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: 120379 Find in a Library
Title: Incarceration Diversion Unit of the Lucas County Adult Probation Department, Report Number Seven
Author(s): E J Latessa
Corporate Author: University of Cincinnati
School of Criminal Justice
United States of America
Date Published: 1987
Page Count: 49
Sponsoring Agency: University of Cincinnati
Cincinnati, OH 45221
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: The Incarceration Diversion Unit (IDU) in Lucas County, Ohio, was established in 1978 as the first program in the State designed to reduce the county's commitment rate without seriously increasing the risk to the community.
Abstract: The program, incorporating reduced caseload size and intensive service provision, does not accept convicts normally eligible for probation, non-probatable cases, transfer cases from other counties, or extremely dangerous offenders; shock probationers are included. Seven evaluations, covering an eight-year period and studying 372 diverted cases (the comparison group totaled 376), used goal attainment, cost-benefit analysis, and impact to assess the program. The activity objectives were measured through records of contacts, direct services, and collateral services provided by probation officers. Outcome indicators included continued criminal behavior, social adjustment, and employment, while impact indicators included commitment rates and cost estimates. Among their conclusions, researchers found that the IDU group reported more involvement with the criminal justice system than the comparison group; the IDU group had higher needs for vocational training, employment, education, drug and alcohol services, financial services, and mental health services; the IDU clients received significantly more contacts; the IDU group reported a higher rate of revoked probations than the comparison group although other recidivism data were similar; the IDU significantly reduced the county's commitment rate and saved over $2.6 million; the IDU showed an increase of 17.6 percent increase in employment compared to 3.7 percent for the comparison group. Increasing the number of client contacts and the IDU program referral rate to keep pace with the county's rising commitment rate, continuing to stress employment, and keeping community safety a high priority are recommended. 18 tables, 8 endnotes.
Main Term(s): Alternatives to institutionalization; Probation evaluation
Index Term(s): Cost/Benefit Analysis; Ex-offender employment; Juvenile Delinquency seriousness scales; Ohio
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.