VISITING
EXPERTS’ PAPERSRESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88
THE EVOLUTION OF EVIDENCED-BASED
CORRECTIONAL PROGRAMS IN CANADA
Laurence L. Motiuk*

I. INTRODUCTION
Building a credible and efficient correctional system requires a detailed plan or outline of what is to be
managed strategically. Correctional programming is but one of a number of critical areas that have to be laidout completely, correctly and clearly. Basically, correctional programs and/or interventions can be viewed
as a structured set of learning opportunities provided to offenders so they can change for the better andremain crime-free. The approach assumes offenders have needs that contribute to their criminal behaviour;that we can identify those needs accurately; that appropriate intervention is available; that intervention
strategies will reduce these needs; and that addressed needs will diminish criminal behaviour. The foregoingis consistent with both a Social Learning Theory perspective1 on reducing reoffending and the correctional
mandate to contribute to public, staff and offender safety. The following offers a problem statement forcorrectional programs, blueprints it, and actively pursues some solutions by advancing a set of case-based
principles for intervention — risk, need, and responsivity — that are deemed effective.2
Correctional programs, whether in institutional or community-based settings, have a common objective:“the adjustment of behaviour from a pattern that is criminal or anti-social to one that is more law-abiding
or pro-social.” For correctional systems, fostering positive change among offenders is the primary way ofcontributing to public safety. The task is more than making correctional programs available; it is actively
encouraging and assisting offenders to participate in them. This means that an agency must make sure it
has the best correctional programs available. These are correctional programs that concentrate on criminal
recidivism, what causes it and what can be done to change it.
Program responsiveness or motivation has been operationally defined as “the probability that a person
will enter into, continue, and adhere to a specific strategy.” Traditionally, motivation was defined as apersonality characteristic or problem. However, this is now considered to be a narrow and simplistic viewof motivation. Subject matter experts now take an “interactionalist” perspective that sees motivation as adynamic variable and asserts that internal and external factors influence the personal change process. In
this context, some responsibility falls to correctional service providers to motivate offenders. Therefore,
institutional and community settings must strive to create effective motivational choices in order to increase
the probability that offenders will respond favourably to correctional plans.
This discussion paper for the training course accompanies another paper broadly focused on offender* Special Adviser, Infrastructure Renewal Group, Correctional Service Canada. The opinions expressed in this paper are thoseof the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Correctional Service of Canada or the Government of
Canada.
1 Albert Bandura, born in Alberta, Canada and currently at Stanford University, USA, is considered to be the most important
contemporary theorist in the world. “Human functioning is the product of a dynamic interplay of personal, behavioural, andenvironmental influences.” His major works include: Aggression: Social Learning and Personality Development (1963); Social
Learning Theory (1977); and Social Foundations of Thought and Action (1986). Since the late 1960s, behaviourism has given
way to the “cognitive revolution,” of which Bandura is considered a part.
2 Don A. Andrews is well known for having developed a general personality and social psychological perspective of criminal
behaviour, which recognizes that “[r]ecidivism is predictable and can be influenced.” Together he and his colleagues (J. Bonta& R. Hoge) have evolved a theoretical model which emphasizes the importance of risk and need factors that form a bridge
between offender assessment and treatment.

22

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

risk/needs assessment; this paper sets forth a problem statement (why correctional programs); presents
the impetus for developing correctional programs; takes programs from theory and research to practice;suggests strategies to engage treatment-resistant offenders; promotes contingency management; raises
training issues, emphasizes the need for accreditation (program integrity); and offers some anticipatedresults. Finally, a set of decision requirements is given to training course participants for consideration.

A. The Problem Statement — Why Correctional Programs?
Correctional program rooms, whether they are located in institutions or community-based settings, areviewed as essential areas in the home front of corrections. It is the place where offenders are called upon
to engage in the personal change process. One can identify the focal issue by asking those who work therea straightforward question — “What challenges you most here?” Usually, correctional program delivery
officers will list such key factors as the offenders themselves, other staff and public opinion. Raisingawareness of the major trends in these three areas provides a clearer picture of the various challenges thatare facing those delivering correctional programs on any given day.
First, statistical trends and correctional research indicate that there will not only be increasing caseloads
to manage, but the offender population profile has been changing as well. More specifically, correctional
caseloads are increasingly becoming higher-risk/higher-need, with serious addiction and/or mental healthissues, as well as more violence prone, gang affiliated and culturally diverse. In addition, many in theoffender population are not highly motivated to change and appear to be serving relatively shorter sentences
than before. Recent research has focused beyond targeting offender risk and need(s) and providing
appropriate programs and interventions; it has concluded/determined that motivation for treatment aswell as length of time available to intervene are becoming the most significant factors in programmingcorrectional populations. Indeed, higher-risk/higher-need offenders with poor motivation have the highest
rates of failure on conditional release. While most correctional programs will be comprised of clientele
motivated to engage in their correctional plans, there has been a rise in number of higher-risk/higher-need
offenders whom many correctional practitioners would consider treatment resistant, non-engaged or at least
unresponsive.
Fortunately, there is now an available body of scientific literature that focuses on motivation as anintermediate treatment target and provides guidelines for increasing offender motivation for intervention.
As such, motivation for treatment should be considered as just one component of a thorough offenderassessment for a correctional program. As well, offenders who are resistant to treatment may require pretreatment priming (motivational counselling) in order for more formal programming to be effective.
Whereas the first factor affecting the delivery of correctional programs emphasizes offender characteristics,
there is another important condition of program delivery that promotes positive change — namely, competentstaff. The correctional program delivery model generally involves behavioural intervention, using techniquessuch as modeling, graduated practice, role-playing, reinforcement and cognitive restructuring. Within the
cognitive-behavioural framework, services in institutional or community settings should be designed tomatch offender conceptual levels and personality styles. Clearly, it will be critical for institutional andcommunity settings to promote and maintain positive staff-offender relationships. Therefore, administratorsof correctional programs will have to take action to close any skills gap among staff and begin matching theservice delivery styles of their staff with the learning styles of offenders. This could well lead to anothermajor breakthrough in effective correctional practice.
The third factor likely to challenge correctional programs model is public opinion. Being acutely awarethat the general public does not fully understand the inner workings of the correctional system, thecorrectional program administrator of today and even more so tomorrow will be called upon to provide
ready responses and accurate information on the effectiveness and efficacy of offender programs that target
education, employment, family violence, gang affiliation, substance abuse, violence prevention, sexual
offending and pro-criminal attitudes. Given that public tolerance has been stretched to the limit for any
failure means that correctional program delivery staff will have to learn everything there is to know about
effective correctional programming and become actively involved in public relations.
To summarize the problem — offenders, staff and public opinion exert a significant influence over the23

