GROUP 2

PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTROLLING RECIDIVISM USINGEFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS WITH OFFENDERS WHILST SERVINGTHEIR SENTENCES: AN EXAMINATION OF BEST PRACTICES
Chairperson
Co-Chairpersons
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs
Members

Ms. Marcia Angela Reid
Mr. Nor Afifi Bin Sulong
Mr. Ken Ogushi
Mr. Somphop Rujjanavet
Mr. Rodrigo Bonach Batista Pires
Mr. Leiva Gamoneda Javier Francisco
Ms. Diah Ayu Noorsinta Hidayati
Mr. Goro Udo
Mr. Kazuki Ueda

(Jamaica)(Malaysia)(Japan)(Thailand)(Brazil)(Honduras)(Indonesia)(Japan)(Japan)Visiting Expert

Dr. Brian A. Grant, Ph.D

(Canada)Advisers

Professor Koji Yamada
Professor Masato Uchida
Professor Shintaro Naito(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
It is agreed that mechanisms to enhance the opportunities for offenders’ rehabilitation and their re-entry
into society are an essential part of any strategy to reduce recidivism. However, the issues are extremelycomplex. It is not safe to assume that the offender was well integrated in society prior to his or her
imprisonment. Worldwide evidence is that many prisoners were not well integrated, and in fact in many
countries, the ‘average’ prisoner does not have good life skills, educational or trade qualifications, work
experience or stable housing.
According to Mr. Peter Wheelhouse, visiting expert from the United Kingdom, studies have revealed that
58% of offenders not being rehabilitated in prison are more likely to be convicted of another crime within
two years.
The process of reintegration begins at the time when the needs of the offender are assessed at reception
into Correctional Services. For an offender to be successfully reintegrated into the community, it isimportant to have strategies in play to address the needs and support required by the individual offender.

II. PROBLEMS AND CURRENT SITUATIONAt this point of the Workshop, individual country representatives spoke about issues that inhibit effective
rehabilitation in their respective jurisdictions.

A. Overcrowding
Overcrowding can severely inhibit the desired results when treating offenders for reintegration into
communities.
In Jamaica and Honduras most of the prison facilities are very old. No new penitentiaries have been built
and the prison population has increased over the years. They lack necessary infrastructural space forrehabilitation in keeping with twenty first century practices.
In the case of Malaysia, the increasing numbers of prisoners sentenced or awaiting trial for breaches of
the Immigration and other Acts, and for which the Prison Department has been assigned responsibility forincarceration and detention since 2003, is a contributory factor to overcrowding in that country.

163

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The total capacity of all prisons in Brazil is approximately 200,000, while the number of inmates is about
360,000. This denotes a great rate of overcrowding and the necessity for newly built prison facilities.
Moreover, a significant proportion of prisoners are remand inmates in trial custody. The Government alsoemphasizes repressive efforts against crimes instead of rehabilitation programmes.
Although the Directorate General of Correction has established more new prison facilities, still it is notenough to accommodate the increasing number of prisoners. Indonesia is also facing the same problem as
Malaysia and Brazil with the increasing number of prisoners on remand.
In contrast, it could be said that the current total number of prisoners in Thailand (154,486) does notpresent a problem of overcrowding. Furthermore, the overall extended capacity of all correctional facilities
can accommodate 205,436 inmates.
Before 1995, Japan’s prisons were not affected by overcrowding. However, since 1995 the prison
population has been increasing continuously, due to recession in the economy and other factors. Even
though the incarceration rate is still lower than other participating countries, one of the main causes for theincrease of the prison population is severe sentencing based on public anxiety about crime. The public prefer
offenders to be kept in prison. Serious crimes committed by probationers or parolees have also increased
public anxiety. It is said that probation and parole supervision is not sufficient.

