In jurisdictions with discretionary release, parole boards have sometimes sought to protect the public by repeatedly denying parole to some of the most serious offenders, those few who have long criminal records and thick files full of institutional misconduct reports. But, it is often these very same individuals who then return to society with the least supervision because they have "maxed out" their sentences, having served every possible day in prison. Thus, while corrections administrators, releasing authorities, and the public may wish to keep offenders who pose a risk to the community incarcerated for as long as possible, they should bear in mind that nearly all prisoners will eventually be released. If individuals expend their entire sentence in prison or jail, the releasing authority will be unable to mandate any form of community-based supervision. To avoid such a scenario-or the scenario of any individual who needs services and support from returning to society without a structured system of supervision-every person should be supervised in the community upon his or her release from prison or jail when evidence shows that he or she is likely to recidivate if released. (See Policy Statement 25, Development of Supervision Strategy, and Policy Statement 26, Implementation of Supervision Strategy, for more on structuring supervision to reduce risk and increase public safety.)

In any state, the sentencing structure will determine what policies can and should be implemented to ensure that post-release supervision is imposed in appropriate instances. There is no evidenced-based formula for determining exactly how long a person should be supervised in the community. Where release is discretionary, releasing authorities should consider not only how much time a person should serve in prison for a particular offense, but also how much time he or she will need to readjust to the community under the supervision of a parole or probation office. In a jurisdiction that has a mandatory release system, sentences for high-risk offenders should always include provisions for community supervision. Legislation or regulations should mandate a minimum or maximum percentage of the sentence to be served in the community or specify an exact combination of incarceration and community supervision based on the type of offense or length of incarceration.

Example: Parole eligibility, United States Parole Commission

Unless the court has specified a minimum time for the offender to serve, or has imposed an "indeterminate" type of sentence, parole eligibility occurs upon completion of one-third of the term. If an offender is serving a life sentence or a term or terms of 30 years or more, he or she will become eligible for parole after 10 years.

Whether because of state law, corrections policy, or parole board discretion, there is inevitably a segment of the population not subject to community supervision, even though a risk assessment instrument indicates that they are likely to re-offend. For these individuals, policymakers could create a bridge between incarceration and the community by continuing to hold them in a secure facility, but gradually introducing community-based elements. Some substantial control mechanisms, such as a halfway house or electronic monitoring, may offer options for those individuals who would otherwise move directly from, in some cases, maximum security units to an outside world with no structure or supervision. (See Policy Statement 22, Workforce Development and the Transition Plan, for information on work-release programs, which offer one kind of structured environment.) Indeed, such programs may prove to be an effective transitional step for all individuals who will re-enter society.

Example: Pre-Release Services, Montgomery County Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (MD)

Montgomery County offers several programs that provide treatment, supervision, and monitoring to individuals who are within six months of their release date, including a residential work-release facility and the Community Accountability, Reintegration and Treatment (CART) Program. CART is a nonresidential, prerelease program that offers intensive supervision of offenders in their homes with the assistance of electronic monitoring equipment. CART staff work closely with offenders and their families to initiate treatment interventions and provide counseling services and support. Specifically, the program requires daily supervision by an assigned case manager as well as a sponsor (such as a family member, employer, counselor, or clergy).

Finally, in jurisdictions where prisoners are to be released to the community with no transitional step and no community supervision, local law enforcement officials should be notified of the release in a timely way, and the individuals being released should receive contact information for community-based support services.

Example: Automatic notification, New York Department of Corrections

In New York, local law enforcement officials automatically receive notification when an individual is being released into the community, whether or not he or she will be under correctional supervision. The Inmate Records Coordinator at the facility from which a person is being released provides law enforcement officials with a packet that includes a fingerprint card, mug shot, the individual's new address (or, if that is unavailable, his or her address at the time of the crime), and, when applicable, the name of the individual's supervising officer and the duration of his or her parole supervision.