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: 220662 Find in a Library
Title: Standards in the Privatization of Probation Services: A Statutory Analysis
Journal: Criminal Justice Review  Volume:32  Issue:3  Dated:September 2007  Pages:233-245
Author(s): Christine S. Schloss; Leanne F. Alarid
Date Published: September 2007
Page Count: 13
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This research examined Missouri statutes that address private probation guidelines and compared them with States that authorize private probation.
Abstract: Analysis found statues lacking in standardization both between and within some States, but because the amount of detail within the statutes varied enormously, a comprehensive comparison could not be provided. Most private probation agencies supervise misdemeanor and municipal offenders; however, budgetary constraints in some States may push felony offenders into the hands of private providers as well. Probation supervision as a joint effort between State and private agencies could provide more extensive services with the cost at least partially paid by probationers. Mandating a set fee for supervision, and ensuring that all agencies charge at least the lower limits of the fee structure would also even out the requirements of supervision. If the fees were set and enforced, there would be a lower likelihood of agency competition for monetary compensation, and more focus on the actual services provided. A concerted joint effort could lower costs, encourage rehabilitation, mandate restitution, and increase community safety. In standardizing such guidelines and practices, extreme care should be taken to ensure that big business and political lobbyists do not influence legislators, and support company profits over the interest of the client or the general public. Through a statutory review of Missouri private probation guidelines, Missouri was found to have no statewide standardized guidelines for private agency approval, no requirements to provide any verification of fees collected, and an absence of educational and training requirements for private probation staff. Private probation agencies in Missouri are not required to carry insurance, and the current standards in place allow for wide discretion, inconsistencies, and possible conflicts of interest with treatment services provided by probation agencies. Other comparison States lacked standardization in offering private probation services. References
Main Term(s): Probation or parole services
Index Term(s): Contract probation; Laws and Statutes; Missouri; Private adjudication; Privatization in corrections; Standards; Standards implementation
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.