B. Budget
In most countries, budgets for corrections are a last priority. All participating countries except Japan areallocated a limited budget for strategic and operational functions. Corrections departments are notconsidered to be revenue generating. Public sentiment often impacts on these decisions as budget
allocations come from tax earnings. When compared with other agencies in criminal justice systems, thecorrectional services tend to receive the lowest budget allocations.
A good example is the Japanese experience as shown in the following table:
AgencyBudget (US$ million)

Staff

Police28,038288,451

Prosecution

800

11,532

Court

2,562

25,349Correction

1,688

21,839Rehabilitation

156

1,429

C. Human Resources
All the participating countries shared their common problems with human resources, especially
professional staff, such as medical doctors, dentists, nurses, psychologists, social workers and vocational
instructors, and also discussed insufficient basic and advanced training for correctional officers.
1. Japan
In Japan, to deal with about 60,000 probation and parole supervision cases a year, about 50,000 Volunteer
Probation Officers and about 1,100 staff of Probation Offices operate the rehabilitation system in aframework of co-operation between Volunteers and Government Officers. However, in reality, there is aheavy dependence on the volunteers. Within this framework, problems, such as an inability to prevent
recidivism, exist and have contributed to present concerns.
In 2006 a new prison act came into force, but the number of staff members in charge of rehabilitation isvery low and a staff training system for implementation of the new programme is also not yet established.
Therefore, for the moment, the targets and contents of the rehabilitation programmes will be limited.

164

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

2. Brazil
Each one of the States of the Federative Republic of Brazil is in charge of its own Corrections
Institutions, which is regulated by a federal law. This situation proves difficult because each State pays
different salaries for officers and has different levels of public investment, infrastructure, equipment andnumbers of professionals. Low salaries for the officers result in a lack of staff for the treatment of offenders.
Also, there is no systematic training. The penitentiaries’ administrations are also facing problems withcorruption; lack of equipment, technology and appropriate spaces for lawyers and visitors; and clinics toguarantee adequate support for the proper work of the human resources.
3. Malaysia
The ratio of staff to inmates in Malaysia is about 1:16. This situation leads to problems for the
Corrections Department in carrying out necessary activities for the inmates, especially activities related torehabilitation. Basic training for the supporting staff lasts for three months before they start working in theprison institution. The Department encourages all staff to continue their studies in many fields. Currently
there are a number of senior staff with master’s degrees and two staff are pursuing Ph.Ds. The Department
is receiving good support from other agencies in giving training to the inmates.
4. Indonesia
Based on recapitulation data of correctional officers, it is known that the total number of correctional
officers in Indonesia in 2002 was 22,895. Around 85.23% of them were at staff level, the majority having highschool education. There is a shortage of professionals and experts to carry out treatment and rehabilitation
programmes. In the last two years, the Directorate General of Correction tried to overcome the humanresources problem by recruiting new employees and also developing and maintaining co-operation withseveral government institutions and non-government organizations.
5. Thailand
In Thailand, the number of correctional officers is about 12,000. The ratio of staff to inmates is about 1:13
whereas the international standard is 1:5.

D. Lack of Family and Community Support
Lack of family and community support is the most challenging reintegration problem shared by allparticipating countries. Positive family and community support is very important in terms of providing
accommodation and emotional and financial assistance to released prisoners. Moreover, a strong andsupportive family can psychologically influence released prisoners and hence are in a better position toassist them to be good citizens.
All participants agreed that the positive attitude and active involvement of the community are main
factors in the successful reintegration of prisoners. However, the community’s negative perception of exprisoners and inaccurate publicity in the media about ex-prisoners and correctional operations can result inpoor community involvement in the reintegration process.
In Japan, some prisoners do not have family accommodation to stay at when they are released fromprison. Half-way houses accept such kinds of offenders and provide them with accommodation and meals.
One of the problems that the half-way houses are facing nowadays is the insufficiency of treatment. Many
offenders who stay in half-way houses have problems such as alcohol dependence, drug addition, lack ofinterpersonal skills and so on. There is a risk of reoffending when offenders leave half-way houses without
solving these problems.
In Indonesia, many prisoners, especially drug dependent and HIV/AIDS afflicted prisoners, are rarely
visited by their family. Besides that, because Indonesia is an archipelago country, many prisoners, especiallyin big cities, are not placed in prisons close to their families.

