies and procedures related to forwarding victim impact statements to the probation department for inclusion in the presentence report and the defendant's permanent case file.  In addition, it is imperative that policies and procedures be established and that interagency agreements be developed that outline how victim impact information is to be shared as a case progresses through the probation and parole process.  Interagency agreements also should clarify who is responsible for what activities related to victim impact.  

When it comes to securing victim impact information from victims, probation and parole agencies should establish policies and procedures that require staff to exercise due diligence when obtaining information, even to the extent that contact is made with outside agencies in an attempt to locate the whereabouts of crime victims.  Outside sources that could be used to determine victim contact information could include the following:
* Postal service.
* Driver's license bureau.
* Voter registration bureau.
* Social Security Administration.
* Utility companies (Alexander and Lord, 1994).

Policies and procedures also should be established that describe how crime victims will be notified and informed of their rights to submit or update victim impact statements.  Victims can be informed by letter or through personal contact (Alexander and Lord, 1994).  Figure 2-1 provides a list of the type of information that victims should be given, at a minimum, related to submitting victim impact statements.

Figure 2-1:  Information to Provide to Victims Related to Victim Impact Statements
* The purpose and use of the victim impact statement in the criminal justice system, the victim's option for exercising or declining his or her right to submit or update a victim impact statement, and specific guidelines concerning confidentiality of victim impact statements.
* Eligibility requirements for submission of victim impact statements (i.e., victim only, family members, designated victim representative).
* How the victim impact statement should be submitted or options for submission (e.g., written, oral, audio, video, other electronic means).
* How the victim impact statement will be reviewed by the court (i.e., inclusion in the presentence investigative report or as an attachment to the presentence investigative report).
* The date and time of the sentencing or parole hearing, as well as the right to attend the proceeding, as well as informing the victim how the proceeding will be conducted (e.g., victim allowed to meet separately with the paroling authority, defendant will or will not be present).
* A specified time frame for returning the completed victim impact statement.
* Instructions for submitting the victim impact statement to the court (i.e., through the prosecutor, probation, or directly to the court).
* Information as to the victim's right to request no contact orders, to receive notification of early release and the conditions of release, probation revocation hearings, parole hearings, and instructions for requesting these rights.
* Information as to the victim's right to submit evidence of additional financial losses for consideration in the modification of existing restitution orders.
* Information for requesting assistance in completing the victim impact statement (i.e., name and phone number of agency contact).
* The importance of notifying probation, correctional, and paroling authorities of changes in address and instructions for doing so.

Source:  Alexander and Lord, 1994.

In addition to the mechanics of how to file a victim impact statement, the criminal justice system should provide outreach for the victim.  The probation and parole agencies should ensure access to an advocate to help victims complete or update victim impact statements and assist with other victim-related issues or needs. If the victim is a child, ill, elderly, or with disabilities and, therefore, possibly would be excluded from presenting victim impact statements, the department should visit the victim.  If the victim is non-English speaking or hearing impaired or does not write or read well, assistance should be provided either by allowing the victim to designate a representative to act in his or her behalf or by providing the information in their required format (i.e., their native language, interpreter, etc.). The victim should also have the opportunity to meet with parole board members.  A separate waiting room for victims which is staffed with personnel knowledgeable about victims' rights in the criminal justice and paroling process allows the victims to communicate their concerns and feel a vital part of the process.

Methods of Delivery
To address the varying and special needs of crime victims, probation and parole agencies should allow victim impact information to be collected through a variety of means.  Methods of delivery could include written, audio, video, allocution, telephone, and other electronic means.

Written Statements
The most common way victims provide information on the impact of crime is through written victim impact statements.  However, according to Robert Wells, Senior Instructor at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and a leading expert in the field of victim impact, many of the instruments used to capture victim impact information are not effective in eliciting victim participation and response (Alexander and Lord, 1994).  

To help criminal justice professionals develop effective tools for soliciting impact information, the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), and American Prosecutor's Research Institute (APRI) joined forces to analyze existing victim impact statements and to determine the design, language, layout, and supporting materials that could be used to extract victim impact evidence while meeting the needs of victims and the criminal justice system.  Their effort resulted in the publication  Impact Statements:  A Victim's Right to Speak, A Nation's Responsibility to Listen, authored by Alexander and Lord (1994).  This document describes four model victim impact statements designed to meet the needs of  (1) adult victims whose cases are being handled at the State and local levels; (2) adult victims whose cases are being handled at the Federal level;  (3) child victims whose cases are being handled at the Federal, State, and local levels; and  (4) family members of homicide victims.  The following are common elements included within each model:
* An Introductory or Informational Sheet: Victims need to be given general information about the use of victim impact statements, their right to submit a statement (which can be easily modified based on jurisdictional statutes),  how to complete and return the statement, crime victim compensation, and how to contact the agency for further assistance.
* An Instrument to Record the Emotional and Physical Impact of Crime:  Based on written cues or questions, ample space should be provided for the victim to write about the emotional and physical impact of the crime and to convey emotional wounds, concerns, and fears to the sentencing and paroling authorities. 
* A Worksheet to Record Financial Losses: Victims should be offered the opportunity to document all financial losses based on current expenditures, as well as possible projected future losses, so that additional restitution hearings can be held to modify restitution orders, if necessary.  
* A Sentencing Recommendation Instrument:  Victims should be able to express their opinion as to the sentencing of the defendant.  Additional requests from the victim such as no contact orders and future notification of offender status, and the opportunity to participate in victim-offender mediation also can be included in this section.  Additionally, information should be included on how victims can receive notification from the State Department of Corrections in cases involving incarceration.

The sample model victim impact statement forms developed for that report have been reproduced with permission and are included in Appendix B.  Each is designed to be easily modified according to the specific laws for submission and use in individual jurisdictions.  In addition, each model can be easily adapted to meet victims' physical and emotional needs, and distinct category of victimization (e.g., sexual assault, burglary, white collar crime, assault).  Sample modifications that agencies can make include the following:
* Increasing the font size of the model to accommodate vision challenges of the elderly or sight-impaired.
* Reproducing the models in languages indigenous to individual jurisdictions (e.g., Spanish, Vietnamese, Tagalese, Japanese, Chinese).
* Reproducing and presenting the child's model as a parent/child activity.
* Tailoring individual questions to meet the needs of specific crime victimizations (e.g., an individualized victim impact statement for family members of homicide victims) (Alexander and Lord, 1994).

Additional considerations to keep in mind when designing forms for written victim impact statements, as described by Alexander and Lord (1994), are as follows: 
* Form Design:  Victim impact statement forms should be easy to read and understand.  They  should use clear, concise language in both their instructions and questions.  The layout and graphic appearance should be pleasing to the eye, and there should be sufficient space for victims' responses.  Additionally, the forms should demonstrate appropriate sensitivity to victims by showing support and sympathy, and by avoiding impersonal or "bureaucratic" language.
* Introduction to the Victim Impact Statement:  The victim impact statement form should be introduced to the victim in a manner that makes clear what its purposes are and how it will be used.  Information should be provided as to why the victim would want to complete it and indicate that he or she has a choice to submit or not submit a statement for review.
* Instructions for Completion and Submission:  A victim impact statement form should include instructions that provide useful information on:  (1) how to complete the statement; (2) the type of information that is useful to sentencing and paroling authorities; and (3) how and to whom the form should be submitted once it has been completed.  These instructions may appear on the form itself or in an introductory letter.  A contact name and phone number to call for assistance in completing the statement also should be provided.  Self-addressed envelopes also are helpful.
* Confidentiality of the Statement: The victim impact statement form should make clear who will have access to the statement, specifically mentioning the judge, prosecutor, defendant, defendant's attorney, and anybody else that will have access to the statement.  Victims must be assured of their safety from the defendant and defendant's family and should not be compelled to reveal any unnecessary identifying information such as their address or phone number, or they should be able to have this information protected from offenders and their counsel.
* Order of Impact Questions: Victim impact statements should seek information from the victim on a number of aspects of his or her life:  emotional state, social and family relationships, concerns for safety and security, physical condition, and financial status and costs associated with the crime.  The statement should not ask narrowly focused, specific questions regarding the impact of crime.  Instead it should ask open-ended questions that allow victims to write about these issues.  This allows victims to identify what is important. 
* Emotional Impact:  The order in which the "impact" questions are asked is important to victims.  The victim impact statement form should first ask for the emotional impact on the victim before eliciting information on the physical or financial impact.  Some victims find it insulting that the court or paroling authority would primarily focus on the financial impact, as opposed to the emotional impact of the crime. Surviving victims should be afforded ample space to express how the crime has personally affected them in homicide cases.  Family members or friends of homicide victims should be given ample space to describe the deceased's personal characteristics and how his/her loss has affected their lives.
* Physical Impact:  The victim impact statement form should seek information about the physical injuries the victim may have suffered as a result of the crime.  Victims should have space to describe the type and degree of injury, how long the injury lasted or is expected to last, the amount of pain and/or modifications to their lifestyle that have resulted from the crime, and any medical treatment required to date, as well as any that might be anticipated.
* Financial Impact:  When seeking financial impact from victims, the victim impact statement form should seek detailed information about the cost of the crime.  Victims should be given the opportunity to list medical costs (e.g., hospitals, doctors, and drugs), counseling costs, lost income from work, or expenses incurred in tasks performed by the victim, (e.g., replacing stolen, damaged or lost property), diminished or lost ability to earn a living, lost support for dependent if the victim died, funeral bills, and any other costs related to the crime.  Victims also should be asked to provide information on the portion of the costs covered by insurance, crime victim compensation, or any other source.  The victim impact statement form should clearly and readily allow for a calculation of the amount of monetary restitution owed  to the victim.
* Notification of Offender's Post-Conviction Status:  In jurisdictions that allow the victim to be notified of the offender's post-conviction status, the victim impact statement form should ask the victim to what extent he or she wishes to be notified of these developments.  The statement should not assume that all victims will want to be involved or notified.  For victims who wish to be notified, their requests should be forwarded to the appropriate agency.
* Victim's Opinion on Sentence:  In some jurisdictions, the victim is allowed to provide a perspective or opinion on the sentence the defendant should receive.  If allowed, the victim impact statement should provide ample space for the victim to inform the sentencing authority of his/her wishes in the sentencing of the defendant.
* Signature/Oath of Victim:  In general, a model victim impact statement form should burden the victim with as few requirements as possible regarding swearing accuracy of the statement and notarizing the victim's signature.  While such formalities may be requirements in some jurisdictions, those which have no such requirements should not compel the victim to seek a notary, and victims should not be compelled to swear to the emotional impact of the crime.

Oral, Audio, Video Statements
For victims who may be unable to read or write, it may be necessary for probation and parole officers to interview the victim over the telephone or in-person, or arrange for the victim to provide an oral statement to the sentencing or paroling authorities (i.e., allocution).  When preparing a victim impact statement over the telephone or through a face-to-face interview, probation and parole officers should be sure that the information provided by the victim is recorded carefully.  Audio taped and videotaped victim impact statements also can be useful in situations where victims are unable to read or write, or are unable to attend sentencing or parole hearings. 

If a victim decides to provide an oral statement to the sentencing or paroling authority, they should be provided with information about what to expect during the proceedings and, if needed, provided with support services.  When victims choose to attend parole hearings in South Carolina, the Office of Victims Services of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Service (SCDPPPS) provides them, in writing, the following type of information and guidelines:
* Who can attend the hearing.
* Maximum number of attendees per offense.
* Time, date, and location of the hearing.
* Directions to the specific hearing room.
* Where to park (victims should have a separate parking area from the individuals who are attending in support of the inmate).
* Agenda that specifies the order of testimony.
* Recommendations about how to testify effectively.
* What to wear. 
* What they can and cannot bring.
* The name, address, and telephone number of the victim service contact person for the agency.

A sample information sheet sent to victims attending parole hearings in South Carolina is included in Appendix B. 

Also, in South Carolina, when victims choose to attend a parole hearing, there is a special waiting area for them which is separate from the waiting room for the inmate and the inmate's family.  The  victim waiting area is staffed by victim-sensitive personnel (using volunteers, as needed) and contains the following types of provisions:
* Information relevant to the parole process and victims' rights.
* Beverages and snacks.
* Newspapers and magazines.
* Toys.
* Restroom facilities.
* Telephone.
* Television and VCR.
* A nonsmoking area.
* A private area.

Victims are greeted in the waiting area by Office of Victim Services staff who explain the hearing process and answer any questions the victims may have.  When a victim's case is called, the inmate and his or her family members and attorney address the Parole Board as to why the inmate is a good candidate for parole.  After the inmate and his or her supporters have left the room, the victim presents testimony to the Parole Board.  A Victim Services Coordinator accompanies the victim to the hearing to provide emotional support as well as to answer any of the victim's questions that may arise during the hearing.  The Office for Victim Services also offers these support services for victims attending probation violation hearings.  

Currently, SCDPPPS is in the process of trying a new way of conducting parole hearings - via video-conferencing.  This allows the Parole Board to meet at the Administrative Office building rather than at the institution.  Victims still appear "face-to-face" before the Parole Board members, while inmates, due to security concerns, appear before the Board via video-conferencing from the local institutions.  Inmates' families are required to go to the institution where the inmate is located if they wish to address the Parole Board.  This type of arrangement prevents the victim from coming in contact with the inmate or the inmate's family, and is a cost effective approach for the agency as well.

Incorporating Victim Information into Agency's Management Information 
An increasing trend within probation and parole departments is to incorporate vital victim information into their offender management information systems.  Instead of having multiple and separate databases that relate to an offender's case and, hence, to the victim's case, many jurisdictions are beginning to centralize their databases and tie victim information to the offender information.  It is important to note, however, that substantial security provisions must be in place to protect confidential victim information (Sigmon and Seymour, 1996).  Automated systems used within probation and parole departments, with respect to victim notification, are discussed in more detail later in this chapter.

Victim confidentiality is a priority for service providers, and much victim information related to the criminal justice system is confidential by law or by agency policy.  Therefore, when developing new technologies that benefit crime victims, it is important for agencies to give careful consideration to the security of specific information.  Technology in today's market easily can accommodate the security of any information deemed confidential by the courts, including victim information.  For example, when developing software packages, access to computer screens with confidential information can be limited to authorized users with passwords.  Unauthorized access to documents also can be prevented through the use of encryption or "scrambling" of documents that are electronically transferred (Sigmon and Seymour, 1996). 

Providing Training on Victim Impact Statements
Alexander and Lord (1994) recommend that all criminal justice professionals (i.e., law enforcement, prosecutors, victim advocates, judges, probation officers, paroling authorities) who influence the victim impact procedure  have a thorough understanding of their State statutes and case law regarding the submission and use of victim impact statements.  This includes the following guidelines:
* The types of crimes for which impact statements are allowed.
* The definition of "victim."
* Whether the submission of victim impact information or statements is mandatory or discretionary at the time of sentencing.
* Whether the submission of victim impact information is mandatory or discretionary at the time of parole consideration.
* Confidentiality limits.
* Rights of enforcement (probably limited to States with State Constitutional Amendments for victims' rights).
* Submission deadlines.
* Perjury penalties.
* Collectability of restitution.
* Liability issues. 
* Other elements or limitations.

To effectively and compassionately address the needs and rights of crime victims and provide them with adequate services, community corrections professionals must have a clear perception of the effect of crime on its victims.  Therefore, probation and paroling authorities should establish policies and procedures that require all employees who have direct contact with crime victims to participate in State or local victim assistance training programs that address the needs, rights, and legal interests of crime victims (Alexander and Lord, 1994). Staff training is discussed in more detail in Chapter 7.  It is important to note for the purposes of this chapter, however, that staff who are responsible for obtaining victim impact information especially need to understand and be sensitive to the needs and concerns of crime victims, and be able to communicate effectively with their victim clients.  

In the 1980's, the Attorney General's Office in Illinois prepared interviewing guidelines for probation officers to follow when conducting in-person and telephone interviews for the purpose of soliciting victim impact.  The Dewitt County (Illinois) Probation and Court Services provides these guidelines to all its probation officers. The guidelines serve as a reminder to officers of the issues individuals may be facing as a result of being a victim of crime and provide helpful suggestions to prepare the officer for interviewing crime victims.  The guidelines cover items such as appropriate settings for interviews, strategies for communicating with victims (e.g., conveying empathy, respecting different stages of the recovery process of victimization, paraphrasing, being adequately prepared), referral services for victims, and appropriate response to the special needs of different types of victimizations (e.g., families of homicide victims, sexual assault victims, child victims, incapacitated victims).  

Victim Notification and Informational Services
Notification and informational needs of victims extend beyond informing victims of their right to submit or update a victim impact statement.  Probation and parole officers have access to both general and offender-specific information that could address victims' myriad informational needs and concerns.  Just knowing how probation and parole work and how they interact with other criminal justice agencies, knowing an offender's custody status, and knowing that offenders will be held accountable for their actions often are enough to ease the fears and frustrations of victims.  

Key Elements for Victim Notification and Informational Services
When developing victim notification and informational services in probation and parole agencies, the following key components should be considered:
* All victims should receive initial information about the probation and parole process and be offered the opportunity to receive future notification of the offenders' status and disposition.
* Agencies should incorporate various forms of notification, such as written, telephone, automated voice response, and in-person.
* Agencies should be proactive in providing both general and offender-specific information to victims of crime.
* To simplify the notification process, agencies should design the department's management information system (with appropriate confidentiality protections) to assist in processing victim notification requests.   
* Information about how the notification process works within probation and parole agencies should be given to all local and State victim service providers.

Many victims do not want continued contact and information from the justice system.  It is important to respect the wishes of these people.

Extending the Opportunity 
After the offender is sentenced to supervision or incarceration, the victim should be identified, notified, and asked to register for future notification of the offender's status.  Some systems limit their notification process to victims of violent crimes, while others reach out to notify all victims regardless of the offense against them.  Agencies should have several methods for victims to register for notification, such as by telephone or an automated calling service, in-person, office visits, and in writing (e.g., through victim impact statements, presentence reports, registration form/cards).

In South Carolina, all victims, regardless of the severity of the offense, are given the opportunity to enroll in the notification program during community supervision and the parole hearing process. The Victim Services Office of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services sends a brochure to victims that has a detachable registration/notification request card that they may complete and return to the department.  When designing request cards, it is important to develop a method for keeping the victim's name and address confidential.  A sample registration/notification request card is included in Appendix B.

In both Washington, D.C. and Georgia, the Parole Board has created outreach posters that describe victims' rights and available services.  In Georgia, the reverse side of the poster can be used by victims to register for notification.

In Arizona, identification of the victim or victim representative is simplified by using a single form that identifies the victim and indicates their request for pre-conviction and post-conviction notification.  This pressure sensitive triplicate form is completed by either victim/witness staff in the prosecutor's office or by the presentence investigation officer in the probation department.  Copies are then forwarded to the victim, victim advocate, arresting law enforcement agency, prosecutor, court, probation and parole, and/or correctional facility.  The form follows the offender throughout the criminal justice process and serves as the basis for victim identification and notification. 

Information to Provide to Victims
Probation and parole agencies can provide victims with general information about how the probation and parole process works and the types of services available for victims of crime in the community.  They also can provide victims with offender-specific information about the status of their case and the disposition of the offender(s) within the criminal justice system. Specifically, victims need information about the following:
* Their rights.
* The probation and parole process.
* Who the victim can contact at the probation and parole agency for more information.
* Submitting victim impact statements.
* Services provided to victims by the agency (e.g., New York's Ulster County Probation Department has formed support groups for children of domestic violence).
* Notice of the sentence and conditions of probation/parole of the offender.
* Offender status (e.g. violations, imposition of intermediate sanctions, revocations, restitution, early terminations). 
* Amount of restitution ordered and payment schedule.
* Names and phone numbers of local, State, and national victim service providers.

Methods of Providing Notification and Informational Services 
There are numerous ways that victims can be provided with information about the probation and parole process and be kept informed of an offender's status.  It is incumbent upon probation and parole agencies to be proactive and creative when developing methods for providing information and assisting victims who wish to receive notification of case status.  Written materials, creation of toll-free telephone numbers, implementation of automated notification systems, and creative, yet careful, use of new technologies (e.g., Internet) are all methods that can be employed at varying degrees within departments to achieve these goals.

Written Materials
At the beginning of their involvement in the probation or parole process, victims should be provided information in writing that explains their rights and how to keep involved and informed.  (See Appendix B for a sample victim-sensitive notification letter.)  It is especially important to remember to make written material easy to read (generally at a seventh grade reading level) and "victim-friendly."  This includes preparing written materials in lay terms (e.g., avoiding criminal justice jargon and acronyms) and having information available in different languages for non-English speaking victims.  In California, the California Youth Authority (CYA) has a sentence in Spanish at the bottom of all its forms that informs victims that information can be sent to them in Spanish if needed. 

Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas 
The Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department's (CSCD) victim notification procedures, in accordance with Texas law, are accomplished through the Victim Services Coordinator's Office with the cooperation of CSCD's Courts Branch. 

Victims receive initial notification that an offender has been placed on probation in the form of a letter, along with a copy of the offender's conditions of probation.  The injured party then knows exactly what the court expects of the offender during the term of probation.  If monetary restitution has been ordered by the court, information specific to the collection and disbursement of those monies is sent along with a copy of the restitution order.  In addition, victims receive CSCD's Crime Victims Handbook. This 34-page Handbook includes the following information:
* Important phone numbers for crime victims.
* General information on probation services.
* Explanations of standard and supplemental conditions of probation.
* Information on how restitution orders are handled by the department. 
* Information on victim services provided by the probation department.
* Information for contacting the probation department.
* Sample conditions of probation forms.
* A copy of the Texas Crime Victims' Bill of Rights. 

The Handbook is easy to read and written in terms that can be understood by persons not familiar with the criminal justice system.  Victims can refer to the Handbook for information throughout the time their offender is on probation, thus reducing the amount of time required by the victim services staff of the department to answer general questions.  

The format used for Tarrant County's Handbook is available both in diskette and photocopied format through the American Probation and Parole Association.  Agencies can follow the format provided and easily adapt the general information to fit their jurisdiction's specific practices.  

Toll-Free Numbers
Toll-free numbers that victims can call are also helpful tools for providing and responding to requests for information.  The South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services (SCDPPPS) recently established a toll-free number for its Office For Victims Services that victims can call for information about an inmate's parole eligibility or the parole hearing process, as well as to obtain information about offenders who are currently on probation or parole. 

Automating the Notification Process
Many States have opted for automated victim registration and notification systems that can save considerable time, money, and human resources.  These automated systems help ensure that victims are notified of an offender's release or impending parole hearing in a timely manner that is in accordance with the law.  Automated systems work by linking a central server computer, via telephone lines, to existing systems in jails, courthouses, prosecutor's offices, probation and parole offices, and prisons. 

According to Sigmon and Seymour (1996, p. 20-27), the process of automated victim notification generally includes the following:
* Victims who request to be notified of an offender's release (either through a prosecutor, victim service provider, Department of Corrections, or paroling authority) have their name, address, and telephone number entered into a centralized database.
* The victim contact information is on a security screen, which means that only authorized personnel (such as the victim services program manager, or case records personnel at institutions) have access to it.
* Computerized notification letters designed to provide details on the offender's status, including release, upcoming release hearing, or death, are keyed into the system and matched to the relevant victim information file.
* At the appropriate juncture  mandated by law (such as 60 days prior to release), the letter is automatically printed out by the computer and disseminated by the victim services program (in centralized systems) or case records personnel (in decentralized systems).

Virginia Department of Corrections
The Virginia Parole Board began implementing its victim notification program in July 1989.  At that time, the notification consisted of parole status information only and was a manual process that consisted of a large red card (containing victim contact information) placed in an offender's central office file with instructions to forward the file to the Victim Services Unit when it became an active Parole Board case.  Although the system basically worked, at times, it fell prey to human error causing some cases to "fall through the cracks."  

In 1992, the Parole Board decided to move toward a totally automated case information and processing system.  The Victim Services Unit, which is now a part of the Virginia Department of Corrections (DOC) uses a Windows-based relational database management system.  The system they have set up allows the victim database to be linked with the offender database, so when changes in the offender's status occur, the system automatically identifies changes in status without relying on a manual process that is subject to human error.  This automated system also allows for quarterly notification of the offender's current parole eligibility, as well as a current mandatory release date.

In terms of extracting statistical and managerial information from the victim notification database and the offender database, the following specific questions can be queried:
* Which area of the State has the most or least victim notification participation?
* Which offenders will be released on mandatory parole over the next 6 months who have victims who want to be notified?
* How many offenders have multiple crime victims?
* What type of crime is most likely to generate an interest in victim notification?

Any number of specific questions can be asked and answered for statistical or notification purposes.  For example, when Virginia transferred several hundred inmates to Texas in response to overcrowding, the Victim Services Unit was able to query the database and determine exactly who the offenders were, the crime they had committed, and the victims' names and addresses for appropriate notification.

The innovative characteristic of this program is its use of existing technology in automation. Its exemplary qualities are the system's ability to provide accurate and timely notification to a large number of victims with limited staffing.  

Startup costs were minimal as the Parole Board had committed itself to full automation of the parole process. Currently, there are two staff persons in the Victim Services unit, each using a networked 486 personal computer, Microsoft Access(tm) software, and a laserjet printer.  The combined hardware costs for the two PC's and software licenses were obtained for less than $5,000.  Staff of the Information Management Systems Unit at the Parole Board did the necessary alterations and programming to allow for the conversion of the database from the original automated system and to allow for specific features that were needed in the new system.  

Although not all offender status changes for victim notification are automated, the VA DOC is committed to the computerized system and is hopeful that in the near future all functions will be online.  

Kentucky Department of Corrections
The Kentucky Department of Corrections and the Kentucky Parole Board have implemented a promising notification system which links the 15 State prisons with crime victims, who wish to be notified of their offender's status, throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky.  The program is modeled after a successful Jefferson County, Kentucky program that originated in December 1994 as a response to a tragic murder.  Mary Frances Byron of Jeffersontown, Kentucky was shot and killed by her former boyfriend as she left work less than 3 weeks after he was charged with kidnapping and raping her at gun point.  He had been released from jail on bond, and she had not been notified of the release despite assurances that she would be.  He was later convicted of murdering her.  In response to the public outcry following this tragic crime, Kentucky implemented its automated system in Jefferson County to notify victims when offenders are released from the county jail.  (See Appendix B.)

Adapted for use by the Kentucky Department of Corrections and the Kentucky Parole Board, critical information regarding inmates can now be accessed by victims through the automated system, automatically 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with complete anonymity. Recently, the KY DOC has been directed by statute to link all 84 jails throughout the Commonwealth to the system.  There also are plans to link the KY Juvenile Justice Department to the system so that victims  of juvenile offenders can register for notification as well.  

The following immediate information is available through the automated system:
* Custody status of the inmate:  Information is provided on whether the inmate is incarcerated, has been transferred, has been released, or has escaped. 
* Location of the inmate:  The current institutional address and telephone number is given for inmates in departmental custody.  
* Parole eligibility:  The next parole hearing date is given.
* Sentence expiration:  The tentative  release date is given.

Victims also can call the toll-free number (800-511-1670), using a touch-tone telephone, to register for notification.  Through computer generated calls, all registered victims will be immediately contacted at a predetermined telephone number when an inmate is scheduled for release or if an inmate escapes from custody.  The system continues to call the victim every hour for the first 8 hours, every 4 hours for the next 24 hours, and every 6 hours for the following 24 hours or until the requesting party accepts the release information.  The system is designed to provide 72 hours advance notification.  In cases of parole, changes in sentencing due to immediate time credits, court ordered discharges or escapes, the system will begin to call once the release occurs.  

Each victim is allowed to register two telephone numbers.  To ensure that the victim receives the release information, the system asks the victim to leave a four digit personal identification number (PIN).  Victims are encouraged to choose a PIN that is easy for them to remember since it may be several years before the inmate is released. Use of the PIN is the only way to halt the notification calls.  Victims who move or change telephone numbers must ensure that this information gets entered into the automated system.  Otherwise, it can create a situation where the system calls an incorrect number and the person or agency on the receiving end of the call is unable to stop the calls because they do not have the victim's personal identification number.  Also, without the proper telephone number being supplied or updated by the victim, he or she may not receive the notification that they originally requested.  

If a victim does not have a touch-tone telephone, the victim may still register for notification by calling the toll-free number and staying on the line and speaking with an operator or by calling the Offender Records Office.  Registered victims with rotary dial telephones are able to receive notification through the automated system and are provided with instructions on how to use their PIN to confirm receipt of the notification announcement.  Individuals without telephones may request written notification of an inmate's release. 

Tennessee Department of Correction
Recently, in Tennessee, the Department of Correction implemented an automated calling system - V.O.I.C.E. (Victims Offender Information Caller Emissary).  Through the use of a touch tone phone, registered victims can call V.O.I.C.E. and access immediate and accurate information about parole hearings and eligibility dates, scheduled and early release dates, and the location of the offender.  Currently, the system cannot make outgoing calls to victims; however, the department forecasts that soon the system will be able to call registered victims and notify them of escapes, prison location changes, sentence or parole eligibility date changes, or the status of the offender.  

Concerns to Address with Automated Callback Systems
Automated callback systems offer jurisdictions who choose to use them a host of benefits - most importantly timely and efficient notification of victims of crime.  However, as with any automated system, there are some drawbacks and concerns to consider and address.  Concerns espoused by some victim advocates relate to the possible errors that can occur by persons responsible for entering the data (e.g., transposing numbers in the telephone number) and to situations where telephone lines may be down for a period of time due to inclement weather or in instances where victims do not have phones.

Additionally, limitations to automated callback systems noted by some victim advocates include the lack of personal contact involved in a call placed by an automated system.  Upon receiving the news that an inmate is about to be released or has escaped custody can instill concern in some victims and generate many questions.  Therefore, departments should ensure that the system provides the victim with information on who they can contact for additional information (e.g., probation and parole department's victim services office, local victim/witness advocate).  Optimally, departments with automated notification systems should consider augmenting the system with a 24-hour toll-free telephone number that victims can call to talk to someone who can provide crisis counseling and provide referrals, as well as answer questions they may have about the individual's release. 

Using the Internet to Provide Information and Notification
The Internet is a powerful tool for disseminating information.  Currently, its use by probation and parole agencies to provide information to victims of crime is rather limited.  However, as more people gain access to the system and it becomes a more routine informational tool in people's everyday lives, it is likely that different and innovative ways of using the Internet to provide information, solicit victim input, and keep victims informed will be developed.  Although, as with any technology, agencies will have to be careful in protecting confidentiality of victim information.

At the very least, probation and parole agencies can use the Internet to provide general information about their services available to crime victims.  The Texas Department of Criminal Justice and the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction are examples of two agencies that have put information about their victim services on their Web sites.  (Further information about the Web sites the Ohio Department has designed is provided in Chapter 8.)  

Victims who have access to the World Wide Web can go to an agency's home page and read about the services available to them. Probation and parole agencies also should be aware of other Web sites (i.e., local, State, and national victim service organizations) that victims can access to get information on victim services or issues and, if possible, arrange for automatic links from their Web site to other sites.  Information on how to access the National Criminal Justice Reference Services (NCJRS) and the Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center (OVCRC) online and other victim-related Internet sites is included in Appendix G.

The New Jersey Parole Board is an example of one agency that is using the Internet to help meet some of its notification mandates.  Pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.45 et seq., the New Jersey State Parole Board is required to give public notice when adult inmates are to be considered for parole.  To help provide this notice, they have created a Parole Eligibility Notice section on their Web site (http://www.state.nj.us/parole) that lists release dates of adult inmates by county. 

Educating Local and State Victim Service Providers
Information about how the notification process works within probation and parole agencies should be given to all local and State victim service providers.   Information can be provided in the form of written materials that victim service providers can distribute to their clients, as well as use for their own internal reference.  Networking events, training seminars, and presentations also are effective ways to educate victim service providers about the notification process, as well as other services provided to victims within the department.  The key is for probation and parole agencies to be proactive about communicating with victim service organizations and to seek these agencies out.  Additional information about community relations and outreach strategies may be found in Chapter 8.

Conclusion
This chapter provided an overview of issues related to providing victim impact, notification, and informational services.  All probation and parole agencies should solicit victim input and keep victims informed of case status as essential components of their work in order for victims to resolve their anxiety and also for the probation and parole agencies to fully understand the impact of the crime.  Only by opening lines of communication and educating victims and the public on what they do, will probation and parole actually better serve crime victims as well as the community-at-large and elevate crime victims to client status.

Chapter 3: 
Restitution

Introduction 
The financial impact of crime on victims is staggering.  
* Violent crime (including drunk driving and arson) accounts for $426,000 billion annually, and property crime accounts for $24 billion.  (Miller, Cohen & Wiersema, 1996).
* Personal crime is estimated to cost $105 billion annually in medical costs, lost earnings and public program costs related to victim assistance.  When pain, suffering, and the reduced quality of life are assessed, the costs of personal crime increase to an estimated $450 billion annually (Miller, et al., 1996).
* Four out of five gunshot victims are on public assistance or uninsured, costing taxpayers an estimated $4.5 billion a year (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 1995).
* Victims pay about $44 billion of the $57 billion in tangible nonservice expenses for traditional crimes of violence.  Employers pay almost $5 billion because of these crimes (health insurance bills, sick leave, and disability insurance), and government bears the remaining costs through lost tax revenues and Medicare and Medicaid payments (U.S. News and World Report, July 1, 1996).

When one considers these statistics, the importance of restitution takes on significant meaning.  The benefits to victims are clear - they receive economic compensation for losses, they hold the offender accountable, and they see the criminal justice system as responsive to their needs.  For offenders, restitution offers the opportunity to comprehend the injury of the offense and the very real consequences to the victim.  Restitution also provides offenders with the experience of taking responsibility for the injury they have caused and of being held accountable to the victim and society for the resulting damage. 

However, for restitution to be truly meaningful, there must be strict accountability on the part of the offender to pay.  Similarly, the system must be accountable for the effective and efficient collection and processing of restitution, and must maintain mechanisms for enforcing the collection of restitution when offenders' repayment becomes delinquent.  

Key elements of an effective restitution management process with a focus on the role of probation and parole will be examined in this chapter.  Readers will be informed about the following:
* The coordinated interagency approach and victims' involvement in the development of restitution programs.
* Factors that should be considered when assessing and documenting victim loss or an offender's ability to pay.
* The merits of encompassing restitution as an agency value and of incorporating restitution strategies within the case supervision plan. 
* Automated collection systems used in three States.
* States that have legislatively authorized approaches to restitution collection.
* Various alternative methods of collecting restitution used in several probation and parole agencies.

Collection of Restitution - An Agency Value
Unfortunately, many supervising agents do not feel that it is their responsibility to be a "bill collector," and they continue to view the collection of restitution in that context. Compounding this issue is the fact that the collection of restitution often directly competes with the collection of other court-ordered fines and fees, some of which may be used to supplement the budgets of probation and parole departments and pay officers' salaries.  
  
