DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OFF ICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

BJA NI J OJJDP BJS OVC

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Bureau of Justice Assistance Monograph

Innovative

State

and

Local

Programs

Programs in

Correctional Settings:

Programs in

Correctional Settings:

Monograph
This document was prepared by the Justice Research and Statistics Association, under cooperative agreement 95–DD–BX–K011,awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of

Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or

recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

Raymond C. Fisher

Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson

Assistant Attorney General

Nancy E. Gist

Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance

U.S. Department of Justice Response Center

1–800–421–6770

Bureau of Justice Assistance Clearinghouse

1–800–688–4252

Bureau of Justice Assistance

World Wide Web Home Page

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also

includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.
Bureau of Justice Assistance

Programs in Correctional Settings:

Innovative State and

Local Programs

June 1998 Monograph NCJ 170088
iii

Programs in Correctional Settings

Acknowledgments

This report is a product of a cooperative effort by the States and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) as part of the State Evaluation Development Program, which is coordinated by the Justice Research and Statistics

Association (JRSA).

The National Institute of Corrections and the Colorado Department of

Public Safety, Division of Criminal Justice, contributed to the coordination

and implementation of this workshop. A special thanks goes to Ida Halasz,

Acting Chief, National Institute of Corrections; William Woodward, Director, Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado Department of Public Safety;

John Inmann, Program Administrator, Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado Department of Public Safety; Henry Solano, U.S. Attorney, District of

Colorado; and George Epp, Sheriff, Boulder County, for delivering welcoming addresses. Special acknowledgment is also due to the outstanding

moderators of the working meeting: Ken Robinson, President, Correctional

Counseling, Inc., and Nancy Shomaker, Manager, Technical Assistance,

National Institute of Corrections.

The State Evaluation Development Program relies on the expertise of the

States to ensure the success of workshops and publications. The following

individuals contributed their knowledge and time to make the workshop

and publication a success: Kathi Atkins, Planning and Grants Manager, Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado Department of Public Safety; Jim

Barbee, Correctional Program Specialist, National Institute of Corrections;

Ruth Cardella, Researcher, New Directions for Families; David

Dillingham, Correctional Program Specialist, National Institute of Corrections; Gail Keil, Montana Board of Crime Control; Pat Scholes, Corrections

Specialist, National Institute of Corrections; Andrew Tarsy, Consultant;

and Beverlee Venell, Grant Coordinator, Criminal Justice Division, Oregon

State Police.

The Justice Research and Statistics Association prepared this document

under the direction of Joan C. Weiss, Executive Director. The following

JRSA staff compiled and edited the information in this report under the

supervision of Deputy Director Kellie J. Dressler: Tara L. O’Connor, Program Assistant; Marylinda Stawasz, Program Assistant; Andrea G.

Richards, Program Associate; Terrylynn Coffin, Program Assistant; and

Jason R. Lunsford, Intern.
v

Programs in Correctional Settings

Contents

Introduction .................................................................................................. vii

State and Local Programs in Correctional Settings

Alabama: Jail Assistance Project .................................................................. 1

Colorado: Integration of Polygraph

Testing With Sex Offenders Program...................................................... 7

Colorado: Juvenile Offender Substance

Abuse Treatment Project ........................................................................ 13

Colorado: Department of Corrections

Youth Offender System .......................................................................... 19

Delaware: Mentor Program, Inc. ............................................................... 25

Idaho: Ada County Jail Substance Abuse Program ............................... 29

Illinois: Department of Corrections

Sex Offender Treatment Program ......................................................... 33

Iowa: Centralized Substance Abuse

Assessment Project—Iowa Medical and

Classification Center ............................................................................... 39

Iowa: Statewide Substance Abuse

Program Coordination in Corrections ................................................. 45

Kansas: Chemical Dependency

Correctional Counseling Program ........................................................ 53

Kentucky: Integrated Programming

for Female Offenders............................................................................... 59

Massachusetts: Stress Reduction and

Awareness Training in Corrections

and the Criminal Justice System ........................................................... 65

New York: Taconic Correctional

Facility Nursery Program ....................................................................... 69

Ohio: Oriana House, Inc.,

Residential Treatment Services Program............................................. 75

Oklahoma: Department of Corrections

Enid Community Learning and Family Center .................................. 81

Oregon: Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Program .............................. 87

Pennsylvania: OPTIONS Women’s Therapeutic Center ....................... 93

Rhode Island: Discovery Substance Abuse

Treatment Program ................................................................................. 99

South Dakota: Corrections Substance Abuse Program ....................... 105

Wisconsin: Rock County Education and

Criminal Addictions Program ............................................................. 113

Wyoming: Department of Corrections

Honor Farm Wild Horse Training

Program ................................................................................................... 121
vii

Programs in Correctional Settings

Introduction

This monograph reports the results of the Bureau of Justice Assistance

(BJA) State Evaluation Development Program working meeting, Programs

in Correctional Settings: Innovative State and Local Programs, held November

2–4, 1995, in Longmont, Colorado. The monograph was developed and

written for the Bureau of Justice Assistance by the Justice Research and

Statistics Association in coordination with the Office of Justice Programs of

the United States Department of Justice and the National Institute of Corrections Academy.

The working meeting brought together more than 60 State planners and local

practitioners, as well as researchers, analysts, and law enforcement officers,

who are involved in implementing or evaluating programs to improve the

criminal justice system and their communities. This publication describes

workshop presentations of programs in correctional settings that focus on improving the criminal justice system at the State and local levels. Although the

programs are local in scope, they hold great promise for replication in other

communities. The report seeks to aid that process by including important information about the programs’ development and implementation.

The 21 programs discussed in this monograph are funded under the Byrne

Formula or Discretionary Grant programs and were nominated as effective

programs by BJA, the Byrne State Administrative Agencies, and local

criminal justice program managers. Several have been evaluated extensively at the State and local levels by State and local criminal justice researchers and practitioners using BJA’s evaluation criteria and guidance.

The results were reported at the Annual Criminal Justice Research and

Evaluation Conference and in other forums.
ix

Programs in Correctional Settings

State and Local Programs in

Correctional Settings
1

Programs in Correctional Settings

Alabama:

Jail Assistance Project

Statement of the Problem

Alabama is a rural State with few metropolitan areas. Because most local

jails do not have the resources to develop proactive corrections programs,

historically they have relied on outside agencies for technical assistance.

Although the quality of the assistance is satisfactory, there is a need to

shorten the length of time involved in producing reports and delivering

technical assistance.

Alabama jails have been in crisis since the mid-1970s, when, in Pug v. Locke

(1976), a Federal court order forbade the State prison system from accepting new inmates until its population no longer exceeded the rated capacity. The result was an instant backlog of State inmates in Alabama’s county

jails. Overcrowding was exacerbated by the influx of drug offenders into

jails, which caused small, local detention facilities to become permanent or

semipermanent residences for felons with long-term sentences. The responses to this crisis varied. Some local jurisdictions implemented additional inmate programming, but others simply allowed the situation to

continue. “Conditions lawsuits” were filed against many local jails, adding

to the burdens on already overloaded systems.

Compounding the problem was Wyatt v. Stickney (1972), a court order that

effectively deinstitutionalized the Alabama mental health system. Many

hospitalized persons were released to community mental health systems ill

equipped to deal with them. As a result, many of these persons were

reinstitutionalized in local jails. Although the courts emphasized the least

restrictive alternative for treatment of mentally ill citizens, those who

found themselves bounced from the Alabama mental health system to the

Alabama county jail system became victims of the “most restrictive alternative,” with few or no resources to provide adequate care. This problem

resulted in additional litigation against local jails, prompting the construction of several new county jails.

In February 1992, several Alabama counties filed a class-action lawsuit

against Alabama’s Commissioner of Corrections to force the removal of

State-sentenced inmates from county jails, inmates for whom sheriffs receive only $1.75 per day from the State for food. No per diem is provided

for housing State inmates in county jails. The State court ordered the commissioner to remove all inmates from county jails within 30 days of receipt

of official transcripts.
2

Bureau of Justice Assistance

The commissioner eventually was found to be in contempt of the order,

but, acting under pressure from the court, reported compliance with the

order on October 13, 1992. Nevertheless, the number of State inmates in

Alabama county jails continues to grow, and the problem will persist until

a better solution is found.

Meanwhile, an untenable nontreatment environment has been created for

mentally ill inmates who continue to be held in Alabama county jails. The

current waiting period for a forensic commitment bed is as long as 6 months,

and the Alabama Department of Mental Health petitioned the Federal district

court in 1992 to eliminate the standards of care established in Wyatt v.

Stickney. That court ruled against the Department of Mental Health, but the

department has since filed an appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. If

the appeal is successful, the Department of Mental Health could continue to

send individuals to the “most restrictive alternative.”

The Alabama jail situation is compounded by several problems that contribute to the overall inability of the jails to house long-term State inmates,

mentally ill inmates, or any other class of inmates other than those typically confined to local detention facilities. Foremost among these problems

is the condition of the State’s local jail facilities, which range in age from 10

to more than 100 years old. Some newer jails are ineffectively designed,

and most of the State’s jail facilities are underfunded, understaffed, and

undermanaged. Government entities responsible for funding the operation

of local jails are often reluctant to invest in adequate staffing. Many still

view the local jail as the fiscal stepchild of the county, even though Alabama law designates the operation of the county jail as the priority preferred claim against the county.

The sheriffs of Alabama, through the Alabama Sheriffs’ Association, responded to these problems with the Alabama Jail Assistance Project

(AJAP). AJAP began operation on March 15, 1992, with funding from the

Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) through the Law Enforcement Planning

Division of the Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs,

and with financial contributions from the sheriffs of Alabama. Although

the project currently employs a limited staff, it has gained widespread acceptance through its provision of technical assistance in various forms to

numerous county and municipal jails.

Goals and Objectives

AJAP makes multifaceted technical assistance available to Alabama county

and municipal jails at no cost. The project’s overall goal is to assist Alabama jails, particularly those with few resources, to cope with increasing

demands for professionalism in their operations and to resolve both immediate and long-term problems.
3

Programs in Correctional Settings

AJAP’s objectives include:

❑ Provision of quick-response technical assistance.

❑ Provision of technical assistance geared to the specific needs of

Alabama jails.

❑ Utilization of local resources to resolve local problems.

❑ Increased training for local jail officers.

Program Components

Inspection and Evaluation

AJAP has no authority to inspect and evaluate jail facilities, organizational

structure, or programming. However, many such inspections and evaluations are conducted at the invitation of the sheriff or chief of police. Inspections and followup reports focus on strengths and weaknesses of the

system and recommend improvements. In most cases, the sheriff or chief

of police forwards recommendations that require funding, with a request

for implementation, to either the county commission or city council.

Training

Providing training is an integral component of AJAP’s mission, and it is

conducted through the University of Alabama Law Enforcement Academy, which is charged by the Alabama Peace Officers Training Commission with providing minimum standards for training Alabama law

enforcement officers.

Although there are no legally mandated minimum training standards for

Alabama jail officers, the academy provides a basic 80-hour jail management training curriculum. Training sessions are conducted at the academy

or hosted by a local sheriff or chief of police. The academy conducts approximately six training sessions annually, and participation has been

excellent. Many departments now require their jail officers to complete the

training, and a large insurance firm in the State pays training expenses for

officers from jails enrolled in the policy.

AJAP staff members participate in all aspects of curriculum development

and instruction. This participation helps to ensure that the training remains focused on the practitioner.

Policy and Procedure Development

Most rural jails in Alabama have a great need for comprehensive policy

and procedure directives. To meet this need, AJAP staff developed sample

policy and procedure guidelines specifically for the State’s jails. Based on
4

Bureau of Justice Assistance

case law, the Alabama County Jail Standards, the Code of Alabama, and

sound corrections practices, the guidelines assist local jails in developing

policies that, while reflecting each jail’s unique operation, maintain consistency throughout the State.

