A Decade of Experimenting with Intermediate Sanctions: What Have We Learned

1. A Decade of Experimenting with Intermediate Sanctions: What Have We Learned? Joan Petersilia, Ph.D. University of California, Irvine

2. 2/7/2012 2 Why Look Back Now? ISP�s have run their natural progression enthusiasm ? program design ? evaluation ? redesign or abandonment All scholarly research carries practical and political implications We should spell those out ourselves rather than leaving it to others The idea that academics should remain �above the fray� only gives ideologues license to misuse our work.

3. 2/7/2012 3 Questions to Be Addressed What did the ISP experiment consist of? Who did what, with whom, for what purpose? What did the evaluations show? offender recidivism, costs, prison crowding Most importantly, how is this knowledge guiding current practice?

4. 2/7/2012 4 Defining Intermediate Sanctions

5. 2/7/2012 5 Conclusions ISP experiment was--in numbers and dollars invested--more symbolic than substantive; But what WAS done revealed consistent findings about how programs MUST be redesigned for effectiveness; Those findings are core to the emerging �community justice� model in corrections.

6. 2/7/2012 6 Why Did ISP�s Emerge? South faced prison crowding in 1980; Georgia developed intensive probation They showed 5% recidivism, full employment, and significant cost savings Much publicity, other States followed RAND showed probation for felons in California threatened public safety recommended ISP�s for prison and probation crowding Morris and Tonry book provided conceptual framework, argued ISPs needed in principle for rational sentencing

7. 2/7/2012 7 Federal, State, and Private Foundations Helped Focus This Energy DOJ held national conference, Attorney General Thornberg endorsed ISPs Edna McConnell Clark funded State-Centered Projects NIJ, NIC, BJA cooperated in national demonstration, research, training, technical assistance

8. 2/7/2012 8 1985-95 Years of ISP Implementation and Evaluation Every large probation and parole agency implemented intensive supervision, electronic monitoring, house arrest, drug testing Most states also developed boot camps Many developed day reporting centers Some instituted day fine programs Dozens of books, articles, evaluations published

9. 2/7/2012 9 But Few Offenders Participated and Few Dollars Were Spent Fewer than 6% of 3 million adult probationers and parolees (P/P) on ISP 1% of P/P on electronic monitoring <10,000 total participants in boot camps <15,000 total participants in day reporting Estimate Less Than 10% of P/P ever on ISPs.

10. 2/7/2012 10 Intensity of Services, Surveillance, and CJS Response Seldom Matched Model Most of the planned treatment never got delivered Contact levels were about 2/month, instead of 8/month Few violations were acted upon jail space limited, judges didn�t prioritize ISP Langan found that, nationally, 50% of probationers were discharged without completing court-ordered conditions. �ISPs not rigorously enforced.�

11. 2/7/2012 11 Dollars and Priorities Were Inadequate Federal funds for research and demonstration <$10 million total over the decade NIJ�s budget at all-time low corrections budgets strained, affected jail and prison beds treatment programs: demand up, funds shrinking, p/p low priority Results might have been different with greater resources and systemwide focus e.g., more treatment, ability to respond to violations, serve warrants

12. 2/7/2012 12 Evaluation Findings ConsistentAcross Sites & Programs 1) ISP participants were not prison-bound but mostly high-risk probationers; 2) ISP�s were more watched closely rearrests did not decrease technical violations increased commitments to jail or prison increased 3) But, offenders who DID receive treatment PLUS surveillance had lower (10-20%) recidivism. Recent meta-analysis confirms.

13. 2/7/2012 13 Is ISP Evidence Is Being Used? Yes, to Redesign Programs OJJDP�s Comprehensive Strategy California�s $50 million Challenge Demonstration Kleiman�s Coerced Abstinence Proposal Governor�s Task Force in Wisconsin Boot Camps, ISPs, and Drug Testing Combine Surveillance + Treatment + Appropriate Response

14. 2/7/2012 14 ISP�s Legacy Is Contributing to �Community Justice� Models As P/P moved towards �tough supervision,� police were moving towards �softer� policing. Both involved proactive community building. Community meetings revealed resident�s fear of probationers and parolees Police could use p/p officers for their knowledge of hot spots, hot offenders, and legal authority concerning p/p conditions and warrants ISP officers emerged as key players in community policing efforts

15. 2/7/2012 15 Boston�s Operation Night Light Formal Police/Probation Partnership Praised by President Clinton in State of the Union address Initial strategy to reduce gang violence spreading to other crimes and locations Police and probation officers go out together, make home visits and corner stops to �non-compliant� probationers, serve warrants, enforce conditions With police help, probation becomes 24-hour a day reality Word is getting out that probation �counts�--judges supportive But it is more than surveillance Team meetings now include clergy, parents, schools Incorporate treatment and prevention programs, summer jobs Spreading across the nation

16. 2/7/2012 16 ISP Programs Helped Send the Message�. No one program, no one agency, can reduce crime. Crime is multi-faceted, and singularly focused interventions don�t work. Long term solutions probably come from community partnerships and not just offender restraint. We learn this lesson repeatedly, but if ISP experiments lend scientific evidence to this much-needed message, the money will have been exceedingly well spent.