JUNE 08 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

National Institute of Justice 

TOWARD CRIMINAL JUSTICE SOLUTIONS

HOPE in Hawaii: 

Swift and Sure Changes in Probation 

IN 

SHORT 

➡

NCJ 222758

THE ISSUE

A few years ago, the probation system in Hawaii 

was like many probation systems. Too many convicted felons routinely failed to show up for 

appointments with their probation officers. Many 

probationers declined to take mandatory drug tests 

or took them and failed. Probation officers had a 

hard time getting others in the criminal justice system to take their concerns seriously. Even the worst 

offenders among those on probation would have to 

commit many infractions before the police, probation officers and courts would take action. 

HOW IT WORKS

In 2004, a judge decided to take a new approach. 

Circuit Judge Steve Alm convinced the police and 

sheriff, local jail officials, probation officers, drug 

treatment professionals, prosecutors and defense 

counsel to collaborate on a “swift and sure punishment” program known as Hawaii’s Opportunity 

Probation with Enforcement (HOPE). 

The judge took a group of high-risk probationers, 

gave them “warning hearings” and told them that 

while the rules of probation were not changing, the 

old rules would now be strictly enforced. 

The judge also emphasized that everyone in the 

system hoped they would succeed on probation, 

but that for them to remain on probation, they 

would have to follow the rules. 

Those who violated the conditions of probation 

would be arrested. Probationers who failed a morning drug test would be arrested immediately, appear 

in court within hours and have the terms of their 

supervision modified to include a short stay in jail. 

To promote ongoing employment, probationers 

would serve their jail time on a weekend, at least 

initially. 

The court also assured those who needed drug 

treatment, mental health therapy or other social 

services that they would get the treatment they 

needed and were expected to attend and complete 

the program. 

The pool of probationers in the pilot program were 

“troubled” probationers who had been failing 

under a “business-as-usual” system. They included 

people who had been convicted of offenses including sex crimes, domestic violence and other druginvolved felonies. 

Perhaps the biggest changes Judge Alm made, in 

addition to the “warning hearings,” were new drug 

testing procedures and the handling of probation 

violations. Probationers had previously received 

notice of drug tests as much as a month ahead of 

time. Today, HOPE participants must call a hotline 

every weekday to learn if they must report for a 

drug test that day. 

In the past, a probationer might have eluded 

appointments with a probation officer, failed to take 

a drug test or failed to attend or complete treatment 

numerous times before facing possible revocation 

of probation and imprisonment for years. Today, 

probationers in the HOPE program face the 

prospect of being jailed almost immediately for 

violating probation terms. Jail terms are usually 

only a few days, but sentence length increases for 

successive violations. 

Office of Justice Programs • Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods • www.ojp.usdoj.gov 
2 

EARLY SUCCESS

According to Judge Alm, “the traditional paradigm—that if you keep violating, you might get sent 

to prison next year for 5 or 10 years—was not really 

working. The new paradigm is that if you test positive this week, you will go to jail this week.” 

The Hawaii legislature took notice of the success of 

the pilot program. They gave the court system 

more funding to expand the program so HOPE 

could handle a greater number of troubled cases. 

Researchers, also intrigued with the early successes, started a rigorous analysis of the numbers. 

Researchers from the University of California at Los 

Angeles and Pepperdine University are collaborating with the Research and Statistics Branch of the 

Hawaii Office of the Attorney General. They are 

conducting a thorough outcome analysis of HOPE 

participants in the Specialized Probation Unit, a randomized controlled trial in the General Probation 

Unit, a process evaluation of HOPE implementation 

and a full-cost assessment of the fiscal impact of 

the program. 

A few of the preliminary findings: 

■	 A group of methamphetamine-using probationers with records of poor compliance were put 

on the HOPE drug-testing-and-swift-sanctions 

program and given a formal warning by the 

judge. Overall the rate of missed and “dirty” 

drug tests went down by more than 80 percent.1 

■	 For 685 probationers who were in the program 

for at least 3 months, the missed appointment 

rate fell from 13.3 percent to 2.6 percent and 

“dirty” drug tests fell from 49.3 percent to 6.5 

percent.2 

■	 The success Judge Alm has had supervising 

offenders does not appear to be unique to him. 

When the nine other felony judges began 

supervising HOPE cases, their success was 

similar to Judge Alm’s.3 

The research study’s final report is expected in
 

December 2008. 


For more information: 


http://www.courts.state.hi.us - SpecialProjects/HOPE
 

1 Angela Hawken and Mark Kleiman, “What a Novel Probation Program 

in Hawaii Might Teach Other States,” The American Prospect, April 10, 

2007. 

2 Research and Statistics Branch of the Hawaii Office of the Attorney 

General, unpublished report. 

3 Research and Statistics Branch of the Hawaii Office of the Attorney 

General, unpublished report. 

*NCJ~222758*
 

This document is not intended to create, does not create, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, 

enforceable at law by any party in any matter civil or criminal. Opinions or points of view expressed in this document represent a 

consensus of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The 

products and manufacturers discussed in this document are presented for informational purposes only and do not constitute product approval or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Justice.