Probation and parole agencies can place the collection of restitution in proper perspective by developing and implementing specific and directive restitution-related policies and procedures that dictate the importance of restitution collection for the individual officers.  If restitution collection is encompassed as an agency value, stipulated as first priority in the order of collection of court-ordered fines and fees, and reinforced by the implementation of performance-based measures on restitution management and collection, probation and parole agencies are more likely to see favorable results.
  
Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas
The Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department's (CSCD) stance on the officer's responsibility for restitution collection is quite clear in its policies and procedures related to probationer payments as stated, in part, below:
  
Ideally, every probationer would pay all fees on time.  In reality, probationers are not likely to do so.  Therefore, to maximize collection of fees, all probation officers must accept their responsibilities, be determined to enforce probation conditions and be willing to invest the effort in their casework.  Each probationer, regardless of how many different probation officers may supervise or contact them, should experience their universal diligence in collection of fees.  The probation officer, who shuns or is casual about the responsibility to collect fees, thwarts the efforts of the Department and those who take the responsibility seriously.

Written policies and procedures help to clarify staff roles and responsibilities. It is clear when reading Tarrant County's policies and procedures that officers are expected to take the order of restitution seriously and not to place it on the back burner when enforcing the conditions of probation.  Their comprehensive and detailed policies and procedures related to probationer payments specify the following:
* The payment of fees is of equal importance to any other conditions that the Court may order, and that the probation officer is responsible for monitoring the probationer's payments and using the casework process and supervision plan to motivate and compell the probationer to take steps necessary to make payments as ordered by the Court. 
* Restitution collection is to be top priority among all court-ordered fees collected by the Department.
* The steps the probation officer must take when documenting payment or noncompliance with the payment schedule.
* The detailed procedure the officer is to follow when the probationer falls behind on making payments (e.g., discuss the problem with the offender, determine obstacles affecting the offender's ability to pay and incorporate strategies within the supervision plan to overcome the obstacles).
* The action to be taken if a probationer claims that payments were not or cannot be made due to a temporary or permanent medical condition.
* The officer is to document the actions taken to bring the offender into compliance in the event the case is referred back to the court.

The Tarrant County CSCD also holds inservice training for supervision officers on these procedures as well as on strategies for increasing collection of court-ordered fees.  A copy of the Tarrant County CSCD polices and procedures for probationer payments is included in Appendix C.

Agencies that implement these types of policies and procedures will reinforce the message that restitution collection within their agencies and on the part of individual officers is important.  

The Restitution Process 
The restitution process extends from the commission of the crime to the postsupervision period.  Its effective management is dependent upon the coordination of multiple tasks by numerous professionals in separate agencies and departments within the criminal justice system.  Key players in the restitution process include victims, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, probation and parole agents, corrections officials, paroling authorities, and the courts.  These professionals, alone or in combination, must coordinate and accomplish numerous tasks comprising the process of criminal restitution which include the following:
* Apprehension and adjudication of the offender.
* Determination of eligibility for restitution.
* Consultation with the victim to determine losses.
* Consideration of restitution in plea negotiations.
* Preparation of presentence report.
* Thorough assessment of defendant's ability to pay.
* Determination of payment schedule. 
* Determining the order of restitution and other financial obligations.
* Monitoring and enforcing restitution orders while an offender is on probation, parole, or incarcerated.
* Prevention of offenders' hiding of assets.
* Imposition of restitution conditions following a period of incarceration.
* Application of sanctions for nonpayment.
* Collection of restitution payments.
* Allocation of restitution fines to victim compensation boards.
* Distribution of funds to victims.
* Imposition of available civil remedies (Burnley and Murray, n.d.).

Most jurisdictions organize their restitution management operations around one particular agency that maintains the primary responsibility for the administration and collection of restitution with a minimum of assistance and cooperation from other agencies.  Typically, this is the probation department; however, in many jurisdictions, the prosecutor, court administrator, or victim/witness office takes the lead.  This type of management structure prevents restitution from being a systemic responsibility. Rather than creating a dynamic and ongoing sense of shared and mutual responsibility among all participants, the process tends to be impossible to coordinate and impossible to render effective (Burnley and Murray, n.d.).

Coordinated Interagency Approach 
The coordinated interagency approach to restitution management, developed by the Victim Assistance Legal Organization (VALOR), is a promising and common sense approach to solving some of the problems which have plagued effective administration of restitution programs for decades. 

In the report, Restitution Reform:  The Coordinated Interagency Approach, published by the Office for Victims of Crime, Burnley and Murray (n.d.) outline five essential goals in the management of restitution based on the coordinated interagency approach.  These goals are closely interrelated and fundamental to the success of a restitution program.  They are as follows:
* Effective Communication and Coordination Among Criminal Justice Agencies and Professionals:  Effective communication and coordination among criminal justice agencies and personnel are crucial to successful restitution management.  A lack of communication affects every aspect of the process and severely hampers any efforts to improve restitution management. 
* Clear Definition and Delineation of Restitution Roles:  Since restitution involves a multitude of tasks, it is essential that agency roles be clearly defined and acknowledged.  The lack of such clarity can lead to duplication of services or failure to provide certain services at all.  Neither the victim nor justice is served when the system fails to define and assign the roles involved in restitution in the most efficient and effective manner.
* Efficient and Streamlined Coordination of Restitution Tasks:  Restitution tasks must be viewed with a keen eye towards elimination of unnecessary steps and duplication of efforts.  The overlapping of restitution tasks - such as preparation of the victim impact statement, or notification of victims regarding case developments - is not only a waste of jurisdictional resources, but harmful to the overall efficiency of the restitution process and insensitive to crime victims.  Effective streamlining also requires the assignment of each task to the agency most capable of performing it efficiently.  At times, this may require rethinking of procedures or reallocation of resources. 
* Routine and Regular Flow of Information and Data:  The establishment of a routine flow of restitution information pertains to (1) substantive and procedural information regarding all restitution cases as they progress through the system; and  (2) restitution data generated from statistical figures on the status of restitution accounts.  It is extremely important for each agency along the criminal justice continuum to be aware of any developments, changes, or problems that have occurred vis-.-vis other agency restitution responsibilities.  
* Participation and Accountability by All Parties to the Process:  The goal of accountability refers to the need for each criminal justice system agency and professional to be willing to take responsibility for their portion of the restitution process.  Restitution is about taking responsibility - on every level.  Key to the establishment of such responsibility is the recognition of the interdependence of all components of the criminal justice system.  The coordinated interagency approach provides a climate in which acceptance of responsibility and accountability by all participants can be realistically achieved.  

Victim Involvement in the Development of Restitution Programs 
Victims, more than anybody else, are able to provide personal insights into the importance of restitution, as well as any problems they may have faced in receiving their own restitution payments.  Agencies seeking to initiate or enhance restitution programs can tap victims' expertise in several ways (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b):
* Conduct random victim satisfaction surveys that provide victims with the opportunity to assess the efforts of the agency and/or staff related to restitution. 
* Utilize existing agency Victim Advisory Committees to review policies and procedures and make recommendations for improvement.
* Establish a specialized, cross-collaborative restitution committee or consortium that includes victims as members, for the purposes of improving approaches to restitution.

For example, the California State Board of Control, which administers the State's victim compensation program, formed a Restitution Committee "to bring together a broad range of criminal justice organizations/entities to address restitution and victim service issues."  Representatives come from the following cross-agency/cross-jurisdictional committee memberships:
* State Attorney General's Office.
* Judicial Council.
* California Judge's Association.
* Legislative Analyst's office.
* California District Attorney's Association.
* Chief Probation Officer's Association.
* California Court Clerks Association.
* California Superior Court Clerk's Association.
* California Superior Court Administrators.
* Victim and Witness Coordinating Council.
* Office of Criminal Justice Planning.
* California Department of Corrections.
* California Youth Authority.

The Restitution Committee provides an ongoing forum for member organizations to offer input and ideas regarding proposed legislation, restitution policies and procedures, and victims' needs.  Since each member represents a different and unique perspective, the entire Committee benefits from their shared insights, problems, and issues.

Crime victims also need information that helps them to understand the process of ordering, monitoring, and collecting restitution in the criminal and juvenile justice systems.  An overview of how all financial obligations are processed (including restitution, base fines, and other penalties) should be provided to victims.  Two excellent charts developed by the State Board of Control that visually describe the restitution process in California are included in Appendix C.  

Key Elements for the Management and Collection of Restitution 
Keeping the concepts discussed above in mind, the following characteristics and components should be considered by probation and parole agencies when implementing promising restitution practices:
* Information should be gathered from the victim during the presentence investigation and prior to parole to estimate the amount of financial loss for use during sentencing and parole hearings.  In addition, a good faith effort should be employed when trying to locate victims for restitution payments.
* Once restitution is ordered, written policies should be in place to ensure that restitution is monitored, managed, collected, enforced, disbursed, and stipulated as a priority in the order of collection.  
* Agencies should implement automated systems to aid in monitoring, managing, collecting, and disbursing restitution and other victim-related fees and fines.
* Probation officers should incorporate measures within the supervision plan to increase offenders' ability to pay (e.g., help offenders seek employment opportunities, provide referrals to job training classes).
* The agency should have alternative means available for collecting restitution (e.g., civil remedies, attachment of assets, garnishment of wages, restitution centers, collection of restitution while institutionalized, forfeiture of bond money for restitution obligations, statutory ability to extend supervision for nonpayment, denial of professional licensure).

Assessing and Documenting Loss 
An accurate and detailed assessment of the extent of the victim's injuries and losses is critical to a fair order of restitution.  While victims may have provided initial information on the financial impact of the crime in a victim impact statement provided to the prosecutor's office, additional and unforeseen financial burdens may have been incurred by victims since that time.  By gathering or updating victim impact information referring to financial loss at the time of the presentence investigation and prior to parole hearings, probation and parole can ensure that the most accurate information is available when the restitution amount is determined and ordered.  Some considerations for guidelines that should be provided in writing to victims include the following:
* Employer statements (letters or affidavits) that document unpaid time off from work the victim took as a result of injuries from the crime or involvement in justice processes.
* Documentation of any workers' compensation claims submitted and/or claims payments received by the victim.
* Copies of bills for services directly related to victims' financial recovery from the crime.
* Any receipts for items or services.
* Documentation that estimates the value of stolen property.
* Photos of valuables that were stolen.
* Copies of any documentation often provided by local law enforcement agencies (e.g., records of serial numbers, photos) that is intended to aid victims in the recovery of stolen property.
* Any law enforcement records that indicate the status of stolen property (e.g., property recovered, recovered but damaged).
* Copies of victims' applications to and/or copies of checks received from the State victim compensation fund.
* Copies of insurance claims and related correspondence between victims and their insurance company, as well as copies of checks victims may have received to cover losses.
  
When the victim files claims with the State for compensation due to crime, the offender is still held accountable. In assessing economic loss to victims as part of a presentence investigation, probation officers must understand that payment made by a Compensation Program does not exempt offenders from having to pay.  When a probation officer recommends to the court that restitution be paid, the officer must consider the amount to be reimbursed to the Compensation Program.

Immediate Losses 
As early as possible, either before or during the presentence investigation, victims should be asked to report information about their losses by completing or updating a financial worksheet, and providing documentation as described above.  A sample financial worksheet is included in the model victim impact statement forms found in Appendix B.

The range of these losses can include the following:

Medical Care
* Emergency transportation to the hospital.
* Rape kit examinations that are not immediately paid by a third party.
* All expenses related to the hospital stay, including the room, laboratory tests, medications, x-rays, HIV testing in cases involving the exchange of bodily fluids, and medical supplies.
* Expenses for care provided by physicians - both inpatient and outpatient - medication and medical supplies.
* Fees for physical or occupational therapy.
* Replacement of eyeglasses, hearing aids, or other sensory aid  items damaged, destroyed, or stolen from the victim.
* Rental and related costs for equipment used for victims' physical restoration (e.g., wheelchairs, wheelchair ramps, special beds, crutches).
  
Mental Health Services
* Fees for counseling or therapy for the victim and his/her family members.
* Any costs incurred as a result of the victim's participation in support or therapy groups.
* Expenses for medications that doctors may prescribe for victims to help ease their trauma following a crime.
  
Funeral Expenses
* Costs associated with burials, i.e., caskets, cemetery plots, memorial services, etc.
* Expenses for travel to plan and/or attend funerals.
	
Time Off From Work
* To repair damage following property crimes.
* To attend or participate in court or parole proceedings.
* To attend doctors' appointments for injuries or mental health needs directly resulting from the crime.
  
Other Expenses
* Crime scene cleanup.
* Costs of replacing locks, changing security devices, etc.
* Expenses related to child or elder care when victims have to testify in court.
* Relocation expenses.
* Fees incurred in changing banking or credit card accounts.
  
In addition to losses sustained as a result of violent crime, losses can also be sustained as a result of stolen, damaged, or destroyed property, including loss of money due to insurance or telemarketing scams or fraud. A victim's car could be stolen and may incur $1,000 in expenses that were not covered by insurance.  Resultant expenses can be cost of repair, insurance deductibles, cost of other transportation if a car is stolen.  These losses are significant and can be listed as compensable costs.
  
Projected Expenses
Victimization often results in injuries or losses that are long term in nature.  While it is not possible to accurately document such projected expenses, it is possible to document expert opinions as to future financial obligations the victim might incur as a direct result of the crime.
  
Victims should be advised to seek documentation (a letter or affidavit) from professionals who are providing them with medical or mental health services that offers an estimate of the victims' future treatment needs, as well as related expenses.  Such costs can include the following:
* Long-term medical treatment.
* Physical or occupational rehabilitation or therapy.
* Mental health counseling or therapy.
* Time that must be taken off from work to receive any of the above services.

The justice professional responsible for assessing victims' restitution needs should provide this documentation to the court or paroling authority.

"To Be Determined" Restitution Orders 
One of the most significant challenges to assessing victims' losses is the speed in which cases move through the criminal and juvenile justice systems.  Plea bargains and related sentencings are often finalized without adequate time to determine victims' financial losses.

Courts should have the option of including "to be determined" restitution orders as part of the sentence in cases that are plea bargained.  In California, courts are required by law to impose "to be determined" restitution orders if victims' losses are not fully assessed at the time of sentencing. Once victims' losses are determined, the case is returned to court to officially record the restitution order and establish a payment schedule.  

This innovative approach provides an important opportunity for offender financial accountability in cases where the only alternative is no restitution order at all.

Assessing the Offender's Ability to Pay 
The "other side of the coin" of victim documentation of financial losses is conducting an assessment of the offender's ability to pay, in order to recommend an appropriate restitution payment plan.  The responsible justice agency should evaluate the offender's current and future financial status in making recommendations about both the amount of restitution as well as the payment schedule.

Issues for consideration include the following: 
* Current employment status, including salary, benefits, and pension plans.
* Projections on future employability (that assess the type of job and remuneration offenders might secure).
* Assets not essential to the offender's quality of life (excluding home or automobile ownership), including savings accounts, investments such as stocks, bonds and mutual funds, and income from investment properties.
* Potential contingency funds, such as State and Federal income tax returns, winnings from lotteries, or inheritances.

Management of Restitution 
Even though the payment of restitution is stipulated as a condition of probation and parole supervision, many offenders manage to complete their supervision period without paying the amount owed.  This disturbing reality places the credibility of the restitution process, as well as the integrity of the entire criminal justice system, at stake.  To help prevent this from happening, probation and parole officers must: (1) take their responsibility for ensuring that restitution is collected seriously, (2) make an effort to instill an understanding in the offender of the critical importance of restitution for the victim and assist offenders in increasing the ability to pay, and (3) take all steps necessary to ensure that the restitution orders are enforced and monies are collected.  Agencies can make the restitution management process easier for their officers by using automated systems and by using specialized staff or units for restitution collection.

Studies have shown that increasing both punitive and nonpunitive enforcement mechanisms can increase the compliance rate for restitution (Burnley and Murray, n.d.).  Findings from a study conducted by the American Bar Association (ABA), Improving Enforcement of Court-Ordered Restitution, suggest that higher compliance rates result:  (1) when efforts are made to monitor payments, and (2) when consistent action is taken to respond to delinquencies.  To avoid a pattern of noncompliance, effective monitoring practices should be initiated so that delinquency can be detected as soon as it occurs.  In the ABA's survey of restitution directors, the directors reported that delinquency in payment of restitution occurred at the time of the first payment approximately 50 percent of the time and at midsentence the remaining 50 percent of the time.  Rarely did noncompliance occur at the end of an offender's sentence (Smith, Davis & Hillenbrand, 1989). This suggests that early and effective responses may successfully interrupt a pattern of nonpayment.

Specialized Staff 
Studies show that a separation between responsibilities for the physical collection of restitution and monitoring of offenders can be extremely productive in terms of overall program efficiency.  The average probation order contains 18 conditions of probation.  Ideally, probation officers should not be in the position of supporting offenders in efforts to responsibly comply with restitution orders while physically collecting the actual payment.  The separation of monetary collection and, if desired, monitoring responsibilities can be achieved by having two separate agencies handle these tasks, or by having a separate unit within the probation agency that is established for restitution purposes (Burnley & Murray, n.d.).  It is important, however, that the primary supervising officer not lose sight of the needs of the victim because they no longer collect restitution payments. Some jurisdictions deal with this by having the specialized restitution officer collect payments while the primary supervising officer continues to have monitoring responsibilities.

Incorporating Restitution Strategies Within the Supervision Plan
When talking to probation and parole officers about restitution, a resounding chorus of "you can't get blood out of a turnip" is often heard.  It is true that many times offenders have extreme financial problems and are not able to earn adequate funds to pay full restitution; however, this should not excuse them from their responsibility to reimburse victims.  Victims often experience severe financial difficulties as a direct result from the crime committed against them and deserve to receive compensation.  Even small payments of $2 per month demonstrate to the victim that the offender and supervising officer take it seriously, that the victim is not forgotten, and that every offender can find a way to pay something.

Regardless of whether the probation or parole agency is directly responsible for physically collecting and disbursing fines and fees, it is the universal responsibility of probation and parole agents to monitor and enforce the collection of restitution when stipulated as a condition of probation or parole.  Research suggests that offenders who work, live at a stable address, and attend school are more likely to comply with their restitution orders (Davis & Lurigio, n.d.).  Therefore, these and other issues that affect the offender's ability to pay restitution should be considered and addressed by supervising agents when developing the supervision plan.  For example, if an offender is unemployed, the initial goal would be to help the offender obtain marketable job skills.  Once that goal is accomplished, the plan would be adjusted to concentrate on making the offender a regular payer (Godwin, 1994).  

The following section highlights promising practices that some probation and parole agencies have implemented to help offenders manage their money and obtain and maintain employment, thereby, increasing their capacity to pay restitution.  

Tarrant County CSCD, Texas - Personal Budgeting Course 
The Personal Budgeting Course is a 3-hour course provided through the Education Unit of the Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department by Consumer Credit Counseling Services.  The goal of the course is to assist probationers to improve their budgeting, so that they will be able to pay their court-ordered fees as well as other essential financial obligations.  Probationers are referred to the program by their supervising officer if they report an income source that falls in arrears on their court-ordered fees in an amount that is equal to 3 monthly payments. 

All probationers are required to fill out a budget worksheet within 60 days of being placed on probation.  This is used as a reference tool throughout the probationer's supervision period.  A copy of the budget worksheet is included in Appendix C.  Prior to attending the Personal Budgeting Course, the offender completes an updated budget worksheet that is forwarded to the Education Unit for use during the course.  During the Personal Budgeting Course, probationers analyze their financial resources to create a manageable budget that takes into consideration monthly expenses (e.g., housing, food, utilities) as well as nonmonthly expenses (e.g., car repairs, insurance payments, taxes) and establish a money management plan.  The course also helps probationers identify strategies for economizing and cutting expenses and provides them with information on community resources to which individuals can turn for financial assistance.  At the end of the class, the probationer completes another worksheet which he takes to his supervising officer.  The supervising officer and the probationer then negotiate a payment schedule.  The new schedule is included in the case supervision plan.

Tarrant County CSCD, Texas - Employment Services Program 
The Employment Services Program is designed to assist offenders on community supervision in acquiring and maintaining stable, full-time employment and increasing their chances of succeeding under community supervision.  This program interacts with other Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department programs which are currently in place, as well as develops new working relationships with other community agencies, educational institutions, service providers, and Tarrant County employers.  In fact, staff of the Tarrant County CSCD Employment Services Program, Fort Worth Independent School District, Texas Workforce Commission, and Texas Rehabilitation Commission are housed in one location (i.e., Resource Center) to enhance the ability of the agencies to work together and share resources to assist offenders in obtaining and maintaining employment.

The Employment Service Program develops placements in the private and public sectors for employment with regard to the offender's respective interests, needs, and skill levels.  The Employment Service Program notifies the Supervision Officer of an offender's activities while s/he is in the employment program.  Records are developed and maintained, and information is gathered from a variety of sources on local business conditions in relation to openings, expansions, and closures.  This information is shared with other agencies who, in turn, share their information on job openings with the Employment Services Program.  The Employment Service Program is marketed through public service announcements and multimedia presentations.  Presentations of the Employment Services Program are made to businesses and service clubs upon request.  

Montgomery County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas - Offender Employment Program (OEP)
The Offender Employment Program (OEP) of the Montgomery County Community Supervision and Corrections Department (MCCSCD) is available to any probationer under supervision who needs or wants employment assistance.  It is designed to provide life long skills to increase the probationers' success at securing and maintaining employment.  The OEP is staffed by a Job Specialist who is responsible for coordinating the program, networking with local businesses, and providing one-on-one assistance to probationers in securing and maintaining employment.  Initial assessments and the job readiness training portion of the program typically are handled by the Educational Assistants in the department's Day Resource Center.  The OEP is a service offered by the department to augment the other services being provided to the offender while on supervision; therefore, while the probationer is involved in the OEP, s/he is still monitored by their supervising agent.  

Referrals for the program are made by supervising officers, and the department director or assistant director following an in-house administrative hearing.  The program consists of four main components:
1. An assessment of employability.
2. Classes to teach probationers job readiness skills.
3. Assistance in securing employment.
4. Followup with the probationer and the employer to increase the probability of successful job placement (Brown & Young, 1992).

Once a probationer has secured employment, OEP staff continue to monitor the progress of the probationer for a period of 2 years or until the offender is removed from probation.  During this time period, OEP staff is available to counsel probationers who may be having difficulties adjusting to the demands of the job and to help address other employment problems that might arise.  

Gainful employment is often the critical factor in offenders fulfilling their restitution orders.  The public and agency resources invested in such programs can reap myriad benefits, including an improved and expanded workforce; gainfully employed ex-offenders who possess new competency and job skills; a reduced burden on taxpayers who might otherwise be contributing to probationers' livelihood and/or the costs for re-incarceration that might result from lack of structure and rehabilitative activities; and, perhaps most important, the payment of victim restitution that helps victims reconstruct their lives in the aftermath of crime.

Establishing Offender Sanctions for Nonpayment of Restitution
Agencies responsible for enforcing restitution must also enforce established sanctions for offenders' willful failure to pay, and ensure that offenders under their supervision are aware of the range of possible sanctions.  Such sanctions can be lifted in extreme cases where an offender can demonstrate hardships that prevent the maintenance of timely restitution payments; however, in such cases, restitution payment schedules should be adjusted, not abandoned (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b).

It is also important that officers understand their obligation to report nonpayment of court- and parole board-ordered restitution in order to assess the reasons for nonpayment, and possibly consider sanctions for offenders in violation of official orders.  Victims should be provided the opportunity to have input into the type(s) of sanctions that might be imposed.  In addition to the remedies noted above, such sanctions can include the following (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b):
* Public/community service employment (both paid and nonpaid).
* Intensive supervision.
* House arrest.
* Curfews.
* Electronic monitoring.
* Urinalysis.
* Revocation of supervision to incarceration (including minimum security institutions and work release programs).
	
Automating the Restitution Process
Automation can relieve many of the burdens associated with management and collection of restitution.  Manual methods of managing restitution can be extremely cumbersome - often involving the use of color-coded ledger sheets for the recording of different types of revenue collected, the use of carbon paper, a lengthy correction process in the event that an error is made on an official ledger sheet, and hand stamping of receipts with the official seal of the agency.  The cycle never ends - often contributing to keeping restitution collection and enforcement at a low priority (Beatty, Frank, Lurigio, Seymour & Macgargle, 1994).  

Automation can enhance the restitution process by doing the following:
* Reducing the amount of staff time needed to manage and collect restitution.
* Automatically generating letters of reminder or bills to offenders related to restitution and other court-ordered fees.
* Automatically generating letters to victims informing them about the restitution process, the status of the payments owed to them, and other available services.
* Increasing the ability of probation and parole officers, supervisors, and department administrators to access information on the status of an individual offender or of a group of offenders (e.g., all offenders supervised by a particular agent or unit, all offenders ordered to pay restitution throughout the State).
* Enabling agencies to prepare statistical reports quickly and easily to analyze and report their progress or results (e.g., collection rates).
	
While a number of probation and parole agencies are turning to automated systems to manage restitution, this section will focus on systems in place or being implemented in Florida and Utah. The automated billing system used by the Washington Department of Corrections also will be discussed.

Florida Department of Corrections -	Court-Ordered Payment System
In May 1991, the Florida Department of Corrections implemented its Court-Ordered Payment System (COPS) to accurately track and simplify the collection of court-ordered payments.  The system started as a pilot in Gainesville, Florida and was fully implemented throughout the State of Florida by November 1993.  Prior to the implementation of COPS, the department relied on a manual process for managing and collecting restitution.  According to agency administrators, the labor-intensive manual accounting system was inadequate and resulted in a wide disparity of practices and procedures and a general loss of system control. 

The Court-Ordered Payment System has given the Florida Department of Corrections the means to do the following:
* Automate the collection and receipting process of offender payments.
* Provide an audit trail.
* Expedite the disbursement of offender payments to victims and other payees.
* Establish payment schedules as defined by the orders of supervision. 
* Disburse offender payments equitably among all victims and other payees within 48 hours of being collected. 
* Generate reports and statistical information on the status of the collection of court-ordered payments in the Department.

Some of the main characteristics and elements of COPS are highlighted in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1:  Characteristics/Elements of COPS
1. Automated collection system is located on the Department of Corrections mainframe computer and linked to the offender's criminal history and supervision/inmate record. 
2. Innovative system provides court-ordered payment information not only to all 155 probation offices throughout the State of Florida but also to 51 major institutions, 32 community correctional centers, and 43 road prisons, work camps, and forestry camps. 
3. Offender's obligation and payment history while on supervision is readily available by computer terminal to prison officials if the offender is later sent to prison.  The same is true for offenders released from prison to post-release supervision. 
4. Offenders bring in one payment instrument (must be a guaranteed form of payment, i.e., a money order) that is disbursed to victims and other payees according to the established payment schedules in COPS. 
5. Governmental checks are disbursed to victims and other payees, eliminating any possibility of victims having to deal with worthless checks from offenders. 
6. The system provides a method for heightened caseload management awareness with the automated tracking of restitution and other court-ordered payments and provides the officer with immediate and accurate documentation for court proceedings and administrative review.

With reference to startup costs, the Florida Department of Corrections reports that the mainframe system was already in place.  Software was developed by the Department of Corrections' Management Information Systems and Management Systems Development with the collaboration of the Department of Corrections Probation and Parole Program Office.  Funding for the project came from the State of Florida's General Revenue Fund.  Once COPS was implemented, the Department began collecting a statutorily-mandated 4 percent surcharge on all court-ordered obligations collected through the system.  The surcharge is paid by the offender in addition to the amount ordered by the sentencing authority.  The surcharge is used by the department to help defray the costs of processing payments from offenders.  

Utah Department of Corrections - Offender Obligation System
The Utah Department of Corrections is in the process of implementing a new automated system, the Offender Obligation System, for managing the restitution process throughout the State.  Prior to implementation of the Offender Obligation System, each of the seven regional probation and parole offices in Utah managed the restitution process by using a Wang computer system, running a financial information database, to maintain restitution collection and disbursement information.  The Wang system used a central processing unit controlling "dumb" terminals.  The money collected in each region was deposited in a local bank and each region was responsible for issuing checks to victims.  

While this system was reported to have served the Department well overall, several disadvantages to the system were noted by the Department that affected the quality of services to victims:
* The regions were totally independent of each other and the Wang system was not networked for communication between regions.  Due to different versions of software and program code "fixes" implemented over the years to address region-specific problems, electronic information from one region was not compatible with another. 
* As offenders and victims moved around the State, payment histories and addresses had to follow by paper in offender case files, notes, and phone calls.  At times, this type of paper trail would result in overpayment, underpayment, and lost information.
* Smaller regional offices had a difficult time maintaining enough staff to separate money handling, bookkeeping, and balancing duties required by department auditing policies.
* Offenders did not receive monthly bills or statements, and often did not know how much restitution had been paid, or was owed.  Agents had to rely on the Restitution Technician in their region for information on case status, which could be a slow process.  When offenders were not reminded of restitution owed on a regular basis, restitution was either placed at a low priority or ignored by offenders until pressured to pay by agents.
* Although the Utah Department of Corrections is responsible for offenders both in prison and on parole, historically, there has been poor coordination of restitution collection efforts between them.  This was due, in large part, to the inability of the separate electronic systems to communicate.  
* The old system was unable to combine payments from multiple offenders for a single recipient (i.e., victim) into one check from within or among the region(s).  Large chain stores and other statewide businesses would receive multiple checks from each region - one for each offender who owed them restitution.

The Offender Obligation System was designed to address and correct these problems.  One of the most beneficial aspects of the new system is its ability to communicate among regional offices, as well as with other State systems.  This has helped to substantially decrease past problems associated with overpayment, underpayment, and misinformation.  All payments made by an offender while on supervision or while institutionalized are handled by the Offender Obligation System.  In short, the new system allows for the following:
* Probation and parole to access court ordered and sentencing information from the court.
* The court to access information related to offenders' payment status.
* Probation and parole officers and supervisors to easily access the payment history of an offender (or group of offenders) from any PC on the network.
* Victims to call the local region and get immediate information on the offender's status, even if the offense was adjudicated in another region.

In addition, the Offender Obligation System has simplified and streamlined the process for updating offender and victim's records (e.g., address changes).  Since the program and its data are centralized and networked, any changes are reflected instantly across the system. 

To serve as a reminder, offenders receive a monthly statement that shows their account status and the amount due.  An envelope also is enclosed for offenders to mail in their payments.  Offenders are able to submit personal checks for payment; however, checks are held for clearance until they are credited to an offender's account.  If a check does not clear, the Offender Obligation System notifies the supervising agent so appropriate and prompt action can be taken.

Rather than each region depositing money in a local bank, a single bank account is used for all deposits and disbursements, thus, making balancing and audit functions quicker and easier.  Once the offender's account has money in it, the program uses the payment schedule established by the supervising agent and distributes the money to the recipient accounts linked to the offender.  A disbursement program then prints a single check to each recipient, showing offender(s) and account information on the check stub. Restitution has been given the highest priority among court-ordered fees and is collected first.

To prepare for the new system, the Department's management information system staff were retrained, and new programming staff were hired.  New equipment with networking capabilities was purchased and installed across the State.  Beginning in 1993, the Department began replacing the "dumb" terminals of the Wang system with a Unix based Client/Server system.  Each region is a Local Area Network with its own server(s).  The regions are joined in a Wide Area Network across the State.  Individuals in the regional offices work on IBM based PCs using the Microsoft Windows environment.  The Offender Obligation System is being developed using the Informix Database and Powerbuilder front end for Windows compatibility.  

Agency administrators report that all funding for the Offender Obligation System originated from Department budget funds.  Figure 3-2 shows a general breakdown of project costs and funding for the system.

Figure 3-2:  Costs of Utah's Offender Obligation System
Amount 		Source 			Purpose

$500,000 		Internal Service  	Purchase 4 H.P. Unix Servers and 24 
			Fund				Network Servers with software and licenses

$4.5 million	Pool of Division  	Hardware for entire Department - PCs, 
			Funds				printer, etc.  The major portion, but not all, 
							was for Field Operations.

$387,000 		Budgeted Funds 		Software Contracting - Offender Obligation
							System and PSI only.  The Department has 
							an additional $456,000 in budgeted funds to
							complete these two systems, making a total 
							of $843,000.

Due mostly to the initial hardware costs, larger regions still do not have PCs for all staff.  Each region, based on its budget status, decides how much to spend on additional hardware/software.  Also, each region is being asked to provide personnel for service on committees for development and implementation of the program and training.  These "volunteers" maintain their full case management and work responsibilities, doing committee work when possible.  The Committee has "spent" an estimated 15,000 hours developing and implementing the program.

One new feature of the system to be tested is the Division of Finance FINDER Program.  The FINDER Program is a result of Utah Code Annotated 59-10-529 which allows the Department of Corrections, in conjunction with the State Tax Commission, to seize an offender's Utah tax refund if s/he owes restitution.  In the past, program administrators report that the FINDER Program has been used inconsistently by individual agents.  1997 was the first time the names of all offenders who owe restitution were sent to the Tax Commission automatically by a report prepared by the OOS.

Washington Department of Corrections 
The Washington Department of Corrections operates a highly successful system for restitution collection that is based upon functions similar to credit card billings. A monthly billing process helps some offenders to budget victim restitution as they would any other financial obligation.  It has proven effective in increasing offenders' victim restitution payments.

The Washington DOC offers the following guidelines for program implementation:
* An accounting system is an integral component of the overall billing process, and should include processes to document and provide receipts for offenders' payments.
* Legislation may be necessary that requires the entity responsible for disbursement of restitution payments to establish a monthly billing process.
* If a clerk's office is responsible for disbursement, a monthly billing process should be established with the correctional or paroling authority responsible for monitoring restitution payments.
* The agency bills the offender on a monthly basis.  
* Policies should be established that clarify and direct the filing and accounting process.
* Credit cards may be accepted as payment for legal financial obligations.  Any costs incurred related to credit card payments (such as interest) are the responsibility of the offender.
* Care and caution should be taken to establish an internal audit process that provides safeguards and protects agencies that accept payments from offenders.

Westchester County Adult Probation Department
In 1991, the Westchester County, New York Department of Probation established an Economics Sanctions Unit, a division of the probation department specifically responsible for the collection of restitution.  Payments from probation are mailed to the unit, and restitution accounts are monitored by the accounting staff.  If there are problems with payments, the accounting staff notifies the offender's probation officer.  Probation officers working within the Economics Sanctions Unit receive individualized and specialized training on restitution collection, which is considered a top priority by all involved personnel.  The Unit is designed to serve the needs of both offenders and victims (Burnley and Murray, n.d.). 

