A Century of Service: Probation and Pretrial Services’ Impact on Justice

Arising from humble beginnings to perform a century of service, U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services has played a pivotal role in serving the courts and protecting communities. The over 7,000 staff that comprise the system are dedicated to supporting the reentry of individuals released into the community and helping them transition to productive lives.

U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang, chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Criminal Law, reflects on the evolution of U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services in recognition of the 100th anniversary of the Probation Act of 1925, which established a probation system for the federal courts. The anniversary is being honored on March 4. 

How did the introduction of U.S. probation officers impact the federal criminal justice system?

Before the Probation Act of 1925, district judges lacked the authority to sentence defendants to probation. Some judges used a practice called “laying a case on file” to hold off on imposing a sentence so long as the defendant maintained good behavior. However, there was no formal way for the court to monitor the defendant’s conduct. 

With the passage of the Probation Act of 1925 and the creation of federal probation officers, courts gained the authority to impose a sentence of probation, and judges could rely on probation officers to supervise these people in the community. Additionally, with the help of probation officers, judges could review presentence reports to help identify good candidates to be placed on probation.

How has the role of U.S. probation officers changed since the position was first created?

Initially, probation officers were only authorized to supervise those sentenced to probation. However, the scope of their work expanded quickly. In 1930, probation officers became authorized to supervise federal parolees. After World War II, probation officers began to supervise military parolees. And in the 1980s, Congress created pretrial services and authorized probation and pretrial services officers to supervise defendants in the community. 

Most significantly, in 1987, when Federal Sentencing Guidelines became effective, officers began to supervise those placed on supervised release. Officers took on a legal-interpretation and legal-application role too – assessing and recommending sentencing guideline calculations in presentence reports. 

The work of probation and pretrial services has only become increasingly complex, with officers managing conditions, such as location monitoring and restrictions on technology access.

What common misconceptions do people have about the role of U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services?

Some people assume that probation and pretrial services work for the Department of Justice. But from the very start, the work of officers was closely related to the Judiciary’s role in sentencing, and in 1940, officers were formally moved into the Judiciary. The status of officers as employees of the court ensures their independence and promotes trust between the officers and judges whom they serve.

Another misconception is that officers have a singular mindset – either law enforcement or social worker – about how to best supervise people on their caseload. In fact, we know that the best officers are multi-dimensional. They understand that the goal of protecting the public includes, and is not separate from, the goal of rehabilitating the person on supervision. 

What obstacles has the U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services system overcome over the past century?

Officers have been asked to adjust to whatever the nation’s pressing needs are. Over the years, officers have supervised bootleggers and mob bosses, draft dodgers, Wall Street tycoons, and violent street gang members. They have had to handle both domestic and international violent extremists, as well as sexual offenders and cyber criminals. It is a testament to the skills and adaptability of officers that they have been able to adjust to all these changes.

Another challenge has been keeping up with new legislative directives and changing trends in crime overall. For example, the Sentencing Reform Act created a seismic shift in the work of probation officers. They needed to learn and apply the sentencing guidelines and understand how the goals of supervised release differed from that of probation.

What major challenges does the U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services system face today?

Securing adequate resources has always been a challenge. Most of our budget is spent on our staff. When we experience budget shortfalls, it means fewer officers and larger caseloads for the remaining officers. When caseloads get too high, there are delays in investigations and reports, which slows down cases. And large caseloads increase the risks that supervision issues are not promptly addressed. 

A significant obstacle that our system – like the rest of the nation – had to overcome was the COVID-19 pandemic. As the virus swept across the country, officers had to change the way they carried out their duties to keep themselves and the people they supervised safe. I was impressed to see the ingenuity and innovations deployed by officers, including virtual home contacts, remote-monitoring technology, and the use of telehealth services. Some of the pandemic-related innovations were so successful that they have been incorporated into today’s post-pandemic policies and procedures.

What technological advancements have most impacted the work of officers?

In the early days of the system, probation officers worried about things like typewriters, office space, and office supplies. But as the system grew, questions arose about what those records should look like. In 1959, at the request of the Judiciary, the General Services Administration conducted a study on recording and reporting of probation office statistics. A number of recommendations were made to promote consistency. These formal reports are still used today to inform the Judiciary, the Congress, and the public about our work. 

To track their work, officers would use logbooks and eventually Dictaphones to track case-related activities. In 1977, the Judicial Conference approved the system’s first case management system – the Probation Information Management System. A decade later, that system was replaced with the Probation and Pretrial Services Automated Case Tracking System (PACTS), and we are now nearing the end of the development of PACTS360, a secure, cloud-based system, which will enhance officers’ productivity and effectiveness. 

PACTS and PACTS360 provide vital information that impacts case-specific decisions, such as the risk level of the person being supervised, and system-wide decisions, such as the resource requirement for the system.

Today, officers have access to most case-related information on their smartphones. They also leverage new technologies to interact with the people they supervise, use location and computer monitoring, and the latest drug testing technology as part of the supervision process to aid them in planning and performing field work safely. 

What lessons from the past 100 years can help guide the future of the U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services system?

The strength of our system is its staff. That was true in the earliest days when, in 1927, the District of Massachusetts appointed Richard McSweeney as the first federal probation officer, all the way to today, when our system has more than 7,000 staff performing the work from Maine to Guam. 

We must ensure that our staff is prepared to handle the challenges of the modern era. To achieve this, we need them to have access to the best training, research, and systems to help them perform their duties; continuously innovate, test, and implement evidence-based practices to reduce recidivism; and promote the fair administration of justice and the protection of the public and our officers at the forefront of our work. If we do these things, we are assured to build on the many successes of the past 100 years and benefit society for years to come.

Learn more about U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services and the centennial of the Probation Act of 1925.