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: 77618 Find in a Library
Title: Demise of Wisconsin's Contract Parole Program
Journal: Federal Probation  Volume:45  Issue:1  Dated:(March 1981)  Pages:34-43
Author(s): O D Shade
Date Published: 1981
Page Count: 10
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Factors in the demise of Wisconsin's Contract Parole Program are examined, with emphasis on the program's cost effectiveness.
Abstract: The Wisconsin experience with the Mutual Agreement Program (contract parole) demonstrates that program planners and developers should be explicit about their goals, methods, and expected program outcomes. The program in Wisconsin failed because these three dimensions were not adequately forecast to meet the test of program evaluation. Evidence shows that the basic program goals were changed in 1974 when funds were sought from LEAA and again in 1977 when the program was included in the department's budget. When the program was evaluated in 1979, evidence showed that the Mutual Agreement Program was not as cost efficient as the regular parole board method of recommending parole release. The program was thus terminated because it was not cost effective in terms of producing shorter stays and curbing recidivism. However, the concept of contracting as an agent of planned change appears workable. Contracting could be implemented by existing staff without additional expenditures. A contract need not be more than a written statement of what an offender and the institution agree should be the goals for the offender's self-improvement and under what methods, timing, and conditions. Contracting for interested inmates does not necessarily require the direct involvement of the parole board or other specialized staff. Wisconsin policymakers have mistakenly discarded a useful concept on the basis of the failure of one effort to implement it. Efforts should be made to apply the concept under the traditional parole structure. Forms used in the Wisconsin program are appended, and six references are provided. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): Contract parole; Evaluation utilization; Probation or parole services; Program evaluation; Wisconsin
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.