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

realization of correctional program objectives. In particular, the task of engaging offenders in the personalchange process will continue to fall squarely on the shoulders of staff. These individuals will be called upon
to deliver more sophisticated services to an offender population that is constantly changing and for a publicthat is doubtful, sceptical, and increasingly intolerant. Moreover, they must do so in as effective and efficienta manner as possible.

B. Blueprinting the Problem
Before deciding whether or not to renovate any room in a home, it is common practice to examine theoriginal blueprint. For corrections, laying out the decision to strategically manage a change begins withlooking at the correctional programs being provided from up close, then from several angles, at long distanceand finally with an eye on the objective — reducing the fear of the public in the offender population underfederal supervision and restoring confidence in corrections.
As one enters the correctional program delivery site, they will find front-line workers gathering information,assessing risk and needs, developing plans, facilitating personal change, intervening when necessary andmonitoring progress. These activities are the foundation of correctional programming in federal corrections.
Any initiative that incorporates continuous improvement in these activities would necessarily result in quality
correctional programming.

II. The Impetus for the “Correctional Programs Model” in Canada
A. So Where Is Canada Today with the “Correctional Programs Model”?
The short answer to that question would be significantly better off than it was well over twenty years ago
when the Correctional Service of Canada launched the, then, very ambitious Correctional Strategy Initiative.
This research-based initiative had successfully put into place a framework for the following:1) establishing program priorities based on risk and need principles;2) implementing and accrediting programs that focus on safe reintegration; and
3) allocating resources to meet the control and assistance needs of offenders.
B. How Did They Get Here?
During the 1980s, Canadian public inquiries (Ruygrok, Conter, etc.) and Correctional Service Canada
internal task forces illuminated the need for improved offender assessment, information sharing among thevarious components of the criminal justice system and correctional programs. Various recommendations
were made aimed at improving offender management policy and procedures. Some of the major
recommendations from these inquests and inquiries follow:a.

The manner in which information is collected and shared in the corrections community must be
improved;b.

Upon admission to federal corrections, which is the earliest stage of the case management process,information must be collected, compiled and assessed and decisions made about institutional
placement and program needs, the later stage of the process (case planning and treatment, releaseplanning and release decision making), will continue these functions with each stage building on
what has gone before.

c.

Correctional Service Canada must increase the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the descriptionof offence histories on inmate files.

d.

Assessment of the risk that an offender represents to the community must be a priority concern to
the Correctional Service Canada and National Parole Board (now Parole Board of Canada).

In 1989, in direct response to the second recommendation noted above, the case management process ofCorrectional Service Canada, which had already been undergoing extensive policy and procedural changes
to address the recommendations, implemented nationally the Case Management Strategies (CMS). In
CMS, a comprehensive profile of the offence was to be assembled from all available information sources assoon as possible, rather than at a later stage associated with a decision point, such as at the first eligibility
for release. Gathering the information early decreases the possibility that a vital line of inquiry about theoffender will be missed, and helps to ensure that all important information about the offender will be

24

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

available at the time of each critical decision.
In concert with the recommendations of the inquiries and consistent with the changes made to date,
Correctional Service Canada launched a Correctional Strategy Initiative in 1992. A major component of
the strategy was to design and develop an objective and comprehensive Offender Intake Assessment(OIA) model to standardize an overall orientation and integrated offender risk/needs assessment process
throughout Correctional Service Canada. The OIA model also incorporated the Case Management strategies
described above.
Further, in the development of the intake assessment and correctional planning process the provisionsof Correctional Service Canada’s governing legislation, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act , S.C.
1992, c. 20 (“CCRA”) and the regulations were necessarily taken into account. More specifically:i.

Section 24 of the CCRA requires that Correctional Service Canada take all reasonable steps toensure that any information about an offender that it uses is as accurate and up to date and complete
as possible.

ii.

Section 76 of the CCRA requires that Correctional Service Canada provide a range of programs toaddress the needs of offenders and contribute to their successful reintegration to the community.

iii. Subsection 4(h) of the CCRA requires that correctional policies, programs and practices respect
gender, ethnic, cultural and linguistic differences and be responsive to the special needs of womenand aboriginal peoples.
iv. Section 80 of the CCRA requires that Correctional Service Canada provide programs designed
particularly to meet the needs of aboriginal offenders.
v.

Standard Operating Procedure 700-04 and CD 840 — Psychological Services were developed following
a number of inquiries, reports and studies completed in the 1980s and are a continuation of changes
commenced in the early 1990s. They are directed at reducing the risk of an inmate committing acriminal offence when released from custody and increasing the odds of their positive offence-free
reintegration into society.

