Free Essay

Adults

In:

Submitted By alv143
Words 10195
Pages 41
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report
December 1997, NCJ-164267

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995
By Thomas P. Bonczar
BJS Statistician
On December 31, 1996, State and local probation agencies supervised more than 3 million adult U.S. residents or about 1 in every 62 persons age 18 or older. Since 1990 the Nation's probation population has grown an average of 3% per year. Probationers account for the largest share of adults under correctional supervision
(58%), including persons held in jails and prisons and those on parole.
Results from the first national survey of adults on probation under the supervision of State and local agencies indicate that 58% had been convicted of a felony; 39% of a misdemeanor, and
3% of other infractions. When the survey was conducted at the beginning of
1995, more than 453,000 adults were on probation for a violent offense;
757,000 for a property offense;
561,000 for a drug offense; and
815,000 for a public-order offense.
Using a nationally representative sample, a two-part survey was conducted to collect detailed information on adults on probation. Results from a sample of 5,867 administrative records are presented here. Data from personal interviews with probationers will be the subject of a future report.

Highlights
Percent of adults on probation
MisdeTotal
Felony meanor Total
Offense
Violent
Property
Drug
Public-order

100 %

100 %

100 %

17.3%
28.9
21.4
31.1

19.5%
36.6
30.7
12.1

13.5%
18.2
7.6
59.6

Criminal history
None
Priors
Juvenile
Adult

49.9%
50.1
9.0
45.1

49.2%
50.8
10.3
45.1

52.1%
47.9
5.6
44.3

Type of sentence
Probation only
Split
Jail
Prison

49.8%
50.2
37.3
15.3

Special conditions
Any
98.6%
Fees/fines/costs 84.3
Drug testing
32.5
Drug/alcohol treatment 41.0
Employment
34.7
Community
service
25.7
Contact in last 30 days
None
28.3%
71.7
Anya
Office
59.2
Field
11.9
Telephone
18.1
Number of probationersb a

45.7%
54.3
36.5
20.6

54.8%
45.2
38.3
9.0

98.4%
84.2
43.0

98.9%
85.1
17.1

37.5
40.9

45.7
27.3

27.3

24.0

23.8%
76.2
63.0
15.3
18.0

34.8%
65.2
53.4
6.8
18.1

2,620,560 1,491,670 991,161

More than 1 type of contact possible. b Excludes persons supervised by a Federal probation agency, those only on parole, persons on presentence or pretrial diversion, and absconders. See Methodology, page 11.

In 1995 an estimated 1.5 million felons and 1 million misdemeanants were under the supervision of State and local probation agencies.
Drug trafficking (15%) and possession (13%) were the most common offenses among felons; driving while intoxicated (35%) and assault (11%) among misdemeanants.
Half of all probationers had a prior sentence to probation or incarceration  30% to jail or prison and 42% to probation.
Drug or alcohol treatment was a sentence condition for 41% of adults on probation; 37% had received treatment. Drug testing was required of 32%.
About three-quarters of the felons and two-thirds of the misdemeanants had been contacted by a probation officer in the last month.
Since entering probation, nearly
1 in 5 had a formal disciplinary hearing. Of these, 38% had been arrested or convicted for a new offense, 41% had failed to report or absconded, and 38% had failed to pay a fine or restitution.

Survey of Adults on Probation, 1995 cial), level (State or local), and region
(Northeast, Midwest, South, and
West). Offices were selected with
The 1995 Survey of Adults on Probaprobabilities proportional to the number tion, conducted by the Bureau of under supervision. (See Methodology
Justice Statistics (BJS), was the first national survey to gather information on page 11 for additional detail.) on the individual characteristics of probationers. The first component
Only adults with a formal sentence to of this survey consisted of a review probation who were not considered abof the administrative records of 5,867 sconders were included in the records adult probationers, providing detailed check. Excluded were persons superinformation on current offenses and vised by a Federal probation agency, sentences, criminal histories, levels of those only on parole, persons on presupervision and contacts, participation sentence or pretrial diversion, juvein treatment programs, and disciplinary niles, and absconders. hearings and outcomes.
Systematic samples of probationers
Administrative records were drawn were drawn by BJS from rosters prefrom 167 State, county, and municipal pared by each agency. A probation probation agencies nationwide. Ofofficer or other person familiar with the fices providing direct supervision were agency’s records collected the data. selected from 16 strata defined by
An overall response rate of 87.4% was government branch (executive or judi- achieved. Estimates for the entire population were generated based on
Table 1. Most serious offense of adults on probation, by severity of offense, 1995
Severity of offenseb
Felony
Misdemeanor

Most serious offense

Totala

Violent offenses
Homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Assault
Other violent

17.3%
.7
3.6
1.9
9.2
2.0

19.5%
1.0
5.6
3.2
7.6
2.1

13.5%
.2
.4
0
11.1
1.7

Property offenses
Burglary
Larceny/theft
Motor vehicle theft
Fraud
Stolen property
Other property

28.9%
5.8
9.9
1.4
7.2
1.7
2.7

36.6%
9.7
11.1
2.0
9.6
2.3
1.9

18.2%
.3
8.5
.4
4.2
.9
3.8

Drug offenses
Possession
Trafficking
Other/unspecified

21.4%
9.8
9.7
1.9

30.7%
13.1
15.4
2.3

7.6%
4.6
1.6
1.4

Public-order offenses
Weapons
Obstruction of justice
Traffic
Driving while intoxicated
Drunkenness/morals
Other public-order

31.1%
2.3
2.2
4.7
16.7
2.1
3.0

12.1%
2.5
1.3
.9
5.2
.5
1.7

59.6%
2.1
3.3
10.2
35.2
4.5
4.3

1.3%

1.0%

1.2%

1,479,904

988,033

Other
Number of probationers

2,595,499

a

Excludes 25,061 probationers (1% of all adults on probation) for whom information on the most serious offense was not reported. b Based on 2,543,925 probationers for whom information on most serious offense and severity of offense is known. Excludes 75,988 probationers sentenced for an offense other than a felony or a misdemeanor. 2 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

the original probabilities of selection and a series of adjustments for nonresponse. Nearly 2 of 5 probationers convicted of a violent or drug offense
In 1995, 17% of the adults on probation had been sentenced for a violent offense and 21% for a drug offense
(table 1). The remainder were nearly equally split between property offenders (29%) and public-order offenders
(31%).
The most frequent offense among probationers was driving while intoxicated
(17%). Four other offenses  including larceny/theft (10%), drug possession (10%), drug trafficking (10%), and assault (9%)  accounted for an additional 39% of the adult probation population. Table 2. Characteristics of adults on probation, by severity of most serious offense, 1995
Characteristic

Total

Severity of offense
Felony
Misdemeanor

Sex
Male
Female

79.1%
20.9

79.1%
20.9

78.4%
21.6

Race/Hispanic origin
White non-Hispanic
Black non-Hispanic
Hispanic
Other

58.3%
27.9
11.3
2.4

55.4%
30.8
11.2
2.6

61.8%
24.5
11.4
2.3

Age
17 or younger
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55 or older

.5%
26.4
36.8
24.7
8.4
3.2

.5%
27.6
36.6
24.6
8.2
2.6

.5%
24.7
37.0
25.2
8.7
3.9

Marital status
Married
Widowed
Separated
Divorced
Never married

26.2%
.9
7.0
14.5
51.4

26.8%
.9
6.9
14.6
50.8

24.7%
.9
7.8
13.4
53.2

Education completed
8th grade or less
Some high school
High school graduate/GED
Some college or more

7.5%
34.9
39.9
17.7

8.0%
37.6
37.6
16.8

7.0%
30.4
43.2
19.5

Number of probationers
2,620,560
1,491,670
991,161
Note: Estimates are based on complete data for sex, race/Hispanic origin and reported data on marital status (82%) and on education (81%).

Felons more than half of all adults on probation
Of the 2.6 million adults formally sentenced to probation in 1995, an estimated 1.5 million had been convicted of a felony (58%). Of these, half had been convicted of a violent (20%) or drug offense (31%). Drug trafficking was the single most frequent offense among felons on probation (15%).
This was closely followed by drug possession (13%), larceny/theft (11%), and burglary (10%).
In contrast, 60% of the estimated 1 million misdemeanants on probation had been convicted of a public-order offense  35% for driving while intoxicated, 10% for another traffic offense, and 5% for drunkenness or morals offenses. An estimated 14% of probationers convicted of a misdemeanor had committed a violent offense
(nearly all of whom were convicted of assault); 18% a property offense; and
8% a drug offense.

