While proponents of quantitative risk/need instruments believe they improve agency decisionmaking and performance, skeptics place more confidence in human judgment and discretion, guided by professional norms. The Wisconsin Client Classification instruments were adopted in Oklahoma in 1981, with three goals in mind: to maintain the current level of client misbehavior, to improve resource utilization, and to minimize client involvement in formal supervision and minimize client contact with officers. Over the years, there have been changes in the classification system and reassessments of client risks/needs. Probation officers who responded to the survey used in this study expressed neutral or negative, rather than positive, attitudes toward the instruments. Only 25-33 percent believed the instruments were useful in identifying high-risk offenders, providing initial insight into the offender, or helping officers allocate their time among different clients. On the whole, attitudes toward the instruments were not correlated with job satisfaction, but were related to the sense of job effectiveness. 1 note, 7 tables, and 21 references
Related Datasets
Similar Publications
- A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of virtual reality job interview training in prison employment services
- Juvenile Justice Contact, Educational Trajectories, and Recidivism: A Mixed Method Evaluation
- Day Reporting Centers as an Intermediate Sanction: Evaluation of Programs Operated by the ATTIC Correctional Services