CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

The Philippines is recognized as one of the most dynamic economies in the

region, marked by its increasing urbanization, a growing middle class, and a vibrant

labour market. Aside from its rising economy, its legal and policy frameworks are not

lagging behind, with its established executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

Philippines still confront several issues on law enforcement, particularly, in its prison and

correctional management. An overpopulated prison system is a natural consequence of an

under developed prison and correctional framework. The country ranks as the most

overcrowded incarceration system in the world, with a startling overcrowded population

rate of 436%.4 (Guinigundo 2021).

The supervisory role of parole and probation officers in the community is vital in

guiding and monitoring parolees to comply with the order and be law-abiding citizens in

the community. Indirectly, they are responsible for protecting the welfare and safety of

the community. However, in undertaking these obligations, the community parole and

probation officers are facing numerous legal and operational impediments. In Criminal

Justice System, probation and parole officers play a vital part in supporting offenders

throughout their community reintegration following release from prison (Rhineberger

Dunn et al., 2016). As defined by the Bureau of Justice, probation is a court-ordered

period of community correctional supervision offered as an alternative to incarceration

(Glaze and Kaeble, 2014). Most prisoners who are released from prison are placed on

parole and assigned to a parole officer (Kennealy et al., 2012). However, carrying out
their functions can be complicated and difficult, particularly in areas with limited

resources and distinct cultural contexts, such as Zamboanga del Norte, Philippines.

Today, probation is a federal, state, and local activity administered by more than

2,000 separate agencies, with nearly 4 million adult offenders under supervision. In

recent years, the role of parole and probation officers has become increasingly important

in the criminal justice system. These officers play a crucial role in ensuring that offenders

are held accountable for their actions while also helping them to successfully reintegrate

into society. However, the implementation of their functions is not without challenges

and problems (Seiter 2014).

In fact, there are studies conducted to explore the challenges and problems

encountered by parole and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and

probationers. For instance, a study by Peralta (2019) examined the experiences of officers

in the province and identified the lack of resources and cooperation from offenders as

major challenges. The study also highlighted the need for more training and support for

officers to effectively carry out their duties. Similar to the study conducted by Bongcayao

(2019) explored the challenges faced by probation and parole officers in the province,

including the lack of resources and support from the government, inadequate training,

and heavy workload. Probation and Parole officers face the challenge of balancing large

caseloads, limited resources, management difficulties, threat to public safety and

criticism of recidivism rates.

A study by Lazo and Racho (2018) examined the factors that affect the

effectiveness of probation and parole services in the province, including the lack of

coordination between different agencies and the limited availability of rehabilitation

programs. The study noted that these factors often contributed to the high rates of

recidivism among offenders in the province. As stated by Arquillo et al. (2020) the

challenges faced by probation and parole officers in implementing community-based

correctional programs in the province revealed that the lack of resources and support

from the government, as well as the limited availability of community-based programs,

often made it difficult for officers to effectively implement these programs.

Therefore, due to lack of studies pertaining to the parole and probation here in the

Philippines, the research will focus on the challenges and problems encountered by

parole and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and probationers in

Zamboanga del Norte, a province in the Philippines. The discussion will draw from

various studies conducted by researchers in the field. With this study, it is clear that

parole and probation officers in Zamboanga del Norte face numerous challenges and

problems in the implementation of their functions. These challenges include a lack of

resources and support from the government, inadequate training, heavy workloads, and

limited availability of rehabilitation programs. Addressing these challenges will be

critical to improving the effectiveness of parole and probation services in the province

and promoting successful reintegration of offenders into society.

Thus, the challenges and problems that parole and probation officers have in

carrying out their duties in Zamboanga del Norte are complicated and multifaceted.

Understanding these challenges is therefore critical in generating effective solutions and

methods for addressing them. To fill this research vacuum, future studies might delve

deeper into the particular challenges and problems faced by parole and probation officers

in Zamboanga del Norte. Surveys with officers might be used to acquire a better grasp of
their experiences and viewpoints. More research is required to fully comprehend these

challenges and problems and devise effective solutions.

Background of the Study

Throughout the years, most encountered challenges and problems by the parole

and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and probationers includes; large

caseloads, limited resources, balancing supervision, hostile environment and high risk-

clients (Lutze, 2014). The role of probation officers has been transformed to combine the

roles of rehabilitation and law enforcement. Balancing the two roles improves

supervision effectiveness, reduces recidivism, and enhances pro-social life for the

offenders (Hsieh, et al., 2015). In addition, probation and parole officers were engrossed

in a role of “threats and punishment” and “punitive officers”. They were likely to work

closely with the court and releasing authority if they reported the most important goals

were offender punishment, monitoring, and community safety. In the early 1990s, a

stronger focus to manage the probationers’ needs and risks arose (Hsieh, et al, 2015).

