Florida's Community Control Program is the nation's largest intermediate sanction (home confinement) program for felons. The question addressed in this research is the effectiveness of this sanction compared to imprisonment, as measured by recidivism. The rearrest, reconviction, imprisonment, and recidivism survival of the first cohort of convicted felons sentenced to Community Control were tracked for nearly five years and compared to the recidivism of a partially matched group of convicted felons released from prison. The findings from the research show that the recidivism rates and survival curves of the two groups are essentially the same. Approximately 4 out of 5 felony offenders sentenced to Community Control or prison recidivated during the five-year study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allison, P.
1984. Event History Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Andrews, D.
, I. Zinger, R. Hogue, J. Bonta, P. Gendreau, and S. Cullen. 1990. “Does Correction Treatment Work? A Clinically Relevant and Psychologically Informed Meta-Analysis.”Criminology28(3):369-404.
3.
Baird, C.
1988. Analyses of the Diversionary Impact of the Florida Community Control Program: Preliminary Report. Madison, WI: National Council of Crime and Delinquency.
4.
Baird, C.
and D. Wagner. 1990. “Measuring Diversion: The Florida Community Control Program.”Crime & Delinquency36(1):112-125.
5.
Banks, J.
, A. Porter, R. Tardin, T. Siler, and V. Unger. 1977. Summary, Phase I Evaluation of Intensive Probation Projects. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6.
Bartollas, C.
and J. Conrad. 1992. Introduction to Corrections. 2nd ed.New York: HarperCollins.
7.
Blumstein, A.
, J. Cohen, J. Roth, and C. Visher. 1986. Criminal Careers and “Career Criminals.” Vol. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8.
Byrne, J.1990. “The Future of Intensive Probation Supervision and the New Intermediate Sanctions.”Crime & Delinquency36(1):6-41.
9.
Byrne, J.
and L. Kelly. 1989. Restructuring Probation As an Intermediate Sanction: An Evaluation of the Massachusetts Intensive Probation Supervision Program. Final Report to the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
10.
Byrne, J.
, A. Lurgio, and C. Baird. 1989. “The Effectiveness of the `New' Intensive Supervision Programs.”Research in Corrections5:1-70.
11.
Carter, R.
and L. Wilkins. 1976. Probation, Parole and Community Corrections. 2nd ed.New York: Wiley.
12.
Clear, T.
, S. Flynn, and C. Shapiro. 1987. “Intensive Supervision Probation: A Comparison of Three Projects.” Pp. 31-50 in Intermediate Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement and Electronic Surveillance, edited by B. McCarthy. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
13.
Clear, T.
and P. Hardyman. 1990. “The New Intensive Supervision Movement.”Crime and Delinquency36(1):42-60.
14.
Cook, T.
and D. Campbell. 1979. Quasi Experimental Design and Analysis: Issues for Field Settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
15.
Erwin, B.
1987. Evaluation of Intensive Probation Supervision in Georgia. Atlanta, GA: Department of Offender Rehabilitation.
16.
Evans, J.
, L. Smith, and J. Hall. 1986. A Study of the Impact of Community Control. Tampa: Florida Mental Health Institute.
17.
Florida Department of Corrections
. 1985. Supplement to Community Control Implementation Manual. Tallahassee: State of Florida.
18.
Florida Department of Corrections
. 1988. Community Control: A Three Year Longitudinal Report. Tallahassee, FL: Department of Corrections.
19.
Florida Department of Corrections
. 1988. Annual Report 1987/88. Tallahassee, FL: Department of Corrections.
20.
Florida Department of Corrections
. 1992. Annual Report 1990/91. Tallahassee, FL: Department of Corrections.
21.
Joint Legislative Management Committee
. 1983. Laws of Florida. Chapter 83-131. Tallahasee: State of Florida.
22.
Joint Legislative Management Committee, Statutory Revision Division
. 1983. Official Florida Statutes. Chapter 948. Tallahassee: State of Florida.
23.
Maltz, M.
1984. Recidivism. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
24.
McCarthy, B.
1987. Intermedite Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement, and Electronic Surveillance. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
25.
Moberg, D.
and R. Ericson. 1972. “A New Recidivism Outcome Index.”Federal Probation36:50-57.
26.
Morris, W.
and M. Tonry. 1990. Between Prison and Probation: Intermediate Punishments in a Rational Sentencing System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
Pearson, F.
1987. Research on New Jersey's Intensive Supervision Program. Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice under Grant #83-IJCX-K027, Washington, DC.
28.
Petersilia, J.
1987a. “Georgia's Intensive Probation: Will the Model Work Elsewhere?” Pp. 15-30 in Intermediate Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement, and Electronic Surveillance, edited by B. McCarthy. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
29.
Petersilia, J.
1987b. Expanding Options for Criminal Sentencing. Santa Monic, CA: RAND.
30.
Petersilia, J.1990. “Conditions That Permit Intensive Supervision Programs to Survive.”Crime & Delinquency36(1):126-145.
31.
Petersilia, J.
and S. Turner. 1986. Prison vs. Probation in California. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
32.
Petersilia, J.
and S. Turner. 1990. “Comparing Intensive and Regular Supervision for High-Risk Probationers: Early Results From an Experiment in California.”Crime & Delinquency36(1):87-111.
33.
Petersilia, J.
, S. Turner, J. Kahan, and J. Peterson. 1985. Granting Felons Probation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
34.
Shinnar, R.
and S. Shinnar. 1975. “The Effects of the Criminal Justice System on the Control of Crime: A Quantitative Approach.”Law and Society Review9:581-611.
35.
Thornberg, D.
1990. “Opening Remarks by the Attorney General of the United States.” Presented at the National Drug Conference.
36.
Tonry, M.1990. “Stated and Latent Features of TSP.”Crime & Delinquency36(1):174-191.
37.
Tonry, M.
and R. Wills. 1988. Intermediate Sanctions. Preliminary Report to the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.
38.
Turner, S.
and J. Petersilia. 1992. “Focusing on High Risk Parolees: An Experiment to Reduce Commitments to the Texas Department of Corrections.”Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency38(1):34-61.
39.
Turner, S.
, J. Petersilia, and E. Deschenes. 1992. “Evaluating Intensive Supervision Probation/Parole (ISP) for Drug Offenders.”Crime & Delinquency38(4):539-556.
40.
U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO)
. 1990. Intermediate Sanctions: Their Impacts on Prison Crowding, Costs and Recidivism Are Still Unclear. Washington, DC.
41.
Visher, C.
, P. Lattemore, and R. Linster. 1991. “Predicting the Recidivism of Serious Youthful Offenders Using Survival Models.”Criminology29(3).
42.
Vold, G.
and T. Bernard. 1986. Theoretical Criminology. 3rd ed.New York: Oxford University Press.
43.
Wainer, H.1981. “Parameterization of Recidivism.”Evaluation Review5(6):810-821.
44.
Waldo, G.
and T. Chiricos. 1974. Work as a Rehabilitation Tool: An Evaluation of Two State Programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Final Report.
45.
Wexler, H.
, G. Faulkner, and D. Lipton. 1990. A Model Prison Rehabilitation Program: An Evaluation of the “Stay `n Out” Therapeutic Community. A Final Report to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. New York Narcotic and Drug Research, Inc.
