The two programs were delivered by the same agency in Marion County, Indiana with essentially the same technology, but the pretrial and postconviction programs differed in several ways: variations in clients; variations associated with program rationale; and differences in actual program operation. Both programs shared some problems in program delivery including limitations of the technology of electronic monitoring equipment. There often occurred a gap in the pretrial and postconviction programs between what clients were told to expect while on home detention and the limited capacity of staff to actually monitor them in the field. A fundamental problem in the pretrial program relates to the lack of any real power among program staff. It is unreasonable to expect that a postconviction program can be transferred directly to a pretrial population. 2 tables and 18 references
Downloads
Related Datasets
Similar Publications
- Collection, Storage, and Use of Client Data: Considerations and Recommendations for Human Trafficking Service Providers
- Offering Recovery Rather Than Punishment: Implementation of a Law Enforcement-led Pre-arrest Diversion-to-treatment Program for Adults with Substance Use Disorders
- Evaluation of Police Officer Integrity Training