Probation Supervision - Adults & Juveniles

Date posted: 06/21/2007

Adult and juvenile offenders who are sentenced to Probation Supervision are assigned varying levels of supervision depending on their individual risk and needs. The length of supervision depends on the Court's sentence. The range of client contact varies from a monthly written or phone-in contact to intensive daily face-to-face contact with a probation officer. Data on this page represent the 8th Judicial District, which consists of Larimer and Jackson Counties, however the number of Jackson County cases as compared to Larimer County cases is very small. All data are based on a point-in-time annual count (June 30) of adult or juvenile probationers.

What this chart shows: Rate of Adults & Juveniles on Probation Supervision in the 8th Judicial District, 1997-2006*

*All data are based on a point-in-time count of probationers, taken on June 30 of each year.

Data Source: 8^th Judicial District (Larimer & Jackson Counties), Department of Probation Services

See data table

What this chart shows: Adults on Probation Supervision in the 8th Judicial District, 1997-2006*

*All data are based on a point-in-time count of probationers, taken on June 30 of each year.

Data Source: 8^th Judicial District (Larimer & Jackson Counties), Department of Probation Services

See data table

What this chart shows: Number of Juveniles on Probation Supervision in the 8th Judicial District, 1997 - 2006*

*All data are based on a point-in-time count of probationers, taken on June 30 of each year.

Data Source: 8th Judicial District (Larimer & Jackson Counties), Department of Probation Services

See data table

What these data tell us:

Juveniles- In 2006, Juvenile Probation rates returned to the same level as the previously reported ten-year low, 9.5 per thousand (2004). Actual numbers of probationers decreased by 70 cases or approximately 20% from 2005 to 2006. During that same time (1997 to 2006), the juvenile population (age 10 - 17) in Larimer and Jackson counties increased by 10%. 8th Judicial Probation staff cited several potential reasons for the decreased caseload:

• The statutes regarding juvenile probation allow the Court to designate agencies in addition to the Probation Department to provide probation supervision; therefore, the numbers here do not reflect all juveniles who are ordered to serve a period of probation by the Court. This data reflects only those who are ordered to serve probation under the supervision of the Probation Department.
• There continues to be a strong emphasis from the District Attorney's office on providing appropriate diversion programming for many juveniles who are arrested for a criminal offense. Larimer County has many diversion type services available that provide alternatives to Court intervention for lower risk juveniles.
• In 2006, through collaboration with the Larimer County Department of Human Services, an additional juvenile Drug Court process was initiated to address addiction issues in lower risk juveniles who were involved in diversion programming but continued to use substances. This 'Level 1' Juvenile Drug Court includes youth who remain as diversion cases and lower-risk youth whose cases are filed in Court following failure on diversion programming.
• In the late 1990's, many criminal justice agencies increased efforts to implement Restorative Justice practices, which often lead to alternative means of working with juvenile offenders. For example, rather than serving probation sentences, offenders might participate in conferencing with the victim, or work with a local merchant board to rectify a shoplifting crime.
• During the sentencing phase, probation staff continue to request diversion sentences for youth with lower risk factors, who have also committed less serious offenses.

Probation staff report that youth who are being sentenced to supervision by the Probation Department continue to have more serious risk factors, and are committing more serious crimes than those participating in diversion programs or being supervised by other agencies. The degree of risk is defined using a standardized assessment instrument.

Adults - In 2006, adult probation caseloads increased 12% from the previous year, with active cases growing from 2,501 to 2,795 (June 30th point-in-time counts). The rate of adults on probation returned to the highest level, previously reported in 2000, 13 per 1,000 adults. The only recent exception to the trend occurred in 2004, when adult probation caseloads decreased 7% from the previous year. According to the Chief Probation Officer, this resulted from a change in private probation providers that year. The transition process necessitated a stringent review of private vendor cases and those cases no longer requiring supervision were closed.

