Return to search results
Availability and Use of Intermediate Sanctions by Judges and Corrections Professionals in the United States, 1994
This survey is part of a larger project designed to explore
ways to increase the availability and use of intermediate sanctions
(IS) on a national level without jeopardizing public safety.
A model for an Intermediate Punishment System is suggested. The
survey was undertaken to ascertain attitudes and practices concerning
IS for three groups: state and federal judges (Part 3), correctional
system administrators responsible for community corrections in their
state or jurisdiction (Part 1), and program directors who actually
operated community programs (Part 2). The units of analysis were
intermediate sanctions/programs operating in jurisdictions across the
United States. Data were collected on the availability and frequency
of use of IS, as well as costs, client/staffing ratios, use of
rehabilitative programming, respondents' opinions concerning the
field's needs, and program eligibility criteria. Information was also
gathered on how decisions were made to place offenders into the
various programs,
program outcome and whether the program was
viewed as being successful (and how this was measured),
and types of new programs needed.
Complete Metadata
| @type | dcat:Dataset |
|---|---|
| accessLevel | public |
| bureauCode |
[
"011:21"
]
|
| contactPoint |
{
"fn": "Open Data Office of Justice Programs (USDOJ)",
"@type": "vcard:Contact",
"hasEmail": "mailto:opendata@usdoj.gov"
}
|
| dataQuality |
false
|
| description | This survey is part of a larger project designed to explore ways to increase the availability and use of intermediate sanctions (IS) on a national level without jeopardizing public safety. A model for an Intermediate Punishment System is suggested. The survey was undertaken to ascertain attitudes and practices concerning IS for three groups: state and federal judges (Part 3), correctional system administrators responsible for community corrections in their state or jurisdiction (Part 1), and program directors who actually operated community programs (Part 2). The units of analysis were intermediate sanctions/programs operating in jurisdictions across the United States. Data were collected on the availability and frequency of use of IS, as well as costs, client/staffing ratios, use of rehabilitative programming, respondents' opinions concerning the field's needs, and program eligibility criteria. Information was also gathered on how decisions were made to place offenders into the various programs, program outcome and whether the program was viewed as being successful (and how this was measured), and types of new programs needed. |
| distribution |
[
{
"@type": "dcat:Distribution",
"title": "Availability and Use of Intermediate Sanctions by Judges and Corrections Professionals in the United States, 1994",
"accessURL": "https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06788.v2"
}
]
|
| identifier |
"3053"
|
| issued | 1998-06-25T00:00:00 |
| keyword |
[
"community service programs",
"correctional facilities",
"judges",
"offenders",
"program evaluation",
"public safety",
"sanctions"
]
|
| language |
[
"eng"
]
|
| license | http://www.usa.gov/publicdomain/label/1.0/ |
| modified | 2013-05-15T14:40:48 |
| programCode |
[
"011:060"
]
|
| publisher |
{
"name": "National Institute of Justice",
"@type": "org:Organization",
"subOrganizationOf": {
"id": 22,
"name": "Office of Justice Programs",
"acronym": "OJP",
"parentOrganization": {
"id": 10,
"name": "Department of Justice",
"acronym": "DOJ"
},
"parentOrganizationID": 10
}
}
|
| title | Availability and Use of Intermediate Sanctions by Judges and Corrections Professionals in the United States, 1994 |
