Chapter E: Community Supervision
At some level, all of the planning and preparation detailed thus far in the Report-from intake to institutional programming to transition to release decision-has been geared toward the time when a person leaves prison or jail and returns to the community. While the moment the facility opens its doors and a person steps over its threshold is undeniably monumental, the process of re-entry does not end there. Rather, time spent in the community following release is yet another dynamic part of the re-entry continuum. Even when conditions of supervision are carefully crafted before release, they may be tested by stresses in the community and should be revisited and revised according to new risk assessments and the consideration of other factors. The policy statements that follow provide for the modification of conditions of release based on changes in the individual, his or her circumstances, and the people touched by his or her re-entry, including family members and victims. In addition, they describe provisions and linkages that should be made, even for people who will not be supervised after release.
Although millions of people are under the jurisdiction of some community supervision agency at any given time (over 4.8 million adult men and women were on probation or parole at the end of 2003), few policymakers make smart use of their community supervision dollars by taking advantage of the extensive research available on "what works" from a public safety and public spending perspective. [1] The recommendations in this chapter are rooted in evidence-based practices: concentrating resources on the most critical time period (just after release) and on the most critical population (those who risk assessments show to be the most dangerous individuals); encouraging compliance with incentives; and responding to noncompliance with swift and sure, often community-based sanctions.
Maintaining community safety and promoting successful re-entry necessitates that state and local jurisdictions significantly rethink the role of community corrections officers. Instead of staying focused on catching probationers and parolees who violate their conditions of release, community corrections officers must focus on establishing tighter relationships with the communities where their parolees or probationers reside and partnering with families, law enforcement, health care providers, and others to achieve results which take all stakeholders into account and maximize public safety. Prison becomes, in this phase, not the inevitable answer to every violation but rather the most extreme sanction in a battery of responses that community corrections officers may employ to encourage compliance with conditions of release and, ultimately, a successful reintegration.
Policy Statements
- Lauren E.Glaze and Seri Palla, Probation and Parole in the United States, 2003, Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (Washington, DC: 2004), NCJ 205336. back