Community Service by Offenders

• NCJ Number: 74556
• Author(s): M K Harris
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 92 pages
• Grant Number(s): AH-O
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Corrections; American Bar Assoc (Basics)
• Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

Various aspects of the concept of community service orders as an alternative criminal justice sanction are addressed in a report prepared by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency.

Abstract

Because of limited fiscal resources available to corrections and the problem of severe prison overcrowding, legislators, judges, and criminal justice officials should consider community-based sanctions for those offenders who can safely remain in the community. Four topics are addressed, including the theoretical aspects of using community service as a court-imposed penalty, practical considerations, monitoring and evaluation efforts, and unresolved issues raised by community service sentencing. A community service program places convicted offenders in unpaid positions with nonprofit or tax-supported agencies to perform a specified number of hours of work or service within a given time limit as a sentencing option or condition. Community service programs operate under a variety of titles, such as court referral, volunteer work, or service restitution. Sentences involving such programs provide an alternative to incarceration, satisfy the community's desire for retribution, and may offer relief from guilt for the offender. The general steps undertaken in establishing a community service progam are froming a core group of advocates; defining the nature of the program, including specifying purposes and target populations; enlisting support from orgainzations and individuals in the community; raising funds; hiring staff; and screening work sites. Monitoring and evaluating the programs require consideration of the consequences on offenders, criminal justice agencies, human service agencies, and the general public. Cost-benefit analyses that have been conducted thus far generally presented a positive picture. Unresolved issues to be considered involve the involuntary nature of the services performed, discrimination in selecting program participants, and disparity of sentencing judges. Approximately 30 references; appendixes of program listings, agency listings, and forms; and extensive exhibits are included.