Restitution and Employee Proficiency
While the elimination of collection responsibilities benefits probation monitoring, it is still essential that probation officers be responsible for monitoring offender restitution.  For example, probation officers in Westchester County and Alexandria, Virginia are evaluated, in part, on how well they manage restitution cases.  Although probation officers are not collection agents, the pivotal roles they play in galvanizing offenders to positive, productive, and socially responsible behavior are crucial to restitution collection (Burnley and Murray, n.d.).

Restitution and Victim Compensation 
In an article entitled "Restitution: A National Priority," National Association of Crime Victims Compensation Boards Executive Director Dan Eddy (1995) offered an excellent overview of restitution's effect on victim compensation programs (pp. 2-3):

	All 50 States, plus D.C., Guam and the Virgin Islands, now operate crime victim compensation programs.  While each State functions independently, under its own State law, the programs tend to be very similar in terms of their eligibility requirements and basic types of compensable expenses.  All of the States will pay for medical expenses, counseling and lost wages, as well as for funerals and lost support for deceased victims' families.  And all of the programs require victims to be "innocent" of criminal activity or misconduct, and to report crimes and cooperate with criminal justice agencies (though some programs waive these requirements in some circumstances).  Major differences in the programs lie in their relative sizes, with some States having staffs of only two or three running their programs (the average size is about 10), and in the dollar levels of benefits that are provided, with maximums ranging from $5,000 in several States to $46,000 and $50,000 in a few others (the median maximum is $20,000).
	Forty-three programs depend in whole or in part on offender fees to fund their compensation programs, with most of this number paying for both benefits to victims and administrative costs from these fees. . ..  Faced with mounting fiscal demands, many States have instituted various cost-control measures, such as limits on mental health counseling, or the payment of medical bills at a reduced percentage.  States are also searching closely for collateral sources of payment, such as private insurance, public benefits, and restitution.
	Because an effective restitution recovery effort requires significant amounts of staff time, and because many compensation programs are short-staffed already, restitution income has not been a large source of funds for compensation programs thus far.  The programs are largely dependent on others in the criminal justice system to perform their responsibilities in seeking, ordering, and collecting restitution, and they generally rely on the victims themselves to reimburse the program when the restitution received is for expenses already paid for by the program (Eddy, 1995).

But a number of States are finding that a modest investment of administrative resources can reap significant rewards. Dan Eddy cites Iowa as an example; "with only one person working full-time on pursuing restitution recovery, it recoups from offenders about 15% of the money it awards to victims. . ..  Iowa is perhaps the best example of a State that has embarked on a serious and systematic effort to maximize its restitution recovery.  By identifying "key players in the restitution arena, and then working closely with them to make sure that restitution orders are sought, obtained, and enforced, Iowa has demonstrated clearly that restitution can be an important component of a State's overall budget plan" (Eddy, 1995).

The collaborative, multidisciplinary approach taken by Iowa's Crime Victim Compensation Program includes the following processes (Eddy, 1995):
* A letter is sent to the prosecutor noting that the victim has applied for compensation and requesting that restitution be sought for the victim's losses.
* When the compensation claim is approved, another letter is sent to the clerk of the court to track case status and related restitution orders; if no restitution was ordered, the prosecutor is asked to seek an amendment to the sentence.
* Once restitution has been ordered, Iowa's restitution specialist locates the defendant's whereabouts through the Department of Corrections database, and then communicates with corrections officials or with parole officers to inform them that the compensation program expects restitution to be forwarded to it.
* Regular direct correspondence to offenders reminds them of their obligation to pay, and makes clear that the compensation program will continue to monitor the offender's payments.
* Delinquency letters are sent to the defendant, prosecuting attorney, and parole supervisors when defendants fail to pay, and additional penalties are requested.
* The program also utilizes garnishment of offenders' wages as well as employer agreements for payroll deductions to recapture the amounts it has paid to victims.
* Incarcerated offenders can have the amount of restitution orders deducted automatically from their accounts and forwarded to the compensation program.
* Through an agreement with the Department of Revenue and Finance, delinquent defendants' income tax refunds can be offset or seized to fulfill restitution orders; the program has even seized a lottery award from a lucky offender!

Eddy (1995) explained that this promising practice in restitution collection has been aided considerably by several legislative changes:
* The compensation program is specifically listed as an eligible recipient in the restitution statute so a court can order the defendant to reimburse the program directly (after paying the victim for losses not covered by the compensation program).
* The prosecutor is authorized to attach a restitution lien to a defendant's property or other assets at the time of indictment, so that those assets can't be divested prior to conviction.
* All restitution orders are entered as civil judgments, so that the victim and/or the compensation program can execute the judgment for nonpayment of debt.
  
This cross-agency effort has served to increase funds for victim restitution and compensation to collaboratively work with justice agencies to enforce restitution orders and to hold offenders accountable. 

Improving the Rates of Collection:  State Laws 
Many promising practices and strategies that individually and collectively improve the rate of restitution collections have been authorized in recent years by State law. The National Center for Victims of Crime's (1996) 1996 Victims' Rights Sourcebook:  A Compilation and Comparison of Victims' Rights Legislation summarizes a number of States' legislatively authorized approaches to restitution collection:
* Alabama:  District attorneys may establish a "restitution recovery division."  The court may transfer any order to pay victims' restitution, court costs, or other court imposed payments which are in default to a district attorney's restitution recovery division and must, at the time of transfer, assess an additional collection fee of 30 percent.  The district attorney's office keeps 75 percent of that collection fee, with the remaining 25 percent transferred to the court.  The district attorney and court are also authorized to contract with private entities for collection.
* Arizona:  The State charges an $8.00 fee for offenders who wish to pay their restitution obligations in installments.
* Delaware:  The court may hold an offender's drivers license as security for payment of restitution or other costs or assessments.  If the offender fails to pay as ordered, the driver's license is suspended. 
* Florida and Alabama:  The court can issue an income deduction order at the time it orders restitution.
* Kansas and Arizona:  Both States require that any payment by the State to the defendant, including tax refunds, shall be paid first to satisfy restitution obligations.
* Massachusetts:  Victims have the right to receive a copy of the schedule of restitution payments, and the name and telephone number of the official responsible for supervising payments.
* Minnesota:  An offender who is ordered to pay more than $500 in restitution is to file an affidavit of financial disclosure with the correctional agency investigating his/her financial resources.
* New Mexico:  When a prisoner recovers financially from a claim against the State, any money paid to satisfy the claim is to be first applied to restitution orders.
* New Jersey:  Information from the presentence report concerning the defendant's financial resources is made available on request to the victim compensation board or to any officer authorized to collect payment on an assessment, restitution or fine.  New Jersey also charges offenders a $1.00 transaction fee for restitution payments, to be used to develop computerized tracking systems.
* Oregon:  The court can report any default in the payment of restitution to the consumer reporting agency.
* Washington:  Individualized monthly billings and weekly notice of payments by offenders are provided by the county clerks to the Department of Corrections.
* Wisconsin:  The State charges a five percent surcharge on the offender for administrative costs related to the collection of restitution, court costs, attorneys' fees, fines, and related costs.
	
Additional information about these model laws is available from the National Center for Victims of Crime's Department of Public Policy.

Alternative Methods of Collecting Restitution
At times, it becomes necessary to employ innovative and more controlled methods for collecting restitution when offenders fail to pay as scheduled.  For example, in the State of Washington, the Department of Corrections can extend parole of the offender for 10 years after the end of the formal supervision period for the purpose of collecting restitution (Beatty et al., 1994).  

In addition to statutory ability to extend supervision for nonpayment of restitution, other alternative methods for collecting monetary restitution include the following: 
* Civil remedies.
* Attachment of assets.
* Garnishment of wages.
* Restitution centers.
* The acceptance of credit card payments.
* Forfeiture of bond money for restitution obligations. 
* Collection of restitution while the offender is institutionalized, as well as once placed on parole.
* Holding parents or legal guardians liable for restitution orders resulting from their children's delinquent acts.

Civil Judgments, Attaching Assets, Garnishing Wages
According to statistics from the National Center for Victims of Crime, in 1991, 22 States allowed restitution to be enforced as a civil judgment.  In most of these States, once there has been a default in payment, a civil judgment can be enforced by placing a lien on the offender's real property, garnishing his/her wages, attaching his/her assets, or freezing his/her bank accounts.

The Maricopa County Adult Probation Department in Phoenix, Arizona requires probationers enrolled in the intensive supervision program and the work furlough program to endorse their paycheck and sign them over to the probation department.  Another check is then issued to the offender, minus the payment toward victim restitution.  Probationers enrolled in the day reporting program also can be subject to this requirement. 

Throughout Colorado probation departments train their officers to examine the entire financial situation of offenders when looking at issues concerning  their ability to pay restitution.  For example, if an offender owes restitution and owns expensive, non-necessity items (e.g., television, compact disc player), then the probation officer can ask the judge to order the offender to sell their possessions to pay restitution to the victim(s).  

Also, in Colorado, offenders who owe more than $2,000 in restitution are required, as a condition of probation, to submit their income tax return to their probation officer.  If the offender is entitled to a tax refund, the probation officer can require the offender to pay that amount toward his/her restitution obligation.  

Forfeiture of Bond Money 
In Westchester County, New York, when a "Violation of Probation" is filed as a result of failure to pay restitution, the probation officer can request bail.  The officer then suggests the court set bail in the amount of the owed restitution, if the amount is not "unreasonable."  In the accompanying report to the court, the court is advised that if the violation is sustained and the probationer is willing to assign the bail money as payment of restitution, the probation department would recommend that probation be continued, or, in some cases, be terminated.  The report recommends alternative sentences for probationers who will not assign bail money.  The available alternatives include an upward modification of the order to include a graduated sanction such as "shock time," community service, or possible electronic monitoring.  In some instances, a recommendation of revocation and a sentence of incarceration are made.

In California, the clerks of courts are required by law to apply bail money, after an offender's conviction, toward the restitution order, the restitution fine, and court costs before returning any portion of the money to the defendant.  This law does not apply to bail payments made by individuals other than the defendant.

Restitution Centers 
Restitution centers are another option used in some States for collecting restitution from offenders. Generally, restitution centers, such as the ones operated in  Texas, house offenders for a period of 6 months to 1 year while they go to work in the community.  The director of the center receives the offender's wages and disburses portions of it for expenses, fines, and restitution according to the predetermined priority (Lawrence, 1990).  Some States that have restitution centers include South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.

Collections in Institutions 
The California Department of Corrections (CDC) has implemented an Inmate Restitution Fine Collections System that enables the department to deduct 20 percent of inmate wages and other trust account deposits to pay court-ordered restitution.  This amount is forwarded to the State Board of Control Restitution Fund.  This fund provides reimbursement to qualified victims for expenses incurred as a result of the crime committed against them, such as medical costs, burial costs, and counseling.  Since its inception in November 1992, this system has resulted in the collection of over $9 million from inmate wages and trust account deposits.  CDC's Victim Services Program staff also facilitate voluntary restitution payments made by inmates and parolees, as well as monies derived from annual inmate fundraisers.

Through the Financial Responsibility Program, the Federal Bureau of Prisons encourages each sentenced inmate to meet his/her legitimate financial obligations, including restitution.  As part of the initial classification process, staff assist the inmate in developing a financial plan for meeting his/her obligations and, at subsequent program reviews, consider the inmate's efforts to fulfill those obligations as indicative of the inmate's acceptance and demonstrated level of responsibility. 

Acceptance of Credit Cards for Payment
The Court Administrator's Office in Stearns County, Minnesota accepts credit card payments for court-ordered fines and fees, including restitution.  To begin accepting that form of payment, the Court Administrator's Office got permission from the local judge and the county commissioners.  Arrangements were made with a local bank, and the office now accepts MasterCard, Visa, and Discover Card.  The Court Administrator's Office absorbs the user fee charged by the bank for use of credit cards, which is generally covered by the interest earned on the account.  Once an offender offers a credit card for payment of restitution, and it is authorized by the bank, it is an immediate "capture" of funds for the Court Administrator's Office. 

Rebate Program 
The California State Board of Control has implemented a "10% Rebate Program" that provides rebates to counties that remit restitution to the Restitution Fund, used to compensate victims of crime in California.  The intent of the rebate is to provide an incentive to the counties that collect restitution fines and orders.  Assembly Bill 817, passed in August 1995, requires counties to use the rebate to further collection efforts and not to enhance general government budgets.  This rebate is in addition to the existing statutes that allow counties to recover up to a maximum of 10 percent of the fine for their costs associated with the administration and collection of restitution.  This program represents the first time a revenue sharing tool has been implemented  between a victims' compensation agency and local criminal justice agencies (State Board of Control, n.d.).	

Converting Restitution Order to Community Service
In extreme cases where offenders are truly indigent and unable to pay restitution, another option is to have offenders perform community service hours in lieu of paying restitution.  Victims can have input into the type and location of the community service performed, which is a truly restorative justice practice.  Offenders may perform direct services for the victim to repair the damage caused by their actions or perform their community service hours for a  favorite charity of the victim.

In Minnesota, the Dakota County Community Corrections Department maintains a restitution fund that is used to pay victims of juvenile offenders.  The juvenile offenders perform community service hours and receive minimum wage credit for the hours they work. The "money" the youth earn is then taken from the restitution fund and paid directly to the victims. 

Reimbursing Victims of Deceased Offenders
In December 1996, officials in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania decided to pay more than $41,000 to 61 crime victims whose restitution had not been fully paid and whose perpetrators had died.  Some of the cases dated back over 20 years.  The money being used to reimburse these victims came from the revenue of a local recycling center, jointly operated by the city and county. Juvenile offenders of the Juvenile Probation Department in Allentown, Pennsylvania work at the center as part of their community service sentence.  The youth "earn" the equivalent of minimum wage salary for the hours they work, which is then paid to victims in cases where restitution has been ordered.  Money to reimburse the victims comes from the revenue the city and county gets from recyclables.  Due in part to the increased value of newsprint, recycling revenue was higher than expected over the past few years, thus creating a surplus of money. In an effort to encourage an appropriate use for the extra money, the probation department presented the innovative plan to reimburse victims of deceased offenders to county officials, who enthusiastically supported the idea (Hartzell, 1996).  

Parental Liability 
Many States have passed laws that hold parents or legal guardians liable for restitution orders resulting from their children's delinquent activities (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b):  
* Liability is "joint and several," which means that if the child is unable to fulfill his/her restitution obligations, the parent or guardian fully shares in the responsibility. (In some jurisdictions this can also mean that if multiple offenders are convicted, they are all obliged to pay the full amount.)
* Most laws provide for limits to monetary liability, which can be determined based upon the severity of the crime, whether or not a person or property was injured in the crime, and whether or not a firearm was used in the commission of the crime.
* State laws vary as to parents' or guardians' liability for restitution orders once the child reaches age 18.  Existing options include termination of orders, enforcement of orders until restitution is fully paid, and allowing victims to convert joint and several liability orders to civil judgments.
* Some laws contain stipulations that base joint liability on a parent's or guardian's "ability to pay," and provide that they provide clear proof of why they are unable to pay the restitution order.

Parental liability laws are not without controversy.  They are based upon the premise that parents' failure to adequately supervise or control their child contributed to the youth's delinquent activities.  Some critics point out that many good parents' ongoing attempts to monitor their children's activities are thwarted by a child's mental illness, use of drugs, and/or the lure of gangs.  Some restorative justice advocates believe parental liability laws reduce the personal accountability of youthful offenders by mandating that their parents share responsibility for their delinquent actions.  Others believe society should focus first on providing supportive services to the families of at-risk children, which include parenting classes and family therapy (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b). 

On the other hand, victims and their advocates express frustration at juvenile restitution orders that remain unpaid, and that are often expunged when the child turns 18.  They believe that parental liability laws offer an important option that increases the likelihood of receiving restitution to which they are entitled (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1997b).

Processing Unclaimed Victim Restitution
Courts and probation agencies may have cases where restitution is ordered and collected, but the victim cannot be located.  In such instances, following duly diligent efforts to locate the victim and after a prescribed period of time (2 to 3 years), restitution payments should be provided to the following (National Victim Center, 1997b):
* Any State-level restitution fund.
* The State's victim compensation program.
* Victim services fund in the county from which the restitution order is derived.

Conclusion 
Restitution plays a key role in the victim's reconstruction in the aftermath of a crime. Granted, restitution cannot undo the damage done by the offender, but it can, in some small way, help the victim and hold the offender accountable.  An offender's failure to pay restitution should not be treated as a minor technical violation of probation or parole. By implementing strategies discussed in this chapter, probation and parole may discover that it is, indeed, possible to "squeeze blood out of a turnip."
	
Chapter 4
Victim-Offender Programs

Introduction 
In the United States, the concept of victim-offender programs is relatively new, spanning just two decades of development and growth. While these programs share many goals, there is usually one important underlying principle: to provide forums that promote greater understanding of the impact that crime has on victims and their families, offenders' families, neighborhoods, and communities and to promote offender accountability and a positive learning experience for all involved participants. Many victim-offender programs incorporate principles of restorative justice, which are discussed below.

Why would victims, who have been harmed by criminal or delinquent activities, want to again be face-to-face with the person who hurt them? For many victims, burning questions in the aftermath of a crime need to be answered:
* Why did you choose to victimize me instead of somebody else?  
* Does my offender(s) realize the emotional, physical, and financial losses that I have endured as a result of his/her action?
* Does my offender(s) feel any remorse?
* Can my offender(s), through words or actions, be directly accountable to me so I can reconstruct my life in the aftermath of the crime?

For adult and juvenile offenders, victim-offender programs can offer substantial value, including an understanding of the impact their crimes have on their victims and communities. Victim-offender programs also offer offenders incentives for personal accountability in the forms of apologies, financial restitution, and community service, as well as facilitate a positive learning experience and competency development that can provide positive alternatives to criminal and delinquent activities. 

Communities as a whole also stand to benefit from the implementation of victim-offender programs. Crime and delinquency have both direct and indirect victims. The "domino effect" of any crime - regardless of its severity - increases communities' fears and feelings of vulnerability. In many victim-offender programs, the active involvement of community representatives sends a strong message that crime will not be tolerated, and that investment in individual and public safety is a community priority. Victim-offender programs often provide cost-effective alternatives to more retributive forms of justice.  When victims are provided with positive tools to reconstruct their lives, they are able to function better as contributing members of a community, which provides universal benefits that cannot be overlooked.

Depending upon the program format, victim-offender programs can be utilized in a number of forums for adult and juvenile offenders, including presentence, diversion, probation, law enforcement incarceration and detention, and parole. Educational programs that incorporate victim-offender principles also are being utilized in curricula for elementary, middle, and high school students that focus on prevention and early intervention.

By the conclusion of this chapter, readers will understand the following:
* The concept of restorative justice and some practical applications of restorative justice within probation and parole agencies.
* The purpose for victim-offender mediation and several policy and program implications for victim-offender mediation.
* The "impact of crime on victims" programs.
* The merits of, and resources for, the development of victim impact panels.

Key Elements for Victim-Offender Programs 
Victim-offender programs and services are not for all victims or all offenders. Such programs should not operate in a vacuum, but rather be an integral component of system- and community-based services for both victims and offenders.

Recommended guidelines for the implementation of victim-offender programs include, but are not limited to, the following:
* A clearly stated mission statement, with supporting goals and objectives, to guide program development, focusing on outcomes and possible benefits relevant to victims, offenders and the community.
* Leadership from a "change champion" - either an individual or entity - who can provide vision and guidance in program implementation.
* Structure that clarifies the role of the program within the criminal or juvenile justice system, as well as its role related to community-based activities.
* Comprehensive knowledge of research and theory related to victimization, crime, juvenile and criminal justice, and offenders to provide a basis for program development.
* Intensive training and cross-training to establish and clarify program expectations, and increase knowledge of professionals and volunteers involved with program planning, development, and evaluation.
* Written policies, procedures, and protocols to guide planning and implementation.
* Policies and procedures to screen victims to ensure that participation is appropriate for them.
* Policies and procedures to ensure that the victim's safety is of paramount importance at all times.
* Measures to ensure that victim participation is strictly voluntary, with no perception of coercion and that victims may end their participation at any time.
* A thorough, sensitive intake procedure to provide adequate screening and preparation.
* Understanding of existing victim-offender programs to facilitate knowledge exchange, and to avoid "reinventing the wheel" or repeating mistakes.
* Written documentation of key program activities (planning, implementation, and evaluation) to facilitate knowledge expansion and exchange among victim-offender program practitioners, allied professionals, and the community.

Restorative Justice 
Many victim-offender programs are based upon the principles of restorative justice, which evokes a substantial shift from America's traditionally retributive approach to justice. Initially offered as a philosophy for justice and fairness, restorative justice has taken on many important practical applications in the past decade - for victims, offenders and communities.

As described by Dr. Gordon Bazemore, Director of the Balanced and Restorative Justice Project at Florida Atlantic University in Fort Lauderdale, the conceptual framework of this approach to justice can best be described as a combined emphasis on three programming priorities (NOTE: Bazemore's model was developed specifically for juvenile offenders):
* Accountability: Restitution, community service, and victim-offender mediation create an awareness in offenders of the harmful consequences of their actions for victims, require offenders to take action to make amends to victims and the community and, whenever possible, involve victims directly in the justice process.
* Community protection: Intermediate, community-based surveillance and sanctioning systems channel the offender's time and energy into productive activities. A continuum of surveillance and sanctions provides a progression of consequences for noncompliance with supervision requirements and incentives that reinforce the offender's progress in meeting competency development and accountability objectives.
* Competency development: Work experience, active learning, and community service provide opportunities for offenders to develop skills, interact positively with conventional adults, earn money, and demonstrate publicly that they are capable of productive, competent behavior.

According to Kay Pranis, Restorative Justice Planner at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, restorative justice asks these questions:
* How can we increase opportunity for victim involvement in defining harm and potential repair?
* How can we increase offender awareness of injury to the victim?
* How can we encourage offender acknowledgment of wrongness of behavior?
* How can we involve the offender in repairing the harm?
* How can we acknowledge victim harm and confirm that the victim is not responsible for what happened?
* How can the community send messages of disapproval while not banishing offenders?
* How can the community provide opportunities for the offender to repair harm?
* How can the community be involved in the process of holding offenders accountable?

The shift from retributive to restorative justice has many implications for victims of crime.  Key to these changes are active involvement in the justice process, as well as a defined role in achieving offender accountability. This shift is depicted in Figure 4-1, which includes definitions of "retributive" and "restorative" justice developed by noted author Howard Zehr (as cited by Bazemore and Umbreit, 1994), and "implications for victims" developed by public safety consultant Anne Seymour.

Figure 4-1:  Retributive and Restorative Justice Assumptions and Implications for Victims of Crime
Retributive Justice		Restorative Justice		Implications for Victims

Crime is an act against  	Crime is an act against 	The victim is individualized as 
the State, a violation of a	another person and the 		central to the crime and the criminal
law, an abstract idea. 		community. 			justice system process, with the community
								duly noted as also affected by crimes.

The criminal justice 		Crime control lies primarily	The community - including victims 
system controls crime. 		in the community.		and their allies - participates in and 
								directly benefits from crime deterrence.

Offender accountability 	Accountability defined as 	Offenders are held directly 
defined as taking 		assuming responsibility and 	accountable to victims.
punishment. 			taking action to repair harm. 

Crime is an individual 		Crime has both individual  	Prevention, intervention, and
act with individual 		and social dimensions		breaking the cycle of violence
responsibility.			of responsibility.		are important considerations.

Punishment is effective.	Punishment alone is not 	Punishment is augmented by 
a. Threat of punishment 	effective in changing 		direct accountability to the
   deters crime.		behavior and is disruptive 	victim and to the community,
b. Punishment changes 		to community harmony		with victims having a strong, 
   behavior. 			and good relationships. 	consistent voice.

Victims are peripheral 		Victims are central to the	Restorative justice principles
to the process. 		process of resolving a crime.	are "victim-centered."

The offender is defined 	The offender is defined by	Reparation to the victim and
by deficits.			his or her capacity to make	to the community is a priority.
				reparation. 

Focus on establishing		Focus is on problem solving,	A central goal is to deter future criminal 
blame, on guilt, on past 	on liabilities/obligations,	action through conflict resolution, problem 
(did he/she do it?). 		and on the future (what 	solving, and fulfilling obligations to the
				should be done?).		victim and to the community.

Emphasis on 			Emphasis is on dialogue 	Victims are active participants 
adversarial relationship. 	and negotiation.		in determining appropriate reparations.

Imposition of pain to 		Restitution is a means of	Restitution holds the offender
punish and deter/prevent.	restoring both parties; goal	accountable and is meaningful 
				of conciliation/restoration.	to both him/her and the victim.

Community is on the 		Community as facilitator 	Just as the community is negatively
sideline, represented 		in restorative process.		affected by crime, it is positively
abstractly by the State. 					affected by restorative justice processes.

Response is focused 		Response focused on 		Crime deterrence in the future
on the offender's 		harmful consequences of		focuses on victim and public
past behavior. 			the offender's behavior; 	safety.
				emphasis is on the future. 

Dependence on 			Direct involvement 		Victims and their allies are directly
proxy professionals. 		by participants.		involved in the criminal justice and 
								restorative justice processes.
Source: Adapted from Bazemore and Umbreit, 1994

As the justice community continually seeks new, innovative approaches to fulfill its mission and goals, the concept of restorative justice has emerged as an approach that incorporates crime prevention, violence reduction, offender accountability, victim assistance, and public safety.

In the restorative model, offenders, crime victims, and the community are all considered clients of justice processes, including corrections. As such, the involvement and interests of these three client populations become core to the planning, development, implementation, and evaluation of justice-related programs and services.

At a national teleconference on restorative justice sponsored by the National Institute for Corrections in December 1996, a panel of experts identified seven core values of restorative justice:
* Crime is an offense against human relationships.
* Victims and the community are central to the justice process.
* The first priority of justice processes is to assist victims.
* The second priority of justice processes is to restore the community, to the degree possible.
* The offender has personal responsibility to victims and to the community for crimes committed.
* The offender will develop improved competency and understanding as a result of the restorative justice experience.
* Stakeholders share responsibilities for restorative justice through partnerships for action.

One of the best practical definitions of restorative justice is offered by Kay Pranis (1996, pp. 15-16), Restorative Justice Planner for the Minnesota Department of Corrections:
	Restorative justice provides a framework for responding to crime that strengthens the community while holding offenders accountable. Based upon a rethinking of crime as an injury to the victim and the community rather than as an affront to the power of the State, the restorative model seeks to repair the harm resulting from crime. To define harm and how to repair it, victims must be involved. Surrogates or advocates may present the victim perspective when a victim does not wish to participate. Offenders are held accountable by taking responsibility for their behavior and acting to repair the harm they've caused.
	The restorative justice model requires the offender to earn his or her way back into the community by making amends to the victim and the community with the assistance of the community, and calls upon the community to reach out and support the victim.
	Restorative thinking can be applied to any crime. Victims should always be allowed to define the harm of the crime and what might help them. . . .  Offenders should always be encouraged to take responsibility for their behavior and make amends if possible. However, no single restorative program is appropriate for all crime. While opportunities to repair harm are generally greater when the offender is kept in the community, violent offenders should be kept in secure facilities. Since part of the harm of crime is damage to the social fabric caused by fear of violent predators, they must be separated from the community.  While in custody, offenders can participate in community service and victim empathy groups, and victim panels can help violent offenders understand the impact of their behavior (Pranis, 1996).

Practical Applications of Restorative Justice
How can probation and parole agencies develop practical applications, i.e., programs, policies, and services, that embody the principles of restorative justice?

There are a number of promising practices that should be considered for replication by probation and parole agencies in their jurisdictions.

Reparative Probation Boards1
In Vermont, communities are not bystanders in the State's approach to restorative justice; rather, they are central to its implementation. The establishment of reparative probation boards, consisting of community members nominated by community leaders and appointed by the Commissioner of Corrections, promotes the concept that communities have much to gain, and nothing to lose, by assuming a role in offender accountability.
[1 Partially derived from Fulton, B.A. (1996).]
 
The Reparative Probation Program provides Vermont's courts with a sentencing option for offenders to make reparation to victims and the community. According to Michael J. Dooley, former Vermont Department of Corrections Program Director, "the emphasis of programs and services, which are traditionally targeted at the offender, are now focused on the community. Here, the emphasis is on the offender accepting responsibility, with the central focus on making victims and communities whole again."

Reparative activities included in offenders' sentences meted out by reparative probation boards include the following:
* Victim restitution.
* Community work service.
* Victim-offender mediation.
* Cognitive skills development sessions.
* Victim empathy programs.
* Decisionmaking programs.
* Driver improvement courses.

As described in an excerpt on Reparative Probation Boards (see Appendix D), four offender activity areas comprise the foundation for community reparative probation boards:
1. Restore and make whole the victims of crime. The offender will be expected to make restitution if ordered by the court, and participate in victim-offender mediation if requested by the victim.
2. Make amends to the community. The offender will complete community work service, preferably a work service activity related to the criminal conduct.
3. Learn about the impact of crime on victims and the community. The offender will appear before a Victim Empathy Panel composed of community members who know the impact of crime on their community. Members may be victims of crime, members of groups like Students Against Drunk Driving or Mothers Against Drunk Driving, merchants familiar with crimes such as shoplifting, or they may be former offenders.
4. Learn ways to avoid re-offense in the future. Offenders will complete short educational programs designed to give them knowledge, skills, and techniques to help them avoid reoffending in the future.
   Vermont's approach takes into consideration the three-pronged approach of restorative justice:  offender accountability, offender competency development, and safety and involvement of both victims and the public. This innovative program enjoys overwhelming support from Vermonters, who "want to be actively involved and want punishment to focus on opportunities and means for offenders to repair injuries and damages they caused (Fulton, 1996).

Family Group Conferencing 
Family group conferencing is currently utilized in several States, including Minnesota, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Vermont. It is often a diversion program for youthful offenders, or can be implemented as a condition of probation and parole.  As described in Restorative Justice, A Discussion Paper published by the Ministry of Justice in New Zealand (1996):
	A family group conference involves the victim (or his/her representative), the offender and members of the offender's family. It is attended by the police and facilitated by a youth justice coordinator who is employed by the Department of Social Welfare. Others, such as a social worker and a legal advocate for the young offender, may attend the conference at the request of the coordinator.

In a review of juvenile justice practices, the process of family group conferences follows a typical pattern:
* Introduction.
* An explanation of the procedure by the coordinator.
* An opportunity for the offender to comment on the accuracy of the police statement.
* An opportunity for the victim (or representative) to present his/her view if the offender admits  the offense.
* A general discussion of possible outcomes.
* A discussion of options among the offender's family.
* The formulation of a plan, response, or outcome by the offender's family.
* General negotiation.
* Agreement from the enforcement agency, the victim, and the offender.
* Recording of the agreed plan and closure of the meeting (Maxwell and Morris, 1995).

In family group conferences, all participants have to mutually agree to a plan, or cases are referred back to court.

Early research on family group conferences found considerable dissatisfaction with the process by both crime victims and those who serve them. Some considerations in developing this approach that may increase victim satisfaction include the following:
* Requiring all program coordinators and facilitators to receive intensive training in victimology theory and principles.
* Establishing a program advisory board, comprised of victims and service providers, to provide input and guidance on program policies, goals and objectives, and overall structure.
* Ensuring that a balance consistently exists between the opinions and concerns of the victim and those of the offender and his/her family. This intervention should not be used in cases involving family violence (with very few exceptions) because of the imbalance of power between the parties and the use by the offender against the victim of fear and intimidation.
* Conferring with victims first, prior to scheduling conferences, in order to facilitate their participation in a nonintrusive manner.
* Developing policies that mandate return of cases to court proceedings when the victim cannot or does not agree to the proposed plan.
  
Circle Sentencing
Circle sentencing is a community-directed process conducted in partnership with the criminal justice system to develop consensus on an appropriate sentencing plan that addresses the concerns of all interested parties. Sentencing circles, sometimes called peacemaking circles, use traditional circle ritual and structure to involve the victim, victim supporters, the offender, offender supporters, judge and court personnel, prosecutor, defense counsel, police, and all interested community members. Within the circle, people can speak from the heart in a shared search for understanding of the event, and together identify the steps necessary to assist in healing all affected parties and prevent future crimes.

Circles typically involve a multistep procedure that includes: (1) application by the offender to participate in the circle process; (2) a healing circle for the victim; (3) a healing circle for the offender; (4) a sentencing circle to develop consensus on the elements of a sentencing plan; and (5) followup circles to monitor the progress of the offender. The sentencing plan may incorporate commitments by the system, community, and family members as well as by the offender.  Sentencing circles are used for adult and juvenile offenders with a variety of offenses and have been used in both rural and urban settings.  Specifics of the circle process vary from community to community and are designed locally to fit community needs and culture.

Circles have been developed most extensively in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the Yukon, and occasionally in other communities. Their use spread to the United States in 1996 when a pilot project was initiated in Minnesota.

Offender Apologies 
In many jurisdictions, judges require a formal apology - either written or verbal - from the offender to the victim, which is then made part of the official court record (or the offender's apology can simply be placed in his/her file). Caution should be taken, however, to ensure first that the victim wants an apology,  to avoid hollow apologies that are meaningless to the one who has been harmed, and to ensure that the offender prepares sincere and blame-free apologies.  A third party, such as the probation or parole officer, should review the apology and return incomplete or inappropriate apologies to the offender for rewriting.  Apology guidelines can be established to guide the offender in formulating his/her apology letter.

Community Service 
Two innovative approaches to community service should be considered by probation and parole authorities as a promising practice:
* Letting the victim offer the court recommendations for the offender's community service.  For example, a victim may live near a local park in which his/her children play that could use 6 months of weekly cleanup; or graffiti along the roads that the victim takes to work might need to be painted over.
* Ordering first-time, nonviolent offenders who have a special skill, such as accounting, landscaping, or computer skills, to perform community service for a victims' rights organization (i.e., rape crisis center or domestic violence shelter). Of course, such agencies must be willing to accept these services prior to initiating this approach.

Both approaches offer victims important input into the offender's sentence, and can be included as part of their victim impact statements for presentence investigations or for allocution in court.

Another approach to community service being taken in Dakota County, Minnesota is through the deployment of Crime Repair Crews. The Dakota County Community Corrections Department has organized these crews, which are comprised of offenders and supervised by department staff, to repair damage to victim's homes or businesses caused by crime. The Crime Repair Crews are set up to perform this service for victims within a short-time period after the commission of the crime.  The crew does not provide services for any of the members' actual victims, but for other victims.

