Study Guide - Final
Study Guide - Final CCJ 4497
Popular in Criminal Justice & Public Policy
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Criminology and Criminal Justice
This 14 page Study Guide was uploaded by Amanda on Wednesday April 27, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to CCJ 4497 at Florida State University taught by Clark in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 176 views. For similar materials see Criminal Justice & Public Policy in Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University.
Reviews for Study Guide - Final
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/27/16
Needs & Theory Evaluations “Silver bullet” solutions: Silver bullet means something that will very easily and quickly solve a serious problem. Size, location, trends, cause of problems: When you define a social problem you consider these. Causal relationships: Linear / & Nonlinear ~ Defining crime: You must look at crime and the criminal justice system Outcomes: Longterm. The ultimate changes thought to result from the outputs and/or the shortterm or immediateterm outcomes. What needs evaluations do: o Help to identify whether a problem exists and, in turn, whether and what type of a policy response is indicated. o Provide guidance on prioritizing different problems. o Point to research gaps that must be addressed before it can be determined that a policy response merits implementation o Highlight the dimensions relevant to assessing success o Clarify policy decisions Outputs: The actions, products, or services that define the policy Stages of conducting a needs evaluation: o Are existing efforts insufficient to address some social problem? o Are existing efforts not only insufficient but also amenable to correction? o In comparison to existing efforts, is a proposed or newly implanted policy a needed substitute or supplement? What a policy theory evaluation consists of: It consists of helping to explain how some specific policyrelated activities or services are expected to cause some intended outcome. Its main task is to describe nature and character of the policy, including its essential activities and how these activities should lead to come outcome. Conditioning factors: Characteristics of the policy environment – the policy (or target groups or areas) that directly, indirectly, or in interaction with other factors, affect activities, outputs or outcomes. Service utilization plans: Involves reference to such dimensions as how frequently clients will be contacted or treated, the duration of participation in or exposure to the policy, and the protocols that must be followed in executing different activities or providing certain services. Purpose of needs evaluations: To determine if there is a need for a policy. Why needs evaluations are important: o Identify if a problem exists o Determine if a policy should be retained o Type of policy response that should be considered o Prioritize problems o Highlight research gaps o Highlight dimensions of effectiveness o Clarify policy discussions and debates How the credibility of policy theory can be evaluated: o 1)Examine whether a policy theory targets a social problem that actually exists. o 2)Assess the logic and plausibility of a policy’s theory Are the goals and objectives well defined? Are the goals and objectives feasible? Is the change presumed in the theory plausible? Are the procedures for identifying members of the target population, delivering services to them, and sustaining the services well defined and sufficient? Are the constituent components, activities, and functions well defined and sufficient? Are the resources allocated for various activities adequate? o 3)Investigate whether social science theory or research exists to support all or part of the policy, especially its critical assumptions. Implementation Goals: o Implementation evaluations can be used for at least three purposes: They can help improve policy design and implementation They can facilitate performancemonitoring efforts and help to hold organizations and agencies accountable They can help inform interpretations of impact evaluations and any identified effects Types (names and what they mean/do): There are five types. o Formative evaluations refer to the use of evaluation to improve a program during the development phase o Process evaluations examine how well the services delivered match those that were planned o Descriptive evaluations provide extensive details about programs so their implementation can be compared across sites or replicated elsewhere o Performance monitoring evaluations connotes an ongoing system of measurement and feedback of program operations and results o Implementation analysis examines what happened to a policy after it has been formulated and during its implementation in realworld settings Why policy monitoring is important: Performance monitoring is essentially a variant of implementation evaluations. It consists of monitoring measures of program, agency, or system performance at regular time, intervals and reports them to managers and other specified audiences on a regular basis. Purposes: Implementation evaluations examine the activities associated with specific policies and practices and the extent to which the amount and quality of implementation accords with the ideals set forth in protocols, standards, or policy descriptions. Formative and summative evaluations: o Formative evaluation: Programs or projects are typically assessed during their development or early implementation to provide information about how best to revise and modify for improvement. This type of evaluation often is helpful for pilot projects and new programs, but can be used for progress monitoring of ongoing programs. o Summative evaluation: programs or projects are assessed at the end of an operating cycle, and findings typically are used to help decide whether a program should be adopted, continued, or modified for improvement. Dimensions of focus: o Delivery of services or activities Considers whether the services or activities associated with a policy reach or are accessed or used by the intended target population Services and activities can include treatment, training, crime