Gaining Access to Parolees and Probationers
There may be multiple ways to access parolees, probationers, and/or the staff that work with them. One way is to access them via the probation or parole agency. However, as with incarcerated populations, this approach requires researchers to be especially careful with IRB protections, since this group also is under correctional control and could potentially face repercussions through the criminal justice system if researchers are not careful.
Depending on the locale, for access to probation officers or clientele, one will first need to determine how the agencies are administered in the location of interest. For example, in some places, probation agencies are administered locally (e.g., California and New York City), and so researchers will need to contact the chief or commissioner of the local probation agency, or at least this office, to start working to obtain access. In other states (e.g., Florida), probation is like parole in that the administration is at the state level, and so access will likely need to be granted at this level before gaining entry into the different offices throughout the state. In these latter cases, there may or may not be an additional step of gaining access in each individual (e.g., regional) office, through the regional or local managers. Parole typically is a state-level function, because it involves people returning from incarceration. Consequently, as with most departments of correction and state-level probation offices, researchers likely will need to obtain access through the state agency first, before going to branch offices. Because official agencies have client databases or lists, taking this approach to access may make sampling easier. For example, one may be able to randomly sample from the population of probation or parole clients. Or, researchers may be able to stratify the sample by location or probation office, if the agency is willing to give the researcher access to the list. If the interest is in studying the officers, a similar approach may be feasible in that one may be able to randomly sample officers or stratify the sample by officer characteristics.
Sometimes, because probationers and parolees are out in the community, researchers may be able to gain access to them without going through the formal criminal justice system. For example, sometimes community-based agencies that serve probation and parole populations will allow researchers access to their clients (e.g., homeless shelters, religious organizations, or nonprofits). In this case, the researcher will need to work with the individual provider to determine the best way to get permission to study the organization’s clients. This approach to gaining access may be easier if the formal criminal justice agency is not receptive to outside researchers, but it may preclude the ability to randomly sample and possibly to generalize if the agency granting access only serves a small or particular segment of the probationer or parolee population. That is, there are tradeoffs to each approach to gaining access, and researchers should carefully weigh these issues when deciding how best to go about studying these groups.
Gaining Access to Juvenile Populations
Like adults, juveniles in the justice system may be incarcerated or supervised in the community. Consequently, many of the tips mentioned above regarding how to access adults apply to juveniles—for example, one may need to contact state- or local-level agencies to gain access, depending on the area. However, incarcerated juveniles combine two vulnerable populations for IRB review—prisoners and youth. Specifically, researchers must take even more precautions when studying youths under correctional control. Thus, there may be even more footwork required to gain access to these populations. For example, researchers must generally get both parental consent and youth assent to study youths; meaning that agency permission may not be enough to be able to contact the juvenile clients directly. In some cases, parents may be willing to bring the youth to a research setting and sign consent forms at the time of data collection. In others, researchers will need to meet with the parent to describe the study or send home detailed information and have permission slips completed before contacting the youth. However, for incarcerated youths who are considered wards of the court, there may be “substitutes” for parental permission. For example, a judge may sign an approval, or this can sometimes be done by a participant advocate (someone who is not affiliated with the study or the institution who can assess the ability of the youth; see chapter 4 for information about juvenile parental consent). The key point here is that studying juveniles often requires another layer of gaining access—contacting the agency, obtaining consent from the parent, and then obtaining assent from the juvenile.
Regardless of who researchers work with to gain access, building rapport with the top agency personnel or gatekeepers is critical for building and maintaining positive professional relationships. The following are examples of ways researchers can build rapport with agencies:
•Open (and keep open) the lines of communication.
•Meet with administrators early in the project to discuss the measured outcomes and what constitutes “positive” versus “negative” findings.
•Before finalizing the survey/interview instruments, ask lead administrators responsible for approving the research and possibly other staff if they would like to include any questions (and include them if possible).
•Ask correctional administrators or staff to review the questions for wording and content. They may have suggestions for rewording some questions to get the same information but with less offensive language, should they see some. For example, researchers may be unaware of hidden operational or political issues that could arise if certain buzzwords are used in questions.
•Make as few requests as possible given that your requests usually result in time, work, and paperwork for staff.
•After the conclusion of the project, provide agencies with a report summarizing the findings from your research, and take into account their comments before sharing the results or report with a wider audience. This agreement may also be included in a memorandum of understanding that is agreed upon during the initial stages of the research (e.g., the approval process). It is often possible to reword statements to convey the same message but in a way that is less offensive to people working in the system. For example, one might say, “guidelines for how to manage clients were unclear” rather than “their leader was a terrible manager who gave no guidance to her staff.” Instead of altering what is said or infringing upon researcher’s freedom of speech, this advice is about considering how the message is conveyed to avoid unnecessarily damaging research relationships.
•In publications, acknowledge and thank the agencies and their staff for their participation (unless they prefer not to be identified).
•Send physical or electronic copies of final publications to relevant people in the agency as well as any other relevant leaders and line staff, especially when multiple agencies are involved in the research project or in service delivery. It may be most efficient to have a designated person in the administration who you keep updated on the status of the study and as someone who can help with issues as they arise.
HOW TO ASK FOR PERMISSION TO ACCESS CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS
Sometimes research requests must be made electronically through an agency’s website and other times it will be necessary to call agencies to request access. We highly recommend calling on the phone instead of, or in addition to, e-mailing because e-mails can easily be ignored or unreturned for prolonged periods of time. One useful approach is to send an e-mail first indicating that the researcher will follow up with a phone call in a few days, and then make sure to call within the noted time period. Depending upon the number of facilities from which a researcher will be requesting access, it may be necessary to repeat one’s request to conduct research multiple times. For example, given the large number of people with whom we spoke within each jail in our quest to gain access to each location, we found it helpful to have a script prepared (either memorized or read) to briefly introduce ourselves and the purpose of our request. See box 1 for the general verbiage we used when calling jails to request access to conduct research.
Having a typed template or bullet points of what to say helps, because it ensures the caller will not forget anything pertinent. In addition, if there are multiple people making calls, it ensures that they are at least generally saying the same things.