Specialized Supervision in Probation: Implications, Research and Issues
Abstract
Specialized Supervision in Probation: Implications, Research and Issues SAGE Publications, Inc.1979DOI: 10.1177/003288557905900204 Edward Latessa Evelyn Parks Harry E. Allen Eric Carlson * This review was part of the assessment of Critical Issues of Adult Probation, conducted by the Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquencv. Ohio State University. The project was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, l'nited States Department of Justice. Professor Latessa iscurrently with the Department of Criminal Justice, University of Alabama in Birmingham. Doctors Allen and Parks are affiliated with San Jose University. Professor Carlson is at the University of Arizona. During a recent review* of probation research conducted since 1950, the issue of generalized vs. specialized probation caseloads was frequently encountered. This issue has implications for a wide variety of subjects, which range from the entry-level educational requirements for probation officers to the methods used for securing services for probationers. It affects not only the management of the probation agency, but also how the individual officer will budget his time. Indeed, this issue goes to the heart of the debate over the "proper" roles and functions of probation and the probation