Management of Sex Offenders by Probation and Parole Agencies in the United States, 1994 [electronic resource] / Kim English

Data file
ICPSR Version, 2005-11-04.
Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1996.
1 data file + machine-readable documentation (text) + SAS setup file(s) + SPSS setup file(s) + Stata setup file(s) + SAS transport + SPSS portable + Stata system + data collection instruments


Restrictions note
Use of these data are restricted to Princeton University students, faculty, and staff for non-commercial statistical analysis and research purposes only.
Summary note
This study examined various ways states approach and sanction sex crimes (i.e., child sexual abuse, incest, and sexual assault) and sex offenders. The aim of the study was to obtain basic information about policies and procedures of probation and parole agencies with respect to adult sex offender case management. State corrections administrators in 49 states and the District of Columbia were contacted to supply information on their states' probation and parole offices and the corresponding jurisdictions. From these offices, probation and parole supervisors at the office-management level were selected as survey respondents because of their familiarity with the day-to-day office operations. Respondents were asked about the usage of various supervision methods, such as electronic monitoring, requiring offenders on probation or parole to register with law enforcement agencies, and polygraph testing. Sanctions such as requiring the offenders to seek treatment and forbidding contact with the victim were discussed, as were various queries about the handling of the victim in the case (whether a written statement by the victim was routinely included in the offender's file, whether officers usually had contact with the victim, and whether there was a system for advising victims of status changes for the offender). Other questions focused on whether the office used specialized assessments, caseloads, programs, and policies for sex offenders that differed from those used for other offenders. Various issues regarding treatment for offenders were also examined: who chooses and pays the treatment provider, whether the agency or the court approves treatment providers, what criteria are involved in approval, and whether the office had an in-house sex offender treatment program.... Cf.:
Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2006-09-15.
Type of data
1 data file + machine-readable documentation (text) + SAS setup file(s) + SPSS setup file(s) + Stata setup file(s) + SAS transport + SPSS portable + Stata system + data collection instruments
Geographic coverage
United States
Funding information
United States Department of Justice. NationalInstitute of Justice. 92-IJ-CX-K021
System details
Mode of access: Internet.
Methodology note
  • Data source: Data were collected through a telephone survey of supervisors of probation and parole agencies.
  • Universe: Probation and parole agencies throughout the United States.
Part 1: Data File; Part 2: SAS Data Definition Statements
Other format(s)
Also available as downloadable files.
Statement on language in description
Princeton University Library aims to describe library materials in a manner that is respectful to the individuals and communities who create, use, and are represented in the collections we manage. Read more...
Other views
Staff view

Supplementary Information