Probation services throughout the world have difficulty in assessing the risks and needs presented by offenders, in evaluating the effectiveness of supervision, and in enabling practitioners to assess the impact of their work with individual offenders. This paper describes how these problems are addressed by the comprehensive and relatively successful approach to evidence-based probation that has been developed since 1996 in the small Probation and After-Care Service of the British Channel Island of Jersey. In conclusion, the authors discuss whether such approaches could work in other jurisdictions, and suggest that this depends partly on context. In particular, the example of England and Wales shows how potentially successful approaches can be frustrated by over-centralization, managerialism and the politicization of criminal justice.
Allen, L., MacKenzie, D. and Hickman, L. (2001). The Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Treatment for Adult Offenders: A Methodological Quality-Based Review. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology45, 498—514.
2.
Andrews, D. and Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory—Revised Manual . Toronto: Multi-Health Systems .
3.
Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Sedo, B. and Coles, R. (2004). Case Management in Manitoba Probation. Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
4.
Brewer, C. and Lait, J. (1980). Can Social Work Survive? London : Temple Smith.
5.
Brody, S.R. (1976). The Effectiveness of Sentencing. Home Office Research Study35. London: HMSO.
6.
Carter, P. (2003). Managing Offenders, Reducing Crime: A New Approach (Correctional Services Review)London: Home Office.
7.
Copas, J.B. (1992). Statistical Analysis for a Risk of Reconviction Predictor. Report to theHome Office. Warwick: University of Warwick, unpublished.
8.
Dowden, C. and Andrews, D. (2004). The Importance of Staff Practice in Delivering Effective Correctional Treatment: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology48, 203—14.
9.
Downes, D. and Morgan, R. (2002). The Skeletons in the Cupboard: The Politics of Law and Order at the Turn of the Millennium. In M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds) The OxfordHandbook of Criminology, 286—321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
Farrall, S. (2006). Rolling back the State: Mrs. Thatcher's Criminological Legacy. International Journal of the Sociology of Law34, 256—77.
11.
Faulkner, D. (1986). Speech to a Chief Probation Officers' conference, unpublished.
12.
Feeley, M. and Simon, J. (1992). The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and Its Implications. Criminology30, 449—74.
13.
Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
14.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (1999). Moral Agent or Actuarial Subject: Risk and Canadian Women's Imprisonment. Theoretical Criminology3, 71—94.
15.
Harper, G. and Chitty, C. (2004). The Impact of Corrections on Re-offending: A Review of `What Works'. Home Office Research Study 291. London: Home Office.
16.
Heath, B. and Miles, H. (2005). Can Alternatives to Custody Deliver? An Examination of Customer Focussed Product Development and Marketing in a British Probation Service. Unpublished paper to the British Society of Criminology conference, Leeds.
17.
Heath, B., Raynor, P. and Miles, H. (2002). What Works in Jersey: The First Ten Years. VISTA7, 202—8.
18.
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation (2005 ). Report of an Inspection of the Jersey Probation and After-Care Service. London: Home Office.
19.
Hollin, C. (2002). Risk-Needs Assessment and Allocation to Offender Programmes. In J. McGuire (ed.) Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment, 309—32. Chichester : Wiley.
20.
Home Office (1996). Guidance for the Probation Service on the Offender Group Reconviction Scale. ProbationCircular631996. London: Home Office.
21.
Hough, M., Allen, R. and Padel, U. (eds) (2006). Reshaping Probation and Prisons: The New Offender Management Framework. Bristol: Policy Press.
22.
Howard, P., Clark, D. and Garnham, N. (2006). An Evaluation of the Offender Assessment System (OASys) in Three Pilots 1999—2001. Online report. London: National Offender Management Service.
23.
Le Herissier, R. (1998). Jersey: Exercising Executive Power in a Non-party System. Public Administration and Development18, 169—84.
24.
Lewis, S., Vennard, J., Maguire, M., Raynor, P., Vanstone, M., Raybould, S. and Rix, A. (2003). The Resettlement of Short-term Prisoners: An Evaluation of Seven Pathfinders. RDS Occasional Paper No. 83. London: Home Office.
25.
Lipsey, M. (1999). Can Rehabilitative Programs Reduce the Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders? An Inquiry into the Effectiveness of Practical Programs . Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law6, 611—41.
26.
Lipton, D., Pearson, F., Cleland, C. and Yee, D. (2002). The Effectiveness of Cognitive-Behavioural Treatment Methods on Offender Recidivism. In J. McGuire (ed.) Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment, 79—112. Chichester , Wiley.
27.
McGuire, J. (2002). Integrating Findings from Research Reviews. In J. McGuire (ed.) Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment, 3—38. Chichester: Wiley .
28.
Mair, G. (ed.) (2004). What Matters in Probation. Cullompton: Willan.
29.
Martinson, R. (1974). What Works? Questions and Answers about Prison Reform. The Public Interest35, 22—54.
30.
Miles, H. (2004). The Parish Hall Enquiry: A Community-Based Alternative to Formal Court Processing in the Channel Island of Jersey. Probation Journal51, 133—43.
31.
Miles, H. and Raynor, P. (2004). Community Sentences in Jersey: Risk, Needs and Rehabilitation.St Helier: Jersey Probation and After-Care Service. Also available at URL: http://www.gov.je/Probation/Publications
32.
National Probation Service (2001). A New Choreography. London: Home Office.
33.
National Probation Service (2005). Performance Report 18 and Weighted Scorecard Q2 2005/06. London: National Probation Service.
34.
OASys Development Team (2001). Offender Assessment System User Manual. London: Home Office.
35.
Raynor, P. (2004a). Rehabilitative and Reintegrative Approaches. In A. Bottoms, S. Rex and G. Robinson (eds) Alternatives to Prison, 195—223. Cullompton: Willan.
36.
Raynor, P. (2004b). The Probation Service `Pathfinders': Finding the Path and Losing the Way? Criminal Justice4, 309—25.
37.
Raynor, P. (2007). Risk and Need Assessment in British Probation: The Contribution of LSI-R. Psychology, Crime and Law13, 125—38.
38.
Raynor, P. and Miles H. (2001). Risks, Needs and Reoffending: Evaluating the Impact of Community Sentences in Jersey. Report to the Jersey Probation Service. Swansea: University of Wales, Swansea.
39.
Raynor, P. and Miles, H. (2005). The Conduct and Effectiveness of Parish Hall Enquiries . St Helier: Jersey Probation and After-Care Service. Also available at URL: http://www.gov.je/Probation/Publications
40.
Raynor, P. and Vanstone, M. (1996). Reasoning and Rehabilitation in Britain: The Results of the Straight Thinking On Probation (STOP) Programme. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology40, 272—84.
41.
Raynor, P. and Vanstone, M. (1997). Straight Thinking On Probation (STOP): The Mid Glamorgan Experiment. Probation Studies Unit Report No. 4. Oxford: University of OxfordCentre for Criminological Research .
42.
Raynor, P., Kynch, J., Roberts, C. and Merrington, M. (2000). Risk and Need Assessment in Probation Services: An Evaluation. Research Study 211London: Home Office.
43.
Roberts, C., Burnett, R., Kirby, A. and Hamill, H. (1996). A System for Evaluating Probation Practice. Probation Studies Unit Report No. 1. Oxford: University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research.
44.
Ross, R.R., Fabiano, E.A. and Ewles, C.D. (1988). Reasoning and Rehabilitation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology32, 29—35.
45.
Ross, R.R., Fabiano, E.A. and Ross, R.D. (1986). Reasoning and Rehabilitation: A Handbook for Teaching Cognitive Skills. Ottawa: University of Ottawa.
46.
Sanders, P. (2005). The British Channel Islands under German Occupation 1940—1945. St Helier: Société Jersiaise and Jersey Heritage Trust.
47.
Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P. and Bushway, S. (1998). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's PromisingWashington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
48.
States of Jersey Statistical Service (2006 ). Jersey in Figures, 2005. St Helier: States of Jersey.
49.
Tong, L.S.J. and Farrington, D. (2006). How Effective Is the `Reasoning and Rehabilitation' Programme in Reducing Reoffending? A Meta-Analysis of Evaluations in Four Countries. Psychology, Crime and Law12, 3—24.
50.
Vanstone, M. (2004). Supervising Offenders in the Community: A History of Probation Theory and Practice. Aldershot:Ashgate.
51.
Walker, N., Farrington, D. and Tucker, G. (1981). Reconviction Rates of Adult Males after Different Sentences. British Journal of Criminology21, 357—60.
52.
Warrington, E. (1998). Gulliver and Lilliput in a New World Order: The Impact of External Relations on the Domestic Policies and Institutions of Microstates. Public Administration and Development18, 101—5.
53.
Whitehead, P. and Statham, R. (2006). The History of Probation: Politics, Power and Cultural Change 1876—2005. Crayford: Shaw & Sons.
