I found it interesting that in their newly posted report, Implementation and Early Outcomes for the San Diego High Risk Sex Offender (HRSO) GPS Pilot Program, Susan Turner and Jesse Jannetta (et al.) of UC Irvine's Center for Evidence-Based Corrections make the following observation: "Although 36 states employ GPS for sex offender supervision, research into the effectiveness of GPS as a tool for the supervision of offenders generally and for sex offenders specifically has lagged behind practitioner adoption of the technology." Does this raise an issue of an addressable disconnect between the availability of effectiveness research and practitioner practices, for whatever reasons? (My original post today regarding the report is in our Community Corrections blog.)