What the COVID-19 Pandemic Teaches About the essential Practices of Community Corrections and Supervision

Date01 September 2021
DOI10.1177/00938548211019073
Published date01 September 2021
Subject MatterArticles
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2021, Vol. 48, No. 9, September 2021, 1300 –1316.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211019073
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
1300
WHAT THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC TEACHES
ABOUT THE ESSENTIAL PRACTICES OF
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS AND
SUPERVISION
CRAIG S. J. SCHWALBE
Columbia University School of Social Work
DEBORAH KOETZLE
John Jay College of Criminal Justice
The COVID-19 pandemic occurred in the midst of a reform movement in probation and parole supervision in the United
States. Because social distancing orders created significant disruptions in probation and parole, the pandemic provides an
opportunity to explore the innovative ways that probation and parole officers adjusted their supervision strategies with clients.
We surveyed probation and parole officers in the United States (N = 1,054; 65% female, 66% probation) in May–June 2020
about the supervision strategies they used with people on their caseloads before and immediately after the pandemic’s onset.
Data indicate that overall rates of contact did not change, but that in-person contacts were replaced with remote communica-
tion strategies. Client access to electronic communication platforms, especially video conferencing, facilitated more frequent
contact and more reliance on behavioral tactics and treatment-oriented case management approaches in the post-COVID
period. Results reveal the potential role for video conferencing as an integral element of probation and parole reform.
Keywords: probation; parole; community corrections
The COVID-19 pandemic that emerged in early 2020 brought unprecedented change
and disruption to all sectors of society in the United States and around the world. By
April 2020, the U.S. Federal Government issued guidelines encouraging “social distanc-
ing” and many states had “stay at home” orders, resulting in school and university clo-
sures across much of the country, office buildings shuttered with staff working remotely
from home, and the closing of “nonessential services,” including retail stores, movie
theaters, and restaurants. With over 1.8 million confirmed cases and nearly 100,000
AUTHORS’ NOTE: The authors would like to thank Nathan Lowe, Program Director, Grants & Research, at
the American Probation and Parole Association and Myrinda Schweitzer Smith, Deputy Director, and Jennifer
Scott, Program Director, at the University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute, for their critical assistance with
recruitment efforts. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose related to the current research in this
unfunded study. Data reported in this study are available for replication and to confirm its findings. Please
contact the first author with a written request to access these data. Correspondence concerning this article
should be addressed to Craig S. J. Schwalbe, Columbia University School of Social Work, 1255 Amsterdam
Ave., New York, NY 10027; e-mail: css2109@columbia.edu.
1019073CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211019073Criminal Justice and BehaviorSchwalbe, Koetzle / Probation and Parole Supervision
research-article2021
Schwalbe, Koetzle / PROBATION AND PAROLE SUPERVISION 1301
deaths by June 1, 2020 (Dong et al., 2020), it seemed clear that some of these changes
would persist for months to come.
The criminal justice system has not been immune from the impacts of the pandemic.
There is some evidence to suggest police had been advised to reduce arrests and shift polic-
ing strategies, the courts in many states closed temporarily, and community corrections
generally shifted to remote and virtual supervision strategies (Buchanan et al., 2020;
Jennings & Perez, 2020; Marcum, 2020; Swan et al., 2020). Given the infectious nature of
COVID-19, particular attention had been paid to the spread of the disease in prisons and
jails, with numerous calls for releasing low-risk and vulnerable individuals from incarcera-
tion. The Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, passed into law on
March 27, 2020, allocated US$100 million to the Federal Bureau of Prison for the release
of individuals to home confinement, while some state and local governments took steps to
accelerate release of low-risk elderly and health compromised people who were incarcer-
ated (Abraham et al., 2020; Akiyama et al., 2020).
Because of the need for social distancing and related health implications, much of the
emerging literature on the criminal justice system’s response to the pandemic has focused
on prisons and jails (Byrne et al., 2020). However, the impact on community corrections
should not be dismissed (Viglione et al., 2020). Much like the prison population, individuals
on community supervision carry a substantial burden of health problems and are dispropor-
tionally Black or Latino/a (Binswanger et al., 2011; Davis & Pacchiana, 2004; Kaeble,
2018; O’Connell et al., 2020), the very groups that have been more heavily impacted by
COVID-19. Decreasing in-person contacts and treatment services provided by criminal jus-
tice and related agencies coupled with decreasing social support and increased rates of
unemployment and related economic disparities make this already vulnerable population
even more so (Gonzalez et al., 2020). Although there is some sense that community super-
vision officers have been advised to reduce or suspend in-person reporting and arrests for
technical violations, little is known about the nature of community supervision and support
strategies in place during the pandemic (Marcum, 2020; Swan et al., 2020). This study
seeks to explore how probation and parole officers adapted their supervision practices dur-
ing the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS AND SUPERVISION STRATEGIES
Community corrections encompasses a range of programs and services aimed at super-
vising and treating people in the community. The vast majority of these approaches are
intended to divert people from incarceration and include diversion, problem-solving courts,
day reporting, alternative to incarceration programs, and reentry programs, along with pro-
bation and parole. With over 4.5 million people under some form of community-based
supervision (Kaeble & Cowhig, 2018), the nature and quality of supervision practices have
significant implications for both community safety and those on supervision.
Inherent in community corrections is a tension between law enforcement and rehabilita-
tive approaches to supervision (Klockars, 1972; Skeem & Manchak, 2008; Steiner et al.,
2004). Achieving the dual goals of keeping the community safe while providing meaningful
services and treatment to individuals on supervision is perhaps best viewed through the
Risk–Need–Responsivity (RNR) framework. Within this framework, individuals who are at
highest risk to reoffend should receive more services and be supervised more intensely than

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT