Help for Inmates 

What is Community Corrections?

 

Community corrections supervises people who are under the authority of the criminal justice system but who are not in prison or jail. In 2009, more than five million people in the United States were supervised in the community by the criminal justice system. This figure includes people at many different stages of the criminal court process. Most people under community supervi­sion fall into one of the following categories:

 

• Defendants on pretrial release with open, active cases in court.

• Defendants with open cases who have been diverted to a specialty court or diversion program      and who will be convicted and sentenced if they are not successful in the court or program.

• Offenders who have pled or were found guilty of their charges and are sen­tenced to a term of community supervision, usually probation, that may in­clude participation in specialized programs like drug courts.

• Offenders who have completed prison or jail terms but remain on commu­nity supervision, usually parole but also probation, for a certain amount of time.

• Offenders released from prison or jail to serve the remainder of their sentenc­es in the community on work release or other programs (this may involve probation or parole supervision).

 

Community supervision includes two distinct populations with different sets of rights and responsibilities:

 

• Defendants charged with offenses but who are presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

• Offenders who have been deemed responsible for an offense by a court of law.

 

Being placed on supervi­sion in the community does not guarantee that no time will be served behind bars. Virtually everyone on community supervision is at risk of being detained or incarcerated upon failure to comply with the conditions of supervision.

 

Despite these different populations in diverse settings and statuses, commu­nity corrections can be discussed within a common framework because many supervision and organizational practices, policies, and procedures are the same.

 

PRETRIAL RELEASE

 

Once arrested on suspicion of committing a crime, a person has the legal right to be considered by the police or an officer of the court for possible release until the case is disposed. The process by which this determination is made is gov­erned by the policies and practices of several agencies. Law enforcement agen­cies decide whether to arrest, then whether to cite and release or book into custody; if arrestees are booked, judicial officers typically determine whether to assign the arrestees to pretrial detention or release. Defendants may also be released from custody during the pretrial stage if they are able to post the bail or bond set by a judicial officer or by the local bail schedule.

 

For most of U.S. history, release pretrial was only possible by posting a bond or bail. However, in 1961, the Vera Institute of Justice was born out of a project that introduced the concept of release on one’s own recognizance based on an objective screening for risk of flight. Known as the Manhattan Bail Project, it was an idea that revolutionized the pretrial process. Today, many jurisdictions have pretrial services agencies that provide the court with objective investiga­tive reports and recommendations to aid in detention and release decisions.

 

An assessment of a defendant’s likelihood to return to court or be rearrested if released usually includes factors that have proven to be predictive of such results: (1) residential stability; (2) employment stability or full-time activities (such as full-time education); and (3) community ties (such as the presence of immediate family or membership in a church).

 

Most pretrial services programs also provide alternative release options to bail and bond that do not penalize defendants for lacking financial resources. At the court’s direction, programs may monitor defendants’ whereabouts, remind them of their court dates, and/or supervise their participation in treat­ment programming.

 

There are significant negative consequences for people detained during the pretrial period. Studies have repeatedly shown that defendants detained pending trial are treated more harshly than similarly situated defendants who are released pretrial. Detained defendants receive more severe sentences and are offered less attractive plea bargains for no other reason than their pretrial detention. There is no more powerful predictor of post-conviction incarceration than pretrial detention.

 

Pretrial detention may have other collateral consequences that affect not only the defendant, but also his or her family and community.

 

Defendants may lose jobs, housing, and custody of children or other dependents if they are detained for even a short time. Pretrial release, on the other hand, may be ac­tively beneficial to the final outcome of a case: If a defendant has followed the court’s conditions, including completing treatment or receiving services prior to sentencing, the court may be more likely to impose a less restrictive, shorter sentence. Conversely, if the defendant is released and fails while in the commu­nity, the judge may be even harsher at sentencing.

 

Defendants and offenders who are not incarcerated have the opportunity to remain with their families, retain employment, and participate in treatment or other programming within the natural context of their lives—as opposed to the unnatural setting of a prison or jail. Drug and mental health treatment, job skills training, and behavioral interventions delivered in the community have long been demonstrated to be more effective than those offered behind bars.

 

ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION

 

An “alternative to incarceration” is any kind of punishment other than time in prison or jail that can be given to a person who commits a crime. Alternatives to incarceration can repair harms suffered by victims, provide benefits to the community, treat the drug-addicted or mentally ill, and rehabilitate offenders.

 

Frequently, punishments other than prison or jail time place serious demands on offenders and provide them with intensive court and community supervision. Just because a certain punishment does not involve time in prison or jail does not mean it is “soft on crime” or a “slap on the wrist.”

 

Alternatives can also reduce prison and jail costs and prevent additional crimes in the future. Before we can maximize the benefits of alternatives to incarceration, however, we must repeal mandatory minimums and give courts the power to use cost-effective, recidivism-reducing sentencing options.

 

They give courts more sentencing options. Each offender and crime is unique, and prison or jail time may not always be the most effective response. If courts have options other than incarceration, they can better tailor a cost-effective sentence that fits the offender and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation.

 

They save taxpayers money. It costs over $28,000 to keep one person in federal prison for one year1 (some states’ prison costs are much higher).  Alternatives to incarceration are cheaper, help prevent prison and jail overcrowding, and save taxpayers millions.

 

They strengthen families and communities. Prison or jail time separates the offender from his or her spouse and children, sometimes for decades at a time. Alternatives to incarceration keep people with their families, in their neighborhoods and jobs, and allow them to earn money, pay taxes, and contribute to their communities.

 

They protect the public by reducing crime. Over 60% of all people leaving prison will reoffend and be back in prison within three years of their release. Alternatives to prison such as drug and mental health courts have been proven to confront the underlying causes of crime (i.e., drug addiction and mental illness) and help prevent offenders from committing new crimes.

 

The public supports alternatives to incarceration. Eight in ten (77%) adults believe that alternatives to incarceration (probation, restitution, community service, and/or rehabilitative services) are the most appropriate sentence for nonviolent, non-serious offenders and that prison or jail are appropriate only if these alternatives fail.