Recognizing the many reintegration dividends that a systematic approach to offender risk and needassessment could yield, the Correctional Service Canada devised and implemented a fully automatedOffender Intake assessment (OIA) and Correctional Planning process. OIA is a comprehensive andintegrated risk and need(s) evaluation of the offender at the time of admission to the federal system. It
involves the systematic collection and analysis of information on each offender’s criminal and mental
health history, social situation, education and other factors relevant to determining criminal risk andidentifying offender need(s). This case-specific information provides the basis for determining the offender’sinstitutional placement and developing an individualized correctional plan.
To be effective and efficient, correctional systems need to be able to produce meaningful and accurate
profiles of the entire offender population. Recognising that estimates of the prevalence, nature and severityof problems being faced by offenders at time of admission to federal corrections would be invaluable infuture years, the Service embedded provisions throughout OIA to collect proxy measures. The intent wasthese OIA indicators would permit Correctional Service Canada to estimate prevalence rates and track
trends over time, and that these indicators would also be useful to alert correctional policy makers, program
planners and deliverers, as well as staff, to cases where differential interventions might be warranted.
Such information can and has been used to raise awareness about institutional and community supervision
populations, and assemble basic statistics on both offender population profiles and social climate. More
important, these data are helping to direct resources and controls to particular segments of the population toincrease public, staff and offender safety.

C. The Changing Offender Population Profile
Enhancing the public safety aspect of reintegrating criminal offenders into the community has been
emerging as an even stronger theme in the accommodation and management of federal offender populations.
Since 1994, tens of thousands of new offenders have been admitted to Canadian federal institutions.
Eventually, almost every federal offender will be released from custody after serving the sentenceprescribed by the courts. The challenge for Correctional Service Canada is to provide effective and efficient25

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

correctional programs and services that will enable these offenders to safely reintegrate into the community.
To meet this challenge, it is essential to understand the composition of the federal custody population,and the obstacles faced by correctional administrators, staff and volunteers. These are the people
who develop, organize and run correctional operations and programs — both in institutions and in thecommunity. Correctional Service Canada’s capacity to produce meaningful and accurate profiles of selectedcharacteristics is being used to raise awareness about the composition of the federal offender population.
If it serves to yield anything, OIA processes tell them they are facing some unprecedented correctional
challenges in managing an increasingly diverse and complex federal offender population than before.
There are four emerging aspects of the federal offender profile to support this claim. First and foremost,the task of reintegrating federal offenders back into the community is being challenged by the amount ofcriminal justice system involvement prior to entering the federal system. Roughly 9 out of 10 offenders infederal institutions have a previous youth or adult court conviction. Fifty percent of these federal offenders
have served a prior sentence as a youth. Clearly, it is a major challenge for the Service to safely reintegrate
offenders into the community whose basic profile shows that the majority are repeat offenders. So far, theseoffenders have been unresponsive to criminal justice sanctioning.
Another characteristic of the federal custody population, considered to be static in nature (thereby
unchangeable through active intervention), is the age composition. Recently, the relative proportion of
offenders in federal institutions 50 years and over has been increasing and those under 30 have been
declining. Consequently, many of the Service's accommodation and management strategies that were
designed for a mostly youthful population will not only have to be maintained but perhaps adapted tobetter accommodate an aging offender population. Also, different age groups vary according to the levels of
motivation for engaging in various correctional programs.
Secondly, the extent to which identified targets for correctional intervention can be identified at theearliest point in the offender’s sentence and then addressed through appropriate treatment poses an evengreater challenge in a constantly changing offender population profile. The Service’s ability to match aparticular intervention in a supportive environment is significantly impacted by the level of cognitive
functioning, prevalence and nature of mental health problems and extent to which addiction issues prevail
among the federal custody population.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the bulk of scientific evidence has shown that “structured cognitive
behavioural” treatment appears to be the best approach to working with offenders. The Service’s internationallyaccredited core programs use this method and have been achieving very good results. However, in recent years
and in light of reintegration success, there have been some important changes in the residual composition of thefederal custody population.
Over the last ten year period, the proportion of federal offenders in Canadian institutions who wereassessed to be experiencing cognitive skills difficulties at the time of admission has continued to grow.
By 2012, the majority have been assessed to be poor at problem solving, unable to generate choices andconsidered impulsive. It seems that a great majority of federal offenders do not possess the cognitive skills
necessary to think before they become involved in illegal activities. Similarly, the proportion of offenders
in federal institutions who were suffering mental health problems at the time of admission has increased.
For addictions, the proportion of offenders in federal institutions who had abused alcohol and/or drugs prior
to their admission has been increasing (80% abused alcohol and/or drugs). Clearly, the federal population
profile is presenting a greater diversity of treatment challenges than before.
Thirdly, a well-established finding in criminological work is that having antisocial and/or delinquent
associates is related to an increased risk of reoffending. In recent years, there have been a growing numberof gang and organized crime members in federal institutions. Certainly, public, staff and offender safetyissues are challenged by this federal offender profile change and these offenders require more carefulattention during the reintegration process.
Fourthly, Aboriginal offenders are continuing to accumulate at an increased rate in federal institutions.

26

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

As a group, Aboriginal offenders in federal institutions are found more likely to be convicted of serious
offences, have had extensive involvement with the criminal justice system as youth/adult and possess someunique needs at admission and on conditional release. These findings validate the need to continue offering
more specialized programs and services to Aboriginal offenders. Other special populations such as women
offenders and visible minorities are also starting to rise in their share of the federal custody population andforecasts suggest this trend will continue unabated into the near future. Hence, careful attention needs to bealso paid to these individuals’ motivation during the reintegration process.
In summary, where is Canadian Corrections in its ability to predict and influence criminal behaviour?
There have been some important breakthroughs. What needs to be done next? Study how well correctional
plans and interventions work for specific groups of offenders.

III. Programs — From Theory, Research to PracticeWith the introduction of the Mission, the Correctional Service of Canada began a determined effort
to develop and deliver evidence-based correctional programs that contribute to the safe and humane
reintegration of offenders.

