COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTION AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction to Community-based Correction

At present, correction as a pillar of our justice system is in front of so many problems and controversies. Among
of its palpable problems are overcrowded jails and prison facilities. Despite of public clamor, the government
cannot afford to lock-up all convicted individuals. Society has all the reasons to condemn convicts but in so
doing, they are just pushed for the continuance of their unlawful activities. Study shows that many convicted
persons who have been incarcerated in jails or prisons, when they return to community are mostly reengage to
the same kind of offense or to some other type of anti-social activities which if not with the same degree with
the first offense, is more serious. It is also an accepted fact that putting all convicted individuals in jail or prison
facilities will definitely prejudicial to the government considering that they consume so much of government
funds and resources. These are the common reasons for the promotion of community-based correction
approach in lieu of institutional correction.

Community-based corrections are non-institutional based corrections which are being considered as the best
alternative for imprisonment. It is a non-incarcerate system of correction. It is described as a method of
rehabilitating convicted felons without a need of placing them into jail or prison facilities. It is likewise refers to
any sanctions in which convicts serve all or a portion of their entire sentence in the community. Community
based correction is a program which deal with supervised rehabilitation of convicts within the community.

The idea behind non-institutional correction programs is that, most convicts can be effectively held accountable
for their crimes at the same time that they can fulfill legitimate living standards in the community. Most convicts
do not pose an imminent danger to themselves or to others and can therefore remain in the community to
maintain relationships. Rehabilitating convicts within the community confers several benefits such as:

1.       The convict will remains in the community in which he or she has responsibilities.

He can continuously engage to his legitimate sources of livelihood to support himself and his family and the
government can collect taxes from him;

2.       Convicts under community-based correction are more capable to compensate their victims through
restitution or to pay-back the community through community service, and

3.       Community-based corrections programs do not expose convicts to the subculture of violence existing in
jails and prisons.

There is now a principle in Non-institutional Correction that works for the reintegration of convicted individuals
to society which is known as restorative justice.  What Restorative Justice advocating is the alteration of the
behavior of convicts through the use of holistic but non-incarcerate methods of rehabilitation, Braithwaite
(1900-1990). It is like helping the convicts to enter the society in a way where they can be accepted by the sciety.
This system has its impact on the society in general as well, as it helps the society understand and accept the
fact that convicts are also a part of the society. (EzineArticles.com)

Community-Based Correction Programs

 
1, Probation - Is a disposition, under which a defendant after conviction and sentence, is released subject to
the conditions imposed by the Court and to the supervision of a probation officer.

2. Parole- A conditional release from prison of a convicted person upon service of the minimum of his
indeterminate penalty.

3. Pardon- A form of executive clemency which is exercise exclusively by the Chief Executive. Pardon may be
given conditionally (conditional pardon) or unconditionally (absolute pardon). For the purpose of Non-
Institutional Correction. it is the Conditional Pardon with parole conditions is under consideration.

Other Community-Based Correction Programs

In other jurisdictions, parole, probation and conditional pardon have always been a way of community
correction, but with technological advancement and considering the psychology of convicted people, correction
programs have widened to accommodate the following:

1.       Work releases;

2.       Day fine programs;

3.       Electronic monitoring,

4.       Home confinement;

5.       Community service;

6.       Half way houses;

7.       Boot camp prisons;

8.       Restitution;

9.       Check-in programs;

10.   Mediation;

11.   Curfews;

12.   Restorative justice centers;

13.   Drug checks;

14.   Alcohol checks; and

15.   Other methods where there is a certain level of trust between the offenders and the

16.   People involved. (EzineArticles.com)

B. Entities of the Government task for providing Community-Based Correction

1.        Parole and Probation Administration (PPA)

 
Conduct investigations of all cases in relation to parole, probation and pardon Responsible for the supervision
of all parolees, probationers and conditional pardon grantees

2.        Board of Pardon and Parole (BPP)

Authority in granting parole Responsible for recommending the grant of pardon and executive clemency to the
president

3.        Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

Handling cases of Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL)

C. Benefits of Community-based Corrections

1.       Strengthening family ties through avoidance of broken family relationships- The Treatment and
rehabilitation of convicted offender is done outside the institutional Facilities hence, family members will not
suffer broken family due to imprisonment of one of its member;

2.       Prevention of Influence Contamination -Putting convicted felon to prison may expose him to hardened
criminals who might influence him to be a more hardened criminal than before;

3.       Engagement of Community Involvement - Rehabilitation can be more effective with the help of the
members of the community;

4.       Assurance of Individualized Treatment Approach - These programs provide individualize treatment

program for the convicts which is if not available, it is hard to attain in correctional institution;

5.       It is more economical than institution-based correction on the part of the

Government.