Jail Design and Renovation

In addition to serving as an adviser to the chief law enforcement official

charged with operating the jail, AJAP serves as a consultant to the government funding agency charged with approving and funding the design and

construction of new or renovated facilities. AJAP works with funding

agencies in planning the development of new institutions, often saving the

agency the expense of employing a private consultant. In this role, AJAP

staff ensure that jail designs are staff- and cost-efficient and that they conform to State standards.

Response to Litigation

AJAP staff members are available on request to assist Alabama jail officials

and their attorneys with litigation over jail conditions, suicides, medical

services, and other issues. The AJAP staff function as consultants to jail officers and their attorneys in developing and presenting a defense. For example, at the request of jail attorneys in the class-action lawsuit against the

Alabama Commissioner of Corrections, and with the consent of the presiding judge, AJAP inspected seven Alabama prisons to determine whether

space was being used adequately to house State inmates. The subsequent

report indicated that space was available in the prisons and that more State

inmates could be removed from county jails without interfering significantly with ongoing rehabilitation programs. The Alabama Department of

Corrections is now using some of those recommendations to assist in removing State inmates from county jails.

Resource and Reference Service

AJAP serves as a resource and reference service for Alabama jail personnel. Sheriffs, chiefs of police, and jail administrators call AJAP staff with

questions about the legality or appropriateness of an issue or planned action. AJAP provides a rapid telephone response, often followed by a letter

or position paper addressing the issue. If needed, AJAP arranges onsite

technical assistance.

New Issues

AJAP serves as a broker for information on new issues relevant to Alabama jails. Information on issues such as the Americans With Disabilities

Act, the Bloodborne Pathogens Rule, the Religious Freedom Restoration

Act, and recent court decisions is disseminated to Alabama jail officials to

inform them of the legal requirements for compliance.
5

Programs in Correctional Settings

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Although AJAP’s success is based primarily on customer satisfaction, a

number of quantitative measures have also been recognized. These measures include:

❑ The number and outcome of lawsuits brought against local jails.

❑ The number of requests for AJAP’s policy manual.

❑ The number of officers trained.

❑ The number of service calls from local jails.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The widespread need for the assistance provided by AJAP, the support of

all State and local agencies affected, and the overall satisfaction with the

project’s work have created a hospitable environment for the project’s

implementation and daily operation. AJAP has been hampered, however,

by its small staff, which currently is one individual, who is on call 24 hours

a day, 365 days a year, to respond to all of the State’s technical assistance

needs. Due to limited resources, the project occasionally cannot respond to

requests as quickly as it would like to, nor can it devote large blocks of

time to a single local need. However, by providing jail personnel with

training and knowledge, AJAP cuts down on redundant calls and often

refers calls to other jails that have solved similar problems.

Successes and Accomplishments

In the more than 5 years it has been in operation, AJAP has become a valuable asset to local corrections jail systems in Alabama and has laid a strong

foundation for addressing the increasing demands overburdened jails will

face in the future. AJAP has raised awareness of the complexities and

needs of local jails throughout the criminal justice system. As a result, local

jails are increasingly viewed as an integral part of the system. Whenever

possible and appropriate, AJAP provides immediate technical assistance

upon request. Formal applications and a waiting period for approval have

been eliminated. Having AJAP as a resource has made local jail officials

feel more comfortable about requesting technical assistance because they

know that assistance will be geared to their needs and will be sensitive to

local issues.

AJAP training has increased professionalism among local jail officers, and

this professionalism has resulted in more statewide involvement in organizations such as the American Jail Association. The Alabama Jail Association has been developed as a professional organization for Alabama’s jail

practitioners. AJAP has played an important role in the development of an
6

Bureau of Justice Assistance

informal network of jail officials throughout the State. Some jail officials,

particularly those in rural areas who have been isolated in the past, have

been able to network with other jail officials and develop informal partnerships to enhance professional growth.

From the project’s inception in March 1992 through August 1997, AJAP

provided training to nearly 2,000 local jail officers. The demand for training will continue because of the high turnover of local jail officers and the

continuing climate of litigation. AJAP, in conjunction with the American

Jail Association, will provide sheriffs with specialized training on jail legal

issues in the near future. AJAP also has provided a sample policy and procedure manual to each Alabama sheriff and to numerous other jail officials. The manual is especially beneficial to rural jails with few resources

for developing such documents. Additionally, AJAP has worked with architects to improve the design of new jails and with numerous attorneys

involved in jail litigation.

AJAP’s efforts have been recognized by members of the Federal judiciary,

and AJAP’s staff person has been appointed as a mediator and monitor in

jail litigation.

Prospects for Replication

Prospects for replicating AJAP are good if the program has strong backing

from two key elements: a supporting organization with a vested interest in

the operation of local jails and a cooperative and innovative State grantor

agency. In addition, the project should be operated by staff with a background in law enforcement and corrections and include adequate clerical

support.

Contact Information

Michael W. Haley

Director of Jail Services

Alabama Sheriffs’ Association

514 Washington Avenue

Montgomery, AL 36104–4385

Phone: 334–264–7827

Fax: 334–269–5588
7

Programs in Correctional Settings

Colorado:

Integration of Polygraph

Testing With Sex Offenders

Program

Statement of the Problem

The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) estimates that the recidivism

rate of sex offenders is 60 percent. In 1983, more than 400 paraphiliac sex

offenders were studied under a Federal certificate of confidentiality. The

study determined that, on average, each sex offender committed 44 crimes

per year. In an effort to enhance public safety, corrections systems are

looking for ways to reduce recidivism and safely reintegrate sex offenders

into the community. Programs that combine offense-specific treatment,

specialized supervision and monitoring, and polygraph examination show

the greatest promise in reducing recidivism.

Although the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) administers

offense-specific treatment and specialized supervision for sex offenders,

prior to this project it did not have the capability to administer polygraph

tests to them. From October 1, 1996, to September 30, 1997, 242 incarcerated sex offenders in the State were released from prison to parole, 249 discharged their sentences, and 54 were released through other means. The

majority of these offenders were released directly into the community

without specialized supervision or polygraph examination.

Goals and Objectives

The goal of the Integration of Polygraph Testing With Sex Offenders Program is to reduce the recidivism of sex offenders by enhancing treatment

and supervision through the use of polygraph examinations. The following

are the program’s objectives:

❑ Develop and establish a polygraph policy for CDOC inmates and

parolees.

❑ Establish a baseline and 6-month monitoring polygraph testing program for inmates in the Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP)

Phase II Therapeutic Community and for inmates and parolees under

Risk Assessment Management (RAM) community supervision and

Approved Treatment Provider (ATP) programs.

❑ Establish a research and evaluation plan to document program participation, effectiveness, and outcomes. Use this information to

develop national research products.
8

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Provide technical assistance and in-service training annually to SOTP

clinicians, community agents, and parole officers to ensure effective

program management.

❑ Establish a statewide list of polygraph specialists who meet ATP’s

standard criteria to conduct the testing program.

❑ Increase by 10 percent the number of sex offenders receiving community or parole placement before their discharge into the community.

❑ Collaborate with the Colorado Board of Parole on the use of polygraphs as a treatment and supervision tool.

❑ Increase public safety by reducing by 10 percent the rate of reoffending

by sex offenders in community or parole placement.

❑ Increase by 50 percent the number of sex offenders receiving polygraph

examinations while on parole and in community corrections.

❑ Establish specific standards for polygraphers on the ATP list.

❑ Conduct a baseline and 6-month followup polygraph examination of

approximately 90 sex offenders in Phase II of SOTP, 110 sex offenders

on parole, and 20 sex offenders in community corrections.

Program Components

Institutional Use

The polygraph test is utilized during Phase II of SOTP. An initial baseline test

is administered at 3 months, with periodic followup tests as clinically appropriate. The polygraph test is integrated into Phase II by explaining it in the

Phase II Treatment Contract. The Phase II Treatment Contract is signed by the

offender prior to enrolling in Phase II. The polygrapher is considered a member of the Phase II treatment team and has access to clinical records and impressions. This role is clarified in the treatment contract.

Prior to each polygraph test, the inmate is given an Informed Consent

Form that explains that (1) DOC employees are required to report to the

Department of Social Services any child abuse that has taken place within

the past 10 years and any specific information indicating prior or current

child sexual abuse; (2) information about new crimes or Code of Penal Discipline (COPD) violations committed between polygraph tests will be reported to the proper authorities; and (3) information obtained from the

polygraph test will be forwarded to parole officers and community corrections agents in a report or personal change contract.

Offenders who exhibit deception on their test but do not admit the deception are subject to a retest, group sessions regarding the results of the examination, and identification of the areas of deception on reports and/or
9

Programs in Correctional Settings

personal change contracts that are forwarded to parole officers and community corrections agents.

Acknowledgment of reoffending COPD violations during the pretest and

posttest interviews on a periodic exam will result in reports to the proper authorities, group discussion and termination from treatment, if appropriate,

and revision of the inmate’s relapse plan and personal change contract. Offenders who refuse to take a polygraph exam are terminated from treatment.

Community Corrections Use

The polygraph test is used by community corrections as a treatment/

supervision tool. All sex offenders receive periodic polygraph tests. Sex offenders who have not previously taken baseline tests are required to do so

while in community corrections. Offenders who deny their crime or are not

participating in treatment are viewed as high risk and tested more frequently.

The polygraph test is a condition of a community corrections placement.

All inmates sign a Release of Information Form to release CDOC case material to the polygraph examiner. Each inmate is required to sign an Informed Consent Form. Offenders who are deceptive on polygraph tests are

subject to increased supervision, treatment, and repeat testing. They are

not regressed solely on the basis of a finding of deception on a polygraph

exam. Upon determination of deception, and when there is no admission

of reoffense or violation, the following steps may be taken: retesting, increasing collateral contacts, increasing surveillance and informing law enforcement as appropriate, electronic monitoring, detention (including

home detention), and remediation.

When an inmate admits during the pretest or posttest interview to a

reoffense or violation, a report is made to the proper authorities. The inmate is then charged with a COPD violation, transferred to a more secure

facility, and electronically monitored. Refusal to take a polygraph test may

result in the filing of Code of Penal Discipline charges.

Parole Use

The polygraph test is used by parole officials as a treatment and supervision tool. All sex offenders receive periodic polygraph tests. Sex offenders

who have not previously taken baseline tests are required to do so while

on parole. Offenders who deny their crime or are not participating in treatment are viewed as high risk and tested more frequently.

Because the polygraph test is a condition of parole for sex offenders, all

parolees must sign a Release of Information Form to release CDOC case

material to the polygraph examiner. Parolees must also sign an Informed

Consent Form. Offenders who are deceptive on polygraph tests are subject

to intensified parole supervision and treatment and repeat testing. Parole

will not be revoked solely on the basis of a finding of deception on a
10

Bureau of Justice Assistance

polygraph exam. Upon a determination of deception, and when there is no

admission of reoffense or violation, the following steps may be taken: retesting, referral to the Intensive Supervision Program (ISP), increasing collateral contacts, increasing surveillance and informing law enforcement‘

and electronic monitoring.

When parolees admit during the pre- or posttest interview that they committed an offense or violation while on parole, the proper authorities are

notified, and an arrest is made when appropriate. If there is no revocation,

ISP and electronic monitoring are considered. A parole complaint is filed

when an offender refuses to take a polygraph test.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The program has had an impact on the Colorado criminal justice system in

the following areas:

❑ Identifying offenders’ risk areas, which contributes to improving

personal change contracts (relapse prevention plans); imposing more

stringent parole conditions; authorizing parole plans and limiting

contact with the victim pool; implementing community supervision

plans; selecting an approved treatment provider; and notifying law

enforcement.

❑ Tracking the number of offenders receiving treatment.

❑ Increasing parole of sex offenders contingent upon their receiving

treatment, enabling the Parole Board to have more knowledge of the

offender’s history and a more effective monitoring tool for parole.