E. Insufficient Education and Vocational Training for Offenders
Basic educational and vocational training programmes are provided for prisoners in every correctional
service, aiming to render prisoners with essential knowledge and skills to earn a living after release.
However, all participating countries agreed that prison overcrowding and inadequate budgets createddifficulties in the implementation of education and vocational training for prisoners.

165

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

1. Jamaica
In Jamaica, it is mandatory under the Juvenile Act that every juvenile in a Correctional Institution mustreceive basic education before his release. Limited resources make it difficult to improve training, but theinmates have agricultural and computer training, etc. There is a National Training Agency with responsibility
for accreditation of vocational training and skills. Inmates are sometimes accredited by that agency to enable
them to be certified for jobs.
2. Malaysia
In Malaysia, prisoners are given opportunities to participate in educational and vocational training. The
prisoners are given training in many fields, such as tailoring, carpentry, agricultural work, etc. Whenreleased, the prisoners are able to use the knowledge and skills received in prison.
3. Thailand
In Thailand, after the key purpose of punishment was shifted to rehabilitation and reduction of thenumber of prisoners, the Department of Corrections has been committed to the principle of through-careand has implemented various rehabilitation initiatives to generate safe and successful prisoners’ re-entry
into the community. However, there are still some problems in implementing educational and vocational
training programmes in some correctional institutions.
4. JapanJapan’s Department of Corrections has a programme with the public employment security office. This
involves corporative employees’ recruitment due to the fact that ex-offenders cannot gain optimum
employment immediately after release because they don’t have the high skills that are necessary. Juvenile
Training Schools have two goals of vocational training: to award vocational training certificates and to guidethe juvenile in the right direction.
One weakness of the Japanese system is insufficient co-operation between the public employment
security office and the probation office. It is necessary to establish strong links to help offenders in finding
employment.

F. Insufficient Health Services
All the participating countries provide basic medical treatment in a specific area inside the prison.
However, the health service staff, medical equipment and infrastructure need to be improved.
1. Brazil
Brazilian prisons seldom have sufficient health services to provide for the huge number of inmates.
There is a lack of correctional hospital equipment, medicines, medical and dental staff inside thepenitentiaries. However, in cases of grave illness or for further exams, prisoners are often taken to hospitals
outside prison.
2. Indonesia
In Indonesia, most of the correctional institutions, especially in rural and remote areas, do not haveappropriate health care facilities and medicine stocks. The room space and tools to deliver the services arevery limited. Because of the limited budget for supplying medicine, most of the time correctional institutions
apply one type of medicine for all kinds of health problems. The limited number of medical personnel is oneof the factors leading to an insufficient health care service in correctional institutions, besides the lack ofhealth care facilities and medicines.
3. Japan
In Japan, the situation is different, for example HIV/AIDS inmates are rare due to the low level of persons
with this disease in the wider population.
Concerning parolees who are drug offenders, in April 2004 urinalysis of stimulant drug offenders wasintroduced. This method is as follows. In the first interview, the parolee receives an explanation ofurinalysis. If the parolee consents to urinalysis a test date is fixed beforehand at regular intervals, such as

166

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

every two or three weeks. The parolee comes to the probation office at the fixed date to receive a urinalysis.
The point of this method is its voluntary basis. Officers do not carry out the urinalysis except on the fixed
date. Some might think it is nonsense, since it is natural for parolees not to use drugs before the set date.
However, we consider this training for drug offenders to refrain from using stimulant drugs. This
programme provides an opportunity for such offenders to stop drug use by obtaining a feeling of attainment
and praise from officers when they receive a negative urinalysis result.
4. Malaysia
In Malaysia, the Prison Department has been trying its best to give good health services, according to
the UN standards. Most of the prison institutions have health units to attend to any minor health problems.
However, there is still need to increase the number of medical staff. For severe health problems inmates
they are sent to local hospitals; as for the case of HIV/AIDS, there are quite a number of HIV positive
inmates in the institutions. However, they are well taken care of even though the number is increasing
gradually.
5. Honduras
In Honduras only two detention centres have a psychologist. There is no drug treatment programme.
6. Jamaica
In Jamaica efforts are being made to give the inmates comprehensive treatment but the employment of
more professionals would be ideal.
7. Thailand
In Thailand, there is one medical correctional institution for a long term treatment of sick inmates. In
addition to this, every prison has a small medical unit. However, the ratio of medical staff to inmates is still
very wide.

III. TREATMENTS
A. Effective Assessment to Select Appropriate Offenders for Appropriate Treatment1
Definition of treatment based on the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners, Part II, Section A (Prisoners Under Sentence) is that the treatment of persons sentenced to
imprisonment or a similar measure shall have as its purpose, so far as the length of the sentence permits, toestablish in them the will to lead law-abiding and self-supporting lives after their release and to fit them todo so. The treatment shall be such as will encourage their self-respect and develop their sense of
responsibility.2
Upon consulting various pieces of literature, the group came up with the following definition oftreatment: intervention measures to change offenders’ behaviour to lead law-abiding lives and to encourage
their self-respect, develop their sense of responsibility and self-supporting lives after release.
Identification of effective treatment models is important for three reasons:Firstly, some kinds of treatment models (for example, open or half-open institutions) make people
anxious. So it is necessary to show them the evidence and long-term benefits of effective treatment.
Secondly, to ensure an adequate budget for treatment, the evidence of effectiveness must be presented to
the respective government agencies.
Thirdly, to keep improving treatment, and to know “what works”. This can prove difficult if there is nocontrol group. According to Dr. Brian A. Grant, Visiting Expert, the assessment of offenders upon entry in
the institution is critical. So to begin with, we must start to develop measurement techniques.

1 Content of this section relies heavily on Bonta, James, Offender Assessment: General Issues and Considerations.

Correctional Service Canada – Research. http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca, http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca. 2000: 1.
2 Compendium of UN Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: 12.

