< Previous30 PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 44, NUMBER 4 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS Table 1. Survey Respondent Demographics Gender Female Male Prefer not to answer Answereda (N) 614 372 54 1,040 (%) 60 35 5 100% Agency Type Adult Juvenile Answered (N) 1,045 308 1,353 (%) 77 23 100% Age 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Answered (N) 33 244 290 337 117 19 1,040 (%) 3 24 28 32 11 2 100% Size of Agency <30 employees >30, <70 employees >70, <150 employees >150, <250 employees >250, <350 employees >350 total employees Answered (N) 297 289 319 112 104 187 1,308 (%) 23 22 25 8 8 14 100% Race White/Caucasian Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Asian American Indian/Alaska Native Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Other Prefer not to answer Answered (N) 557 91 309 3 8 1 5 66 1,040 (%) 54 8 30 .30 .77 .10 48 6.35 100% Years of Service Less than 1 yr. 1 yr. less than 3 yrs. 3 yrs. less than 5 yrs. Between 5 and 10 yrs. More than 10 but less than 15 yrs. More than 15 yrs. less than 20 yrs. 20 or more yrs. Answered (N) 54 96 102 175 182 125 306 1,040 (%) 5 9 10 17 17 12 30 100% Level of Education High School Diploma Some college, no degree Associate’s Degree Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate Answered (N) 6 11 14 800 196 13 1,040 (%) .58 1 1.42 77 19 1 100% Staff Type Director Deputy Director Operations Manager/Director Unit Manager/Supervisor Probation Officer Technology Staff Other Answered (N) 128 41 18 155 687 62 60 1,151 (%) 11 3 2 14 60 5 5 100% Ethnicity Non-Hispanic Hispanic Answered (N) 676 364 1,040 (%) 65 35 100% a The total N for each question is unequal due to respondents skipping questions. Results Respondents were asked questions about operational and procedural changes and for certain questions were asked to check all situations that applied as this crisis continued to unfold over the months, and thus percentages did not total 100%. As laid out in Table 2, one can see how severely COVID-19 impacted day-to-day operations of probation departments as they strived to comply with safety guidelines, various city and county rule changes, and statewide changes mandated by gubernatorial Executive Orders, especially the one issued on March 29 specifically addressing detention in county and municipal jails during the COVID-19 disaster (Texas Executive Order No. GA-13, 2020).31 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION Table 2. Operational Changes Operational ActivityPercentage % Operational ActivityPercentage % Court Proceedings%Drug Testing% Temporarily suspended new probation placements 56.48Temporarily suspended “in-person” testing 56.39 Experienced a significant decrease in new probations 65.41Still submit, but social distance42.58 Continued “in-person” proceedings but followed social distancing, etc. 19.83Reviewed on a case-by-case basis25.75 Used videoconferencing67.96No observation of submitted drug tests5.49 Did not really change much.86Alternative testing (i.e. patch, SCRAM, hair) 8.50 Unsure8.24Did not really change much 6.87 Other3.78Unsure9.70 Filing Motions to Revoke/ Adjudicate %Outpatient Treatment% Temporarily suspended submitting all violation reports, filing or request 10.47Temporarily suspended all programming. 61.37 Only filed motions or requested on serious offenders 44.03Switched from in-person to telephone sessions. 58.28 Reviewed on a case-by-case basis43.09Switched from in-person activities to video sessions 61.46 Did not really change much 24.29Provided other online options, webinars, online assignments, etc. 32.53 Unsure14.16Reviewed on a case-by-case basis.11.07 Other4.55Waived remaining hours left to complete 2.32 Did not really change much.52 Unsure10.04 Community Service Restitution (CSR)%Education Classes% Temporarily suspended all CSR 59.06Temporarily suspended all programming. 54.16 Opportunities conducive to social distancing 17.17Switched from in-person to telephone sessions. 20.52 Reviewed on a case-by-case basis18.97Switched from in-person activities to video sessions 38.28 Waived remaining hours15.02Provided other online options, webinars, online assignments, etc. 31.16 Allowed offenders to find their own opportunities 6.52Reviewed on a case-by-case basis.8.15 Allowed money or goods to be donated 34.25Continued in-person but social distanced 8.33 Did not really change much3Waived remaining hours left to complete 2.23 Unsure12.27Did not really change much1.89 Other6.01Unsure16.31 Other3.6132 PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 44, NUMBER 4 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS Table 4. Safety Protocols Implemented Safety Protocols%N Social distancing measures94312 Reduced staff/skeleton crew in the office 93306 Paid leave time/Time off47155 Sent out information about Coronavirus (symptometctesting, treatments) 82271 Work from home/tele-commute 78257 Implemented telephone or videoconferencing for clients in lieu of reporting in person 88290 Provided hand sanitizer89294 Required all staff to check their temperature 38126 Provided thermometers at the office for use if needed 38126 Instructed any and all staff to stay home if not feeling well 96318 Suspended home visits/change in how home visits 84278 Provided personal protective equipment (e.g., masks) 87288 Other (please specify)39 Answered332 Skipped1021 Many respondents (50%) felt that other disciplines (medicine, education, finance, etc.) were more progressive with the use of technology in serving their clients compared to the criminal justice system. Respondents were Table 3 presents the results of a question regarding offender contact procedures during the pandemic. Some examples of “other” measures that people reported using included