❑ Increasing public safety by detecting technical parole violators earlier

and removing them from the community before they reoffend.

❑ Incorporating knowledge about sex offenders into law enforcement

training and victim treatment programs.

❑ Sharing information on the treatment and supervision of sex offenders

with the board of the Sex Offender Treatment Program, which sets

treatment and monitoring standards for the Colorado criminal justice

system.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The Colorado Board of Parole is unlikely to parole sex offenders. This

project offers a safer method to monitor sex offenders in institutions, in

community corrections, and on parole. An important question is how to

handle the disclosure of past crimes during polygraph testing. CDOC is
11

Programs in Correctional Settings

consulting with sex crime prosecutors to obtain recommendations for reporting past crimes.

Successes and Accomplishments

The program, which began in October 1995, has achieved several objectives. Criteria for polygraph examiners have been established, and five

qualified polygraph examiners have been contracted to provide services.

Parole officers, SOTP staff, and polygraph examiners have received training on both the program and cultural diversity, and the State attorney

general’s office is reviewing the program policy for final approval. The

Colorado Parole Board has met with the program’s staff to exchange ideas

and address concerns, and staff members have shared information with

police departments on individual behavior patterns. Data forms have been

developed, and sexual history questionnaires are in use. In addition, staff

have met with a research consultant to develop and plan data collection.

Polygraphing of all sex offenders receiving treatment is now mandatory in

Colorado.

Prospects for Replication

This project could be replicated by other corrections departments in conjunction with sex offender treatment programs, community corrections

halfway house systems, and parole divisions. Any polygraph testing program should consider using experienced and knowledgeable polygraph

providers, having all procedures and personnel in place before initiating

the program, employing a rotating schedule of polygraph examiners, and

structuring examinations in ways that prevent offenders from becoming

too aware of the procedure.

Contact Information

Peggy Heil Bonita McKee

Director Program Administrator

Sex Offender Treatment Division of Adult Parole Supervision

 Program Colorado Department of Corrections

Colorado Department 10403 West Colfax, No. 700

 of Corrections Lakewood, CO 80215

P.O. Box 1600 Phone: 303–238–5967, ext. 16

Canon City, CO 81215–1600 Fax: 303–238–0176

Phone: 719–269–4506

Fax: 719–275–2859
13

Programs in Correctional Settings

Colorado:

Juvenile Offender Substance

Abuse Treatment Project

Statement of the Problem

There is a significant and serious gap in the system of care for substanceabusing youth in Colorado’s juvenile detention facilities. Despite a large

body of evidence documenting the high incidence of substance abuse

among juvenile offenders and the relationship between substance abuse

and criminal activity, no treatment is offered to youth in secure or

nonsecure detention alternatives. For 4 years, surveys on substance abuse

conducted at Zebulon Pike, the El Paso County youth detention facility,

have identified substantial numbers of youth in need of substance abuse

treatment and intervention, yet these results have never resulted in the

provision of treatment services. The following data from Zebulon Pike

illustrate the extent of the problem:

❑ Of 1,173 surveys on substance abuse administered to youth in detention in 1996 by the Detention Services for Juveniles (DSJ) program, 275

scored high, indicating substantial dysfunction and immediate need for

treatment, whereas 286 scored in the middle range, indicating immediate need for intervention.

❑ A survey of Zebulon Pike residents (150 questionnaires) yielded the following information: 41 percent indicated that they use marijuana often,

39 percent indicated that they use alcohol often, and 9 percent indicted

that they use hard narcotics often. (Not all respondents answered every

question.)

❑ Of youth designated serious habitual offenders, more than 46 percent

are known to have substance abuse issues.

❑ At least 536 juvenile arrests in 1992 involved drugs, alcohol, or both.

The Juvenile Offender Substance Abuse Treatment (JOSAT) Project was developed to address the problem behind these numbers. JOSAT targets youth

brought to detention whose score on a substance use survey (given as part of

each youth’s intake assessment by detention staff) indicates a need for further

assessment and educational and/or treatment alternatives. It is critical for the

rehabilitation of these youth that their substance abuse treatment needs be addressed. Most adolescents have not “bottomed out” like their adult counterparts, many of whom have lost their jobs, families, finances, and health. With

appropriate treatment and support, adolescents can recover. If they can be

reached, they have the ability to heal.
14

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Goals and Objectives

JOSAT was created to help the large number of juvenile offenders who

abuse alcohol and other drugs as part of their criminal activities. Its goals

are to:

❑ Provide thorough case management and aftercare for juvenile offenders with substance abuse problems.

❑ Decrease substance abuse by achieving at least a 60-percent decrease in

substance abuse among treated youth after 3 months.

❑ Reduce recidivism by achieving a 70-percent decrease in recidivism

among youth after 3 months.

❑ Decrease the population of youth in secure detention by annually

treating in the community 25 youth who previously would have been

detained.

To establish these priorities, the following objectives were set:

❑ Assess the treatment needs of all juvenile offenders.

❑ Recommend community-based treatment, rather than detention, whenever possible.

❑ Meet the treatment needs of assessed juvenile offenders through individual and group counseling as part of a program model that adheres

to accepted standards of practice.

❑ Establish linkages with case management services provided by the DSJ

program.

❑ Develop an appropriate followup plan to take effect upon release from

detention or discharge from DSJ.

❑ Develop a committee to plan for continued funding before the project’s

original grant expires.

Program Components

All youth brought to Zebulon Pike are assessed by DSJ. Part of the assessment

includes a substance use survey. Youth scoring high or at the high end of the

middle range are referred to JOSAT. Scores are turned over to two Coloradocertified drug and alcohol counselors who conduct further assessments and

complete written treatment recommendations for referred youth. (Both counselors are employees of the El Paso County Health Department, which provides weekly clinical supervision and a training budget.) From this point,

linkages between JOSAT Project staff and youth are established through the

case manager and meet the specific requirements of the Federal Regulations

of Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records.
15

Programs in Correctional Settings

There are two treatment options for youth recommended for treatment. In

conjunction with the DSJ case managers, the possibility of pretrial release

into the DSJ program is considered. If the youth meets criteria for

community-based services, with a specified level of supervision, a JOSAT

Project treatment component is recommended to the court. If the court

agrees, participation in the project becomes a condition for release. For

these youth, group treatment sessions are offered three times a week at

Workout, Ltd., the component of DSJ that supervises released youth.

Weekly individual sessions are scheduled as required. In addition, drug

testing by urinalysis may be used with youth receiving such treatment.

Youth remaining in secure detention at Zebulon Pike participate in weekly

educational groups scheduled within the center’s educational curriculum

and taught by JOSAT counselors. Individual counseling is also available

through a recommendation after intake assessment and with the youth’s

consent. Followup treatment is available for appropriate youth upon release from detention. However, unless mandated by court order as a condition or parole or release, followup treatment is voluntary.

In all cases, the needs of the families are considered. If further services are

necessary for and desired by families, project staff, Workout, Ltd., and/or

DSJ case managers work together to make the most appropriate referrals

and assist them with suggestions.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The JOSAT Project measures its impact using statistical data, self-reports, and

community and agency feedback and input. Statistics are kept on the number

of youth originally assessed as appropriate for the project and the number of

youth leaving detention with treatment as a condition of release.

The overall decrease in secure detention population due to the project is

computed. Self-report inventories at 3-month intervals measure decreases

in drug and alcohol use and recidivism. When youth agree to a release of

information waiver, such data are collected from or verified by officials

such as probation officers and case managers. An oversight committee

consisting of collaborating agencies, probation officers, and local law enforcement personnel reviews the information and offers feedback on how

the program could be improved.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Implementation of the project was delayed for approximately 4 months

due to the participating agencies’ difficulty in developing and maintaining

a collaborative relationship. However, once these agencies fully understood the project and its implementation plan, the process proceeded

smoothly. The project’s ability to use programs already in place was partly
16

Bureau of Justice Assistance

responsible. Drug and alcohol screening had been conducted by DSJ staff

for 4 years before the JOSAT Project’s inception, and court officials’ full

support of the project led to their immediate approval of treatment recommendations as part of release conditions.

A continuing problem for the project has been finding an effective approach to followup treatment for youth who are appropriate for treatment

but not released to a supervised facility. Unless followup treatment is ordered by the court, JOSAT counselors have no power over youth. As a

result, they often have no outside incentive or encouragement to take

advantage of treatment opportunities. JOSAT counselors are working with

probation and parole agents to encourage them to emphasize continued

substance abuse treatment when working with youth in need of assistance.

Successes and Accomplishments

For the first time, a concrete connection has been found between the

project’s survey results and further assessment and treatment in both detention and the community. This advance is significant in that it allows the

system to respond to the needs of youth and their families. During the

project’s first 2 years, 404 juvenile offenders were treated. In addition to

having access to services, all detained youth were provided with substance

abuse education. In total, more than 1,600 youth have benefited from the

program.

Other accomplishments include:

❑ A decrease in the population of Zebulon Pike Detention Center.

❑ Thorough case management and aftercare for substance-abusing

juvenile offenders.

❑ A decrease in substance abuse by treated youth.

❑ A decline in recidivism among treated youth.

❑ The creation of a funding committee.

Prospects for Replication

Replication of JOSAT is possible if commitment and resources for collaboration exist in the community. Elements contributing to smooth implementation

are:

❑ Broad-based support by the justice system.

❑ Collaboration with nonsecure detention facilities, the State’s social services agency, probation departments, and group homes to accommodate the aftercare needs of youth released from detention.
17

Programs in Correctional Settings

❑ Full-time detention staff working to administer and score drug and alcohol screening assessments and distribute them to project counselors.

(Counselors can also perform assessments, but only of youth admitted

during the hours they are at the facility.)

❑ Facilities for treatment and educational sessions at secure and nonsecure detention centers.

❑ A project evaluator and oversight committee to track and evaluate

project strengths and weaknesses.

❑ The contribution of local cash matching funds by participating

agencies.

❑ Policies and procedures for regular staff training and supervision.

❑ A plan for future funding to ensure the project’s continuation.

Contact Information

Mercedes Harden

Director

McMaster Center for Alcohol and Drug Treatment

El Paso County Department of Health and Environment

301 South Union Boulevard

Colorado Springs, CO 80910

Phone: 719–578–3153

Fax: 719–578–3182
19

Programs in Correctional Settings

Colorado:

Department of Corrections

Youth Offender System

Statement of the Problem

In summer 1993, the Governor of Colorado initiated a 14-point plan for a

Colorado Partnership Against Violence. Given the significant problem of

youth violence, specifically violence involving weapons, in Colorado and

throughout the Nation, a major facet of the plan called for the creation of

an innovative program to address youth violence. In response, the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) developed and presented the

Youth Offender System (YOS) program to the Governor and to the Colorado General Assembly. The program was passed into law on September

13, 1993, and received its first commitments in March 1994.

YOS targets youthful offenders (14 to 18 years of age at time of offense)

who have been convicted as adults of a violent, weapons-related offense

(class 3 through class 6 felony) or who are designated as chronic youthful

offenders. As appropriate, the court suspends the adult sentence on condition that the offender complete a 2- to 6-year determinate YOS commitment. Throughout the sentence, the court retains jurisdiction and can

sentence the offender to adult CDOC or order probation if he or she does

not benefit from YOS. Additionally, CDOC retains authority to recommend to the court that an unmanageable or intractable youth be transferred by revocation to adult CDOC. Revocation results in the institution

of the suspended adult sentence, which is typically significantly longer

than the YOS sentence.

Goals and Objectives

The mission of YOS is to provide youthful offenders with a controlled and

regimented environment that affirms the dignity of one’s self and others,

promotes values of work and self-discipline, and develops useful skills

and abilities through an enriched, needs-based, phased program. The program also seeks to provide strict but supportive aftercare to prepare offenders for positive community reintegration.

YOS has developed the following objectives:

❑ Provide effective intervention for youth offenders who are not career

criminals now but would likely become career criminals or more serious offenders without intervention.
20

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Provide staff models and mentors who promote the development of

socially accepted behavior and attitudes.

