HOPE Springs Eternal

Oleson, James C.

doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12262

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The recent study of a community supervision program known as Project HOPE appears to bear further witness to this equivocal conclusion. The initial study of HOPE [51] used a randomized design and found that swift and certain, but not severe, responses to parole violations led to fewer future violations, arrests, and reimprisonment. This celebrated finding inspired 160 program replications across the United States [52].…”

Section: Effectiveness and Recidivism: Mid-20th To Early 21st Centurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Still Asking ‘What Works’: A Punishment Question for the Ages or an Aging Punishment Question?

Lucken

2021

Histories

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expectation that punishment be effective at controlling crime is a longstanding convention in the U.S., and no doubt elsewhere. While the history of American punishment has not been shaped entirely by the question of efficacy, it has played a predominant role in justifying penal policy for over 200 years. The question has become even more salient in policy decision-making of late, as research has begun to certify and consolidate findings on what is effective at reducing recidivism. What is lacking in this ongoing conversation, however, is a critique of this penal policy question and the answers it generates in the form of recidivism rates. The current paper fills this void by interrogating the claims of the evaluation literature, namely that better proof of what is effective is available and that more research is still needed. The questions and findings of 19th, 20th, and 21st Century seekers of what is effective in the American adult penal system are recounted and analyzed using several data sources. They include government reports, professional association meeting minutes, legislative documents, scholarly reports, individual studies, research reviews, and statistical analysis of systematic reviews. Ultimately, an overarching narrative is provided that deepens and challenges our understanding of what is known about what is effective.

show abstract

Section: Effectiveness and Recidivism: Mid-20th To Early 21st Centurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Still Asking ‘What Works’: A Punishment Question for the Ages or an Aging Punishment Question?

Lucken

2021

Histories

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hawken & Kleiman's (2009) early assessments found the program reduced violations for failed drug tests and reduced rearrest and reincarceration rates in Hawaii. The success of the program led to over 160 replications in the continental US (Oleson, 2016). Subsequent research on these replications, however, have been mixed (Hamilton Z. , Campbell, van Wormer, Kigerl, & Posey, 2016;Lattimore, et al, 2016;O'Connell, Brent, & Visher, 2016).…”

Section: Responses To the Health Needs Of Community Corrections Popul...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Corrections and the Health of Criminal Justice Populations

Matz

2018

Journal of Health and Human Services Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community supervision remains the most prevalent form of correctional control in the United States, with 1 in 53 adults on probation supervision. A large proportion of probationers, as well as parolees, possess distinct health issues associated with substance abuse, mental illness, and co-occurring disorders. These behavioral disorders influence and interact with criminal behavior patterns, commonly expressed as dynamic risk factors, necessitating increased collaboration with community service providers and health organizations. This article provides an overview of community corrections, health problems associated with community corrections populations, programming considerations, and notable barriers to expanding justice-health collaboration.

show abstract

“…While research is limited, a few studies have discussed the presence of TJ practices in probation programs (e.g., Henshaw et al, 2019; Oleson, 2016). Compliance with probation conditions plays a large role in the success of TJ practices in probationary settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Swift and Certain Probation

Frailing

Alfonso

Taylor

2020

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the manifestation of therapeutic jurisprudence in specialty courts such as mental health and drug courts has received attention in the literature, there is little scholarship on the manifestation and function of therapeutic jurisprudence in probation settings. This study examines therapeutic jurisprudence in the context of a HOPE-based probation program called Swift and Certain probation. We observed status hearings and surveyed participants on their perceptions of the program for over 2 years. We found that therapeutic jurisprudence was manifested in the judge’s liberal use of praise during status hearings, which appeared to be an important part of participants’ positive perceptions of him and of procedural justice more generally. It was also manifested, though less directly, in interactions and relationships participants have with their probation officers. We conclude with suggestions for the implementation of therapeutic justice practices in Swift and Certain and similar probation programs.

show abstract

HOPE Springs Eternal

Cited by 10 publications

References 48 publications

Still Asking ‘What Works’: A Punishment Question for the Ages or an Aging Punishment Question?

Still Asking ‘What Works’: A Punishment Question for the Ages or an Aging Punishment Question?

Community Corrections and the Health of Criminal Justice Populations

Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Swift and Certain Probation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About