prevention activities, arrests, sanctions, and community supervision o Operations Outcome/Impact evaluations What outcome evaluations do: o An outcome evaluation establishes whether a policy is associated with some intended outcome or set of outcomes Identify the types, levels, or changes in an outcome or set of outcomes and their association with some policy o Provides the initial groundwork for making causal claims, but provides little to no comparative framework for establishing causality Different between an outcome and an output: o Outcomes are the state of the target population or the social conditions that a policy is expected to have changed o Outputs are the services or activities undertaken by a policy What impact evaluations do: o An impact evaluation determines whether an association is causal They establish whether a policy not only is associated with outcomes but also whether it actually produces or causes them Attempts to determine what would have happened if a policy had not been implemented Components of service quality: (COULD NOT FIND) Why outcome and impact evaluations are important: o Outcome and impact evaluations can help to draw attention to and clarify the ultimate goals of a policy, and, by extension, the relevant criteria for judging policy performance. o Outcome evaluations can provide a relatively inexpensive platform from which to improve policy performance o Impact evaluations provide information about policy effectiveness and, in turn, can contribute to debates about which policies merit greater support and which do not o Outcome and impact evaluations help to ensure that scarce resources are allocated to policies with the best chances for producing returns Counterfactual (what is it, why does it matter when we are doing impact evaluations): o The most common counterfactual is to use a comparison group. The difference in outcomes between the beneficiaries of the intervention (the treatment group) and the comparison group, is a single difference measure of impact. This measure can suffer from various problems, so that a double difference, comparing the difference in the change in the outcome for treatment and comparison groups, is to be preferred. outputs and outcomes in the absence of the intervention. The counterfactual is necessary for comparing actual outputs and outcomes to what they would have been in the absence of the intervention. (FOUND ON GOOGLE) Costefficiency evaluations What do costefficiency evaluations allow us to do: o Allows us to assess our returns on criminal justice policy investments o Highlight whether a policy’s impact justifies the expense required to produce it o Inform and complement deliberations about whether policies should be implemented, continued, expanded, or terminated o Are central to creating a more accountable and effective criminal justice system Types of costefficiency evaluations: o Costeffectiveness o Costbenefit What costefficiency evaluations tell us about policies: o Provide guidance about how likely it is that a given policy or set of policies will produce substantial returns o Provide critical information for deciding whether to continue, expand, or terminate a policy What costeffectiveness evaluations are used for: o Costeffectiveness analyses identify the cost per outcome Used to determine which of several approaches is best for achieving a given outcome. What costbenefit evaluations are used for: o Costbenefit analyses identify, in monetary terms, policy costs and benefits Used to determine which of several approaches that target qualitatively different outcomes creates the most benefit relative to the cost. Steps of conducting a costbenefit analysis: o State the policy question – Should be derived from a needs evaluation, which will provide context for describing the specific problems and possible solutions o Identify the perspective of analysis – Different perspectives will produce different classifications of outcomes as costs or benefits o Identify costs and benefits – Involves the cataloguing of any cost and/or benefit related to the policy of interest o Assign values – Assigning monetary values to all identified costs and benefits o Compare costs vs. benefits of one or more policies – Summing all (monetized) costs and benefits then creating a bottomline assessment o Assess sensitivity and articulate limitations – Costbenefit estimates may be incorrect or sensitive to minor changes in assumptions about costs and benefits Limitations of costefficiency and costbenefit analyses: o Most are subject to the “house of cards” criticism They build on a wide range of implausible or untested assumptions, unreasonable time frames or discount rates, or incorrect cost and benefit estimates o “Garbage in, garbage out” Can include failure to account for selection bias and failure to identify unintended effects o Intangible costs and benefits Why sensitivity analyses are important: o A sensitivity analysis is a technique used to determine how different values of an independent variable will impact a particular dependent variable under a given set of assumptions. This technique is used within specific boundaries that will depend on one or more input variables, such as the effect that changes in interest rates will have on a bond's price. Sensitivity analysis is a way to predict the outcome of a decision if a situation turns out to be different compared to the key prediction(s). (FOUND ON GOOGLE) Genderbased programming Ways in which female offending differs from male offending: o Female offenders are less likely to have committed violent offenses and more likely to have been convicted of crimes involving alcohol, other drugs, or property Up to 80% of the female offenders in some state prison systems now have severe, longstanding substance abuse problems o Most female offenders are poor, undereducated, and unskilled o Twothirds of women incarcerated in the U.S. have children under the age of 18 o Nearly 80% of female prisoners had experienced some form of physical or sexual abuse o Women’s sentences are, on average, shorter than males’ How feminist theories of crime are different from “traditional” theories: o Theories are traditionally focused on male offending o