This question about the central role
of community supervision has plagued the correctional field for
nearly 150 years, or since the first official case in 1841. The
dilemma sets apart the different roles and responsibilities that
supervision can provide to the system of justice, as well as the
overarching purpose of sentencing.
Under a law enforcement model,
supervision has the primary responsibility to enforce legal obligations
as established by the court and/or the parole board or commission.
The social worker model views
the chief duty as providing counseling or rehabilitation programs.
These models often assume the responsibilities
and actions to be mutually exclusive-either one or the other,
and the tension often undermines both the effectiveness of supervision
and public support for it.
Yet new research on recidivism and
a new way of thinking about the delivery of public services provide
a way out of the century old impasse. Research has identified
the process through which people change their attitudes and behavior
(Prochaski and DiClemente, 1986), and, correspondingly, a set
of interventions and techniques, or tools, are available that
can work powerfully to help people move through that process of
change. At the same time, a new focus on the outcomes of government
operations, rather than the inputs (offenders), has helped define
the chief task of supervision squarely in terms of protecting
public safety. This results-oriented approach demands that
supervision reduce recidivism through all effective means, regardless
of the previous law enforcement or social work purpose.
These key developments have given rise
to a hybrid model of community supervision based on principles
of behavior management. By blending the law enforcement and social
work models together, behavior management defines supervision
as a comprehensive set of tools focused on changing offender attitudes
and behaviors to enhance public safety. It emphasizes that the
goal of public safety is best met when supervision succeeds in
assisting offenders change their behavior. This requires motivating
offenders to change, helping offenders acquire skills useful to
be pro-social in the community, and ensuring compliance with supervision
obligations that are goal-oriented. In this model, the goal of
public safety focuses supervision agencies on reducing recidivism
by: keeping offenders crime- and drug-free during the period of
supervision, and helping them learn to regulate their own behavior
so they remain crime- and drug-free after the supervision period
ends. Sustained offender change becomes the cornerstone of better
long-term public safety.
The convergence of the law enforcer
and social worker model into a revised role for the supervision
field-change agent-is an important step in recognizing that supervision
is vital to the goal of reducing criminal recidivism and the overall
rate of crime in society. The behavior management approach positions
correctional supervision agencies to better understand why offenders
commit crime and to apply a proven set of tools to change offenders'
attitudes and behavior to prevent them from committing future
offenses.
This manual provides a guide to incorporate
behavior management concepts within the primary roles and responsibilities
of supervision staff. Its goal is to put the evidence-based practice
literature, commonly known as "what works," in the hands of staff
to help improve offender outcomes. The manual was written to summarize
the key concepts for supervision staff. Supervision agencies will
need to construct and implement policies to support the behavioral
management approach. We begin our discussion by reviewing the
current state of supervision outcomes which builds the case to
resolve the mission of supervision, emphasize behavioral change,
and become a more goal-oriented profession.