The majority of adults in the U.S. correctional system are not incarcerated in jail or prisons; in fact, 60% of adults under correctional supervision are on probation (Glaze and Palla 2005). Probation is the conditional release of a convicted offender into the community under the supervision of an officer of the court. Probation is a conditional sentence—in other words, an individual’s probation can be revoked if he or she commits a new crime or if other conditions specified by the court are not met (Schmalleger and Smykla 2005). The goal of probation is to punish and deter offenders while reintegrating them into the community without exposing them to the negative environment of incarceration in prison. Supervision and conditions of probation help ensure crime control as well. Parole is the conditional release of a prisoner, prior to the completion of the sentence imposed by the sentencing authority, under the supervision of a parole officer (Schmalleger and Smykla 2005). Parole is usually granted from authorities within the correctional system after completion of some length of incarceration in prison. Probation is a sentence from a judicial officer that generally does not require incarceration in prison as part of that sanction.
Probation and parole provide alternatives to future incarceration for probationers and further incarceration for parolees. While probation serves those who have the potential of going to jail and parole serves those who are already in jail or prison, the overall function for both is to release offenders into the community, decrease incarceration, and still carry out the sanctions of the court.
Under both probation and parole, conditions are placed on the release of the offender into the community. These conditions generally fall into two categories. Standard conditions are those constraints imposed on all probationers and parolees in a given jurisdiction. Standard conditions typically require probationers and parolees to attend meetings with their supervising officers, seek permission from their supervising officer prior to leaving jurisdiction, and seek and/or maintain stable employment. Punitive conditions are those constraints imposed on some probationers or parolees to increase the restrictiveness of their sentence in an effort to make that probationer or parolee more likely to successfully complete their sentence. Examples include fines, community service, and restrictions associating with certain types of people. If these conditions are violated, probation or parole can be revoked and the offender can be sentenced to incarceration. Violation of these conditions is considered a technical violation. For both parole and probation, offenders are more likely to have their sentence revoked for a technical violation than for commission of a new criminal offense.
Probation in the United States dates back to the nineteenth century when John Augustus, a Boston shoemaker, began posting bail and paying fines for carefully selected offenders who were released to him for a term of approximately thirty days. In 1880, Massachusetts created the first statute authorizing statewide probation in the United States. Other states followed Massachusetts and by 1925, every state and every federal court district offered probation (Schmalleger and Smykla 2005).
The concept of parole is often attributed to British Navy Captain Alexander Maconochie, superintendent of a penal colony in Australia in the early 1840s. Maconochie implemented a ”ticket of leave” system whereby inmates earned marks toward release by demonstrating improved behavior and good work habits. As such, inmates could earn early release from their penal duties by demonstrating that they were rehabilitating themselves. Sir Walter Crofton replicated Macono-chie’s ideas in Ireland in the 1850s; the Elmira Reformatory in New York was the first correctional institution in the United States to implement an extensive parole system in 1876. By 1889, twelve states had implemented parole programs, and by 1944, all forty-eight states had enacted parole legislation (Schmalleger and Smykla 2005).
On December 31, 2004, there were 4,151,125 people on probation and 765,355 people on parole in the United States. Of the 6,996,500 people under correctional supervision, almost 60% were on probation and slightly more than 10% were on parole. Half of all probationers were convicted of a misdemeanor and half were convicted of a felony. One in four probationers was on probation for a drug violation and 15% were on probation for driving while intoxicated. Three in four probationers were male and slightly more than half were white. About 60% of those eligible successfully completed their probation sentence in 2004 (Glaze and Palla 2005).
At the end of 2004, one in eight parolees (12%) was female; approximately equal percentages were white (40%) and black (41%). Approximately equal percentages of parolees (24% and 26%, respectively) were serving a sentence for violent and property offenses. One in three parolees (38%) was serving a sentence for a drug offense. Less than half (46%) of those eligible successfully completed their parole in 2004 (Glaze and Palla 2005).
Currently, offenders typically receive one of four types of probation. First, an offender can be sentenced to traditional probation in which he or she receives a suspended incarceration sentence and conditional release into the community. A second alternative is known as a split sentence, in which the court specifies a period of incarceration that will be followed by probation. An offender can also have his or her incarcerative sentence converted to a probation sentence. Through intermittent incarceration, it is also possible for an offender on probation to spend weekdays in the community and nights and/or weekends in jail. Finally, offenders can also receive shock incarceration. Under shock incarceration, offenders are sentenced to incarceration. After a short period of incarceration, they are then sentenced to probation. Because the offenders are unaware that they will be sentenced to probation instead of prison, the period of incarceration is used to ”shock” them into complying with the rules of probation upon their release from incarceration.
Inmates are generally released to parole under one of two strategies. Discretionary release occurs when a paroling authority, generally known as a parole board, considers the case of an incarcerated offender and decides to release the offender to parole. The paroling authority’s decision is based on some combination of the potential risk to the community, the inmate’s institutional behavior and program participation, and the nature of the inmate’s offense and prior criminal record. Historically, most states used this type of parole supervision until the 1980s when some states moved to mandatory supervised release. Mandatory release has become the most common method of release to parole today. Under mandatory release, inmates are given their conditional release from prison after serving a portion of their original sentence less the ”good time” credits. These good time credits are reductions to an inmate’s sentence given to the inmate for avoiding serious misconduct in prison or participating in various types of programs. These credits are generally given automatically. Thus, even with the move from discretionary parole, most inmates do not serve their entire prison sentence in an incarcerative setting and spend some time on parole in the community (Schmalleger and Smykla 2005).
Although there are numerous similarities between parole and probation, there are also two key differences. First, parolees are felons who are sentenced to confinement and are being granted early release from confinement; probationers may be felons or misdemeanants and are typically not sentenced to confinement as part of their probation. Second, parole supervision is generally more intensive than supervision for probationers.
Probation and parole offices vary in the jurisdiction and the branch of government that control them. With a centralized system, all of the probation offices in a state are administered by the state. In a decentralized system, the city or county has control over the probation office. The judicial branch still supervises probation in some jurisdictions but most jurisdictions are currently under the supervision of the executive branch. The executive branch is almost always responsible for supervision of parolees.
The shift of control to the executive branch has brought a shift in the focus of probation. While the original model of probation focused on humanitarianism and rehabilitation of offenders, today’s model focuses on law enforcement and risk management. This has led the probation officer to become more of a law enforcement officer than a caseworker. Today, probation officers often have minimum contact with probationers. Probation officers often have role conflict because they are expected to exercise the power of the law but often do not have arrest powers, are not armed, and are powerless to revoke probation. As such, they often have to rely on authority rather than power.
The shift toward law enforcement is also reflected in the new role of the probation officer as a presentence investigator. Through a presentence investigation (PSI) report, probation officers provide detailed findings from an investigation of the convicted offender that includes such things as the offender’s family and employment history, criminal record, and financial information. This information is collected through official records and interviews of the offender and the offender’s family and acquaintances. The report also includes a statement from the victim and a sentence recommendation to the sentencing authority. The final report not only aids the court in determining the appropriate sentence, but also aids probation officers in supervisory efforts during probation or parole, assists prison officials in classification, furnishes background information for parole decisions, and serves as a source of information for research.
