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: 140441 Find in a Library
Title: Risk Classification Systems and the Provision of Juvenile Aftercare
Journal: Crime & Delinquency  Volume:39  Issue:1  Dated:special issue (January 1993)  Pages:90-105
Author(s): J R Maupin
Date Published: 1993
Page Count: 16
Sponsoring Agency: Arizona Dept of Corrections
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Juvenile aftercare decisionmaking systems that classify parolees according to perceived risk and needs are designed to standardize the treatment of these individuals by juvenile parole officials. This article analyzes a system implemented in Arizona to determine if the intensity of supervision received by parolees differed as a function of classification score.
Abstract: The Arizona Juvenile Aftercare Decision-Making System was implemented in 1988, after extensive interviews with parole officers and a review of 16 different reassessment tools developed for use in probation and parole across the country. The system translates a set of characteristics about each juvenile into numerical scores which are then used to structure the discretion of parole officers as they provide aftercare services to parolees. Decisions controlled by the system fall into two broad categories: appropriate placement environment, inhome or nonhome, and intensity of supervision provided by the parole officer deemed appropriate for each juvenile. To evaluate supervision intensity, interviews were conducted with parole officers and parole supervisors, and a random sample of 280 juvenile parolees was tracked for 90 days. Findings revealed that intensity of supervision did not differ based on the classification score, suggesting that the Arizona system did not control the decisionmaking of parole officers. A primary obstacle identified by parole officers in accomplishing their daily tasks involved a lack of both time and resources. Organizational factors affecting the way parole officers use the decisionmaking system to allocate time among parolees are discussed. An appendix provides additional information on procedures used to examine the quality or intensity of juvenile parole supervision. 25 references, 2 notes, and 5 tables
Main Term(s): Juvenile offender classification; Juvenile parolees
Index Term(s): Arizona; Juvenile aftercare/parole statistics; Juvenile parole officers; Parole supervision
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.