The most recent Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics (Council of Europe,

2019) found that the ratio of probationers per individual staff member varied from 4.7 in

Norway to 240.1 in Greece with an average (median) ratio of 32.8. Probation staff had

long been convinced that high caseloads affect both the reoffending rates of the

probationers they supervise and their own well-being. A number of surveys in Canada

and the US have covered the issue of caseloads. For example, a Canadian survey of 541

parole officers (Union of Safety and Justice Employees, 2019), including staff working

both in custody and the community, is typical. Gayman and colleagues (2018) surveyed

798 probation and parole officers working in North Carolina as part of a cross-sectional
survey concerning job characteristics and well-being. The survey investigated the impact

on those probation officers who had the highest number of probationers with mental

health problems on their caseload.

The parole system used to release inmates involved parole supervision. More

recently, the service emphasis of parole has shifted from rehabilitation to supervision,

lowering the number and availability of services provided to parolees (Vito et al., 2015).

Probation officers need to provide continuous attention, counselling, programming, and

assistance to successfully rehabilitate the probationers. People on community supervision

connect to human service agencies through a variety of channels. Sometimes they are

court-ordered to engage with treatment programs, obtain employment, or pay child

support as a condition of supervision. In these cases, failure to cooperate with human

service agencies can result in revocation of community supervision and incarceration in

jails or prisons or no coordination between these multiple service providers- a fact that

can lead to conflicting, duplicative, and inefficient service delivery (Cecelia Klingele,

J.D. 2021)

The United States’ prison system has been under scrutiny, with a focus on the

correctional system’s ineffectiveness and policies. For over 40 years, punitive and

punishment strategies dominated the criminal justice system (Viglione & Blasko, 2018).

The “tough on crime” movement that emphasized surveillance and control in probation

supervision was ineffective in reducing recidivism. Due to the ineffectiveness, growing

attention was renewed on rehabilitation ideals and evidence-based practices (EBPs).

These are a core set of practices that have been defined to reduce recidivism and are
useful in an intervention. These practices refer to research and data that guide policy and

practice decisions to improve individuals’ outcomes (Blasko, et al., 2016).

Previous research suggests traditional probation and parole services perform less

than optimally in reducing recidivism. In response to these findings, several attempts to

integrate the principles of effective intervention and core correctional practices into

community supervision have been made. Preliminary results from several jurisdictions

suggest that the use of core correctional practices within the context of community

supervision has been associated with meaningful reductions in offender recidivism

(Smith P, et al,. 2012). Most individuals released from prison are placed on parole and

assigned to a parole officer (Kennealy et al., 2012). The purpose of the parole officer

during the re-entry process is twofold. First, the parole officer serves as an important

mechanism of control—to ensure that individuals do not pose public risk. The second

role of the parole officer is to supply aid and support to the returning individual (Glaser,

1969; Kennealy et al., 2012). In this role, parole officers may engage in a wide range of

supportive functions such as assisting the individual in finding a job or ensuring the

returning person is receiving appropriate services. Functions such as assisting with

housing needs, providing services and treatment, and facilitating connections with the

broader community are also examples of social support.

The study by Morash and colleagues (2015) demonstrates that supportive social

relationships between the returning person and the parole officer are vital during the re-

entry process as parole officer social support indirectly promoted pro-social re-entry

outcomes. In a sample of 140 youth, Vidal et al. (2015) found that a strong bond between

the youth and the supervising officer was related to less violent recidivism. The
complexities of human behaviour in a globalized world have resulted in the rise of crimes

in the late modernity and consequently criminals found guilty are being incarcerated

(Gideon & Sung, 2011).

Due to less studies pertaining to the parole and probation, the researchers saw the

need to conduct the study specifically the challenges and problems encountered by the

parole and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and probationers in

Zamboanga Del Norte.

Conceptual Framework of the Study

An assessment of the study will leads to the formulation of the conceptual

paradigm in the study. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study, it contains

three (3) boxes, the first box contains the parole and probation officers in the supervision

of parolees and probationers as the independent variable, the second box contains the

challenges and problems encountered by the parole and probation officers in Zamboanga

del Norte, the third box which contains the demographic profile of the members of parole

and probation officers in terms of their age, gender, position, and length of service as the

intervening variables.
 INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT
VARIABLE VARIABLE

The challenges and

Parole and probation officers
problems encountered by the
in the Supervision of the
parole and probation officers
Parolees and Probationers
in Zamboanga del Norte

The demographic profile of

the members of parole and
probation officers in terms of:
age;
sex;
position; and
length of service

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the Study

Statement of the Problem

This study sought to determine the challenges encountered by the parole and

probation officers in the supervision of parolees and probationers in Zamboanga del

Norte. Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the members of parole and probation officers

in terms of:

1.1 age;

1.2 sex;

1.3 Position;

1.4 length of service?

