supervision strategy that monitors probationers at a
level commensurate with their likelihood of future
criminal activity. The officer’s duty as a control agent
is to ensure that the conditions of probation are fully
satisfied, investigate reports or indications of behavior
that could jeopardize the safety of others, and initiate
probation revocation proceedings to remove offenders
from the community for failing to comply with the
conditions of their probation sentence.
The reintegration of offenders into the community
requires an evaluation of probationers’ needs and an
identification of their major problem areas and defi-
ciencies. The purpose of the evaluation is to formulate
a treatment plan that will encourage offenders to ful-
fill the probation contract. Officers act as counselors
in their efforts to rehabilitate offenders. The probation
officer’s basic function in this area is to support the
probationer in making important transitions: from
law-abiding free citizen to convicted offender under
supervision, and finally a return to free citizen.
Although probation officers are usually the principal
change agent in offenders’ lives, they are often unable
to deliver all the interventions necessary to accomplish
the successful reintegration of offenders. Limited
departmental programs and personnel and large case-
loads demand the use of community resources. The
probation officer as resource broker assesses the service
needs of the probationer, locates the social service
agencies that address those needs, refers the proba-
tioner to the appropriate program, and verifies that the
probationer has actually received services. The officer
is responsible for facilitating the delivery of services
that are unavailable in the community.
Probation officers perform a number of tasks
throughout the probation process to protect the com-
munity and foster offender change. The supervisory
decision, which is central to the surveillance or con-
trol aspect of probation, consists of two components.
The first component pertains to the frequency with
which a probationer reports to the officer. Although
limited by legal statute and specified at the time
of sentencing, the frequency of contacts is typically
modified in accordance with the court’s or officer’s
assessment of the offender’s risk of continued crimi-
nal behavior (potential threat to the community).
Probationers can report on a monthly (the prescribed
and most common frequency), bimonthly, or weekly
basis. In general, offenders who are at greater risk
report more often.
The second component pertains to the type or mode
of supervision. An officer can monitor a probationerthrough office visits, telephone contacts, mail-in
reports, or electronic contacts. An offender’s assessed
level of risk determines the selection of a supervision
mode. For example, felony probationers are required
to visit the probation office regularly or observe a cur-
few; people who have committed less serious offenses
are allowed mail-in reports. Related to the determina-
tion of a supervisory mode is the officer’s decision to
assume a particular interactive posture with different
members of their caseload. The changes in posture
involve shifts in a probation officer’s attitudes, focus,
and emotional tone during contacts with offenders.
Officers’ supervisory styles are altered in response to
probationers’ demeanor on report days; their genuine
willingness to cooperate in the rehabilitation process;
and their expressed resolve to lead a productive and law-
abiding life (e.g., find a job, finish school, and refrain
from gang activity). These factors are generically
referred to as the probationer’s “attitude.” Offenders
who are honest in their self-disclosures and willingly
accept the conditions of their sentence are viewed
as possessing a positive attitude. A negative attitude, in
contrast, is expressed in a probationer’s belligerence,
indifference, sarcasm, or blatant attempts to patronize or
curry favor with an officer. Such behaviors are indicative
of a poor adjustment to probation.
At any point during the probation sentence, an offi-
cer can initiate collateral contacts or cultivate relation-
ships with a probationer’s spouse, parent, teacher,
friends, or employer or representatives of other
agencies serving the offender. These contacts verify
information such as residence, employment, and com-
pliance with special conditions. They can also be initi-
ated to enlist the aid of significant others in efforts to
control, rehabilitate, and reintegrate the offender. If
officers suspect that a probationer has resumed illegal
activities, they can request reports that detail subse-
quent arrests or charges that the probationer might
have incurred during the probation sentence.
Another discretionary decision of probation officers
involves the determination of whether the probationer
can benefit from counseling or extradepartmental
resources. This decision consists of a gross evaluation
of major problem areas (emotional, physical, interper-
sonal, and financial). During initial meetings with a
probationer, the officer searches for telltale signs and
symptoms of drug or alcohol abuse, psychological dis-
orders, intellectual deficits, or inadequate social or
vocational skills.
In the past, probation officers relied on their own
sensitivity, common sense, and subjective judgmentsProbation Decisions——— 623P-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:43 PM Page 623