D. Purposes

1.       Facilitating Convicts Reintegration;

2.       Fostering Convicts Rehabilitation;

3.       Providing an Alternative Range of Convicts Punishment

4.       Heightening Convicts Accountability

E. Functions

1.       Client monitoring and supervision to ensure program compliance

2.       Ensuring public safety

3.       Employment assistance

4.       Individual and group counseling

5.       Educational training and literacy services

6.       Networking with other community agencies and business

7.       Reducing jail and prison overcrowding

YOU MAY ALSO CLICK THE ATTACHED FILE BELOW TO DOWNLOAD THE LESSON.

WEEK 2
COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTION AS SOLUTION TO INMATES CONGESTION IN JAILS AND PRISONS

Congestion status of  bureau of correction: As of june 2017

Current Issues and Concerns on Community-based Correction

1.       Public resistance against non-institutional correction

2.       Punishment against rehabilitation and reintegration

3.       Convicted individual needs safety as well as the public

4.       Availability of Rehabilitation Services

5.       Education and training for rehabilitation service providers

6.       Coping with special needs of the convicts

 Evaluating the effectiveness of Community based Correctional Programs

Community-based corrections as alternatives to prison claim to be more effective in reducing recidivism than
traditional prisons, to be cheaper than prisons, and to reduce overcrowding in prisons and jails. A study used a
case study approach of a community based program was conducted by Nancy Marion in the Midwest United
States to determine if those community corrections alternatives achieve those results.

The findings from this case study show that the recidivism rates of community corrections are lower than those
of the prison inmates only in some cases and that the costs are cheaper only in some cases. It also shows that
community corrections serve as a true alternative to prison in some instances but more often only widens the
net and increases the state's control over criminal offenders. (Source: Effectiveness of Community based
Correctional Programs: A Case Study, 2012 Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters, 2013)

Four Ways to Reduce Prison Congestion

1.       Review and Reform All Processes

One of the first steps is to determine who is in prison and how their needs can be met. Higher incarceration
rates of adult males skew data to promote resources in their favor, but the lower percentages of women and
children have needs that are unmet and unacknowledged. One major concern is the holding of minors. Nearly
5,000 youth are held in adult facilities according to Prison Policy.org—should law enforcement detain a parent
as well? Can they serve their sentence outside of a custodial institution? Data can be used to decide how best to
care for prisoners overall based on effective—and cost-effective—bases to create more humane environments.

There are factors at each step in the process of incarceration that can be reformed to reduce the number of
unjust sentences for those that commit minor offenses and those based on socially-biased convictions. Settling
minor offenses outside of criminal court with informal or restorative justice solutions prevents the system
getting bogged down unnecessarily, while investments in social policy can ensure that those facing criminal
court also have better access to legal aid before their trials.

The hope is to limit the number of people in prisons to those whose crimes deserve that kind of punishment.
Too often, prisons are crowded with those being held before trial without the ability to bail themselves out,
those with non-violent or non-serious crimes, and those that could better serve their sentence elsewhere.
Frequently, those kinds of prisoners are better off with non-custodial sentences or sentences that do not
entirely take place in prison, like discharges, community service, house arrest and halfway houses.

2.       Early Release and Parole

Awarding those with good behavior and/or productive time with early release or parole is a great incentive to
create better environments and outcomes for non-violent prisoners who receive education, rehabilitation or
treatment. Standardizing and reducing sentence lengths can lower overcrowded prisons by routinely cutting
sentences down to more manageable and suitable times. New York and Kansas are currently examining the
benefits of early release; however, many states require a minimum sentence length, making it impossible to
grant early releases to deserving prisoners.

3.       Access to Mental Illness and Drug Addiction

Because mental illnesses and drug addiction place many in prison—often times as default—rather than in
institutions that would actually benefit them and reduce recidivism, it is vital to see where the system can be
reformed to help rather than punish those convicts. Most prisons are ill-equipped to meet the needs of
individuals who are mentally ill and create more negative effects that could affect the prisoner once released,
resulting in re-offending. Specialist facilities could reduce prison numbers and decrease the likelihood of re-
offenses by getting the mentally ill and drug addicts better suited to manage their situations. These prisoners
make great candidates for the aforementioned early release programs. New York is in the process of
restructuring the state institution to ensure that punishments suit the crimes by reducing minimum sentences
for first-time drug offenders and increasing sentences for drug traffickers, rather than treating drug addicts as
Class A felons.

4.       Reduce Recidivism

Recidivism—the act of re-offending—understandably contributes to high imprisonment rates. Rehabilitation

programs and drug and alcohol courses are at the forefront to help those needing recovery assistance. New
York has found that these types of programs are 15 times more effective than basic imprisonment and those
released commit two-thirds fewer crimes. California’s mass forgiveness program released prisoners by the
thousands. Those non-violent prisoners who were mass-forgiven and participated in the realignment plan were
not inclined to repeat past crimes or get involved in violent behavior.