2. What are the challenges encountered by the parole and probation officers in the

supervision of parolees and probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte in terms of:

2.1 Hostile Environment,

2.2 Rehabilitation and Treatment of criminal offenders, and

2.3 supervision?

3. What are the problems encountered by the parole and probation officers in the

supervision of parolees and probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte in terms of:

3.1 stress,

3.2 caseloads, and

3.3 resources?
Significance of the Study

This research is fundamental in determining the challenges and problems

encountered by the parole and probation officers in the supervision of parolees and

probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte. Particularly, the findings will benefit the

significant persons and offices enumerated below.

Bureau of Jail Management and Penology- The data gathered from this study

will serve as a basis for the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, to undertake

measures in terms of coping mechanism intended for parole and probation officers that

may addressed their sentiments in implementing their functions.

Criminology Students- The result of this study will benefits all criminology

students since they are taking non-institutional correction (CA2) as one of the major

subject in Bachelor of Science in Criminology.

National Government- The findings of this study will help the National

Government in improving their ways in dealing with parole and probation workers in the

country.

Parole and Probation Officers- The result of this study will benefit the parole

and probation officers in relation to their function in supervising parolees and

probationers and may give them effective and efficient strategies as basis in dealing with

challenges and problems encountered during supervision.

 Researchers- This study may serve as reference material to any further similar

and related studies to provide a favourable environment for the researcher.

Future Researchers- The result of the study will be a big help to future

researchers who wish to conduct similar study of the same nature.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

Content Delimitation- This study will focus on the challenges and problems

encountered by the parole and probation Officers in the supervision of parolees and

probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte.

Subject Delimitation- The target respondents of this study will be the total

enumeration of members of Parole and Probation Administration in Zamboanga Del

Norte.

Place Delimitation- This study will be conducted in Dipolog, Zamboanga Del

Norte parole and probation office.

Time Delimitation- This study will be conducted in the calendar year 2023-2024.

Definition of Terms

For a better understanding of the study's essential terminologies, the following

terms are defined operationally below:

Challenges. It highlights how parole and probation officers were able to deal

with challenges related to their position at hand.

Correctional System. It refers to an action within the criminal justice system

that punishes, treats, and/or rehabilitates offenders for their criminal actions.
 Criminal Justice System. It compromises rules and procedures in the sake of

preserving social control and preventing crime through punishment and rehabilitation.

Parole and Probation. As used in the research, it refers to the privileges granted

to convicts under the supervision of parole and probation officials, which serve as an

option for the condemned individual to avoid spending time in jail.

Parole and probation officer. As used in the study, it refers to the capacity of

the parole and probation officers in dealing with the challenges and problems

encountered during their supervision of parolees and probationers.

Rehabilitation. As used in the study, the term refers to rehabilitation programs

designed to reintegrate convicts into society with the assistance of parole and probation

officers.

Supervision- It refers to the act of parole and probation officers in supervising

and handling parolees and probationers in accordance with the terms of the order, as

defined in the study.

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the related literature and studies, both international and local

in scope, that have bearing to the present study.

Related Literature

Under the Probation Law of 1976, Parole and Probation Administration (PPA) is

mandated to: Promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him

with individualized treatment; provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent

offender which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and prevent

the commission of offenses. Pursuant to Executive Order No. 292 Chapter 7 Parole and

Probation Administration Section 23. The PPA herein after referred to as the

Administration shall have the following functions: (1) Administer the parole and

probation system; (2) Exercise general supervision over all parolees, and probationers;

(3) Promote the correction and rehabilitation of offenders; and (4) Such other function as

may hereafter be provided by law.

Over the last three decades, the use of community corrections as a viable

alternative to jail, particularly probation, has steadily increased. The Bureau of Justice

Statistics reported 3,789,800 persons on probation and another 870,500 on parole at the

end of 2016, compared to 2,172,800 people detained in jails and prisons nationwide

(Kaeble & Cowhig, 2018). Correctional officer tasks have been shown to be difficult,

with issues affecting both their professional and personal lives. Most notably, these

professions have been discovered to be extremely demanding, which may lead to bad
health, high rates of divorce, work burnout, and other major professional and personal

issues (McCoy & Aamodt, 2010; Mumfor et al., 2015).

Officer time is extremely valuable owing to the increasing demand to perform

more with fewer resources. According to research, fewer caseloads combined with

effective intervention tactics to address criminogenic needs can reduce recidivism (Jalbert

et al., 2010). Jalbert and Rhodes (2012), for example, investigated the impact of lowered

caseloads of 54 medium- to high-risk probationers per officer on probationer recidivism.

The authors discovered that officers with reduced caseloads had considerably more face-

to-face interaction with probationers, and that lesser caseloads resulted in a 30% drop in

recidivism. The findings did, however, show that fewer caseloads and more frequent

interaction resulted in a minor rise in technical breaches.