Staff Victimization and Restorative Justice
In 1996, the American Correctional Association Victims Committee (1996, p. 4) developed a position paper about utilizing a restorative justice approach to deal with staff victimization and critical incidents. Its suggestions are worth reviewing for development into promising practices for staff safety:
	A correctional institution and living units are microcosms of the community-at-large.  People live together, work together, come and go and, similar to society-at-large, they hurt each other. They suffer the consequences of victimization together. And together, they have to protect each other.  
	When an assault or critical incident hurts a member of the corrections community, the balanced and restorative justice principles should apply.
	How is the offender handled following a critical incident? How is, or is, the victim and his or her family helped?  How is the sense of community reestablished? How is the victim reintegrated back into the corrections workforce?
	How the department of corrections treats victims and offenders within its own community is mirrored by the criminal justice system. Victims often have few or no rights and services available; they are often blamed for their victimization and can't get information about what happens to their offender. They have no voice.
	Offenders are often placed back in the unit and treated lightly. Yet, they are responsible for disrupting their entire community of corrections. Should the offender be isolated or removed, or should they be held accountable for their behavior?
	Corrections can effect the principles of balanced and restorative justice by doing the following:
	* Providing staff victims with basic rights, such as notification of the status of their cases, the opportunity to have a voice in proceedings, protection, and restitution from the offender.
	* Offering staff victims and their families supportive services, such as appropriate and sensitive crisis response, counseling, support groups (within the corrections community and externally), information about victim compensation, and meaningful restitution from the offender.
	* Treating staff victimization offenses as crimes. Responses from both the corrections agency, as well as the criminal justice system, should be swift and incorporate the victim  throughout the process. The offender should be held accountable to his or her victim through restitution, community service, and fulfilling the requirements of the sentence. The corrections community within the institution should also be restored through actions by the offender that holds him or her accountable for disrupting the institutional community (American Correctional Association Victims Committee, 1996).

Victim-Offender Mediation 
Modern day victim-offender mediation, also called "dialogue," was first utilized in Ontario, Canada in 1974, and found its way to the United States in 1978 in Elkhart, Indiana in a program that dealt exclusively with juvenile property crimes. Today in the U.S., over 300 programs offer victim-offender mediation, the majority in juvenile cases, most of which involve minor property offenses. As described in program materials from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), "mediation can be a viable means by which justice is facilitated. What can be accomplished, however, is qualified by the victims' and offenders' personal experience, expectations, perceptions, background, age, level of maturity, sensitivity, honesty, openness, level and nature of support, nature, extent and frequency of the offense, relationship to the offender, and means by which the victims and/or offenders mediate, or deny their past and present circumstances and feelings."

A very few programs facilitate victim-offender mediation in more serious crimes. The TDCJ program manages mediations - all initiated by the victim/survivor - in cases involving death row inmates. At the TDCJ, the purpose of mediation is "to provide victims of violent crime with the opportunity to have a structured, face-to-face meeting with their offender(s) in a secure, safe environment, in order to facilitate a healing recovery process."

The TDCJ has established five goals that guide the implementation of its victim-offender mediation program, which may be found in Figure 4-2.

Figure 4-2: Texas Department of Criminal Justice's Goals for Implementation of Victim-Offender Mediation 
Goal 1: To provide victims with the opportunity for closure to unresolved trauma associated with violent crime.
* To directly and constructively express to offenders current and repressed feelings, such as fear, anxiety, anger, loss, pain, and grief. 
* To ask questions and receive answers and insights which only offenders can provide. 
* To experience a sense of empowerment through a direct voice and participation in this process of justice by helping to determine appropriate acts of restitution and accountability for the offender, and constructive acts of healing for the victim.

Goal 2: To provide offenders with an opportunity to face the full human impact of their crime upon the victim.
* To hear firsthand the depth of trauma experienced by the victim. 
* To express remorse related to their offense and resulting impact. 
* To answer questions for the purpose of personal assistance for the victim rather than legal defense of the offender. 
* To reach greater accountability by determining the means whereby offenders become obligated beyond themselves to their victims and communities, and to restore what has been "wronged" within the victims' physical, emotional, spiritual, financial, and social dimensions of their everyday life to whatever extent possible - for example, determining actual and symbolic restitution through an affirmation agreement.

Goal 3: To provide victims and offenders the opportunity for clearer understanding and personalization of the crimes' impact upon their lives.
Goal 4: To provide victims and offenders participating in victim offender mediation/dialogue with a process for developing mutual agreements, insights, or projects that could serve to benefit other victims and offenders in similar circumstances, such as mutual commitment to crime prevention, assurance of personal safety, victim advocacy, service to/within the community, criminal justice reform, victim impact panels.
Goal 5: To provide the community and society-at-large an opportunity to receive healing and restoration.

Research on Victim-Offender Mediation 
To understand the implementation and implications of victim-offender mediation, an examination of key research in this growing field is crucial. In the first large cross-site evaluation of victim-offender mediation programs in the United States, four program sites that worked closely with juvenile courts were examined carefully by a research team from the Citizens Council Mediation Services in Minneapolis, MN and the School of Social Work at the University of Minnesota:  Albuquerque, NM, Austin, TX, Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN, and the East Bay area of California.

The findings of this significant research, outlined in Umbreit and Coates (1992, pp. 2-4) Victim-offender Mediation:  An Analysis of Programs in Four States of the U.S.: Executive Summary Report, can help guide promising practices in the planning and implementation of victim-offender programs:
	A substantial amount of quantitative and qualitative data has been collected from a total of 1,153 interviews with crime victims and juvenile offenders in four States, review of program and court records, interviews with court officials and program staff, and observation of 28 mediation sessions. The conclusions that emerged from analysis of these many data sources are first identified below. While these conclusions cannot be generalized to represent all victim-offender mediation programs, they do provide important insight into this growing international field of justice reform.
	 1. Victim-offender mediation results in very high levels of client satisfaction (victims, 79%; offenders, 87%) and perceptions of fairness (victims, 83%; offenders, 89%) with the mediation process for both victims and offenders. This is consistent with a number of previous studies (Coates & Gehm, 1989; Digman, 1990; Marshall & Merry, 1990; Umbreit, 1991, 1990, 1988).
	 2. The importance among victims and offenders of meeting each other and interacting through the mediation process is documented quantitatively in this study, whereas prior research (Coates & Gehm, 1989) provided qualitative data related to this issue.
	 3. Participants experience mediation as having a strong effect in humanizing the justice system response to crime, both for victims and juvenile offenders. This is consistent with the findings of prior studies (Coates & Gehm, 1989; Marshall & Merry, 1990; Umbreit, 1991).
	 4. The process of victim-offender mediation has a more significant positive effect upon crime victims (when examining comparison groups), even though both victims and offenders indicate very high levels of satisfaction and perceptions of fairness with mediation.
	 5. Victim-offender mediation makes a significant contribution to reducing fear and anxiety among crime victims.  Prior to mediation, nearly 25% of victims were afraid of being victimized again by the same offender.  After mediation, only 10% were afraid of being revictimized.
	 6. Juvenile offenders do not perceive victim-offender mediation to be a significantly less demanding response to their criminal behavior than other options available to the court. The use of mediation is consistent with the concern to hold young offenders accountable for their criminal behavior.
	 7. Victim-offender mediation can be effective in working with juvenile offenders with prior convictions, rather than simply with "first time" offenders.
	 8. The mediation process can be effective in working with more serious crimes such as burglary, robbery, and assault.
	 9. The specific location and sponsorship of the program had no major impact upon the high degree of client satisfaction with the outcome of mediation, or their perception of fairness with the mediation process, for either victims or offenders.
	10. Victim-offender mediation has strong support from court officials, both judges and probation staff, and is increasingly becoming institutionalized into the juvenile court system.
	11. The vast majority of offenders indicate they voluntarily chose to participate in victim-offender mediation. Programs in this study appear to have done a better job of presenting victim-offender mediation as a voluntary choice to the offender (81% of offenders) than indicated in prior research (Coates & Gehm, 1989).
	12. Mediation is perceived to be voluntary by the vast majority of victims who participated in it. Although 91 percent of victims felt they voluntarily chose to participate in mediation, a small number of victims (9%) felt that they were coerced into participating in the victim-offender mediation program. Whether this perception of coercion was a function of the program staff, mediators, court-related officials, or even parents (of juvenile victims) is unclear.
	13. Considerably fewer and less serious additional crimes were committed within a one-year period by juvenile offenders in victim-offender mediation programs, when compared to similar offenders who did not participate in mediation.  Consistent with two recent English studies (Marshal & Merry, 1990; Digman, 1990), this finding, however, is not statistically significant.
	14. Victim-offender mediation has a significant impact on the likelihood of offenders successfully completing their restitution obligation (81%) to the victim, when compared to similar offenders who completed their restitution (58%) in a court-administered program without mediation.
	15. There is some basis for concern that the mediation process can become so routine as to suggest an impersonal atmosphere, potentially leading to a dehumanizing experience for participants. The spontaneity, vitality and creativity of the mediation process must be preserved by training and monitoring.
	16. As the field of victim-offender mediation expands and becomes more institutionalized, a danger exists that mediation will alter its model to accommodate the dominant system of retributive justice, rather than influencing the present system to alter its model to incorporate a more restorative vision of justice upon which victim-offender mediation is based. 

Implications
A number of implications for both justice policy and direct practices are offered, based upon the conclusions that emerged from this extensive 2.5 year multisite study of victim-offender mediation in the United States.

Policy Implications
* Wider public policy consideration should be given to increasing the availability of victim-offender mediation services, perhaps even as a basic right for those victims of crime who would find it helpful, assuming the offender agrees to such a meeting and a credible victim-offender mediation program is available to both parties.
* Victim-offender mediation should be more consistently integrated into the large national network of court-sponsored restitution programs. There is strong evidence that victims of crime are more likely to actually be compensated if the restitution plan is negotiated by the offender and victim.
* Mediating conflict between interested crime victims and their offenders should receive far more attention from the large network of victim advocacy groups throughout the United States. There is strong evidence that a victim's sense of vulnerability and anxiety can be reduced following a direct mediation session with his or her offender.
* More research is needed to assess the impact of victim-offender mediation, particularly with adult offenders and in crimes of violence.
  	
Program Implications
* Training of mediators should be enhanced to ensure that an appropriate nondirective style of mediation is used. This style includes the ability to make use of silence during mediation sessions and to avoid missing opportunities to encourage either victim or offender to address issues that are important to them. Emphasis should be placed on demonstrated skill competency rather than simply completing a set number of hours of mediation training.
* New and written video training resources should be developed to highlight the importance of a nondirective style of mediation. Specific examples of how to avoid "missing opportunities" for greater emotional closure for the victim and offender should be provided.
* Additional attention should be given to ensuring that participation in mediation is voluntary for both parties. This should include training of case developers and mediators to inform both parties of all available options prior to their choice of mediation.
* Programs should routinely have victims and offenders sign a "consent to participate in mediation" form, prior to the actual mediation session, which clearly explains mediation, states the voluntary nature of mediation, and identifies other options that are available to both parties. Even after signing such a consent, victims should be free to end the session at any time.
* The appropriate role of parents in the mediation process involving juvenile offenders needs additional clarification. Rather than either a policy of including or not including parents in the actual mediation session, programs should develop policies that identify for whom and under what specific circumstances parents should be allowed in the entire mediation session.
* New written and video training resources should be developed to provide program staff and mediators with assistance in identifying which cases and under what circumstances parental involvement in the mediation is desirable.  The manner in which parents are allowed to be in the mediation session, including additional ground rules, should be incorporated into mediation training.
* Case referral criteria in victim-offender mediation programs should include both offenders with prior convictions and cases involving more serious offenses, such as residential burglary, robbery, aggravated assaults, and negligent homicide.
* Programs should develop an ongoing system for collecting client satisfaction and other related data that are helpful for maintaining high quality control. This should include collecting data related to the participants' perception of voluntary participation and the role and effectiveness of the mediator. A program evaluation kit made available through this study could be helpful with such an effort (Umbreit and Coates, 1992).

"Impact of Crime on Victims" Programs
"Impact of Crime on Victims" (IOC) classes were initiated by the California Youth Authority (CYA) in 1985, the nation's largest agency that detains juvenile offenders. Classes are now in all CYA institutions, and have since been replicated in 17 other States and at the Federal level. Applications for the IOC program include forums for adult and juvenile offenders, both nonviolent and violent, in diversion, probation, incarceration, detention, and parole settings.

In a program abstract written by IOC founder Sharon English, Assistant Director of the CYA and Martie Crawford, Program Director of the Riverside County (CA) Victim/Witness Program (1989), guidelines for developing an educational IOC model were offered.

In CYA, no new funds were allocated for the classes, but resources were redirected; that is, redirected so that budgeted education funds were reassigned to conduct this class instead of another course. This course, however, includes a number of the other educational activities such as analyzing problems, spelling, writing, and reading. The difference is the subject  matter.

The following sections describe course requirements, instructor/facilitator selection, and availability of resources to develop the program:

Course Description 
The students of the IOC course must meet the following objectives:
* Explore how they view the rights of other people.
* Raise their awareness of the long-term impact of their action.
* Recognize their own possible victimization as children and how that abuse might influence them today.
* Provide opportunities to help them become non-abusive parents and good spouses/partners.
* Discuss their tendency to depersonalize the people they injure.
* Consider how they are accountable for the crimes they committed.

Subjects taught in a victim awareness class should span a range of topics, including property offenses, domestic violence, sexual assault, homicide, robbery, child abuse and victims' rights. In these classes, offenders should not be separated by offense type, since the goal is for all offenders to learn about the far-reaching effects of crime.

The course must be experiential with a variety of activities that include the use of visual aids such as videotapes with study guides, television newscasts or programs; guest speakers; notebooks with articles; scenarios and exercises; and role-playing opportunities. Of these activities, visits by actual victims provide the most important experience. Nothing can replace or substitute hearing from a parent whose child was killed or a burglary victim who is still afraid to be in his/her own home.

The only substitute for an actual victim could be a victim services advocate who has worked with many victims, and who can relate the stories of the people he or she has helped. Most people do not fully appreciate the tragedies of crime or the related financial and emotional costs. Consider this example: The fiancee of a bride-to-be is stabbed to death just weeks before their marriage, and all deposits for the wedding and celebration are non-refundable.  Besides that, the young woman has no rights as a victim, since she is not the "next of kin."

This type of real-life story can make more of an impact on a delinquent youth than the horrible, sensational stories which even habitual offenders find repulsive. For that reason, instructors in this course should use everyday news stories on television and in the newspapers to present material involving ordinary people.

Other good exercises are to have the offender assess and write about what he or she thinks is owed to the victim, or what he or she feel would be owed if either of them were the victim of this offense. Another approach used by the Texas Youth Commission at the Giddings Correctional Facility involves having the young offenders role play their violent offenses as both the victim and the perpetrator.

Instructor/Facilitator Selection 
The instructor/facilitator must be able to do the following:
* Confront delinquent youth regarding their attitudes and beliefs in an assertive manner that encourages maximum self-examination and minimizes defensiveness.
* Understand the conflicting attitudes of both offenders and victims.
* Use experiential (student participation) teaching techniques to facilitate offender learning in the classroom.
In order to facilitate an "Impact of Crime on Victims" course, the instructor must know how to be successful. The instructor cannot attempt to teach this course without advanced preparation, and so must be trained by victim service advocates. The instructor must stay on target with victim of crime issues. This is not a course on the general causes of delinquency, nor is it a course on other offender needs such as housing, employment, or gangs.  It is often too easy for offenders or staff to focus on the many other societal problems and neglect the personal responsibility of each individual for his or her situation.  This is not a course on philosophy (i.e., are fish victims?) and is not a course on the holocaust or natural disasters (i.e., victims of hurricanes).

Resources to Develop the "Impact of Crime on Victims" Program
A comprehensive teachers' manual and students' curriculum has been developed by CYA.  In addition, the Office for Victims of Crime provided support for a "training for trainers" session in IOC and victim impact panels in 1996, from which many resources and trained course facilitators emerged. Additional information about how to plan and implement an IOC class in probation or parole settings is available from the California Youth Authority, Office of Prevention and Victim Services, 4241 Williamsbourgh Drive, Suite 214, Sacramento, CA  95823.

Victim Impact Panels 
Victim impact panels (VIPs) have been utilized in conjunction with the criminal and juvenile justice systems since 1980. Initially developed by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and Remove Intoxicated Drivers (RID) to educate DUI offenders about the tragic effects their actions have on victims, VIPs have expanded to also include persons convicted of offenses such as burglary, robbery, auto theft, and property crimes.  VIPs can be utilized in a variety of venues involving adult and juvenile offenders, including diversion, probation, parole, detention, or incarceration. In addition, VIPs have proved effective as a preventive approach for youth through school forums.  They are also extremely beneficial when included as components of any training for justice and allied professionals, including probation and parole.

Benefits for Offenders and Victims 
For offenders, VIPs offer an opportunity to hear firsthand about the short- and long-term pain and suffering their crimes cause to victims. For victims who choose to participate, VIPs can be a valuable component in their attempts to reconstruct their lives in the aftermath of a crime. Many victims believe that by speaking directly to offenders, they may help prevent future delinquent or criminal behaviors.

Program Coordination 
VIPs must include a truly collaborative approach that crosses the justice system and the community.  Stakeholders in program planning, development, and implementation include the following:
* System-based and community-based victim service organizations.
* Crime victims.
* Adult and juvenile courts.
* Judiciary.
* Prosecutors.
* Adult and juvenile probation/diversion.
* Adult and juvenile corrections.
* Adult parole and juvenile aftercare.

Resources for VIP Program Development
Excellent resources for program development, including a planning guide and videotape, are available from the National Office of MADD, P.O. Box 541688, Dallas, TX 75354-1688, or by calling 1-800-GET-MADD. Recommended guidelines for organizing a VIP program, as developed by Lord (1990), address the following issues:
* Criminal justice system support.
* Research on victim impact panels.
* Steering committee.
* Other victim impact panel options.
* Site selection.
* Procedures/forms.
* Sample forms.
* Funding.
* Selection of victim speakers.
* Guidelines for victim speakers.
* Preparation tips for victims.
* The panel presentation.
* Evaluation. 
* Sample evaluation forms.

Conclusion 
This chapter gives an overview of the value of victim-offender programs and offers concrete examples of victim-offender programs that have been implemented in probation and parole settings. When implemented correctly, victim-offender programs can provide substantial benefits to victims, offenders, and the community.

Chapter 5
Family Violence1

Introduction 
Family violence is a pervasive and insidious problem in American society, and one that, all too often, has been ignored by the criminal justice system.  Family violence affects victims across the entire age span and from all socioeconomic and ethnic groups.  Child abuse, partner abuse, and elder abuse are among the types of family violence most commonly addressed by criminal justice and social services agencies.  However, violence in other family relationships, such as between siblings, assault of parents by juveniles, and abuse by family caretakers of vulnerable adults (e.g., those with physical or mental impairments) also exists and must be studied more thoroughly to understand the full extent and ramifications for victims and society.

This chapter contains a discussion of the following:
* The extent and consequences of family violence and its impact on victims.
* Several practices recommended for an effective community corrections response to family violence and its victims.
* The type of information that should be provided to victims of family violence.
* Offender supervision in relation to family violence cases to help protect victims.

Exploration of Problems and Issues 
Extent of Family Violence 
The magnitude of family violence incidents is difficult to ascertain.  The "family" has generally been regarded as an inviolable unit of society, protected from the scrutiny of outside contingents.  Therefore, experts believe much family violence is never included in official reports. Nonetheless, known prevalence is staggering.  The following data underscore the occurrence of several types of family violence:
* There were nearly 2 million reports of child abuse and neglect involving 2.9 million children in 1993.  About 40 percent of reported cases were substantiated, or there was some indication of maltreatment.  One thousand and twenty-eight (1,028) children died from maltreatment.  Of child abuse perpetrators, approximately 77 percent were parents and 12 percent were other relatives (National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1995).
* The majority of partner abuse crimes are committed by men toward their female partners.  More than 1 million women were victims of violence at the hands of their intimate partners (husbands, ex-husbands, boyfriends, and ex-boyfriends) in 1992 (Bachman & Saltzman, 1995).  
* Elder abuse has been studied less intensively than has child or partner abuse.  However, estimates range from 1 percent to 10 percent of the elderly population experience abuse, including physical, emotional, and financial maltreatment (Tatara, 1993).

Consequences of Family Violence 
The significant association between family violence and other issues confronting the criminal justice system make this a critical issue to address.  Children who grow up in abusive households (whether the violence is directed toward them or toward a parent) are more likely, but not destined, to live in abusive households as adults (Gelles & Cornell, 1990).  Recent studies underscore that abuse of children increases the potential risk of future delinquency and adult criminality.  Widom (1992) followed a sample of 908 abused children and a comparison group of 667 non-abused children for 15 to 20 years.  She reached the following conclusions:
* Being physically or mentally abused or neglected as a child increased the likelihood of the following:
  -- Arrest as a juvenile by 53 percent.
  -- Arrest as an adult by 38 percent.
  -- Arrest for a violent crime by 38 percent.
* Being abused or neglected in childhood increased the likelihood of arrest for females by 77 percent.
* Physically abused children were more likely to be arrested later for a violent crime (15.8%), however this was followed closely by those who were neglected (12.5%).

A review of research on the effects on children of witnessing violence led Widom (1989) to conclude that observing hitting between parents was more highly related to later marital aggression than was being hit as a teenager.  However, experiencing both types of violence - partner and child abuse - resulted in the highest risk of subsequent partner abuse.

Although much more research is needed, there is evidence that risk factors for various types of family violence are very similar to those for general criminality.  Therefore, it is likely that within the general population of criminal offenders supervised by community corrections professionals, there are many who have committed, or currently are committing, family violence offenses. Factors that often are present among perpetrators of family violence, as well as general offender populations, usually have violence in family of origin; criminal history; substance abuse; generalized aggression, including assaults against both males and females outside the home; low education level; social isolation; and are relatively young  (Gelles & Cornell, 1990; Gelles, Lackner & Wolfner, n.d.; Klein, 1994; Milner, 1995; Saunders, 1995).

A pervasive factor in all forms of family violence is the feeling of entitlement by the perpetrator. A need for power and control over a victim/family member often results in violence if victims are not perceived as being compliant with offenders' demands.  Perpetrators often express feelings of "ownership" of other family members and feel they have a right to control family members using any means.

Impact on Victims 
Impact on victims of child abuse, partner abuse, and elder abuse manifests itself in three ways: 

Child abuse (inflicts lifelong scars on victims) and its potential ramifications:
* Relationship difficulties experienced as children and as adults include the distrust of others; fear of intimacy; feelings of isolation, alienation, and abandonment; and attachment disorders (Brier, 1984; Courtois, 1979; Egeland & Erickson, 1987; Herman, 1981; Zeanah & Anders, 1987).
* Psychological consequences such as suicide, substance abuse, lower self-esteem, and feelings of powerlessness.
* Delinquency and adult criminal behavior, including perpetration of violence toward family members and others.

Partner abuse frequently produces the following consequences among its victims (Walker, 1988, Battered Woman's Syndrome):
* Cognitive distortions (confused thinking, difficulty in concentrating, pessimistic thinking style).
* Memory distortions (partial amnesia, intrusive memories, flashbacks, dissociation).
* "Flight" symptoms (high avoidance, depression).
* "Fight" symptoms (hypersensitivity to cues of danger, exaggerated startle response, irritability, and anger released during periods of low danger).
* Sleeping and eating problems.
* Physiological reactivity (seeking medical help during calm periods after abuse occurs for aches and pains associated with high stress).

Women who are physically or sexually abused by their partners perceive themselves as less healthy, complain more about physical and emotional distress, and engage in behavior that is injurious to their health (e.g., substance abuse) more often than women who do not experience abuse (Koss, Koss & Woodruff, 1991).

In addition to the effects of partner abuse on women, children living in domestic violence situations also are adversely affected by the abuse.  The consequences often encountered by children living in homes where partner abuse occurs include the following (Seymour, 1996a):
* A risk of suffering physical or sexual abuse themselves at the hands of the batterer.
* Emotional or financial neglect.
* Emotional distress, such as fear, phobias, and depression.
* Threats and manipulation by the batterer to promote his power and control of his partner.
* Diminished self-esteem.
* Academic and/or peer relationship problems.
* Disruptions in residency when women seek shelter and/or actual homelessness.
* Learned aggression which is perpetuated toward other family members and persons outside the home.

Elder abuse occurs when elders are subjected to family violence.  The elderly victim also experiences physical manifestations (e.g., bruises, sprains, abrasions, bone fractures, burns, and other wounds) as well as psychological consequences such as depression, appetite loss, and sleep disturbances (Pillemer & Frankel, 1991; Phillips, 1983; Hudson, 1986).

Key Elements for Intervening with Victims of Family Violence 
Family violence has traditionally been defined as a social problem rather than an issue for the criminal justice system.  Two themes often were used to rationalize neglect by the criminal justice system:  (1) what happens within the family is private; and  (2) resources need to be directed toward dealing with "real" crimes and criminals (e.g., bank robberies, car thefts, stranger abductions, and murders).

These two lines of reasoning are fallacious because victims deserve protection whether they experience violence at the hands of a family member or a stranger.  The evidence is strong, as well, that family violence crimes often lead to, or are associated with, other types of criminal behavior.  Thus, violence within families often fosters the next generation of criminals. Intervening at the earliest possible opportunity may prevent future criminal behavior. Several practices are recommended for an effective community corrections response to family violence victims: 
* Program Goals: Victim protection and empowerment is the primary goal of intervention in cases of family violence.  To support that goal, offender accountability and offender behavior change also are adopted as goals.
* Case Assessment: Assessment activities include both offenders and victims. Offenders are told that victims will be contacted by the probation/parole agency initially and throughout the supervision period.  Victims' accounts of the violence are heard as credible and used as a basis for making case decisions.  Victims are advised during the assessment process, and subsequently, of their rights and actions they may take to increase their safety.  All family violence offenders are initially classified as high-risk and assessed for substance abuse problems.
* Special Conditions of Release: Community corrections professionals and courts or paroling authorities work cooperatively to impose special conditions of release on family violence offenders that assist probation and parole officers in achieving the goals of victim safety, offender accountability, and offender behavior change.  There are swift consequences for violations of these conditions and/or any further instances of abuse.
* Victim Services and Offender Supervision: In an attempt to ensure victims' safety, family violence offenders are supervised as high-risk offenders, including frequent contacts, home visits or field surveillance, investigation of records for new abuse, contact with victims (if they are willing), substance abuse monitoring, checks of attendance and participation in treatment programs, electronic monitoring or curfew checks, and monitoring of offenders' financial obligations. 
* Enforcement of Conditions of Probation or Parole: Supervision protocols include ongoing contact with victims and the provision of additional resources to victims (through the probation/parole agency or referral to other agencies), such as safety planning, victim protection technologies (cellular phones, electronic monitoring), and opportunities for treatment and support.
* Trained Staff: The probation/parole agency has staff who are trained in dealing with cases of family violence and are sensitive to victims' issues. Attempts by offenders and others to deny, minimize, externalize, and rationalize abusive behaviors are challenged.

These elements are summarized in the remainder of this chapter.  The information provided is based on reviews of probation and parole agency materials and professional literature.  The agency contact and resource list in Appendix I contains a list of some community corrections programs providing specialized family violence services containing many of these practices.

In addition to the elements listed above, the community corrections agency should keep accurate data on cases of family violence and undertake efforts to evaluate program effectiveness.

Program Goals 
Victim Protection and Empowerment 
Victim protection and empowerment must be a priority for community corrections.  Four important reasons to emphasize victim protection and services are as follows: 
1. Prevention of death or injury.
2. Containment of the intergenerational transmission of violence. 
3. Empowerment of victims. 
4. Reduction of exposure to legal liability.

The potential for death and injury in family violence cases, and the increased risk of its intergenerational continuation, have been addressed already.  Victim empowerment is another key aspect of this goal.  Seeing others take their situation seriously empowers a victim of family violence to act on her own behalf.  Victim empowerment is more likely to occur when the justice system intervenes appropriately.  Conversely, when they are not believed, when they are blamed for the abuse, or when cases become "lost in the system," victims often become further alienated, victimized, and less able to act for themselves.  The most important method of empowering victims of family violence is to believe them, investigate, and take appropriate action. 

Legal liability is still another reason victim protection is important.  Many changes in legislation and policies and procedures for law enforcement, court personnel, prosecutors, community corrections, and treatment providers occurred largely through litigation brought by victims or survivors of murder victims.  Most lawsuits stem from victim protection responsibilities that often have at their core the justice system's failure to take these cases seriously.  Because family violence cases involve a known victim who is usually in foreseeable danger from an identified perpetrator, and because these victims often have restraining or protective orders that may be interpreted as committing the State to intensified protection efforts, community corrections' exposure to legal liability is somewhat heightened in these cases.

Offender Supervision and Accountability
Community corrections agencies have a public protection mandate.  In family violence cases, the "public" consists of known and potential victims as well as others outside the family.  The protection of all of them is a fundamental responsibility of community corrections.  As discussed previously, there is evidence suggesting family violence is correlated with risk for other criminal behavior.  Stringent supervision techniques and swift and sure enforcement of conditions affects the safety of identifiable victims, as well as the public at-large.

Holding family violence offenders accountable for their actions is central to supervision and enforcement of conditions.  Offenders often exhibit a sense of entitlement toward those with whom they are intimate, and they often are tenacious in their pursuit of victims.  They may deny, rationalize, minimize, and blame victims for their behavior.  These attempts must be confronted every time they occur.  Appropriate responses from the criminal justice system reinforce to the offender and others that violence within the family is unacceptable, criminal behavior. 

Offender Behavior Change 
Family violence behavior is thought to be learned in most cases.  Therefore, with appropriate intervention, it can be "unlearned," or different behaviors can be learned to replace abusive ones.  Appropriate intervention is based on psychoeducational and cognitive behavioral principles provided in group settings and specific to the type of offense(s) committed.  Intervention focuses on stopping abusive behaviors, protecting victims, and holding offenders accountable.  Traditional treatment modalities, such as marriage counseling, anger control, and individual insight therapy have been ineffective when used early in the intervention process or when used exclusively.  Some States legislatively prescribe appropriate treatment in domestic violence cases because more traditional approaches have the potential for batterers to avoid accepting responsibility for their behavior or for failing to reduce victim danger and victim blame.  It is increasingly recognized that intervention generally should be long-term.  This may require legislation extending the period of probation or parole allowed for some offenses.  Enforcement of treatment conditions should include regularly monitored attendance, active participation, and successful completion of treatment goals. 

Case Assessment 
A thorough assessment is the foundation of good case planning and intervention.  It facilitates an appraisal of potential risk to victims and a determination of appropriate intervention and supervision strategies for family violence offenders.  Each victim and offender may share many characteristics with similar victims and offenders, but each also is unique.  Individual needs and resources must be evaluated and used as the basis of the case management strategy.

Victim Assessment 
Victim assessment should be undertaken to determine any needs victims may have, including those related to their safety.  Victims also are instrumental in the assessment of offenders.  They have firsthand knowledge of the offender's patterns of abuse and factors that increase the risk of violence.  Because family violence offenders tend to deny, minimize, externalize, and rationalize their behavior, the victim's account is likely to be more accurate and should be used for comparison with the offender's version.  Victims should be assessed in the manner that is most appropriate for their needs.  

In many cases, victims of physical or sexual child abuse have a social worker from the Child Protective Services Department; they also may have a therapist working with them.  Often law enforcement personnel are involved in investigative assessments of child abuse.  These persons perform assessments, and it is unlikely that community corrections will have much contact with these victims.  Similarly, in cases where older persons have been abused, an Adult Protective Services unit is likely to be involved.  These professionals have been especially trained to work with children or elders.  However, establishing working relationships with protective services agencies so vital information on the offender's supervision can be shared is important.  

On some occasions, however, it may be necessary for a community corrections professional to make initial assessments of victims of child or elder abuse.  This may occur if interactions with offenders indicate the possibility of abuse.  For example, if a probation officer is conducting a home visit with an offender and notices a child or elder who has suspicious injuries or other indicators of abuse or neglect, a preliminary assessment of the child or elder becomes necessary to determine if a report to protective services should be made.  In such a case, the following procedures should be taken:
* Separate the suspected victim from possible abusers so he or she can talk freely.
* Approach the child or elder with respect and in a nonthreatening manner.
* Use language that the child or elder understands.
* Assure the possible victim that s/he has done nothing wrong and is not in trouble.
* If children or elders are reluctant to talk, ask if there is someone they would like to speak with (e.g., teacher, friend, relative).  Express concern for their safety.
* Ask the child or elder to explain how s/he received the injury or why s/he is behaving as they are (e.g., crying, isolated, fearful).

If abuse is suspected, most State laws require professionals to report it to the protective services agency.  Community corrections professionals should know the reporting laws and procedures in their States, including whether or not they are mandated reporters.

Probation and parole officers have more frequent contact with victims of partner abuse.  In most locations there is not an equivalent of a protective services agency for adults who are neither elderly nor vulnerable because of physical or developmental challenges.  Some partner abuse victims seek services such as shelters, mental health counseling, or legal remedies (e.g., restraining orders).  However, many victims are systematically isolated and controlled by their batterers and have little knowledge of community resources or skills for accessing needed services.

Contact should be made with partner abuse victims as soon as possible when community corrections professionals become involved with these cases.  See Figure 5-1 for a suggested protocol for assessing victims.  The offender should be informed from the beginning of probation 
or parole contact that the victim will be contacted for assessment information, and periodically throughout the period, the offender is receiving community supervision.  The offender should be admonished that s/he is not to interfere in any way with such contact nor to attempt to influence the victim's response to such contact.  The purpose of contact is to assess the victim's ongoing safety and needs, as well as to determine whether or not the offender is complying with the conditions of probation or parole.  It should not be the responsibility of the victim to monitor the offender's behavior; however, s/he may be the only one who has certain information (e.g., if the offender has made unauthorized contact with the victim). 

There are several areas to assess with domestic violence victims.  Figure 5-2 contains a list gleaned from several assessment instruments and program manuals.  Several areas listed are the same as those for which offenders should be assessed.  Figure 5-3 contains suggested interviewing approaches for victims of partner abuse.

