LAST YEAR DURING the American Probation and

LAST YEAR DURING the American Probation and
Parole Association’s Annual Training Institute, the Reinventing
Probation Council issued a monograph entitled Transforming
Probation Through Leadership: The ‘Broken Windows’ Model
(2000). This publication drew from, but offered a much more
comprehensive exposition of, an earlier manifesto, Broken
Windows Probation: The Next Step in Fighting Crime (1999),
also produced by the Council. These reports were intended to
spark a fundamental reexamination of the purpose and practice
of probation. They called for the reinvention of the field of
probation through a transformation of the focus and conduct
of community supervision.
We are gratified that the ideas and strategies associated
with the “Broken Windows” model of probation have received
serious attention from those within the profession, as well as
from our colleagues in academia. Seven probation departments
will begin receiving technical assistance in 2001 from members
of the Reinventing Probation Council on implementing this
BY EDWARD E. RHINE, GARY HINZMAN, RONALD P. CORBETT, DAN RICHARD BETO AND MARIO PAPAROZZI

---

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
model. As the technical assistance proceeds, a “user’s manual” will be
public safety. What public safety means is drawn from Smith and Dickey
developed focusing on the lessons learned from these sites and the
who define it quite uniquely as the extent to which persons and property
experiences gained in those jurisdictions that have already moved
are free from attack or theft, that is, from the threat or risk of harm in
independently to adopt the “Broken Windows” model.
particular places at particular times. Consistent with a community justice
As the reinvention effort moves forward, it is timely and appropriate
vision, this is a definition that calls for a strategic approach to crime
to revisit the argument associated with the “Broken Windows” model of
prevention, reduction, and control.
probation. The need to do so is highlighted by an article in this issue of
It is also a definition that involves, as the monograph highlights, a
Perspectives written in response to our work. The article — “Fixing Broken
systemic, yet local focus on the social ecology of crime. The emphasis on
Windows,” by Taxman and Byrne, does not present with any accuracy
social ecology informs a number of the strategies proposed under the
either the argument for, nor the community-centered implications
“Broken Windows” model. Contrary to the suggestion by Taxman and
attached to reengineering the work of probation under the “Broken
Byrne that this somehow represents throwaway rhetoric, incorporating
Windows” model. What follows, however, offers less of a rejoinder to
an ecological focus is essential to redirecting and guiding the daily work
these authors’ claims and more of a restatement of the essential parameters
of probation officers. In fact, it is inseparable from the pursuit of public
of the monograph. We leave it to the reader to assess the adequacy of
safety as defined by Smith and Dickey. With respect to probation officers,
their critique.
attending to local ecology requires a proactive and daily engagement in
At the start, it is important to clarify the use of the “Broken
the wider arena of community and victim vulnerabilities in those locales
Windows” metaphor. As noted in the monograph, this metaphor refers
and at those times of day where the threats to public safety are greatest.
to an innovative approach to community policing; one that attends to
Even more, it requires the pursuit of community-centered and
the problems of social disorder, especially in public spaces, by engaging
neighborhood-based approaches to supervision.
the citizenry in the mission and practice of policing. In its more progressive
For too long, the supervision of probationers has been conducted
forms, this style of policing views citizens as partners in crime control, as
in government office buildings in a fortress-like fashion far removed
well as customers of the services police provide. In a number of urban
from where offenders live or carry on their lives. Numerous commentators
centers across the country, what has emerged is a proactive, problem-
have long observed that where the office may serve as the base of
solving, order-maintaining role for the police, not just a commitment to
supervision, the neighborhood should be the place of supervision. As
the activities traditionally associated with law enforcement alone.
noted in the monograph, a commitment to place-based supervision
The application of this metaphor to probation suggests a comparable
recognizes that the rate of crime actually reflects the aggregate of many
redefinition for community supervision. At its core, the “Broken
different crime problems, scattered about in many different
Windows” model argues that the work of probation must move well
neighborhoods. The threats offenders pose to public safety are by
beyond the management of individual caseloads and engage the
definition “local in nature,” disproportionately affecting some
community in the business of community supervision. Its vision, rooted
neighborhoods, street corners and other public spaces, far more than
firmly within a community justice framework, is neither control-oriented,
others.
nor offender-centered. Rather, it is a vision that seeks to reconnect
A commitment to public safety and the adoption of place-based
probation practitioners as willing partners in working with and
supervision strategies requires that resources be allocated with a sustained
contributing to the quality of community life. Embracing the vision
focus on managing the risk of harm posed by probationers at those times
statement on community justice issued by the American Probation and
and in those places where the potential for victimization is greatest. Such
Parole Association, the “Broken Windows” probation model argues that
an approach requires that probation officers widen the community net.
communities and victims must become active participants in co-
They must reach well beyond the management of individual caseloads
producing the outcomes associated with justice.
to devote a significant portion of their time to connecting offenders with
The monograph develops seven key strategies for reengineering the
prosocial peers, mentors and other adults in the neighborhoods where
field of probation. These strategies, however, do not work in isolation
probationers live. At the same time, they must draw on the informal
from each other. They are built upon community partnerships,
sources of social control to monitor and respond proactively to the public
community mobilization, and community collaborations that are
safety risks posed by such offenders. Within the “Broken Windows”
designed to provide both short- and long-term public safety. We must
model, probation officers must redefine their role to serve as a “catalyst”
take on the business of addressing serious and violent offenders in the
for building these relationships, in effect, aligning their efforts with the
short-term, while providing the appropriate balance of supervision and
greater operational, resource and socializing capacities that communities
treatment strategies in the long run—each seeking as its primary outcome
provide.
reduced victimizations in the future.
It is surprising to us that Taxman and Byrne challenge the
The first three strategies include “placing public safety first,”
fundamental importance of moving probation officers out on the street
“supervising probationers in the neighborhood, not the office,” and
where they not only interact with offenders, but develop a much more
“rationally allocating resources.” Recognizing that the primary concern of
informed understanding of the environment in which offenders, and
the public is to be free from crime, the paramount emphasis is on achieving
those around them live, work, and recreate. The effectiveness of
American Probation and Parole Association
31