Feminist theories suggest that the focus of gender goes beyond simply adding another variable to the study of female crime Examine female criminality as a reflection of the situations of women and girls in relation to offending Examine female offending as a reflection of the situations of women’s and girls’ lives and their attempts to survive Principles of genderspecific programming: o Five fundamental principles for effective genderspecific programming: Empowering women, Providing meaningful choices in programs and community facilities, Treating women with respect and dignity, Providing a physically safe and supportive environment, and Sharing responsibility among both correctional staff and members of the community (Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women, 1990) Female pathways to crime: o Daly (1992) found five female pathways to crime: o The street woman o The harmedandharming woman o The battered woman o The drugconnected woman o The economically motivated woman Empirical evidence regarding genderspecific programming: o A 2013 report by the National Institute of Corrections outlines the (limited) research on various genderspecific programs: Moving On – teaches women to access and mobilize varied community resources. Consistent with the emerging profiles of women offenders, it also works with women to enhance strengths, build healthy relationships, and target selfdefeating thoughts. A 2010 study in Iowa and found significant reductions in recidivism Helping Women Recover and Beyond Trauma – substance abuse treatment programs that combine addiction, mental health, and trauma recovery treatment. A 2010 study found that both programs significantly lowered return to prison rates for women (compared to a standard therapeutic program), and also had positive effects on psychological wellbeing Seeking Safety – cognitive behavioral therapy program for co occurring disorders (mental health, trauma, and/or substance abuse). Numerous studies have found reductions in suicide attempts and drug use and improvements in treatment retention, mental health, and PTSD symptoms (no specific recidivismrelated outcomes have been studied) Drug courts History/development/scope of drug courts: o Response to rising arrests for drugs during late 1980s and early 1990s o During the 1990s drug courts emerged as an alternative to incarceration for drug offenders o Judiciallyled nationwide grassroots efforts o Drug Courts Program Office established to develop more drug courts o Drug Courts are widely applied to adult criminal cases, juvenile delinquency and truancy cases, and family court cases involving parents at risk of losing custody of their children due to substance abuse Causal process model: Unintended consequences: o Drug courts are too limited in scope and duration and thus cannot create a significant impact on the drugcrime problem o Sanctions don’t help drug addicted populations because addiction compromises their ability to respond to choices in a rational manner o If drug use is not the sole or primary cause of crime in drug addicts, curbing drug usage will not necessarily reduce crime among addicts What types of offenders would not be eligible to participate in a drug court? o Eligible offenders include pretrial and postadjudicatory o Requirements may include drug testing, group counseling, AA/NA meetings, fees, restitution (in the form of police investigative costs), and/or state prosecutor fees. o So, anyone who does not fit these requirements would not be eligible. Empirical evidence on effectiveness of drug courts Also, what role the RiskNeeds Responsivity principles play: o A 2012 metaanalysis of 96 studies/reports (representing a total of 103 distinct drug treatment courts and 50,640 offenders) found that: Individuals who participated in drug court were 11% less likely to recidivate than those that did not participate Treatment quality matters Adherence to none, one, or two of the RiskNeedsResponsivity principles corresponded to a 5%, 11%, and 31% reduction in recidivism, respectively o A May 2013 report of Florida drug courts found that: Drug court participants were less likely to be rearrested for any new felony or for a new drug arrest, compared to individuals who did not participate in drug court Problems with implementing drug courts: o Potential problems successfully implementing a drug court program: Varied theoretical framework and designs Multiple strategies and services Collaboration and cooperation with diverse parties Investments that may not be adequately sustained over time o Without successful implementation of a program it is difficult for researchers to accurately determine the outcomes and impacts of the program Community policing History/development of community policing: o Community policing developed out of two major forces: Concerns about rising crime rates The national Civil Rights movement o These movements lead to increasing attention and funding for research and policy development Policing organizations became committed to improving policing methods Federally funded victimization surveys documented the existence of unreported crime. Social/technological changes that influence the social distancing of police from communities: o Social distancing: Reform era in government and nationwide move towards professionalization resulted in the separation of police from the community o Technological developments: 911 telephone systems o The prevailing ideology was that the professional knew best and community involvement in crime control was seen as unnecessary Kansas City Preventative Patrol Study: o Found that decreasing or increasing routine preventative patrol within the range tested had no effect on crime, citizen fear, community attitudes toward police, response time, or accidents. Community – and problemoriented policing models: o Community policing promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problemsolving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime. o Community Process: Trust Community contact Communication *Back to trust* o Problemsolving process: Public identification Problem solving Trust Information exchange *Back problem identification* Findings from Newark Foot Patrol Study: o