Numerous collaborative studies conducted by the National Center for State Courts

in various states serve as the foundational research for workload and time studies in

probation and parole (Talbarico et al., 2010). Building on this research, DeMichele et al.

(2011) recommended for workload studies to educate others outside of the profession on

what probation officers do, as a tool for managers, to inform policymakers, and as a

source of accountability. Furthermore, DeMichele and Payne (2018) conducted a recent

study to understand how probation officers spent their time in their daily activities, as

well as how demographics, risk levels, offenses, and the tasks at hand influenced the

amount of time officers spent on tasks.

As stated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS; 2019), 63.5% of all probation

and parole officers are female in the criminal justice area. In relation to the BLS (2019),
probation/parole officials, like law enforcement officers, are primarily Caucasian

(63.8%). Furthermore, Caucasian probation and parole officers, like law enforcement

officers, are not entirely representative of offenders in the criminal justice system. Other

demographic characteristics, such as marital status, were shown to be insignificant

predictors of officer stress (Armstrong et al., 2015).

The general characteristics of probation are based on procedures that developed in

eighteenth-century England. Beginning around this time, judges suspended sentences in

exchange for a specified period of good behavior, and once offenders demonstrated they

could continue to live in the community without committing additional crimes, they

petitioned the Crown for a pardon (Mays and Win free Jr., 2014). While some probation

programs continue to emphasize rehabilitation (Phelps, 2013), research indicates that

current probation practices are more concerned with monitoring, surveillance, and public

safety (Phelps, 2013; Robinson, 2016). As noted by Robinson (2016), throughout the

1970s, community corrections shifted from a therapeutic approach focused on

rehabilitation to a managerial model focused on offender management.

On the basis of Andrews and Bonta (2010), correctional staff could adjust

programing and case management to meet institutional goals for each individual by

implementing risk assessment instruments and carefully matched intervention programs

and following the risk need responsively (RNR) principles. Prior research has shown that

when risk and need concepts are strictly followed in supervision and treatment, effective

probation lowers recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Andrews et al., 2011; Lutze,

2014). In this regard, high-risk offenders receive thorough monitoring and assistance,

whereas low-risk offenders receive less supervision and intervention.

 As noted by Slate and Johnson (2013), community correctional facilities confront

four types of stress. These areas include (a) public and community stress, (b) internal

stress of community correctional organizations, (c) external stress linked with the

criminal justice system, and (d) personal stress. Some of these incidents involve violent

offenders, suicide attempts, and threats/assaults (Lewis et al., 2013). Furthermore,

Severson and Pettus-Davis (2013) referred to the social work role assigned to probation

and parole officers as secondary trauma. In other words, these officers are subjected to

clients recalling previous terrible events.

As mentioned by (Borjas, & Ware, 2018). Research has recently highlighted the

importance of the parole and probation officer for returning persons. As just one

example, Chamberlain et al. (2018) found that positive parole officer rapport was

associated with reduced recidivism, while negative parole officer rapport was associated

with increased recidivism. Although this small group of studies has established that

parole officer support matters, it is likely that the link between the parole officer and

returning person is more than just “positive” or “negative.” When placed within the

framework of social support again, the receipt of resources through social connections the

parole officer is an important mechanism of social support as they provide the returning

person with a wide range of resources such as assisting in acquiring and maintaining

employment counselling the individual by talking and listening to them about their

problems and hardships.

However, beyond understanding the parole officer simply as another source of

social support, when placed within the broader research on peers and families as

mechanisms of support during reentry (e.g., Mowen, Stansfield, & Boman, 2018), there is
ample rationale to believe that parole officer social support is multidimensional and

comprised of interpersonal (e.g., listening and caring) and professional (e.g., providing

important resources and acting professionally) social support components.

In Canada, PPOs are employed within provincial and territorial correctional

systems and parole officers are largely employed federally. Accordingly, the literature

review on Canadian community corrections is limited, and researchers have tended to

focus on the federal parole system rather than provincial probation and parole services

(Maier, 2020). Absent in the research on parole and probation in Canada is an in-depth

consideration of PPOs’ occupational experiences and the impact of said experiences on

their mental health, well-being, and ability to effectively perform their public safety role.

In Duxbury et al.’s (2015) examination of stressors in police organisations and

Ricciardelli’s (2018) more recent study of Canadian rural policing, conceptualizes

stressors experienced by PPOs as emerging from either operational factors (i.e., the duties

of the job) or organisational factors (i.e., structural aspects of the organisation in which

PPOs work).

Correctional work may create particular mental health concerns that are unique

when compared to other public safety roles. For example, Carleton et al. (2018b) found

that, across six categories of Canadian public safety personnel, 4 correctional workers

(along with paramedics) expressed the greatest prevalence of suicidal behaviours both in

the past year and over their lifetime. Despite a high prevalence of mental health concerns

among public safety personnel, including correctional workers, they may still feel they

face stigma within their organisation when seeking treatment for mental health needs
(Ricciardelli et al., 2020b) or receive inadequate mental health resources from their

employers (Ricciardelli et al., 2018).