167

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

These measurement techniques will help to determine what will work based on each offender’sindividual needs. This will ultimately guide research and testing of alternative approaches. It will also guideoutcome prediction through identification of some dynamic factors such as antisocial personality,
companions, criminogenic needs, interpersonal conflict, personal distress, social achievement and substanceabuse. Ultimately this will provide some determinant factors such as who to treat, what to treat, how totreat, when to treat and where to treat.
One prerequisite of effective treatment is classification and assessment of offenders. An accurate
assessment facilitates the fair, efficient and ethical classification of offenders. A failure to conduct a proper
assessment can lead to serious consequences such as placing an inmate within an inadequate security
setting with subsequent escape; the mistaken release on parole of an offender who was thought not topresent a danger; or the failure of a parole officer to recognize a parolee’s deteriorating situation. Therefore,
in general, the assessment of offenders has centred on issues related to security and release. However,through recent developments in effective classification and assessment of offenders, correctional institutions
can devise appropriate treatment for each offender. The classification and assessment of offenders for
effective treatment must be based on risk, needs and responsivity factors of offenders as the generalprinciples.
1. Risk Assessment
Risk assessment is one tool to predict an offender’s future criminal behaviour (probability of reoffending).
In order to improve the predictive accuracy of an offender’s future criminal behaviour, multi-methodmeasurement of theoretically relevant factors (e.g. sociological, psychopathological and general personality
and social learning) is the first necessary step. The second step to improving predictive accuracy is tocombine the individual factors to form more comprehensive offender assessment measures.
Risk assessment has implications for release and security decisions and also for treatment planning. By
conducting this assessment, the correctional officer will be able to match the levels of treatment services tothe risk level of the offender. The target of this assessment is the higher risk offenders, because reductions
in recidivism are found when intensive levels of treatment are directed at higher risk offenders.
2. Needs Assessment
In order to deliver effective treatment it is important to identify the offender’s needs because manyfactors identified as important are dynamic or changeable. For offender assessment, it is important to assess
dynamic risk factors objectively and systematically. Dynamic risk factors are also referred to as criminogenic
needs, which are those offender needs that, when changed, are associated with changes in recidivism.
This need principle of effective rehabilitation calls for the targeting of criminological needs in treatment
programmes. From the assessment perspective, the measurement of criminological needs is highly
important for directing treatment services and for the active supervision of offenders. Based on convincing
evidence (Andrew & Bonta, 1998), it is said that interventions targeting criminogenic needs are associatedwith reductions in recidivism. By this assessment, correctional institutions can provide the most intense
services to higher need offenders. Determination of risk levels of offender and appropriate sanctions andsupervision are arranged in risk management. Based on risk management, the determination of risk level
and criminogenic needs and the reduction of risk factors through effective treatment and appropriate
supervision can be fulfilled.
3. Responsivity Factors Assessment
How people learn from life’s experiences depends on their cognitive, personality and social-personal
factors, which may not be offender risk factors or criminogenic needs. These responsivity factors influence
the individual’s responsiveness to efforts to help them change their attitudes, thoughts and behaviours. It is
has an important role to play in choosing a type and style of treatment programme, consistent with theability and learning style of the offender, by identifying the offender’s characteristics. Finally, we can easily
recognize that offenders may be more responsive to certain staff members based on gender or ethnicity.

B. Best Practices Treatment Models
Some of the participant countries have adopted specific models of treatment of offenders which include

168

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

interesting concepts concerning rehabilitation, and which can be considered best practices in this field. Suchmodels provided interesting insights that can be useful in developing a comprehensive model suitable forother countries.
1. Brazil
A programme, created by the Association for Protection and Assistance of Convicts – (APAC), associatedwith the Prison Fellowship International – PFI (an United Nations collaborative organization), is based on
the concept of human valorization and consists of cost-effective non-governmental treatment of offenders.
This has been developed in Brazil from 1972, and has been able to reduce recidivism by measures suchas:(i) health assistance, based on the fact that an offender mentally and physically ill is not capable to reach
optimum rehabilitation;(ii) legal assistance, in order to guarantee a fair fulfilment of the penalty before Justice;(iii) motivational interviewing by means of valorizations classes to improve self-esteem;(iv) education, work, vocational and social skill training, improving pre-release measures;(v) community participation by means of volunteers, employers’ partnership and social services;(vi) cognitive behavioural therapy, aiming to improve self-discipline, respect for other people and society,human appreciation, achievement of a sense of responsibility and disciplinary evaluation;(vii) enhancement of family relationships, rebuilding the good image of the family, emphasizing its
importance, and engaging the family to support and take responsibility concerning the inmate’s
rehabilitation;(viii)religious assistance, in order to restore principles and moral values;(ix) the fulfilment of the sentenced sanction in small and proper facilities, near the inmate’s family or
original community.
The programme, based on the progressive system of sanction fulfilment stated by Brazilian law, is divided
in to four stages, each one focused on the progressive re-entry of the offenders into society, applying thereferred fundamental elements.
2. Jamaica
Jamaica has a national rehabilitation strategy and the core functions are carried out by the Rehabilitation
Unit of the Department of Correctional Services. This approach is not simply to help clients but also
facilitates public safety.
The Juvenile Act mandates that wards who are made subject to correctional orders must be assessed andplaced at appropriate institutions. It is mandatory that they be exposed to an educational or vocational
environment with optimal care and opportunities for behaviour modification.