❑ Create a daily regimen that occupies youth offenders in physical training, strict discipline, education, work, and meaningful social interaction while providing appropriate security and discipline.

❑ Develop an environment of positive peer support and influence that

promotes behavioral change.

❑ Provide diagnosis, treatment, and program services (including counseling;

substance abuse education and relapse prevention; academic, cognitive,

prevocational, and vocational education; and placement assistance) that

enable the offender to pursue a course of lawful and productive conduct

upon release from legal restraint.

❑ Teach self-discipline by providing clear consequences for behavior.

❑ Reinforce offenders’ use of cognitive behavioral strategies that change

criminal thinking and teach problem-solving skills that serve as alternatives to criminal activity.

❑ Enhance education, self-care, and parenting skills to improve life-role

functioning.

❑ Support offenders’ development of employment skills.

❑ Reduce offenders’ gang involvement and replace gang principles with

values accepted by the community.

❑ Reduce criminal recidivism.

❑ Reduce substance abuse among offenders.

❑ Enable offenders to develop and internalize positive behavioral norms.

❑ Increase offenders’ participation in services to establish and maintain

program gains.

❑ Give offenders a “second last chance” to learn and develop positive

self-concepts and the value of service to others.

Program Components

YOS is multifaceted, providing core programming to all offenders and additional individual options to meet offenders’ special needs. An intake, diagnostic, and orientation (IDO) phase is followed by three program phases.
21

Programs in Correctional Settings

Intake, Diagnostic, and Orientation Phase

Typically 1 month in duration, this phase sets the stage for participation

in YOS. The intake process establishes the foundation for assessing individual offender characteristics and developing an individual program

plan. The subsequent comprehensive diagnostic process, led by a multidisciplinary YOS team, results in an integrated and individualized program plan designed to maximize positive change.

Throughout the IDO phase, all youth, when not involved in orientation or

diagnostic activities, are subject to a highly structured regimen based on

the traditional military boot camp model. Emphasizing group discipline

and group incentives, this regimen establishes the attitudes and behaviors

needed to participate effectively in the positive peer culture and programming that characterize Phase I.

Phase I. This phase provides intensive residential programming in a secure facility for 8 months to 4 years and 8 months, depending on the determinate sentence. Phase I uses a functional unit approach within the context

of positive peer culture. Each unit (up to 16 residents) serves as a small

community in which incentives, negative consequences, and peer pressure

are used to discourage antisocial thinking and behavior and replace them

with prosocial behavior. Each resident participates in a core program,

which emphasizes academic education, cognitive restructuring, and

prevocational and vocational education. Each youth also participates in

supplementary programs tailored to his or her program plan. Phase I is

staffed by multidisciplinary teams, with each team member sharing in the

responsibilities of security, discipline, education, treatment, and behavior

modification. Staff are chosen for their ability to mentor, coach, train, and

counsel effectively within these domains.

Phase II. A 3-month transition program that supports the progress made

in Phase I, this phase establishes the basis for reintegration into the community in Phase III. This phase offers a diversity of program components,

including education, life skills, and prevocational training, and engages

resident in development of a Phase III plan that encompasses living arrangements, education, employment, community service, and other individual needs.

Phase III. A 3- to 9-month community reintegration program, this phase

gradually decreases supervision intensity while increasing positive program participation, progress toward defined objectives, and prosocial

community involvement.
22

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Infrastructures being established to measure outcomes of all phases of YOS

will serve a vital function in examining the program’s effectiveness. Data

will be collected on screening, assessment, diagnosis, program services,

reentry to the community, community followup, and 5-year followup.

Outcomes, which will be obtained from offender interviews and clinical

assessments, will include relapse into criminal behavior, gang membership, and drug and alcohol dependence; the provision of restitution to victims; and psychological, social, and physical impairment. Primary goals of

the YOS evaluation component are to:

❑ Determine the program’s effectiveness in reducing criminal behavior,

arrests, and commitments to CDOC.

❑ Examine the cost effectiveness of the program relative to the costs of

institutional commitment and community supervision.

❑ Assess offender progress over the course of YOS in skills development,

emotional functioning, and motivation.

❑ Evaluate the community adjustment of YOS offenders in employment,

involvement in treatment, and use of community services.

❑ Identify offender characteristics that predict positive outcomes during

and following YOS to determine whether program assessments and

interventions are provided as intended and according to curriculum

program manuals and other program provider guidelines.

❑ Examine changes in YOS over time.

Seeking to develop thorough and well-founded research and evaluation

approaches, YOS has established liaisons with agencies and organizations,

including local universities and other criminal justice agencies, that have

recognized experts in the field. In addition, the YOS evaluation program

plan includes a range of established procedures and instruments.

Implementation Problems and Successes

There have been numerous challenges for the many agencies and individuals who are stakeholders in YOS. While implementation problems have, in

large part, been similar to those experienced by other programs with nontraditional systems, they have been magnified in scope and intensity because the unique features of YOS extend beyond its immediate legislative,

judicial, and correctional environments. YOS has broken new ground nationally. Intensive education and communication have been used successfully to facilitate stakeholders’ understanding of the program’s mission,

goals, objectives, and methodologies; to ensure consistency with the program plan and legislative intent; and to secure and enhance staff skills.
23

Programs in Correctional Settings

In addition, intensive efforts have been required to maintain qualified and

experienced staff that meet the programmatic requirements of YOS. Position classifications suited to other employment settings, including the

adult CDOC, are not suited to YOS. Although efforts are under way to develop more appropriate classifications, time delays in bringing a full staff

on board have made it difficult to implement the entire YOS program.

Through patience and persistence, however, YOS has filled nearly all of its

staffing needs with dedicated individuals who are qualified to deliver the

program’s diverse program components.

The development of information collection, storage, analysis, and retrieval

infrastructures to support accountability, program evaluation, and other

vital monitoring functions has challenged limited staff resources. Traditional systems have been found to have limited utility within YOS, making

it necessary to modify existing systems or develop new ones. A number of

basic systems are currently in place and will provide a sound foundation

for future enhancements.

YOS requires the delivery of highly diversified program components, and

securing established curriculums of a level, scope, depth, and length suited

to the YOS population and environment initially posed problems. However, due to substantial investigatory efforts, virtually all major and most

supplementary program components have been implemented.

Finally, integration of the YOS program phases has presented challenges.

A comprehensive program spanning initial incarceration in a highly secure

and structured environment through community placement and supervision is central to the program’s success. Strong, positive liaisons spanning

program phases have been established and continue to facilitate effective

redirection.

Successes and Accomplishments

YOS is innovative in concept and in development. The program integrates

components and approaches that research and experience have demonstrated to be among the most promising in redirecting the lives of young

and violent offenders. By continually improving its effectiveness by developing quality assurance, process, and outcome evaluation components, the

program ensures that it is not only effective but dynamic. To date, the program has accomplished the following:

❑ In 1994, legislation modified the YOS sentencing structure, establishing

the program as a sentencing alternative for chronic youthful offenders

who meet specified criteria.

❑ YOS has attracted nationwide attention as a model program.

❑ Funding has been secured and contracts finalized to provide Phase I

housing and programming for all Phase I females and for males exceeding the 96-bed capacity of the current YOS facility. The project’s

new facility opened in 1997.
24

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ As of May 1997, the total YOS youth population stood at 272. Of those

youth, 228 were in Phase I, 15 were in Phase II, and 29 were in

Phase III.

❑ Drug and alcohol education and relapse prevention, cognitive restructuring, and postsecondary education programs have been developed,

with emphasis on vocational education and job-readiness preparation.

Prospects for Replication

By legislative mandate and program commitment, YOS is actively establishing the foundations for rigorous quality assurance, program evaluation, and research with the intent of identifying the extent to which YOS

supports the effective redirection of youthful offenders toward healthy,

productive behavior. The results of these efforts will be used to guide decisions about program replication and to facilitate replication by providing

clearer definitions of the YOS program and its components.

Contact Information

Noble Wallace

Director, Phase I

Youthful Offender System

10900 Smith Road

Denver, CO 80239–8006

Phone: 303–375–2900

Fax: 303–375–2909
25

Programs in Correctional Settings

Delaware:

Mentor Program, Inc.

Statement of the Problem

Nationally, a high proportion of women return to prison within their first

year of release. Female offenders state that they lack role models and have

more obstacles to overcome than men. Participants interviewed expressed

very low self-esteem and found no support system upon release. Less than

50 percent have their general equivalency diploma or high school diploma,

and most lack marketable skills.

Women stated that they had so much anger and pain that it was hard for

them to function from day to day. It was this pain and anger that drove

them to dependency on alcohol or other drugs, and to maintain their use of

alcohol or drugs they resorted to stealing and prostitution. Other women

were so involved in abusive relationships with men that if their partners

did not beat them, the women thought they did not love them. These

women believed they deserved this type of relationship because they had

experienced physical, mental, or sexual abuse as children.

Goals and Objectives

The goals of the Delaware Mentor Program (DMP), Inc., are to reduce,

through a self-awareness program, the number of women who return to

prison within their first year of release, develop a support system for their

transition into the community, and help female offenders compete in and

contribute to society.

The objectives of the program are to secure funding and office space, recruit a board of directors, secure 501(c)(3) status, develop a self-awareness

program, hire an executive director and a Phase I coordinator, recruit professional presenters from the community, recruit women to be mentors,

develop a postgraduate phase, and raise awareness through the news media, public appearances, and special events.

Program Components

A 19-member board of directors conducts the business affairs of the program and oversees finances. The board meets monthly to review accomplishments and develop goals for the future. All program participants are

volunteers. During preenrollment interviews, participants discuss why

they want to change and their willingness to do so. Guidelines for completion of the course are discussed, and participants are given control over
26

Bureau of Justice Assistance

their future choices. They understand that they are accountable for their

actions from this time forward. All mentors are selected from the community. They may be graduates of the program with the stipulation that they

have resided successfully in the community for a year. The program has

three components.

Phase I. A self-awareness program designed to allow female offenders to

discover who they are and understand how their anger and pain dictates

their behavior, Phase I consists of 48 to 53 2-hour workshops over 13

weeks. The workshops are offered in five categories: self-actualization, relapse prevention, relationships, preparation for employment, and educational opportunities. After Phase I is completed, many participants move

to work release or remain incarcerated while participating in the postgraduate phase.

Postgraduate Phase. Designed to help graduates of Phase I determine individual recovery paths, this phase offers participants the opportunity to understand and change patterns of behavior. The group meets weekly for 2 hours

and represents DMP in special events. Sessions are open to residents who

have graduated from Phase I until their release from prison. Because they are

considered role models for the entire prison population, participants’ behavior and willingness to work on personal issues are a top priority.

Education and Recruitment. Whenever possible, the executive director and

graduates of DMP who are in the community speak to organizations and participate in special events. The program is supported by the University of Delaware, Delaware Technical and Community College, and local corporations

and organizations. Members of these organizations serve as presenters, mentors, or board members, and all volunteer valuable time and services.

DMP expects graduates to change the way in which they interact in society.

The women get involved in support organizations such as Alcoholics Anonymous and women’s counseling groups, and they seek to increase their educational levels by obtaining a general equivalency diploma or high school

diploma or attending college. Instead of applying for minimum wage employment, graduates seek positions that offer career advancement.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Women in the program are tracked through the criminal justice system,

and data are updated once a year. Within the coming year, data will be released relating to graduates’ housing, education, and employment. Other

performance measures include the number of successful graduates helped

by the program, recidivism rates, and degree to which participants have

separated themselves from negative home environments after release.
27

Programs in Correctional Settings

Implementation Problems and Successes

DMP’s success has been supported through the efforts of the warden and

staff of Delors J. Baylor Women’s Correctional Institution (DJBWCI). An

important factor has been the program staff’s willingness to work as a

team with the corrections and judicial systems to help women offenders

become contributing members of society.