Police could develop more positive attitudes toward community members and could promote positive attitudes toward police if they spent time on foot in their neighborhoods Community corrections Probations vs parole (definitions): o Probation: is a courtordered period of correctional supervision in the community, generally as an alternative to incarceration. In some cases, probation can be a combined sentence of incarceration followed by a period of community supervision. o Parole: is a period of conditional supervised release in the community following a prison term. It includes parolees released through discretionary or mandatory supervised release from prison, those released through other types of postcustody conditional supervision, and those sentenced to a term of supervised release. Churning effect: o Potential for a “churning” effect The process of “churning” describes the experience of offenders who are committed to prison, released on parole, returned to prison for either a technical violation of parole or for a new crime, and subsequently rereleased from prison on the original sentence. o Churning is a function both of technical violations and new crimes committed by exoffenders Types of supervision in Florida: o Court Imposed Felony Probation Drug Offender Probation Sex Offender Probation Community Control o Contractual Agreement PreTrial Intervention Drug Offender PTI o PostPrison Release Parole Conditional Release Addiction Recovery What works in community corrections: o Redefinition of agency goals and officers’ roles Correctional agencies need to shift to a mission of producing public safety through the success of supervisees o Graduated responses and incentives Providing a continuum of responses that includes both programming interventions and sanctions (such as an official reprimand from a senior supervising officer, more frequent reporting, a new curfew, or timelimited travel restrictions) gives officers the tools to respond to every violation while allowing them to continue interacting and working with their supervisees through difficult periods o Risk and Needs assessment tools: Risk assessment instruments measure the probability that a person will reoffend if or when released into the community. Needs assessments identify a person’s criminogenic needs, such as education, mental health counseling, or positive social peers. Supervision based on level of Risk The greatest return on corrections spending can be realized by supervising moderatetohigh risk offenders more intensively Supervision tied to Needs Unless officers understand the reasons why a parolee cannot maintain stable housing or keep a job, they cannot help change the situation What works in Florida: o NonSecure Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Over 92.2% of successful program completers are not recommitted to prison or supervision during their first year after completion o Secure Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Lower success rates than nonsecure substance abuse treatment programs, likely due to high risk offenders o Probation and Restitution Centers Moderately successful; 86.9% of successful completers have no recommitment to state prison o Jail Incarceration Programs Least successful program; 45.2% of successful completers are recommitted to prison or supervision What doesn’t work in community corrections: o Large caseloads 1970s: Parole officers supervised 45 parolees 2003: Parole officers supervised 70 parolees Probation officers supervised 130 probationers o “Onesizefitsall” conditions Standardized conditions apply to everyone, regardless of offense or perceived need; some conditions may be imposed that research has demonstrated are more harmful than helpful o Lack of differentiation in case supervision Decades of research confirm that overly supervising (by number of contacts, overprogramming, or imposing unnecessary restrictions) lowrisk probationers and parolees is likely to produce worse outcomes than essentially leaving them alone o Use of incarceration as a primary sanction In many cases, a return to jail or prison is unnecessary to protect public safety and may make things worse as serving time in prison has been shown to increase the risk of future offending, not to decrease it Effectiveness of community supervision in Florida. (Generally and FSU study on post prison supervision): o FSUFL Dept. of Corrections study o Findings: Split probation and community control are significantly better than no supervision Offenders were approximately 2530% less likely to be arrested or convicted of a new felony However, they were 3 times more likely to be returned to prison Offenders were 24% more likely to be employed after release o Conditional release supervision had mixed results relative to no supervision Offenders were between 2026% less likely to be arrested or convicted of a new felony However, they were also 3 times more likely to be returned to prison Offenders were about 20% less likely to be employed after release o Since the elimination of parole in 1983 there have been an increasing number of community supervision sentencing options o According to the Florida Dept. of Corrections: Approximately twothirds of inmates are released with no supervision to follow There were 143,809 offenders being supervised by Probation Officers on June 30, 2014 o Of those with supervision, probation or community control and conditional release were the most common forms. o Nationally: Of the 2.3 million probationers exiting supervision in 2009, only 65% completed probation successfully Of the 579,000 parolees exiting supervision in 2009, only 51% completed parole successfully o Florida: Generally, having supervision to follow a term of incarceration is a strong predictor of future reimprisonment for both male and female inmates The type and length of time on postrelease supervision matter in predicting success after prison release Theoretical foundations of community corrections: o Retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation The “typical” offender on community supervision in Florida o White male o 2534 o 3549 o With 0 prior supervision commitments o CHART BELOW
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'