Studies that have examined absconding have pointed to the relevance of factors related to demographics, situational, and social characteristics, as well as criminal history variables as predictive of offenders’ decision to abscond. This study contributes to this literature by extending factors that have been explored for criminal justice outcomes such as recidivism to predict the likelihood of absconding. In particular, this study incorporates the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) risk assessment instrument and types of violations to examine their impact on the likelihood of absconding. Using a large sample of parolees from Colorado (n = 30,181), the findings in this study indicate that the largest predictors of absconding were substance abuse problems and education. In addition, variables measuring the components of the LSI-R and specific nonabsconding parole violations moderately predict absconding. The implications of the findings and recommendations for future research are discussed.
AllisonP. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
2.
AndersonD. C. (1995). Crime and the politics of hysteria: How the Willie Horton story changed American justice. New York, NY: Random House.
3.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (1995). LSI-R: The Level of Service Inventory–Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
4.
ButtarsA.HussM. T.BrackC. (2015). Sex offender risk assessment: A reexamination of the coffee can study. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 42-43, 31-36.
5.
CaudyM. S.DursoJ. M.TaxmanF. S. (2013). How well do dynamic needs predict recidivism? Implications for risk assessment and risk reduction. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 458-466.
6.
ChenaneJ. L.BrennanP. K.SteinerB.EllisonJ. M. (2015). Racial and ethnic differences in the predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised among prison inmates. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 286-303.
7.
EnnsP. K. (2014). The public’s increasing punitiveness and its influence on mass incarceration in the United States. American Journal of Political Science, 58, 857-872.
8.
GaesG. G.KendigN. (2002). From prison to home: The effect of incarceration and reentry on children, families, and communities: The skill sets and health care needs of released offenders. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
9.
GrattetR.LinJ. (2016). Supervision intensity and parole outcomes: A competing risks approach to criminal and technical parole violations. Justice Quarterly, 33, 565-583.
10.
GrattetR.LinJ.PetersiliaJ. (2011). Supervision regimes, risk, and official reactions to parolee deviance. Criminology, 49, 371-399.
11.
HairJ. F.Jr.AndersonR. E.TathamR. L.BlackW. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis. New York, NY: Macmillan.
12.
HerbermanE. J.BonczarT. P. (2014). Probation and Parole in the United States(NCJ 248029). Washington DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, US, Department of Justice.
13.
HolsingerA. M.LowenkampC. T.LatessaE. J. (2006). Exploring the validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised with Native American offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 331-337.
14.
KellyC. E.WelshW. N. (2008). The Predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory—Revised for Drug-Involved offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 819-831.
15.
KirkD. S. (2009). A natural experiment on residential change and recidivism: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. American Sociological Review, 74, 484-505.
16.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience.
17.
LowenkampC. T.HolsingerA. M.LatessaE. J. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of child abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 543-563.
18.
ManchakS. M.SkeemJ. L.DouglasK. S. (2008). Utility of the Revised Level of Service Inventory (LSI-R) in predicting recidivism after long-term incarceration. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 477-488.
19.
ManchakS. M.SkeemJ. L.DouglasK. S.SiranosianM. (2009). Does gender moderate the predictive utility of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) for serious violent offenders?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 425-442.
20.
MayzerR.GrayM. K.MaxwellS. R. (2004). Probation absconders: A unique risk group?Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 137-150.
21.
McShaneM. D.WilliamsF. P.IIIPetersK. (2012). Female parole absconders: Considering the necessity of a separate risk instrument. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 8, 112-135.
22.
MilesH.RaynorP. (2004). Community sentences in Jersey: Risk, need and rehabilitation. St. Helier, UK: Jersey Probation and After Care Service.
23.
MossmanD. (2000). Evaluating violence risk “by the book”: A review of HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence, version 2 and the manual for the sexual violence risk—20. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18, 781-789.
24.
NewburnT.JonesT. (2005). Symbolic politics and penal populism: The long shadow of Willie Horton. Crime, Media, Culture, 1, 72-87.
25.
OrrickE. A.MorrisR. G. (2015). Do parole technical violators pose a safety threat? An analysis of prison misconduct. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 1027-1050.
26.
PyroozD. C. (2012). Absconding among juvenile parolees in Arizona: Constructing and validating a gender-responsive risk instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 923-937.
27.
Ragusa-SalernoL. M.OstermannM.ThomasS. S. (2013). Does the LSI-R have utility for sex offenders?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 952-969.
28.
RobertsJ. V. (2004). The virtual prison: Community custody and the evolution of imprisonment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29.
RoystonP.WhiteI. R. (2011). Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE): Implementation in state. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(4), 1-20.
30.
SchlagerM. D.PachecoD. (2011). An examination of changes in LSI-R scores over time: Making the case for needs-based case management. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 541-553.
31.
SchlagerM. D.SimourdD. J. (2007). Validity of the Level of Service Inventory—Revised (LSI-R) among African American and Hispanic male offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 545-554.
32.
SchwanerS. L. (1997). They can run, but can they hide? A profile of parole violators at large. Journal of Crime and Justice, 20, 19-32.
33.
SchwanerS. L.NamcgaugheyD.TewksburyR. (1998). Situational constraints and absconding behavior: Toward a typology of parole fugitives. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 27, 37-55.
34.
SimsB.JonesM. (1997). Predicting success or failure on probation: Factors associated with felony probation outcomes. Crime & Delinquency, 43, 314-327.
35.
SmithP.CullenF. T.LatessaE. J. (2009). Can 14,737 women be wrong? A meta-analysis of the LSI-R and recidivism for female offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 8, 183-208.
36.
SpohnC. (2007). The deterrent effect of imprisonment and offenders’ stakes in conformity. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18, 31-50.
37.
SteenS.OpsalT.LovegroveP.McKinzeyS. (2013). Putting parolees back in prison: Discretion and the parole revocation process. Criminal Justice Review, 38(1), 70-93.
38.
TillyerM. S.VoseB. (2011). Social ecology, individual risk, and recidivism: A multilevel examination of main and moderating influences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 452-459.
39.
TjurT. (2009). Coefficients of determination in logistic regression models—A new proposal: The coefficient of discrimination. The American Statistician, 63, 366-372.
40.
TonryM. (1995). Malign neglect: Race, crime, and punishment in America. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
TonryM. (2014). Remodeling American sentencing: A ten-step blueprint for moving past mass incarceration. Criminology & Public Policy, 13, 503-533.
42.
TurnerS.BraithwaiteH.KearneyL.MurphyA.HaerleD. (2012). Evaluation of the California parole violation decision-making instrument (PVDMI). Journal of Crime and Justice, 35, 269-295.
43.
VitoG. F. (1987). Felony probation and recidivism. Federal Probation, 50(4), 17-25.
44.
VoseB.SmithP.CullenF. T. (2013). Predictive validity and the impact of change in total LSI-R score on recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 1383-1396.
45.
WilliamsF. P.McShaneM. D.DolnyH. M. (2000). Predicting parole absconders. The Prison Journal, 80, 24-38.