Furthermore, in the most recent Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics

(Council of Europe, 2019) it was found that, the ratio of probationers per individual staff

member varied from 4.7 in Norway to 240.1 in Greece with an average (median) ratio of

32.8. Probation staff had long been convinced that high caseloads affect both the

reoffending rates of the probationers they supervise and their own well-being. A number

of surveys in Canada and the US have covered the issue of caseloads. For example, a

Canadian survey of 541 parole officers (Union of Safety and Justice Employees, 2019),

including staff working both in custody and the community, is typical. Gayman and

colleagues (2018) surveyed 798 probation and parole officers working in North Carolina

as part of a cross-sectional survey concerning job characteristics and well-being. The

survey investigated the impact on those probation officers who had the highest number of

probationers with mental health problems on their caseload.

Related Studies

Published article from Sage Publication, Inc. (2020) as indicated, two other

commonly confused terms are probation and parole. These are not synonyms, but refer to

two different situations. Probation and parole are types of sentences. Probation is a

sentence that suspends or delays a term of full-time incarceration in prison or jail. In

return for the suspended or delayed sentence, the judge orders the offender returned to the

community, where he or she must abide by certain rules and conditions. Since its

inception, the use of probation (and other intermediate sanctions) has become the most

common form of sanction administered in the United States. Typically, a person given
probation has not served time in a jail or prison for that particular offense. A person just

released from prison may be placed on parole as part of his or her sentence. Parole

operates like probation in that the offender is released from prison back into the

community, where he or she must abide by certain rules and conditions. Failure to

comply with those rules often means returning to prison.

In the study conducted by Chron Contributor on December 01, 2020 Probation

officials keep an eye on criminals who have been ordered to report to a court-appointed

watchful eye. Probation officers must deal with complicated documentation

requirements, heavy caseloads, and limited resources that provide little room for mistake

while interacting with clients in order to achieve their goals. Candidates must to weigh

the benefits and risks of becoming a probation officer. For instance, officers frequently

enter tense situations and motivate offenders with drug problems or violent criminal

records to seek rehabilitation. Officers frequently leave the field due to a variety of

issues. According to officers, the rising automation of numerous employment duties has

not resulted in fewer criminals needing to be dealt with. A 2014 research by the Maryland

Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services provides Maryland as an example,

where probation officers had an average caseload of 83 individuals. Due to the huge

volume of cases, probation officials are forced to concentrate on high-risk situations,

leaving the majority of offenders with little to no monitoring.

As specified in the study of Hyatt &Barnes (2014) numerous studies have found

that retributive strategies and intensive supervision probation have not achieved

reductions in recidivism. At the same time, rehabilitation programming has experienced a

renaissance as researchers have uncovered treatment approaches and protocols that when
combined with risk assessment and case management, are related to lower rates of

recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010) noted that this retributive doctrine which utilizes

control-oriented “surveillance has been the dominant model of probation supervision,”

whereas the “treatment model is difficult to find” in practice in institutions and agencies

across the states.

Joy E. Presado & Ronato S. Ballado on “Parole and Probation Administration in

Northern Samar, Philippines” made mentioned that Restorative Justice, Therapeutic

Community, and Volunteerism indeed, these are the instruments that the Administration

use to prepare the client for reintegration into the society as a reformed, rehabilitated,

productive, drug-free, and law-abiding citizen (Parole and Probation Administration

Operations Manual, 2015).

The implementation of the parole and probation programs can never escape from

different problems. The different states of America shared similar problems on the

rehabilitation of offenders especially among those in Parole and Probation, or other

similar forms of re-entry programs. Dougherty (2011) pointed out the barriers to

successful ex-offenders’ re-entry are the parole and probation programs itself,

employment, and housing. In the local setting, the programs attained remarkable heights

of success of a social program in the past three decades but the probation and parole

systems continuously derive less concern and attention of society and government. In the

2015 Annual Report of the Regional Office 8, the Northern Samar Parole and Probation

Office No. 1 and 2 placed at the lower rank on the volunteerism program, mediation

conducted, conferencing conducted, clients who attended community work services, and

circle of support meetings as compared to the other parole and probation offices in the
whole region. Problems could be attributed to the lack of funds to support the activities

conducted by the office, absence of stable linkages between the governmental and

nongovernmental organizations, lack of awareness of the different sectors and individuals

of the society particularly on the volunteerism which must be provided to the parolees

and probationers, lack of community support on the different stages of the parole and

probation grant, lack of skills training and community work services/programs

implemented, mediation activity and conferencing which are very important in ensuring

the safety and security of the parties involved, lack of qualified parole and probation

officers which are native of the locality. Another problem that the office is facing is on

the understanding of the parolees and probationers on the privilege being granted to them

for most of them lack education. These could lead to other problems such as the

compromised safety and security of the parolees and probationers, lack of acceptance

from the community where the grantees will return, non-probability of employment, non-

development of the well-being of the parolees and probationers which would ensure their

rehabilitation.
 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter contains the discussion of the method used, research environment,

respondent of the study, research instrument, validation of the instrument, data gathering

procedure, and statistical treatment of the data in this study.