C. Methadone Substitution (Maintenance) Treatment
In Indonesia the number of the HIV/AIDS infected population is increasing gradually. This is also
happening in prisons and remand prisons. In fact, the World Health Organization stated that the rate of HIV
infection among inmates in most countries in the world is higher compared to the general public. Based on
WHO data and the infection rate of HIV in prisons and detention centres in some states, there are inmates
who were infected by HIV before incarceration and there are also those infected while in custody as a resultof unsafe needle syringes for drug injection, sharing needles or unsafe sexual activity.
Realising the importance of intervention in overcoming drug abuse and preventing the increase of
HIV/AIDS prevalence in prisons, in 2002 the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, the Directorate General of
Corrections, through the Directorate of Narcotics Treatment, decided to make a connection between themethadone pilot service which was underway in the Centre of Methadone Treatment (CMT) in Sanglah
Hospital, Bali with Kerobokan Prison, Bali. Correctional institutions’ medical officers (doctors) withsupervision from Sanglah Hospital, conducted methadone therapy in prison. Based on the successful resultof the Methadone Substitution Treatment in Bali, in 2005 and 2006 the Directorate General of Corrections
expanded this programme to several prisons, such as Jakarta Narcotics Prison, Central Jakarta Remand
Prison, East Jakarta Remand Prison, Bekasi Prison, and also Bandung Prison, West Java.

169

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The principal object of Methadone Substitution Therapy is reducing the harm of drugs use individuallyand in the community, which is related to opiate injection inside prison. The special objectives of theMethadone Substitution Therapy in prisons are:• Decreasing injecting heroin use in prisons;• Decreasing the spread of infection, especially through blood, in prison;• Decreasing the mortality rate among opiate user prisoners including released prisoners;• Decreasing the crime rate related to opiate usage;• Increasing the health and social skills of clients in the community reintegration process.

D. Vivat Polamuang Rajatan School Project, Thailand
The project is a four-month intensive military-style treatment programme specially provided to classified
prisoners who have already served one third of their sentences in prisons. After finishing the programme,
the prisoners receive special parole (two thirds of their sentences in case of normal parole). The curriculum
has been run from the military’s Vivat Polamuamg School which provides an intensive treatment programmefor drug addicts. Short-term vocational training, behavioural change and disciplinary training have been
added into the programme in order to help them to resettle during their conditional release in thecommunity. At the end of the programme, prisoners passing the evaluation receive special parole and returnto the community as decent citizens. Since 2003, there were about 2,700 inmates graduating from theschool.
This project aims to bridge the period of transition from prison to the community and allows wellbehaved inmates who have high chance of reintegration to restart their new lives in the community, undersome forms of supervision or monitoring, more quickly. Not only can conditions imposed with parole ensure
public safety, it also helps ex-prisoners in maintaining acceptable behaviour until they successfully settle inthe mainstream community.

E. Juvenile Training School (JTS), Japan
In Japan, juveniles accommodated in JTSs will return to society and will grow up in the community after
release. In order to ensure their rehabilitation, JTSs need to promote co-operation with other agencies,
including volunteer groups, and provide them with opportunities to participate in various activities within
their own communities. Volunteers from the neighbouring community also support various activities at JTSs
such as counselling and advice, lectures, seasonal events, games and sports, etc. Juveniles at JTSs are
greatly encouraged through these interactions with volunteers in their rehabilitation into society. In order topromote our activities, JTSs regard guardians and parents of juveniles as partners in correctional education.
JTSs need to help them trust in their various correctional activities and to feel that the institution is a secure
place for juveniles. JTSs need to promote guardians’ commitment to their educational activities. At JTSs,
guardians and parents are invited to the institution and meetings are held with juveniles and instructors to
discuss family environment, juveniles’ future plans after release, and so on.
F. Community Based Treatment
1. Classification System
This system divides probationers and parolees into two groups in accordance with the difficulty oftreatment. Probationers or parolees who were found to be difficult to treat receive intensive supervision andspecial attention by both professional and volunteer probation officers.
2. Categorized Treatment
There are a variety of types of offenders and juvenile delinquents. The type of treatment given depends
on the type of probationer or parolee, in order to be effective in supervision. There are 13 categories, as
follows: paint thinner abusers, stimulant drug abusers, alcoholics, organized crime offenders, ‘joy’ riders(motorcycle gangs), sex offenders, people with mental disorders, junior high school students, those who
commit school violence, aged people (65 and over), unemployed people, those who are violent towards
family members, and gambling addicts. Methods of assessing cases, problems of supervision, treatment
plans, and specific methods of treatment for each type are made and manuals published. Both professionaland volunteer probation officers should use the manuals and implement effective treatment.