8th Judicial Probation staff indicate that the continued increase in adult rates and actual case numbers have several possible causes:

• Domestic Violence cases, added to Adult caseload data totals in 1996, continue to play a significant role in the workload of the department.
• A legislative change in 1998 mandated that certain Felony sexual offenses committed after November 1, 1998, would carry longer sentences (ten or twenty years to life) than permitted previously. Thus sex offenders sentenced to probation continue under supervision for long periods of time.
• Since June 2000, the 8th Judicial District Probation Department has contracted with a private provider to supervise low risk offenders, with higher risk offenders continuing to be supervised by the Probation Department. According to probation staff, the increased access to probation supervision has resulted in greater numbers of probation sentences for misdemeanor offenders. Over the past year some high risk drunk driving offenders have also been sentenced to probation supervision, with most of these offenders transferred to the private provider.

• Another contributing factor might be an increase in the rate of charges filed by the District Attorney's office, which would translate into more offenders with the potential of receiving a probation sentence. However, charges filed in 2006 were at a five-year low reversing this trend. It remains to be seen if this will eventually translate into lowered numbers of probationers.

Additional Information:

On Compass -

• Adult Abuse
• Adult Arrests
• Alternative Sentencing Unit
• Charges Filed by the District Attorney's Office
• Child Abuse
• Domestic Violence
• Jail Population & Capacity
• Juvenile Arrests
• Population Size & Growth
• Population by Age

Outside Compass -

• American Probation & Parole Association - information on publications, grants, and best practices in the field.
• Colorado Bureau of Investigation - Crime in Colorado Report
• Colorado Judicial Branch, 8th Judicial District - Court & Department of Probation information.
• Department of Probation Services, 8th Judicial District, (970) 498-5800, FAX: (970) 493-5858
• United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics - discusses nature of work, employment outlook, earnings, etc. for Probation Officers.

Industry Standards or Targets:

N/A

Data Tables:

Adults on Probation in the 8^th Judicial District*

Year	Larimer County Adults (18-90+)	Jackson County Adults (18-90+)	Total Adults	Adults on Probation	Rate per 1000 Adults (18-90+)
1990	139,637	1,190	140,827	788	5.6
1991	144,846	1,157	146,003	796	5.5
1992	149,746	1,170	150,916	892	5.9
1993	155,469	1,206	156,675	908	5.8
1994	161,882	1,224	163,106	1137	7.0
1995	167,282	1,197	168,479	907	5.4
1996**	171,889	1,185	173,074	1628	9.4
1997	176,463	1,191	177,654	1786	10.1
1998	181,602	1,183	182,785	2075	11.4
1999	187,376	1,176	188,552	2209	11.7
2000	193,090	1,175	194,265	2534	13.0
2001	197,984	1,215	199,199	2535	12.7
2002	202,238	1,213	203,451	2566	12.6
2003	203,887	1,219	205,106	2607	12.7
2004	206,247	1,224	207,471	2432	11.7
2005	210,691	1,207	211,898	2,501	11.8
2006	213,527	1,214	214,741	2,795	13.0

*All data is based on a point-in-time count of probationers, taken on June 30 of each year.

**Domestic Violence cases were added to adult totals in 1996.

See chart - 'Rate of Adults'

See chart - 'Number of Adults'

Juveniles on Probation in the 8th Judicial District (Larimer & Jackson Counties)

Year	Larimer County Youth (10-17)	Jackson County Youth (10-17)	Total Juveniles	Juveniles on Probation	Rate per 1000 Youth (10-17)
1990	19,502	192	19,694	409	20.8
1991	20,351	188	20,539	405	19.7
1992	21,136	193	21,329	371	17.4
1993	22,043	201	22,244	429	19.3
1994	23,060	204	23,264	404	17.4
1995	23,936	204	24,140	505	20.9
1996	24,706	203	24,909	548	22.0
1997	25,474	205	25,679	533	20.8
1998	26,333	208	26,541	564	21.3
1999	27,286	207	27,493	519	18.9
2000	28,241	208	28,449	408	14.3
2001	29,168	206	29,374	359	12.2
2002	29,357	200	29,557	324	11.0
2003	29,209	198	29,407	323	11.0
2004	28,821	190	29,011	273	9.4
2005	28,320	170	28,490	339	11.9
2006	28,044	169	28,213	269	9.5

*All data is based on a point-in-time count of probationers, taken on June 30 of each year.

See chart - 'Rate of Juveniles'

See chart - 'Number of Juveniles'

© 2004-2007 Larimer County | About | Newsletter | Site Map | Feedback