Women and non-Hispanic whites make up comparatively high percentages of adult probationers
In 1995 women constituted 21% of the probation population, or twice as large a share as among the jail and parole populations (10% each), and more than 3 times the share of women in prison (6%) (table 2).
Probation
Jail
Prison
Parole

Percent female, 1995
21%
10
6
10

Unlike the Nation's jail and prison population, a majority of probationers were non-Hispanic whites (58%).

Probation, 1995
Jail*
State prison*
Federal prison*

Percent of offenders
White Black Hispanic
58%
28%
11%
37
41
18
35
46
17
38
30
28

*Based on surveys of jail inmates conducted in 1995-96, and State and Federal inmates in 1991.

Non-Hispanic whites accounted for a larger share of misdemeanants than felons (62% compared to 55%). NonHispanic blacks constituted 28% of all probationers (31% of felons and 25% of misdemeanants). Hispanics, who may be of any race, comprised 11% of both felons and misdemeanants.
Slightly more than half of all probationers never married (51%), and 58% had completed at least high school or a
GED. Felons (54%) were somewhat less likely than misdemeanants (63%) to have completed high school or a
GED.
Types of offenses vary among men and women and blacks, whites, and
Hispanics on probation
Men were more likely than women to be sentenced for a violent offense
(19% compared to 10%), but nearly as likely to have been sentenced for a drug offense (22% of men and 20% of women) (table 3). Among men,

Table 3. Most serious offense of adults on probation, by sex, race/Hispanic origin, and age, 1995
Age
Most serious offense

Sex

Race/Hispanic origin
White
Black
Hispanic
16.5%
17.1%
19.4%
1.0
.3
.3
4.9
1.2
2.4
1.0
3.1
2.4
7.6
11.0
11.6
2.0
1.6
2.7

24 or younger 16.5%
.4
1.8
3.1
9.0
2.2

25-34
17.0%
.6
3.0
1.3
10.3
1.8

35-44
17.4%
.9
3.8
2.0
8.7
2.0

45 or older 20.3%
1.1
9.1
.7
7.1
2.3

Violent offenses
Homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Assault
Other violent

Male
19.4%
.6
4.3
2.0
10.3
2.2

Female
9.5%
.9
.6
1.4
5.1
1.5

Property offenses
Burglary
Larceny/theft
Motor vehicle theft
Fraud
Stolen property
Other property

25.3%
6.6
8.2
1.5
3.7
2.0
3.2

42.6%
2.8
16.5
.8
20.8
.8
.9

29.9%
6.3
10.0
1.1
7.4
2.0
3.2

28.6%
5.5
10.9
1.0
7.4
1.3
2.5

23.8%
4.3
8.4
2.7
5.6
1.5
1.3

38.7%
10.4
13.6
2.5
4.6
3.0
4.6

27.0%
5.2
9.3
1.4
7.9
1.4
1.8

22.9%
3.5
8.2
.7
7.7
1.3
1.6

24.7%
2.2
7.2
.1
10.3
1.0
3.8

Drug offenses
Possession
Trafficking
Other/unspecified

21.7%
10.3
9.7
1.7

20.1%
8.0
9.7
2.4

17.0%
8.1
7.8
1.1

30.9%
13.4
14.2
3.4

23.1%
10.9
9.7
2.4

19.7%
8.0
10.2
1.5

23.9%
10.7
10.8
2.3

23.2%
11.2
9.8
2.2

13.4%
8.1
4.7
.6

Public-order offenses
Weapons
Obstruction of justice
Traffic
Driving while intoxicated
Drunkenness/morals
Other public-order

32.3%
2.8
2.3
4.7
17.4
2.0
3.1

26.5%
.7
1.7
4.7
14.2
2.5
2.8

35.6%
1.8
2.1
4.7
21.2
2.0
3.9

22.2%
3.2
2.4
5.0
7.7
2.3
1.6

30.4%
2.5
2.1
4.7
17.3
1.6
2.2

22.1%
3.9
2.6
4.2
7.1
1.5
2.7

31.5%
2.3
2.7
5.5
16.4
2.0
2.6

35.7%
.9
1.3
4.6
22.7
2.7
3.5

40.7%
1.8
1.4
3.2
27.7
2.3
4.3

1.3%

1.3%

1.0%

1.2%

3.2%

3.1%

.6%

.7%

.8%

295,243

700,261

Other

Number of probationers 2,057,405 538,094
1,521,161
717,389
Note: Excludes an estimated 25,061 probationers (1% of all adults on probation) for whom information on type of offense was not reported.

957,412

641,015

296,811

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 3

driving while intoxicated was the single most frequent offense (17%), followed by assault (10%), drug possession
(10%), and drug trafficking (10%).
Women most frequently were sentenced to probation for property offenses (43%), particularly fraud (21%) and larceny/theft (17%). Fourteen percent of women on probation were convicted of driving while intoxicated, only slightly below the percentage for men.
Among non-Hispanic probationers, blacks (31%) were nearly twice as likely as whites (17%) to be under supervision for a drug offense. Among
Hispanic probationers nearly a quarter had been convicted of a drug offense.
White (21%) and Hispanic (17%) probationers were also more than twice as likely as black probationers (8%) to be under supervision for DWI. Nearly equal percentages of whites and blacks were on probation for violent and property offenses.

DWI accounts for more than a quarter of probationers over age 44
Convictions for driving while intoxicated bore a strong relationship to age, increasing steadily from 7% of those under age 25, to 28% of those age 45 or older. DWI was the single most frequent offense among probationers in each age group 25 or older. Among those under age 25, larceny/theft
(14%), drug trafficking (10%), and burglary (10%) were the most common offenses. The relative frequency of other types of offenses also varied by age. Sexual assault increased from 2% of those under age 25 to 9% of those age 45 or older. Drug trafficking steadily declined with advancing age, from 10% of probationers under age 25 to 5% of those 45 or older.
Half of all probationers have at least one prior sentence
Half of all adults formally sentenced to probation had a prior sentence to probation or incarceration, 45% as an adult and 9% as a juvenile (table 4).

Table 4. Prior sentences of adults on probation, by sex, race/Hispanic origin, and severity of current offense, 1995
Prior offense
Probation
None
Prior sentence*
Juvenile
Adult

58.3%
41.7
6.8
36.8

57.6%
42.4
8.0
36.7

60.9%
39.1
4.0
35.6

Incarceration
None
Prior sentence*
Juvenile
Adult

69.7%
30.3
3.7
27.2

67.9%
32.1
4.7
28.1

73.3%
26.7
1.7
25.5

Probation or incarceration
None
49.9%
Prior sentence*
50.1
Juvenile
9.0
Adult
45.1

49.2%
50.8
10.3
45.1

52.1%
47.9
5.6
44.3

Number of probationers Total

Severity of current offense
Felony
Misdemeanor

2,179,214 1,331,995

746,464

Note: Excludes 441,346 probationers (17% of all adults on probation) whose prior conviction status was not known.
See Methodology and Appendix table 3 for discussion of coverage of criminal history data.
*Detail may add to more than total because some probationers had prior sentences as both an adult and a juvenile.

4 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

About 30% of probationers had previously been sentenced to incarceration, while 42% had previously been sentenced to probation.
About a third of felons and a quarter of misdemeanants had a prior criminal history which included incarceration.
The percentage of felons having a juvenile record of incarceration was more than double that of misdemeanants (5% to 2%).
Violent offenders on probation the least likely to have a prior sentence
Violent offenders (45%) on probation were less likely than property (51%) or public-order offenders (55%) to have had a prior sentence to probation or incarceration (table 5). Nearly half of all drug offenders had a prior sentence. Among all probationers violent offenders had the lowest percentage
(37%) with a prior sentence to probation, and public-order offenders, the highest (45%). Led by those with traffic violations, public-order offenders also had the highest percentage of persons with a prior sentence to prison or jail (34%).

Table 5. Most serious current offense, by prior sentences of adults on probation, 1995
Most serious current offense
Total

Total

None

Prior sentences
Any
type Probation

Incarceration

100

49.9%

50.1%

41.7%

30.3%

Violent offenses
Sexual assault
Assault
Other violent

100%
100
100
100

55.3%
63.6
52.9
44.5

44.7%
36.4
47.1
55.5

36.8%
31.8
40.3
41.8

28.5%
22.7
28.4
40.3

Property offenses
Burglary
Larceny/theft
Fraud

100%
100
100
100

48.8%
45.1
53.5
52.6

51.2%
54.9
46.5
47.4

43.0%
45.5
38.1
40.8

30.2%
34.6
26.6
23.1

Drug offenses
Possession
Trafficking

100%
100
100

51.3%
50.9
52.8

48.7%
49.1
47.2

40.6%
39.7
40.0

28.4%
29.9
27.0

Public-order offenses
Traffic
Driving while intoxicated

100%
100
100

45.1%
33.5
48.7

54.9%
66.5
51.3

45.4%
54.2
40.6

34.1%
45.4
30.7

Note: Excludes an estimated 458,704 probationers (18% of all adults on probation) for whom information on current offense or prior conviction status was not known.

