California Study Looks at Factors Leading to Parole Revocation

Regarding the personal characteristics of parolees, the study found that the strongest predictor of a parole violation was the number of times the parolee had been in prison as an adult; the risk for all types of violations was highest during the first 6 months after release from prison. The intensity of parole supervision apparently did not deter violations; in fact, more intensive supervision increased the likelihood of detecting all types of violations. Regarding the link between parole agents' characteristics and parole violations, only the parole agent's gender was a factor. Female agents were apparently more forgiving of low-level offenses such as drug use, whereas male agents were more forgiving of absconding. The study also found that the neighborhood to which a parolee returned promoted or discouraged behavior that leads to violation. Parolees who lived in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods were more likely to abscond, but were not a greater risk for other violations. Where substance abuse and mental health treatment were available, low-level criminal violations were less likely. The study found that 77 percent of all criminal violation cases resulted in a return to prison, as decided by a court or a ruling of the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH). Once a court referred a case to the BPH, a greater percentage of cases resulted in parole revocation. Whereas a court sent 25 percent of parolees back to jail, the BPH incarcerated 73 percent of parolees who committed criminal violations. Based on these findings, recommendations for policy changes are offered.