Research Design

The researchers will employ quantitative method to gather data on the prevalence

and frequency of specific challenges and problems by the parole and probation officers.

The study will adopt the descriptive method of research, particularly survey technique

employing a questionnaire-checklist that are distributed to a sample of parole and

probation officers in Zamboanga Del Norte parole and probation office to determine the

challenges encountered by the parole and probation officers in the supervision of the

parolees and probationers and also apply correlational technique. The questions can be

closed ended, with a fixed set of response options, and the data can be analyze using

statistical methods to identify trends, patterns, and relationships.

Research Environment

The study will be conducted in Dipolog, Zamboanga Del Norte parole and

probation office to all members of parole and probation administration to determine the

challenges and problems encountered by the officers in the supervision of the parolees

and probationers.

Zamboanga del Norte is a province in the Philippines situated within the

Zamboanga Peninsula Region in Mindanao. It is the largest province of the Zamboanga

Peninsula in terms of land area and has a population of approximately 1.01 million
people as of the 2020 census. The early history of Zamboanga del Norte is shared with

that of Zamboanga City, which had been the center of the entire Mindanao area, most

notably during the American era. When Zamboanga City became a chartered city on

October 12, 1936, it encompassed the southern tip of the Zamboanga Peninsula and the

island of Basilan, making it the largest city in the world in terms of land area. It’s capital

is Dipolog City. Dubbed as the Twin-City Province, Zamboanga del Norte has been made

famous by the beauty and charm of the Orchid City of Dipolog and the historic, rustic

quaintness of the Shrine City of Dapitan . The province is known for its diverse culture

and natural attractions, such as beaches, waterfalls, and caves, and is home to several

indigenous communities. The province's economy is driven by agriculture, fishing, and

tourism, and is a major producer of coconut, rice, and other crops. Tourism is also a

growing industry, and the province has several educational institutions and a well-

established healthcare system. Overall, Zamboanga Del Norte is a province with a rich

cultural heritage, abundant natural resources, and a vibrant economy that offers plenty of

opportunities for its residents and visitors alike.

Zamboanga del Norte Parole and probation office is located at 2/F Bulwagan ng

Katarungan, Gen. Luna St., 7100 Dipolog City which has an areas of jurisdiction to

Sindangan, Manuel A. Roxas, Siayan, Katipunan, Sergio Osmena, Sr., Labason, Gutalac,

Liloy, Tampilisan, Manukan, Salug, Godod, Jose Dalman, Leon Postigo, Kalawit, Ponot,

Siocon, Baliguan , and Siraway. The court’s served were the Regional Trial Court Branch

6-10 Dipolog City; RTC branch 11 Sindangan; RTC branch 28 Liloy; MTC in Manuel

A. Roxas and Manukan; MCTC 3rd from Sindangan, Siayan, Leon Postigo, and Kalawit;
7th Liloy, Tampilisan; 8th Manukan and Ponot; 9th Salug and Godod; and Shari’a Disrict

3rd in Zamboanga Del Norte.

Research Respondent

The study will utilize fifty (50) members of Parole and Probation Administration

within the territorial jurisdiction of Zamboanga Del Norte parole and probation office.

The researchers will gather data with the assistance of the head of the Parole and

Probation officers in Zamboanga Del Norte. The questionnaire will be distributed to the

respondents of the study through descriptive sampling technique due to the presence and

availability of the respondents in this district on parole and probation officers in relation

to the challenges and problems encountered in the supervision of parolees and

probationers as their function. Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents of the study

in which actual numbers of parole and probation officers are reflected. The sampling

technique used will be descriptive since the respondents were identified right at the very

time of the conduct of the study.

Table 1. Distribution of Respondents of the Study

Respondents Number of Respondents

Parole and probation officers 50

Total 50
Research Instrument

The research instrument will use questionnaire-checklist which will be conducted

by the researchers for the purpose of assessing the challenges and problems encountered

by the parole and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and probationers in

Zamboanga Del Norte. It consists of three (3) parts. The first part delves to the personal

data of the respondents, the second part delves to the challenges encountered by the

parole and probation officers in supervision of the parolees and probationers, and the last

part delves to the problems encountered by the parole and probation officers in the

supervision of the parolees and probationers.

