The public generally feels certain that prisons are necessary for violent offenders. However, other, non-incarcerating punishments and sanctions can be equally effective or more effective, and also can be less costly, for many non-violent offenders. Unlike prison, which separates the offender from the victim, these community-based sanctions can include restitution for the victims. These sanctions can be demanding and restrictive (more rigorous than sitting around in prison playing cards, watching TV, and learning lessons from more dangerous, violent felons), and they can force offenders to be accountable for their actions. At times a reconciliation or healing process for both the victim and the offender is possible. In addition, Intermediate Sanctions may be appropriate for those who have successfully completed drug treatment, education, and other rehabilitation programs in prison - see the section on " What Works."
An expanded range of sentencing options can exist between the two extremes of probation on the one hand and incarceration on the other. These intermediate sanctions give the judge much greater discretion in selecting punishments that fit the circumstances of the crime, the victim, and the offender. They allow the maintenance of expensive prison cells for violent offenders, and offer greater opportunities for rehabilitation of offenders. And they do this at relatively low cost. The primary options that are being used in various states, and can be applied in various combinations, are:
An evaluation of a well designed Florida ISP program concluded that graduates commit new crimes at a lower rate than a comparable group of offenders released from prison (Wagner and Baird, "Evaluation of the Florida Community Control Program," National Inst. of Justice, Jan. 1993). Further, the study found that FCCP saved the state $2750 per offender, not counting restitution, taxes, and family support paid by offenders who could work while under supervision.
However, ISP's that are solely oriented to tight surveillance, without rehabilitation services, may not improve recidivism, even though the resultant coercion and diminution of freedom make an added punitive sanction and create a public safety benefit (Nat. Inst. of Justice Research in Brief, May, 1993).
The amount of a fine may be based on the crime and on the offender's ability to pay. Restitution is sometimes achieved by a mediation process, where the victim and offender meet face to face in the presence of a trained mediator.
A study of 13,000 cases by the Nat. Center for Juvenile Justice (U.S. Dept. of Justice Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Sept. 1992) showed that: "In cases involving male juveniles, recidivism occurred significantly less often in cases where restitution was paid than in cases involving other informal dispositions (12 percent versus 20 percent)."
For further information on drug treatment programs, click:
The Harris County (Texas) Day Reporting Program (known as the Super Intensive Probation Program (SIPP) operates two County Centers with a combined capacity of 1750 offenders. A broad range of services is provided, including: substance abuse evaluations, computerized education lab, support group meetings, individual and group therapy, vocational intervention (including employment referals), life skills training, health and personal growth, education (including AIDS awareness, conflict resolution, parenting skills, and employment skills).
Maricopa County (Arizona) Day Reporting furloughs selected offenders from incarceration into a program of strict community supervision and structured reintegration services. Features include job placement and job readiness, education/literacy, self-help support groups, intensive addiction counseling, community service, and other programs focusing on health, life skills, and family.
86% of the offenders completing the 12 week Maricopa program had no new arrests or serious rule violations.There were 2% absconders and 11% returns to jail.
Non-compliance with the terms of an intermediate sentence can result in harsh consequences, including a jail or prison sentence.
1 "Longitudinal Study: Alternatives to Incarceration Sentence Evaluation, Year 3", September 1996, prepared by The Justice Education Center, Inc., for the Connecticut Judicial Branch and Department of Correction.
See graph for Drug Offenders Under Age 21
See graph for Drug Offenders with Prior Convictions
See graph for Offenders Under Age 21
See graph for Offenders with Prior Convictions
It’s high time that New York State put much more emphasis on Alternatives to Incarceration, instead of the relatively ineffective, exorbitantly costly, violence-prone, and often personality-destructive prisons. For many offenders, restorative justice is vastly more appropriate. Intermediate Sanctions (residential community treatment centers, day reporting, house arrest, etc.) can more economically provide rehabilitative alcohol and drug treatment, require restitution and community service, and - where needed - facilitate education, vocational training, and job preparation .
"It is apparent that each year thousands of persons who present no, or a minimal, threat to public safety are being committed to State prison. And this is being done despite the exorbitant costs involved and despite the fact that community-based programs may well be as effective, or appreciably more effective, in rehabilitating these offenders."
"Obviously, alternative programs, particularly those that offer long-term residential drug treatment, are not only a cheaper form of supervision but also may do a better job than incarceration in rehabilitating certain offenders."
"The overwhelming percentage of trial judges consider limited program availability to be an obstacle in sentencing offenders. Because alternative programs are less costly than incarceration, and because research strongly suggests that certain programs can be as effective, or even more effective, than incarceration in reducing recidivism, an intelligent and cost-effective criminal justice policy in New York requires that the State (as well as local governments) adequately fund alternative programs that have demonstrated their success in supervising and treating offenders."
(1) Report of the Unified Court System’s Committee on Alternative Criminal Sanctions, December 1996.
Let your voice be heard. See the Action Page
Prisoners over 60 are reported to have a re arrest rate of less than 10%, compared to a rate of around 70% for prisoners aged 18-24.
Alternatives to incarceration for older, infirm inmates, with stringent probation and home detention with electronic surveillance, therefore makes good economic and safety sense. Even those who must be placed on public asistance or transfered to state run convalescent nursing homes would cost the state less than $20,000, a fraction of what it costs to keep them behind guarded walls. (Modern Maturity, March-April, 1997)
"Policies on intermediate sanctions can be linked to those on mandatory sentences because they must confront the issues of balancing the costs of incarceration with the need to enhance safety in our communities. Many have argued that long mandatory sentences are neither cost effective nor effective at crime prevention because they confine individuals beyond their criminally active years. Research has incated that as offenders age, their risk of recidivism decreases. As part of their administrative policies on intermediate sanction, states could consider some form of administrative review to determine if continued confinement is required for those serving long mandatory sentences." ("Key Legislative Issues in CJ; Intermediate Sanctions," Nat Inst. of Justice Research in Action, January 1997)
Research in Germany indicates that youthful offenders sent to prison had higher rates of recidivism than those given alternative sanctions. Removing youths from society - even when incarceration included job training - appeared to negatively affect their ability to find employument when released. In spite of intensive job trtainig and good intentions, prisons were believed to destroy postrelease opportunities for normal living.
Results showed that the number of offfenders per 100,000 inhabitants increased by 7 percent in regions where imprisonment was the sentencing norm and decreased by 13 percent in regions thot opted for alternative sentencing.
After reviewing some 2000 case dispositions, researchers asigned judges to one of two groups: "authoritarian" judges and "liberal" judges deemed more communicative, more positive in their expectations of offenders, and milder in their sentencing approach. Social workeres who were responsible for monitoring community service sentences were similarly categorized. The rates at which offenders disobeyed judicial orders were analyzed:
The CURE-NY recommendations on Intermediate Sanctions are part of the Seven Recommendations included in the What Works page.
Let your voice be heard. See the Action Page
To return to the Home Page, click: