Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:07 pm
Time: 12:07 pm
Results for low-risk offenders
2 results foundAuthor: Jannetta, Jesse Title: Kiosk Supervision for the District of Columbia Summary: The majority of people involved with the criminal justice system are under community supervision. In 2009, 5 million of the 7.2 million individuals under some form of criminal justice system control were supervised in the community (Glaze 2010). Although all individuals under supervision are required to report regularly to their supervising officer, the intensity and structure of supervision varies considerably according to the risk of reoffense. Managing this population to facilitate their success in becoming law-abiding citizens is a huge challenge for community supervision agencies across the country as they struggle to distribute scarce resources across their supervised population without diluting interventions and monitoring to the point of ineffectiveness. Providing the appropriate level of supervision and intensity of treatment based on an individual’s assessed risk and need is the key to meeting that challenge. One supervision method that states and localities across the nation have adopted to supervise low-risk offenders and pretrial defendants efficiently is kiosk supervision. Kiosk systems can replace in-person reporting requirements, are convenient for both supervisees and supervision agencies, and help shift resources to moderate- and high-risk probationers and parolees who need more intensive interventions and monitoring. With supervision budgets under increasing stress and caseloads rising, these aspects of kiosk supervision systems are highly attractive. In 2008, the Court Supervision and Offender Services Agency for the District of Columbia (CSOSA) set out to implement a kiosk reporting pilot program for the probationers and parolees the agency supervises. CSOSA engaged the Urban Institute to conduct an outcome evaluation of the pilot. Due to software integration problems, implementation was delayed, and the Urban Institute instead conducted a simulated analysis. The simulation was designed to identify, if possible, low-risk offenders who posed the same risk whether supervised passively (i.e., with a minimal compliance reporting requirement or Kiosk reporting) or actively (i.e., in-person reporting to community supervision officers). After the simulation analysis was complete, the Urban Institute co-sponsored (with the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for the District of Columbia) a symposium titled The Risk Principle in Action: Right-Sizing Supervision Monitoring for High- and Low-Risk Offenders. The symposium presented an overview of research on kiosk supervision for low-risk supervisees and global positioning system (GPS) monitoring for higher-risk offenders as examples of different technology-based approaches used to allocate supervision resources according to offender risk level. Local criminal justice leaders joined the symposium to address issues raised and discuss implications for the future direction of practice in the District. This brief draws upon and summarizes findings from both the simulation and the symposium. It discusses the capabilities of kiosk supervision technology, how kiosk supervision fits within a broader risk reduction supervision strategy, challenges of kiosk implementation, and empirical evidence regarding kiosk supervision impacts. It concludes with recommendations for implementation of a kiosk supervision system in the District of Columbia. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2011 at: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412314-Kiosk-Supervision-DC.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412314-Kiosk-Supervision-DC.pdf Shelf Number: 121149 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationLow-Risk OffendersOffender Supervision (Washington, D.C.)ParoleesPretrial DefendantsProbationers |
Author: Florida. Legislature. Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability Title: Diverting Low-Risk Offenders from Florida Prisons Summary: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2018, Florida had 143 prison facilities, including 50 major institutions housing 96,253 inmates. Florida's inmate population is the third largest state prison population in the United States. The Florida Department of Corrections' total budget for Fiscal Year 2017-18 was $2.4 billion, with the estimated cost to house an inmate at $59.57 per day, or $21,743 annually. Over the past 8 years, both admissions to prison and prison population have decreased. However, Florida continues to have the 10th highest incarceration rate in the United States at 500 per 100,000. There are multiple points at which offenders can be diverted from the path between arrest and prison, and Florida currently uses many of these diversion programs. Diversion programs include pretrial intervention, plea bargaining, problem-solving courts, and probation. Probation and plea bargaining are the most utilized types of diversion in Florida. Our analysis finds that there are additional lowerrisk offenders who could be diverted from prison, which could likely result in reduced recidivism and long-term cost savings. As such, the Legislature may want to consider various options for diverting additional offenders from prison. This review answers five questions: - How are offenders sentenced in Florida? - What factors influence Florida’s incarceration rate? - How does prison diversion occur in Florida? - Are there low-risk offenders who could be diverted from prison? - What options exist for diverting low-risk offenders from prison? Details: Tallahassee. Florida: The Florida Legislature, Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, 2019. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 3, 2019 at: http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/summary.aspx?reportnum=19-01 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/MonitorDocs/Reports/pdf/1901rpt.pdf Shelf Number: 154754 Keywords: Incarceration RateLow-Risk OffendersOffenderPlea BargainingPrisonProbation |