---

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
supervision is undermined where probationers are able to maintain
Windows” model addresses the enforcement/sanctioning dimension of
anonymity and social distance from their probation officers and from
probation work (“provide for strong enforcement of probation conditions
those who may and often are better positioned to exert meaningful
and a quick response to violations”), while another targets the need for
leverage and accountability over them.
the development of programs grounded in evidence-based practices
The successful adoption of the first three strategies discussed above
(“establish performance-based initiatives”). The former offers a no-
requires the pursuit of another strategy discussed in the monograph:
nonsense argument for levying consequences for non-compliance with
namely, the need to “develop partners in the community.” If the goals of
the expectations of probation, while the latter draws on well-established
crime prevention, reduction and control are to be achieved, and if
research in urging the adoption of rehabilitative programs that seek to
reparation of the harm caused by criminal actions is to be addressed,
reduce offender recidivism.
then it is vital that community, faith-based and neighborhood groups,
In terms of enforcement, there is a need to provide aggressive
as well as law enforcement and human service agencies be involved in
surveillance and control for probationers whose behavior is deemed a
new and meaningful partnerships with probation.
threat to public safety, and to provide swift, timely and proportionate
There are many potential partners with whom to collaborate. The
responses to all violations of probation conditions. A carefully calibrated
“Broken Windows” model argues that probation practitioners must move
continuum of graduated sanctions offers probation officers a range of
such collaborations and partnerships from the margins to the center of
measured responses short of revoking and returning all such violators to
what they do. When such relationships are established, probation agencies
prison. In addition, the “Broken Windows” model calls for strict and
are better positioned to effectively supervise offenders, and impose greater
proactive policies relative to apprehending absconders from probation.
leverage and accountability over them. Each collaboration that is formed
We strongly disagree with Taxman and Byrne that such an emphasis
contributes to the provision of public safety and to more credible
represents a return to the failed “get tough” policies of the past. The
probation practices given their connection to the social ecology of
demanding enforcement of offender accountability for abiding by the
neighborhood and community relations. They enhance the limited
conditions of supervision represents sound probation practice. It is also
leverage probation exercises over offenders by drawing on the “social
responsive to the public’s expectation that probation serve as a meaningful
capital” furnished by local community groups and institutions.
sanction within the justice system, not an ineffectual slap-on-the-wrist.
Clearly, the monograph calls for a more complex form of community
As the monograph points out, achieving public safety within a
engagement for probation. It also speaks to the need to hold offenders
community justice framework means more than reducing offender
accountable for their actions and for them to maintain prosocial, law-
recidivism. Nevertheless, its accomplishment is enhanced significantly
abiding behavior. One of the seven strategies discussed under the “Broken
through effective rehabilitative programming. Reducing the threat or
risk of harm presented by offenders requires the development of
programmatic interventions that connect them to environments that
have prosocial supports and structure. For this to occur, probation
“If the goals of crime prevention,
practitioners must incorporate the findings and principles established in
the well-known “what works” literature in corrections. Some things work
reduction and control are to be
in correctional practice; certain programs will, if designed properly and
implemented with “therapeutic integrity,” produce significant outcomes
achieved, and if reparation of the
relative to reducing offender recidivism. As is clearly stated, it is incumbent
on probation agencies to draw on this research, as well as to rely more
harm caused by criminal actions is
generally on evidence-based practices when justifying the continued
operation or retention of particular programs.
to be addressed, then it is vital
It is perplexing to us that Taxman and Byrne seem to have missed
this section of the monograph entirely in their critique of the “Broken
that community, faith-based and
Windows” model. Not only do we provide ample reference citations for
the reader, but members of the Reinventing Probation Council have
neighborhood groups, as well as
been writing about, advocating and adopting programs for years drawing
on the various meta-analyses of “what works” in corrections.
law enforcement and human service
Incorporating this research into effective programming falls under the
strategy of adopting performance-based initiatives as discussed in the
agencies be involved in new and
monograph. While Taxman and Byrne seem to believe that a commitment
to rehabilitative programming grounded in evidence-based practice
meaningful partnerships with
represents the sine qua non of probation practice, we argue that it is but
one element of a more comprehensive vision of reconnecting the
probation.”
community to community supervision.
32
Perspectives
Spring 2001