A. Theoretical Foundation
Social Learning Theory posits that criminal behaviour, like all other behaviours, is learned, and not genetic;in other words, the belief that no one is born criminal. Criminal behaviour results from an interaction between
important personal factors and the situation that the offender encounters. There are many possible conditions
which shape and support criminal behaviour, and the pathways to crime can change over time.
What determines whether a particular behaviour will reoccur is whether it is rewarded. People need tomake that determination by assessing the rewards and costs of that specific behaviour. Over time, many
reactions become automatic. But people’s behaviours are based on their individual appraisal of what isrewarding and what is costly.
Social learning theorists suggest that criminal behaviour is often rewarding, not only because of illicit
gains but also because of other criminogenic factors; for instance, criminal behaviour can be rewarded by thesocial support of criminal peers, by the excitement associated with the risk, by the reaffirmation of criminal
attitudes, and through the acquisition of criminal skills. Social Learning Theory has become the framework
for the assessment, treatment and management of offenders in Canada.
Canadian researchers have extended this theoretical perspective into a psychology of criminal conduct
and a set of case-based principles for effective intervention — risk, need, and responsivity. First andforemost, the risk principle posits that treatment (programming) must match the offender’s level ofrecidivism risk. When offenders are divided into groups according to risk level and provision of services
aimed at reducing criminal behaviour, a significant pattern emerges. What can reduce recidivism? Whenlower-risk offenders receive minimal services, their rate of recidivism is low. When higher-risk offenders
receive intensive services, then the rate of recidivism decreases. What can increase recidivism? Whenlower-risk offenders receive intensive services, then the rate recidivism increases. When higher-risk
offenders receive minimal services, then the rate of recidivism increases.
Correctional program content specifically addresses those risk factors related to reoffending. Correctional
Service Canada program examples are: Education; Employment; Substance Abuse; Living Skills Training(Anger and Emotions Management, Reasoning and Rehabilitation); Counter Point; Sex Offender Treatment;
Violence Prevention; Family Violence; Women Offender Programs (Women Offender Substance Abuse
Program); and Aboriginal Offender Programs (including Aboriginal Offender Substance Abuse Program,
Basic Healing, In-search of Your Warrior, High Intensity Aboriginal Family Violence Program, Circles of
Change, Spirit of a Warrior, and Tupiq). Some of the new programs are targeted to large proportions of theoffender populations who are at greater risk of recidivism. Reductions in reoffending of 20% to 60% havebeen reported for these programs.

27

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

B. Education
Correctional Service Canada is determined to succeed in its goal of assisting offenders to reintegrate
successfully into the community as law-abiding citizens by increasing education levels through the provisionof provincially accredited or certified programs. To this end, the following educational programs are available
in minimum-, medium-, and maximum-security institutions: Adult Basic Education (Grades 1 to 12),
Vocational Education, and Library Services.
Post-secondary education is available for federal offenders who meet the criteria outlined in Commissioner’s
Directive 720 Education of Offenders. Financial responsibility for participation in education at this level remains
primarily with the offender.

C. Employment
Correctional Service Canada offers different “on-the-job” training programs to offenders. These
programs are recognized and accredited by the Ministry of Education of each province, and they provide an
official document to offenders as proof of the skills they acquired during their employment. Short programs
to improve employability skills are also continuously developed and offered to offenders in the institutions
and the community. These short programs meet the specific demands of the Canadian labour market.
In addition, employment and career planning programs are offered to inmates. These programs aredeveloped in light of the employability skills profile described by the Conference Board of Canada and allow
offenders to acquire skills, attitudes and behaviours valued by employers. More specifically, they include
problem solving, critical thinking, punctuality, interacting with coworkers, being respectful of people's
opinions and feelings, and dealing with authority figures.

D. Substance Abuse
Correctional Service Canada provides a range of internationally accredited substance abuse programs tooffenders whose dependence on substances is related to their criminal behaviour. The more significant theoffender’s problem, e.g. level of dependence, the higher the intensity of intervention provided. Offenders
with substantial to severe problems are referred to an 89-session-high-intensity program and those withmoderate need require a 26-session-moderate-intensity program. Offenders assessed as demonstrating
a low-level dependence participate in a community-based, low intensity program. Moreover, there aresubstance abuse programs designed especially for women and Aboriginal offenders.
Maintenance and aftercare is provided in the institution and the community. Offenders participate inmaintenance at a frequency that reflects their risk and need. Offenders no longer participate in maintenancewhen they have a demonstrated period of stability. Through their participation in the substance abuseprograms and aftercare, offenders are taught strategies to manage their patterns of substance abusing withthe ultimate goals of decreasing recidivism.

E. Living Skills Programming (Including Anger and Emotions Management and Reasoning andRehabilitation)
1. Anger and Emotions Management Program
The Anger and Emotions Management Program is an accredited moderate intensity Correctional Program.
The program teaches offenders to change their thinking patterns that trigger and feed emotions associatedwith their criminal behaviour. The aim is to help participants manage the intense emotions that lead to theircriminal behaviour. It focuses on the following:•
The factors that trigger anger, jealousy, depression, anxiety and aggression;•
Learning how to reduce levels of emotional arousal;•
Challenging the thinking patterns that feed these emotions;•Learning techniques for resolving conflict without creating more problems; and•Developing a relapse prevention plan.
Following the anger and emotions management program, offenders who still have problems will be directedto the maintenance program. This is a structured intervention that assures maintenance of the skills learned
and pursuing the intervention started in the Anger and Emotions Management Program. Presently, the28