reporting in the parking lot using social distancing, conducting visits through the glass door of the department, and field visits in offenders’ yards using social distancing. Table 3. Offender Contact Reporting Alternatives Alternative Reporting Measures %N Telephone reporting99.40330 Videoconferencing45.18150 Report by mail48.80162 Web report/web check- in 45.78152 Temporary reduction in reporting requirements 28.3194 Drive-through or drive-by reporting 6.9323 Other (please specify)3.0110 Answered332 Skipped1021 Perceptions Regarding Operational Changes Respondents were asked how they felt about staff being allowed to continue to work from home as an option in the future, even after the COVID-19 crisis subsides, to help alleviate burnout among probation professionals; nearly 65% of respondents agreed this would be helpful. Table 4 depicts the safety protocols implemented by departments. 33 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS asked about the various types of technologies they would like to use in their jobs going forward from the pandemic. The great majority (87%) indicated they wanted to continue using videoconferencing for contact with clients and for other work-related activities, 75% wanted to use tablets for more mobility in carrying out their duties, and close to 60% wanted to have a paperless offender file system. Moreover, 77% indicated they would like to use an electronic signature technology such as DocuSign, and 52% wanted to have voice-to- text capability for entering chronological case notes and other tasks. Kiosks (64%) and online offender portals (69%) were also supported, and 55% wanted a better department website that would be more helpful for offenders, with downloadable forms, FAQs, etc. Probation Officer Questions Of the respondents, 687 self-identified as either adult or juvenile probation officers. Officers were asked a series of questions about work environment, workload issues and stress, attitudes, their relationship with their clients, and issues their clients had throughout the crisis. Work environment, workload, and stress Around 30% of probation officer respondents agreed they felt more productive working from home, and in response to a question about distractions nearly 40% reported fewer distractions while working at home.3 Officers who reported working from home agreed that communication with their supervisor was very good during that time. Perhaps not surprisingly, 80% of probation officer respondents were worried about themselves or their family members contracting the virus. A smaller but sizeable number (30%) agreed they felt less productive than usual because of the stress from frequent changes that occurred. Nearly two-thirds (62%) were concerned about public safety due to offenders violating supervision, without the officers knowing, because of changes in operational procedures (i.e., no drug testing and no field visits). Only 24% were worried about being “overwhelmed” with work when normal business operations resumed, and 30% were currently overwhelmed with their workload. Officer attitudes about offender supervision Around 26% of probation officer respondents found they were “less punitive” towards their clients during the pandemic. Nearly 40% of respondents agreed they found themselves being more helpful than usual to their clients during the pandemic. Nearly 50% agreed they found themselves helping their clients with things they normally did not discuss. Examples of topics discussed included learning more about or applying for unemployment (58%), finding a food pantry/getting help with groceries (55%), getting set up for teleconferencing (46%), financial assistance for bills/utilities/rent (41%), allaying fears about the pandemic (57%), medical or health care issues (38%), stress or anxiety levels (67%), school issues/ homeschooling (32%), and finding an online 12-step program (49%). Examples of “other” topics officers discussed included providing information about COVID testing sites and other virus-related information, future plans for offenders (such as possibly going to college), basic needs like food and clothing, housing, childcare options, and employment. To put this last topic in context, unemployment rates in 34 PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 44, NUMBER 4 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS Texas skyrocketed from around 3-4% in early March to 13.5% in April, a 237% increase, before dropping down to 8.6% in June 2020 (DiFurio, 2020). Relationships with probationers and client issues Nearly 30% of officers agreed with the statement that the crisis changed the way they viewed their role as a probation officer. Half of officer respondents reported their clients seemed to feel more relaxed and open during telephone/video “visits.” Around 25% felt they will have better relationships with their clients as a result of this crisis. Nearly 70% of probation officer respondents agreed that videoconferencing could help offenders be more successful on probation under certain circumstances. Officers know there are offenders with no driver’s license, unstable or no transportation, and other such problems. In these instances, videoconferencing would help offenders, but certainly never replace face-to-face contacts.4 However, many agencies, 56%, were not even able to use videoconferencing with those on supervision. Sometimes this was because they did not have the capability/technology in place to do so, and in other cases there were reasons that clients were not able to use this technology. Administrator Questions A total of 342 administrators (directors, deputy directors, operations managers, and supervisors) responded to questions focused on gathering information and understanding perceptions about