Probation and Parole: Supervision

Offenders under correctional control in the community are generally given one of three general forms of supervision: (1) minimum, which requires little if any formal reporting; (2) regular, where the offender reports to a probation officer on a reoccurring basis; and (3) intensive, in which more stringent reporting requirements and other conditions are placed on the offender. An intensive supervision program (ISP) is most often viewed as an alternative to incarceration. Persons who are sentenced to intensive probation supervision are supposed to be those offenders who, in the absence of intensive supervision, would have been sentenced to imprisonment. Intensive supervision programs emphasize punishment of the offender and control of the offender in the community at least as much as they do rehabilitation. Further, contemporary programs are designed to meet the primary goal of easing the burden of prison overcrowding. No two jurisdictions define intensive supervision in exactly the same way. However, one characteristic of all ISP programs is that they provide for very strict terms of probation. This increased level of control is usually achieved through reduced case loads, increased number of contacts, and a range of required activities for participating offenders that can include victim restitution, community service, employment, random urine and alcohol testing, electronic monitoring, and payment of a probation supervision fee. Intensive supervision programs vary in terms of the number and type of contacts per month, case load size, type of surveillance conducted, and services offered.

In an article summarizing the state of ISP, Fulton and others (p. 72) summarize what we know from the research concerning intensive supervision programs:

• ISPs have failed to alleviate prison crowding.
• Most ISP studies have found no significant differences between recidivism rates of ISP offenders and offenders with comparison groups.
• There appears to be a relationship between greater participation in treatment and employment programs and lower recidivism rates.
• ISPs appear to be more effective than regular supervision or prison in meeting offenders' needs.
• ISPs that reflect certain principles of effective intervention are associated with lower rates of recidivism.
• ISP does provide an intermediate punishment.