This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Alarid, L. F. Articles by Schloss, C. S. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Alarid, L. F. Articles by Schloss, C. S. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Attorney Views on the Use of Private Agencies for Probation Supervision and Treatment

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Leanne.Alarid{at}utsa.edu.

	Abstract

The exponential rise in probation caseloads has necessitated that some jurisdictions contract with private probation agencies and community-based private treatment providers. Regulations that monitor private providers are ill defined or absent, leaving standards open to broad interpretation. Attorneys in one jurisdiction that used private providers were surveyed to measure their beliefs about private treatment providers for people sentenced to probation. The research found that attorneys supported private provider representatives being present in court to contact defendants and to provide evidence to strengthen probation violations. Private agency reputation and standardized criteria were important to establish qualifications in offering supervision and treatment services.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?