Offender screeningfor classification has become increasngly popular in correctionalfield
services. The most common approach uses objective risk and need scales to classify
offenders, a strategy designated as "model" by the National Institute of Corrections.
However, adoption of this system raises managerial problems, especially concerning
selection of scale cutoffs and adoption of supervision standards. The significance of these
problems is illustrated in this article by data from several organizations currently engaged
in offender screening.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Administrative Office of the Courts, State of New Jersey (1977) An Evaluation of Supervision in Essex County Probation Department. Trenton, NJ: Administrative Office of the Courts.
2.
Arling, G. and K. Lerner (1980) Client Management Classification. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
3.
Baird, S.C. et al. (1979) The Wisconsin Case Classification Staff Development Project: A Two-Year Follow-Up. Madison: Wisconsin Bureau of Community Corrections.
4.
Bohnstedt, R. (1979) Screening for Risk: Classification Instruments for Criminal Justice Decisions. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
5.
Carter, R. and L.T. Wilkins (1979) Probation, Parole and Community Corrections. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.
6.
Clear, T.R. et al. (1981) "Objectives-based case management." Criminal Justice J.5,1: 69.
7.
--- ( 1980) New Jersey Case Management Project. School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University.
8.
Ford, C. and R. Johnson (1977) Probation Prediction Models and Recidivism. Correctional Manpower Services and Project. Springfield: Illinois Department of Correction.
9.
General Accounting Office (1976) Probation and Parole Activities Need to be Better Managed. Report to Congress, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
10.
Gottfredson, D. et al. (1981) Final Report of the Intensive Correctional Field Services Project. School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University.
11.
Gottfredson, S. and D. Gottfredson (1981) "Risk screening: a comparison of methods." Criminal J. and Behavior8, 1: 35-49.
12.
Gray, C. M. [ed.] (1979) The Costs of Crime. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Pub. Co.
13.
Jacobs, T. (1979) New York City Differential Supervision Project . New York: New York City Department of Probation.
14.
Monahan, J. (1977) "The prediction of violent behavior," in Report of the Panel on Deterrent and Incapacitative Effects. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
15.
New York City Department of Probation (1981 ) Differential Supervision Implementation Project. New York: New York City Department of Probation.
16.
Stanley, D.T. (1976) Prisoners Among Us. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
17.
von Hirsh, A. (1976) Doing Justice. New York: Hill & Wang.
18.
--- and K. Hanrahan (1979) The Question of Parole. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
19.
Wright, K. et al. (1981) "A critique of the universal applicability of the Wisconsin probation risk assessment instrument." Presented to the American Society of Criminology, Washington, DC, November.