Validation of the Instrument

To validate the researcher's instrument, it will be submitted to the researcher's

adviser for modification and enrichment. It will also be presented for comprehensiveness

to a committee of research experts who were knowledgeable in the field of criminology

to examine the instrument for comprehensiveness and additional information in order to

enrich it. The instrument will assures it was revised and edited by the validators

following suggestions from the panel of experts prior for the finalization and fielding of

the instrument to the identified respondents.

Data Gathering Procedure

To gather data from the target respondents of the study, the following procedures

will consistently be followed:

1. After the questionnaire will be validated, revised, and edited, the researchers

will formally request permission from the School of Criminal Justice Education Research

Committee to begin gathering the data.

2. As soon as the School of Criminal Justice Education's Research Committee will

approve the researcher's data collection, the researchers will personally appear in

Zamboanga del Norte Parole and probation office located at 2/F Bulwagan ng

Katarungan, Gen. Luna St., 7100 Dipolog City to ask permission to distribute their

questionnaire to the target respondents.

3. While the researchers will distribute the questionnaires to the target

respondents, the researchers will document it by taking photographs of the respondents

answering the questionnaire with the researchers thereafter.

4. The researchers will recover the instrument when the respondents will finish

answering the said questionnaires. Following the retrieval, the data gathered will be

tallied and tabulated.

Population and Sampling

The respondents for this study will be the members of parole and probation

administration in Zamboanga Del Norte. The descriptive sampling approach will be used

by the researchers to collect data due to the availability of respondents. During the span
of the study, a complete count of members of parole and probation administration will be

taken into account for the study's population. A survey questionnaire will be utilized to

collect data for the study. The researchers will provide a self – made questionnaire -

checklist to the respondents in order for them to provide the relevant information on the

challenges and problems encountered by the parole and probation officers in the

supervision of the parolees and probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte.

Statistical Treatment and Tool of the Study

The study will employ the following statistical tools in analyzing and interpreting

the data gathered in the study.

1. In answering problem number 1, the researchers will use simple frequency count

and simple percentage.

2. In answering problem number 2 and 3, the researchers will use descriptive

statistics to identify the most common challenges and problems encountered by

the parole and probation officers in the supervision of the parolees and

probationers in Zamboanga Del Norte.

REFERENCES

Bongcayao, M. B. (2019). Challenges of Probation and Parole Officers in Zamboanga del

Norte. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 8, 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4409.2019.08.01.
Daniel Alberto G. Guinigundo; (2021). A Path to Restorative Justice: Applicability of
Mental Health Courts in the Philippines . Asian Journal of Legal Education, (), –.
doi:10.1177/23220058211028411.

Hsieh, M., Hafoka, M.P., Woo, Y., Wormer, J.V., Stohr, M.K., & Hemmens, C. (2015).
Probation Officer Roles: A Statutory Analysis. Federal Probation, 79, 20.

Hsieh, M., Hafoka, M.P., Woo, Y., Wormer, J.V., Stohr, M.K., & Hemmens, C. (2015). Probation
Officer Roles: A Statutory Analysis. Federal Probation, 79, 20.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/role-human-services-during-community-supervision
https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/98317_book_item_98317.pdf
https://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/13715/legal_matters/role_of_a_probati
on_officer.html.

Kennealy PJ, Skeem JL, Manchak SM, & Eno Louden J. (2012). Firm, fair, and caring
officer- offender relationships protect against supervision failure. Law and Human
Behavior, 36, 496. doi: 10.1037/h0093935 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
Lazo, N. B., & Racho, A. J. (2018). Factors affecting the effectiveness of probation and
parole services in the province of Zamboanga del Norte. Asian Journal of
Criminology, 13(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-017-9262-2

Lutze, F. E. (2014). Professional lives of community corrections officers: The invisible

side of re entry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc
https://www.academia.edu/65300809/Probation_Officer_Roles_A_Statutory_Ana
lysis?sm=b.

Peralta, J. (2019). Challenges and experiences of probation and parole officers in

Zamboanga del Norte. Philippine Journal of Criminology, 17(1), 1-18.

Rhineberger-Dunn G, Mack KY, Baker KM (2016) Secondary trauma among community

corrections staff: an exploratory study. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 55(5):
293–307.
Part 1: Demographic profile of Respondents
Name: ________________________________________ (Optional)
Age:
21-30 years old
31-40 years old
41-50 years old
51 and older
Gender:
Female Male
Position: ___________________________________
Length of Service
1-5 years
6-10 years
11-15 years
16- 20 years
More than 20 years
Part II: Challenges Encountered by the Parole and Probation Officers in the Supervision
of the Parolees and Probationers in Zamboanga del Norte.

General Instructions: Answer each questions below by simply marking a check (/) in the
appropriate box. Mark only one answer per questions. Please answer every items.

