Opportunities for success: perceptions of intensive supervision probation with services

ABSTRACT

Probation remains at the forefront in relation to criminal justice supervision strategies. Many variations of probation exist, including intensive forms of community supervision for individuals classified as higher risk. Debate remains ongoing as to the efficacy of such forms of supervision, but most scholars agree that paired with services and treatment, community supervision at a variety of levels holds promise though the degree to which those under supervision agree remains in question. The current study examines the perceptions of those under an intensive supervision and services program, highlighting the experiences of 90 individuals participating in an intensive supervision with services program. Utilizing flexible coding and thematic analysis of responses to open-ended questions regarding the nature of supervision experiences, the results lend insight into what is perceived to be working – or challenging – regarding participation. Most participants indicated the structure, clarity, and service access promoted overall well-being and potential desistance, though structural challenges and time demands could limit the longer-term effectiveness of this type of supervision. These findings suggest probation programs may incorporate specific components to better supervision outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Probation
• perceptions
• corrections

Disclosure statement

This project was supported by funds from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority. Points of view or opinions contained within this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the State of Illinois or the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.

Notes

1. Supplemental coding and analysis by site did not reveal qualitative differences in program perceptions.

2. The nature of this data collection resulted in anonymity. While generally officers may be aware of who reported the day of data collection the research team has no way to connect any individual to the completed survey and the agency would be unaware of agreement or not to participate or overall completion in the research study.

3. On the whole, most individuals who initially expressed interest in meeting with the research team agreed to participate and completed the survey. We do not have a base estimate of the response rate (how many total ISP-S participants would be eligible) given the phase-based program and rough estimate of active individuals under this type of supervision.

4. There were a larger number of participants who completed the objective part of the survey. The current study only utilizes those who submitted at least one response to the short answer questions and were currently under ISP-S supervision.

5. A handful of respondents (n ~ 5) felt that they did not need to be in the program, and it did not correspond to their individual risk and/or need. As a result, those individuals were essentially existing in the program – though typically compliant – until fulfilling the required period of supervision – and had little response to the open ended survey questions.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.

Notes on contributors

Breanne Pleggenkuhle

Dr. Breanne Pleggenkuhle is an associate professor in the School of Justice and Public Safety at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. Her research interests focus on post-conviction experiences, with emphases on collateral consequences and the social and structural context of persons under correctional supervision, as well as community-based program evaluation.

Monica Summers

Dr. Monica Summers is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminology at California State University. Her research interests focus on women’s pathways to criminality, the experiences of incarcerated populations during and after incarceration, and domestic violence and sexual assault. She works on increasing accessibility to higher education in prisons and is currently teaching in-person classes in two California prisons. She also partners with several rehabilitative and reentry programs to aid incarcerated people in their journey back to the community.