Figure 5-1:  Suggested Protocol for Assessing Partner Abuse Victims 
	 1.	Contact victim advocates, police, or others known to have knowledge about the case prior to the interview with the victim or offender to obtain any applicable information. 
	 2.	Contact the victim after interviewing the defendant in order to verify statements made by the offender. Victim contact should be made at the earliest point of contact with the offender (i.e., pretrial, presentencing, probation intake, parole planning, or parole intake). 
	 3.	Always interview victims and perpetrators separately.  If both are in court for a pretrial hearing, interview the defendant first and then the victim.  If the offender comes to the court or probation office alone, contact the victim as soon as the offender leaves.  This allows an interview with the victim before the perpetrator has an opportunity to prepare or coach her for the interview. 
	 4.	Express concern for the victim's safety and explain the need for her involvement in the assessment process. 
	 5.	Ask the victim to describe the abuse in general and the specific incident resulting in this court involvement. 
	 6.	Use an interview guide or assessment instruments selected for the assessment process.  This helps ensure a thorough assessment. 
	 7.	Explain the court and legal processes being conducted (i.e., pretrial hearing, sentencing, probation, parole). 
	 8.	Confirm the victim's mailing address or request another address where she would like to be contacted (e.g., a family member or friend).  Inform the victim that a letter will be sent to her that will provide information on domestic violence and community resources available to her. 
	 9.	Mail a letter to the victim explaining the court, probation and/or parole processes affecting her.  Include the name and phone number of the shelter closest to her, information about obtaining restraining or protection orders, a list of community resources she may need, information on planning for her safety, and other information on domestic abuse. 
	10.	If a victim refuses to provide information or requests materials not be sent to her, document this in the case record. 
	11.	Maintain the victim's contact information in a secure place separate from the offender's file. 
	12.	Make a followup call to verify the victim received the mailed information and inquire as to whether she has any additional information to share, feels she is safe at present, or has any other problems for which she needs assistance.

Sources: Black, 1995; Domestic Violence Committee, New York Department of Probation, n.d.; Family Division, Superior Court of Connecticut, 1986; Pence, 1989. 

Figure 5-2:  Areas for Assessment of Partner Abuse Victims
Family History:  Were either the victim or perpetrator abused as children or witnesses to marital violence? 
Types of Violence Experienced:  What types of physical and emotional abuse has the offender perpetrated against the victim? 
Cycle/Frequency of Violence:  How long has the violence been committed and how frequently does it occur?  Is it becoming more serious?  How many times have police been called?  Is there a current (or previous) restraining order?  Has the offender been abusive in previous relationships? 
Present Offense:  What is the victim's account of the present offense?
Dangerousness/Lethality:  What is the victim's assessment of the danger to her and her children?  What is her level of fear?  What is the most serious violence she has experienced?  Does she know whether or not the offender has access to weapons?  In what ways has he threatened her?  Has the offender ever harmed pets or taken hostages? 
Suicide Threats or Attempts:  Have either the offender or victim threatened or attempted suicide? 
Forced Sex:  Has the perpetrator forced the victim to have sex against her will? 
Child Abuse:  Has the offender ever abused the children?  Has the family ever been investigated or received services from the child protective services department? 
Substance Abuse:  Do either the offender or the victim have a problem with the abuse of alcohol or other drugs?  Has either of them received substance abuse treatment?  Does the victim perceive substance abuse is a contributing factor in the violence?
Violence or Other Criminal Activity Outside the Home:  Does the victim report the offender's involvement in abusive behaviors or other criminal activities away from home? 
Property Destruction:  Does the offender ever throw objects, break things, or otherwise destroy property? 
Isolation of the Victim and/or Perpetrator:  Is the victim allowed to work, go out with friends and family, participate in activities in the community, and receive mail and phone calls?  Does the perpetrator work, have friends, and participate in activities outside the home? 
Attitudes Toward Violence:  Is violence viewed as acceptable or expected behavior? 
Offender's Attitudes Toward Victim:  Is the offender jealous, critical, or demeaning toward the victim? 
Victim's Needs:  Does the victim need housing or temporary shelter, medical care, financial assistance, legal assistance, educational services, counseling, or support? 
Victim's Support System:  Who can she turn to when she needs help or support?  Does she have family or friends in the immediate vicinity?  Is she aware of, or has she used, community services?

Sources: Black, 1995; Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.; Family Division, Connecticut Superior court, 1986; Onondaga County Probation Department, 1991; Pence, 1989.

Figure 5-3:  Interviewing Techniques for Partner Abuse Victims 
Victim safety should be the first priority.  
* Express concern for her safety, but respect her reasons for staying. 
* Recognize the cycle of violence, and help her understand it is likely to happen again. 
* Understand that leaving her batterer may be the most dangerous time for her. 
* Ask if this is a good time to talk; avoid interviewing victims if abusers are present. 

Support the victim. 
* Help her understand the abuse is not her fault; she does not deserve to be beaten or verbally abused. 
* Emphasize the abuser is responsible for his behavior. 
* Encourage and support her if she realizes she needs to get away from danger, but do not pressure her to leave or criticize her for not leaving. 
* Explain the benefits of intervention with the abuser and acknowledge that the process of change will be difficult for both for them. 
* Always be honest with the victim. 

Listen carefully to victims. 
* Take her story seriously. 
* Don't interrupt. 
* Listen to how things are said and what is not said. 

Question victims with care. 
* Use probing, open-ended questions. 
* Follow responses with specific questions to get details. 
* Ask for examples and specifics. 
* Define terms used.
* Clarify common statements (e.g., "What did you mean when you said he hits you a lot?"). 
* Avoid giving victims answers to your questions (e.g., Ask "What do you argue about?" instead of "Don't you argue about the children?"). 

Be aware of personal thoughts, feelings, and biases. 
* Try to remain nonjudgmental. 
* Understand differing cultural and religious values and beliefs. 
* Recognize and understand victims' ambivalence; they often love their partners. 

Define roles and responsibilities. 
* Clarify the professional role and responsibilities of a community corrections professional. 
* Explain what can and cannot be done. 
* Be sure the victim understands that some information she shares may not be kept in confidence. 

Empower victims. 
* Recognize that abusers often damage victims' confidence and self-esteem. 
* Offer them information that increases their choices. 
* Avoid taking over and making decisions for her. 
* Encourage victims to take small steps toward independence and to rebuild self-confidence. 

Identify the victim's needs. 
* Ask if she needs medical attention. 
* Ask if she needs safe housing. 
* Help her prioritize her needs. 
* Provide information about services available to her.

Sources:  Black, 1995; Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.

A sample letter that could be sent to a victim of domestic violence at the point of initial case contact is contained in Appendix E.  A sample safety plan for victims of domestic violence also is included in Appendix E.

Offender Assessment 
Offender assessment is a vital component of efforts to ensure victim protection and empowerment.  When determining which offenders to assess, agencies need to make some critical decisions.  Community corrections caseloads contain offenders whose present sentence results from a conviction for a family violence offense, such as domestic violence or child sexual abuse.  However, there may be offenders on probation or parole for other crimes who have family violence arrests or convictions in their past records.  Further, there likely are many offenders who never were arrested for a family violence offense who, nevertheless, are violent toward 
their family members.  Andrew Klein, former Chief Probation Officer in Quincy, Massachusetts, where a nationally recognized coordinated response to domestic violence has been developed, 
has identified several types of offenses that are especially likely to include a family violence component.  These include breaking and entering, annoying phone calls, stalking, malicious property damage, and cruelty to animals (Klein, 1996).  An agency's resources and commitment to stopping the violence will influence the extent to which assessments of each of these groups will be undertaken.  

The first group, adjudicated family violence offenders, must be assessed, and appropriate intervention plans should be developed to ensure victim safety.  If possible, all offenders should be screened for family violence offenses, whether or not there is an official record of such conduct. 

Many probation and parole professionals regularly conduct risk and needs assessments on offenders.  The areas covered by these assessments also will apply to family violence cases.  However, there are some special considerations for these cases, as well.  Part of the assessment task often calls for the probation or parole officer to attempt to predict the degree of risk or dangerousness presented by the offender. Probation and parole professionals should be familiar with specific risk and lethality factors associated with various types of family violence.  (For a more comprehensive discussion of risk factors and assessment processes, please see Chapter 10, Assessment, in Ann Crowe's Intervening in Family Violence:  A Resource Manual for Community Corrections Professionals, published by the American Probation and Parole Association, 1996.)

Establishing from the beginning of intervention and supervision that the offender's behavior - the violence - will be the focus is important.  At the first contact, the purpose should be articulated clearly.  This may be done by the officer making statements to the offender, or the officer may ask the offender to explain why s/he has become involved with the courts (Sonkin, 1987).  The latter approach allows the officer to assess the extent to which the offender employs denial, minimization, externalization, and rationalization.  When the offender uses these tactics, s/he must be confronted and refuted by the probation or parole officer.

Victims' and offenders' responses to assessment questions should be compared.  Often, the victim's account will be the more accurate.  Klein (1996) recommends asking interview questions three times as more detailed information often emerges with each repetition.

Offender Supervision 
Each department should have procedures for processing cases upon adjudication and assignment to probation or release of the prisoner on parole.  Agency policies should delineate how cases are referred and processed, how long offenders have to report to their supervising probation or parole officers, and any materials they should bring with them.  This information should be provided to offenders before they leave court or an incarceration facility.  For example, the following is the policy of the New Jersey Conference of Chief Probation Officers (1992, p. 3).

	The speedy and efficient processing of cases from the court to probation should be a top priority.  The Chief Probation Officer should work with the Family and Criminal Division Managers to establish procedures to alert probation of new cases as soon as possible, but no later than 24 hours of disposition.  The paperwork should be expedited so the supervising officer receives the necessary information as soon as possible. . .  .
	When a sentence to probation is imposed in a domestic violence matter, the defendant should be directed to report to probation immediately.  Where possible, the defendant should be escorted from the court to probation, along with the appropriate paperwork.

Placing family violence offenders on specialized caseloads that are smaller and intensively supervised by probation and parole professionals who have received extensive training in family violence is recommended.

Maryland Division of Parole and Probation Family Assault Supervision Team 
The Family Assault Supervision Team (F.A.S.T.)  provides a specialized form of intensive supervision to offenders who have been released to parole/probation supervision for domestic violence offenses. The supervision model  focuses on offender accountability and victim safety and incorporates intensive supervision practices with the coordination of batterer's treatment and substance abuse treatment.  The supervision protocol also emphasizes expeditious procedures for reporting parole and probation violations, especially those involving victim safety. . .  .  (Source:  Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.;  Stop the Violence (Program Description).  Baltimore, MD:  Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.)

Agents selected for F.A.S.T. received a 2-day training session conducted by the staff of the House of Ruth, Baltimore, a comprehensive domestic violence intervention program. . . . (Source: Family Assault Supervision Team. (n.d.).  Stop the Violence (Program Description).  Baltimore, MD:  Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.)

Initially, contact standards for offenders to report to their probation officers should be very frequent.  Most program materials indicate the standard is weekly (e.g., Quincy, MA Probation Department; Klein, 1996), every-other-week (e.g., Maricopa County, AZ, Adult Probation Department; Black, 1995) or twice monthly (e.g., Maryland Division of Parole and Probation, Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.) contact for family violence offenders. 

Supervision contacts should "reinforce the probationer's obligation to the court and remind him of the consequences of violation" (Klein, 1996, pp. 15-16).  Frequent contact also helps divert offenders' attention from preoccupation with the victim to the requirements of probation or parole (Klein, 1996).  In addition to supervision contacts, offenders are seen in a group intervention program and possibly for drug testing and treatment. These contacts help keep offenders focused on their obligation to obey the conditions of probation or parole.

Klein (1996) recommends regular checks with other parts of the criminal justice system to be sure abuse is not continuing unbeknownst to the probation or parole officer.  The following are recommended by Klein (1996):
* Monthly checks of police logs for calls to the offender's or victim's residence.
* Weekly checks of persons held in protective custody for intoxication.
* Regular checks of local or statewide computer records of criminal cases (for any new complaint, family abuse or otherwise) and civil restraining order activity (whether initiated by the victim of record or another).
	
Offenders should be considered in violation of their probation and possibly returned to court if their names are found through any of these sources.

Offenders should be required to participate in group intervention programs specifically for the type of offense they have committed (e.g., batterer's intervention for domestic violence offenders; sex offender treatment groups for child molesters).  Figure 5-4 provides an excerpt from Quincy, Massachusetts Probation/Parole Manual for the Supervision of Domestic Violence Cases Programs that describes batterers' treatment.  Programs should set firm policies about absences from treatment.  Some agencies will allow two absences before offenders are returned to court. Probation and parole officers should receive regular information about the attendance and participation of offenders in a group intervention program.  With modern technology, most intervention programs and community corrections agencies can exchange information very quickly by fax or internet.  The treatment provider can fax, deliver, or mail an attendance list following each weekly group meeting.  The list also can indicate the name of any offenders about whom the group leaders have concerns.  This cues the probation or parole officer to contact the group leader for further details.  Probation and parole officers may observe group sessions occasionally to obtain first-hand information on offenders' progress.  The same process as just described also can be used to monitor offenders' compliance with substance abuse treatment conditions. 

Figure 5-4:  Batterer's Treatment
Probationers should be referred to a certified batterer's program, those programs that specialize in the treatment of batterers that are psycho-educational, cognitive restructuring, and behaviorally-oriented. . ..  Treatment in isolation, no matter how rigorous, will not be effective if not complemented and supplemented by consistent intervention by the criminal justice system to end battering behavior. . ..  Mandatory treatment is preferred over voluntary treatment.  It is important that the treatment agency be responsive to the probation officer's need to hold the offender accountable. . .  .

Source:  Klein, A.R. 1996. Probation/Parole Manual for the Supervision of Domestic Violence Cases, p. 18. Penfield, NY:  Quincy Court/Polaroid Information Service.

Both offenders and victims should be told that a condition of no contact can be changed only by the court.  Even if the victim drops a restraining order, a condition of no contact requires action by a judge or paroling authority to change.  A decision is based on recommendations concerning the offender's behavior, so he or she should be counseled to focus on behavior change conditions of release.  Sobriety, no new abuse, no infraction of probation or parole conditions and progress in treatment should be among the areas assessed in making a recommendation for a change.

Case Classification 
To ensure victim safety, family violence offenders should be classified initially as maximum supervision cases.  For example, the New Jersey Conference of Chief Probation Officers' (1992, p. 3) policy states the following:
	All cases received for supervision as the result of a domestic violence complaint, for supervision of a restraining order, for violation of a restraining order, or other convictions arising out of a domestic violence situation (e.g., assault) shall be classified as maximum supervision cases.  This policy overrides the normal risk and offenses based classification process for adult probation supervision.  There shall be no exceptions to this policy for the first six months of supervision.  At the 6-month reassessment, the supervision level may only be lowered with the explicit approval of the supervisor.

Most agencies use a risk and needs classification system designed for all offenders.  These risk and needs assessment tools generally evaluate areas such as prior criminal record and probation supervision, age at first offense, stability of residence, employment status, substance abuse, and the like.  These classification systems do not always reflect accurately the degree of risk posed by family violence offenders.  As family violence offenders often have committed offenses many times without being apprehended, their recidivism rates will not be depicted reliably.  Often previous offenses, if apprehended, have been prosecuted as misdemeanors rather than as the felonies they actually are.  Family violence offenders often have access to their victims, increasing the danger involved (Hofford, 1991).  

Three approaches have been reported by probation departments for adjusting the classification of family violence offenders appropriately:
1. Some agencies automatically classify these offenders for maximum supervision as illustrated in the excerpt from New Jersey's policies cited above.
2. Some agencies use a different instrument with family violence offenders, such as the one developed in Connecticut and Colorado.
3. Some agencies add points to the regular risk assessment form when a family violence offense is involved, such as  the process used by the Family Assault Supervision Team in Baltimore, MD. (See Appendix E.)  Figure 5-5 provides an explanation of the override system from Stop the Violence prepared by the Family Assault Supervision Team, (F.A.S.T.) Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.

	
Figure 5-5:	Stop the Violence/Override System 
For Item #3, Risk Assessment, all offenders assigned to F.A.S.T. for a domestic violence related offense are to score 6 points.  If the domestic violence offense is an assaultive offense an additional 4 points will be entered.

For Item #12, Risk Assessment, the Impression of Offender Risk should be considered "high" if the typical characteristics listed in the instructions are present (i.e., rationalizes behavior; shows no intention of changing irresponsible behavior; acts impulsively and without proper deliberation).  If offender risk is considered "high" score this item 5 points.

Cases with a score based level of Standard shall receive an override to Intensive level and receive Intensive level supervision for at least six months.

Source:  Family Assault Supervision Team (n.d.).  Stop the Violence (Standard Operating Procedure, p. 2).  Baltimore, MD:  Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.

Regardless of the mechanism used, family violence offenders (especially domestic batterers) should be classified so they can be intensively supervised initially to more effectively protect victims.

Special Conditions of Release 
Probably the most important tool community corrections professionals will need to protect victims is suitable conditions of release for family violence offenders placed on probation and parole.  Without these, officers may be unable to supervise and hold offenders accountable for behaviors that endanger their victims.  Probation and parole administrators should work with judges or paroling authorities to request the appropriate conditions be imposed.  Presentence investigations and prerelease assessments can be valuable procedures in assuring the conditions are appropriate for the offender.  Understanding of the dynamics and consequences of family violence and the importance of pertinent criminal justice sanctions by judges and paroling authorities is vital.  

The advantage of having the appropriate conditions imposed is being able to return the offender to court or the paroling authority for further action if s/he fails to abide by them.  If specific conditions are not enacted, probation and parole administrators may want to consider developing agency rules that cover these areas.  This can be done broadly under court directives that offenders cooperate with their supervision on probation or parole.  The drawback to this approach is if the offender fails to abide by a specific agency rule, the court or paroling authority may or may not be willing to have the case returned for a review.  If not, only the intermediate sanctions available to the department can be enacted.  With specific conditions imposed, offenders can be returned to court or the paroling authority easily for disregarding or disobeying court orders.  The court or paroling authority, then, has the option of incarcerating the offender, if appropriate.

Figure 5-6 contains an array of possible special conditions of probation or parole that may be imposed on family violence offenders.  Figure 5-7 depicts special conditions appropriate for sexual abuse offenders.  The information in each of these figures was compiled from several probation/parole agencies and other literature as documented in each figure.

Figure 5-6:	Recommended Conditions of Release for Family Violence Offenders 
Protective: 
* No further abuse.	
* No contact with victims or their families.
* Abide by all court restrictions and directives. 
* Submit to warrantless search and seizure. 
* Electronic monitoring. 
* Intensive supervision. 
* Supervised child visitation and/or public drop-off/pick-up point. 
* Cooperation with child/adult protective services. 
* Forfeiture of weapons and suspension of license. 
* Release of information to third parties as appropriate.
	
Treatment: 
* Mandatory attendance, participation in, and successful completion of an offense-specific group intervention program. 
* Substance abuse testing. 
* Substance abuse treatment. 
* Abstinence. 
* Self-help/support groups. 
* Release of information to third party treatment providers.
	
Punitive: 
* Incarceration. 
* Noncustodial loss of liberty. 
* Fine. 
* Community work service.

Financial: 
* Family support. 
* Restitution. 
* Attorney fees for victim. 
* Counseling for victims and children. 
* Group intervention program and substance abuse treatment program fees for offender. 
* Cost of urinalysis. 
* Fees/court assessment.

Sources: This is based on the original work of Klein, 1994, with additional contributions by Black, 1995; Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.; and Hofford, 1991.

Figure 5-7:  Recommended Conditions of Release for Sex Offenders 
Protective:
* No sexual contact or abuse. 
* No contact with any child. 
* No contact with victims; abide by terms and restrictions of family reunification procedure. 
* Do not live with children; no new relationships with families that include children. 
* Register as sex offender. 
* Reside in approved location. 
* Maintain appropriate/approved employment. 
* Abide by curfew. 
* Submit to search and seizure. 
* No possession of pornographic material, frequenting of adult book stores and movie theaters, or use of 900 phone numbers. 
* Remain fully clothed in public. 
* Abstinence from drugs or alcohol. 
* No hitchhiking or picking up hitchhikers; no operation of motor vehicle alone. 
* Submit and comply with a schedule of daily activities. 
* No possession or use of firearms.

Treatment: 
* Mandatory attendance, participation in and successful completion of a sex offender treatment program. 
* Submit to psychological and/or physiological assessment (i.e., polygraph and Plethysmograph). 
* Submit to substance abuse testing. 
* Submit to testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. 
* Substance abuse treatment. 
* Release of information. 

Financial: 
* Pay for victims' therapy. 
* Restitution. 
* Pay for sex offender treatment program. 
* Pay for substance abuse testing, polygraphs, and plethysmograph tests.

Sources: Child Abuse Task Force, Georgia Department of Corrections, n.d.; English, Pullen, Jones & Krauth, 1996; Pithers, Martin & Cumming, 1989; Scott, n.d.

The imposition of conditions should be based on an individualized assessment of each case.  Some of the conditions recommended in Figures 5-6 and 5-7 may be imposed on all family violence offenders, while others should be used selectively to match the needs of the victims and 
offenders involved. 

In developing the specific conditions of probation and parole for family violence offenders, judges, paroling authorities, and probation and parole professionals must keep in mind that family violence offenses are serious criminal acts that all too often result in serious injuries or death.  The specific conditions imposed on the offenders should reflect this reality as well as information on special needs revealed by an individualized assessment of each case.  If found guilty of a family violence offense,  offenders should experience consequences that impress upon them the serious criminal nature of their behavior.  Being sentenced to probation or being incarcerated and later paroled is the first step.  The general consensus of most research findings, experts, and practitioners in the area of domestic violence is that diversion of cases, particularly if a guilty plea is not entered, is ineffective with these offenders.  The coercive power of the criminal justice system is needed to enforce the conditions of probation and parole in order to protect victims and compel abusers to change their behaviors (Klein, 1994).

Victim Services 
To achieve the goal of victim protection and empowerment, probation and parole professionals need to take a more proactive role with family violence victims, especially victims of domestic violence.  Some probation and parole agencies designate victims' advocates to work with victims in general or specifically with victims of family violence.  This additional staff allows agencies to provide extra services victims often need.  If unable to hire a victims specialist, community corrections agencies might consider the possibility of developing contracts or working agreements with victim support agencies in the community.  Another option is the use of trained volunteers to assist victims.  However, whether or not a victims' advocate is available, line officers supervising partner abuse offenders also should have contact with and provide services for victims. 

The sooner contact is established with victims, and they hear about the specifics of the probation or parole conditions from the probation or parole officer, the less opportunity there is for the offender to contact, intimidate, or harass the victim further.  At the first supervision meeting with the offender, the supervising officer should state clearly that initial and ongoing contact will occur between the victim and officer, that this is a standard procedure, and the offender should not interfere with such contact.

All initial contacts (letters, telephone, and/or in-person) should strive to ensure the safety of the victim and provide needed information.  Initial contacts should include the following information; also see sample letter in Appendix E.  (Sources:  Black, 1995; Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.; Klein, 1996; New Jersey conference of Chief Probation Officers, 1992.)
* Identification of the supervising officer, his/her role, address, and telephone number.  (Be sure the victim understands to call police first in an emergency; then she should inform the probation or parole officer).
* The name of the probationer/parolee.
* The conditions of release provided in understandable language; details regarding no contact orders should explain that any contact, whether threatening or not, is prohibited and should be reported to the probation or parole officer.
* An explanation that only the court can modify the conditions of release, including no contact orders; clarify that no contact orders do not prohibit the offender from visitation with the children unless otherwise stated in the orders.
* How the victim can contact the officer if a violation occurs or with other relevant information;  the name of another contact person (e.g., the officer's supervisor) if the probation or parole officer is not available.
* The plan for the officer to make regular contact with the victim.
* An explanation about the confidentiality of information the victim may share with the officer (e.g., it cannot be kept from the court but will not be revealed to the offender unless the victim's statement is to be entered into the court record).
* The victim's safety cannot be guaranteed - include an honest description of the limits of protection orders and offender treatment.
* Victims' rights afforded by statute or department policy (e.g., the right to notification of release, the right to attend and give testimony at revocation hearings).
* Under what conditions the victim will be subpoenaed to give testimony (to reinforce to the offender that the case is being conducted by the State and not the victim).
* Appropriate referrals with telephone numbers to include the following:
  -- Police/911.
  -- Shelters.
  -- Adult and child protection agencies.
  -- Legal services.
  -- Victim advocates (include State numbers that may exist).
  -- Victim treatment providers.
  -- Crisis focused child and/or adult day care centers.

Victims or their guardians should be notified whenever there is a status change for the offender, including incarceration, release from custody, dropping out of treatment, and changes in residence or employment (English, Pullen, Jones & Krauth, 1996).

Enforcement of Conditions of Probation or Parole 
The purpose of probation or parole intervention in family violence cases is to protect victims by changing offenders' behavior and stopping the violence.  The supervision recommendations discussed previously in this chapter attempt to accomplish these objectives.  However, family violence is an insidious and persistent problem fueled by learned behaviors that often are legitimized culturally.  Thus, the behavior change process can be lengthy and arduous.  Many offenders are unable to complete a term of probation or parole without violating some of the conditions of their probation or parole and/or committing new offenses.  The role of the probation or parole professional is one of reinforcing positive behavior changes and of holding offenders accountable for their behavior through negative sanctions for unacceptable behavior.

Most offenders will commit technical violations.  Family violence offenders are accustomed to being in control and often continue to act as they please by flouting court orders.  Technical violations may or may not constitute new offenses, but they generally increase the potential risk to victims.

Any form of new abuse to a victim - physical or sexual abuse, threats or harassment - should be sanctioned immediately, no matter how minor.  Other criminal offenses also should be confronted. New offenses can go through the normal criminal justice process, which often is very long and cumbersome.  Charges must be filed, and often the offender is released again to the community while awaiting trial.  In the interim he possibly is able to continuing abusing his victim.

However, if community release conditions contain terms that an offender shall obey all laws and perpetrate no further abuse, new abuse or other criminal offenses can be treated as probation or parole violations.  This allows much swifter handling of the case and imposition of sanctions by returning the offender to court.  It may be advisable to let the case continue along both routes:  as a technical violation and as a new case for prosecution.

The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges states:  "Probation violations of any kind in family abuse cases should be promptly returned to the court for adjudication" (1990, p. 47).  As is well understood by community corrections personnel, offender accountability goals are meaningless if sanctions are not forthcoming for violations.  Failure to enforce the conditions of release is especially problematic in family violence cases because of the increased risk to the victim and the negative reinforcing message non-enforcement sends to the offender, the victim, and the public.  Because of the traditional view that intimate violence is less serious than other violent crimes, enforcement for failure to attend treatment or violations of no contact orders often are not dealt with strictly by the courts; however, technical violations are often a present indicator of criminal violations yet to come (Brown, et al., 1984, as cited by National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1990).  Probation and parole officers have the unique opportunity to follow family violence offenders closely and expedite offender accountability by bringing violations back before the court or paroling authority for increased supervision, other intermediate sanctions, and/or incarceration (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1990).

Both judicial and prosecutorial education are vital for the successful supervision of family violence cases.  Judges and prosecutors must understand the tenacity with which many family violence offenders pursue their victims and the association between technical violations and future re-offending.  They also need to embrace the primary goal of victim protection as they approach these cases.

An effective working relationship between community corrections agencies and the court is vital for holding family violence offenders accountable for violations of probation or parole.  Klein (1996) recommends an arrangement whereby only one judge hears violation cases.  With this method, offenders are likely to be dealt with more consistently.  A single judge can view a particular case in the context of all other family violence cases. This judge would be more familiar with typical behavior patterns and better able to respond to violators.

Trained Staff 
Supervising family violence cases is difficult work and requires skills and dedication from officers.  The New Jersey Conference of Chief Probation Officers (1992, p. 3) delineated the requirements of personnel as follows:
	The supervision of domestic violence cases should be assigned to a limited number of officers who specialize in this function.  The officers assigned should, when possible, have the following qualifications:
	-- Experience in supervision.
	-- Senior probation officer status, or eligible to be.
	-- Experience and/or training with substance abuse.
	-- Interest in taking on the assignment.
	-- Experience in child support enforcement.

Figure 5-8:  Line Officer Responsibilities 
* Conduct presentence investigations and make recommendations to the court. 
* Assess offenders' level of risk, individual needs, and resources. 
* Develop appropriate case plans. 
* Initiate and maintain contact with victims. 
* Provide or refer victims to needed services. 
* Hold offenders accountable for their behavior and comply with court orders by implementing sanctions when necessary. 
* Check with other components of the justice system to learn of new charges, and new restraining or protective orders. 
* Maintain contact with third party sources (e.g., treatment providers, neighbors, associates) to learn of ongoing abusive behavior. 
* Provide or refer offenders to appropriate treatment services. 
* Maintain appropriate case documentation. 
* Monitor attendance and participation of offenders in treatment programs. 
* Monitor offenders for drug use. 
* Collect or arrange for the collection of any payments the offender is ordered to make (e.g., child support, restitution, victim resettlement costs). 
* Arrange for and monitor the offender's compliance with special conditions of release, such as apologizing to the victim and performing community service. 
* Monitor or search the offender and his/her dwelling and vehicles for weapons and signs of victim contact (e.g., children's toys; a partner's belongings). 
* Enforce child (or other family) visitation requirements. 
* Challenge offenders' attempts to deny, rationalize, minimize or externalize their abusive behavior. 
* Provide a role model of prosocial behavior.

Probation or parole officers' responsibilities generally include those listed in Figure 5-8.  Some agencies have a staff member whose responsibilities solely are to work with victims.  If so, some recommended tasks and responsibilities are included in Figure 5-9.  However, even if a specialized victims' services worker is available, line officers supervising family violence offenders also should have contact with victims.

Figure 5-9:  Victim's Services Worker 
* Maintain contact with the victim. 
* Notify victims of new offenses by their abuser and/or changes in the status of the offender (e.g., release from incarceration). 
* Help victims develop a safety plan. 
* Help victims assess their needs and refer them to appropriate services and resources. 
* Prepare and support victims during court procedures, such as revocation hearings. 
* Communicate with all parts of the criminal justice system and community services to maintain cooperative working relationships on behalf of clients. 
* Educate other staff on the jurisdiction's victims' rights requirements.

In Quincy, Massachusetts, the probation department has a policy that states the following victim contact requirements, "The probation officer shall inform the victim that the probation officer will be in periodic contact with the victim to ensure that everything is going okay, whether the probationer is living with her or not." (Klein, 1996, p.11).

Qualifications for staff in a program to intervene in family violence also should be carefully considered. Requirements for staff may vary depending on the program model, agency mission, community needs and many other factors.  Clearly delineating job expectations and staff qualifications in the program planning process is important.  A careful selection procedure for choosing staff to take part in the program should be undertaken.  Desirable qualifications include the following: 
* Demonstrated commitment to the purpose and goals of the program. 
* Prior successful experience working with community corrections offenders and victims. 
* Specialized training in family violence. 
* Necessary skills to perform the job duties.

The community corrections professional needs to emphasize constantly the offender's responsibility for his or her behavior, thus reinforcing the notion that accountability is vital to the change process (Black, 1995).  The probation or parole officer's attitude and behaviors are as important as the sentences and conditions of release.  Many abusers receive reinforcement for their criminal behavior from peers, relatives, and society-at-large.  This reinforcement allows offenders to believe their behavior really is not criminal and is the victim's fault.  The probation or parole officer may be the first person they encounter who challenges these beliefs (Klein, 1996).

Probation and parole professionals must challenge every attempt on the part of offenders to deny, minimize, rationalize, or externalize their behavior.  They must be wary of offenders' attempts to manipulate them into fraternizing and colluding with them about the abuse.  Sexist jokes, derogatory comments about the victim, and attempts to portray themselves as the victims must be confronted with factual information about the criminal nature of their behavior.  Only through changing both the attitudes and behaviors of offenders will the violence be ended.

Education and sensitization training about family violence are important for all professionals within the criminal justice and community service delivery systems.  All community corrections personnel should receive fundamental training, including the dynamics of all types of family violence and recognition of indicators of abuse in probationers and parolees and in the family members of offenders.  Probation and parole officers should appreciate the potential lethality of family violence and should understand their agency's position about intervention when abuse is suspected.  

For example, agents selected for Maryland Division of Probation and Parole Family Assault Supervision Team (F.A.S.T.) receive a 2-day training session.  Training segments include dynamics of domestic violence, legal remedies (including Maryland's new Protective Order), intervention strategies, victim safety planning, and offender supervision.  In addition to agents assigned to F.A.S.T., the training session is attended by other Division staff and representatives of Baltimore City Pre-Trial Release Services (Family Assault Supervision Team, n.d.).  

Those who work with specialized caseloads of family violence offenders, or all community corrections staff if these cases are assigned throughout the agency, must receive more comprehensive training.  Hofford and Harrell (1993) list several topics that should be addressed in training for justice system personnel:
* Dynamics of family violence.
* Battered-spouse and battered-child syndromes.
* The correlation between spouse abuse, child abuse, and delinquency.
* Impact of arrest.
* Evidence gathering and prosecution techniques.
* Victim safety issues.
* Proper courtroom treatment of victims, offenders, and witnesses.
* Impact of personal attitudes and gender bias on the demeanor and actions of justice system personnel.
* Sanctions available and treatment standards for offenders.
* Elements of a good protection order.
* Shelter and support services available for victims.
* Effectiveness of coordinating and consolidating cases and services.

Cross training between community corrections staff and other professionals in the justice system and in community service agencies is recommended highly.  A coordinated community response to family violence is essential.  Therefore, the development of a common knowledge base and commitment to collective goals among all persons in the community (or State) who will be involved in working with victims and offenders is required.

Conclusion 
Hofford (1991, p. 16) provides a good description of the role of probation (and parole) in supervising family violence cases:
	Probation departments and individual probation officers can play a pivotal role in improving not only the response of the probation department, but of the entire court system.  By setting and enforcing new standards of behavior between family members, the court system not only responds more sensitively and fairly to victims of abuse, the court also promotes an intolerance of violence in the community which will reduce future violence and make homes safer for millions of victims.  In addition, the court and probation officers have the unique opportunity to break the self-replicating pattern of violent behavior which condemns the children to learned domestic violence and crime.

Chapter 6
Responding to Workplace Violence and Staff Victimization 1 

[1 This chapter is derived from Responding to Workplace Violence and Staff Victimization in Correctional Settings (1997), developed for the Promising Practices and Strategies in Corrections project, sponsored by the National Center for Victims of Crime, with support from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.]

"You only work in this business because you know it's (staff victimization) going to happen to someone else - not you!"
- A correctional officer who was held hostage in a critical incident resulting in the murder of his coworker by an inmate.

Introduction
Violence in the workplace - including assaults, sexual assaults, robberies, and murders - has escalated to the point where the U.S. Department of Justice recently proclaimed the workplace to be the most dangerous place in America (Anfuso, 1994).  Workplace homicide has tripled in the last decade, making it the fastest growing category of murder in America (Baron, 1993), as well as the leading cause of workplace death for women (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1994).

A review of the latest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics annual crime survey reveals startling statistics about workplace violence:
* Nearly 1 million people become victims of violent crime in U.S. workplaces every year.
* An estimated 8 percent of rapes, 7 percent of robberies, and 16 percent of all assaults occurred while victims were on duty or working.
* Overall, one out of every six violent crimes experienced by U.S. residents age 12 or older happens at work.
* Over 30 percent of victims who were working during a violent victimization faced armed offenders (Bachman, 1994).

