There was a rise of probation population from 53 % in the year 2006 to 55 % in 2008. The rise in probation had a positive correlation with an increase in probationers completing the conditions of supervision. Year 2008 experienced the fastest growth in the parole ever since 2000. It is true that from year 2000 to 2008, those offenders who were under community supervision rose by half a million that is the probable figure in 2000 being 4.6m and that in year 2008 it was 5.1 M. The admissions to probation decreased in 2008 while the release increased.
Most of the probationers who were engaged in active management at the end of 2008 and the rate was 71 %. The mode of reporting to the probation authority was via email, telephone or offenders to go in person only if they are under active supervision. During this period, probation for inactive prisoners was only 8 per cent and they were not required to report to the probation authority on a daily basis. There were those probationers who were given a warrant requiring them to be arrested. Those who had been given a warrant were only 6 per cent while 7 per cent of the population was under statuses.
Substance abuse was the main violation which made many probationers to be put under regulation. This is because out of ten probationers three of them were under supervision due to drug offense. In 2003, 23 percent of the probationers were under supervision due to property violations but in 2008, this rate increased to 25 per cent (US Department of Justice, 2009). In 2008, there was an increase in parole exit which was attributed by an increase in parolees completing the terms of their supervision. During this year most parolees were at a higher chance of sentence due to drug offence than any other offense (US Department of Justice, 2009).
In 2008, two percent of the probationers were released from prison because they failed to comply with prison regulations. This group was not returned to prison since their prison term was recalled. After handing in of parole and publication counts to the BSJ some states do bring up to date their data. This is because modified population estimates may contain figures which were not entirely processed at the last part of the year (US Department of Justice, 2009).