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Anger and Emotions Management program is being replaced by a moderate intensity violence prevention
program that will address a broader range of the targets related to violence.
2. Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program
The Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program is an accredited moderate intensity Correctional Program.
The program trains offenders in skills that address the socio-cognitive deficits linked to criminal behaviour.
Socio-cognitive deficits are deep-seated, maladaptive thought processes and can be found in most offenders.
The program teaches participants to think before they act; to anticipate problems and plan their reactions;to focus more on problems and solutions; to consider other people’s points of view, and to be more flexible,
open, rational and reflective in their way of thinking in general. More precisely, the areas targeted are selfregulation and self-management (impulsiveness and poor emotions, management); egocentrism/lack ofsocial perspective; problems related to assertiveness and problematic social interactions; poor criticalreasoning (easily influenced); rigid thinking (not learning from one’s mistakes; always thinks the same way);
and rarely questions values.
Following the Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program, offenders who still have significant socio-cognitive
deficits will be directed to the Cognitive Skills Maintenance Program. This is a structured intervention thatassures maintenance of the skills learned and continuing work on socio-cognitive deficits linked to criminal
behaviour. Presently, the Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program (Revised) will be replaced by a programthat addresses a broader range of targets associated with criminal offending. The Attitudes, Associates andAlternatives (AAA) Program is described below.

F. Counter-Point
Counter-Point is an accredited moderate intensity community-based Correctional Program. Its principal
goal is to help participants change their pro-criminal attitudes and take more responsibility for their criminal
actions. Correctional research consistently shows that two factors in particular are linked to criminal
behaviour. These two “key factors” are having pro-criminal attitudes and associating with antisocial peers.
Reducing these factors is an important objective in effective correctional programming. The program
focuses on the following themes: setting goals to change and lead a crime-free life; identifying tools that
can help bring about the desired change and identifying the obstacles to such change; identifying thethinking patterns conducive to criminal behaviour; challenging the thinking patterns conducive to criminal
behaviour; identifying a pro-social support network; solving interpersonal problems by pro-social means;and developing a relapse prevention plan. Presently, the Counter-Point program is being replaced by the
Attitudes, Associates and Alternatives (AAA) Program that address a broader range of targets associatedwith criminal offending.
G. Attitudes, Associates and Alternatives
The Attitudes, Associates and Alternatives (AAA) Program focuses on changing criminal attitudes andtraining on goal setting, but it will also include more detailed work on self-regulation problems by providing
intensive training on decision-making, consequential thinking and problem solving. It will also have agreater emphasis on training on strategies and skills for avoiding criminal peers and establishing pro-social
relationships. This program will target factors related to crime for gain such as robbery, theft, drug offences,fraud, etc.
H. Sex Offender Treatment
Correctional Service Canada manages the sex offender population in accordance with a national sex
offender strategy and a compliment of internationally accredited programs. All sexual offenders are initiallyassessed to determine the appropriate level of intensity required to address their specific criminogenic
needs and risk levels.
The National Sex Offender Programs (NaSOP) are cognitive-behavioural interventions designed to be atherapeutic rather than solely didactic or psycho-educational programs. All programs are based on empiricalresearch and best practice in the provision of services to sex offenders. Principles of effective correctional
interventions, social learning, adult learning, group processes, therapeutic rapport and alliance, motivational
enhancement, and skills development are respected throughout.
The programs also incorporate both group and individual work, and recognize learning that occurs

29

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

outside the formal treatment venue. The NaSOP uses a "menu" approach and targets criminogenic needs
and known risk factors associated with individual offenders' patterns of sexual offending behaviour.
The program emphasizes the need for offenders to take responsibility for their actions, recognize thebehavioural progression that proceeded and followed sexual offences, identify situations which place themat risk to reoffend, and assist them to develop strategies to prevent recidivism. The treatment of sexual
offenders is a therapeutic and semi-structured intervention aimed at reducing the risk of recidivism throughthe use of effective self-management. In addition to the general self-management objective, the program
components are cognitive distortions, deviant arousal and fantasy, intimacy deficits, anger and emotion
management, empathy, and victim awareness.
The current NaSOTP has two levels of intensity, the Moderate Intensity Sex Offender Treatment and
Low Intensity Sex Offender Treatment; both levels have a maintenance phase. A National High Intensity
Program designed to replace the regionally developed high-intensity programs was piloted in two regions(Prairies and Atlantic) in 2007. It completed the compliment of nationally available and managed sex
offender programs. In addition, women who have sexually offended are referred to the National Sex Offender
Program for women.

I. Violence Prevention Programming
The Violence Prevention domain consists of two types of interventions: Violence Prevention Programs
and a Segregation Intervention Strategy.
1. Violence Prevention Programs
Aggression and violent behavioural problems are multidimensional. Given that targets of change areusually complex and multiple, the High Intensity Violence Prevention Program (HIVPP) is an intensive
intervention for the highest risk offenders who have significant histories of violence. The Moderate
Intensity Violence Prevention Program (MIVPP) was piloted in 2007, and offered to offenders who requireintervention for their violent behaviour, but who were not significantly high risk to meet criteria for HIVPP.
Both Violence Prevention Programs integrate a variety of rehabilitative approaches. They focus on violent
criminal activity and interpersonal aggression that do not exclusively result from anger or emotional control
problems. The primary intervention approach is cognitive behavioural and skills-based, with an emphasis on
relapse prevention. The intervention techniques are reinforced by a consistent strategy emphasizing selfcontrol, social problem solving, education, self-management, role playing, and homework assignments. The
goal of these programs is to improve the skills of the participants, and subsequently, to reduce the risk of
future violence.
2. Segregation Intervention Strategy
The Segregation Intervention Strategy is comprised of the Motivation-based Intervention Strategy plus
six skills workshops: self-monitoring, anger control, high-risk thinking, slips and cravings management,
communication, and problem solving. The interventions are delivered individually or in small groups. They
were designed to motivate participants to change problematic behaviours and motivate them to participate intheir correctional plan. The skills workshops teach basic concepts in different areas to prepare offenders toparticipate in correctional programs. The overriding legislative principle of the segregation program is thatthe placement of offenders in the general population is the norm, as is the provision of adequate protection,
control, programs, and services to offenders who cannot be maintained therein. In practical terms, thismeans that the goal is to assist offenders in returning to the general inmate population as early as possible,
while providing rehabilitative program opportunities to offenders who have no short-term alternatives tosegregation.