Directions: Please indicate your assessment as a member of parole and probation

administration on the challenges encountered during the supervision of parolees and
probationers using the scale below. Simply check on the column which commensurate to
your response.
Hostile Environment
ITEMS 1 2 3 4 5
Seek support from family members to supervise and
monitor daily activities of offenders
The administration assures the
 Seek support from community members to help offenders
avoid risky places and activities
Seek support from family members to help offenders
avoid risky places and activities
Seek support from police officer to help parole and
probation officer to avoid in risky places

In this section, we would like to know your feelings on the challenges

encountered in the supervision of parolees and probationers in the rehabilitation and
treatment of offenders with whom you deal.
Beside each of the statements listed below, please indicate whether you strongly agree
(SA), agree (A), disagree (D), strongly disagree (SD), or are truly undecided (U).
ITEMS SA A D SD U
1 2 3 4 5

In general, rehabilitation of criminal offenders is not

possible
Most offenders will become recidivists.

I never met a rehabilitated offender.

More offenders should be supervised in the community

rather than sent to prison.
It is more difficult to supervise offenders who have been
in prison.
Community based resources for offenders should be
increased.
Treatment programs for offenders are ineffective.

The system coddles offenders.

The system places too much emphasis in the rights of

offender and not enough on the rights of the victims.
Offenders only understand strict and harsh discipline.
Part II: Problems encountered by the Parole and Probation Officers in the Supervision of
Parolees and Probationers in Zamboanga del Norte
Directions: rate accordingly the Problems encountered by the Parole and Probation
Officers in the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers in Zamboanga del Norte using
the scale below. Simply check on the column which commensurate to your response.

Numerical Value Mean Range Descriptive Scale

5 4.20-5.00 Very Serious (VS)
4 3.40-4.19 Serious (S)
3 2.60-3.39 Moderately Serious (MS)
2 1.80-2.59 Less Serious (LS)
1 1.00-1.79 Not a Problem (NP)

Stress - Stress can come from a number of sources. One of the sources for you may be the
organization you work for. Below is a list of possible sources of stress you may have
experienced as a result of your organization
ITEMS 1 2 3 4 5
Mandatory overtime
Lack adequate supervision
Problems with co-workers
Rotating shift work
Lack of influence on policy and decision making in the
department
Inadequate recognition for good work
Involuntary transfer
Supervisor leadership style
Paper works
Role conflict (responsibility for enforcing the law versus
providing service to citizens)

This time the researcher would like to know how you deal with the stress encountered.
Using the scale below. Simply check on the column which commensurate to your
response.
Numerical Value Mean Range Descriptive Scale
4 4.20-5.00 Often
3 3.40-4.19 Sometimes
2 2.60-3.39 Seldom
1 1.80-2.59 Never

ITEMS 1 2 3 4
Used stress management or relaxation techniques (for example,
meditation)
Worked overtime or more overtime than before
Relaxed by yourself (for example, listened to music; read
magazines; books, newspaper; surfed the internet)
Engaged in a hobby
Engaged in recreational activities (for example outdoors sports,
reading, going to the movies or concerts and bowling)
Practice nutritious eating habits
Engaged in regular exercise
Increased your use of alcohol
Talked to other family members
Participated in the department stress program:
a. Wellness program
b. Counseling program
c. In-service training or education
d. Critical incident debriefing
e. Talked with peers supporter

Caseloads
Numerical Value Mean Range Descriptive Scale
 5 4.20-5.00 Very Adequate (VA)
4 3.40-4.19 Adequate (A)
3 2.60-3.39 Neither adequate or inadequate (NI)
2 1.80-2.59 Inadequate (I)
1 1.00-1.79 Very Inadequate (VI)

ITEMS 1 2 3 4 5
How would you rate the adequacy of your current caseload size in
relation to your workload?
How well do heavy paperwork/documentation requirements align
with your caseload management needs
Rate the adequacy of training and professional development
opportunities provided to address the challenges associated with
managing a high caseload.
How well does your current caseload size allow you to effectively
assess the risk and needs of each offender?
Rate the level of job-related stress or burnout resulting from your
caseload size.

Resources
Numerical Value Mean Range Descriptive Scale
5 4.20-5.00 Very Satisfied (VS)
4 3.40-4.19 Satisfied (S)
3 2.60-3.39 Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied(NS)
2 1.80-2.59 Dissatisfied (D)
1 1.00-1.79 Very Dissatisfied (VS)
 ITEMS 1 2 3 4 5
What are the level of adequacy of staffing resources for managing
your caseload?
Rate the sufficiency of funding for support services (e.g., mental
health, substance abuse treatment, employment assistance)
provided to parolees/probationers under your supervision?
The level of effectiveness of technological resources available to
streamline caseload management?
How satisfied are you with the level of training and professional
development opportunities provided to address resource-related
challenges in caseload management?
The level of support received from your organization in terms of
resource allocation for caseload management?