Sexual assault offenders (36%) were the least likely to have had a prior sentence of any type. The most likely to have had a prior sentence were probationers convicted of traffic offenses
(67%), ahead of those convicted of driving while intoxicated (51%).

Table 6. Presentence investigation reports and recommendations, by current offense severity and prior sentences of adult probationers, 1995

Number of probationersa Total

Presentence investigations focus on the most serious offenders
A large portion of probation officers’ work is assisting the courts by preparing presentence investigation reports
(PSI’s). PSI’s involve examining records that document the offense and the defendant's criminal history. Other information often comes from consulting with the arresting officer and others who have had contact with the defendant. Severity of offense
Felony
Misdemeanor
Most serious offense
Violent
Property
Drugs
Public-order
Prior sentence
No prior sentence
Probation or incarceration
Probation
Incarceration

Percent of probationers with 
Completed
Presentence presentence report and recinvestigation Probation ommendation b report recommended for probationc

2,496,600

47.2%

35.5%

79.6%

1,429,140
941,646

63.9%
18.9

48.1%
15.5

77.7%
87.1

433,565
715,084
528,953
767,873

57.3%
53.9
56.6
29.2

38.9%
42.0
43.6
22.9

72.4%
82.1
80.3
83.0

1,063,628
1,049,878
906,544
611,951

49.1%
54.1
53.0
58.7

39.1%
38.8
37.1
42.5

84.4%
75.4
73.9
74.6

a

Excludes 123,960 probationers (nearly 5% of all adults on probation) for whom information on PSI completion was not provided.
Based on 2,377,850 probationers for whom PSI completion status (recommended, not recommended, no recommendation) was known. c Based on 1,060,452 probationers for whom a PSI was completed. b Among adults on probation, PSI’s were completed more often for felons (64%) than misdemeanants (19%) (table 6).
Probationers whose most serious offense was a public-order offense were the least likely to have had a PSI
(29%). Those with a past sentence to prison or jail had a greater chance of having a PSI (59%) than those with no prior sentence (49%).

Among probationers with a completed
PSI, felons were less likely than misdemeanants to have received a
Among those probationers for whom a recommendation of probation (78%
PSI was prepared, 80% had received a compared with 87%). In addition, a lower percentage of those with a prior recommendation for probation. Alsentence to probation or incarceration though this percentage is evidence that courts accept the PSI findings, this were recommended for probation
(75%) than were those without a prior survey does not contain data on persentence (84%). sons sentenced to jail or prison.
Those data are needed to accurately measure the extent to which courts follow PSI recommendations.
4 out of 5 probationers with a PSI recommended for probation

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 5

Table 7. Type and length of sentence for adult probationers, by severity of current offense and prior sentence, 1995

Type and length of sentence

Total

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor

None

Prior sentences
Any
Probation

Type of sentence
Probation only
Probation and incarcerationa
Jail
Prison

49.8%
50.2
37.3
15.3

45.7%
54.3
36.5
20.6

58.9%
41.1
28.4
14.5

40.4%
59.6
44.5
18.7

Number of probationersb

2,571,605

1,470,814

1,073,781

1,081,969

54.8%
45.2
38.3
9.0
974,029

Incarceration

40.8%
59.2
44.5
18.1

32.2%
67.8
52.8
19.2

927,085

632,424

b

--Not calculated because of too few cases. a Detail may add to more than total because some probationers were sentenced to both jail and prison.

Excludes 48,955 probationers (nearly 2% of all adults on probation) for whom information on type of sentence was not reported. Half of sentences split between incarceration and supervision

More than a third of probationers also serve jail or prison time

82% of probationers given 3 or more conditions on sentence

Half of the probationers received a sentence that included incarceration, sometimes called a “split sentence”
(table 7). Felons were more likely to have received a split sentence (54%) than misdemeanants (45%). An estimated 1 in 5 felons on probation had received a sentence to prison on the current sentence. (Information on average length of sentence to probation is discussed in the Methodology, page 13.)

While half of the probationers received a sentence that included a period of incarceration, 37% had actually served time in jail or prison. The remainder had their sentence to incarceration suspended. An estimated 35% of felons, compared to 25% of misdemeanants, had served time in a local jail;
9% of felons had served time in a prison. Almost all probationers (99%) had one or more conditions to their sentence required by the court or probation agency (table 8). Among such conditions were fees, drug testing, employment, and requirements for treatment.
Seventeen percent of probationers had
1 or 2 conditions; 36% had 3 or 4 conditions, and 46% had 5 or more.

Repeat offenders more likely to be incarcerated
Among adults on probation, having a criminal record meant a greater chance of being sentenced to incarceration  60% with a prior sentence received a current sentence to incarceration compared to 41% without any prior sentence. Among those probationers whose prior sentence specifically included jail or prison, more than twothirds were again sentenced to incarceration. A sentence to probation only, or “straight probation,” was the most likely outcome (59%) for those probationers with no prior sentences.

Percent of adults on probation
Total Felony Misdemeanor

Sentence served Jail or prison*
Jail
Prison

36.8%
31.2
5.6

44.2%
35.2
9.2

26.1%
25.0
--

-- Not calculated because of too few cases.
*Some probationers had served sentences to both jail and prison.

Probationers with a split sentence to jail had served an average of 3 months. The average time served in prison among probationers receiving a split sentence was 20 months.
Jail
Prison

6 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

Time served
Total
Felony Misdemeanor
3.1 mo 4.0 mo
1.1 mo
20.4
21.1
--

Number of conditions Total
None
1
2
3 or 4
5 or 6
7 or more

Percent of adults on probation
100.0%
1.4
5.7
10.9
36.1
28.8
17.0

Majority pay supervision fees
A monetary requirement was the most common condition (84%)  61% were required to pay supervision fees; 56% to pay a fine; and 55% to pay court costs. In addition, nearly a third were required to pay restitution to the victim or victims of the crime. One in ten probationers were restricted from contacting the victim or victims.
One of every four probationers were required to perform some type of community service. Two of every five probationers were formally required to maintain employment or to enroll in some type of educational or training program. The sentences of 10% of all probationers included one or more requirements intended to monitor or in some way restrict their movement. These probationers may have been required to stay away from certain places like bars or particular businesses or may have been under electronic monitoring, house arrest, or a curfew.

Felons and misdemeanants were equally likely to be required to pay a supervision fee or court costs; felons were less likely to be required to pay a fine (47% compared to 68%). Felons were more likely than misdemeanants, however, to be required to pay victim restitution (40% to 18%); to have special restrictions on their movement
(13% to 6%); and to be required to maintain employment (41% to 27%).

Table 8. Conditions of sentences of adult probationers, by severity of offense, 1995
Condition of sentence
Any condition

Total
98.6%

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor
98.4%
98.9%

Fees, fines, court costs
Supervision fees
Fines
Court costs

84.3%
61.0
55.8
54.5

84.2%
63.9
47.4
56.4

85.1%
59.8
67.9
54.5

Restitution to victim

30.3%

39.7%

17.6%

Confinement/monitoring
Boot camp
Electronic monitoring
House arrest without electronic monitoring Curfew
Restriction on movement

10.1%
.5
2.9

12.9%
.8
3.2

6.3%
.1
2.0

.8
.9
4.2

1.1
1.6
5.3

.5
0
2.9

Restrictions
No contact with victim
Driving restrictions

21.1%
10.4
5.3

24.0%
11.8
4.3

16.0%
8.2
5.8

Community service

25.7%

27.3%

38.2%
32.5
8.1

48.1%
43.0
10.4

23.7%
17.1
5.2

Substance abuse treatment
Alcohol
Drug

41.0%
29.2
23.0

37.5%
21.3
28.3

45.7%
41.0
14.8

Other treatment
Sex offenders program
Psychiatric/psychological counseling
Other counseling

17.9%
2.5
7.1
9.2

16.1%
3.9
8.9
4.4

20.9%
.2
4.7
16.4

Employment and training
Employment
Education/training

40.3%
34.7
15.0

45.4%
40.9
15.5

34.4%
27.3
15.1

Other special conditions

16.5%

19.0%

More than 2 of every 5 probationers were required to enroll in some form of substance abuse treatment. An estimated 29% of probationers were required to get treatment for alcohol abuse or dependency and 23% for drug abuse. Alcohol treatment was required about twice as frequently among misdemeanants as felons
(41% compared to 21%), while drug treatment was required nearly twice as frequently among felons as among misdemeanants (28% compared to 15%).