J. Family Violence
Correctional Service Canada's national Family Violence Prevention programs are primarily focused onmale offenders who have been abusive in their intimate relationships with female partners or ex-partners.
The programs are based on the principle that responding with violence and abuse in intimate relationships
is a learned pattern of behaviour that can be modified. The programs teach participants to understand the
dynamics of their abusive relationships and train them in techniques that will allow them to replace their30

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

abusive behaviours with approaches that are conducive to forming healthy non-abusive relationships.
The menu of Family Violence Prevention programs includes the following programs: High Intensity
Family Violence Prevention Program, Moderate Intensity Family Violence Prevention Program, National
Maintenance Program and the Treatment Primer “Roadways to Change.”

K. Women Offender Programming
1. Women Offender Substance Abuse Program (WOSAP)
The Women Offender Substance Abuse Program (WOSAP) is a unique intensive gender-specific programthat addresses the needs of substance abusing women offenders. The Program is based on a harm reduction
model, as its purpose is to reduce the adverse consequences of alcohol and drug use. The program isfounded on the principles of Social Learning Theory, Cognitive-Behavioural Theory, Relational Theory, atherapeutic model, and the Model of Change.
The program is designed to offer a continuum of care from admissions to warrant expiry. It consists offour modules:

Module I — Education and Engagement (Initial Engagement at Intake and includes 8 sessions). The
purpose of this module is to provide women offenders with relevant knowledge and information about the
impact of alcohol and drugs on their lives. At this stage, important linkages are made with health services, in
response to growing concerns regarding infectious disease, pregnancy, fetal alcohol syndrome, medication,
etc.
Module II — Intensive Therapeutic Program is co-facilitated and includes 20 cognitive-based sessions
and 20 emotive-based sessions. This module entails two phases: therapeutic and cognitive-behavioural.
Therapeutic sessions are structured in such a way as to encourage women to explore underlying issues,
such as depression, anger, or anxiety, related to substance use. Psycho-educational sessions educate women
about negative effects of substance abuse, and help women acquire the necessary knowledge and coping
skills to change their alcohol- and drug-using behaviours as well as attitudes and beliefs. While cognitive andtherapeutic sessions are divided, they are delivered in tandem.
Module III — Relapse Prevention and Maintenance (20 sessions). The relapse prevention and maintenancemodule offers on-going support to women in institutions as well as communities. The purpose of this module
is to consolidate continued recovery by providing ongoing skill building, goal setting and support, as well as
preparing women for successful transition from the institution to the community.
Module IV — Peer Support and Community Building (ongoing). In order to ensure continuous support
to women, this module eases their transition from institution to community by providing them with accessto resources/information relevant to their recovery. The peer support group offers mutual support andpromotes a support network for women outside structured program times.
2. Women Who Sexually Offend
A Sex Offender Program for Women is available at all women’s federal institutions as well as in thecommunity. There are five sex offender specific modules: self-management; deviant arousal; cognitive
distortions; intimacy, relationships and social functioning; empathy and victim awareness. The primary goalsof treatment for women who sexually offend are to learn to identify the factors that influenced their offences,and to learn how to deal more effectively with them, in order to reduce the risk of reoffending. Factors that
influence offences of women who sexually offend may include past victimization and/or relationships with
intimate partners.
A Protocol for the Assessment and Treatment of Women Who Sexually Offend has been implemented toensure consistency in the assessment and treatment of this small group of women. In addition, a national
consultant in the field of women who sexually offend is available for consultation on each of the cases.
The intervention begins with a specialized assessment at the time of admission, is ongoing and includes
maintenance in the institution and the community. Both short- and long-term evaluations will be carriedout. In the absence of an empirically-based static and dynamic assessment tool, evaluation is based on
responsivity to treatment.

31

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

3. Violence Prevention Program for Women (VPPW)Correctional Service Canada has developed a violence prevention program for women. The goal of
VPPW is to help participants develop ways of living that are incompatible with violence. The main objectives
of VPPW is to guide participants in developing a vision of change to empower them to live healthy andnon-violent lifestyles; to help participants identify violence and its function in their lives; and to help
women develop skills to manage emotions, to problem solve, to communicate, and to resolve conflict. The
Program is to be founded on the principles of Social Learning Theory and a feminist model of change. Theintervention models include Cognitive-Behaviour Intervention, Self-Efficacy and Change.

