Community corrections as a social service

Community Corrections as a Social Service

With around 2 million Americans incarcerated in the nation's prisons and jails at a cost of tens of billions of dollars each year, policymakers are scrambling for alternative solutions and many have identified community corrections as a viable option. Using parole and probations programs, community corrections provide a valuable social service to the country by giving juvenile and adult offenders the opportunity to rejoin mainstream society in meaningful and productive ways that reduce recidivism rates and restore the integrity of the family unit. This paper reviews the relevant literature concerning these programs to demonstrate that community corrections represents an important social service that should be expanded to reduce prison and jail overcrowding rates and provide offenders with the chance they need to rebuild their lives. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning community corrections as a social service are presented in the conclusion.

Literature Review

While many Americans believe that community corrections programs are a fairly recent innovation, they actually date back to 1841 when the principles of John Augustus, "the father of probation," were first implemented in England and subsequently in the United States (Waters, 2003). Achieving definitional clarity with respect to community corrections, though, has been challenging for criminal justice practitioners, with some making the point only that, "Community corrections is not incarceration" however, it is also clear that "there are many programs providing more structured residential services that are more like traditional incarceration" (Evans, 1996, p. 124). Regardless of their specific format, though, community corrections programs are the most commonly used alternative for supervising most offenders who are released into some type of correctional supervision in the community (Waters, 2003).

Although structured residential services may resemble traditional incarceration, the defining characteristic of such programs is the administration of supervision for offenders in the community rather than traditional incarceration in some type of penal institution (Corrections and reentry, 2014). In most cases, community corrections programs exercise jurisdiction over juvenile and adult offenders through parole agencies which provide for supervised release from prison into the community and probation agencies which provide a community-based alternative to incarceration (Corrections and reentry, 2014). According to the definitions provided by Black's Law Dictionary (1990), parole is "release from jail, prison or other confinement after actually serving part of a sentence [and] is a conditional release from imprisonment which entitles parolees to serve remainders of terms outside of confines of an institution" (p. 1116). By contrast, probation is defined as "sentence imposed for commission of crime whereby a convicted criminal offender is released into the community under the supervision of a probation officer in lieu of incarceration" (Black's, 1990, p. 1202).

In the past, community corrections alternatives were generally available only to nonviolent offenders (Jackson & Russo, 2015). In recent years, however, even higher-risk offenders have been released from prison into some community-based parole programs due to overcrowded prison conditions (Jackson & Russo, 2015). In addition, community corrections programs have experienced significant changed in format and mission over the years. In this regard, Robinson (2009) reports that, "It is no stretch to say that the few community corrections programs that existed in the mid-1960s do not have a lot in common with the programs of today" (p. 8). Indeed, this assertion is supported by the transition that has been experienced in community corrections programming.

The forerunners to modern community corrections programs were primarily so-called "halfway houses" that focused solely on providing offenders with "three hots and a cot" while they conducted independent searches for employment and future housing options (Robinson, 2009). By sharp contrast, community corrections practitioners today apply evidence-based methods to their programming that typically includes mental health and medical care, case management, employment-preparation training, coping skills, substance abuse counseling, academic support such as the general education development diploma completion, and various faith-based interventions (Robinson, 2009).

Given the paucity of rehabilitative programming in the nation's prisons and jails, it is clear that community corrections programs offer a valuable return on investment by helping offenders change the direction of their lives by providing them with the tools, training and other resources they need to successfully transition back into mainstream society. Indeed, this primary focus on rehabilitation as a social service has even resulted in debate over whether community corrections authorities are best characterized as law enforcement officials or social workers (Waters, 2003).

Moreover, community corrections practitioners have increasingly recognized that there is no single, optimal "one-size-fits-all" approach to providing support services for offenders participating in community corrections programs and current practice typically includes thorough assessments and specialized programs based on individual needs and requirements (Robinson, 2009). In addition, growing numbers of community corrections programs are being accredited by the American Correctional Association (ACA) as evidence of their professionalism and commitments to the maintaining the highest standard of service (Robinson, 2009). For instance, according to the ACA's Web site, "ACA accreditation is intended to improve facility operations through adherence to clear standards relevant to all areas/operations of the facility, including safety, security, order, care, programs, justice, and administration" (ACA accreditation, 2017, para. 3).