Successes and Accomplishments

The program’s accomplishments include:

❑ Becoming a 501(c)(3) organization with a full board of directors that

meets monthly.

❑ Obtaining four offices and a reception area at DJBWCI.

❑ Obtaining funding for an executive director and a Phase I coordinator.

❑ Completing 15 Phase I classes.

❑ Analyzing and presenting recidivism results.

❑ Securing a Federal grant and State contracts.

❑ Receiving positive reviews by media, including television and

newspapers.

❑ Receiving enthusiastic support from the DJBWCI warden, who has observed a noticeable change in demeanor among program participants.

❑ Increasing the ability of the program’s graduates to make choices to

improve themselves after release from prison by working on core

issues, to consider halfway houses instead of returning to destructive

past relationships, and to set goals to ensure a secure future.

❑ Creating and implementing a transition phase for women offenders

after release from prison.

❑ Receiving the Governor’s Outstanding Volunteer Award in 1996.

As of June 1996, 170 women had graduated from the Delaware Mentor

Program and left the institution for the community. In addition, 15 participants who did not complete the program left the program before that date.

First-year recidivism rates for graduates and all participants were 21.8 percent and 22.2 percent, respectively, compared with the 1989 baseline rate of

39.5 percent. Marsha Miller, a statistical consultant and past chair of the

program’s board of directors, follows all clients through the criminal justice system and provides updated statistics yearly.
28

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Prospects for Replication

DMP can be replicated in any female institution. Teamwork among the

corrections staff, the judicial system, and the community is essential to

provide the support incarcerated women need to heal their anger and pain

and become productive citizens.

Contact Information

Linda Forshey

Executive Director

Delaware Mentor Program, Inc.

P.O. Box 11524

Wilmington, DE 19850

Phone: 302–577–3004

Fax: 302–577–5849
29

Programs in Correctional Settings

Idaho:

Ada County Jail Substance

Abuse Program

Statement of the Problem

Crime in Idaho is connected to drug use and abuse. The most recent statistics indicate that 46 percent of arrests in Ada County are directly connected

to drug or alcohol use. Of all arrests involving drugs, 90 percent are for

methamphetamine (speed). In the Pacific Northwest, use of methamphetamine is on the rise. Within the past 2 years, use of the drug has risen 400

percent in the region.

Generally, inmates with a drug or alcohol problem are treated in State prisons, not in local or county jails. State prisons incarcerate inmates for longer

periods than do local jails, and they are typically better funded. Most prison

inmates have a record of several arrests and periods of incarceration prior to

serving State prison time, and most have served at least one stint as a county

jail inmate before becoming a State prison inmate. To stop the drug/crime

cycle before drug-abusing offenders reach this point in the criminal justice

system, training and education must be offered to them earlier in the process.

Goals and Objectives

If drug abuse among young first- or second-time offenders can be reduced,

the incidence of crime will decrease. Waiting until offenders are incarcerated in the State prison system makes achieving this outcome extremely

difficult. The mission of the Ada County Jail Substance Abuse Program is

to reduce the use of drugs and alcohol by offenders who are sentenced to

incarceration at the local level. Incarceration is an excellent time to provide

education and group treatment to offenders. The program provides shortterm treatment and, upon release, refers the offender to a community

agency for followup treatment.

Program Components

The 4-week coed program employs 1 full-time instructor to teach approximately 16 inmates, who are in class 30 hours each week. Male and female

inmates are housed separately. Participants are encouraged to study together and discuss their assignments with inmates from previous sessions.

The program’s administrative assistant screens applicants and assigns inmates to upcoming sessions. A psychologist, who serves as the program’s

administrative head, coordinates program activities and designs the sta-
30

Bureau of Justice Assistance

tistical evaluation. The program’s first-year budget was funded entirely

through a Federal grant. For the second year, one-third of the budget was

funded by inmates. Over the next 2 years, inmates assumed 100 percent of

program costs.

Inmates participate in the program either voluntarily or by court order. Inmates must be compliant, be sentenced to time in the county jail, be able to

live in a dormitory setting, and have ties to the local community so that

upon release they can be tracked and placed in aftercare. Inmates must

have no pending charges and no convictions for violent felonies. Offenders

are removed from the program if they proposition or are rude to one another.

Upon admission to the program, inmates sign contracts in which they

agree to comply with all jail rules and staff instructions, attend the program voluntarily, attend at least 1 year of followup outpatient alcohol and

drug treatment after release from jail, stay in contact with the program's

staff for 1 year following release from jail, involve their families in followup treatment and provide them with followup information, and live in the

community after release.

After a contract is signed, the inmate’s substance abuse is evaluated and a

treatment plan is created. Services offered by the program include individual and group counseling, 12-step programs, and classes on relaxation

and meditation, legal matters, education, health and nutrition, addiction,

financial issues, social and family dynamics, spirituality, communication

skills, sexuality and gender issues, relapse prevention, and vocational rehabilitation. Female inmates are treated in separate counseling sessions.

In aftercare, which is paid for by inmates, the program links offenders with

an aftercare program in the community. Jail staff help inmates make reservations in the aftercare program and perform followup interviews with inmates and their families after inmates have been released.

Ada County has also created a program in which offenders go to work,

live at home, and attend mandatory classes at the jail. Urine analyses are

conducted during their visit, and offenders may be held overnight in the

jail if their urine analysis reveals substance abuse.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The program was designed with the minimum expectation that graduates

will stop using illegal drugs or alcohol or will use them less frequently. It

is also expected that graduates will be arrested less frequently. Following

release from custody, inmates are contacted by the administrative assistant

every 3 months to ensure that they are attending classes and counseling
31

Programs in Correctional Settings

sessions according to their treatment plan. To measure the program’s impact, jail staff periodically check the local criminal database to determine if

program graduates have been arrested and, if so, whether the arrest is related to drug use.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The program’s most significant problem during implementation was lack

of classroom space due to overcrowding in the jail. The situation was remedied, however, when a break in the influx of inmates to the jail created extra space.

Successes and Accomplishments

Early in 1997, staff determined that they needed access to statewide criminal records to compare the program’s recidivism data with that of other

jail substance abuse programs. (For the study, recidivism was defined as

an arrest, within a 12-month period after release, that led to a conviction.)

Nationally, recidivism for offenders charged with drug-related crimes is 50

to 80 percent.

Prospects for Replication

The program’s prospects for replication are excellent. Its essential elements

are simple: an instructor, an administrative person, inmates, classroom

space, educational materials, and security staff.

In addition, these factors are critical:

❑ Inmate payments to help cover program costs.

❑ Linkage to aftercare following inmate’s release from jail.

❑ Program instructors with backgrounds that enable them to connect

with inmates.

❑ Selection of inmates appropriate for the program. Special consideration

should be given to inmates from the local community, enabling staff to

track them following release from custody.

❑ Involvement of the inmate’s family.

❑ Emotional and financial cooperation of inmates.

❑ Training for jail security staff.

❑ Support from local judges. The placement of an inmate on probation

following release from custody is highly correlated with the inmate’s

participation in programs after release.
32

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Contact Information

Lieutenant Michael Laky

Housing Section Commander

Ada County Sheriff’s Office

7200 Barrister Drive

Boise, ID 83704

Phone: 208–377–6609

Fax: 208–377–7316
33

Programs in Correctional Settings

Illinois:

Department of Corrections Sex

Offender Treatment Program

Statement of the Problem

Sexual victimization is becoming prevalent throughout the Nation. Studies

have revealed that at least one in five children experience at least one incident of sexual victimization. Rape is fast becoming one of society’s most

plaguing problems. Unfortunately, the frequency of sex crimes is widely

believed to be seriously underestimated. Victims of child molestation,

rape, incest, and other sexual crimes suffer immediate trauma and serious

long-range effects. To respond to this crisis, the State of Illinois found it

imperative to explore the application of recently developed therapies to

reduce criminal behavior that causes such suffering.

The goals of incarceration include both punishing the offender and protecting society. For sex offenders, punishment alone too often is unproductive and increases their pathology, leaving these individuals with fantasies

more deviant than those prior to incarceration. Treatment specialists have

discovered that such fantasies directly influence sex offenders’ actions

upon release, as demonstrated by their high rate of recidivism. Research

indicates that sex offenders who are denied treatment have between a 50-

and 85-percent chance of reoffending, but the odds can be radically reduced through intensive, broad-ranged therapy. Estimates provided by

current research indicate that graduates of sex offender treatment programs have only a 15-percent chance of reoffending. A Vermont study on

the cost effectiveness of sex offender treatment concluded that treatment

saves taxpayers money. For each offender, treatment programs cost onefifth of prosecuting and sentencing another sex crime. The Illinois program

will pay for itself if it prevents one in five offenders from reoffending.

However, the cost of victimization alone would seem to justify treatment.

In response to sexual victimization, the need to treat sex offenders, and the

available research, the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) implemented a comprehensive sex offender treatment program devised by a

committee of representatives of all operational divisions in the agency, including clinicians experienced in sex offender treatment. In January 1992,

with funding from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority,

IDOC established its first residential treatment unit for sex offenders and

began creating a pilot sex offender treatment program for parolees.
34

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Goals and Objectives

The primary mission of the IDOC Sex Offender Treatment Program is to

reduce, through treatment, the number of sexual offenses committed each

year and thereby the number of victims of sexual offenses. For the purposes of the program, sex offenders are those inmates committed under

the sexually dangerous persons law and those who have been criminally

convicted of a sexual offense but deemed mentally ill. The program addresses the needs of sex offenders through the following objectives:

❑ Offer programs on sexual orientation for a large population of sex

offenders.

❑ Identify inmates who need intensive, specialized attention.

❑ Provide intensive residential treatment that includes the elements determined by researchers and experts to be critical to the treatment of

sex offenders.

❑ Provide a monitoring system for offender compliance with treatment

upon release.

Program Components

Nonintensive Sex Offender Programming

Although technically not a component of the Sex Offender Treatment Program, nonintensive programming is critical to its success. Of the 26 adult

correctional facilities (maximum, medium, and minimum) that are currently part of the program, 24 offer sex offender orientation treatment or

educational/therapeutic groups, and all of the facilities offer a combination of 59 supportive treatment groups. The objectives of these programs

are to:

❑ Educate offenders on contemporary sex offender treatment.

❑ Break down offenders’ fears concerning treatment.

❑ Facilitate positive attitudes toward treatment.

❑ Dispel myths surrounding treatment.

❑ Motivate offenders to seek intensive treatment.

❑ Increase offender awareness of the impact on victims.

Initial Assessment

This component was developed to provide the program with a uniform and

systematic method of identifying and encouraging qualified inmates to invest

in their rehabilitation and recovery through intensive sex
35

Programs in Correctional Settings

offender treatment. To be accepted into the program, offenders are required

to submit an application and to be interviewed by a mental health professional. A sex offender data collection survey is completed on the applicant’s

offenses, victim history, background, and mental health history. From this information, an offender’s condition and motivation level can be determined.

Offenders must also complete a self-report on their behaviors.

If, based on the self-report and the mental health professional assessment,

an offender is chosen for the program, he or she must sign a contractual

agreement that spells out the program’s requirements.

Intensive Residential Treatment

Having agreed to the contract, offenders are sent to one of three intensive

residential treatment units currently available in IDOC. In this therapeutic

environment, therapists assist offenders through a phase-based system

that focuses on retraining arousal patterns, sex education, relapse prevention, and victim empathy. Throughout the phases a variety of recognized

treatment techniques are applied. For example, inmates develop disgust

for their deviant behavior through correct sensitization, satiation therapy,

and noxious odor aversion. After deviant sexual arousal patterns have

been reduced, misconceptions and irresponsible attitudes related to sexual

activity are dealt with in a group setting. Group psychotherapy techniques

are used because they are less costly and more effectively recognize and

deal with participants’ denials and evasions of responsibility. Because

most offenders lack social skills, the group is designed to be a laboratory

for learning responsible community living skills. Groups focus on victimization issues, relaxation techniques, learning to assert rights without being aggressive, getting a more realistic view of the world, sex education,

and covert conditioning of disgust for deviant sexual acts. Additional

treatment is provided through psychoeducational modules on a variety of

themes, modern psychophysiological assessment procedures, and individual support sessions as needed.