170

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

G. Human Development Plan, Malaysia
The Malaysian Prisons Department has practiced the Human Development Plan as its sole rehabilitative
programme for all convicted prisoners. It is an integrated programme based on both spiritual and physicalaspects, balancing the elements of attitude (A), skills (S), and knowledge (K).
The rehabilitation plan is developed based on an integrated rehabilitation concept between physical andspiritual aspects through four main phases. They are:i) Phase 1: Discipline Development (three months)ii) Phase 2: Personality Enhancement Programme (6-12 months)iii) Phase 3: Skill/Trade Developmentiv) Phase 4: Pre-Release Programme (six months).
The main aim of this plan is to produce inmates who are rehabilitated with strong determination and who
possess skill either in the aspect of vocational training or excellence in sports.

IV. CO-ORDINATION AMONG AGENCIES
A. Agencies that Provide Treatment
Most prisoners will, at a future date, return to the community. Generally, a successful reintegration
process is one which provides a gradual, structured, supervised release which considers public safety andwhich involves public sector agencies and/or all community organizations as partners. In terms of public
sector agencies, reintegration is likely to involve a range of government services that go beyond theboundaries of prisons and corrections. Most countries rely heavily upon the goodwill of community
organizations (NGOs) to assist in the rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders. Generally, depending of
the type of public sector agency and community organization, the service and support they offer may extend
from the time in custody through to post-release.
In order to deliver the treatment programme a number of considerations must take place at theorganizational level and should include the following:
Types of offenders, such as:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Drug offenders
Sex offenders
First time offenders
Organized crime offenders
Drunken drivers

Prison authorities cannot manage an effective treatment programme without any collaboration from otheragencies. Due to budgetary constraints, human resources etc., this can be an opportunity to foster
community participation. Some critical agencies are:
1. Department of Public Health and related health services
2. Drug Rehabilitation Centres
3. Police Department
4. Parole Board
5. Department of Probation
6. Half-way Houses
7. Religious Organizations
8. Traffic Department
9. Educational Organizations
10. Employment Agencies
11. Local and International NGOs.

B. Problems and Challenges of Collaboration among Related Agencies
The collaboration of the above relevant agencies is essential to ensure the continuity of service, which is
key to boosting offenders’ chances of resettlement. Also, co-operation of every sector of the community isvital since offender reintegration demands a great deal of resources and is a complex task that is unlikely tobe accomplished by a single agency. However, if this integration process is not managed properly it can be

171

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

tedious and result in ineffectiveness of the programme. Some of the problems that commonly arise include
the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Competition among agencies – e.g.: display of superiority complex
Information not shared
Lack of political support – e.g.: no close support and oversight from central government necessary
Bureaucracy and splinter government agencies
Lack of integrated teams
Staff lack of knowledge and motivation
Staff not involved in planning process
Infrequent report back/debriefing sessions
No central database.

Mr. Peter Wheelhouse (Visiting Expert) mentioned that the success of the United Kingdom’s Drugs
Intervention Programme depended heavily on partnerships at the local level which worked throughintegrated teams created to work together and deliver case management of offenders.
In Jamaica the police and correctional services formed a partnership to carry out rehabilitation through a
music project which has been very successful so far.

V. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF TREATMENT
The ultimate goal of corrections is offenders’ successful reintegration into community. It is important tohave the tools to measure success in prisoner treatment programmes and to conduct appropriate monitoringand evaluations. In principle, evaluation of effective programmes can be achieved as follows:3(i) Quality assurance processes:•
Internal processes to ensure that assessments, services and interventions provided by the
programme are delivered as designed;•
External processes to ensure services and interventions provided by outside providers aredelivered as designed.
This step can include case-file audits, videotaping groups, client satisfaction surveys or exit interviews,
clinical supervision, programme audits, site visits and observation and certification processes.
(ii) Assessing progress of offenders in acquiring pro-social behaviour:•
Assessing dynamic risk factors and then reassessing;•
Developing a treatment and supervision plan based on assessment, then closely monitoring
attainment of goals;•
Measuring behavioural indicators linked to recidivism and risk;•
Pre/Post testing on attitudes, knowledge and behaviour.
(iii) Outcome Studies which should include:•
Tracking of recidivism using as many measures as possible (e.g. re-arrest, reconviction,
incarceration);•
A comparison group;•
A report or published results to be compiled periodically (e.g. every five years).

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
A. Recommendations
The group members, after taking into consideration the diverse social, economic, cultural, legal andgeographical features existing in their respective countries, discussed the possible recommendations tochallenges concerning effective treatment programmes that can be adapted by individual countries in
reducing recidivism and promoting public safety whilst the offender is serving his sentence. These are as
follows:
1. The implementation of comprehensive assessment methods, to improve management of prison
systems. This should include measures such as:
3 Compendium of UN Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: 10.

172

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR•••

Establishment of a database;
Provision of centres for research;
Ensuring classification of offenders is in keeping with the United Nations Standards Minimum
Rules (UNSMR) for the Treatment of Prisoners.

2.

Identification of the most important treatment target:•
Ensuring that the highest risk offenders are given priority treatment;•
Making optimal use of the budget;•
Maximizing human resources;•
Enhancing community participation.

3.

Identification of the most effective treatment methods by providing comprehensive treatment,
to include:•
Motivational interviewing;•
Cognitive behavioural therapy;•
Education, work and social skills training;•
Enhancing family and community participation;•
Health, legal and religious assistance.

4.

Revision and concentration of resources on target groups:•
Preparation of an annual plan and budget;•
Review assessment and classification of offenders.

5.

Development and expansion of collaboration with other agencies:•
Formation of teams to reflect diversification of professional staff roles, Government andcommunity support;•
Dissemination of information through development of public relations plans;•
Establishment of Memorandum of Understanding with all stakeholders.

6.

Increase public awareness of the importance of family and community in the reintegration process of
ex-prisoners:•
Encouraging development of family relationships during an offender’s incarceration;•
Implementing strategies to keep families informed of the progress of prisoners;•
Strengthening networks with potential employers and keeping them updated on prisoners’
competences;•
Collaborating and maintaining relations with welfare agencies.

B. Conclusion
Over the past decade, key challenges in the reintegration of offenders have emerged due to increasing
and ageing populations, economic and unemployment issues, homelessness, mental health issues, publichealth issues, environmental problems and the limited acceptance of offenders returning to the community.
In order to solve these problems four basic principles have to be taken into account in developing
assessment and treatment services to meet the criminogenic needs of offenders and their cultural
diversities. These are the risk, need, responsivity, and professional discretion assessments. 4 Somejurisdictions have in place intervention strategies and programmes to address the needs of offenders,
including substance abuse, sexual offending, violent offending, education, and life skills for community
reintegration.

4 Dr. Brian A. Grant, Ph.D, “Reducing Recidivism by Applying the Principles of Risk, Need, and Responsivity”, contained inthis volume of the Resource Material Series.

173