---

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
At its core, the “Broken Windows” model argues that of all the key
that offer exemplary illustrations of elements of the “Broken Windows”
strategies necessary for transforming the practice of probation, leadership
model in practice. It is thus appropriate to end this summary of our
is, in the final analysis, the most important of all. It is critical for leaders
argument for a new approach to probation by pointing out what this
in the field to constantly strive in all that they do to create something of
choice will require.
public value. This means seeking to achieve tangible outcomes that matter
Probation leaders can no longer wait for major shifts or increases in
to the community. It means “embracing accountability” for producing
funding to flow their way. They must be willing to take the first steps on their
results that contribute to public safety and community well-being. As
own, with or without new support, and they must demonstrate positive
the monograph notes, the leaders and practitioners of probation must
results NOW, under present conditions and in the environments in which
consider how and in what ways their vision and actions move their agencies
they labor daily. They must be willing to fully assume responsibility for creating
toward the creation of public value.
credible supervision strategies that the public and other critical stakeholders
The muddled critique offered by Taxman and Byrne illustrates,
value. They must, in essence, chart a course for the present and the future
ironically, the very distinction we draw in the monograph between
that establishes the worth of their work and then challenge others to furnish
leadership and management. Leadership seeks to move the field forward
greater support if the desire is there to sustain and expand upon the
with a bold new vision of how things ought to be, where management
contributions and accomplishments of probation.
concentrates on working within the existing paradigm. Taxman and Byrne
It was and remains the vision of the “Broken Windows” model to
argue for a very traditional, offender-centered, treatment-oriented model
place probation “at the table” when public safety and justice issues are
of probation. It represents a reactive, one-dimensional approach to
debated and resolved. It is a vision that seeks to bind probation
supervision that is rightly viewed by the citizenry as sorely lacking in
practitioners as valued community partners in working across the entire
credibility. It is a model that is disengaged from the community, and
spectrum of local crime prevention, reduction and control. Achieving
destined to remain ineffectual in achieving outcomes that matter to the
this vision and thereby contributing to outcomes that are valued by the
public. It is a recipe that will only contribute to the further devaluation
citizenry represent, in our view, the sine qua non of a revitalized probation
of probation.
practice.H
There is no doubt that the adoption of the strategies that occupy
the center of the “Broken Windows” model will require a loosening of
Edward E. Rhine is the Special Projects Administrator in the Division
organizational structure and a major redirection in the management
of Parole and Community Services at the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation
practices associated with many probation agencies today. This will
and Correction in Columbus, Ohio. Gary Hinzman, is the District Director
necessarily involve a decentralization of tasks, greater reliance on
of the Sixth Judicial District Department of Community Services in Cedar
automated information systems, an outcomes-based or results-driven
Rapids, Iowa. Ronald P. Corbett is the Executive Director of the Supreme
focus, and the cultivation of wide-ranging staff competencies that facilitate
Judicial Court in Boston, Massachusetts. Dan Richard Beto is the Director
building partnerships within and linking offenders to the communities
of Correctional Management Institute of Texas, Criminal Justice Center at
in which they live. Taxman and Byrne express grave concern that this
Sam Houston University in Huntsville, Texas. Mario Paparozzi is the
will greatly complicate the managerial task of maintaining operational
Chairman of the New Jersey State Parole Board.
control over the whereabouts and activities of field staff now accomplished
by keeping them in the office. A more careful reading of the monograph
would have shown that there are numerous agencies that have
already adopted such changes and are doing so with great
success.
The Reinventing Probation Council began
its work by noting that probation had reached
a critical turning point in its history.
Whether probation will serve at the
political and intellectual hub of future
policy-oriented efforts to promote
public safety and offender
rehabilitation or continue to be
undervalued, ineffective, and sorely
lacking in resources is viewed by the
Council as dependent on choices
made by those in leadership positions
across the field. Many examples are
provided throughout the monograph
American P
Amer
r
ican P obation and P
r
a
obation and P role Association
a
33

---