Factsheets: Crime Victims & Corrections

• Overview
• References
• Bibliography
• For Additional Information...

• At year-end 1999, more than six million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole (3.1 percent of all U. S. adult residents). Nearly 4.5 million adult men and women were on probation or parole at the end of 1999, an increase of about 119,000 during the year. ( Bureau of Justice Statistics, Correction, 2000).
• In 1998 an estimated 950,000 women were under the care, custody, or control of correctional agencies (Greenfeld,1999).
• A 1996 nationwide study conducted by the National Center for Victims of Crime showed that adult correctional agencies in 78 percent of states notified victims of changes in incarcerated offenders’ status; juvenile correctional agencies in 55 percent of states and parole agencies in 80 percent of states provided such notification services for victims. (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996).
• Adult correctional agencies in 75 percent of states, juvenile correctional agencies in 50 percent of states and parole agencies in 68 percent of states have representatives active in local, state and regional coalitions of crime victims and service providers. In addition, adult correctional agencies in 75 percent of states, juvenile correctional agencies in 40 percent of states and parole agencies in 68 percent of states provide information, training and technical assistance by agency professional staff to crime victims and service providers within their states. (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996.)

Overview

In 1982, the Final Report of the President’s Task Force on Victims of Crime included four key recommendations to improve victim services in the parole process:

1. Parole boards should notify victims of crime and their families in advance of parole hearings, if names and addresses have been previously provided by these individuals;
2. Parole boards should allow victims of crime, their families, or their representatives to attend parole hearings and make known the effect of the offender’s crime on them;
3. Parole boards should take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that parolees charged with a crime while on parole are immediately returned to custody and kept there until the case is adjudicated; and
4. Parole boards should not apply the exclusionary rule to parole revocation hearings.

At that time, there were no similar recommendations for probation or institutional corrections. Much has changed to remedy the lack of attention to victims’ rights and services throughout the institutional and community corrections process.

In 1986, the American Correctional Association (ACA) developed a broad policy statement on victim services and charged its newly formed Task Force on Victims of Crime with developing recommendations to expand upon its policy. In 1988, the ACA Task Force published a landmark report with 15 recommendations, which then became the foundation of four training and technical assistance projects funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime entitled Crime Victims and Corrections: Setting and Implementing the Agenda for the 1990s.

The basic recommendations of the ACA Task Force on Victims of Crime were divided into four major areas:

1. Victim Services in Corrections

A broad range of services helps victims through the corrections process, including: notification of offender status (including transfer and release); protecting victims’ confidentiality from offenders; handling complaints from victims and witnesses; establishing programs to protect victims and witnesses from intimidation, harassment or harm; and allowing victims input at parole hearings. 2. Offender-Directed Programs

Such programs serve two purposes: first, they give victims and offenders the opportunity to discuss and listen to each others’ views about the criminal incident; and second, these programs can help determine conditions of the offender’s supervision — including restitution, community service and fines, and “no-contact” orders.

“Impact of Crime on Victims” classes, initiated by the California Youth Authority in 1986, bring crime victims into correctional institutions’ educational programs to help youthful offenders understand how their crimes affected their victims, their victims’ families, and society. This innovative program has been replicated in many other states through the Crime Victims and Corrections training and technical assistance project sponsored by the National Center for Victims of Crime.

Restitution is of significant importance to victims, as financial losses resulting from crime can devastate a victim and his or her family. In 1996, adult correctional agencies in 78 percent of states, juvenile agencies in 60 percent of states, and parole agencies in 46 percent of states were authorized by state courts to order restitution from offenders sentenced to prison terms (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996).

Restitution also holds offenders accountable for their actions. Some correctional agencies invoke a variety of sanctions to encourage restitution payments by inmates, including: restricting activities; automatically deducting a percentage of offenders’ earnings; revoking privileges or “good time” credits; or extending the length of community supervision until the restitution obligation is fulfilled.

3. Responding to Staff Victimization and Critical Incidents

On a daily basis, institutional and community corrections professionals assume many risks just to get their jobs done. When such risks result in critical incidents — such as assaults, hostage situations, and riots — correctional agencies must be prepared to deal with the aftermath, which often includes severe trauma for victims, witnesses and other agency personnel.

In 1996, there were 75 percent of state correctional agencies, 84 percent of state juvenile correctional agencies, and 42 percent of state parole agencies that had programs and protocol to assist staff involved in critical incidents within institutional and community corrections (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996).

4. Building Networks Among Victim Service Providers and Correctional Professionals

The best way to improve victim services in corrections is to maintain open, continual communication among the respective disciplines.

States are responding to the need for strong networks of correctional professionals among victim service providers by: joining each others’ state and local coalitions; providing cross-training on a variety of key issues affecting both crime victims and corrections; establishing victim advisory boards for correctional agencies and correction’s advisory boards for victim agencies; and, recently, implementing combined public awareness programs about victim services in corrections.

In recent years, jurisdictions around the nation have begun to struggle with redefining juvenile justice. The corrections field has recognized the equally important equation of “victim justice” when the offenders are juveniles. There is no evidence that victims of juveniles need services less than victims of adults; instead, research suggests that victims of juveniles and adults respond similarly to the trauma of victimization and to the criminal justice process. The American Correctional Association has led the way through its adoption of 1994 Report and Recommendations on Victims of Juvenile Crime of the ACA Victims Committee — now one of the ACA’s standing committees, having evolved out of the 1986 Task Force on Victims of Crime.

