Introduction
Restitution is a highly complicated and complex justice system process involving a multitude of
tasks and virtually every agency within the criminal and juvenile justice systems. In the last three
decades, as the victims’ rights discipline has evolved and increasing attention has been focused
upon the importance of victims in the process of justice, restitution has received more and more
attention as a remedy with the potential to benefit all parties to crime: the victim, the offender,
and the community. A parallel development within justice systems in this country is an increase
in attention upon a restorative justice approach to justice. Although restorative justice has been
defined in various ways, it is, at its most fundamental level, an approach that emphasizes the
importance of the roles of the victim, the offender, and the community in fashioning genuine and
long-lasting solutions to crime. As such, the emphasis is not upon sanctions for the sake of
sanctions, but rather upon remedies that work best to instill accountability and the opportunity for
true change in the offender; to bring about a process of healing and recovery for the victim; and
to initiate the reestablishment of community ties that have been damaged and/or broken by the
commission of a crime.
Both restitution, as a criminal justice remedy, and restorative justice, as a criminal justice
approach, can be traced back to the most ancient of civilizations. Their revitalization in recent
years is an indication of the timelessness embodied in the wisdom of approaching crime as a
breakdown of human relationships. While this approach does not excuse the horrific damage
done by crime, nor does it minimize the actions of the offender and the consequences to the
offender of those actions, it does acknowledge that for healing to occur at all levels of the breach,
a remedy that addresses all three levels must be fashioned. Restitution, in the restorative justice
context, is such a remedy, and many jurisdictions around the country are implementing
restitution programs that are innovative and effective in addressing this three-pronged approach
to justice.
Recognizing the importance of restitution for victim reparation, community involvement, and
1
offender accountability, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) of the United States Department
of Justice assumed leadership in addressing this issue by funding a project to develop a
Compendium of Promising Practices for Restitution. The American Probation and Parole
Association, in affiliation with the Victims Assistance Legal Organization, was awarded funding
to conduct the project.
Project staff engaged in extensive research concerning financial restitution management
throughout the project. This included reviews of literature, administration of a written survey
instrument, and in-depth interviews with administrators and practitioners conducting restitution
programs. An initial attempt was made to identify as many restitution programs as possible. The
written survey was then sent to all identified programs, and completed questionnaires were
received from more than two hundred criminal and juvenile justice professionals and victims’
services practitioners involved in financial restitution management.
This Compendium of Promising Practices for Restitution compiles the information and ideas
gleaned from the research process and presents a step-by-step approach for managing restitution,
including gathering information on victims’ losses, entering an order for restitution, monitoring
and enforcing the order, collecting payments, and disbursing funds to victims. The text describes
innovative approaches, obstacles that programs experience, and practical tips that some programs
have implemented to overcome these difficulties.
The Compendium is organized into ten chapters. Chapter 1, Restitution from Past to Present,
provides a historical perspective on restitution encompassing both the traditions of the past and
the recent and emerging changes that are making it a more powerful tool for restoration and
change. Chapter 2, The Process of Restitution, lays the groundwork for understanding the
importance and interdependence of each major phase of this highly complex process. Chapter 3,
Survey Methodology and Results, provides a brief summary of the research process and the
overall responses and results.
2
The next six chapters provide a detailed description of the primary phases of the restitution
process including a chapter on managing the information and conducting program evaluation.
Chapter 4, Determination of Eligibility and Amount of Restitution, emphasizes the important
initial work to be done with victims to gather information needed for the court to make an
appropriate restitution order. Chapter 5, The Order of Restitution, stresses the court’s role in
reviewing the information and making a reasonable order for restitution by the offender. Chapter
6, Monitoring and Enforcement, provides information on case management procedures, programs
that increase offenders’ ability to pay, and incentives for payment and penalties for nonpayment.
Chapter 7, Collection of Restitution, discusses types of payments that increase the likelihood
victims will receive restitution, the use of accepted accounting standards for processing
restitution payments, priority for crediting restitution payments when offenders have multiple
court-ordered financial obligations, and methods to increase the likelihood offenders will meet
their restitution obligations by utilizing innovative payment sources and mechanisms. Chapter 8,
Disbursement of Restitution, describes procedures for maintaining contact with victims, giving
priority to disbursement of restitution funds, and providing information about other actions
victims may pursue to recoup their losses. Chapter 9, Information Management and Evaluation
of Restitution Programs, discusses the need for affordable and efficient technological solutions
for managing restitution information and methods for evaluating restitution programs.
Finally, the overriding and fundamental need for strong collaboration and coordination between
and within justice system agencies and other key players in the restitution process is detailed in
Chapter 10, Restitution Policies and Procedures: The Case for Collaboration. Although the
means for effecting strong collaborative practices will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the
critical importance of this approach cannot be overestimated in achieving maximum success in
any restitution program.
The Compendium repeatedly and alternately discusses restitution from the two perspectives
outlined above: as a powerful remedy for crime victims, with historical underpinnings and
deeply ingrained philosophical and even religious meaning; and as a complicated and highly
3
complex justice system task involving literally every component of the criminal justice system.
As a practical task with many inherent obstacles, not the least of which is the apparent inability
of many offenders within the criminal justice system to pay restitution, it is not surprising that
many justice system officials have grown discouraged and even apathetic at the prospect of
collecting restitution. However, as the Compendium will demonstrate, many individuals and
jurisdictions are taking a fresh look at restitution. In a plethora of efforts, restitution programs
are being revitalized all over the country. Critical to this effort is an understanding by key
stakeholders, not only of the complex tasks and roles involved in the restitution process, but also
a keen understanding of and appreciation for the importance of restitution as a remedy, and the
potential power it holds in assisting victims, communities, and offenders in the aftermath of
crime.
As such, the Compendium is a blend of the necessity and interplay of two critical elements:
practical tips and know-how with respect to managing, monitoring, and collecting restitution, and
a demonstration of the kind of systemic approach necessary to improve restitution management
as well as the commitment to doing what is necessary to make that happen. The end result of the
successful merging of these two interdependent and complex approaches is, in many instances,
the development of innovative and victim-focused practices that result in an ongoing movement
toward true accountability on the part of offenders, increased community involvement and safety,
and the acknowledgment of the harm suffered by victims, as well as genuine progress in their
recovery in the aftermath of crime.
4