L. Aboriginal Offender Programming
1. Aboriginal Offender Substance Abuse Program (AOSAP)
AOSAP is a moderate-high-intensity program for male Aboriginal offenders who present with considerable
need in the area of substance abuse. The program runs 10-12 weeks in duration and consists of 65 sessions.
The program represents an integration of Principles of Effective Corrections with traditional Aboriginal healing
approaches. Aboriginal facilitators, Elders, spirituality and ceremony are integral to program delivery anddesign.
2. Aboriginal Basic Healing Program (BHP)
The Basic Healing Program is deemed to be a “culturally-appropriate alternative” to the Anger andEmotions Management Program as well as the Reasoning and Rehabilitation. It is a moderate intensity
program for Aboriginal offenders who present with need in the areas of interpersonal problem solving,
critical reasoning, self-control and self-management, rigid cognitive style, and cultural identity. The program
has a duration of 3 months and consists of 60 sessions.
3. In Search of Your Warrior (ISOYW)
The ISOYW has been deemed to be a “culturally-appropriate alternative” to the national ViolencePrevention Programs. ISOYW is a high-intensity program for male Aboriginal offenders with 2 or moreconvictions for violent offences. The program is 4 months in duration and consists of 75 sessions. It
represents an integration of Principles of Effective Corrections with traditional Aboriginal healing
approaches. Aboriginal facilitators, Elders, spirituality and ceremony are integral to program delivery anddesign. The program is emerging from demonstration mode with an eye towards national implementation.
ISOYW has recently undergone a formal research evaluation with positive results. Native Counselling
Services of Alberta are the Copyright holders and proprietors of this program.
4. High-Intensity Aboriginal Family Violence Program (HIAFVP)The HIAFVP has been deemed to be a “culturally-appropriate alternative” to the mainstream National
Family Violence Prevention Programs. The HIAFVP is a high-intensity program for male Aboriginal
offenders at high risk of violence towards women with whom they have an intimate relationship. The
HIAFVP is 3 months in duration and consists of 72 sessions. It represents an integration of Principlesof Effective Corrections with traditional Aboriginal healing approaches. Aboriginal facilitators, Elders,spirituality and ceremony are integral to program delivery and design. The program is emerging fromdemonstration mode with an eye towards national implementation. Research is on-going.
5. Spirit of a Warrior Program (SOAW)The Spirit of a Warrior Program was specifically designed to address the needs of Aboriginal women
offenders. The Program is divided into four sections: introduction; childhood; adolescence; and adulthood/alternatives to violence. The Program consists of an in-depth intervention intended to reduce the risk ofviolent reoffending, reduce risk of relapse, improve family relations, improve ability to communicate withothers, improve coping skills, and adapt Aboriginal culture and spirituality into all aspects of behaviour andeveryday life. It is expected that with a more informed base of traditions, Aboriginal women will be better
able to manage their lives.
6. Circles of Change Program
The Circles of Change Program is a unique and gender-specific program that addresses the criminogenic
needs of Aboriginal women offenders. The Circles of Change Program includes three rehabilitative
strategies: relational, cognitive-behavioural, and solution-focused. The modules include: the process of32

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

change; increasing the knowledge of Canadian Aboriginal culture; communication styles; self-esteem
and self-care issues; problem solving skills; woman’s role in her family of origin; healthy and unhealthy
relationships; and social injustice.
7. Tupiq
The Tupiq Sex Offender Treatment Program is an Inuit-specific high-intensity holistic treatment program
targeting moderate to moderate-high risk sexual offenders. The Program runs 22 weeks in duration with
328 contact hours per offender-participant and consists of 97 group sessions, 22 individual sessions and fourweeks of pre-, mid- and post-assessment. The Program is delivered 5 days per week with both morningand afternoon sessions. The Program was developed in 1999 in order to meet the correctional needs of the
majority of Inuit federal offenders nationally. It is a complex treatment and holistic approach incorporating
multiple modalities and parallel intervention processes including Inuit Healing (an Inuit-specific therapy
group), a sex offender therapy group adhering to national standards, an Inuit-specific critical reasoning skills
group (which incorporates cultural and social values, problem management, emotion management, family
violence prevention, substance abuse prevention and relapse prevention) individual counselling and links to
the offender’s home community.
The Tupiq Program is delivered bilingually in Inuktitut and English and all components are delivered by
Inuit contracted staff with the exception of the Self Management Group (the sex-offender therapy group),
which is delivered twice per week and is co-facilitated by Inuit and the Program’s Clinical Supervisor, acontracted psychologist specializing in sex-offender treatment who is, at this time, not Inuit. The Tupiq
Program provides intensive training and support of Inuit delivery staff prior to and throughout the program
delivery.
The program is just emerging from demonstration mode with an eye towards wider implementation. A
formal research report has been completed with positive results.

IV. Strategies to Engage Program Resistant Offenders
From the behavioural science and correctional treatment literature there is a body of knowledge
that informs strategies to modify offender behaviour. Approaches include the application of specificskills (e.g. pro-social modelling) by staff and the management of behavioural contingencies (e.g. positive
reinforcement). In terms of staff intervention skills, these strategies include direct and indirect techniques
intended to engage offenders, methods to build working relationships, practices to increase offenders'
understanding about the outcomes of specific behaviours, and procedures to assist offenders to overcome
obstacles to change.


There is a range of approaches currently available that could be systematically applied by correctional
staff to address offender resistance.

Custody involves offenders living in social groups. Separating offenders whose behaviour is disruptive
is consistent with Social Learning Theory application and correctional experience that indicate theseoffenders could have an undue negative influence on their peers.

When applied to offenders, research has found that strategies such as motivational interviewing to beeffective in increasing engagement, improving interpersonal relationships between staff and offenders,and improving program participation and completion.

Some of this work on motivational interviewing has already been applied in higher-intensity programs
and is being developed for use in the Special Handling Unit. The use needs to be expanded to include
all members of the multidisciplinary team to ensure a consistent approach to offender accountability
and behaviour change.

The development of program primers (motivational interviewing) is important in order that offenders
can receive the kind of correctional program that is responsive to their level of motivation.

V. Contingency Management — Consequential Learning
In addition to specific interventions by staff, contingency management can also influence behaviour.
This involves the consistent and systematic application of consequences to modify behaviour. There can be

33

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

differentiation in the contingencies for offenders who do or do not participate in their correctional plan. A
broader range of contingencies (e.g. pay level, accommodation) that address control and assistance issues
could increase the ability to actively encourage behaviour change by offenders while still maintaining
concerns for offender rights.
There is empirical evidence that the application of behavioural science principles in juvenile andadult correctional and mental health settings have yielded positive results in reducing disturbed anddisruptive behaviour. Contingency management is an important component to the goal of modifying
offenders' behaviour.

