(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree with the majority that the district court has wide discretion in the imposition of a sentence, but this action should be remanded to the district court for resentencing. The district court has the discretion to impose “probation under such terms and conditions as • it deems necessary and expedient * * 1 To properly exercise its discretion, the district court has an obligation to insist that a positive plan for rehabilitation of the defendant be presented in the presentence report. The district court can only exercise its sentencing discretion when it is apprised of all the facts and circumstances concerning the defendant which includes his opportunities for rehabilitation.
The duty of the district court to demand a positive rehabilitation plan from the probation office before imposing a sentence also arises out of our cases holding the district court must consider the following factors in considering a request for probation:
“1) All the facts and circumstances surrounding the offense of which the defendant is convicted; 2) whether the defendant is a first offender; 3) the previous actions and character of the defendant; 4) whether the defendant might reasonably be expected to be rehabilitated; and 5) whether it reasonably appears that the defendant will abide by the terms of the probation.” 2
In order to evaluate these factors, the district court must have a presentence report that contains a positive rehabilitation plan.
In this action the presentence report did not set forth a positive rehabilitation program for the appellant, and therefore the action must be remanded and the district court directed to demand a proper rehabilitation plan before resentencing the appellant. The remaining portion of this opinion will describe the type of positive rehabilitation plan that should be contained in a presentence report, and it will discuss the role of defense counsel in the formation and evaluation of presentence reports.
To begin a discussion of the requirements of a presentence report’s recommendation for rehabilitation, the purpose of the presentence report must be defined. One of the best definitions is that,
“No single instrument in our hands so neatly typifies the modern correctional philosophy as does the presentence report. Its only reason for being is to depict the intimate dynamics of one particular individual offender and to enable the court to dispose of his case with a tailor-made plan that is corrective in intent, whereas without such knowledge the disposition can only be punitive.”3
From the stated purpose of presentence reports, it is clear that the rehabilitation plan is the most important element in a presentence report because it provides the “tailor-made” plan for the court, and thus a presentence report is only as good as the rehabilitation plan.
To be at all useful to the district court, the rehabilitation recommendation must be a positive program for the defendant. It should recommend more than whether probation should or should not be granted, but *687rather it should set forth what steps need to be taken to prevent a reoccurrence of the defendant’s criminal behavior.4 In formulating a positive plan of rehabilitation, the presentence report should explain the weaknesses and strengths of the defendant, and it should explain how the rehabilitation program will rely on the defendant’s strengths and correct his weaknesses.5
“Much more is needed in a presentence report than a mere recital of facts about such tangible items as employment, resources, address, type of residence, church affiliation, and so on. A newspaper reporter can pull together the bare facts in a person’s history but a trained probation officer should be expected to develop much more on the subjective elements in the background of a defendant and assess their relative importance. If a report is to be helpful to a sentencing judge it should contain a careful analysis of the defendant’s problems, needs and concerns; his attitudes and feelings about himself, his family, and those with whom he comes in daily contact; his sense of values; his outlook on life in general; his feelings and attitudes about many things including the offense in which he is involved.” 6
In addition to describing the social relationships of the individual, the role of those relationships in the rehabilitation plan should be explained.7 A positive rehabilitation program must include more than statements that certain services would be helpful in dealing with the defendant’s problems, but rather it must be a schedule of activities that are available. One limitation on the scope of probation plans is that they may not impose conditions that are impossible for the defendant to fulfill, i. e., total abstinence for an alcoholic.8
As an example of what it means to formulate a positive rehabilitation plan, general recommendations will be set forth followed by the detailed information that must be included to make a “tailor-made” plan for the defendant. This list of general proposals is not by any means a complete list of the programs that can be formulated in a positive rehabilitation program.
1. PARTICIPATION IN ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS OR OTHER ALCOHOLIC REHABILITATION PROGRAMS
A rehabilitation plan suggesting the use of alcoholic treatment programs must specifically describe the suggested program, establish whether the defendant would qualify for the program, determine whether he can attend the meetings and set specific dates for his attendance, and estimate the duration of treatment and its chances for success. If other members of the defendant’s family or his friends contribute to his alcoholism by their own alcoholism, it should be determined whether they are willing to participate in the program. Finally, the recommendation must explain why the alcoholism program will deter future criminal conduct by the defendant.
2. PSYCHOLOGICAL COUNSELING AND/OR GROUP COUNSELING
The availability of psychological counseling and group counseling for the defendant and his willingness to participate in it must be established. The counselor or group session must be named and an appointment schedule set up for the defendant. The probation officer and the counselor or group leader should submit short statements explaining why they believe the *688counseling will assist the defendant, and estimate the chances of success. The duration of the recommended counseling must be calculated and a means for financing the counseling must be set forth.
3. EDUCATION
The specific educational goals of the defendant, whether academic or vocational, must be set forth and their relevancy to his criminal behavior must be explained. The possibility of waiver of tuition and housing costs at state institutions should be investigated as well as the availability of counseling services on the campuses. The acceptance of the defendant into the named institution must be established, the courses he will attend described, and the means of payment discussed.
4. FAMILY COUNSELING
The possibility of family' counseling services for the defendant and his family, and their willingness to participate in them must be determined. A schedule of counseling sessions should be established. A letter from the counselor explaining why his services would be beneficial to the defendant should be included with the recommendation in addition to the presentence investigator’s appraisal of the need and benefit to be derived from family counseling.