various operational changes and the financial impact of COVID-19. Operational changes The initial series of questions for administrators asked about operational changes. Eighty-two percent (82%) of respondents agreed with the question: “Since the pandemic and forced changes in operational areas, do you think the use of technology in more operational areas of the department is ideal?” When asked about support, respondents agreed overwhelmingly that their judiciary, local officials, and state oversight agencies were supportive during the crisis. A majority of respondents reported that there are opportunities for positive changes in the field of probation due to the COVID-19 crisis. A majority of respondents, 60%, would like to use (or continue using) alternative reporting methods for offenders with transportation problems, those in substantial compliance (69%), those assessed as low risk (75%), or on a case-by-case basis (81%). Managerial respondents were asked what groups they thought might be opposed to the continued use of videoconferencing with offenders. While approximately 40% reported they did not think anyone would be opposed to videoconferencing, 34% believed the community would not be receptive to videoconferencing. Around 72% of administrators indicated they did not allow staff to work from home prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the pandemic resulted in a shift in attitude on this subject, as 44% agreed their agency is considering (or might consider) allowing staff to work from home after the COVID-19 crisis subsides under appropriate circumstances. Moreover, 55% of administrative respondents agreed that allowing staff to continue working from home after the COVID-19 crisis (under appropriate circumstances) would help 35 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS improve employee retention rates. Some reasons administrators oppose staff working from home include the inability to monitor what staff are doing while they are logged in (27%), need to purchase extra equipment (21%), lack of funds (13%), and cyber security concerns (15%). Financial impact Next, administrators were asked about the financial impact of COVID-19, and 63% of respondents agreed COVID-19 has severely impacted their department’s budget. Nearly 20% of respondents reported they may have to permanently lay off personnel because of the pandemic, and others have had to (or may have to) temporarily furlough staff. Nearly 74% of administrators are concerned about their department’s budget. The overwhelming majority of respondents (86%) agreed with the following statement: “The Legislature needed to provide more funding to community supervision agencies prior to the COVID-19 crisis, but especially now.” Next, 82% of management respondents agreed the pandemic has highlighted the need to revise the way probation in Texas is funded. When asked if the state should consider allowing departments to keep surplus funding instead of returning it at the end of the fiscal year, 100% of management respondents agreed. The majority of management respondents (66%) agreed the COVID-19 crisis will continue to affect department budgets long after the crisis “is over,” because arrest rates significantly decreased during the pandemic, which means fewer probation placements, added to the fact that many offenders lost their jobs during the pandemic and are unable to pay their fees (which for adult probation departments is a major contributor to their budgets). Administrators were asked to rank in order of severity which items had the most negative impact on their departments, with the following overall rankings: • Reduction in probation placements (44%) • Offenders unable to pay probation fees (27%) • Providing cell phones, laptops and other equipment to staff during the crisis (7%) • Community concerns about offend- ers (7%) • Getting the technology set up at home for staff to work from home (5%) • Tracking employee productivity (4%) • Political concerns (3%) In a separate question, administrators were asked what their most significant concern was at the moment, and 55% percent answered that it was funding/financial. Conclusion The results of this survey revealed several salient issues for probation in Texas, and many, if not all, of these presumably may apply to probation agencies in other states: (1) Need for review and updating of planning documents and emergency management-36 PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 44, NUMBER 4 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS contingency plans for continued operations; (2) dealing with financial impact and need for sustainability in funding structures; and, (3) the need for more flexible and innovative approaches in supervision efforts. Emergency Management-Contingency Plans Generally, emergency management issues are not something probation directors think about on any given day. Since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, major emergencies have been at the forefront of day-to-day concerns. Collaborative networks proved to be imperative during the pandemic, as state oversight agencies and local government officials’ flexibility and support of probation agencies helped to minimize interruptions in necessary continuous operations. Communication from oversight agencies was frequent, as agency waivers of standards and requirements were granted, Executive Orders from the Governor’s office were released, and local public health and government officials released their own changes in policies, rules, and ordinances. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for probation agencies to have updated emergency contingency plans, or at the very least to be knowledgeable about county government emergency management plans already in place. The purpose of an emergency operational contingency plan is to outline “systematic responses to emergencies that may threaten an organization and the records and information necessary for continuing operations” (Murray & McCutcheon, 1999). These plans should account for potential natural, technological, and man-made threats, and, as we have learned recently, public health threats. Agencies should conduct a hazard vulnerability assessment to screen for risk and plan for the strategic use of limited resources (Cagliuso, Leahy, & Sandoval, 2010). One example of strategic use of limited resources offered by a survey respondent was to replace all desktop computers with laptops so that operations can “go mobile” at any time—a step which could also assist agencies in times of non-emergency situations so that laptops are available for timely documentation, note taking, and critical email communications in situations such as conducting field visits, going to court, or attending meetings. The survival of an agency is not just about getting through the immediate threat, but also about considering the financial stability of an organization immediately following and continuing long after an emergency. The results of this survey reveal concerns about the financial impact COVID-19 has had on probation agencies, as these agencies may well have to deal with negative long-term effects on their operations and their ability to fulfill their missions. Financial Impact This survey project showed budgets and financial uncertainty were the top concerns of probation administrators. Total shut-down of daily life led to skyrocketing unemployment rates, fewer arrests, and fewer future probation placements, which have ultimately affected both adult and juvenile probation budgets.5 About one-third of respondents indicated they may have to “lay off” personnel and others may need to “temporarily furlough” staff. Departments’ budget dollars are stretched thin and the majority of administrator survey respondents agreed change in legislative appropriations for probation is necessary, 37 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS indicating that this was true even before the pandemic but is especially true now. A resounding majority of supervisory respondents (86%) agreed departments should be allowed to keep any “surplus” funding at the end of the fiscal year instead of returning it to the state. Unusual times call for creative and “outside the norm” type of responses. The oversight agency for probation departments in Texas has two funding sources that have been potentially impacted by COVID-19 to a degree that might have a long-term financial effect. First, some funding is calculated per capita based on the number of misdemeanor placements and direct felony cases in the previous calendar year. Second, funding comes from Community Corrections Programs based on (1) the percentage of the state’s population residing in the counties served by the department and (2) the percentage of all felony defendants in the state under supervision by the department. Since courts throughout Texas have not been in full operation since the pandemic, potentially major shortfalls can be predicted. Furthermore, the financial deficit created by COVID-19 will undoubtedly affect some departments’ ability to provide raises in the future and retain quality staff, as probation generally has lower salaries compared to other jobs in the criminal justice field (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020). Probation agencies often compete against federal probation, law enforcement, public schools, and other industries who can offer more attractive salaries. Retention and salary problems present prior to the COVID-19 crisis are now only exacerbated, while probation departments are still responsible for more offenders in the criminal justice system compared to penal institutions (Texas Commission on Jail Standards, 2020; Texas Department of Criminal Justice, 2019; Texas Juvenile Justice Department, 2019). Flexibility and Innovations in Supervision The COVID-19 health crisis forced probation agencies to make major changes in operational procedures overnight, the main one being suspending face-to-face contacts with offenders. While virtual visits may be convenient, probation officers overall agreed that face-to-face interaction with their clients is critical, especially regarding community safety and being agents of change. Although, low- risk offenders, offenders with mental health issues, and offenders with transportation issues could benefit from occasional virtual reporting opportunities, high-risk offenders need to be supervised more intensely, and virtual visits are not appropriate for all clients. Operational changes such as drug testing, court proceedings, counseling and treatment sessions, and home visits were suspended at one point or another for many agencies. Some jurisdictions were able to use videoconferencing for treatment sessions, and this was helpful, especially for offenders with transportation issues. There is a possibility of using this going forward to help offenders be more successful on probation. Some agencies reported they subcontract to a laboratory for substance abuse testing, so drug testing was not affected for them. There are many advances in technology for drug/alcohol monitoring that could replace the traditional collection of urine specimens and possibly save departments money. Probation administrators agreed there are opportunities for positive changes in the 38 PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 44, NUMBER 4 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS field of probation due to the COVID-19 crisis, with many advocating for the continuing use of videoconferencing