Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0306624X08316510v1
53/3/278    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Alarid, L. F.
Right arrow Articles by Schloss, C. S.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Alarid, L. F.
Right arrow Articles by Schloss, C. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

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

Leanne Fiftal Alarid

The University of Texas at San Antonio

Christine S. Schloss

Northland Dependency Services, Liberty, MO

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.

Key Words: correctional privatization • treatment providers • probation • attorney perspectives

This version was published on June 1, 2009

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol. 53, No. 3, 278-291 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0306624X08316510
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?