5. FINANCIAL COUNSELING
In addition to setting forth the financial resources of the defendant, the presentence investigator should determine whether financial counseling is needed by the defendant and the availability of financial counseling should be established. Financial counseling will often be included in family counseling. The defendant’s willingness to participate in financial counseling must be set forth as well as a schedule of meetings with the financial counselor.
6.CHURCH RELATED OR OTHER VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO ASSIST PERSONS TO DEAL WITH THEIR PROBLEMS
The availability of all community based services must be investigated and the defendant should be informed of these programs. Many of these programs should be considered in the context of assisting the defendant by involving his whole family in the program. If it is determined that specific programs would be helpful to the defendant, then a description of the program and how it relates to the defendant’s criminal behavior must be included in the presentence report. A letter from the leader of the program stating how it will assist the defendant should also be included in the report.
In summary, a positive rehabilitation program must be a step by step schedule for the defendant to pursue. It must specifically set forth the needed services which have been investigated to insure that they are available to the defendant. A mere listing of possible programs that the defendant should be urged to participate in is meaningless and gives the district court no real guidance in the imposition of the sentence. If the presentence report fails to set forth a positive rehabilitation program for the defendant, it fails to fulfill the very purpose of recommending a “tailor-made” plan of rehabilitation.
Even if the probation officer is unable to formulate a rehabilitation plan, he should prepare an exhaustive list of available community services to aid the court in sentencing.9
The district courts have an active role in the formulation of presentence reports. They should request that specific rehabilitation programs be investigated, and if a presentence report does not contain a positive program of rehabilitation, they should require it to be formulated. The importance of the presentence report should also be stressed to the defendant and his attorney, and they should be urged to coop*689erate with the probation officer preparing the report and encouraged to submit their own plans for rehabilitation.
The district court has continuing jurisdiction over a defendant while he is on probation and can modify the terms of the probation at any time.10 In accordance with this continuing jurisdiction, the district court should require the probation officer to submit periodic (at least quarterly) follow-up reports which review the progress of the defendant under the court imposed probation plan, and if necessary, the probation plan could then be modified. The follow-up reports would provide the district court with a means of evaluating the reliability of the rehabilitation programs.
The defense counsel must play an active role in the formulation of presentence reports.11 This role arises out of their overall duty to their client.
“This role extends to the gathering and evaluation of facts relevant to sentencing, and most important, to their presentation in court at the time of sentencing. Certainly in view of the shortage of competent lawyers to perform all the legal tasks in the criminal process, it would be unwise to rely exclusively on defense counsel to gather and evaluate sentencing facts. However, the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that facts are gathered and evaluated and for persuasively presenting them to the court rests with counsel.” 12
By gathering and evaluating the facts relevant to sentencing and the availability of community services, the defense attorney will often be submitting his own presentence report. The submission of rehabilitation plans by defense attorneys will provide the courts with additional alternatives to choose from in the sentencing process.
The procedure of sentencing defendants to the prison system and not using probation rehabilitation programs has resulted in the following,
“After a century of ‘prison reform,’ our country has a penal system that is a dismal failure. The American taxpayer has been deluded into believing that our penal system provides treatment and rehabilitation for criminal offenders while it protects the public by keeping offenders incarcerated. During fiscal year 1971 alone, the American taxpayer spent $1.5 billion to keep 400,000 prisoners incarcerated in Federal, State, and local prison facilities. And in return for their money the taxpayers are the victims of more and more felonies — 80 percent of which are committed by former offenders. A recent Federal Bureau of Investigation study shows that approximately two-thirds of all offenders released from prison are rearrested within 4 years — a nationwide recidivism rate of 66% percent. Since the recidivism rate is the rate at which former offenders commit new crimes, it seems that it would be the best barometer of the success or failure of a penal system.” 13
Through the development of more specific rehabilitation plans by the probation officer and the defense attorney, the district court will have a wider range of sentences to choose from to avoid the “dismal failure” of the prison system.
. I.C. § 19-2601(2).
. State v. Ogata, 95 Idaho 309, 508 P.2d 141, 145 (1973) ; see also: State v. Trowbridge, 516 P.2d 362 (Idaho 1973) ; State v. Kauffman, 94 Idaho 20, 480 P.2d 614 (1971) ; State v. Mitchell, 77 Idaho 115, 289 P.2d 315 (1955).
.Keve, The Professional Character of the Presentence Report, Probation and Parole, 81 (R. Carter & L. Wilkins eds. 1970).
. P. Keve, The Probation Officer Investigates 151 (1969).
. Id., 153; Keve, supra, note 3 at 87.
. L. Sharp, “Objectives of the Presentence Report,” in Pilot Institute on Sentencing, 26 F.R.D. 231, 327-328 (1959) ; see also: L. Sharp, “The Presentence Report,” Sentencing Institute — Fifth Circuit, 30 F.R.D. 185, 242 (1961).
. Administrative Office of the United States Courts, the Presentence Report 3 (1965).
. State v. Oyler, 92 Idaho 43, 436 P.2d 709 (1968).
. P. Keve, supra, note 4, at 153.
. State v. Oyler, supra, note 8; I.C. § 20-221.
. Dash, The Defense Lawyers Role at the Sentencing Stage of a Criminal Case, 54 F.R.D. 315 (1972) ; Feit, A Guide To Defense Counsel in the Exercise of His Post-conviction Responsibilities, 9 Crim.L.Bull. 149 (1973) ; The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Courts 19 (1967).
. The President's' Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Courts 19 (1967).
. House Select Committee on Crime, Reform of Our Correctional Systems, H.R.Rep. 93-329, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 47 (1973).