in select situations–albeit not totally replacing face-to-face interactions between officers and offenders. It has been realized that some offenders may be over- supervised and that changes are needed to truly supervise offenders appropriately by risk level. A majority of administrator survey respondents agreed that utilizing technology more in various areas of departmental operations is necessary going forward, but budget constraints are hampering these efforts. Some jurisdictions have already begun utilizing advanced technologies in daily operations. Some have paperless offender file systems, which many respondents find desirable. Electronic signature systems, kiosks, a “probation app” for smartphones, and many other types of technologies could streamline operations. Furthermore, regarding teleworking, about 45% of probation administrators may possibly consider allowing staff to work from home on occasion to help improve morale and staff retention rates. This could be used as a job perk, especially since some jurisdictions are not able to offer salary increases at all and others not consistently. In sum, the findings of the survey are highly informative and encouraging because adaptability and resilience of adult and juvenile probation agencies in the face of a global pandemic were evident. Also, the consensus among survey respondents was that telework can be used in certain situations and may help with agency retention rates and staff burnout, and videoconferencing with offenders may be used in certain circumstances as long face-to-face interactions with clients also continue, especially with higher risk clients. Probation staff understand that having rapport with clients is critical to quality supervision and would not forego in-person interactions simply for their own convenience or benefit. The pandemic led some officers to become more helpful than before to their clients, while some had the simple realization during this crisis that we are all just human beings trying to make it through this unprecedented crisis. Clients have the same fears as probation staff about contracting COVID-19; they are just trying to provide for their families and to remain healthy. Bios Kelli D. Martin, Ph.D. is the Research Policy Planner for Taylor Callahan & Coleman Counties CSCD, Bexar County and Hidalgo Counties CSCDs in Texas. Dr. Martin has 26 years’ experience in the field of community corrections, 15 of those years in management including Training Academy Director, Sex Crimes Unit Supervisor, and Research Director. Some of her recent publications can be found in Criminal Justice and Behavior , American Journal of Criminal Justice , Criminal Justice Policy Review , and Federal Probation . She can be reached at Haley R. Zettler, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Texas. Her primary research interests focus on community corrections, substance abuse, mental health, and recidivism. She is a former Adult Probation Officer. Recent publications can be found in Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice , International Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminology , Criminal Justice Policy Review , American Journal of Criminal Justice and Aggression & Violent Behavior . She can be reached 39 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS References Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020). Occupational employment and wages, 2019. Retrieved from Cagliuso, N. V., Leahy, N. E., & Sandoval, M. (2010). Developing the hospital emergency management plan. In Reilly, M. J., & Markenson, D. (Eds)., Health Care Emergency Management: Principles and Practice (pp. 89- 110). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett. DiFurio, D. (July 17, 2020). Texas unemployment fell to 8.6% in June before COVID-19 resurged. Dallas Morning News. Retrieved from Murray, G., & McCutcheon, S. (1999). Model framework and principles of emergency management. Revue Scientifique et Technique, 18(1), 15-20. Texas Executive Order No. GA-13 (March 29, 2020). Retrieved from State of Texas Texas Commission on Jail Standards. (2020). County jail populations: Abbreviated population report for 10/1/20. Retrieved from Texas Department of Criminal Justice (2019). Annual review 2019. Retrieved from Texas Juvenile Justice Department. (2019). Annual report to the Governor and Legislative Budget Board: Community juvenile justice appropriations, riders and special diversion programs. Retrieved Endnotes 1 Probation agency clerical and support staff were excluded, as this project focused on issues pertaining to probation officers and management of agency operations and probation officer units; however, it is recognized that such staff were critical to the continued operation of departments during the pandemic. It is further noted that the survey responses from IT personnel are not presented here, although these are available upon request. Those working in residential facilities were not surveyed, as this study was designed to explore issues only partially applicable to such facilities. 2 An individual response rate was unable to be calculated due to being unable to track how many total staff received the survey from their director. 3 Figures are based on the number of respondents who answered each question; thus, the number of respondents reflected in the stated percentages vary from question to question and section to section. 4 This survey question sought to elicit information on probation staff perceptions about the use of videoconferencing, both currently and in the future, without advocating a position one way or another in regard to videoconferencing. 5 According to Texas Juvenile Justice Department, 75% of juvenile probation departments are funded by local counties. Next >