These recommendations were based on a year of research and review of model programs and policies that have significantly improved the plight of victims of juvenile offenders, as well as the youthful offenders themselves. The ACA has taken the opportunity to lead the nation in establishing standards, model programs, policies and protocol for serving and assisting victims of juvenile offenders — just as it provided vision and strength to the rapidly expanding discipline of adult corrections-based victim service programs.

In addition to the ACA Victims Committee, the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) started a Victim Issues Committee in 1992, and in 1994 adopted a policy statement on victims which states that probation, parole and other community-based correctional professionals should be acquainted with and sensitive to the needs of victims while performing their primary service responsibilities to the public and to offenders. The APPA position on victims further states that this “acquaintance and sensitivity” must be reflected in all agency programming, particularly as mandated by law (APPA, 1994). APPA has provided tremendous leadership in efforts to improve victims’ rights and services in community corrections and to promote understanding among crime victims, victim advocates, and probation and parole officials. Other corrections-related organizations have also begun to recognize and promote the rights and need for services for crime victims. The Association of Parole Administrators, International (APAI) passed a National Crime Victims’ Rights Week resolution for the first time in 1992. Also the Restorative Justice Association’s (RJA) members and proponents recognize the importance of victims’ input and participation as vital components of the “restorative justice”— sometimes referred to as “community justice” — model for corrections, and the paradigm shifts that are necessary for the concept of restorative justice to become the focus for institutional and community corrections in the American criminal justice system.

References

American Correctional Association Victims Committee. (1994). Report and Recommendations on Victims of Juvenile Crime. Laurel, MD.

American Probation and Parole Association. (1994). “Special Issue: Incorporating Victim Services.” Perspectives, 18(3): Complete issue.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2000). Corrections Statistics.
Http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/correct.htm.

Greenfeld, Lawrence; Snell, Tracy. (1999).
Women Offenders. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1996). National Victim Services Survey of Adult and

Juvenile Corrections and Parole Agencies, Final Report. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

United States. (1982). President’s Task Force on Victims of Crime, Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Bibliography

American Probation and Parole Association. (1992). The Offender Supervision and Restitution Project. Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association.

Bazemore, Gordon and Mark Umbreit. (1994). Balanced and Restorative Justice: Program Summary. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Beatty, D., L. Frank, A.J. Lurigio, A. Seymour, M. Paparozzi and B. Macgargle. (1994). A Guide to Enhancing Victim Services Within Probation and Parole. Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association.

Bourque, Blair and Roberta Cronin. (1991). Helping Victims and Witnesses in the Juvenile Justice System: A Program Handbook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Hughes, Stella and Anne Schneider. (1990). Victim-Offender Mediation in the Juvenile Justice System. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. National Center for Victims of Crime. (1996). “Constitutional Rights for Crime Victims.” INFOLINK. Arlington, VA:

National Center for Victims of Crime.National Center for Victims of Crime. (1994). Focus on the Future: A Systems Approach to Prosecution and Victim Assistance — A Training and Resource Manual. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1997). “Overview of the Criminal Justice System.” INFOLINK. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1996). “Restitution Legislation.” INFOLINK. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1995). “Rights of Crime Victims.” INFOLINK. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1995). “Victim Impact Statements.” INFOLINK. Arlington, VA: National Center for Victims of Crime.

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1992). “Working with Criminal Justice Agencies.” The Road to Victim Justice: Mapping Strategies for Service, A Training Series. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Victims of Crime and National Organization for Victim Assistance.

Reeves, R. (1992). “Approaching 2000: Finding Solutions to the Most Pressing Issues Facing the Corrections Community.” Corrections Today, 54(98): 74, 76-79.

Stark, James and Howard Goldstein. (1985). The Rights of Crime Victims. New York: Bantam Books, Inc.

Umbreit, Mark. (1994). Victim Meets Offender: The Impact of Restorative Justice and Mediation. Monsey, NY: Criminal

Justice Press.Van Ness, D. (1990). “Restorative Justice.” In Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson (eds.), Criminal Justice,

Restitution, and Reconciliation. Monsey, NJ: Willow Tree Press.

For additional information, please contact:

American Correctional Association
4380 Forbes Boulevard
Lanham, MD 20706-4322
(800) ACA - JOIN
(301) 918-1800

American Jail Association
2053 Day Road, Suite 100
Hagerstown, MD 21740-9795
(301) 790 - 3930

American Probation and Parole Association
Iron Works Pike
P.O. Box 11910
Lexington, KY 40578-1910
(606) 244 - 8000

Center for Restorative Justice and Mediation
School of Social Work
University of Minnesota
386 McNeal Hall
1985 Buford Avenue St. Paul, MN 55108-6144
(612) 624 - 4923

Federal Bureau of Prisons
Victim-Witness Assistance Program
U.S. Department of Justice
320 First Street, NW
Room 536
Washington, D.C. 20534
(800) 359 - 3267
(202) 307 - 0884

Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20850
(800) 627 - 6872

Restorative Justice Association
2530 Fairmount Blvd.
Eugene, OR 97403
(514) 484 - 2468

All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2001 by the National Center for Victims of Crime. This document may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or by any other means, without the expressed written permission of the National Center for Victims of Crime.