The Philippines ranks third in the world for jail and prison overcrowding, so alternatives to incarceration are very important. This research concentrates on the Parole and Probation Administration’s (PPA) role in furnishing these services to parolees and probationers. The research aims to determine the regional and field offices’ ideas to deliver successful services to society. Using a descriptive mixed-method design, the research was done in selected regions of the Philippines. It used survey questionnaires, statistical analysis, document review, and in-depth interviews. Results indicate that the PPA has a strong multi-sectoral collaboration with local social welfare services, health departments, educational institutions, and religious groups. These collaborations help address the diverse needs of probationers and parolees, such as healthcare, mental health services, substance abuse treatment, and education. However, challenges have still been experienced, such as inadequate resources. To conclude, collaboration with other community sectors helps deliver services to PPA clients.
ApplegateBKSmithHPSitrenAH, et al. (2009) From the inside: the meaning of probation to probationers. Criminal Justice Review34(1): 80–95.
2.
BeckB (2024) Local government spending: policing versus social services. Annual Review of Criminology8(1): 505–528.
3.
CampbellSGreenwoodMWalkerK, et al. (2020) Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing: JRN25(8): 652–661.
4.
CantonR (2024) Probation as social work. Probation Journal71(3): 214–233.
5.
CarrN (2023) Should I stay or should I go? What to do about the probation staffing crisis. Probation Journal70(3): 221–223.
6.
ClarkeSH (1979) What is the purpose of probation and why do we revoke it?Crime & Delinquency25(4): 409–424.
7.
De SilvaB (2025) The emergence of sociological criminology: on the factors, perspectives, and impact in the early 20th century. ASES EDUSCI (International Journal of Educational Sciences)5(1): 123–132.
8.
HardingDJWesternBSandelsonJA (2022) From supervision to opportunity: reimagining probation and parole. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science701(1): 8–25.
Herzog-EvansMSturgeonJ (2022) Remote probation by phone in France and Scotland during the 2020 lockdown. European Journal of Probation14(1): 60–78.
11.
JannettaJBurrellWD (2014) Effective supervision principles for probation and parole. In: Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Springer.
12.
KimJ (2024) Unveiling the developmental dynamics of labeling theory: within-individual effects of perceived informal labeling on deviant self-concept in the Korean Context. Child and Youth Care Forum53(6): 1271–1289.
13.
KoernerAAJohnstonJM (2022) Linking organizational capacity and performance: the case of probation and Medicaid reform in California counties. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory32(4): 702–716.
14.
LoganWA (2003) The importance of purpose in probation decision making. Buffalo Criminal Law Review7(1): 171–232.
15.
MorrisJGrahamH (2019) Using technology and digitally enabled approaches to support desistance. In: The Routledge Companion to Rehabilitative Work in Criminal Justice. Routledge, 179–192.
16.
OkechC (2024) Community corrections in Kenya: a developmental and practice account. In: The Routledge Handbook on Global Community Corrections. Routledge, pp. 37–55.
17.
OmbotoJO (2022) An analysis of probation service order and its application in Kenya. Open Journal of Social Sciences10: 111–120.
18.
Papsa-ao RT (2024) Attributed to crime causation among persons deprived of liberty in a rural jail in the Philippines. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research6(2): 1–18.
19.
PhelpsMS (2013) The paradox of probation: community supervision in the age of mass incarceration. Law & Policy35(1-2): 51–80.
20.
PhillipsJ (2017) Probation practice in the information age. Probation Journal64(3): 209–225.
21.
PiqueroNL (2003) A recidivism analysis of Maryland’s community probation program. Journal of Criminal Justice31(4): 295–307.
22.
RaynorP (2018) Back to the future? The long view of probation and sentencing. Probation Journal65(3): 335–347.
23.
SchaeferLBrewerS (2021) Probation and parole: from control to case management. In: Handbook of Issues in Criminal Justice Reform in the United States. Springer International Publishing, pp. 275–290.
24.
StewartGSmithD (1987) Help for children in custody: some implications of probation withdrawal. British Journal of Criminology27(3): 302–310.
25.
StreltzovNvan DeventerEVanjaniR, et al. (2023) A new kind of academic MLP: addressing clients’ criminal legal needs to promote health justice and reduce mass incarceration. Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics: A Journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics51(4): 847–855.
26.
TorneoAR (2020) Public administration education in the Philippines 1951-2020: history, challenges, and prospects. Journal of Public Affairs Education26(2): 127–149.
27.
UNICJRI (1997) (The United Nations interregional crime and Justice Research Institute) J. O. Omboto. Promoting probation internationally. United Nations. Journal of Social Sciences 120 Open. DOI: 10.4236/jss.2022.104008.
28.
WeaverB (2014) Control or change? Developing dialogues between desistance research and public protection practices. Probation Journal61: 8–26.
29.
WenkEAGottfredsonDMRadwinMS (1970) A modern information system for uniform parole reports data. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency7(1): 58–70.
30.
WhiteheadJGunnS (2012) Probation employee job attitudes: a qualitative analysis. Journal of Crime and Justice11(1): 1988.
31.
YukhnenkoDWolfABlackwoodN, et al. (2019) Recidivism rates in individuals receiving community sentences: a systematic review. PLoS One14(9): e0222495.
32.
ZamiriMEsmaeiliA (2024) Methods and technologies for supporting knowledge sharing within learning communities: a systematic literature review. Administrative Sciences14(1): 17.