Greater protection for our nation's workforce, along with timely and sensitive responses for employees who are victimized on-the-job, have become priorities for many public and private sector employers in the United States - including corrections - as a direct result of the drastic increase in workplace violence.  

This chapter describes the scope and characteristics of workplace violence in community corrections; discusses the process for developing a post-trauma program protocol; identifies unwritten expectations of community corrections staff who are victimized; and identifies strategies for victims and survivors of workplace violence/victimization.

Corrections and the Scope of Workplace Violence
People who seek careers in corrections are usually aware that they are entering into a high-risk profession.  The supervision of criminal and delinquent offenders with histories of violent behavior alone increases the likelihood of potential victimization.  In 1996, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1996) identified ten factors that may increase a worker's risk for workplace assault as described in previous research:
 1. Contact with the public.
 2. Exchange of money.
 3. Delivery of passengers, goods, or services.
 4. Having a mobile workplace such as a taxicab or police cruiser.
 5. Working with unstable or volatile persons in health care, social services, or criminal justice settings.
 6. Working alone or in small numbers.
 7. Working late at night or during early morning hours.
 8. Working in high-crime areas.
 9. Guarding valuable property or possessions.
10. Working in community-based settings.

Most, if not all, of these factors are part of the daily work experience of many community corrections professionals.

Various surveys of probation and parole agencies in the United States have found that significant numbers of employees have been victimized in their career, as depicted in Figure 6-1 (Parsonage, 1990):

Figure 6-1: Percentage of Probation and Parole Employees Who Have Been Victimized in Their Career
							Percentage of
State	Career 					Victimization	
Texas Board of Pardons and Parole		41%	
Virginia Division of Probation and Parole	39%	
New York State Probation			55%	
Pennsylvania Statewide Survey			38%	
	

Hostage-taking incidents also are occurring at a higher rate.  In the Federal Bureau 
of Prisons alone, there have been 157 employees held hostage in 9 separate incidents since 1987.  Remarkably, none of those employees was seriously injured physically, but significant emotional trauma resulted from such victimization in many cases (Digman and Fagan, 1996).

Violence in Correctional Workplaces:  Characteristics Unique to Correctional Personnel Who Are Victimized
The issues of violence and victimization in correctional settings - including institutions, jails, youth detention centers, probation and parole - can differ significantly from similar issues in the general population.  Due solely to the nature of correctional clientele, the risk of being victimized on-the-job is greater for correctional professionals than for most other jobs.  Many agencies lack policies and procedures on how staff can and should report workplace violence, and how the agency will respond to them. 

The scope and breadth of community-based victim services provide a fairly good "safety net" for citizens who are victimized while, for community corrections employees, the availability of agency-sponsored victim services may be limited or, in some cases, nonexistent.  The typical process for dealing with violent crimes perpetrated against community members involves investigations, arrests, and criminal prosecutions.  For community corrections, some matters that would otherwise be considered "criminal" may be handled administratively, depending on agency policies and procedures.

A basic element of crisis intervention for victims is assuring them that the crime "is not their fault."  For community corrections employees, there are occasions when a staff member's oversight, negligence, or failure to follow established procedures contribute in some way to his or her victimization. As a result, "victim blaming" for incidents of workplace violence involving community corrections employees becomes a barrier to crisis intervention and followup supportive services for the victimized staff.  Victim assistance may be accompanied by disciplinary actions.  In addition, other staff may harbor feelings of resentment toward a victimized colleague who failed to follow procedures.

For community members, victims often exercise options to completely remove themselves from "the scene of the crime," e.g., leaving their homes and communities, getting a new job, changing identities, etc.  In corrections, victimized staff are, in many cases, expected to "return to the scene of the crime" - often very soon after the incident occurs.  Rapid re-integration into the workplace without extensive supportive services can be a "trigger" for severe psychological reactions.  In some cases, the victimizer (probationer or parolee) continues to remain in, or report to, the same field office, while the victim (the community corrections professional) is transferred to another site "in his or her best interests."  Such actions can be considered punitive, and erroneously support the concept that the victim was to blame.

The responsibility of supervising or monitoring a known "correctional staff victimizer" can add tremendous stress to those who must assume this job. Probationers and parolees with histories of victimizing staff must continue to be supervised.  These differences between general community response and the corrections/workplace community response may affect the scope and sufficiency of the agency's services for staff who fall prey to workplace violence.  Recognizing and understanding these unique characteristics are two of the most important steps toward formulating an appropriate agency response that best meets the special needs of community corrections employees.

Key Elements for Responding to Workplace Violence in Community Corrections
The overall increase in workplace violence in America, coupled with the fact that community corrections is a high-risk profession in itself, comprise a "double-edged" sword for agency administrators, as well as for employees.  Staff safety issues should be addressed within planning, policy development, training, and evaluation and research. Agencies and practitioners must recognize that violence in the workplace can occur at the hands of offenders under supervision. In addition, critical incidents are fast becoming increasingly prevalent in the general population of the United States, such as violence perpetrated by family members, friends, coworkers, and strangers. Such incidents include the following:
* Intimidation or harassment (including sexual harassment) by persons known to employees (including coworkers) or by people committing behaviors that fall under the criminal definition of "stalking" (including strangers).
* Crimes resulting from escalating domestic violence situations in employees' homes.
* Retaliatory crimes committed by family members or friends of offenders who are under some form of correctional supervision but who are unknown to the correctional employee at the time of the crime.
* Assaults or criminal incidents, involving complete strangers who are unaware of a correctional employee's position, are committed while employees are either on- or off-the job or are perpetrated against a family member of the employee. Criminal incidents include physical assaults, rapes, robberies, drunk driving crimes, and homicide. 

In order to practice preventive, as well as responsive, approaches to inappropriate behaviors that can lead to workplace violence, community corrections agencies must have policies that state "no tolerance" for any inappropriate behavior that intimidates, harasses, or threatens any of its employees.  (The Federal Bureau of Prison's Staff Workplace Violence Prevention Program Statement is included in Appendix F.)  Agencies must also provide an environment that is conducive to reporting any such incidents, along with policies that clearly state that - and how - the agency will respond, and whether or not victims' complaints will be confidential, if such protection is provided.  Employees must feel confident that any interactions they have, resulting from a critical incident, will remain confidential, if such protection is provided. Factors that agencies should consider in developing their threat incident reports, developed by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, are included in Appendix F.  In addition, the agencies should incorporate training on appropriate behavior in the workplace for all employees as part of both orientation training and continuing education and implement supervisor's training on how to identify and intervene in situations where inappropriate behavior is evident.  

Also, the development of a mission statement, goals, and objectives for post-trauma response efforts can contribute to a comprehensive agency response. Last, there should be a coordinated response within the criminal justice system, as well as followup with staff, when incidents occur.

Developing a Mission Statement, Goals, and Objectives for Post-Trauma Response
It is helpful for community corrections agencies to develop a mission statement, goals, and objectives that clearly define its vision for, and approach to, responding to staff victimization, critical incidents, and workplace violence.  A workgroup should be convened that includes the following personnel and allied professionals:
* Representative of the agency administration.
* Director of the employee assistance program.
* Director of victim services.
* A site supervisor/administrator.
* A member of the agency's critical incident response team (where applicable).
* Representative(s) from the agency's Victim Advisory Council.
* Representative from line staff or the employees' union.

The workgroup should consider two crucial issues prior to writing the mission statement, goals, and objectives:
* Defining the various types of workplace violence, victimization, and critical incidents to which the agency will respond.
* Defining the scope of the agency's response.

Developing a Mission Statement
The program mission statement should provide an overview of the ideals and values upon which the post-trauma response program is based.  Two examples of a mission statement that can serve as a foundation for workgroup discussion and actions is as follows:
	The mission of the (agency's) post-trauma response program is to implement timely and sensitive policies, procedures and protocols for both short- and long-term support of employees, their families, and any witnesses who are detrimentally affected emotionally, physically or financially by crimes committed  against them on- or off-the-job, in order to promote a supportive environment for them to reconstruct their lives in the aftermath of a crime.
	The mission of the (agency's) program is to establish a safe and professional environment in which employees and their families recognize the importance of reporting traumatic and/or critical incidents, and understand the need to address such incidents through a variety of interventions and debriefing protocols and services.

Another example of an agency mission statement from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) Parole Division's Post-trauma Staff Support Program is as follows:
	To establish and maintain uniform procedures for providing immediate peer support to employees who are traumatized emotionally or physically in a critical incident in an effort to reduce subsequent problems.

Developing Program Goals and Objectives
An agency's post-trauma program can benefit from the development of goals and objectives that clearly reflect the program's overall mission and provide a "road map" for the development of policies and protocols.  Examples of program goals include the following:
* To provide a supportive environment where employees feel comfortable reporting any traumatic or critical incident, and confident that they will receive comprehensive, quality assistance, information and referrals to help them cope in the aftermath of such incidents.
* To reduce the detrimental effects of crimes committed against department employees or their loved ones, either on- or off-the-job, through immediate crisis intervention, as well as short- and long-term supportive services offered by the agency, or by qualified professionals in the community.
* To provide assistance and services, including group debriefings, for any agency employees who may be traumatized by witnessing, working at the site of, or being otherwise detrimentally affected by any incident of workplace violence.

Post-trauma response program objectives should match the program goals developed by the agency, and more clearly delineate the agency's response to traumatic incidents.  The TDCJ Parole Division established seven program objectives that can provide a model for other correctional agencies, which are to accomplish the following:
* Provide an immediate, accessible, and planned response to employees involved in a trauma-related incident.
* Establish a management initiative team of employees readily available on a daily/on-call basis for the purpose of providing support to employees involved in a serious or traumatic incident.
* Establish a post-trauma response team comprised of employees and volunteers within a region who will be available to respond, when called upon, to critical incident situations, and who will offer employees a means of dealing with the multitude of feelings associated with these situations.
* Assist and facilitate an employee's access to community resources, as may be needed, to enable return-to-duty at the earliest possible date.
  -- Promote confidentiality and trust for employees receiving support.
  -- Provide information to employees that will assist them in assessing and meeting their needs as it relates to trauma-related incidents.
  -- Provide an opportunity for the Post-Trauma Staff Support Program Coordinator to meet with the Staff Support Team Leader to discuss the program and share information to enhance the program's effectiveness.

Defining a Traumatic Incident
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division, as stated in the Post-Trauma Staff Support Program Operations Manual (1996), offers a comprehensive definition of a "traumatic incident" that is worthy of consideration and replication:
	A traumatic incident is 'an incident that significantly affects one's life, perhaps causing feelings of total loss of control, fear of loss of limb or life, or fear of permanent change to one's integrity.  A traumatic incident is often unexpected, unpredictable, or of sudden onset, and it may generate severe panic.  Such incidents include, but are not limited to, the following: physical assault; sexual assault; death of a staff member, volunteer, close work associate, or inmate/releasee; psychological assault or death threat; hostage or riot situation; natural disaster or fire; exposure to a potentially life-threatening disease; or witnessing of a suicide or an attempted suicide of a staff member, volunteer, close work associate, or inmate/releasee.'

Correctional agencies can use this definition as a foundation upon which to build their own detailed description of a "traumatic incident" to which the agency will respond with post-trauma response and support.

Developing an Agency Policy to Guide Post-Trauma Response
Little in corrections happens without a detailed policy to guide it.  Yet in 1996, there were still a significant number of correctional agencies that did not have written policies concerning how to handle critical incidents in which personnel become either victims or witnesses, including 78 percent of adult correctional agencies, 71 percent of juvenile correctional agencies, and 33 percent of paroling authorities.  A Prototype Administrative Policy on Staff Victimization that is designed to augment an agency's mission, goals, objectives, and overall policies related to how it responds to workplace violence is included in Appendix F.  In additional, detailed policy guidelines and post-trauma protocol from the California Department of Corrections are also in Appendix F. 

Developing an Agency Post-Trauma Program Protocol
In addition to developing policies for post-trauma response activities, community corrections agencies should create a protocol that clearly defines the following: 
	* When the program will be implemented.
	* Which staff will be involved in the program, and who makes decisions related to staff participation.
	* Examples of specific incidents that will result in the implementation of any agency's post-trauma response.

The California Department of Correction's protocol, found in Appendix F, offers a promising practice worthy of consideration and possible replication by other correctional agencies.

Victim Reconstruction:  The Challenge for Community Corrections 
It is misleading to speak of a victim's "recovery" from a very traumatic event.  "Recovery" suggests that the wound is gone, the patient is cured, everything is back to normal.  It is more helpful to think of the process of getting better as one in which the emotional roller-coaster stops lurching so much, with lower high points, and higher low points.  Moreover, for most, getting better means that victims are constructing a new and different equilibrium for themselves.  They are somewhat different people with a somewhat different outlook, with a somewhat different (and usually sadder) range of normal emotional swings.  That reconstruction process can be very difficult and take a long time - often much longer than the victim, their loved ones, or the correctional agency expects.  It involves living through bad days and good days and, for some, becoming satisfied if they can count more good days than bad at the end of the process.

Community corrections agencies, through their policies, procedures, and staff training, must recognize and allow ample time for victimized employees to reconstruct their lives in the aftermath of a crime, whether it is committed on- or off-the-job.  Some examples of related issues are as follows:
* The "tough" culture of community corrections can pose barriers to staff reporting incidents, as well as the agency's response.
* Often, there is a tendency to get back to "business as usual," an approach that can be difficult (or impossible) for traumatized staff, including victims of and witnesses to a critical incident.
* The coworkers of the victimized staff may resent having to "pull double duty" or otherwise cover for that employee's absence, especially if his or her time off from work is prolonged.  Such feelings must be validated and discussed.
* Reconstruction takes time, so agencies must adhere to policies that allow for a reasonable amount of time for this process.

Responses of Individuals and Agencies
The attitudes of coworkers and administrators affect the progress of someone working on reconstructing his/her emotional life after a trauma.  The influence of colleagues, for good or bad, is greater if the trauma was job-related.  Unfortunately, high-risk professions, like corrections, tend to have unwritten expectations of staff that work against the victim.

A "Tough" Job
First, community corrections personnel may tend to think of themselves as "tough" - -people who can face difficult situations and survive.  Stress is not a negative factor in life - it is valued.  Normal emotional reactions to victimization are viewed as a sign of weakness.  Anger may be acceptable as a response, but fears, tears, confusion, or self-blame may be denied or suppressed.  Even anger must be controlled.

The Stigma of Victimization
As Dr. Morton Bard has repeatedly pointed out in his lectures and writing, victims are seen as "losers" in our society.  The criminal is the "winner" and the victim is the "failure" in a fight the victim did not pick.  Victims are further stigmatized because coworkers and others want to distance themselves from the victimization.  The closer a colleague is to a victim, the more vulnerable the colleague may feel.  By blaming or isolating the victim, coworkers can continue to believe that they won't be victimized themselves.

Gender Bias
As a male-dominated profession, "toughness" is a highly valued personal trait.  For women in community corrections who may feel they "don't fit" the traditional model of a probationor parole officer, a victimization and ensuing coworker perceptions of "weakness" may be pronounced.

"Business as Usual"
There is an organizational imperative, often driven by a lack of resources, to keep staff working on the job.  This fuels the tendency to re-establish routines and to conduct business as usual as quickly as possible following a critical incident or staff victimization.  Some victimized staff complain of having been asked to immediately fill out incident reports, prior to having their physical and/or emotional trauma addressed.  The frustration of having to do everyday tasks by an individual who has felt vulnerable, in danger, and perhaps suffered an injury or property loss is often overwhelming.  Community corrections agencies can help victimized employees by providing "emotional first-aid" and assigning another staff member to help the victim complete the necessary paperwork related to the critical incident.  Ongoing inservice training is also important.

Involvement in the Criminal Justice System
The department's internal disciplinary system may give some sense of justice or vindication to a victimized staff member.  If not, the staff member at least has a chance to voice his or her displeasure.  This is less true if the case deserves prosecution, in the staff member's eyes, and little or nothing happens.

In many jurisdictions, the criminal justice system is still unresponsive to victims' issues, most particularly the emotional costs of crime that victims must endure.  Many of the new "victims' rights" seek to answer the victim's emotional needs even more than they seek to influence decisions. Thus, the right to be consulted over a charging decision, or to sit in the courtroom during a trial, or to file a victim impact statement may help victims feel they had some control, that they got their stories told, even if the results were the same as if the victim had been denied all these rights.

Unfortunately, victimized community corrections officers may not be afforded even these protections.  Assaults may be dismissed as not worthy of further investigations or prosecution.  It may be considered a waste of resources to pursue prosecution against offenders who already are serving sentences.  Or, internal investigation with administrative hearings may be substituted for criminal proceedings.  In such cases, victims' right to information, notification, and participation in the criminal justice system may not be required (or even allowed)  in administrative hearings.

Worker Culpability
In some instances, a community corrections employee may have violated agency policies or procedures - actions that, in some way, could have contributed to a critical incident.  Community corrections agencies must conduct investigations and, in some cases, initiate disciplinary actions against the employee.  In addition, other staff may rightfully resent that employee's error that makes them feel vulnerable.  

Community corrections agencies can benefit from policies that immediately address any victim trauma the employee is going through, prior to initiating any disciplinary actions.

Workers' Compensation and Victim Compensation
Workers' compensation is sometimes available for staff who are victimized on-the-job, although 1996 survey data indicated that there appears to be a lack of knowledge as to the extent of such coverage, as depicted in Figure 6-2 (Seymour, 1996b).

Figure 6-2: Workers Compensation Coverage

ADULT CORRECTIONS
					
Type of	Fully	      Partially	No	      Not Sure - Don't
Coverage	Covered	Covered	Coverage	Know - Refused
	
Workers 
Compensation	19%	33%	-	47%	

Victims
Compensation	14%	31%	11%	44%	

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS
Type of	Fully	      Partially	No	      Not Sure - Don't
Coverage	Covered	Covered	Coverage	Know - Refused		

Workers 
Compensation	45%	21%	3%	32%	

Victims 
Compensation	3%	45%	18%	34%	

PAROLING AUTHORITIES					
Workers' 
Compensation	25%	13%	-	63%	

Victim 
Compensation	-	35%	13%	53%	

	
The compensation application process may be complicated, and the subsequent decisionmaking process is not always smooth.  A Washington, D.C. teacher was denied workers' compensation a few years ago after she had been raped in a school on the grounds that rape was a danger that was inherent to the job; it was a risk she assumed when she took the job.

Moreover, some workers' compensation programs are not well schooled in the emotional injuries victims suffer, and don't underwrite needed counseling or therapy.  In many departments, such services are available only through an Employee Assistance Program; many of these are only now learning to add trauma counseling to their bank of skills.

Community corrections agencies should always assign the supervisor or a coworker of the victimized staff  to help that individual through the process of applying for workers' compensation.  This includes completing forms; providing guidance on the types of records that the employee will need to maintain; and serving as staff liaison, if the employee requests, to the agency's EAP.

While victim compensation is available in virtually all States, it is a "resource of last resort" for victims.  Most compensation programs exclude coverage to correctional staff.  Administrators may want to check this out, especially if their employee benefit package does not pay for stress-related counseling that victim compensation might cover.

Appropriate Treatment for Victims and Survivors of Workplace Violence/Victimization 
While this chapter contains a variety of strategies and promising practices about how to provide appropriate treatment for victims and survivors of workplace violence and critical incidents, agencies can lay a strong foundation upon which strategies can be implemented by clarifying employees' rights when they are victimized.  Just as crime victims in all 50 States and at the Federal level have a "victims' bill of rights" that guides how the criminal justice system should treat them, and how their cases will be handled, so should community corrections agencies articulate similar rights for the fair treatment of staff who are victimized by violence in the line of duty.

Guidelines for Community Corrections Employees Who Are Victimized in the Line of Duty
The following guidelines, modeled after "Victims' Bills of Rights" adopted in most States, provide community corrections agencies with ideas for appropriate treatment of community corrections staff who are victimized in the line of duty* and offers employees a "checklist" of supportive services that can be provided by the agency:

"As a victim of a serious crime committed while you were performing your duties, you will:
* Be treated with dignity and respect by the Department and all of its employees.
* Be provided with direct assistance and support from the Department's Office of Victim Services for both you, your family and coworkers.
* Be informed in writing of your rights, stated here, by Department management within 48 hours following the critical incident.
* Receive timely information about the status of the administrative and/or criminal proceedings related to the critical incident.
* Receive timely disposition of your case, including administrative or disciplinary actions involving the offender.
* Be allowed to be present, upon request, at any administrative proceedings related to the critical incident, or to have a representative of your choice present at such proceedings; and to be present at any criminal proceedings related to the critical incident, pursuant to State law, with time away from work to attend proceedings provided by the agency.
* Have the opportunity to submit a victim impact statement - either written, oral, audio taped or videotaped - prior to the administrative disposition of the case, and to have a record of your victim impact statement maintained in a case file separate from the offender's case file; and to be afforded this right in the event of a criminal prosecution, pursuant to State law.
* Be notified about the final disposition of the case in a timely manner.
* Be encouraged to enroll in the Department's Victim Notification Program, regardless of whether your case is pursued as an administrative or criminal matter, in order to be kept informed of the offender's status and location, pursuant to State law and agency policy, and to have your notification request and related information kept confidential from the offender.
* Receive reasonable protection from the accused.
* Not be required to continue supervising the accused.
* Receive restitution from the offender, either monetarily or as an appropriate form of community service within the corrections community, based upon a recommendation from you.
* Receive workers'compensation and/or victims' compensation, and to receive assistance with completing the applications and other associated requirements.
* Receive a timely referral to the agency's Employee Assistance Program.**
* Receive mental health counseling, upon request, for both you and members of your immediate family from a competent professional who is qualified in providing crisis intervention, sensitive trauma response, and ongoing therapy or counseling, as appropriate.
* Receive information about and a referral to supportive victim services and assistance in your community."

 * The rights in criminal proceedings must be defined by individual correctional agencies in accordance with State (or Federal) law.
** Where applicable.

Developing a Brochure for Community Corrections Staff
The California Department of Corrections wanted to ensure that all of its employees were aware of the programs and services the agency offers to staff who are victimized in the line of duty.  The Department's Victim Services and Restitution Branch developed a comprehensive 10-page brochure that describes in detail how the agency responds to workplace violence.  The brochure, a truly promising practice for correctional agencies, includes the following information:
* Employee rights as a victim and related service available, both within the Department and externally.
* Overview of the Department's Employee Post-Trauma Program (EPTP).
* Resources available from the Employee Assistance Program.
* Information about and a toll-free number to contact the State Board of Control (Victims of Crime Compensation) Board.
* Information about workers' compensation and the agency's return-to-work policies.
* Overview of the "catastrophic time bank," through which agency employees can donate their vacation days, annual leave, etc. to a fellow employee who is injured in a catastrophic incident.
* Contact information for internal and community-based services to assist victimized staff.

Single copies of Helping Staff Victims are available free by writing to California Department of Corrections, Victim Services and Restitution Branch, P.O. Box 942883, Sacramento, CA 95283-0001.

Confidentiality
One of the most significant barriers to community corrections employees seeking mental health assistance in the aftermath of a critical incident is the fear of others finding out.  In corrections, where mental health consultation could be viewed as a sign of weakness or vulnerability, it is essential to provide victimized employees with protection of their privacy through both a written policy and training programs such as the following:
* Written information about confidentiality issues in the aftermath of a workplace violent incident will be incorporated into orientation training for all agency personnel.  Any revisions in confidentiality provisions will be presented as part of the agency's continuing education program for all employees.
* If a community corrections employee seeks mental health assistance or a referral from the agency's EAP, the employee will be offered the opportunity to consult with an EAP representative at a site that is away from the agency.
* Any employee who voluntarily seeks mental health supportive services in the aftermath of a workplace violent incident will be guaranteed complete confidentiality, both for the request for assistance, as well as for any ensuing activities related to treatment, unless there is a duty to warn a third party.
* All records of mental health treatment, provided either internally or by a qualified professional outside of the agency, will be privileged, except information given to a mental health professional that constitutes the admission of a crime in violation of the laws (of the State).
* Records of any mental health consultations sought by a community corrections employee who is victimized shall not be sought or admissible in any disciplinary hearings related to the critical incident.
* For record keeping purposes, information about requests for mental health assistance and/or referrals will contain the following information without divulging the name of the employee seeking assistance:  descriptive summary of the nature of the critical incident that preceded the request for assistance; number and type of contacts relevant to an employee; and types of assistance and/or referral(s) provided to the employee.
* Community corrections agencies should also research any State laws relevant to client-counselor confidentiality, both for employee interactions with the agency's EAP, as well as with outside referrals.

Utilizing Victim Services in the Community
Community corrections agencies should be supportive of services for victims "off the job" and using those services when victimized employees need short- and/or long-term support and assistance.

While probation and parole agencies may provide in-house crisis intervention and crisis response teams, it is also appropriate to provide support for employees who are victimized in their area. Agencies should do the following:
* Inventory existing services:  The program database of either the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC) or the National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) can be used to identify local resources, but such programs should be examined more closely to determine types of victims served, eligibility requirements, and any other distinguishing features that may either enhance or limit service.
* Establish a Victim Advisory Council which, among many duties, can serve as the liaison to community-based victim service providers.
* Develop agreements for referrals so that employees can be served quickly and effectively when necessary.
* Develop supplementary programs within the corrections arena to assist victims of crime with information and referral, counseling, and advocacy where services do not exist.
* Promote the expansion of victim services to serve all types of crime victims in the community.
* Refer victimized employees to programs on an as-needed basis.

The agencies can develop a close working relationship with the staff of local victim services programs by doing the following:
* Develop a policy statement that states why "outside" victim services are important to augment the agency's internal programs for assisting victimized staff.
* Invite outside crisis counselors to help plan the inhouse program, train the agency's volunteer crisis intervenors, and serve as an ongoing resource.
* Invite outside counselors to do staff trainings (and mini-trainings) on the normal reactions to abnormal events.  This may help staff better cope with the frightening events they experience as part of their daily job, and add to a supportive environment when very traumatic things happen to staff members.
* Explore with them the idea of a regional crisis response team.  More and more victim service and mental health professionals are creating such voluntary, interagency teams, for a number of practical reasons:  while no one agency is likely to use such a team very often, if all community agencies use it for every multi-victim crisis, the team will get experience and acceptance; also, it helps to pool all the available, skilled crisis intervenors into a key, community resource.
* Although the local correctional facility or work site may never need such a team, if it ever does, the scale of the disaster may be very broad.  Thus, it makes sense for the agency to contribute staff to the team, and make the staff available for any community crisis.

Other Sources of Basic Support for Victimized Staff
Agencies should provide basic employment-related support. Agencies should make sure that mental health counseling is a part of the employees' benefit package and that such counseling is available for all crime victims.  Agencies should also allow an appropriate number of days off following victimization and time off to participate in the criminal justice system to the full extent of the victim's rights and duties.  Management should show support by providing inhouse crisis intervention programs by making referrals to local victim service providers and other programs that support victim rights and services.  Also, agencies can sponsor training programs about victims' issues for correctional employees on a regular basis, as part of both orientation and continuing education.

Providing Appropriate Mental Health Referrals and Assistance
For victims of crime, there are numerous barriers that sometimes prevent them from seeking and receiving appropriate mental health treatment.  Dr. Dean Kilpatrick, Director of the National Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center at the Medical University of South Carolina, has identified lack of knowledge and lack of resources as the two most significant barriers:

Lack of Knowledge
* About the long-term mental health impact of crime.
* That effective mental health treatment exists for many crime-related mental health problems.
* About how to find mental health professionals with specialized expertise in treating crime victims.
* That workers' compensation and victims' compensation will cover certain types of mental health treatment.
* About how to determine whether claims to compensation for mental health treatment are appropriate.

Lack of Resources
* All levels of the criminal justice system lack sufficient resources to provide adequate levels of services to all crime victims.
* Victims lack access to mental health services due to the following reasons:
  -- Insurance coverage generally discriminates against those with mental health treatment needs.
  -- The public mental health treatment sector is under considerable pressure to provide treatment to the chronically mentally ill, and has few resources to devote to the treatment of crime victims.
  -- The private mental health sector has virtually abandoned treatment of patients without money.
* There are insufficient numbers of mental health professionals with specialized expertise in the treatment of crime victims.  (NOTE:  This is particularly true relevant to treatment for correctional employees who are victimized on-the-job.)

Should Post-Victimization Incident Review/Treatment Be Mandatory?
This is perhaps one of the most challenging questions facing community corrections administrators today.  Some staff could have very good personal reasons for not wanting to receive mental health assistance.  In addition, the issue of choice is very significant.  When dealing with victims, who do not choose to be victimized, giving them choices in the aftermath of a crime forms the very foundation of crisis intervention and victim assistance.  Providing victims with choices gives them control over decisionmaking, and helps them in the efforts to reconstruct their post-victimization lives.

However, in light of the many barriers that preclude community corrections staff from receiving appropriate mental health assistance, it is the recommendation of Promising Practices and Strategies that staff who are victimized on-the-job be mandated to attend at least one incident review session.  Such an agency policy would eliminate the "taint of weakness" that is often a perception of peers.  It would also offer victims an opportunity to receive support that they may need and appreciate, and allow them to make an educated choice as to whether or not to continue receiving mental health supportive services.

Employee Assistance Program Referrals for Victimized Staff
Many employee assistance programs maintain rosters of competent mental health professionals who provide a variety of services, including counseling for alcohol and other drug abuse, occupational stress, and family dysfunctions.  However, the needs of individuals who are victimized are unique, and require the services of mental health professionals who have specialized knowledge and training.

Furthermore, mental health professionals to whom the agency refers victimized staff should possess an understanding of the corrections community.  What is it like in the workplace environment?  What are some of the special issues that should be considered when dealing with probation or parole officers who supervise high-risk offenders?  Are there considerations related to the victimized staff member returning to work which was "the scene of the crime?"

The California Department of Corrections requires all mental health professionals who provide services to victimized staff to actually visit and tour an institution.  This is an excellent approach that can increase the mental health professional's understanding of corrections, as well as related issues that might affect their treatment of the correctional employee.

As one correctional officer who was held hostage in an Ohio institution noted, "Corrections needs to provide resources because there are not enough counselors in the entire State that understand what goes on in prison."

The agency's EAP should carefully assess mental health professionals prior to making referrals for any staff who are victimized on-the-job.  EAP staff should use the type of information found in Figure 6-4 that describes types of mental health professionals to ascertain the professional credentials of any mental health professionals to whom they refer staff who have been victimized on-the-job.  

The following 10 questions provide a basis for determining the appropriateness of mental health referrals, and also serve to ensure that victimized staff receive competent, appropriate care:
* What are the provider's professional credentials?
* Does the professional have any direct experience in assisting victims of violent crime, such as rape survivors, battered women, assault victims, and/or victims or surviving family members of DUI crashes and homicides?
* Is the professional trained in disorders common to many survivors of crime and critical incidents, such as Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Rape Trauma Syndrome, or Battered Women's Syndrome?
* What are the professional's credentials relevant to continuing education training on victim-related issues (a vitae can provide this information)?
* Has your State's Crime Victim Compensation Program reimbursed the services of this professional in the past?
* Does the professional actively participate in any local, State or national victim assistance or victim service coalitions?
* Does the professional belong to or have any affiliation with organizations that specialize in mental health, trauma response, or victimization?
* What has been the experience of correctional employees who have received supportive services from this professional in the past?  Do you have any official mechanism to obtain this type of personal evaluation feedback?
* Does the professional accept payment from workers' compensation and/or victim compensation, and are services rendered on a sliding fee scale?
* Does the professional have a standardized process for getting feedback from victim clients regarding their satisfaction with treatment?

Figure 6-3:  Types of Mental Health Professionals
There are three major types of mental health professionals:
1. Psychiatrists (M.D. degree) have attended 4 years of medical school, have completed 1 year of internship, and have completed at least 2 years of residency.
2. Clinical psychologists (Ph.D or Psy.D degree) have completed at least 4 years of graduate training, including supervised assessment and treatment, along with a 1-year internship.  They have usually had at least 1 additional year of postdoctoral training prior to being licensed.
3. Clinical social workers (M.S.W. degree) have completed 2 years of graduate training, including classes and field work.  Sometimes, additional years of postgraduate training is required for licensing.

Two other types of mental health professionals include the following:
1. Marriage and family therapists must have at least a master's degree in a behavioral science field and 2 years of supervised clinical practice with couples and families.
2. Clinical mental health counselors must have a master's degree, 2 years of training (including internship), and certification by the National Academy of certified clinical mental health counselors.

Coordinating with Law Enforcement and Prosecution When Staff Are Victimized
All probation and parole agencies have regular and longstanding relationships with local (or State) law enforcement and prosecution agencies.  Sometimes the relations are strained, as when the agencies cannot get assaults committed against their staff treated seriously.  More often, the relations are good, with the agency doing some of its own screening, and the outsiders respecting these judgments on how to proceed.  Whatever the circumstances of a particular agency or faculty, the "victims' movement" is, in effect, encouraging a new kind of compact among these three agencies - one that puts the victimized staff member in a more meaningful position.  That compact might have these characteristics: 
* The guidelines for supportive services for community corrections employees who are victimized on-the-job (described earlier in this text) should be enforced in all cases.
* All staff members will be required to report all incidents of threats and violence; the policy will not necessarily mean an increase in disciplinary or criminal actions, but it will serve to track the level of stress affecting employees so that appropriate help can be given them. 
* Victimized employees will be fully consulted on how the department will proceed with the case.  Guidelines will help govern whether disciplinary or criminal sanctions will be sought, and the staff member's views on this issue, and on which charges to file, will be considered.
* Law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities will contribute to the guideline-writing so that referrals for investigation and prosecution will lead to predictable results.
* In both disciplinary and criminal proceedings, employees will be given all the rights accorded by State law to "civilian" crime victims.

Death Notification
The ultimate violation of a community corrections professional - murder - requires a well-planned, sensitive, and collaborative approach in the aftermath of such tragedy.  Coworkers may experience severe psychological or physical reactions to the violent death; increased vulnerability is often a collective outcome.  Not only are individuals prone to overwhelming distress but also entire agencies, such as the correctional facility, work site, or other agency offices, can experience collective fear, anxiety, and anger as a result of the murder of a fellow employee.

One of the first priorities of the community corrections agency is to provide sensitive, timely notification to the murdered employee's next-of-kin.  While death notification procedures are among the most difficult and taxing duties an agency ever faces, proper planning and careful implementation of a sensitive approach can help make this difficult task both compassionate and efficient.

