skip navigation

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

  NCJ Number: NCJ 161838     Find in a Library
  Title: Key Legislative Issues in Criminal Justice: Intermediate Sanctions
  Document URL: Text PDF 
  Author(s): D Parent ; T Dunworth ; D McDonald ; W Rhodes
  Corporate Author: Abt Associates, Inc
United States of America
  Date Published: 1997
  Page Count: 6
  Series: NIJ Research in Action
  Annotation: This paper discusses the origins and goals of intermediate sanctions, their effects on crime reduction and criminal justice sentencing practices, and their costs; it concludes with an analysis of future policy issues.
  Abstract: Intermediate sanctions are intended to expand sentencing options that will better match the severity of punishment to the severity of the crime. They are also intended to permit more rational allocation of correctional and sanctioning resources to safely supervise petty offenders in community programs while confining serious offenders. The primary forms of intermediate sanctions are intensive supervision programs, home confinement, community service orders, prison boot camps, day fines, and day reporting centers. To date, use of these sanctions has not achieved anticipated benefits. Only a few programs in a few jurisdictions have been evaluated, and it is not clear whether evaluated programs fairly represent broader practice. Evidence suggests that intensive supervision programs and community service have not rehabilitated or deterred participants from committing future crimes any better than traditional sentencing options. Positive results on recidivism rates have been found for home detention and electronic monitoring. Boot camp research has been inconclusive. Problems with intermediate sanction programs may be attributed to design flaws, constraints in the local environment, and insufficient control over how and on what type of offender the sanctions are imposed. The cost of operating these programs has often exceeded expectations. In spite of mixed results on the effectiveness of intermediate sanctions, their continuation is warranted, because they enable more rational allocation of correctional and sanctioning resources. The availability of more alternative sentencing choices should limit the inappropriate use of either probation or confinement. 17 notes
  Main Term(s): Corrections effectiveness
  Index Term(s): Sentencing/Sanctions ; Corrections costs ; Intermediate sanctions
  Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America

US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
United States of America
  Grant Number: 94-IJ-CX-C007
  Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
  Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
  Country: United States of America
  Language: English
  Note: From National Institute of Justice Research in Action, January 1997.
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.