What limitations are outlined regarding local plans for probation services?

The correct choice highlights that local plans for probation services must address personnel costs and evaluation services. This is crucial because funding for probation services is essential to ensure that there are enough qualified staff to supervise probationers and implement evidence-based practices. Additionally, incorporating evaluation services allows for the assessment and improvement of these programs, ensuring they effectively meet the needs of both the probation population and the community.

The requirement to include personnel costs ensures that local agencies allocate adequate resources toward hiring and training probation officers and support staff, which are critical for the success of probation programs. Evaluation services also foster accountability by measuring outcomes and determining the effectiveness of various interventions, thereby supporting continuous improvement.

The other choices do not align with the requirements for local probation service plans. Allowing unlimited capital expenditures would not promote fiscal responsibility, while restricting plans only to community service programs limits the range of interventions available, which can be detrimental to rehabilitation efforts. Lastly, prohibiting residential programs could eliminate essential options for managing higher-risk individuals who may require structured environments for effective supervision.