An offender’s progress from one phase to another is not necessarily based

on his or her ability to recite the information presented, but rather on the

offender’s conceptualization, assimilation, and application of the information in accordance with the program’s primary motto, “No More Victims.”

Graduation criteria include developing a high level of victim empathy,

identifying and recognizing one’s deviancy, identifying relapse conditions

and preventing relapse, understanding the concept of honesty with oneself

and others, and developing a plan for moving successfully through life.

Parole Monitoring

The final element of the program combines a strong parole component with

monitoring of ongoing outpatient treatment. Thus far, it has been successfully implemented in one region of the State. All sex offenders, whether or

not they complete intensive residential treatment, are given the opportunity
36

Bureau of Justice Assistance

to continue their treatment during parole. A case manager meets with an interested offender 6 months before release to determine treatment needs. After the offender is released, the case manager provides referrals and monitors

(with the assistance of the parole agent) the offender’s compliance with treatment objectives.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Evaluations of the program’s performance are based on the following

measures:

❑ The number of inmates enrolled in the program.

❑ The number of inmates who complete the program.

❑ The recidivism rate of those who complete the program.

In 1993 and 1994, two extensive annual evaluations of the program were

conducted. The results of external audit development are as follows:

❑ 1995—Conducted a survey/program audit of Adult Division out patient care counseling and support group services within the 26 adult

facilities.

❑ 1996—The survey/program audit was expanded to the Community

Services and Juvenile Divisions.

❑ 1995 to Present—Documentation was added to the survey/program

plan that monitors monthly the racial makeup of the intensive program

participants.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Training. Mental health professionals, facility counselors, and Pre-Start

(parolee) agents at designated facilities received training from well-known

clinicians throughout the Nation, and with the opening of each inpatient

program, the importance of training became apparent. In the training,

mental health professionals expressed legitimate concerns about interacting with and treating sex offenders in a therapeutic environment, and

some expressed feelings of disgust and personal bias against the target

population. Many sought assistance on performing in a professional manner, given these conditions. A psychoeducational manual was developed

and distributed to all mental health professionals and support staff. This

manual helped mental health administrators and counselors better prepare

their facilities for treating sex offenders.
37

Programs in Correctional Settings

Clinician Relationships. Administrators of the intensive residential programs found that relationships between offenders and sex orientation

treatment providers were much stronger than expected. They, therefore,

engaged in intense recruitment, stressing to both offenders and clinicians

that nonresidential treatment could only go so far and that the residential

program was in the best interest of the offender. By educating the parties

about the exact nature of the program and encouraging participation, administrators were able to resolve this initial problem.

Waiting Lists. Overcrowding in the facilities and the high percentage of

sex offenders seeking treatment made waiting lists for the program inevitable. However, program administrators discovered that by making offenders more accountable for their actions, double celling was possible,

thereby reducing waiting lists. Those still remaining on the waiting list

were provided continuing sex orientation programming.

Racial Imbalance. Early on, a significant racial imbalance in program

participation (approximately 75 percent white and 25 percent AfricanAmerican) was noted. A number of factors creating this imbalance were

cited, including African-Americans’ traditionally negative attitudes toward government-sponsored treatment programs. In response, referral

processes were implemented, and sex orientation programs worked to

address some of the issues causing the imbalance.

Voluntary Programming. At present, all of this initiative’s group and

intensive sex offender treatment programs are voluntary. However,

policymakers and clinicians from outside the facility are calling for the

program to be made mandatory. Currently, the only incentive to join the

program is each offender’s desire to receive treatment. Most program participants are honestly asking for help and are highly motivated to change.

Administrators indicate that requiring the program for all sex offenders

would destroy its therapeutic and productive atmosphere, creating an environment in which an undercurrent of rebellion and disruption, as well as

significant breaches of confidence, would exist. To dissuade this call for

mandatory participation, administrators are learning that these problems

will make successful implementation of a sex offender program difficult.

Community Reaction. Community reaction, frequently an issue of concern

when correctional programs strive to “treat” offenders, has not been a

problem for this program. The program has avoided negative community

reaction by maintaining a low but accountable profile. Interviews are given

to provide information to a curious, skeptical, and concerned public.
38

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Successes and Accomplishments

Since its implementation in 1992, the Sex Offender Treatment Program has

accomplished the following:

❑ Approximately 2,200 sex offenders have participated.

❑ Enrollment in intensive residential treatment has increased from 150 to

250 inmates.

❑ The program has increasingly utilized risk assessment scales to measure participants’ success.

❑ Six regional training/certification symposiums will be held in February

1998. Invited participants include community-based providers of

treatment to sex offenders under the custody/control of IDOC; IDOC

mental health professionals who treat sex offenders at IDOC adult and

juvenile facilities and IDOC community-based sex offender treatment

programs; and IDOC staff responsible for the direct supervision of sex

offenders.

Prospects for Replication

Since the pilot program began in 1992, the Sex Offender Treatment Program has been duplicated at two other Illinois facilities, and IDOC is exploring ways to expand the program. Factors to be considered regarding

the program’s replication include:

❑ Training that reduces judgmental or biased treatment of sex offenders.

❑ Education throughout the criminal justice system about the nature of

the program.

❑ Voluntary participation.

Contact Information

Linda Dillon

Superintendent Training Academy

Illinois Department of Corrections

1301 Concordia Court

P.O. Box 9277

Springfield, IL 62794–9277

Phone: 217–522–2666, ext. 6605

Fax: 217–522–2666, ext. 6602
39

Programs in Correctional Settings

Iowa:

Centralized Substance Abuse

Assessment Project—Iowa

Medical and Classification

Center

Statement of the Problem

Many offenders entering the prison system have drug or alcohol problems.

Although all of Iowa’s correctional facilities provide some level of substance abuse treatment, no actual substance abuse assessments were made

in the past. Because of this, recommendations for treatment were not always made in a consistent manner. Certain programs had long waiting

lists, whereas others were not used to capacity. Inmates with very different

treatment needs were often referred to the same program.

In 1993–94, a research and demonstration project undertaken by the Iowa

Department of Corrections (DOC); the Iowa Department of Public Health,

Division of Substance Abuse and Health Promotion (IDSA) and Division of

Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP); and the Mid-Eastern Council on Chemical Abuse (MECCA) led to the establishment of a centralized

substance abuse assessment unit at the Iowa Medical and Classification

Center (IMCC). Iowa employs a centralized assessment model in determining placement and treatment needs of inmates entering the prison system.

Upon arrival at IMCC, inmates undergo medical, educational, and psychological testing as well as a reception interview. The information gathered is

used to determine the inmates’ appropriate risk level and appropriate

treatment modalities.

Goals and Objectives

The three primary goals of the centralized assessment project are to assist

in decreasing criminal recidivism and substance abuse; expedite inmates’

movement through the institutional system, allowing the most advantageous use of treatment resources; and evaluate the effectiveness of referrals made by the assessment unit.

Objectives of the project include:

❑ Assessing all inmates entering IMCC with a 10-year or less sentence.

❑ Referring inmates to the appropriate level of substance abuse

treatment.
40

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Updating each inmate’s treatment summary record on the DOC automated information system to enable institutional classification teams

and the parole board to make appropriate decisions.

❑ Providing training for institutional treatment staff on how to use the

assessment instrument.

❑ Maintaining communication to ensure that the assessment unit is

making appropriate clinical and placement decisions.

❑ Establishing a database to collect demographic information and outcome effectiveness information.

❑ Implementing the program’s database.

❑ Producing data reports summarizing treatment needs, referrals, and

types of treatment recommended.

❑ Assisting DOC in determining future types of treatment programming.

Both institutional and community treatment providers review data reports

to determine the need for treatment revision or development.

Program Components

MECCA developed its assessment tool using the criteria contained in the

IDSA’s standardized assessment form, but revised it to reflect the characteristics of both the prison population and the treatment available in the

institutions. To understand treatment needs and resources, MECCA and

IMCC staff visited all treatment programs in Iowa correctional facilities.

These visits helped to open lines of communication between assessment

staff and treatment staff. Close supervision of the assessment process has

ensured consistent treatment recommendations.

The key elements of the project are reception, evaluation, classification,

and placement. During the reception period, inmates are interviewed by

the IMCC assessment staff, who compile substance abuse evaluations according to standards set forth by IDSA. These evaluations form the basis

for recommending the most appropriate treatment for inmates during their

time in the institution and upon release. Treatment recommendations are

considered by the classification manager in light of the risk posed by the

inmate and all information from the inmate’s psychological and educational profiles. The inmate is then placed in the most appropriate institution for the risk and needs indicated. In the first year of the project, the

substance abuse assessment frequently resulted in placement decisions for

inmates that differed from those of past years.

Each institution has a classification team. Upon arrival, and then periodically throughout incarceration in the institution, each inmate’s case is reviewed by the classification team to determine appropriate physical and
41

Programs in Correctional Settings

programming placements. Specific recommendations for substance abuse

treatment have been integrated into each team’s decisionmaking process.

Iowa’s State parole board is an autonomous entity. No other department or

office has jurisdiction over or influence on the parole of inmates. The parole board receives all inmate information through its computer system.

The treatment summary section of this system contains the recommendations from the assessment unit. The parole board can then expedite the review of inmates who are placed in treatment. The parole board has been

very supportive of the project and has helped DOC determine the predicted parole review dates of inmates in the target population, helping

classification staff prioritize the placement of inmates into limited treatment resources.

Inmates who are released from prison to community-based correctional

(CBC) programs such as work release or parole are often expected to be involved in some level of substance abuse treatment. The centralized substance abuse assessment is forwarded to the CBC program for use by

community-based substance abuse treatment providers.

For the past 5 years, DOC has submitted data indicators to the Governor’s

Alliance on Substance Abuse (GASA) regarding the nature of substance

abuse needs in the inmate population. Without specific substance abuse

assessment, these indicators are at best approximations. Aside from reporting indicators, data on offender treatment needs can suggest how treatment resources should be allocated and how to match offenders to

treatment approaches that are likely to be effective. The creation of a database of treatment records, maintained within Federal confidentiality

guidelines, is essential to the success of the program. At present, most data

collection and reporting is accomplished through manual compilation

supplemented by an existing, limited database system; however, the program is in the process of becoming automated.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The program measures its performance using these indicators:

❑ Equal utilization of all treatment programs and facilities.

❑ The length of the waiting lists for admission into treatment programs.

❑ The number of individuals assessed.

❑ The level of interagency cooperation between MECCA and DOC staff.

❑ Demographic information.

❑ Type of treatment recommendations.
42

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Results reported in the project’s annual report.

❑ Identification of drug abuse trends.

❑ Collection of data that identify use patterns, relapse issues, and treatment needs.

Implementation Problems and Successes

As with any new project, the assessment unit had to overcome obstacles

during the project’s implementation. Startup of the project was delayed by

contract negotiations, hindering the ability of the assessment unit to meet

its first-year goal of 1,500 assessments. The problem was resolved when

GASA approved an increase in the assessment staff for the last 3 months of

the fiscal year.

When the first evaluations began arriving at the institutions for review by

the classification teams and treatment staff, there were cases in which the

institutional staff disagreed with the recommendations of the assessment

team. This issue was resolved by establishing better communication between institutional and assessment staff. Institutions are expected to follow

the MECCA recommendation unless they have a significant reason to suggest an alternative. If another suggestion is made, MECCA staff are consulted. If clinical agreement cannot be reached, the IMCC treatment

director and the DOC substance abuse coordinator are consulted to make

the final decision. To prevent disagreements, MECCA staff have been familiarized with prison treatment programs so that they are better versed in

the services available. Since the implementation of these two actions, few

assessment recommendations have been disputed.

