Title from title screen (viewed April 17,2010). / "March 2010." "The Harlem Parole Reentry Court was established in June of 2001 in response to the high concentration of parolees returning to the East Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan. Created by the Center for Court Innovation in cooperation with the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services and the Division of Parole, the Reentry Court provides intensive judicial oversight, supervision and services to new parolees during the first six months following release from state prison. The goal of the program is to stabilize returning parolees in the initial phase of their reintegration by helping them to find jobs, secure housing, remain drug-free and assume familial and personal responsibilties. Following graduation, participants are transferred to traditional parole supervision, where they may continue to receive case management services voluntarily through the Reentry Court." -- Executive summary. "The Reentry Court seems to have had a positive effect with regard to preventing new crimes as measured by rearrests and reconvictions. However, participants were found to have higher rates of revocations. In particular, program participants were more likely to be revoked for technical violations of parole conditions. Given the lower caseload and greater intensity of the program, it is assumed that :"supervision effects" are partially responsible for the higher rate of technical violations. In other words, the Harlem Parole Reentry Court may be detecting violations that might otherwise have gone unnoticed. This suggests that reentry courts may want to explore enhancing the use of alternative sanctions in lieu of revocation. Furthermore, reentry courts should explore the possibility of providing greater feedback to parole officers and case managers, making them aware of potential unintended consequences when supervision is increased." -- Executive summary. Includes bibliographical references (p. 35-40).

Title from title screen (viewed April 17,2010). / "March 2010." "The Harlem Parole Reentry Court was established in June of 2001 in response to the high concentration of parolees returning to the East Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan. Created by the Center for Court Innovation in cooperation with the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services and the Division of Parole, the Reentry Court provides intensive judicial oversight, supervision and services to new parolees during the first six months following release from state prison. The goal of the program is to stabilize returning parolees in the initial phase of their reintegration by helping them to find jobs, secure housing, remain drug-free and assume familial and personal responsibilties. Following graduation, participants are transferred to traditional parole supervision, where they may continue to receive case management services voluntarily through the Reentry Court." -- Executive summary. "The Reentry Court seems to have had a positive effect with regard to preventing new crimes as measured by rearrests and reconvictions. However, participants were found to have higher rates of revocations. In particular, program participants were more likely to be revoked for technical violations of parole conditions. Given the lower caseload and greater intensity of the program, it is assumed that :"supervision effects" are partially responsible for the higher rate of technical violations. In other words, the Harlem Parole Reentry Court may be detecting violations that might otherwise have gone unnoticed. This suggests that reentry courts may want to explore enhancing the use of alternative sanctions in lieu of revocation. Furthermore, reentry courts should explore the possibility of providing greater feedback to parole officers and case managers, making them aware of potential unintended consequences when supervision is increased." -- Executive summary. Includes bibliographical references (p. 35-40).

No description available.

The researcher conducted a mixed method research study on parole violations from a South African perspective. In South Africa, there is limited research regarding the causes of parole violations. Thus, the study is mainly descriptive, but also exploratory in nature and considered a first of its kind. The study aimed to explore parole violation as a phenomenon through the perceptions, opinions, attitudes and incident recall of re-incarcerated parolees. Furthermore, the study aimed to describe the causes for parolees to fail on parole. A two-phase sequential mixed methods research design was used that involved the collection and analysis of primarily quantitative data from self-administered questionnaires. These questionnaires were complemented by a qualitative data collection phase consisting of focus group interviews. A representative sample (n=111) chosen according to the various ethnic groups was drawn from a population of 1 111 adult male parole violators in the Gauteng region (aligned to the regional divisions used by the Department of Correctional Services and not to the provincial borders) for the quantitative phase. Non-probability sampling was used to select 22 participants who volunteered for the second, qualitative phase of the study (focus group interviews). Descriptive statistical analysis was used to analyse the data collected from the questionnaires. The data was analysed by means of frequencies (frequency tables and graphs) to describe one variable and cross tabulations (contingency tables) to show bivariate quantitative data. All the focus group interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. The transcripts provided a complete record of the discussions and helped to facilitate the analysis of the data according to identified, recurring themes. On release, many stigmatised and rejected parolees face widespread post-release challenges that prevent successful reintegration. The study revealed that poor pre-release planning and post-release support, a lack of education, unemployment, substance abuse, and a loss of family support are described as the main causes of parole violations. The recommendations from the research findings showed the importance of pre-release planning, risk assessment, employment, education, treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, community partnerships, family involvement, and graduated responses to parole violations that are fair, consistent, and legal. / Penology / D.Lit. et Phil. (Penology)

The researcher conducted a mixed method research study on parole violations from a South African perspective. In South Africa, there is limited research regarding the causes of parole violations. Thus, the study is mainly descriptive, but also exploratory in nature and considered a first of its kind. The study aimed to explore parole violation as a phenomenon through the perceptions, opinions, attitudes and incident recall of re-incarcerated parolees. Furthermore, the study aimed to describe the causes for parolees to fail on parole. A two-phase sequential mixed methods research design was used that involved the collection and analysis of primarily quantitative data from self-administered questionnaires. These questionnaires were complemented by a qualitative data collection phase consisting of focus group interviews. A representative sample (n=111) chosen according to the various ethnic groups was drawn from a population of 1 111 adult male parole violators in the Gauteng region (aligned to the regional divisions used by the Department of Correctional Services and not to the provincial borders) for the quantitative phase. Non-probability sampling was used to select 22 participants who volunteered for the second, qualitative phase of the study (focus group interviews). Descriptive statistical analysis was used to analyse the data collected from the questionnaires. The data was analysed by means of frequencies (frequency tables and graphs) to describe one variable and cross tabulations (contingency tables) to show bivariate quantitative data. All the focus group interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. The transcripts provided a complete record of the discussions and helped to facilitate the analysis of the data according to identified, recurring themes. On release, many stigmatised and rejected parolees face widespread post-release challenges that prevent successful reintegration. The study revealed that poor pre-release planning and post-release support, a lack of education, unemployment, substance abuse, and a loss of family support are described as the main causes of parole violations. The recommendations from the research findings showed the importance of pre-release planning, risk assessment, employment, education, treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, community partnerships, family involvement, and graduated responses to parole violations that are fair, consistent, and legal. / Penology / D.Lit. et Phil. (Penology)