The purpose of this survey was to ascertain the
attitudes and practices of judges, system administrators, and program
directors regarding intermediate sanctions with the further objective of
exploring ways to increase the availability and use of intermediate
sanctions on a national level.
Survey questionnaires were mailed to judges,
program directors, and administrators to elicit information on
attitudes and practices with respect to IS.
A 10-percent random sample was used for the judges survey.
Both federal and state jurisdictions were sampled -- federal district
courts and state courts of general jurisdiction. Officials responsible
for community corrections in each jurisdiction were selected from the
"1993 Directory of Juvenile and Adult Correctional Departments,
Agencies, and Paroling Authorities." System administrators were
asked to identify personnel who actually operated their IS programs.
Intermediate sanctions/programs operating in jurisdictions across
the United States.
self-enumerated mailed questionnaires
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
program outcome and whether the program was
viewed as being successful (and how this was measured),
and types of new programs needed.
The survey of judges yielded a 32-percent response rate
without follow-up. The survey of correctional administrators resulted in
responses for 41 jurisdictions without follow-up. Regarding program
directors, for whom follow-up contact was desired, responses were
received from all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
and the Federal Bureau of Prisons for 158 different sanctions