24.0%

Alcohol/drug restrictions
Mandatory drug testing
Remain alcohol/drug free

More than 2 of 5 adults on probation required to receive treatment for alcohol or drug abuse

12.6%

Number of probationers*

2,558,981

1,470,696

Nearly a third of all probationers were subject to mandatory drug testing 
43% of felons and 17% of misdemeanants. Nearly 1 in 5 probationers were required to participate in other treatment programs, such as special psychiatric/ psychological counseling, sex offenders program, or “other counseling” — primarily counseling for domestic violence. 982,536

Note: Detail may not sum to total because probationers may have more than one condition on their sentences, and totals may include items not shown in the table.
Excludes 61,579 probationers (2% of all adults on probation) for whom information on conditions of probation were not reported.

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 7

Nearly three-quarters contacted by a probation officer in last 30 days
An estimated 72% of all probationers had some type of contact with their probation officer in the 30 days prior to the survey; 61% had a face-to-face contact; 27% had been contacted by mail or by telephone (table 9). Most personal contacts occurred in the probation office (59%); fewer in the field, at an offender's home or job (12%).
In addition to face-to-face contacts and contacts by telephone or by mail, probation agencies made “collateral” contacts with other persons, such as the probationer's employers, teachers, treatment providers, police, relatives or acquaintances to gather information on those under their supervision. Overall, during the 30 days before the survey, probation agencies made one or more collateral contacts for more than a quarter of all probationers.
Felons were more likely than misdemeanants to have had an office contact in the last 30 days (63% as compared with 53%), to have had a field contact (15% compared with 7%), and to have one or more collateral contacts (31% compared to 22%).
Based on probation office classifications, nearly half of all felons and a third of all misdemeanants were currently supervised at a “medium” or
“high” level. Though agencies differed in how they defined levels of supervision, a greater number of personal contacts within 30 days of the survey characterized both medium and high levels (table 10). Of probationers at a high level of supervision, 82% had a personal contact, and at a medium level, 78%, compared to 57% of those at a minimum supervision level, 35% of those unclassified, and 8% of probationers on administrative supervision. levels, ranging from 45% of those in high supervision to 9% of those in administrative supervision.

Collateral contacts within the last 30 days were the most frequent for probationers in the highest supervision

Table 9. Level of supervision and type of contact by probation officer in last month, by severity of offense, 1995

Total
Contact with probationer in last 30 days
None
Anya
Personal
Office
Field
Other contact
Mail
Telephone

Total
100 %

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor
100 %
100 %

28.3%
71.7
60.7
59.2
11.9
27.0
10.5
18.1

23.8%
76.2
65.0
63.0
15.3
27.1
10.5
18.0

34.8%
65.2
54.1
53.4
6.8
26.5
10.2
18.1

Collateral contact in last 30 daysb
None
One or more

72.8%
27.2

69.0%
31.0

77.8%
22.2

Level of supervision
High
Medium
Minimum
Administrative
Unclassified
Other

16.2%
26.7
39.0
6.8
9.9
1.5

19.8%
29.3
37.5
7.2
4.4
1.8

9.2%
24.1
41.5
6.2
17.8
1.2

2,451,337

1,449,405

Number of probationersc

907,654

a

More than 1 type of contact was possible.
Case-related contacts that do not include contact with the probationer such as verification of employment or attendance in treatment program. c Excludes 169,223 probationers (6% of all probationers) for whom information on number of contacts were not reported. b Table 10. Type of contact by probation officer in last month, by level of supervision, 1995
Level of supervision
Minimum Administrative Unclassified

Type of contact

High

Total
Contact with probationer in last 30 days
None
Anya
Personal contact
Office
Field
Other contact
Mail
Telephone

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100%

12.9%
87.1
81.5
78.4
32.6
30.5
8.6
23.6

14.1%
85.9
78.0
76.2
14.5
25.9
7.6
20.3

29.1%
70.9
56.5
55.5
6.3
29.6
13.5
18.0

74.5%
25.5
7.5
6.6
1.1
18.8
13.7
5.9

54.8%
45.2
35.2
34.9
1.8
19.9
7.9
12.1

Collateral contact in last 30 daysb
None
One or more

55.1%
44.9

69.7%
30.3

76.8%
23.2

91.4%
8.6

81.5%
18.5

383,886

659,393

987,121

174,340

Number of probationersc a Medium

More than 1 type of contact was possible.
Case-related contacts that do not include contact with the probationer such as verification of employment or attendance in treatment program. c Excludes 200,062 probationers for whom information on number of contacts or level of supervision was not reported, and an additional 32,941 probationers with other supervision levels. b 8 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

182,817

More than a third of probationers in alcohol/drug treatment program
At some time since entering probation supervision, more than 60% of all probationers had participated in some type of special supervision or other program (table 11). The most common program was alcohol or drug treatment/ counseling  33% of felons and 42% of misdemeanants had received such treatment while under their current sentence to probation.

intensive supervision program (15% compared to 4%). Ten percent of felons also received psychological or psychiatric counseling, as compared with 6% of misdemeanants.

Not all of the probationers who had participated in the special supervision or treatment programs were doing so at the time of the survey. When the survey was conducted, an estimated
37% were enrolled in a treatment program, being tested for drugs, under intensive supervision, or in another
Nearly a third of probationers had been type of program. A quarter of all protested for drugs at least once since en- bationers were being tested for drugs; a sixth were in an alcohol or drug treattering probation. Drug testing was ment program. About 5% were under more common among felons (44%) intensive supervision. than misdemeanants (17%).
Felons were more likely than misdemeanants to have participated in an
Table 11. Participation in special supervision and other programs since entering probation, by severity of offense, 1995
Program
Any special supervision or program

Total

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor

61.2%

62.9%

59.4%

10.1%

14.6%

4.0%

Other special supervision
Detention center/confinement
Boot camp
Electronic monitoring
House arrest without electronic monitoring 5.2%
.1
.7
3.5

6.5%
.2
1.2
3.9

3.2%
.1
.1
2.6

1.2

1.7

Community service

1.1%

.9%

1.4%

Drug testing

32.3%

43.9%

16.6%

Alcohol or drug treatment

37.1%

33.4%

11.4%
5.3
4.9
2.7

15.7%
7.2
6.8
4.1

5.2%
2.7
2.2
.6

18% faced a disciplinary hearing after entering probation
Probationers who violate a condition of their probation, or who are arrested for a new offense, may be called before the court to review the circumstances of their violation. Such disciplinary hearings may result in the issuance of an arrest warrant for a probationer who has absconded, a sentence to incarceration, or reinstatement of probation with or without new conditions.
At the time of the survey, an estimated
18% of all adults currently on probation had experienced one or more formal disciplinary hearings after entering probation supervision. Probationers included in the survey who had served longer on a probation sentence also had more experience with disciplinary hearings. Of those who had served 36 months or more and who were still on probation (or who had returned to probation following a period of incarceration), 38% had at least one formal hearing, compared with 5% of those who had served less than 6 months.

41.9%

Other treatment
Day
Residential
Sex offender

Percent participating in a program at time of survey
Any program
36.8%
Intensive supervision
4.9
Confinement/monitoring
.6
Community service
.5
Drug testing
24.5
Alcohol/drug treatment
16.0
Other treatment
4.3
Counseling
5.2
Education
3.2

Intensive supervision

Counseling
Psychological/psychiatric
Family
Life skills/parenting
Victim impact panel
Other counseling
Education
Basic education/GED program
Vocational/job training
Other
Number of probationers*

.6

11.6%
8.1
2.9
1.4
.4
.6

11.6%
9.9
2.0
1.5
0
.2

12.6%
5.8
4.3
1.3
1.0
1.3

7.0%
5.2
2.5

9.1%
7.0
3.0

4.0%
2.6
1.9

.4%

.3%

.6%

2,545,594

1,465,521

973,197

*Excludes an estimated 74,966 probationers (3% of all adults on probation) for whom information on participation in special supervision or treatment program was not reported.

