This article presents the results of a study that examined the 18-month recidivism of juvenile felony offenders who were placed into an intensive supervision program in lieu of commitment to an institution. The study used a quasi-experimental design to compare the outcomes of intensive supervision program (ISP) participants with those of youth who were incarcerated and then released to parole, and with a group of felony offenders who were handled on regular probation. Results show that, although not a panacea, intensive supervision clearly is an effective alternative to incarceration. However, ISP cost-effectiveness is difficult to achieve without large-scale diversion.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Altschuler, David
and Troy Armstrong. 1990. Intensive Community-Based Aftercare Programs: Assessment Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2.
Armstrong, Troy
. 1988. “National Survey of Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision, Parts I and II.”Criminal Justice Abstracts2:342-348; 497-523.
3.
Armstrong, Troy
. 1991. “Introduction.” Pp. 1-25 in Intensive Interventions With High-Risk Youth: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole, edited by T. Armstrong. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
4.
Baird, S. Christopher
. 1991. “Intensive Supervision Programs for High-Risk Juveniles: Critical Issues of Program Evaluation.” Pp. 295-316 in Intensive Interventions With High-Risk Youth: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole, edited by T. Armstrong. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
5.
Baird, S. Christopher
and Dennis Wagner. 1990. Evaluation of the Florida Community Control Program. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
6.
Banks, J.
, A. L. Porter, R. L. Rardin, R. R. Siler, and V. E. Unger. 1977. Summary: Phase I Evaluation of Intensive Special Probation Projects. Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.
7.
Barton, William H.
and Jeffrey A. Butts. 1990. “Viable Options: Intensive Supervision Programs for Juvenile Delinquents.”Crime & Delinquency36:238-256.
8.
Bennett, Lawrence E.
1987. “A Reassessment of Intensive Service Probation.” Pp. 113-132 in Intermediate Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement and Electronic Surveillance, edited by B. McCarthy. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
9.
Byrne, James M.
and Linda Kelley. 1989. Restructuring Probation as an Intermediate Sanction: Evaluation of the Massachusetts Intensive Probation Supervision Program. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
10.
Byrne, James M.
, Arthur J. Lurigio, and S. Christopher Baird. 1989. “The Effectiveness of the New Intensive Supervision Programs.”Research in Corrections2:1-48.
11.
Clear, Todd R.
and Patricia L. Hardyman. 1990. “The New Intensive Supervision Movement.”Crime & Delinquency36:42-60.
12.
Deschenes, Elizabeth
. 1989. “The Skillman Intensive Aftercare Project.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Reno, NV, November.
13.
Empey, LaMar T.
and Maynard L. Erickson. 1972. The Provo Experiment: Evaluating Community Control of Delinquency. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
14.
Empey, LaMar T.
and Steven G. Lubeck. 1971. The Silverlake Experiment: Testing Delinquency Theory and Community Intervention. Chicago: Aldine.
15.
Erwin, Billie S.
1987. Evaluation of Intensive Probation Supervision in Georgia. Atlanta: Department of Corrections.
16.
Erwin, Billie S.
and Lawrence E. Bennett. January 1987. “New Dimensions in Probation: Georgia's Experience with Intensive Probation Supervision.”Research in Brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
17.
Fagan, Jeffrey A.1990. “Treatment and Reintegration of Violent Juvenile Offenders: Experimental Results.”Justice Quarterly7:233-263.
18.
Feinberg, Norma
. 1991. “Juvenile Intensive Supervision: A Longitudinal Evaluation of Program Effectiveness.” Pp. 423-447 in Intensive Interventions with High-Risk Youth: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole, edited by T. Armstrong. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
19.
Finckenauer, James O.
1982. Scared Straight! and the Panacea Phenomenon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.
Grunewald, Paul
, S. Laurence, and B. West. 1985. National Evaluation of the New Pride Replication Program: Executive Summary. Walnut Creek, CA: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation.
21.
Krisberg, Barry
, Orlando Rodriguez, Audrey Bakke, Deborah Neuenfeldt, and Patricia Steele. 1989. Demonstration of Post-Adjudication Non-Residential Intensive Supervision Programs: Assessment Report. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
22.
Krisberg, Barry
, Ira M. Schwartz, Paul Litsky, and James Austin. 1986. “The Watershed of Juvenile Justice Reform.”Crime & Delinquency32:5-38.
23.
Latessa, Edward
. 1987. “The Effectiveness of Intensive Supervision with High Risk Probationers.” Pp. 99-112 in Intermediate Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement and Electronic Surveillance, edited by B. McCarthy. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
24.
Lerman, Paul
. 1975. Community Treatment and Social Control: A Critical Analysis of Juvenile Correctional Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
McGarrell, Edmund F.1991. “Differential Effects of Juvenile Justice Reform on the Incarceration Rates of the States.”Crime & Delinquency37:262-280.
26.
Murray, Charles A.
and Louis A. Cox Jr. 1979. Beyond Probation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
27.
Ohlin, Lloyd E.
, Alden D. Miller, and Robert B. Coates. 1977. Juvenile Correctional Reform in Massachusetts. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
28.
Palmer, Ted
. 1974. “The Youth Authority's Community Treatment Project.”Federal Probation38:3-14.
29.
Pearson, Frank S.
1987. Research on New Jersey's Intensive Supervision program. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
30.
Petersilia, Joan
and Susan Turner. 1990. “Comparing Intensive and Regular Supervision for High-Risk Probationers: Early Results from an Experiment in California.”Crime & Delinquency36:87-111.
31.
Sametz, Lynn
and Donna M. Hamparian. 1989. Innovative Programs in Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court: Intensive Probation Supervision and Probation Classification. Cleveland, OH: Federation for Community Planning.
32.
Sontheimer, Henry
, Lynn Goodstein, and Michael Kovacevic. 1990. Philadelphia Intensive Aftercare Probation Evaluation Project. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency.
33.
Tonry, Michael
. 1990. “Stated and Latent Functions of ISP.”Crime & Delinquency36:174-191.
34.
Wagner, Dennis
. 1989. “Reducing Criminal Risk: An Evaluation of the High Risk Offender Intensive Supervision Project.”Perspectives13(3):22-27.
35.
Wiebush, Richard G.
1989. An Assessment of the Delaware County Intensive Supervision Program. Columbus: Ohio Governor's Office of Criminal Justice Services.
36.
Wiebush, Richard G.
1991. Evaluation of the Lucas County Intensive Supervision Unit: Diversionary Impact and Youth Outcomes. Columbus: Ohio Governor's Office of Criminal Justice Services.
37.
Wiebush, Richard G.
and Donna M. Hamparian. 1991. “Variations in `Doing' Juvenile Intensive Supervision: Programmatic Issues in Four Ohio Jurisdictions.” Pp. 153-188 in Intensive Interventions with High-Risk Youth: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole, edited by T. Armstrong. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