Another coordination problem, which has always been difficult to solve

for the institutions, is the need to predict how much of the inmate’s sentence will be served before the parole board will review his or her case.

This information is required to ensure that inmates are treated as close as

possible to the time of release, increasing treatment efficacy and establishing community aftercare resources. The problem has been resolved somewhat through planning meetings with the coordinator, treatment director,

and parole board. The board has given DOC a list of sentence types and

likely sentence lengths. The greatest variable to this planning is inmate behavior, but a starting point now exists for determining when it is appropriate to place an inmate in a treatment program.

Successes and Accomplishments

Much of the project’s success can be credited to the positive and supportive working relationship between MECCA and DOC. In general, inmates

have cooperated with the evaluation project. Recommendations have been

based on consistent criteria and have been well received and followed by

DOC staff. The initial project size has doubled, providing the opportunity
43

Programs in Correctional Settings

for an increasing number of inmates to participate in substance abuse assessment. Waiting lists in treatment programs have decreased, and formerly underutilized programs are now operating at capacity. Discussions

are under way on how to fill gaps in treatment provision, including relapse prevention services and residential treatment at minimum security

institutions. The project has provided a clear picture of the drastic increase

in methamphetamine use in the State and identified unique problems accompanying the increase. Although there is a desire to increase data collection capabilities, the current system has provided valuable and relevant

information, and this information has been used at a variety of programming and policymaking levels. To enhance data collection, this project has

been awarded an additional GASA grant for the purchase of personal computers and software.

More than 1,300 substance abuse assessments were provided by MECCA

during the project’s first year. In FY 1996, 2,800 assessments were conducted. In FY 1997, the number increased to 3,500.

Prospects for Replication

The primary factor in the Centralized Substance Abuse Assessment

Project’s success was the cooperation of multiple systems and disciplines.

If this level of cooperation can be duplicated, projects of this type in other

jurisdictions should be able to achieve similar results. In Iowa, substance

abuse assessment was integrated into DOC’s existing structure of centralized classification, making the assessment process compatible with the environment in which it is used. Finally, the willingness of all participants to

learn from one another, to be flexible, and to be innovative has ensured a

comprehensive and consistent approach to treatment provision.

Contact Information

Lowell Brandt Marie Havel

Treatment Director Clinical Supervisor

Iowa Medical and Mid-Eastern Council on

 Classification Center Chemical Abuse

P.O. Box A P.O. Box A

Oakdale, IA 52319 Oakdale, IA 52319

Phone: 319–626–4473 Phone: 319–626–2391

Fax: 319–626–6641 Fax: 319–626–6641
45

Programs in Correctional Settings

Iowa:

Statewide Substance Abuse

Program Coordination in

Corrections

Statement of the Problem

Substance abuse in the Iowa correctional system is a widespread and complex problem at every level of the system. The State’s community-based

corrections (CBC) and institutionalized corrections populations are saturated with substance abusers—70 to 80 percent of CBC clients use drugs,

as do 80 to 85 percent of prison inmates. These populations are growing

quickly and are too large for effective correctional management, let alone

management of complicating factors such as substance abuse. Iowa correctional institutions currently oversee nearly 6,000 inmates in space designed

for 3,600. Iowa’s prison population has grown 12 percent annually for the

past 3 years, and resources for providing substance abuse treatment are extremely limited.

An adversarial relationship exists between the State’s CBC and communitybased substance abuse treatment providers, even though community treatment programs receive 65 percent of their referrals from CBC. Communitybased treatment providers have not responded to requests for proposals to

establish substance abuse treatment programs in prison settings.

At the time this report was written, the State of Iowa had contracted with

an outside organization to establish managed care for all substance abuse

services in the public sector. Conventional managed care strategies often

exclude certain clients in prison populations from admission or readmission to needed services. The criteria for exclusion often fall disproportionally on the CBC population.

Most significantly, dealing effectively with substance abuse among offenders requires dealing with the complexities of the criminal mind—its duality (substance abuse and criminal/antisocial personality characteristics),

resistance to treatment, and chronic, long-term dependence on numerous

substances. In Iowa, virtually all substance abuse programs for offenders

were designed for noncriminal clientele. Few treatment resources existed

for substance-abusing offenders.

These problems limit:

❑ The availability of treatment.

❑ Staff tolerance of criminal-addict behavior, resulting in the early discharge of many clients who have finally accessed treatment.
46

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Communication and coordination between CBC, institutions, and

community treatment providers.

❑ The efforts of the criminal justice system and community substance

abuse programs to rehabilitate mutual clients.

Goals and Objectives

The main goal of the Iowa Department of Corrections Substance Abuse

Program Coordinator is to work with wardens, CBC district directors, the

Department of Public Health’s Division of Substance Abuse and its managed care contractor, community-based substance abuse agencies, the

Treatment Alternatives to Street Crimes (TASC) program, and the Iowa

Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation. More specifically, the program is designed to:

❑ Evaluate and define the extent and nature of the substance abuse problem among offenders.

❑ Establish a discriminating assessment process that matches chemically

involved offenders to the most effective treatment.

❑ Develop treatment approaches that are more likely to have an impact

on resistant, extrinsically motivated clients.

❑ Work with the managed care contractor to advocate that criminal

justice clients be admitted to and retained in treatment and to promote

that the contractor use treatment modalities and levels of care that are

effective for this population.

❑ Identify new and existing modalities of treatment that will offer several

tiers of treatment at varying levels of intensity within the criminal justice system.

❑ Ensure that qualified individuals operate substance abuse programs.

❑ Identify and pursue additional funding while maintaining present

resources.

❑ Coordinate the communication network among institutions/CBC, the

Iowa Division of Substance Abuse, and public/private community

treatment agencies.

Program Components

The program is designed to coordinate available interventions as well as develop new interventions to meet the needs of offenders with substance abuse

problems. The program seeks to reduce the likelihood that offenders will continue criminal behavior after their release from the criminal justice system.
47

Programs in Correctional Settings

The program is administered by a coordinator within the Administration

Division of the Department of Corrections. His duties include working

closely with all Iowa State correctional institutions, the eight CBC districts,

all TASC programs, the Governor’s Substance Abuse Prevention and Education Council, the Drug and Violent Crime Commission, the statewide and

eight local corrections/substance abuse task forces, the Division of Substance Abuse in the Iowa Department of Public Health, the Iowa Board of

Substance Abuse Certification, the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment

and the Criminal Justice Branch in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, community-based substance abuse treatment agencies, and

the Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The program’s expected results include:

❑ Networking the eight TASC programs statewide.

❑ Establishing a licensed substance abuse treatment program in each of

the State’s eight correctional institutions.

❑ Improving communication and coordination between CBC and community substance abuse staff and reducing service duplication.

❑ Implementing new approaches to substance abuse treatment in correctional programs.

❑ Improving the qualifications of counselors currently working in correctional treatment programs to serve as substance abuse counselors.

❑ Reducing waiting lists for substance abuse treatment.

❑ Realizing cost benefits for all parties involved.

❑ Responding to requests for proposals for funding to facilitate these

goals.

The overall expectation was that the treatment system for criminal justice

clients would improve; gaps in programming would close; adversarial

staff of other programs would work together; and these programs would

better accomplish their missions.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The biggest obstacle to program implementation dealt with conflicts between community corrections and community substance abuse staff over

fundamental treatment issues: the effectiveness of substance abuse treatment for offenders; whether offenders’ paramount problem was mental
48

Bureau of Justice Assistance

illness, behavioral maladaptation, criminality, immorality, or a primary

disease; where and by whom the offender would be most effectively

treated; and how resources should be distributed. As a result, the groups’

common purpose was overlooked and treatment in the State’s prisons suffered. The conflicts led to the formation of a task force through which the

program coordinator, with the Director of the State Division of Substance

Abuse, established a plan of action to resolve disputes between community

corrections and substance abuse staff.

Adding to the difficulties, shortly after implementation, State budget cuts

and layoffs reduced the size and number of treatment programs in State

prisons, lowered staff morale, and reduced the operating budgets of programs not specifically targeted by the cuts. During the coordinator’s first 9

months on the job, funding and staffing levels in prison treatment programs dropped dramatically. However, none of the treatment programs

closed, and all of the State’s original programs eventually expanded beyond their initial capacity. At the time of program implementation, 4 of the

licensed programs were funded at 75 percent of capacity through grants.

However, through the lobbying efforts of the coordinator and the programs’ good reputation, all were funded by State appropriations when

their grants expired.

The State personnel system, which handles all State employees, further

complicated implementation. Although substance abuse professionals are

commonly considered to be clinical staff with specific education and training needs, the personnel department felt that these requirements were unnecessary, resulting in a severely deficient applicant pool from which the

program was required to interview and hire. Official protests did not improve the situation, but merely delayed filling positions by 6 months.

Institutions anxious to fill vacancies often rushed to hire unqualified individuals. Furthermore, the collective bargaining agreement in effect for employees at the institutions prohibited the coordinator from changing

minimum qualifications listed for substance abuse professionals. In response, the coordinator enlisted the support of the Governor’s Alliance on

Substance Abuse and the Director of the State Division of Substance Abuse

to encourage the Iowa Department of Personnel to establish a new “advanced “ substance abuse professional position that would apply only to

corrections institutions and require applicants to be certified by the Iowa

Board of Substance Abuse.

The current challenge to the program is managed care. Iowa is in the process

of moving to private managed care for all publicly funded substance abuse

treatment. Concerns over the use of a managed care system revolve around

three issues: Will resistant and unmotivated clients be able to access treatment? Will people with a history of multiple treatment experiences be able to

access treatment? Will there ultimately be a cost shift from publicly funded

community-based treatment to jail- and prison-based treatment?
49

Programs in Correctional Settings

Successes and Accomplishments

The program has achieved numerous advances in substance abuse treatment for offenders in Iowa. Although these advances were facilitated by

the coordinator, they are largely due to the efforts and cooperation of the

key agencies involved.

Savings. The time offenders spent on waiting lists for substance abuse

treatment dropped from 6 months to 1 week, and the centralized coordination of the program resulted in significant financial savings for the system.

Both aspects made the system more user friendly for offenders.

The 5-Year Plan. The coordinator created a publication, The Role of Substance Abuse Treatment in Corrections, that discusses the duality of criminality and the disease of addiction, and how they work together in the

chemically addicted criminal. The document proposes that the initial

course of action for the correctional system must be to establish a seamless

continuum of intervention for offenders.

The Joint Business Plan. The Department of Corrections and the Division

of Substance Abuse developed a business plan to resolve numerous shared

issues and needs. The majority of the goals listed in the business plan were

accomplished.

Centralized Assessment. The first step in achieving a continuum of intervention in the Iowa prison system was establishing a centralized assessment process at the reception center. With this new process, the classification manager has information on the substance abuse treatment needs of

inmates before they are classified and assigned to an institution. Inmates

can be matched to the most appropriate treatment based on their history,

risk level, and so on. Future funding requests for centralized assessment

has been built into the State’s budget request process.

Institutional Treatment. Four prison-based treatment programs existed

when the coordinator program was implemented. There are now seven licensed treatment programs—one at each of the State’s general population

institutions. These programs include a variety of approaches to treatment

as well as varying levels of intensity. Six of the programs were initiated

through grant funding. Through the lobbying efforts of the coordinator, all

seven programs are now funded by State appropriations.

Treatment Alternatives to Street Crimes Program. When the coordinator

program began, the TASC program had been piloted in three of the State’s

eight judicial districts. TASC has since expanded into a $1.2 million statewide program using grants the coordinator helped to secure and became

the largest substance abuse pilot project ever approved for funding by the

Iowa legislature.
50

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Coordination is a key element of the TASC program. Each judicial district

is autonomous, with its own director and board of directors. The coordinator established a TASC accreditation process through which resource utilization, productivity, and program outcome are evaluated every 2 years.