Reinforcers of positive/pro-social behaviour can be social (e.g. verbal and written praise, engagement
strategies, involvement in multidisciplinary team meetings), activities (leisure, TV, visits) andtangible (e.g. pay level, accommodation).



Where possible providing the offender choice about reinforcers increases their relevance andeffectiveness.

VI. Training Issues
Staff can and do play an important role in the implementation and success of correctional programs.
There is, therefore, a need for staff training and quality control. Standardized training of frontline andsupervisory staff is crucial to avoid misapplication of techniques.
The quality of staff-offender interactions is key to perceptions of fairness in the application of correctional
programs.



The use of multidisciplinary teams introduces a need for increased communication among staff andwith offenders in order to ensure consistency in the manner in which offenders are managed.

Training materials from other jurisdictions and the pedagogical literature are currently available andcould be adapted with relative ease. Effectiveness of training would be part of the evaluation.

VII. The Need for Program Accreditation Processes
Program Accreditation is an approach originally developed by the Her Majesty’s Prison Service (HMPS)
of England and Wales and adapted by the Scottish Prison Service in the mid-1990s. It originated as a meansof demonstrating accountability. The main themes of the approach were an emphasis on theoretically soundprograms and empirical evidence of effects on recidivism. According to the “What Works ” literature James
McGuire states: “The optimal route selected by a number of services is the development of procedures foraccreditation of programs designed to reduce recidivism .” Moreover, there should be a clear evidence-based
theoretical model underpinning the program; program material should identify factors linked to offending;programs should be inter-linked with a case management process, and guidelines for implementation within
services and program materials should include assessment and evaluation measures, and a framework forevaluation of the program's overall delivery, short-term, and long-term impact.
In October 1997, Correctional Service Canada adopted a strategy for accreditation that involved two
separate phases: 1. programs would be accredited through the use of International-Expert Panels that would
utilize criteria derived by HMPS and 2) teams of Correctional Service Canada staff, using standards as partof the Program Accreditation, would conduct the audit of the program delivery sites . The first Correctional
Program Accreditation Panel in Correctional Service Canada was held in May 1998.
In Correctional Service Canada, programs are accredited in accordance with the following criteria: a)explicit, empirically-based model of change; b) targeting criminogenic need; c) using objective methods; d)skills oriented; e) address responsivity issues; f) program intensity; g) continuity of care; and h) ongoing
monitoring and evaluation.
In terms of benefits, an accreditation process promotes high-quality correctional programs; provides
internal and external (international) recognition; maintains program integrity; allows Correctional Service
Canada to focus resources on effective, research-based programs; increase delivery of programs which havebeen proven to be effective in reducing recidivism; helps standardize program delivery across sites andregions; and allows for sharing of best practices.

34

151ST INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

VIII. Anticipated Results
Anticipated results from the “correctional programs model” include:

A. Attitudes
 Improved perceptions about a safe working environment (offenders and staff).
 Increased job satisfaction.
 Improved ratings of interactions with staff by offenders.
 Decrease in negative attitudes towards staff by offenders.
B. Programs Increased enrolment and completion of correctional programs.
 Lower rates of program attrition (refusals and drop-outs).
 Improved ratings of program performance.
 Changes in level of motivation over the course of an offender serving his or her sentence.
C. Outcomes Reduced time served in more secure settings.
 Reduced rate of offenders involved in institutional incidents, charges.
 A potential shift in the nature of grievances submitted.
 Improved parole grant rates.
 Reduced reoffending post-release.
D. Decision Requirement
There are several key decisions for correctional programs that must be considered in terms of contingencies
and level of motivation.


The correctional system should commit to systematically assessing the level of offender motivationand incorporate it into a scheme of correctional “responsiveness” categories.



The correctional system should target offender “responsiveness” through the systematic applicationof engagement strategies (motivational interviewing) and program primers (basic elements of coreprograms).



The correctional system should undertake a series of well-controlled demonstration projects in theuse of motivational enhancement strategies.

IX. Conclusion
The evolution of the “correctional programs model” in Canada has led to a stage where it needs to reachbeyond offender risk/need and focus efforts on integrating correctional program modalities and enhancing
offender motivation to engage in their correctional plan. In practice, this means that the assessment of“correctional plan engagement” will serve to structure decisions being made regarding custody or security
designations, program assignment, temporary and conditional release recommendations, and community
supervision requirements.
While there exists for Correctional Service Canada a suite of well-designed correctional programs, delivery
methods need to be reviewed to ensure they show consideration for gender, ethnic, cultural and linguistic
differences and are responsive to the special needs of women, Aboriginal peoples, and others with special
requirements (i.e. learning disability, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder).
Strategies to decrease offenders’ resistance to participate in their correctional plans exist and should
be incorporated into correctional practice. An expanded range of correctional program strategies to include
primers should serve to reduce program attrition.
Reinforcers are important in modifying offender behaviour, but failing to differentiate consequences
for behaviour reduces correctional effectiveness. The “correctional programs model” focuses on offender

35

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.88

behaviour that is both appropriate and problematic and relates it to progress in correctional plans. The use ofconsequential learning would be viewed as a systemic change for many correctional systems.
With the changing offender profile and implementation of new, integrated correctional program strategies,
program staff roles and competencies will change. Training and supervision is a critical element to the successof correctional programming.
As correctional programs must meet recognized standards and sites must deliver them as designed tooffenders that require them in a timely manner by qualified staff, a revamped accreditation process that is
simplified, streamlined and utilizes program management monitoring tools is required to ensure integrity ofdelivery.
As before, there remains the requirement for Correctional Service Canada to measure a range of relevantcorrectional outcomes (effectiveness, efficiency and relevance) to demonstrate the impact of the “correctional
programs model.”36