No. Little. Some. Probation Officer Use of Case Management Practices across Jurisdictions

• In Event: Delivering Effective Programming to Young People in Juvenile Justice and Correctional Settings

Abstract

Considered a staple of community corrections practice, case management techniques incorporate offender risk and need assessment results into a working and iterative supervision plan with the goal of matching the offender with appropriate resources to address risks and needs. In theory, the case plan process requires probation officers to use structured-decision making in tandem with assessment results to prioritize the most important needs and develop individualized goals with offenders. Despite some acknowledgement this is an ideal approach by community corrections practitioners, little research considers how this strategy operates in practice. Using ethnographic data from three community corrections agencies (two adult and one juvenile), we explore how front-line staff understand case management concepts, practices and the degree to which they adhere to its’ theoretical components. Preliminary findings suggest differences across jurisdictions in staff understanding of case management, influenced by organizational factors such as informal policies, information dissemination, perceived role within the agency, and comfortability with the risk and need assessment tool. As a result, staff used no, little, or some components of case management as part of their supervision strategy. Lessons gleaned from these data inform how agencies may increase fidelity in implementing core correctional practices to improve supervision practices and outcomes.

Authors

• Shannon Magnuson, George Mason University

• Kimberly R. Kras, University of Massachusetts Lowell

• Kimberly S. Meyer, George Mason University

• Danielle S. Rudes, George Mason University

• Faye S. Taxman, George Mason University