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: 76977 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Implementing Community Corrections - A Study and a Rebuttal
Author(s): K Denhardt; D J Palumbo; E B Sharp; P Wright; P McManus
Corporate Author: University of Kansas
Ctr for Public Affairs
United States of America
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 56
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
University of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66045
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

University of Kansas
Ctr for Public Affairs
607 Blake Hall
Lawrence, KS 66045
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Showing why implementation of the Kansas Community Corrections Act (enacted in 1978) is failing, this monograph states that counties should be able to get grants from the State for small programs conducted on a trial basis.
Abstract: The monograph defines community corrections as an approach to handling offenders which has four elements: decentralization of authority from the State to local levels, citizen participation in program planning and policy-making, deinstitutionalization of offenders, and an emphasis upon rehabilitation through community programs. An assessment of the program is based on these elements, since it is not possible to evaluate it by using an aggregate measure such as recidivism or by measuring costs and benefits. An analysis of the act is conducted to show the sources of the implementation problems, and why counties are reluctant to implement the act. The act does not adequately provide for decentralization, citizen participation, deinstitutionalization, or rehabilitation of offenders. Also, it fails to provide unambiguous policy directives that structure the implementation process so as to increase the likelihood that target groups will perform as desired. Further, as it is now written, the act leads to several problems, some of which revolve around the interests of county governments. They include the tendency to take a 'wait-and-see' attitude, inclination to use the act to expand jail facilities, and the view that the State funds are inadequate. The monograph recommends changing the State's approach. The current act takes an all-or-nothing approach: counties must adopt a total program, or not participate at all. A categorical grant approach, modeled after the creative federalism policy of the 1960's, would enable counties to experiment with a variety of programs to see what works. As a result, counties would be much more likely to become involved in community corrections. A rebuttal, 2 footnotes, and 13 references are included. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): Community-based corrections (adult); Community-based corrections (juvenile); Kansas; State laws
Note: Center for Public Affairs Monograph Series, Volume 1, no. 1.
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.