Show simple item record

dc.contributor Cabaldon, Christopher en_US
dc.contributor.advisor Wassmer, Robert W. en_US
dc.contributor.author Adelman, Justin
dc.date.accessioned 2020-02-10T22:54:02Z
dc.date.available 2020-02-10T22:54:02Z
dc.date.issued 2020-02-10
dc.date.submitted 2019-12-05
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/215072
dc.description Thesis (M.P.P.A., Public Policy and Administration)--California State University, Sacramento, 2019. en_US
dc.description.abstract There are approximately one quarter of a million individuals on supervised probation in California. This is more than the number of people incarcerated in, or on parole from, state prisons, and equates to roughly one in every hundred California adults. As the most substantial means of correctional supervision in the state, probation is a crucial piece of public safety when policymakers consider potential changes to any statewide approach to criminal justice. Prior research into probation as a system indicated several critical factors for predicting the likelihood of a probationer’s success or failure: education, criminal background, economic and family ties, race and ethnicity, and mental health. These important elements of a probationer’s life are significant predictors of whether the probationer will complete the term of his or her supervision. However, these are systemic realities that are often hard to solve, or even clearly identify, through targeted policy decisions. However, there are other factors entirely within reach of policy intervention. One example is the use of standardized or well-defined and appropriate caseloads for probation officers. Historically, researchers have explored the impact of probation officer caseload sizes on outcomes and found mixed results, mostly because of the unique circumstances of each study. My research utilizes a regression analysis of probation revocations in California’s 58 counties over eight years between 2010 and 2017. The primary focus of the regression is a comparison of the revocation rate and the overall caseload size in each county, although I also examined other factors such as county racial demographics, education attainment, and economic metrics. Additionally, I provide additional context and insight into the implications suggested by the regression results and potential policy avenues to improve probation in California. I found in my regression results that population density, the county’s median age, the ratio of probationers to probation officers, and the level of state funding provided through the California Community Corrections Performance Incentive (SB 678) program all impact a county’s probation failure rate at statistically significant levels. Comparing against existing literature and noting the limitations of this particular study, I find that careful management of differentiated caseloads based on an offender’s potential risk to re-offend and increasing financial incentives to counties are beneficial policy actions to reducing the likelihood of probationers failing the terms of their supervision. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Public Policy and Administration en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.subject Probation--Evaluation en_US
dc.subject Criminal justice personnel en_US
dc.subject Law enforcement--California en_US
dc.title Somebody's watching me: examining the impact of probation officer caseloads on revocation rates en_US
dc.type Masters thesis en_US

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

My Account

RSS Feeds