Immediate Issues
The facts of the murder must be determined as quickly as possible, with these data provided immediately to the agency's administration.  The following data should be noted:
* Cause of death.
* Time of death.
* Status of the alleged murderer (i.e., detained, detained with injuries, deceased, or still-at-large, etc.).
* Any witnesses.
* Status of witnesses.
* Any information relevant to the investigation (both internal/administrative and external/law enforcement).
* Any information regarding the status of the work site (i.e., office closed, etc.).

Agencies must designate personnel who assume responsibility for death notification to next-of-kin in the event of a murder of  a community corrections employee.  In an institution or jail, the watch commander holds this responsibility while in a probation/parole office, the office director or supervisor is responsible.  All agency personnel must understand that it is the aforementioned officers' responsibility, and theirs alone, for death notification.  Close friends or colleagues of the deceased employee may think it would be helpful for them to go directly to the next-of-kin.  While such support is appropriate, it must only occur after an official notification from the agency has occurred.

It is imperative that the agency has complete and accurate information about whom to contact in the event of a murder.  An Emergency Response Form included in Appendix F provides the following data:
* Both primary and secondary contacts provided by the employee.
* Addresses and telephone numbers where they can be reached 24-hours-a-day, 7 days a week, at both home and office.
* In work situations, the contact's immediate supervisor.
* Medical information pertaining to the primary and secondary contacts.
* Contact information for the primary physician for both the primary and secondary contacts that is updated biannually.

Emergency response forms for all employees should be updated biannually in order to maintain the most current contact information.

Rumor Control
Agencies must have "rumor control" procedures in place to deter innuendo, gossip or "second guessing" by any personnel in the case of a critical incident involving a violent death.  The following issues should be considered: 
* Sending a brief memorandum, via e-mail or fax, to all work sites within the agency that describes the basic facts of the critical incident, to the degree they are known and verified.
* Developing a policy that clarifies the process, procedures, and professionals involved in death notifications from the agency (this is particularly essential for well-meaning colleagues or friends of the deceased, whose initial reaction is to rush to the home of next-of-kin).
* Establishing policies that prevent any employees from discussing the critical incident/murder with the news media or with surviving family members prior to official notification.
* Centralizing the agency's response within the Public Information Office.

Death Notification Procedures
Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the nation's largest victim advocacy organization, has developed a comprehensive protocol for death notification,  Death Notification: Breaking the Bad News with Concern for the Professional and Compassion for the Survivor.  It was developed in 1996 with support from the Office for Victims of Crime.  The complete curriculum for death notification developed by MADD is available free by calling the Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center at 1-800-627-6872. 

Some Considerations to Develop a "Culture of Compassion"
The community corrections agency can show continued compassion for surviving family members through the following responses:
* The agency director or a high-level representative should attend the funeral of the murdered employee.
* A representative of the agency's Employee Assistance Program should contact the victim's immediate survivors within 7 days of the murder to offer information, assistance, and referrals to appropriate supportive services.
* A staff member should be designated to assist surviving family members with workers' compensation, death benefits, victims' compensation, and related issues.
* The agency should provide a direct linkage (in person or via telephone, and in writing) with a contact name, address, and telephone number of a victim advocate or justice professional involved in the adjudication of the case who can provide ongoing information to the surviving victims.
* Many agencies sponsor memorial efforts (i.e., scholarship funds for the victim's children, memorial funds to a charity in which the victim was involved, etc.), which provide a fitting tribute to a colleague killed in the line-of-duty.
* In Illinois, the front hallway of the Department of Corrections is lined with photo plaques of employees who have been killed in the line of duty.  This is a most fitting and lasting tribute that can be replicated in other agencies.
* Perhaps most important, the agency should develop a plan that ensures the surviving victims will be provided with continued support, not only at the crisis stage, but in years to come:
  -- An agency representative should contact the immediate surviving victims at least once a month for the year following the murder.  It is important to determine if they are receiving appropriate support, are being provided information about the status of any criminal proceedings, and are aware of the concern and compassion from the agency.
  -- The agency director/administrator and murdered employee's immediate supervisor should develop an automated calendar that provides "flags" of anniversaries of violent deaths of correctional employees, and send a personal note to surviving family members.  Correctional employees who were close to the victim should also be reminded of the anniversary of his/her death.  Anniversaries of murders are particularly painful for victims; any acknowledgment from the agency and personnel is appropriate and can be very comforting to survivors.
  -- Support groups and related activities that involve other families of murdered correctional employees, including an annual national commemoration each year in May, can provide comfort, as well as an outlet for positive action for survivors.

Media Coverage of Critical Incidents
Critical incidents involving community corrections personnel are, without a doubt, newsworthy.  Violent assaults against staff, and hostage taking incidents all constitute "headline news" in the eyes of the media. 

In violent incidents involving multiple victims and/or offenders, propensity for media interest heightens.  Such cases often, unfortunately, give rise to inaccurate information "leaked" to the press.  Some such leaks are inaccurate; all can be traumatic to the families and friends of correctional personnel involved.

The first and foremost task of any administration is to centralize the dissemination of information to the news media.  Some agencies accomplish this objective through a media specialist on staff at the agency, while others work through a Public Affairs Office.  

In any of these cases, the key to decreasing possibilities of misinformation is to coordinate efforts in dealing with the news media.  Critical incidents require media experts who are trained to deal with crisis events; eliminating multiple spokespersons will also help decrease the chances of rumors, innuendo, and inaccurate statements being released to the news media.

Consideration of Victims' Families and Friends
Often, the news media will be alerted to critical incidents before the agency can notify the families and friends of the staff victimized by assaults or hostage incidents.  The trauma of families and friends is greatly increased by the first hearing of critical incidents on television, on the radio, or in the newspaper. 

Therefore, the priority of the agency administration should be prompt notification of the victimized personnel's immediate family.  Such prompt action will reduce chances of inappropriate notification of staff victimizations by the news media.  It will also allow the agency to inform family members of protocols for dealing with the media, and present the facts that are known relevant to the critical incident.

Many victim service providers are well-trained to help crime victims and survivors deal with news media inquiries at the crisis state of a crime.  Often, victims' families receive a measure of comfort when they have someone willing to field media inquiries and coordinate such inquiries with the criminal justice or corrections agency dealing with the crime.  Administrators should immediately access and utilize the services of such victim service providers during and after critical incidents involving community corrections employees.

The National Center for Victims of Crime has developed comprehensive guidelines for crime victims to help them understand and exercise their rights when dealing with the news media.  A summary of victims' "rights" when dealing with the news media is included in Appendix F and should be made available to the families of community corrections personnel when they are notified of a critical incident involving a loved one. A recommended policy for dealing with the media during critical incidents of staff victimizations also can be found in Appendix F.

Recommended Policy for Dealing with the Media During Critical Incidents of Staff Victimizations
* The agency shall stipulate clearly (and in writing) the name of the personnel who will coordinate media relations during critical incidents such as follows:
  -- Agency director.
  -- Public information officer at the institution.
  -- Public affairs director of the agency.
  -- Any combination of the above.
* Personnel assigned to media relations during critical incidents shall have a plan-of-action prepared in writing prior to such incidents.  The plan shall include the following:
  -- Name of agency/institution spokesperson during critical incidents.
  -- Contact information for the spokesperson (including address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address).
  -- A 24-hour "media hotline" will be available to journalists to receive up-to-date, accurate information about the critical incident.
* A pre-established number of daily press briefings will be determined, including the following information:
  -- When the briefing will be held (hourly, three times a day, etc.).
  -- Where the briefing will be held.	
  -- A list of accommodations the media may require, including electrical outlets, telephones, modems, fax machines, etc.
  -- Guidelines for the media's access to any special accommodations they may require.
* A "contingency plan" will allow for additional or more infrequent press briefings, depending on the nature of the critical incident.
* All immediate family members of correctional personnel involved in the critical incidents will be notified of such incidents prior to any publicity in the news media.
* In cases where news of critical incidents "leaks out" prior to notification of family members, the agency will immediately notify families by telephone (or preferably in person) of the details known of the incident.
* An information hotline for family members of correctional personnel involved in critical incidents will be established to provide them with accurate, up-to-date reports of the incident.
* An information hotline for family members of all personnel employed (and on shift) at the institution will be established.
  -- Correctional personnel at each institution will be advised of both hotline numbers noted above for reference, as needed.
  -- The information hotline for families of all personnel employed at the institution shall also serve as an instrument for "rumor control."
* Depending on the nature and scope of the critical incident, the agency shall prepare written press releases and/or briefings which detail key information related to the incident.
* Guidelines for media coverage shall be made available to news media representatives who arrive in person at the institution at which the critical incident is occurring.  The following questions should be considered:
  -- Will media be allowed in or near the institution itself?
  -- If they are allowed, do any restrictions apply?
  -- If no filming or photography is allowed, will the agency provide photographs or film footage of the critical incident?
  -- Will the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of family members of personnel involved in critical incidents be withheld from the news media?

The agency shall establish a policy relevant to inmates' requests for media coverage of the critical incident, i.e., publicity airing demands in hostage incidents or hostages, initiating press conferences to "bargain" with correctional or criminal justice officials, etc. This agency policy regarding publicity of inmates' demands shall be clearly stated on a regular basis to both inmates and correctional personnel.

Conclusion
A 14-year veteran probation officer was victimized off-the-job by an assailant who placed a brick on the gas pedal of a van loaded with hazardous materials and sent the vehicle roaring through her living room when she, her husband, and child were at home.  She shared her personal experiences with the Promising Practices project, and she was asked how correctional agencies should respond to their employees being victimized, whether or not it is on- or off-the-job.  Her response follows:

Whether or not it is work related is really not important.  They must understand that when someone becomes a victim, their views on crime and all criminals change, as does their view of the criminal justice system.

When choosing a trauma team, put great emphasis on who is on it.  Ours is comprised mainly of appointed supervisors.  Why not let staff have input into this?  We know whom we trust and whom we are comfortable talking with.  Even better would be professionals outside of the agency, and providing us with a list so we can choose who we use.

The trauma team needs to be easily accessed; everyone should have the phone number and be able to place a call to send out a team.  No member of management should be able to refuse an incident report.  I was more apt to talk to my coworkers than management about my feelings.  Yet my coworkers saw a need for me to seek counseling, but were unable to point me in the right direction.  Don't assume once an arrest is made that the employee needs no further counseling.

I may know the justice system from a probation officer's view but not as a victim.  Help the victim with the court system.  Don't say "if there is anything I can do, call."  They won't!  Call them just to see how it's going.

I heard too many times in the past 6 months, "You're strong; you'll make it."   Don't assume this.  The strongest person becomes weak when traumatized.  If they have a strong face, assume they have a good poker face and err on their side.

To do nothing so as to not incur any liability incurs the biggest liability ever.  The first time that (victimized employees) return to their "normal" job duties, go with them - this enhances their safety.  When you know your officers have been traumatized, don't expect them to act rationally.

Don't tell me "you understand my reality" because you don't.  My reality is someone almost killed my 6-year-old. . ..

Chapter 7
Staff Training

Introduction 
Two of the most essential components of community corrections-based victim service programs are staff training and development.  Due to the traditional offender-directed nature of probation and parole, there has been limited emphasis on victim-related education as components of college/university education, orientation training, or continuing education.  Opportunities for staff training on victim services and related issues prove beneficial to the staff, agency, and persons with whom the agency interacts. 

When provided with practical victim services training, probation and parole staff are able to begin to understand a significant clientele of probation and parole agencies crime victims.  Practical information on victim issues helps to improve staffs' work skills and contributes to their professional career development.  Many of the skills and knowledge gained from victim-related training - including sensitivity typologies, policy analysis, and interpretation and enforcement of the law - are applicable to other job elements beyond victims' rights and services.

This chapter includes a description of various training formats that can be used to educate staff on victim services and related issues, a discussion of training priorities, and  identification of topics to include on victims' services in a training curricula for probation and parole officers.
	
Key Elements for Developing Staff Training on Victim Services 
For community corrections professionals to be able to provide effective services to victims of crime, it is critical that they have an understanding of the needs, rights, and legal interests of crime victims.  The following are key elements that should be considered when developing a training curriculum for probation and parole staff:
* All staff should receive mandatory training on victim services and related issues as part of their preservice training.  Inservice training opportunities also should be made available.  When possible, agencies should incorporate innovative formats and methods (e.g., distance learning) for training delivery.
* Probation and parole agencies should have victim services training curricula that addresses topics such as victim sensitivity, major needs of crime victims, victims' rights legislation, services available for victims in the community, and services provided to victims within the agency.
* Victim and victim service providers should be used as facilitators and trainers.

Training Formats 
Internal On-Site Training 
Internal training on victim-related issues should be incorporated into annual agency planning for staff development.  Training formats include the following:
* Orientation training for new staff.
* Continuing education for existing staff.
* Cross-training among community corrections, allied justice agencies, and victim service organizations.

Depending upon the amount of time the agency makes available for these types of training, training curricula should be geared to be adaptable for a 2-hour overview of agency policies, procedures, and services relevant to victims of crime.  Also, 8-hour training that incorporates the above, along with a general overview of victims' rights and how to interact with victims (as described in the "Internal Needs Assessment" section of this chapter) should be included.  The agency should also design specialized training to address a specific type of victim population (such as domestic violence or stalking victims); specific victim issues related to enforcement of laws (such as restitution or protection); and agency-sponsored victim-related programs (such as victim impact panels or mediation). Annual training conducted during National Crime Victims' Rights Week in April, often in conjunction with local and/or State victim service agencies also maintains victim awareness among staff.

Professional Association Training 
Many community corrections professionals belong to local and State professional associations that conduct annual training conferences.  With victim services gaining credibility as a core program in many probation and parole agencies, professional associations should consider sponsoring workshops or training tracks on victim-related issues.

In 1996, the Pennsylvania Association on Probation, Parole and Corrections (PAPPC) took this concept one step further and devoted its entire State-level training agenda to "Incorporating Victim Services into Probation, Parole, and Corrections" for its 75th Annual Training Institute.  Over 400 community and institutional corrections professionals, crime victims, and service providers joined forces for 3 days to promote mutual understanding and address how to better serve victims of crime in Pennsylvania.  Topics included the following:
* A victim impact panel to promote "understanding of the victim experience as the first step to developing policies and designing programs which are responsive to the needs of victims."
* An overview of rights and services for crime victims in Pennsylvania.
* Staff victimization:  probation, parole, and corrections officers as victims.
* Restorative justice.
* Impact of crime classes for inmates and juvenile offenders.
* Technological services in probation and parole.
	
In addition, enforcement of new victim-related laws and the needs of specific types of crime victims were addressed.  

Training-for-Trainers 
The concept of "training-for-trainers" is designed to maximize limited human and programmatic resources to reach the widest audience possible.  In developing a new program, training activity, or technical assistance, probation and parole agencies can, with substantial time and costs, duplicate training and program materials and conduct numerous conferences or other forums to disseminate important information.  The most cost- and time-effective approach, however, is to develop "training-for-trainers" packages in which a core group of probation and parole professionals, including training personnel, receives intensive training on not only the subject materials, but also cutting-edge training techniques.

A "training-for-trainers" package would include the following:
* A comprehensive curriculum with annotations, references, and information accessing additional resources to augment the curriculum. 
* Ideas for "icebreakers" to commence each training-for-trainers session.
* Suggested learning activities.
* Overhead transparencies that correspond with the curriculum and that are accompanied by specific page references and speakers' notes for the trainers.
* Detailed guidelines, experiential exercises on training techniques (i.e., how adults learn, group-work, use of audio/visual aids such as overhead transparencies, Power Point presentations, videotapes, flip charts, etc.), and how to make "dry" subject matters more interesting.
* Modular training segments the following:
  -- Section goals and learning objectives
  -- Section overviews.
  -- Self-tests (either pre-tests, post-tests, or a combination of both).
  -- Guidelines for trainees to "train back" in 10-15 minute segments to their peers.
* Guidelines for maximizing training outreach activities (i.e., conducting training programs or additional "trainings-for-trainers" via satellite at college campuses or correctional agencies, tying into existing training conferences with training sessions within, or adjoining to such conferences, etc.).
* Standardized national resources that are applicable to all four training-for-trainers sessions:
  -- National toll-free information and referral numbers for victim assistance and criminal justice.
  -- Information on the OVC Training and Technical Assistance Center.
  -- Information on the OVC Resource Center.
  -- NCJRS registration form and a list of relevant resources available free with NCJ order numbers.
  -- Resources available electronically from the U.S. Department of Justice (i.e., Web sites, search engines, gophers, etc.).
* A comprehensive evaluation format and strategy, including immediate on-site evaluations of the "training-for-trainers" program, as well as a 90-day or 180-day follow-up evaluation to determine if and how the program and resources were utilized.
  
Distance Learning 
Technological advances have greatly increased opportunities to reach larger numbers of students without the usual expenses associated with travel and accommodations.  Distance learning, which includes compressed video, video teleconferencing, and satellite hookups, accommodates students and lecturers at different geographical sites.

For example, the National Institute of Corrections sponsored a national teleconference on restorative justice in 1996 that linked over 100 sites nationwide together for 2 hours.  A panel of expert practitioners discussed the principles of restorative justice with questions from remote sites made possible through satellite linkages.  Similarly, in 1996, the National Victim Assistance Academy sponsored by the Victim Assistance Legal Organization (VALOR) and the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) linked 120 students, including probation and parole professionals, together at three university sites for 1 week, incorporating 16 hours of compressed video within the 48-hour training program.  In 1997 and 1998, VALOR and OVC linked four university sites together for the Academy.  As of 1998, approximately 700 participants have attended the Academy, including participants from all U.S. States, one American Territory, and three foreign countries. 

In Georgia, the Department of Corrections (DOC) utilizes satellite training for continuing staff development.  In 1997, in partnership with the National Center for Victims of Crime and Office for Victims of Crime, the DOC conducted a satellite training-for-trainers on responding to staff victimization and critical incidents.

Many departments of corrections and universities possess distance learning technology that can be accessed cost effectively.  Probation and parole agencies should determine existing technology in their regions, and utilize it for internal and cross-training purposes.

Getting Started:  Determining Training Priorities 
What do the agency and personnel hope to achieve through victim-oriented training for staff?  The answer to this crucial question comprises a vision or mission statement for the training program.  An example of a vision/mission statement may be found in Figure 7-1.

Figure 7-1:  Sample Vision/Mission Statement 
(Agency) will provide orientation and continuing education for our staff on victim-related issues including victim sensitivity, victims' rights and needs, and our roles and responsibilities in enforcing those rights.  Our scope and quality of victim services will improve with an increased understanding of victims' rights and needs, as will our staff's professional development.  Crime victims, offenders, our agency, and our community all benefit from victim-related training within our agency.

Establishing Training Goals 
Every training program should establish goals that clarify the training vision.  By addressing the following seven issues, agencies can develop goals to guide training program development and implementation:
* Time frame for training.
* Types of training (i.e., orientation, continuing education, cross-training, on-site, association training, distance learning, interactive computer training, etc.)
* Identification of those to be trained.
* Identification of those who will participate as trainers.
* The training topics to be addressed.
* As a result of the training, what improvements agencies and personnel expect to see or implement.
* How training will be evaluated.

Goals also should focus on how the training will translate to improved programs and services for victims of crime.  The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), which incorporates divisions responsible for community justice assistance, institutions, State jails, and parole, established 10 program goals that can be obtained through comprehensive training.  These goals are as follows:
 1. Ensure that victims are treated with respect and dignity by all TDJC personnel.
 2. Ensure that victims are provided with accurate information in the most expedient manner possible.
 3. Ensure victims are aware of their rights in the criminal justice process regarding notification and parole protest procedures.
 4. Ensure that TDJC personnel are trained in victim sensitivity issues.
 5. Develop and assist a statewide professional victim liaison network in each Community Supervision and Corrections Department, District Parole Offices, and Institutional Division prison units.
 6. Create a Crime Stoppers program "behind the walls" of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division facilities.
 7. Provide victims of violent crime the opportunity to have a structured, face-to-face meeting with their offender(s) in a secure, safe environment, in order to facilitate a healing recovery process.
 8. Develop a staff victimization and crisis response program for the TDCJ.
 9. Provide for the creation of a library for victims, victim advocates, and TDJC staff on a statewide-access basis.
10. Provide opportunities for the greatest possible access and use of volunteers within TDCJ Victim Services.

When a mission and goals have been established for a victim-related training program, the next step is to conduct a needs assessment.  The determination of training needs can be accomplished with input from a variety of sources including management staff, line staff, allied victim service providers, and crime victims who have accessed services from the agency.
	
Internal Needs Assessment 
An internal needs assessment can be conducted either in writing or by a focus group-type meeting of key personnel.  In either case, a "menu" of possible training topics should be offered, with assessment participants ranking the importance of each topic and offering additional topics that they believe are important.  For example, when the District of Columbia developed new policies for parole notification and input, the D.C. Parole Board sought training on victim issues for 150 parole and corrections staff.  An initial meeting was held with eight agency managers, including the training director, who met with the victim advocate trainer.  During these meetings, they accomplished the following:
* Reviewed new agency policies and procedures.
* Discussed the types of victims most frequently served by parole and corrections.
* Discussed how parole and corrections personnel most interacted with victims (i.e., over the telephone and at institutions and parole hearings).
* Agreed upon the importance of "training-for-trainers" so that victim-related training could be incorporated into ongoing staff development efforts.

A 6-hour basic training program was developed to meet the District's special needs and included review of agency policies relevant to victims and related staff responsibilities; an overview of the victims' rights discipline; agency response to staff victimization and critical incidents; overview of the rights and needs of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, gang-related crimes, and child abuse; the major needs of victims in the post-sentencing phases of their cases; effective communication skills, in writing, in person, and over the telephone; and victim information and referral.  In addition, the Chief of the Victim/Witness Unit of the U.S. Attorney's Office in D.C. concluded each training day with a 1-hour overview of local programs and services.
 
External Needs Assessment 
Victims and service providers are very knowledgeable about the strengths and weaknesses of community corrections' services to victims.  It is crucial to gain input from these agency stakeholders about what they perceive to be the most salient training needs.  An additional benefit is that victims and advocates who participate in the needs assessment also may be willing to serve as trainers, and provide information and resources to augment training efforts.

Another excellent tool to guide the development of training topics is the ongoing implementation of victims' assessments of their interactions with the agency and of the services they receive.  A one-page victim evaluation/assessment form, provided randomly on an ongoing basis, will help the agency identify areas of weakness in service delivery.  It will also highlight agency strengths and identify victim-sensitive personnel who can be utilized as potential trainers.  

Developing Training Resources 
It is important for probation and parole agencies to be aware of the many existing resources that can augment their training efforts.  Don't reinvent the wheel!  There are myriad comprehensive training curricula on victim-related issues, many of which were written specifically for probation and parole.  While these standardized curricula require agencies to "personalize" the content to be applicable to laws, agency policies, and victims' specific rights and needs in each jurisdiction, they provide an excellent foundation for any training program.

At the national level, promising practices in training for probation and parole are available from the following sources:
* American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) has developed curricula on enhancing victim services within probation and parole, and domestic violence geared specifically toward community corrections.
* Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) makes available a handbook and videotape on how to implement victim impact panels in court, probation, parole and/or diversion settings.
* National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), whose 800-page curriculum entitled Crime Victims and Corrections:  Implementing the Agenda for the 1990s addresses topics such as corrections-based victims' rights and services, victim-offender programs, and staff victimization.  The NVC also has curricula on workplace violence, victim impact statements, and other topics relevant to probation and parole.
* National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) has published Responding to Communities in Crisis and other curricula that address a wide variety of victim issues.
* Victim Assistance Legal Organization (VALOR) has published a 700-page training notebook that incorporates over 30 topics relevant to victims' rights and needs, and the criminal justice system's related responsibilities.  The National Victim Assistance Academy Curriculum is designed for a comprehensive, intensive 48-hour training program.

Federal resources to help develop victim-related curricula include the following:
* The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), within the U.S. Department of Justice, has a Training and Technical Assistance Center (TTAC) that provides funding for trainers and training resources on victim-related issues for a variety of constituencies, including probation and parole.  A TTAC application is included in Appendix G.
* The OVC Resource Center maintains databases and resources in both paper and electronic formats on hundreds of topics relevant to victims' rights and needs.  A summary of OVCRC and other Justice Department reference service resources available by telephone, electronically, and in paper format is included in Appendix G.
* The National Institute of Corrections (NIC), within the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, provides training, technical assistance, informational services, and policy/program development assistance (which includes information related to restorative justice, community justice, and enhancement of victim services) to Federal, State, and local government agencies. 

Examples of effective State and local training resources include the following:
* The Violence Against Women Law Enforcement Training Program is in a training-for-trainers format developed by the Governor's Justice Commission in Rhode Island.
* The Impact of Crime on Victims: Teachers and Students Manuals were developed by the California Youth Authority to help youthful offenders understand the impact their crimes have on their victims, their families, communities, and themselves.
* The Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department's Crime Victims Handbook, which addresses a wide range of victims' rights, resources, and services, and is available in electronic format for easy adaptation from APPA.

These comprise just a few examples of existing resources available for probation and parole agencies.  A roster of national victim service and allied justice organizations is included in Appendix G for additional information and resources.

Identifying Training Facilitators 
Most communities have service providers who assist different types of victims and survivors, from property crimes to child abuse and domestic violence, sexual assault and elder abuse, DUI crimes and homicide.  Some States and local jurisdictions have coalitions of victims, advocates, and allied professionals.  The best approach to obtain knowledgeable trainers from the victims' field is to become involved in State- and community-based victim activities including the following methods:
* Serving as advisors to local victim service agencies and providing their representatives with the opportunity to participate in an advisory capacity to probation and parole agencies.
* Joining State and local victim service coalitions, for which training, including cross-disciplinary training is often a key activity.
* Sponsoring victim-offender programs, such as victim impact panels and "impact of crime on victims" classes, which provide an excellent source of victims and service providers who can augment staff training efforts.

Building a Resource Library 
Staff training and development efforts can be enhanced by the creation of an internal agency library on victim-related issues, which should be made available to staff on an ongoing basis.  Agencies such as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole maintain small libraries that include the following:
* Information on agency policies, protocols, programs, and services for victims.
* A wide variety of standardized victim-related curricula.
* The latest statistics and resources on crime and victimization in America.
* Contact information for national, State, and local victim services, and State and local victim services in probation and parole.
* Vitae and credentials of experts who can serve as trainers in victim-related issues.
	
The latest national resources on crime and victimization are available at no charge from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) within the U.S. Department of Justice.  A roster of print publications and ordering information, along with an NCJRS registration form, are included in Appendix G.  Information also is available on the World Wide Web.  

Developing Training Curricula 
The best approach to developing training outlines and curricula is to think, plan, and execute in "layers," which means create levels of training based upon time allotted, existing level of staff knowledge, and agency resources.  The first level of training described below should be considered "basic training" applicable to all agencies and personnel.  Additional levels can be added on when most appropriate, based upon the results of the agency's training needs assessment, resources, and other relevant factors.  Once the parameters of staff training have been determined, the agency should develop training outlines that include topics, learning goals and objectives, time allotment, relevant resources and curricula, and potential trainers (e.g., internal staff and allied professionals, such as victims, service providers, judges).

Principles of Adult Learning 
When developing training classes and materials, consideration should be given to basic principles of adult learning.  (For an example, see National Victim Assistance Academy:  Faculty Development Training Guide, Victim Assistance Legal Organization (n.d.), McLean, VA, p. 16.):
* Adults want to know how training will benefit them.
* Adults understand new concepts much faster if you can relate new information to their past experiences.
* Adults consistently rate training sessions much higher if there are opportunities for participation and interaction with other members of the audience.
* Adults want to be listened to and have their opinions respected.
* Adults should be encouraged to be resources to training faculty and each other.
* Adults want to be treated like adults.

Level One Training 
There are seven core components that should comprise mandatory training for all agency staff.  These topics can be taught in 2-6 hours, depending on the level of detail desired and the time allotted.  Core components include the following:
* History of victims' rights and services in America.
* Overview of crime-related psychological trauma:
  -- Fear and anxiety.
  -- Depression.
  -- Difficulty dealing with important relationships.	
  -- Shattering of precrime assumptions ("just world theory").
  -- Post-traumatic stress disorder.
* Victimization Theory
  -- Stress theory (developmental, chronic, and acute stressors).
  -- Classical conditioning.
  -- Second-order conditioning.
  -- The criminal justice system and victim stress (with an emphasis on stressors related to probation and parole).
* Responding to probation/parole staff victimization and critical incidents.
* The major needs of victims when dealing with probation and parole.
  -- Safety and security.
  -- Ventilation and validation.
  -- Prediction and preparation.
  -- Information and education.
* How to effectively communicate with victims.
* Local, State, and national resources for victim information and referral (a roster of national toll-free information and referral services for victims is included in Appendix G).

Victim-Specific Training Segments 
There are many types of victims with whom probation/parole agencies and personnel interact.  One- to sixteen-hour training modules can be developed that address specific victim populations, including victims and survivors of the following offenses:
* Property crimes (burglary, larceny, theft).
* Child abuse and neglect.
* Elder abuse and neglect.
* Domestic violence.
* Hate violence.
* Sexual assault and rape.
* Gang-related crimes.
* Juvenile offenders.
* Drunk and drugged driving.
* Homicide and manslaughter.

Topics that should be included in all of the aforementioned training modules include the following:
* An overview of statistics relevant to the scope and nature of this type of crime and victimization.
* General victim typologies.
* Reactions and experiences that are specific to this type of victim.
* Offender typologies.
* Agency policies relevant to the implementation of these victims' rights.
* Any agency programs and/or services that assist these victims.
* How to implement a multidisciplinary approach among justice agencies, victim service organizations, and allied professional agencies to better serve these victims.
* Local, State, and national resources available to provide information and assistance.

Law and Policy-Related Training Segments
Today in America, there are almost 30,000 Federal and State statutes relevant to crime victims' rights and services.  In addition, as of November 1998, 32 States had a State-level constitutional amendment providing for a range of participatory rights for victims in the criminal, and in some States, juvenile justice system(s).  In both cases, many of the rights pertain directly to community corrections.

Training segments on victim-related law and policies should focus on what the law states; who is responsible for enforcement; any relevant remedies for noncompliance; interdisciplinary efforts to assure a "seamless" enforcement of victims' rights across law enforcement, courts, community corrections, and institutional corrections; and practical application of relevant laws and policies in the agency's jurisdiction.

Relevant topics include the following:
* Victim notification, including junctures in probation and parole at which victims have the right to notification (i.e., offender status, bail release, parole hearings, probation/parole revocation, etc.); responsibility for notification; sample notification processes, (i.e., letters, forms, voice response, etc.); community notification (i.e., "Megan's Law" and sex offender notification); and providing appropriate information relevant to notification (i.e., what the victim might expect to happen, the process of parole hearings, timelines for notification, etc.)
* Victim participation, including junctures in probation and parole at which victims have the right to participate (i.e., parole hearings, revocation hearings, etc.) and how to accommodate victim participation in a timely, sensitive manner.
* Victim impact statements (VIS), including assessing victim impact; VIS as part of presentence investigations; methods of securing VIS, including allocution, written, audio tape, videotape, teleconferencing, and satellite audio/video/telephone hookups; and sample victim impact statements (for property crimes, violent crimes, children, and neighborhoods).
* Restitution, including assessing victim restitution needs through victim impact statements and presentence investigations; ordering, monitoring, collecting, and disbursing restitution  payments; developing interagency agreements to promote a seamless enforcement of restitution collection and disbursement; technology to automate and enhance restitution enforcement; and any relevant civil remedies available to victims.
* Protection, including policies and protocols for victims to report and receive protection from intimidation, harassment, and/or harm; civil protection and restraining orders; antistalking statutes and related remedies for victims; and technology to enhance victim protection, including electronic monitoring, automated voice response victim notification of offender status, and antistalking electronic units that warn victims, law enforcement agencies, and a central monitoring office when an offender under an order of protection comes within 500 feet of the victim's residence.

Training Program Evaluation 
All training programs should be evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the trainer and resources, applicability to their personal and professional development, and value of training resources, including curricula and audio/visual tools.  Participants also should be provided with the opportunity to recommend topics for future training.  

Conclusion 
For agencies as a whole, well-trained staff can increase the agency's and officials' compliance with victims' rights as afforded by Federal or State statutes, or constitutional amendments.  Orientation and continuing education on victim-related issues also can help the agency fulfill its obligations to key stakeholders.  In addition, increases in employee satisfaction due to systematic staff development and positive learning experiences go a long way toward improving agency morale, as well as overall operations.

Chapter 8
Community Relations and Outreach

Introduction 
Community relations and outreach activities have the capacity not only to educate victims, citizens, and various other service providers, but to garner the public support and assistance so desperately needed by community corrections agencies across the country.  Victims should be viewed by the profession as a main constituent group or customers deserving of services.  An agency's mission statement should rank victim services as a high priority.  A work plan with measurable objectives and specifically assigned duties should map out the department's commitment to meeting the objectives.

This chapter provides an examination of key elements to a comprehensive community relations and outreach strategy. Chapter 8 will include a discussion of the following issues:
* Various formal and informal strategies for informing and educating victims and the public about probation and parole and its services.
* Two probation and parole agencies that have established advisory committees on victim services and related issues.
* The value of developing partnerships with other agencies and advocating for victims' rights.

Key Elements for Community Relations and Outreach Activities 
Traditional public relations methods involve using the media and developing written materials to inform victims and the public about the agency's mission, operations, and services.  More innovative public relations strategies involve probation and parole personnel developing partnerships and volunteering for community projects and causes outside the direct scope of community corrections. Agencies must employ various strategies to reach wide-ranging segments of the community.

Key elements of a comprehensive community relations and outreach strategy include the following:
* Informing and educating victims, victim service providers, allied justice agencies, and the general public about the probation and parole process and services provided to victims.
* Establishing an advisory committee or internal task force to seek ways to address victim services and related issues within the department.
* Having an agency representative(s) serve on victim service organizations' advisory committees.
* Having membership in relevant city, county, State, and national coalitions.
* Forming partnerships for prevention.
* Having an awareness of State laws concerning victims and participating in legislative advocacy for victims' rights and services.

Informing and Educating Victims and the Public 
Strategies probation and parole agencies can use to inform and educate victims and the public about the services they provide include the following:
* Developing and distributing written materials such as brochures, telephone rolodex cards, fact sheets, and handbooks describing departmental services.
* Producing audio tapes, videotapes, and slides for distribution and for use during presentations.
* Creating and distributing promotional items such as posters, pencils, pens, pins, bookmarks, buttons, and bumper stickers that display the agency's victim services program contact information.
* Using radio, television, and print media.
* Organizing open houses and public forums. 
* Making presentations and providing training about departmental services.
* Participating in National Crime Victims' Rights Week activities during April each year.

Written Materials 
Written materials should be clear, concise, and written at an appropriate reading level so readers will easily understand the message.  Written materials also should be available in different languages for those who do not speak English.  The California Youth Authority includes a statement in Spanish on the bottom of all forms and materials so that if a victim needs a form in Spanish, s/he can request it.	

Agencies may find that organizations such as private marketing companies and marketing departments of local universities are willing to donate their time and talent in helping to develop a brochure or other public relations materials.  Also, if approached, local printing companies may be willing to donate the paper and printing services needed to mass produce the materials.

Creating an agency logo and slogan that can be displayed on the department's outreach materials may serve to remind the community of victims' rights and services.  Private companies spend millions of dollars developing logos and slogans because they work in getting the message out. 

Brochures 
Many victims, citizens, and even victim service providers don't fully understand correctional systems, how they work and integrate with other justice agencies, the differences between community and institutional corrections, and the differences between probation and parole.  All victim service programs should have a brochure (see Appendix H for a sample brochure from the Victim Services Program within the California Department of Corrections) that provides the following information:
* Description of the agency.
* Victims' rights and services available from the agency, and how they are accessed, e.g., victim notification enrollment requirements, upon request only, by completing certain forms, etc.
* How (or if) the agency interacts with allied justice agencies.
* The most common questions victims ask about rights and services.
* Confidentiality provisions (if applicable).
* Contact information (address, telephone number (toll-free, if applicable), fax, e-mail address, and agency Web site address).
* Contact information for supporting victim services at the State and community level (e.g., victim compensation, statewide coalitions).

When developing a brochure, information that changes such as supervision guidelines, program staff names, and contact information for county or regional probation and parole offices can be listed on a separate "brochure insert" or pocket size card so the information can be updated quickly with minimal cost.  Brochures should be developed in conjunction with the agency's communications or public information office, and can be designed to have a "family look."  In addition, some States such as Kansas, Washington, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina have a brochure panel dedicated to victim notification requests that are detachable and can be mailed to the victim services program for enrollment for this service.

Telephone Rolodex Card 
A rolodex card that includes contact information for the agency's victim service program, including address, telephone number, and e-mail information, is an excellent outreach tool for crime victims, service providers, and allied professionals.  An example of a rolodex card from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction is included in Appendix H.

Informational Bulletins and Fact Sheets 
The Victims' Service Program of the California Department of Corrections periodically issues informational bulletins and memoranda to field staff and community-based victim service providers on issues concerning crime victims and the California Department of Corrections.  The program also assists in the search for missing children by distributing posters and information to institutions and parole offices throughout the State.

In South Carolina, the Department of Juvenile Justice has created a series of one-page fact sheets describing various programs that are placed in a sleeve folder.  These materials are distributed at public forums, criminal justice and victim service conferences, civic and volunteer meetings, and to targeted private organizations.  

Handbooks for Crime Victims 
The Tarrant County (Texas) Community Supervision and Corrections Department has created a Crime Victims Handbook. This 34-page Handbook includes the following information:
* Important phone numbers for crime victims.
* General information on probation services.
* Explanations of standard and supplemental conditions of probation.
* Information on how restitution orders are handled by the department. 
* Information on victim services provided by the probation department.
* Information for contacting the probation department.
* Sample conditions of probation.
* A copy of the Texas Crime Victims' Bill of  Rights. 

The Handbook is easy to read and is written in terms that can be understood by persons unfamiliar with the criminal justice system.  Victims can refer to the Handbook for information throughout the time their perpetrator is on probation, thus reducing the amount of time spent by the victim services staff of the department answering general questions.  

The format used for this Handbook is available in diskette and photocopied formats through the American Probation and Parole Association.  Agencies can follow the format provided and easily adapt the general information to fit their jurisdiction's specific practices.  

Posters 
Posters are a cost-effective and useful public relations and marketing tool.  They can be displayed at various meetings, conferences and special events, as well as placed on community bulletin boards and in public areas such as libraries, grocery stores, gas stations, malls, shopping centers, and local offices.  Some national victim service organizations (e.g., National Center for Victims of Crime, National Organization for Victim Assistance) have excellent display-ready materials that are generic enough to fit any agency's needs.

Audio and Video Educational Tapes and Slide Presentations 
Audio tapes, videotapes, and slide presentations can be excellent training and educational tools.  The California Department of Corrections (CDC) Victim Services Program has developed a "Helping Crime Victims" brochure and videotape to inform crime victims of their rights concerning offenders who are under the jurisdiction of CDC.  Copies of the video and brochures also are sent to community-based victim service providers, institutions, and parole regions.  

In South Carolina, the Office for Victim Services of the Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services has used slide presentations as a cost-effective way to depict the program's services.  In addition to pictures relevant to the program's services, graphs, charts, and bulleted statements can be easily converted to slides and incorporated into the presentation for variety. The Office for Victim Services has a script that goes along with the slides so that any representative from the department (e.g., line officer, administrator) can make a presentation on the program's services.

Promotional Items 
Promotional items provided at conferences, meetings, and special events are useful marketing devices and serve as daily reminders to recipients of the programmatic efforts in which an agency is involved.  The California Department of Corrections has created a comprehensive package of pencils, pens, pins, buttons, rulers, and bumper stickers that are distributed to internal staff, related external service providers, the general public, and victims to promote victim services within the department.

Television, Radio, and Print Media
Television, radio, and print media can be excellent vehicles for reaching a wide segment of the population.  A monthly or quarterly newsletter can update staff, educate allied service providers and interested profit and non-profit organizations about the department's services and current issues.  It also can profile specific articles that address victim services.  Many probation and parole departments' victim service divisions (e.g., Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole's Office of the Victim Advocate) have created special issue newsletters that focus entirely on victim services.  Submitting articles and information to be published in other organizations' publications (e.g., national, State, and local newsletters, professional association journals, and magazines) about departmental services and promising victim-related practices and programs of the agency is another way to "spread the word" about probation and parole-based victim service programs.

The media tends to focus their attention on negative aspects of community corrections. Consequently, it is incumbent upon probation and parole agencies to proactively seek out the media to help promote and educate the public about the positive things community corrections does for victims and the community.  For example, press releases that describe services or new programs for victims can be developed and mailed to all radio, television, and print media sources on a regular basis.  Also, department staff can offer to be on local radio and television programs to tout the benefits of their victim services program or prevention efforts in the community.

Billboard advertisements are another visual way to get the word out about probation- and parole-based victim services.  In South Carolina, the Department of Corrections has received Federal funding to create billboards regarding crime prevention and victim services.

Open Houses and Public Forums 
When a new program or service is offered that serves the interest of victims or the general public it should be profiled.  For example, prior to a new prison accepting inmates, the South Carolina Department of Corrections sponsors a "spend the night in prison" program to educate those interested in learning what an inmate experiences in prison.  In addition, the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services routinely holds "open house events" for their Restitution Centers, Community Control Centers, and community service work sites.  

The American Probation and Parole Association's Victims Issues Committee periodically holds public hearings on victim issues during its annual training conferences.  Victims are invited to come and speak about their experiences with the criminal justice system as a victim of crime. These powerful events offer an opportunity to sensitize criminal justice professionals to the plight of victims and also provide a chance for service providers, criminal justice practitioners, victims, and legislators to offer ideas and recommendations on how victim services in community corrections can be improved.

Recognizing that the holidays can be a difficult time for crime victims, in 1996, the Tarrant County Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) in Texas held an impromptu holiday reception for local victims of crime.  CSCD staff bought the food for the reception, the police and fire departments donated space for the party, and local businesses donated party decorations. Victims and staff from various criminal justice agencies (e.g., probation, juvenile corrections, State parole) attended the informal gathering.

Presentations and Training Opportunities
Educational information and training to victims, victim service providers, criminal justice professionals, and the general public can be provided through many different types of forums - both formal and informal.  One way to provide cross-training and information to other professionals involved in victim services within a community is to establish a victim service provider training network.  Participants in the network should include the following:
* Law enforcement.
* Prosecutors/court personnel.
* Community and institutional corrections.
* Private attorneys.
* Juvenile justice system representatives.
* Representatives from the faith community.
* Domestic violence, rape, and crisis victim service staff.
* Professionals who provide social service assistance.
* Medical and psychological professionals.
* Educators.
* News media.
* Volunteer professionals.
* Substance abuse professionals.
* Personal advocacy groups for offenders, children, and victims.
* Social and civic community organization members.
* State and local service providers (Beatty, Frank, Lurigio, Paparozzi, Seymour, and Macgargle, 1994).

Initially, the training network participants can provide formal presentations about their agency's services to victims at the network's periodic meetings.  Presentations should allow time for questions and discussion of the agency's practices.  Ideas for enhancements and modifications of an agency's services also can be discussed (Beatty et al., 1994).

The network does not have to limit itself to formal meetings.  Informal methods of sustaining communication can include telephone conference calls, luncheon meetings, and networking during shared social events (Beatty et al., 1994).

Cross-training is another effective way to educate and provide information on victim issues and services across agencies, as well as promote coordination and collaboration.  In South Carolina, the victim services staff in the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services (DPPPS) provide training to every new victim services employee (i.e., paid staff and volunteers) hired by the prosecutor's Victim Advocacy Program in designated jurisdictions.  In return, the DPPPS victim services paid volunteer staff who received training by the prosecutor's victim advocate (Beatty et al., 1994).

In addition, on a local level, social clubs, churches, corporations, and professional groups are always looking for presenters who have interesting ideas to share.  All public relations materials should provide appropriate contact information and indicate the agency's ability to provide speakers on relevant issues.  Presentations on victim services provided by the department at State and national victim or criminal justice organizations' conferences and training symposiums also offer an avenue for disseminating information to a wide audience. 

Web Sites 
Some departments, such as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) and the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, have developed Web sites on the Internet that inform victims of services available through the agency.  

TDCJ's Web site (http://www.TDCJ.  Capnet.state.tx.us./victimse.html) provides an overview of the services to crime victims as well as descriptions of some of the specialized services such as the crime victim clearinghouse, victim offender mediation/dialogue, victim impact panels, and prison tours.  The Web site also includes the bill of rights for Texas crime victims and contact information for State and national victim organizations.

The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's Web site (http://www.drc.ohio.gov) has a victim services section that provides background information on the types of services available through its Office for Victim Services as well as who to contact at the Department for further information.  The Web site also offers information on national victim service organizations, State coalitions, State of Ohio government agencies, and on-line victim resources.  

National Crime Victims' Rights Week 
One of the most important recognition events for crime victims is National Crime Victims' Rights Week (NCVRW), which is held in April each year.  NCVRW provides an opportunity to reflect upon the rights and needs of crime victims, to commemorate the accomplishments of the victims' rights movement, and to reemphasize the need to ensure justice for victims of crime.  Probation and parole agencies should be actively involved in NCVRW by hosting activities and providing a combination of informational and community participation events to increase public awareness and to educate the community about the rights and needs of crime victims.  The Office for Victims of Crime within the U.S. Department of Justice develops resources, such as standard posters and display materials for use during the week.  The NCVRW Resource Guide is available free to criminal justice agencies, and departments can affix  their agency's name, address, phone number, and other helpful information to the materials.

Tarrant County (Texas) Community Supervision and Corrections Department 
In Texas, the Tarrant County Texas Community Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) has hosted and participated in the following types of activities during National Crime Victims' Rights Week:
* CSCD held a department-wide clothing drive and donated the materials to local women's shelters.
* CSCD produced 3,000 book markers that contained victim assistance information and toll-free phone numbers and distributed them to all county employees.
* Staff volunteered their time to answer phone calls for the National Center for Victims of Crime in Ft. Worth, Texas.
* Staff adopted a local school and assisted them in a multitude of activities.

For these types of exemplary victim services, the CSCD was given an award during the Texas Governor's Annual Conference in 1994.

California Department of Corrections 
The Victim Services Program of the California Department of Corrections celebrates National Crime Victims' Rights Week and Child Abuse Prevention Month, which is also held in April.  The following activities were sponsored by the Victim Services Program:
* Distributing informational packets and posters to field staff.
* Hosting a training forum.
* Honoring staff and community-based victim service providers with awards. 

Many of the institutions and parole regions also conduct training and hold fundraising activities to benefit crime victims during the month of April.

Oklahoma Department of Corrections 
In Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, the first statewide exhibit of artwork produced by victims/survivors of violent crime was displayed at the State Capitol Building during National Crime Victims' Rights Week in 1996.  The exhibit was sponsored by Institution Programs, Inc.,  State Arts Council of Oklahoma, Oklahoma Crime Victims Center in Shawnee, and the Oklahoma Department of Corrections.  

Establishing Advisory Committees 
Many departments have solicited help in program, policy, and practice development and assessment by creating advisory committees comprised of departmental staff, victim service providers, and victims of crime.  Agencies also may want to consider including loss prevention personnel on these types of committees.

Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 
In Pennsylvania, the Department of Corrections (DOC) has created a Victim Services Advisory Committee, directed by agency policy, which is established to advise and make recommendations to the DOC, and the Board of Probation and Parole (PBPP).  In the policy, the Committee is directed to address the following issues:
* The development and implementation of the educational program entitled, "Impact of Crime Classes" for offenders.
* The Victim Input and Notification Program.
* DOC and PBPP policies and program initiatives which impact crime victims.
* Victimization within the department.
* Legislative and public policy issues affecting crime victims.
* Victim Offender Reconciliation and Mediation.

Efforts are made to ensure geographic and cultural representation on the Committee.  In addition to the director of the Office for Victim Services and the victim advocates for the PA Board of Probation and Parole and the prosecutor's office, committee members are comprised of individuals from the following entities:  PA Coalition Against Domestic Violence, PA Coalition Against Rape, PA Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), Prosecutor's Victim Advocate, community-based victim service providers, and victims of crime.

Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Texas 
The Tarrant County Community Supervision and Corrections Department's (CSCD's) Victim Advisory Committee was established in 1995 to provide a continual assessment of the Department's victim services, including their restitution procedure, use of victim impact panels, community service program, outreach activities, and staff training on victim issues.  The committee holds quarterly meetings.  In the past, the committee has included representation from victims of crime and CSCD staff. Recently, in an effort to broaden the range of victim input and promote communication and coordination between the adult and juvenile justice systems, CSCD has invited representatives from juvenile probation and parole and victims of juvenile offenders to be involved on the committee.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice 
To ensure that input from victims and victim services providers are accounted for when deciding what types of victim services are needed, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice has instituted a Victim Advisory Council.  The Council consists of approximately 30 representatives from victim advocate groups, State agencies, and local victim service providers.  The group meets quarterly to assess needs that are not being addressed, approve and comment on various TDCJ Victim Service programs, and relay information back to statewide organizations represented.  The members volunteer to serve 2-year terms.

Developing Partnerships with Other Agencies and Advocating for Victims' Rights and Services 
Developing partnerships with other agencies that provide services for victims of crime is an ideal way to (1) share and receive information about services being provided to victims, and (2) create a powerful base for advocating for victims' rights and services. 

Many States have Victim Assistance Networks that are designed to represent victims and all related victim service providers.  These types of networks offer a means for accomplishing the following:
* Providing support in establishing a solid funding base for agencies and nonprofit organizations that serve victims.
* Lobbying for victim-specific legislation.
* Providing opportunities to cross-train various providers through workshops, conferences, and training institutes.
* Serving as the central-State collector of research and literature regarding victimization. 
* Serving as a central communications link throughout the associated profession of victim services.
* Establishing a statewide talk-group through e-mail and Internet services where providers can share information. 
* Collecting information and developing a statewide victim service resource directory.

Key staff from community corrections agencies should be actively involved in these networks.  Ideally, staff should be on the network's board of directors and volunteer for key positions.

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction 
In Ohio, the Office of Victim Services of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction collaborates with other State and local agencies to ensure the delivery of effective services to crime victims.  For example, the Ohio Attorney General's Office, the Court of Claims of Ohio, and the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction work together to develop marketing strategies for all statewide victim services available within the agencies.  In addition, the Office of Victim Services participates in following victim service coalitions:
* ACTION-OHIO (domestic violence network).
* CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates for Children).
* MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving).
* OCOSA (Ohio Coalition on Sexual Assault).
* OCPA (Ohio Crime Prevention Association).
* ODVN (Ohio Domestic Violence Network).
* OPAA (Ohio Prosecuting Attorney's Association).
* OVWA (Ohio Victim Witness Association).
* POMC (Parents of Murdered Children).

California Department of Correction 
The Victim Services Program staff of the California Department of Corrections are involved in a variety of activities to advocate for better services for crime victims.  For example, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency (YACA) in California, convened a Summit in 1993 for the purpose of reviewing the state of victim services in corrections and developing recommendations for addressing the unmet needs of victims.  Approximately 75 representatives from victim/witness centers, victims of homicide support groups, law enforcement, the judiciary, and affected State agencies participated in the Summit.  Their recommendations focused on five issues:  restitution, allocution, notification, offender programming, and system improvements.  YACA compiled the recommendations and sent a report to the Governor for review and consideration.  Victim Service Program staff of the California Department of Corrections have been instrumental in developing legislation to implement several of the recommendations from that report. 

South Carolina Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services 
The South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services (SCDPPPS) understands that victims and victim groups can be powerful allies in helping them attain needed resources.  Departmental staff have made a point of getting involved, and remaining involved, with various victim service organizations throughout the State.  Over time, the increased understanding of victims and victim groups to the constraints SCDPPPS must contend with, along with their witness of the concerted efforts being made by the Department to provide more effective and efficient services to crime victims, has led these individuals and groups to lend their support to the Department.  This support has even extended to victims and victim organizations speaking to legislative bodies on behalf of probation and parole.  This type of support in front of the legislature has enabled the Office for Victim Services staff of SCDPPPS to grow from two grant-supported positions to its current level of eight State appropriated positions.  The department plans to ask for an additional four positions in the 1997 legislative session.

Conclusion 
To counteract the negative personae of probation and parole, community corrections agencies must take a proactive approach to educating and informing victims and the public of the mission of probation and parole work.  The provision of services to victims of crime must be included within that mission.  This chapter provided an overview of various elements and strategies that can be employed in community relations and outreach efforts.  By implementing the types of approaches discussed, probation and parole can begin to transform and enhance its image within the community.

Bibliography
	
Alexander, E. K., and Lord, J. H. (1994), Impact Statements:  A Victim's Right to Speak, a Nation's Responsibility to Listen, Washington, DC:  Office for Victims of Crime, U.S. Department of Justice.

American Correctional Association Victims Committee (1996), Reports and Recommendations on Restorative Justice (Draft), Lanham, MD:  Unpublished manuscript.
	
Anfuso, D. (1994), "Deflecting Workplace Violence," Personal Journal, 10:66, p. 73.
	
Bachman, R. (1994), "Violence and Theft in the Workplace," Crime Data Brief:  National Crime Victimization Survey, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
	
Bachman, R., and Saltzman, L. E. (1995, August), Violence Against Women:  Estimates From the Redesigned Survey (Special Report), Washington, DC:  Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
	
Baron, S. A. (1993), Violence in the Workplace:  A Prevention and Management Guide for Businesses, Ventura, CA:  Pathfinders Publishing, p. 15.
	
Bazemore, G. (1994), "Developing a Victim Orientation for Community Corrections:  A Restorative Justice Paradigm and a Balanced Mission," Perspectives, 18:3, pp. 19-24.
	
Bazemore, G. and Umbreit, M. S. (1994, October), Balanced and Restorative Justice:  Program Summary, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
	
Beatty, D., Frank, L., Lurigio, A. J., Seymour, A., Paparozzi, M., and Macgargle, B. (1994), A Guide to Enhancing Victim Services Within Probation and Parole,  Lexington, KY:  American Probation and Parole Association.
	
Black, B. (1995), Confronting Domestic Abuse, Phoenix, AZ:  Maricopa County Adult Probation.
	
Boone, H. N., and Fulton, B. F. (1995), Results-Driven Management:  Implementing Performance-Based Measures in Community Corrections, Lexington, KY:  American Probation and Parole Association.
	
Brier, J. (1984, April), "The Effects of Childhood Sexual Abuse on Later Psychological Functioning:  Defining a "Post-Sexual-Abuse Syndrome," " Paper presented at the Third National Conference on Sexual Victimization of Children, Washington, DC.
	
Brodie, K., and Sotak, A. (1994, November), Iowa Collection Program:  How to Obtain and Collect Subrogation and Restitution on Compensation Claims.  Iowa:  Iowa Department of Justice, Crime Victim Compensation Program.
	
Brown, M., and Young, K. (1992, Spring), "Employment Assistance as a Part of Probation," Perspectives, 16:2, pp. 38-39.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (1993), Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, p. 15.
	
Bureau of Labor Statistics (1994), "Violence in the Workplace Comes Under Closer Scrutiny," Issues in Labor Statistics, Summary, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Labor, pp. 94-100.
	
Burnley, J. N., and Murray, M. (1997), Restitution Reform:  The Coordinated Interagency Approach," Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Child Abuse Prevention Task Force, Georgia Department of Corrections (n.d.), Special Conditions.  Child Abusers/Sex Offenders:  Child Victim, Atlanta, GA:  Author.
	
Coates, R. B. and Gehm, J. (1989), "An Empirical Assessment," in M. Wright and B. Galaway, eds., Mediation and Criminal Justice, London:  Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 251-263.
	
Courtois, C. (1979), "The Incest Experience and Its Aftermath," Victimology:  An International Journal, 4, pp. 337-347.
	
Crowe, A.H. (with P. Wack and  P. J. Schaefer) (1996), Intervening in Family Violence:  A Resource Manual for Community Corrections Professionals, Lexington, KY:  American Probation and Parole Association.
	
Davis, R. C., and Lurigio, A. J. (n.d.), "Compliance with Court-Ordered Restitution:  Who Pays?" Unpublished manuscript.
	
Digman, J. (1990), Repairing the Damage:  An Evaluation of an Experimental Adult Reparation Scheme in Lettering, Northamptonshire, University of Sheffield, England:  Center for Criminological and Legal Research, Faculty of Law.
	
Digman, J. and Fagan, T .J. (1996), "Workplace Violence in Correctional Settings:  A Comprehensive Approach to Critical Incident Stress Management,"  Violence on the Job, Identifying Risks and Developing Solutions, Washington, DC:  American Psychological Association, p. 368.
	
Eddy, D. (1995, April), "Restitution:  A National Priority."  The Restitution Review,  Sacramento, CA:  California State Board of Control.
	
Egeland, B., and Erickson, M. F. (1987), "Psychologically Unavailable Caregiving," in M. R. Brassard, R. Germain, and S. N. Hart, eds., Psychological Maltreatment of Children and Youth, New York:  Pergamon Press.
	
English, K., Pullen, S., Jones, L., and Krauth, B. (1996), "A Model Process:  A Containment Approach," in K. English, S. Pullen, and L. Jones, eds., Managing Adult Sex Offenders:  A Containment Approach, Lexington, KY:  American Probation and Parole Association.
	
English, S., and Crawford, M. (1989), "Victim Awareness Education is Basic to All Offender Programming," No Excuses:  Accountability in the Treatment of Juveniles, Sacramento, CA:  California Youth Authority.
	
Family Assault Supervision Team (n.d.), Stop the Violence, Baltimore, MD:  Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.
	
Family Division, Connecticut Superior Court (1986), Program Description:  Family Violence Intervention Unit, Wethersfield, CT:  State of Connecticut.
	
Fulton, B.A. (1996), Restoring Hope Through Community Partnerships:  The Real Deal in Crime Control, Lexington, KY:  American Probation and Parole Association.
	
Gelles, R. J., Lackner, R., and Wolfner, G. D. (n.d.), "Risk-Markers of Men Who Batter,"  Paper prepared for the Family Division, State of Connecticut Judicial Branch.
	
Gelles, R., and Cornell, P. C. (1990), Intimate Violence in Families (2nd edition), Newbury Park, CA:  Sage Publications, Inc.
	
Godwin, T. (1994, Special Issue), "Introduction to the Management and Collection of Restitution," Perspectives, 18:3, pp. 41-43.

Hartzell, D. (1996, December 23), "County to Pay Victims," The Morning Call, B1, B4.

Headden, S. (1996, July 1), "Guns, Money, and Medicine," U.S. News and World Report, 121:1, pp. 31-40.

Herman, J. L. (1981), "Father-Daughter Incest," Cambridge, MA:  Harvard University Press.
	
Hofford, M. (1991, September), "Family Violence:  Challenging Cases for Probation Officers," Federal Probation, pp. 12-17.
	
Hofford, M., and Harrell, A. V. (1993, October), Family Violence:  Interventions for the Justice System.  (Bureau of Justice Assistance Program Brief), Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance.
	
Hudson, M. F. (1986), "Elder Mistreatment:  Current Research," in K. A. Pillemer and R. S. Wolf, eds., Elder Abuse:  Conflict in the Family, Dover, MA:  Auburn House.
	
Immarigeon, R. (1996, October), "Families Know Best," State Government News, 39:9, pp. 22-23, 35.
	
Klaus, P. A. (1994), "The Costs of Crime to Victims," Crime Data Brief, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
	
Klein, A. R. (1994), Probation Manual for Domestic Violence Cases, Quincy, MA:  Probation Department.
	
Klein, A. R. (1996), Probation/Parole Manual for the Supervision of Domestic Violence Cases, Cambridge, MA:  Polaroid Corporation.
	
Klein, A. R. (1994), Spousal/Partner Assault:  A Protocol for the Sentencing and Supervision of Offenders, Swampscott, MA:  Production Specialties, Inc.
	
Koss, M. P., Koss, P., and Woodruff, W. J. (1991), "Deleterious Effects of Criminal Victimization on Women's Health and Medical Utilization," Archives of Internal Medicine, 151, pp. 342-347.
	
Lawrence, R. (1990), "Restitution as a Cost-Effective Alternative to Incarceration," in B. Galway and J. Hudson, eds., Criminal Justice, Restitution and Reconciliation, Monsey, NY:  Willow Tree Press, Inc.
	
Lord, J. H. (1990), Victim Impact Panels:  A Creative Sentencing Opportunity, Dallas, TX:  Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
	
Marshall, Tony F. and Merry, Susan (1990), Crime and Accountability, Victim Offender Mediation in Practice, London:  Home Office.
	
Martin, R., and Zimmerman, S. (1990), "A Typology of the Causes of Prison Riots and an Analytical Extension to the 1986 Virginia Riot," Justice Quarterly, 7, pp. 711-737.

Maxwell, and Morris (1995), "Family Group Conferences and Re-offending," Criminology, Aetearo a/New Zealand, 3, pp.12-13.

Miller, T. R., Cohen, M. A., and Wiersema, B. (1996, February), Victim Costs and Consequences:  A New Look, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
	
Milner, J. S. (1995), "Physical Child Abuse Assessment:  Perpetrator Evaluation," J. C. Campbell, ed., Assessing Dangerousness:  Violence by Sexual Offenders, Batterers, and Child Abusers, Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage Publications, Inc.

Ministry of Justice (1996), "Restorative Justice, A Discussion Paper," New Zealand:  Author.
	
National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (1995), Child Maltreatment 1993:  Reports from the States to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, Washington, DC:  U.S. Government Printing Office.  
	
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (1990), Family Violence:  Improving Court Practice, Reno, NV:  Author.
	
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1996), "Violence in the Workplace:  Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies," Current Intelligence Bulletin 57, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, p. 14.
	
National Center for Victims of Crime (1992), Crime Victims and Corrections:  Implementing the Agenda for the 1990's, Arlington, VA:  Author.
	
National Center for Victims of Crime (1996), 1996 Victims' Rights Sourcebook:  A Compiliation and Comparison of Victims' Rights Legislation, Arlington, VA:  Author.
	
National Center for Victims of Crime (1997a), Compendium of Promising Practices and Strategies for Victim Services in Corrections, Arlington, VA:  Author.
	
National Center for Victims of Crime (1997b), Victim Services in Corrections:  A Training and Resource Manual, Arlington, VA:  Author.
	
National Center for Victims of Crime (1997c), Responding to Workplace Violence and Staff Victimization in Correctional Settings, Arlington, VA:  Author
	
National Victims' Constitutional Amendment Network (1997), NVCAN State Victim Rights Amendments, Washington, DC:  Author.  Available on www:  http://www.mailbag.com/users/derene/StVras.htm
	
New Jersey Conference of Chief Probation Officers (1992), "Domestic Violence Supervision in Probation," Trenton:  Administrative Office of the Courts.
	
O'Ran, S. (1996), "The Criminal Justice Continuum," in J. N. Burnley, C. Edmunds, M. T. Gaboury, and A. Seymour, eds., National Victim Assistance Academy,  Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Office of National Drug Control Policy (1995, June), Drugs and Crime Factsheet, Washington, DC:  Author.
	
Onondaga County Probation Department (1991), Policy Memorandum (Policy # 91-9), Syracuse, NY.
	
Parsonage, W. H. (1990), Worker Safety in Probation and Parole, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
	
Pence, E. (1989), The Justice System's Response to Domestic Assault Cases:  A Guide for Policy Development, Duluth, MN:  Domestic Abuse Intervention Project.
	
Phillips, L. R. (1983), "Abuse and Neglect of the Frail Elderly at Home:  An Exploration of Theoretical Relationships," Journal of Advanced Nursing, 8, pp. 379-392.
	
Pillemer, K., and Frankel, S. (1991), "Domestic Violence Against the Elderly" (Chapter 7), in M. L. Rosenberg, and M. A. Fenley, eds., Violence in America:  A Public Health Approach, New York:  Oxford University Press.
	
Pithers, W. D., Martin, G. R., and Cumming, G. F. (1989), "Vermont Treatment Program for Sexual Aggressors," in D. R. Laws, ed., Relapse Prevention with Sex Offenders, New York:  Guilford Press.
	
Pranis, K. (1996, October), "A Hometown Approach to Crime,"  State Government News, 39:9, pp. 14-16, 29.
	
Rand, M. R. (1993), "Crime and the Nation's Households, 1992," Bureau of Justice Assistance Bulletin, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
	
Saunders, D. G. (1995), "Prediction of Wife Assault," in J. C. Campbell, ed., Assessing Dangerousness:  Violence by Sexual Offenders, Batterers, and Child Abusers,  Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage Publications, Inc.

Scott, L. (n.d.), Maricopa County Adult Probation Sex Offender Program, Phoenix, AZ:  Maricopa County Adult Probation Department.
	
Scott, M. J. (1996, October), "Righting Wrongs," State Government News, 39:9, pp. 17-21.
	
Seymour, A. (1996a), "Domestic Violence," in J. N. Burnley, C. Edmunds, M. T. Gaboury, and A. Seymour, eds., National Victim Assistance Academy, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Seymour, A. (1996b), National Victim Services Survey of Adult and Juvenile Corrections and Paroling Authorities, Arlington, VA:  National Center for Victims of Crime.
	
Seymour, A. (1996, October), "Putting Victims First," State Government News, 39:9, pp. 24-25, 35.
	
Shapiro, C. (1988), Making It Work:  Addressing Victim Concerns Through Community Corrections Programs, Longmont, CO:  National Institute of Corrections.
	
Sigmon, S., and Seymour, A. (1996), "Mastering the Information Age," in J. N. Burnley, C. Edmunds, M. T. Gaboury, and A. Seymour, eds., National Victim Assistance Academy, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Sinclair, J. (1994), "APPA's Public Hearings Explore Probation and Parole's Response to Victims of Crime," Perspectives, 18:3, pp. 15-18.
	
Smith, B. E., Davis, R. C., and Hillenbrand, S. W. (1989), Improving Enforcement of Court-ordered Restitution:  Executive Summary, Chicago, IL:  American Bar Association.
	
Sonkin, D. J. (1987), "The Assessment of Court-Mandated Male Batterers," in D. J. Sonkin, ed., Domestic Violence on Trial:  Psychological and Legal Dimensions of Family Violence, New York:  Springer.
	
Staff Safety Curriculum Planning Committee (1986), Federal Judicial Center, Washington, DC.
	
State Board of Control (n.d.), Restitution Information Package, Sacramento, CA:  State Board of Control, Revenue Recovery and Compliance Branch.
	
Tatara, T. (1993), "Understanding the Nature and Scope of Domestic Elder Abuse with the Use of State Aggregate Data:  Summaries of the Key Findings of State APS and Aging Agencies," Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect, 5:4, p. 35-57.
	
Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division (September 1996), Post Trauma Staff Support Program Operations Manual, Austin, TX:  Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division.
	
Umbreit, M. S. and Coates, R. B. (1992), Victim Offender Mediation:  An Analysis of Programs in Four States of the U.S., Executive Summary Report, Minneapolis, MN:  Citizens Council Mediation Services, MN Citizens Council on Crime and Justice, and School of Social Work, University of Minnesota.
	
Victim Assistance Legal Organization (n.d.), National Victim Assistance Academy:  Faculty Development Training Guide, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Walker, L. E. (1988), "The Battered Woman Syndrome," in G. T. Hotaling, D. Finkelhor, J. T. Kirkpatrick, and M. A. Straus, eds., Family Abuse and Its Consequences:  New Directions in Research, Newbury Park, CA:  Sage Publications, Inc.
	
Walker, S. D. (1996), "History and Overview of the Victims' Movement," in J. N. Burnley, C. Edmunds, M. T. Gaboury, and A. Seymour, eds., National Victim Assistance Academy, Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime.
	
Westchester County Department of Probation (n.d.), "Family Court Investigations,"  Policy and Procedures Manual, White Plains, NY:  Author.
	
Widom, C. S. (1989), "Does Violence Beget Violence?  A Critical Examination of the Literature," Psychological Bulletin, 106:1, pp. 3-28.
	
Widom, C. S. (1992, October), The Cycle of Violence (Research in Brief), Washington, DC:  National Institute of Justice.
	
Zeanah, C. H., and Anders, T. F. (1987), "Subjectivity in Parent-Infant Relationships:  A Discussion on Internal Working Models," Infant Mental Health Journal, 8, pp. 237-250.

Appendix A
Chapter on Supporting Crime Victims

Appendix B
Sample Model Victim Impact Statement Forms

Appendix C
Flow Chart:  Restitution Process, CA State Board of Control

Appendix D
Reparative Probation Boards

Appendix E
Sample Initial Victim Contact Letter for Domestic Violence Cases

Appendix F
Staff Workplace Violence Prevention Program Statement

Appendix G
OVC Training and Technical Assistance Center Fact Sheet and Application

Appendix H
Sample Brochure:  Victim Services Program -- CA Department of Corrections

Appendix I
Agency Contact and Resource Lists

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office for Victims of Crime

Promising Victim-Related Practices and Strategies in Probation and Parole

For copies of this publication and/or additional information, please contact:

Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center (OVCRC)
Box 6000
Rockville, Maryland 20849-6000
Telephone:  1-800-627-6872 or 
301-519-5500

E-mail orders for print publications to puborder@ncjrs.gov
E-mail questions to askovc@ncjrs.gov
Send your feedback on this service to tellncjrs@ncjrs.gov 

Refer to publication number - NCJ 166606