Months served on probation
All probationers
Less than 6 months
6 to 11
12 to 23
24 to 35
36 or more

Percent of probationers who had at least one disciNumber of probationers* plinary hearing
2,553,052
557,238
594,726
697,545
344,361
359,183

18.4%
4.8
11.0
21.8
26.1
37.6

*Excludes 67,508 probationers (3% of all adults on probation) for whom information on formal disciplinary hearings or time served on probation was not available.

The records check survey underestimates the percentage of all persons sentenced to probation who have disciplinary hearings over the course of their sentence. Probationers who had a disciplinary hearing which resulted in revocation of their probation and who

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 9

were currently incarcerated were excluded from the survey. In addition, some probationers who had no disciplinary hearing may have had a hearing after the survey but before completing their sentence. Consequently, the percentage of all persons initially placed on probation and subsequently having a disciplinary hearing is likely to have been higher than 18%.
Disciplinary hearings more common among unemployed and those with prior sentences
Among probationers included in the survey, those who were unemployed were more likely to have had a disciplinary hearing (23%) than those who were employed (16%). Probationers who had a prior sentence to probation or incarceration were also more likely to have had a hearing than probationers with no prior sentence (23% compared to 15%).
Percent of adults on probation with disciplinary hearing

contact with a probation officer. Arrest or conviction for a new offense was somewhat more likely among felons than misdemeanants (43% compared to 31%). Failure to attend or complete a substance abuse treatment program, however, was more frequent among misdemeanants (33%) than felons
(18%). Forty-three of misdemeanants and 34% of felons with a disciplinary hearing failed to pay fines or restitution. Over 40% receive new conditions of supervision; 29% incarcerated
Among persons under probation supervision who had experienced one or more disciplinary hearings, 42% were permitted to continue their sentence, but only with the imposition of additional conditions; 29% were incarcerated in jail or prison; and 29% had their supervision reinstated without any new conditions (table 13). Nearly 1 in

Table 12. Reasons for disciplinary hearings of adult probationers, by severity of most serious offense, 1995
Reason for disciplinary hearinga

Total

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor

Absconded/failed to maintain contact

41.1%

43.3%

37.6%

New offense
Arrested
Convicted

38.4%
30.4
13.9

43.2%
34.9
15.8

31.0%
23.5
10.5

Failure to pay fines or restitution

37.9%

34.1%

43.0%

Drug/alcohol violation
Failure to attend/complete treatment program
Positive drug test
Alcohol abuse

22.5%
11.2
2.7

17.5%
14.3
2.9

33.0%
5.6
2.7

Violation of confinement restrictions
Failure to do jail time/return from furlough
Violation of home confinement

2.5%
1.3

2.5%
1.6

2.8%
.6

8.5%
6.8

9.5%
6.9

6.7%
6.7

457,279

297,481

144,550

Employment
Employed
Not employed

15.9%
22.9

Other violations
Failure to complete community service
Other

Severity of offense
Felony
Misdemeanor

21.1%
14.8

a

Prior sentence
No prior sentence
Probation or incarceration

14.9%
23.2

Failure to maintain contact the most frequent reason for hearing
Of those probationers who had experienced a disciplinary hearing, the most frequent reason was absconding or failure to contact the probation officer
(41%) (table 12). This was followed by arrest or conviction for a new offense
(38%), failure to pay fines or restitution
(38%), and failure to attend or complete an alcohol or drug treatment program (22%). An estimated 11% of the probationers who had a disciplinary hearing had a positive drug test; 9% had failed to complete a community service requirement.
Overall, 43% of felons and 38% of misdemeanants with at least one disciplinary hearing failed to maintain

Number of probationersb

Detail adds to more than total because some probationers had more than one disciplinary hearing, while others had a single hearing with more than one reason. b Excludes probationers who never had a disciplinary hearing or for whom information on disciplinary hearings was not reported.

Table 13. Outcome of disciplinary hearings of adult probationers, by severity of most serious offense, 1995
Outcome of disciplinary hearing
Charges not sustained

Totala

Severity of offense
Felony Misdemeanor

3.5%

3.7%

3.5%

Supervision reinstated
With new conditions
Without new conditions

41.9%
28.6

46.0%
26.8

33.9%
30.5

Incarcerated

29.1%

34.4%

18.9%

2.7%
1.6
1.6
1.6

1.7%
2.1
1.7
2.3

4.7%
.7
1.7
.3

Other outcomes
Bench warrant issued/declared absconder
Residential treatment/diversion order
Supervision level reduced
Other
Hearing not completed
Number of probationersb a 24.0%

20.2%

32.4%

455,221

299,941

141,075

Detail adds to more than total because some probationers had more than one disciplinary hearing, while others had a single hearing with more than one outcome. b Excludes probationers who never had a disciplinary hearing or for whom information on disciplinary hearings was missing.

10 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

4 probationers had not completed a hearing. Four percent had charges that were not sustained.*

Appendix table 1. Summary of the sample for the 1995
Survey of Adults on Probation
Census universe

Felons who experienced a disciplinary hearing were more likely than misdemeanants to have been incarcerated
(34% compared to 19%) and somewhat more likely to have had their supervision reinstated with new conditions (46% compared to 34%).

Type of agency and region

Methodology

Executive branch, local

The 1995 Survey of Adults on Probation (SAP) was conducted for the
Bureau of Justice Statistics by the U.S.
Bureau of the Census. It was the first nationally representative survey to collect information on the individual characteristics of adult probationers.
The SAP was a two-part survey, consisting of a records check based on the probationers’ administrative records and a personal interview. Only information from the records check component — collected during December
1994 through September 1995 — are included in this report.

Sample design
The sample for the 1995 SAP records check sample was selected from a universe of 2,627 State, county, and municipal probation agencies with a total of 2,618,132 formally sentenced probationers (appendix table 1). The universe came from the 1991 Census of
Probation and Parole Agencies. The sample design was a stratified twostage selection.
In the first stage, probation agencies were stratified into 16 strata defined by government branch (executive or judicial) and level (State or local), and census region (Northeast, Midwest, South, or West). The largest 43 probation agencies were made self-representing and were selected into the sample with certainty. The remaining 2,584
*The percentages for hearing outcomes add to a total larger than 100% because some probationers reported more than one hearing or outcome.

Total
Executive branch, State
Northeast
Midwest
South
West

Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Judicial branch, State
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Judicial branch, local
Northeast
Midwest
South
West

Sample selections

Number of Number of
Number of Number of
Number of field offices probationers field offices offices/sitesa probationersb
2,627

2,618,132

165

167

5,867

1,448

1,176,429

67

85

2,744

94
321
803
230

39,759
153,469
873,858
109,343

2
9
50
6

2
8
70
5

86
319
2,199
140

198

411,825

24

24

910

86
52
7
53

134,819
67,781
19,584
189,641

8
4
1
11

8
4
1
11

267
94
22
527

370

462,020

27

28

1,107

41
188
63
78

203,294
127,418
86,152
45,156

12
7
5
3

13
7
6
2

504
321
220
62

611

567,858

47

30

1,106

78
347
42
144

78,124
223,831
49,120
216,783

7
19
5
16

6
10
3
11

258
371
88
389

Note: The universe file for the 1995 Survey of Adults on Probation was based on the 1991 Census of Probation and Parole Agencies. In this census agencies reported the address of their field offices and the number of adults under supervision in each office. Field offices were categorized based on the characteristics of their agencies by type (executive or judicial branch) and level of government (State or local). a Of 165 offices selected, 19 were out of scope, not currently supervising adult probationers, and 20 would not participate. Twenty-four selected field offices reported having additional suboffices. Of the 110 suboffices, 41 were sampled. One office represented an entire State (Massachusetts), from which a systematic sample of 210 probationers were selected. b Of 5,922 eligible probationers selected within 167 offices/sites, completed record check forms were received for 5,867 (or 99.1%).

probation agencies were not selfrepresenting and were grouped within strata into 122 clusters of roughly equal size. One agency was selected from each of the 122 clusters, with probability of selection proportional to size. Twenty-four agencies had a total of
110 additional subagencies that were not included among the 2,627 probation agencies. A total of 41 subagencies were selected, and were included in the cluster of their parent agency, resulting in an overall total of 206 agencies. Excluding 19 agencies subsequently determined to be out of scope and 20 which refused to participate resulted in a final total of 167 agencies selected.

