The two programs were delivered by the same agency in Marion County, Indiana with essentially the same technology, but the pretrial and postconviction programs differed in several ways: variations in clients; variations associated with program rationale; and differences in actual program operation. Both programs shared some problems in program delivery including limitations of the technology of electronic monitoring equipment. There often occurred a gap in the pretrial and postconviction programs between what clients were told to expect while on home detention and the limited capacity of staff to actually monitor them in the field. A fundamental problem in the pretrial program relates to the lack of any real power among program staff. It is unreasonable to expect that a postconviction program can be transferred directly to a pretrial population. 2 tables and 18 references
Downloads
Related Datasets
Similar Publications
- Reducing Disorder, Fear, and Crime in Public Housing: An Evaluation of a Drug Crime Elimination Program in Spokane, Washington: Final Report
- National Assessment of the Byrne Formula Grant Program: A Seven State Study; An Analysis of State and Local Responses to the Byrne Formula Grant Program; Report 3
- Evaluation of the Multnomah County Drug Testing and Evaluation Program