skip navigation


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 Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. 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: 115517 Find in a Library
Title: Michigan Prison Diversion Study
Author(s): T S Bynum; M A Morash; W S Davidson; J M Basta
Corporate Author: Michigan State University
School of Criminal Justice
United States of America
Date Published: 1987
Page Count: 268
Sponsoring Agency: Michigan Dept of Corrections
Lansing, MI 48913
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
Contract Number: 110-47-2208
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This three-phase study examined the feasibility of a prison diversion program in Michigan.
Abstract: Data were collected from official records, interviews, questionnaires, and a literature review to determine (1) the offender population most amenable to diversion, (2) the feasibility of community sanctions as alternatives to incarceration and judges' attitudes toward such sanctions, and (3) the experience of other jurisdictions with such programs and the phenomenon of net-widening. Offenders most likely to be considered for diversion are those serving sentences of 2 years or less. These are primarily low-risk, property offenders with several prior probation experience. In their sentencing practices, judges emphasized the dual goals of punishment and rehabilitation, felt that the severity of sanctions should escalate for recidivists, and expressed concern about the availability of community-based programs and resources. Of the alternatives, judges favored shock incarceration and intensive probation, although they also expressed some favor for jail authorization and electronic monitoring. A sizeable minority expressed nonsupport of community sanctions. Experience with alternatives in four States suggests that additional sentencing options can enhance community correctional programs and probation services. However, success of such programs has been mixed, and the majority of offenders participating in them has not been in the targeted population. Pilot testing is recommended. Chapter tables and figures and 85 references.
Main Term(s): Diversion programs
Index Term(s): Community-based corrections (adult); Judicial attitudes; Michigan; Model program adoption
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.