In the second stage, Bureau of the
Census field representatives visited each selected agency and systematically selected a sample of probationers using predetermined procedures. Only persons age 18 and older, who were formally sentenced to probation, who were not absconders were included in the records check. Excluded were persons supervised by a Federal probation agency, those only on parole, persons on presentence or pretrial diversion, and juveniles. As a result, approximately 1 of every 442 probationers were selected. A total of
5,867 records checks were completed by a probation officer or other probation agency representative. The overall response rate of 87.4% represents the combination of an agency

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 11

response rate of 88.3% and a records check completion rate of 99.1%.
Based on the completed records checks, estimates for the entire population were generated using weighting factors derived from the original probability of selection in the sample.
These factors were adjusted for variable rates of non-response across strata. A further adjustment was made to the 1994 yearend counts of the number of adults formally sentenced to probation.

Accuracy of the estimates
The accuracy of the estimates presented in this report depends on two types of error: sampling and nonsampling. Sampling error is the variation that may occur by chance because a sample rather than a complete enumeration of the population was conducted. Nonsampling error can be attributed to many sources such as the inability to obtain information about all cases in the sample, inability to obtain complete and correct information from the administrative records, and processing errors. In any survey the full extent of the nonsampling error is never known.
The sampling error, as measured by an estimated standard error, varies by the size of the estimate and the size of the base population. Estimates of the standard errors have been calculated for the 1995 survey (appendix table 2).
These estimates may be used to construct confidence intervals around

percentages in this report. For example, the 95-percent confidence interval around the percent of adults on probation for a drug offense is approximately 21.4% plus or minus 1.96 times
1.1% (or 19.2% to 23.6%).
These standard errors may also be used to test the significance of the difference between two sample statistics by pooling the standard errors of the two sample estimates. For example, the standard error of the difference between white and black adults on probation for drug offenses would be 2.8%
(or the square root of the sum of the squared standard errors for each group). The 95-percent confidence interval around the difference would be
1.96 times 2.8% (or 5.5%). Since the difference of 13.9% (30.9% minus
17.0%) is greater than 5.5%, the difference would be considered statistically significant. The standard errors reported should be used only for tests on all probationers. Comparisons of male and female probationers require different standard errors. Data on prior sentences
The availability of criminal history data in probation office administrative records was more limited than other types of information collected on the

Estimated percentages
98 or 2 95 or 5 90 or 10 80 or 20 70 or 30
2.3
3.5
4.9
6.5
7.5
2.0
3.1
4.2
5.6
6.5
1.4
2.2
3.0
4.0
4.6
1.1
1.8
2.4
3.3
3.7
1.0
1.5
2.1
2.8
3.2
0.9
1.4
1.9
2.5
2.9
0.7
1.1
1.5
2.1
2.4
0.6
1.0
1.3
1.8
2.0
0.5
0.8
1.1
1.5
1.7
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.1
1.3
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.1
1.3

12 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

Percent of records, by amount of data reported on prior sentences Complete
Partial
No data

73.6%
14.6
11.8

Overall, data on any prior sentences to probation or incarceration in a jail or prison were missing for 17% of probationers (appendix table 3). This is higher than the 12% of probationers for whom no data were available because partial data could only be used when there was an indication of a prior sentence. Partial data did not allow a prior sentence to be ruled out.
The amount of missing criminal history data varied for each type of prior sentence status. Differing percentages of missing data occurred for the status of having or not having a prior sentence.
Twenty percent of records were missing information on prior sentence to incarceration, compared to 14% of

Appendix table 3. Missing data for prior sentences, by severity of offense, completion of presentence investigation, and level of supervision, 1995

Appendix table 2. Standard errors of the estimated percentages for adults on probation, 1995
Base of the estimate
75,000
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
750,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,500,000
2,620,560

SAP records check form. Complete information on whether a probationer had a prior sentence to probation or incarceration, and whether any prior sentences they had were as a juvenile or as an adult, was available for 74% of the estimated 2,620,560 adult probationers covered by the survey. Partial information was available for 15% of probationers. No data were available for the remaining 12%.

50
8.1
7.0
5.0
4.1
3.5
3.1
2.6
2.2
1.8
1.4
1.4

Any type Total missing

Prior sentences, percent missing data
Proba- Incarcetion ration Adult
Juvenile

16.8%

14.3%

19.7%

18.9%

24.8%

Severity of offense
Felony
Misdemeanor

10.7
24.7

7.5
23.3

12.6
29.4

12.7
26.5

16.3
35.4

Presentence investigation Completed
Not completed

7.6
22.3

6.4
18.0

8.6
27.0

9.7
24.4

13.4
31.1

Level of supervision
High/medium
11.7
Minimum/administrative 16.0
Unclassified
41.3

8.8
14.8
33.4

14.7
17.7
48.6

14.6
17.4
43.4

19.8
23.0
53.1

Note: The reported statistics are in tables 4, 5, 6, and 7.

records missing data on prior sentence to probation. Twenty-five percent of all records were missing whether a probationer had a prior juvenile sentence, and 19% were missing whether there was a prior adult sentence.
The amount of missing data also varied by severity of offense, with misdemeanants registering twice as much missing data as felons for any type of prior sentence (25% compared with
11%). Large differences between misdemeanants and felons were also found for their status on each type of prior sentence. Data were missing for more than a third of misdemeanants regarding a prior juvenile sentence  nearly 20% greater than for the prior juvenile sentence status of felons
(16%).

each type of prior sentence. Nearly a third of the data on prior juvenile sentences was missing for probationers without a completed PSI.
Less highly supervised probationers were more likely to have incomplete prior sentence information available than were those on higher levels of supervision  41% of data were missing for unclassified probationers, 16% for those on minimum or administrative supervision, and 12% for those on a high or medium level. The amount of missing data by level of supervision varied for each type of prior sentence.
Data on prior juvenile sentence status were missing for about half of probationers whose level of supervision was unclassified. Among sampled felons admitted to probation within the 12 months prior to the SAP, the average probation sentence was 42 months, or about the same as the NJRP estimate of average sentence imposed in 1994.
Few felons sentenced in the last year left probation supervision prior to the survey date.
Overall, probationers included in the
SAP had received an average sentence to probation of 39 months. The average sentence among misdemeanants (21 months) was 2½ years shorter than that for felons.

Sentence lengths
More information on prior sentences was available for probationers with a completed PSI (8% missing data compared with 22% missing data). Not having a PSI completed was strongly related to having more missing data for

longer than the average sentence to probation of felons in State courts in
1994 (40 months), as estimated by
BJS' National Judicial Reporting Program (NJRP). Persons who entered probation with shorter sentences left probation more quickly, resulting in a longer average sentence length among persons remaining to be sampled for the SAP.

Felons included in the SAP had an average sentence to probation of 51 months (appendix table 4). Because of the SAP sampling design, this is

Appendix table 4. Felony sentences of adults who entered probation, 1994, compared to sentences of adults who were on probation in 1995

Most serious current offense
Total

National Judicial
Reporting Program, 1994, felons sentenced to probation only or to probation and incarceration
Mean
sentence
Percent
length
100%
40 mo

Survey of Adults on Probation, 1995
Felons
All probationers
Mean
sentence
Percent
length
100%
39 mo

All felons
Mean
sentence
Percent
length
100%
51 mo

Admitted
Misdemeanants
last 12 months
Mean
Mean sentence sentence length Percent length 42 mo
100%
21 mo

Violent offenses
Murder
Rape
Robbery
Assault

14%
**
2
3
7

45 mo
54
56
48
41

17.3%
.2
.3
1.9
9.2

48 mo
**
**
60
36

19.5%
.1
.5
3.2
7.6

62 mo
**
**
60
55

51 mo
**
**
**
48

13.5%
.2
**
**
11.1

21
**
**
**
19

Property offenses
Burglary
Larceny/theft
Fraud

32%
10
13
9

41 mo
44
39
41

28.9%
5.8
9.9
7.2

42 mo
51
39
43

36.6%
9.7
11.1
9.6

50 mo
52
49
50

42 mo
46
38
43

18.2%
.3
8.5
4.2

20 mo
**
20
22

Drug offenses
Possession
Trafficking

34%
16
18

39 mo
38
41

21.4%
9.8
9.7

43 mo
38
49

30.7%
13.1
15.4

47 mo
42
50

39 mo
34
42

7.6%
4.6
1.6

22 mo
19
**

----

31.1%
4.7
16.7

27 mo
18
28

12.1%
.9
5.2

48 mo
**
54

39 mo
**
50

59.6%
10.2
35.2

20 mo
17
23

429,694

2,595,499

1,461,774

500,931

Public-order offenses
Traffic
Driving while intoxicated

----

Number of probationers 429,694

2,543,831

1,479,904

988,033

956,871

Note: Persons on probation in 1995 may have started their sentence at any time prior to the survey.
--Not available.
**Too few cases to provide an estimate.

Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995 13

The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the
U.S. Department of Justice.
Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is director.
BJS Special Reports address a specific topic in depth from one or more datasets that cover many topics.

Data presented in this report may be obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan, 1-800-999-0960.
The archive may also be accessed through the BJS Web site. When at the archive site, search for data set
ICPSR 2039, National Survey of
Adults on Probation.

Thomas P. Bonczar wrote this report under the supervision of Allen J.
Beck. Christopher J. Mumola,
Bonita A. Reynolds, Coliece R. Rice,
Jennifer L. McGihon, and Tracy L.
Snell provided statistical assistance.
Tom Hester edited the report, assisted by Priscilla Middleton. Marilyn
Marbrook, assisted by Yvonne Boston and Jayne Robinson, prepared the report for publication.
Allen Beck and Tom Bonczar designed the survey, developed the questionnaire and monitored data collection, production of weights, and variance estimates.
LaTerri D. Bynum, Kenneth B. Dawson, and Marita K. Perez, Demographic Surveys Division, U.S.
Bureau of the Census, carried out data collection and processing under the supervision of Kathy Creighton,
N. Gail Hoff, and Gertrude B. Odom.
Larry Altmayer, under the supervision of Stephen T. Phillips, provided programming assistance. Denise
Lewis, under the supervision of Michael Roebuck and Thomas Moore, designed the sample and weighting specifications. Cynthia Eurich, Field
Division, coordinated the field operations, under the supervision of Michael McMahon.
December 1997, NCJ-164267
This report and many of its data, as well as other reports and statistics, may be found at the Bureau of Justice Statistics World Wide Web site: http:www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ 14 Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Adult Children

...attention and affection for a healthy development, a family’s living circumstances in North America has become substantially and increasingly more comfortable, at least for the wealthy class. This has caused the transition from childhood to adulthood to become an extended period of adolescence. Individuals have been remaining emotionally and financially dependent on their parents up until their late twenties, and some even longer. Although John Rosemond had said, “the primary purpose of raising a child is to help that child get out of your life and into a life of its own,” it is proven that wealthier parents may create an easier living situation, involving less work for a for a young adult, which causes them to choose to stay living at home for a longer time period. When considering the reasons why an adult would return home after already leaving, or make the decision not to leave in the first place, it is important to recognize factors that have changed throughout history and time. In the past, a functionalist would argue that separation of youth from parents was a practical solution due to high rates of infant mortality and childhood illness; this led to nearly half of the population of children to die before the age of twenty. It was a necessity for parents to have many children, in order to ensure they would be supported in their old age. Parents in poorer families would often send their children to work for wealthier families, as this would allow them to avoid attachment and allow...

Words: 1247 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Merging Young Adult

...Human Development October 14, 2014 In order to gain more knowledge about young Psychosocial Development in Merging and adulthood, I interview a young lady in college who is approaching her 30th birthday in January. For the purpose of this interview I will called the young lady Paige, a factious name to protect her privacy. Paige is the only child for her parents. She grew up in an upper class neighborhood in Greenwich where money wasn’t an option for luxury. Both her parents are still alive and a fixture in the social life like Donald Trump. When I asked Paige about what influences her path and becoming an adult, she answered with angelic smile that life experience and her environment forces her to be an adult at an early age as 13. For example my mom had been sick at home with Osteoporosis (a joint disease) since I was 12 years of age. I had to make sure she was properly care for at night, by assisting with medication and her frequent bathroom visits. My parents had so much pride to have a living care giver. They don’t want the stigma of been sick and unable to be a nursing home picture to anyone in their social circle. I noticed at the end of her answer she got really joyfully like a child getting her first Barbie doll. In addition to that, Paige mention that she her parents thought her at early age that financial and educational success is not an option. She was helping her dad in his Law office every other weekend which earned her $20.00 “chuckle”. Moreover, Spanish...

Words: 905 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Examples Of Emerging Adults

...I like the idea of calling them "emerging adults". As Simmons writes, "The title defines people by what's going on in their development as people, rather than defining them by age, marital status, or place at church" (11). I used to call this age group "young professionals", but then realized that not all of them fit in this category. It is true that even as we continue to get developed later in life, the most crucial developmental phase happens in our twenties. And the name "emerging adults" reflects the time where people are "well on their way to being fully adult but are not quite there yet" (11). All three video provide genuine examples of Biblical Witness, and all ideas in the videos can be effective in bringing God's love to people...

Words: 274 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Adult Learning

...ADULT LEARNING THEORY The author examines two observation of the Adult Learning Theory: "Increased Attention to where learning takes place and its Multidimensional Natures". First, the author discusses "the increase attention to various contexts in which learning takes place," Merriam, Sharon (2008) Adults Learning Theory Twenty-First Century, (p96) using context broadly, ranging from the concrete ("workplace") to the more abstract, as in one's subculture or society as a whole. She states that this increased attention has been the result of a shift from the focus on the individual perspective and how they process the information they receive. Before, most of the research on the "Adult Learning Theory" was relegated to studying the individual; what they heard or receive and how they process the information. Today, more information is put on the external factors that play apart. Secondly, millions of dollars has been invested toward research concerning the multidimensional natures of adult learning. No more is education restricted to one setting, but Universities and Colleges alike has geared their curriculum's toward what will work best and which approach will be more effective. What was taboo decades ago especially for women concerning become adult learners, has now became an open market. The author discusses; "the multidimensional nature of learning and its holistic approach"."Frielier's chapter on learning through the body makes the case that learning is a holistic...

Words: 593 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Adult Deveopment Tesr

...| 1. | |Question : | |When asked to describe his life, Johnny mentioned his wife, kids, neighborly friends, and coworkers. He has described his _________________. | | | | | | | |  | |Student Answer: | | | |MACROBUTTON HTMLDirect [pic]  macrosystem | | ...

Words: 1468 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Adult Learner

...Title: Humanist and Behavioral Traditions EDU 528: Methods of Teaching in Adult Education Professor: Helen Mc Eachin Ladreine E. Price Date: 12 May 2012 Strayer University Although Jean Piaget (1896 – 1980) was looked upon as a patriarch of cognitive theories during his time, his interest in human thinking worked towards evaluating results of children intelligence tests as he tracked relationships between their ages and what types of mistakes were made. Absorbed with this information, he realized that different mistakes are made predictably by and within a certain age group which then forced his attention into what was found. With his observations, he concluded that children were not less intelligent than adults, but they actually think differently. Santrock, John W. (2008) Piaget established what is now known as the Cognitive theory, a behaviorism theory that applies emphasis to structure and development of individuals thought processes; as with memory, decision making and resolution, from youth to adulthood. Piaget, J. (1990) Piaget described key processes used by individuals in its attempt to become accustom to: assimilation and accommodation. Both of these processes are used throughout life as the person increasingly adapts to the environment in a more complex manner. Assimilation is the process of using or transforming the environment so that it can be placed in preexisting cognitive structures. Accommodations are the processes of changing cognitive structures...

Words: 1301 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Adult Attachment

...ADULT ATTACHMENT In 1984, Main and Goldwyn performed an experiment to denote whether early patterns of attachment influence adult relationships and in particular, the attachment with their own children. In this study, each participant under went an Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) where they were asked about both their adult and childhood relationships. Every adult was then classified into four groups so that the attachment with their children could be assessed. They found a link with Ainsworth's study and realised there was a correlation between the infant attachment types and the adult classification. The first classification was dismissing (detached); in this group, people's childhood experiences are not seen as important and neither are personal relationships. Referring back to the link with Ainsworth's study, they found that adults in this classification, usually had infants who were insecurely (anxious-avoidant) attached. The second group was Autonomous (secure), adults in this category thought relationships to be important and both positive and negative experiences were recalled in the AAI with insight into how they influenced themselves - this group was linked with the infant attachment type B - secure. Preoccupied (entangled) was the third group and contained adults who recognised the emotional significance of their past experiences, yet they were often unresolved - their children were found to be insecurely (anxious-ambivalent) attached. Finally, there was the...

