This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by TURNER, S. Articles by PETERSILIA, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Focusing on High-Risk Parolees: An Experiment to Reduce Commitments to the Texas Department of Corrections

JOAN PETERSILIA

This article presents the results of a randomized experiment conducted to assess the effects of Intensive Supervision Parole (ISP), a Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles program whose primary objective was to help alleviate prison crowding. The evaluation assessed program implementation, as well as the program's impact on offenders and system costs. Overall, the ISP results were the opposite of what was intended. The study found that ISP was not associated with fewer arrests, even though ISP offenders received more contacts than offenders on routine supervision. ISP was associated with increased technical violations, particularly in Houston, where the ISP model was implemented more fully. At the end of one year, about 30% of all ISP participants were in prison, whereas this was the case with about 18% of those on routine parole. Instead of saving the State of Texas money, ISP supervision turned out to be 1.7 times the cost of routine parole. The ISP program did however constitute an appropriate intermediate punishment, also an important Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles objective. If jurisdictions are primarily interested in providing much-needed flexibility in sentencing decisions by imposing an intermediate punishment that more closely fits the crimes of offenders, then ISP holds promise. If, however, they are primarily interested in reducing recidivism and system costs, then ISP programs, as currently structured—with a focus on surveillance as opposed to treatment—will likely fall short.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 29, No. 1, 34-61 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0022427892029001003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. McDougall, M. A. Cohen, R. Swaray, and A. Perry The Costs and Benefits of Sentencing: A Systematic Review The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May 1, 2003; 587(1): 160 - 177. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. J. Giblin Using Police Officers to Enhance the Supervision of Juvenile Probationers: An Evaluation of the Anchorage CAN Program Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2002; 48(1): 116 - 137. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Ryan Who Gets Revoked? A Comparison of Intensive Supervision Successes and Failures in Vermont Crime Delinquency, January 1, 1997; 43(1): 104 - 118. [Abstract]

				E. P. DESCHENES, S. TURNER, and J. PETERSILIA A Dual Experiment in Intensive Community Supervision: Minnesota's Prison Diversion and Enhanced Supervised Release Programs The Prison Journal, September 1, 1995; 75(3): 330 - 356. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. N. NURCO, T. E. HANLON, R. W. BATEMAN, E. TOLEDANO, and T. W. KINLOCK Policy Implications Derived from an Experimental Intervention Involving Drug-Abusing Offenders The Prison Journal, September 1, 1993; 73(3): 332 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Turner, J. Petersilia, and E. P. Deschenes Evaluating Intensive Supervision Probation/Parole (ISP) for Drug Offenders Crime Delinquency, October 1, 1992; 38(4): 539 - 556. [Abstract]