Words: 745 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Adult Learning

...Summary Sharon B Merriam wrote, “The more we know about how adults learn the better we are able to structure learning activities that resonate with those adult learns with whom we work.” Opening with behaviorist investigate that adult learning theory in North America has pay attention on the individual learner. A learner receives data and learns how to become more self-reliant. Sharon B Merriam mentions in her report that Hill introduced the Con’vergence movement. It is when learning from environment such as well-liked teaching, fundamental citizenship, and unfavorable use activism. Non-Western Cultures are structure of circumstance that develop our thinking ahead of an individual learner. An adult social surroundings influence how she or he learns. The mind takes in details and information changes it all to wisdom. This could lead to behavior change. The way the brain processes Information from using sensory, emotions, and hands on experience are call neurobiological. Gordon Welty wrote an effective training reader Q & A It is about the work place and how the adult learning theory is used. These theories are base on Eduard Lindeman, Malcolm S. Knowles, Benjamin Bloom, Lorin W. Anderson, David Krathwohl along with a few others who acknowledge the different types of learning. Some theories are recent and some are from the early 1900’s. ...

Words: 540 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Adult Education

...Adult Education among Coastal Residents As we know, often associated with coastal communities are consist mainly of fisherman as a main job who is often describe as marginalized communities, backward and left of the current development. Adult education is a practice in which adults engage in systematic and sustained learning activities in order to gain new forms of knowledge, information, skills, attitudes, or values.[1] It can mean any form of learning adults engage in beyond traditional schooling, encompassing basic literacy to personal fulfillment as a lifelong. [2] In particular, adult education needed to fulfill and respond to the human needs.[3] Adult learning can be in any of the three contexts such as formal, non-formal and informal education. Formal education is like structured learning that takes place in an education or training institution, usually with a set curriculum. Non-formal looks like learning that is organized by educational institutions. Non-formal learning opportunities may be provided in the workplace and through the activities of civil society organizations and groups. While informal education is learning that goes on all the time, resulting from daily life activities related to work, family, community or leisure. [6][7] With education, the things that you do not know how to do, you will know later when you get the education; you can change the way your family will live in the future. By the way, according to the traditional of coastal communities...

Words: 917 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Act Like an Adult

...An adult is someone who is mature and responsible. Adulthood does not come easy, you take on numerous of new responsibilities as you mature into an adult like; having a career so you can pay bills, buying the car you always wanted, or even dating. As you mature and growing acting like an adult comes easier. Adults make wise decisions, and think about the repercussions that they would face if they make a childish decision. You have to go through those childish phases to see what it takes to not only be, but act like an adult. Once you go through those trials and tribulations’ acting like an adult becomes extremely easier. Some may argue that people aren’t adults due to their age, but in fact it’s not the age it is the mental capacity of an individual. Take the military for example, when you enlist to fight and defend your country people don’t think about the fact that most of the fighting force is probably 17, 18, or 19 year old that go on those front lines. They think of the service member as an adult, because civilians know that it takes someone of a certain mental capacity to knowingly know that they might not come back from Afghanistan, or Iraq. Acting like an adult is being completely prepared for anything that may happen. Everything isn’t for sure going to go a certain way, but you make the decisions that would classify you as acting as a child or an adult. Your persona reflects on the kind of adult you are; one that doesn’t accept defeat or the one that...

Words: 273 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Adult Development

...Adult Development Education is Vital for Great Decision Making PSY202 Adult Development Education is Vital for Decision Making Before learning about adult development, I was unaware of how the events in my life have shaped me. Looking at them now, I would have made better decisions if I had the knowledge of adult development that I have learned in this class. As an immigrant, I know what an opportunity I was given when I came to the United States. The education I have been exposed to in the United States has increased my situational awareness and overall decision-making abilities. I was born in Santiago, Chile to a middle income hard working family. My parents were very young when I was born so they didn’t have any experience raising a child. They were also very poor. My father struggled through medical school. During the earlier years of his career, I remember how he would go from house to house taking people’s blood pressure for donations. This is how we would eat. Due to my father’s intelligence, the University of Chile hired him as a scientist. He became very successful which is why the National Institute of Health bought all of us tickets to the United States. This was a very major transition in my life. I was nine years old when I came to the United States. Because I was so young, I learned English very quickly. I was the oldest of three girls. During this time of my life, I gained a sense of industry more then a sense...

Words: 1123 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Understanding People - Early Adult

...Understanding People Early Adult: 22 – 40 Years + “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man I put the ways of childhood behind me.” 1Cor 13:11 March 28, 2016 Introduction Parents drill in a child's head that we have arrived at eighteen. That's the golden age. We are lead to believe we are grown, free to set our own rules and live life as we chose. You are a lady or a young man. As if to imply an individual has reached the end of a stage. I thought I would no longer have to complete my house chores but I almost got knocked down. Developmental theorist say it is in fact the beginning of early adulthood. Adults are in transition. In spite of the young adult’s proclamation of being grown, they are still developing and growing in many facets of life. Theorists such as Egan, Levinson, Sell, Sheehy, and Gilligan expressed beliefs of adult’s transitional stage (Fawcett, p69). Early adult (some call it pre-adult or young adult), range between ages eighteen to forty. Some theorist began as early as eighteen to thirty-five. For the purpose of this paper I will use the referenced author age range, which is age twenty-two to age forty. This paper will expand on the definition of early adulthood by unpacking the various definitions and theories concepts. I will further explore that perspective as well as other theorist perspective such as Erik Erickson and Jean Piaget. And finally end with some...

Words: 797 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Young Adults Living at Home

...having a longer transition between adolescence to adult hood, or they’re having difficulty finding a job, or maybe they’re just not used to the idea of living without mom and dad, young adults should be allowed to live with or near relatives until they are emotionally, mentally, and financially. Studies show that our generation is experiencing a longer transition between adolescence and adulthood. More than one out every ten young adults still live with their parents and forty percent of all young adults find themselves moving back with parents at least once. Many never even move out once! More than sixty percent of young adult males stay living with their parents until they are in their late twenties. Two out every three young adults are living with a romantic partner, later returning with parents after a divorce or a failed relationship. Although the number of young adults living with a romantic partner is rising, the average age at which people get married is also rising. What used to be the age that people would be married by, twenty one has now risen to twenty nine! I suppose our generation seems to be experiencing some commitment issues as well. Lack of work in this bad economy is a good motive to live with or near relatives too. Young adults go through an average of eight jobs in their twenty’s, that’s a lot of job changes. With it getting so hard to find a job and the risk of losing your job always running, many young adults feel more economically secure living with parents...

Words: 659 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Adult Learning Theories

...explains how adults learn. The adult learning process is complex, context bound, and highly personal. As a result, there is no single theory of learning that can be applied to all adults. Instead, the literature of the past century has yielded a variety of models, sets of assumptions and principles, theories, and explanations that make up the adult learning knowledge base. The more adult educators are familiar with this knowledge base, the more effective their practice can be, and the more responsive it can be to the needs of adult learners. This fact sheet reviews three major theories and discusses their implications for practice. What is Andragogy? In attempting to document differences between the ways adults and children learn, Malcolm Knowles (1980) popularized the concept of andragogy (“the art and science of helping adults learn”), contrasting it with pedagogy (“the art and science of teaching children”). He posited a set of assumptions about adult learners, namely, that the adult learner • Moves from dependency to increasing self-directedness as he/she matures and can direct his/her own learning; • Draws on his/her accumulated reservoir of life experiences to aid learning; • Is ready to learn when he/she assumes new social or life roles; • Is problem-centered and wants to apply new learning immediately; and • Is motivated to learn from internal, rather than external, factors. Inherent in these assumptions are implications for practice. Knowles (1984) suggests that adult educators...

Words: 1656 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Spirituality and Adult Learning

...Title Marshall R. Chafee INFT 101 9/9/2013 Title The Article I selected focuses on how spirituality influences adult learning. There is often some confusion between "spirituality" and" religion." Generally, spirituality is described as an individuals personal experience with the sacred, that can be experienced anywhere. Religion, on the other hand is often described as an organized community of faith. (Tisdell, 2008). Spirituality has had an important influence on adult education throughout history. There are four primary ways spirituality influences adult learning. The first way states that many adult learning professors have had a career in ministry, at some point (Tisdell, 2008). The second way states that recent writers have discussed the influence of spirituality and soul in how it affects learning on an individual level (Dirkx, 1997, 2001; English and Gillen, 2000; Hunt, 2001). The third influence would be learning in the workplace, here authors focus on how it influences how they think or act in a professional environment or in working for the common good as a leader or educator (Bolman and Deal, 1995; Daloz, Keen, Keen, and Parks, 1994; Conger, 1994; English, Fenwick, and Parsons, 2003; Fox, 1995). Finally we see a strong influence of spirituality present in those educating for social justice in myriad adult education settings (Clover, Follen, and Hall, 1998; Dillard, 2006; English, 2005; Tisdell, 2003; Tolliver and Tisdell, 2006). Much of the learning from these...

Words: 818 - Pages: 4