Because the Department of Corrections controls the funding for TASC, the

individual programs must comply with accreditation standards to continue operating. The coordinator holds quarterly meetings with TASC

supervisors and annual or biannual meetings with all TASC staff. The program has been well received by the State’s justice and substance abuse

treatment systems.

Violator Program. Two institutions in Iowa house male and female violators of probation/parole and work-release program rules. The coordinator

was asked to design and implement a culturally sensitive program, known

as the Violator Program, to serve these institutions. The program, which

provides offenders a 60-day residential stay followed by a 5- to 8-month

community-based program, combines substance abuse relapse treatment

with cognitive skills programming. At the 30-bed institution for women,

the program includes the core subjects described above as well as a number of services specific to women. The 75-bed men’s facility also offers

services that are gender specific. The Violator Aftercare Program is the

community-based portion of the effort, providing close community monitoring and weekly group sessions. The sessions are offered for 20 weeks,

but can be extended on an individual basis. A 4-year, grant-funded evaluation by the Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation has recently been completed. Results are not yet available.

Counselor Training Program. When the coordinator program began, a

number of counselors working in Iowa’s correctional substance abuse

treatment programs were not sufficiently qualified for their positions. Personnel issues and the policy of promoting correctional officers to correctional counselors had produced these staffing inadequacies. To address the

training needs of staff members, the coordinator implemented a program

to prepare staff for Correctional Substance Abuse Counselor Certification

(IBSAC). The program offers 120 of the 130 hours required for certification,

forcing staff members to obtain some training from outside sources. Many

of the 30 counselors who participated in the program received counselor

certification.

Prospects for Replication

The prospects for replicating this program are excellent. Every State

has key agencies similar to those in this project, and prior interagency

cooperation is not a prerequisite. No precedent for such cooperation existed in Iowa before this program was implemented. The program’s approach is a relatively inexpensive way to leverage additional resources for

correctional substance abuse and to maximize resources already in place.

Support from corrections personnel, administrators, and an advisory
51

Programs in Correctional Settings

group to help establish priorities for substance abuse intervention development will enhance the program’s success. The coordinator should have extensive experience in the substance abuse intervention field, negotiating

skills and the ability to be both diplomatic and assertive, strong writing

skills and experience applying for grants, and good training skills.

Contact Information

Darlene Baugh

Community Corrections Service Representative

Iowa Department of Corrections

523 East 12th Street, Capitol Annex

Des Moines, IA 50319

Phone: 515–281–4811

Fax: 515–281–4062
53

Programs in Correctional Settings

Kansas:

Chemical Dependency

Correctional Counseling

Program

Statement of the Problem

The four northeastern Kansas counties—Brown, Doniphan, Jackson, and

Nemaha—are typical of rural counties. Their population totals 41,233

people. The region’s predominant industry is agriculture. Personal and

family incomes are lower than national and State averages, as are new

housing starts and land values.

A number of risk factors in these counties have an impact on crime and

substance abuse. The Chemical Dependency Correctional Counseling Program was developed to address these risk factors and to serve as a protective factor for communities in this region.

The risk factors identified by the program are based on studies that compared empirical field data for this area of Kansas with data for the entire

State. The field data present a picture of an area in great need of protective

factors. The risk factors are:

❑ A higher than average number of families receiving Aid to Families

With Dependent Children payments.

❑ A higher than average juvenile arrest rate.

❑ A higher than average number of persons receiving general assistance

welfare payments.

❑ A dramatic rise in local crime rates over the past 10 years.

❑ A higher than average rate of disorderly conduct cases.

❑ A higher than average rate of driving under the influence, vandalism,

and drug arrests.

❑ A higher than average rate of unemployment.

❑ A higher than average rate of renter-occupied housing units.

❑ A higher than average rate of population mobility.

❑ A higher than average rate of persons reporting a family history of

alcohol or other drug abuse.
54

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ A higher than average rate of children reporting that someone in their

household uses illegal drugs.

❑ A higher than average rate of school absenteeism and dropouts (in one

of the four counties).

Before this program was implemented, chemical dependency counseling

services were provided to inmates of local jails on a crisis basis. Law enforcement and mental health professionals, however, wanted more intensive services for inmates. The sheriff of Brown County and the chief

executive officer of the KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center, Inc.,

worked together to secure a grant that funded the Chemical Dependency

Correctional Counseling Program. Sheriffs from the other three counties

collaborated on developing the program.

Goals and Objectives

The main goal of the program is to provide chemical dependency recovery

counseling to inmates residing in Brown, Doniphan, Jackson, and Nemaha

County jail facilities. A secondary goal is to provide consultation and training to law enforcement, dispatch, and jail personnel concerning the inmates’ behavioral health. Although there are no quantified data for the

number of consultations and in-services provided to these personnel during the program’s first year, the certified chemical dependency counselor

formally and informally carried out these duties every week.

Program Components

The program’s two components create a strong link between mental health

services and law enforcement and corrections agencies in the area. One

component is the KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center, Inc., a licensed, nonprofit mental health and chemical dependency center serving

the four counties. The other is the chemical dependency counseling program, which employs one full-time chemical dependency counselor who

travels to the four county jails weekly, providing counseling to inmates

and consultations to law enforcement staff. Approximately 10 to 15 percent

of the counselor’s time is spent with jail staff. The counselor is at each institution on specific days. If a crisis occurs at any of the institutions, he or she

has the flexibility to rearrange his or her schedule to respond. In addition,

a therapist from the KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center is on call

7 days a week, 24 hours a day.

Inmates are referred to the program by the head jailer, law enforcement officers, the sheriff, the client’s attorney, family members, or self-referral. On

average, inmates stay in the program for 14 sessions. Inmates are treated

by KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center staff and are afforded the

same services as mental health clients in the community. All services are
55

Programs in Correctional Settings

paid for by the county. After inmates are released from jail, however, they

are responsible for the fees. When appropriate, the counselor treats family

members or refers them to the KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center for service.

When an inmate is discharged from the program, the chemical dependency counselor completes a Treatment Success Measure survey describing the client’s achievements in the program. The survey’s criteria are

different for each of the four types of clients served by the program: chemically addicted, psychologically dependent, codependent, and adult and

minor children of alcoholics and drug abusers.

To successfully complete treatment, a chemically addicted client must

meet three of the following four criteria:

❑ Reports abstinence from chemicals during treatment period.

❑ Reports attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous or similar meetings

during treatment period.

❑ Is able to discuss the disease of addiction and its concepts.

❑ Reports satisfactory achievement of other counseling goals.

A psychologically dependent client must meet four of the following six

criteria:

❑ Can discuss his or her chemical use and the degree to which that use is

interfering in various aspects of his or her life.

❑ Can identify self-defeating behaviors and express ways to reduce them.

❑ Reports abstinence from chemicals during the treatment period.

❑ Can discuss the disease of chemical abuse and its concepts.

❑ Reports attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous or similar meetings as

needed during treatment.

❑ Reports satisfactory achievement of other counseling goals.

A codependent client must meet four of the following six criteria:

❑ Can discuss the disease of addiction or abuse and its concepts.

❑ Can discuss the ways in which another person’s chemical abuse or

addiction has affected his or her life.

❑ Can identify self-defeating behaviors and express ways to reduce them.

❑ Reports making plans for self-improvement.
56

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Reports using self-help groups as needed or as available during

treatment.

❑ Reports satisfactory achievement of other counseling goals.

An adult or minor child of an alcoholic or drug abuser must meet three of

the following nine criteria:

❑ Reports decreased fear or anger.

❑ Reports increased self-esteem.

❑ Understands the effect of chemicals on family or self.

❑ Displays increased self-expression.

❑ Can evaluate his or her addiction or dependency.

❑ Displays an increased level of trust.

❑ Understands his or her feelings.

❑ Knows how to meet his or her own needs.

❑ Can identify his or her addiction or dependency.

Successful completion was defined as the inmate’s level of cooperation and

willingness to engage the counselor during sessions. It does not imply continued sobriety.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The goal for the program’s first-year completion rate was 60 percent, and

this goal was exceeded. Completion rates in the program’s second and

third years were 97 and 89.5 percent, respectively. Benefits to inmates, law

enforcement personnel, and the mental health center are expected to continue. To measure the program’s performance, a survey instrument was

developed that studied the program’s impact in a variety of areas, including recidivism rates of treated inmates versus those of untreated inmates.

Implementation Problems and Successes

A source of revenue from the program’s counseling activities was overlooked during the first year of operation. The four local county jails house

contract prisoners from counties outside the mental health center’s catchment area, and an opportunity to bill these counties for counseling services

was missed. The billings are estimated to be worth only $5,000 annually,

but this sum would meet a large portion of the mental health center’s required matching funds.
57

Programs in Correctional Settings

Successes and Accomplishments

The mental health center directly attributes the following results to the

program:

❑ The mental health center receives fewer crisis calls from jails.

❑ Jail personnel perceive a partnership with the counselor and feel more

comfortable with prisoners who have behavioral health problems.

❑ Inmates are less agitated by pent-up personal problems, and they perceive a link to the outside.

❑ Jail personnel distinguish between real and manufactured inmate

mental health crises.

❑ The mental health center’s value to the counties has increased.

❑ Contacts between law enforcement and mental health center personnel

concerning matters such as civil commitments and suicide calls have

become more positive.

During its first year, the program served 54 individuals. Of these clients,

52 were male and 2 were female; 36 were white, 12 were Native American,

and 6 were African-American. Clients ranged in age from 19 to 74 years;

the average age was 32 years. Inmates’ rate of successful completion while

incarcerated was 38.4 percent. This figure increases if the completion rate

includes inmates who continue treatment after release to the community.

From July 1994 to June 1995, 65 individuals participated in the program,

with a high percentage continuing treatment after incarceration. From July

1995 to June 1996, 79 participated, and from July 1996 to June 1997, 61 did

so. Prior to this project, the region lacked a formal means to arrange

postincarceration treatment.

Prospects for Replication

Replication of the program is relatively simple. Financing, however, will

be a challenge for each local area. The program is financed through Federal, State, and local funds, a combination that should be sought by other

jurisdictions attempting replication. As with most new programs, obtaining matching funds is the key, and billing other counties for inmates from

areas outside the program’s catchment area will help meet this match.
58

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Contact Information

Bill D. Persinger, Jr.

Chief Executive Officer

KANZA Mental Health and Guidance Center, Inc.

P.O. Box 319

909 South Second Street

Hiawatha, KS 66434

Phone: 913–742–7113

Fax: 913–742–3085
59

Programs in Correctional Settings

Kentucky:

Integrated Programming for

Female Offenders

Statement of the Problem

Dismas Charities in Owensboro, Kentucky, is a 100-bed private community center and prison for female offenders. Results of informal studies of

the client population at Dismas Charities are startling. Residents of the

prison come from violent, abusive homes that lack structure, appropriate

guidance, and a nurturing environment. The majority of women at the facility have been abused by their parents and their boyfriends or spouses. It

is clear that many women learned poor parenting skills from their parents.

They lack understanding of the proper use of discipline, the nature of

parent-child relationships, the management of problem behaviors among

children, and other parenting issues. Without intervention, residents will

likely pass on these parenting deficiencies. Many continue to deal with issues of abuse, and several report engaging in abusive behavior with their

own children.

Most residents at the facility were convicted of offenses related to alcohol

and other drug abuse. Returning these women to their homes without addressing their drug and alcohol dependencies makes it difficult for them to

change the destructive aspects of their lives. If dependency issues continue

to plague them, they will not be able to find or keep jobs or manage their

families effectively.

Goals and Objectives

The program’s goals are to assess programming needs for female offenders, successfully reintegrate female offenders into society, reduce their

recidivism rates, reduce the rate of incarceration among the offenders’ children, and empower female offenders to become economically independent, productive citizens and parents. To accomplish these goals, the

program uses an integrated approach to treatment that addresses all

aspects of their lives.

Program objectives include:

❑ Educating residents about parenting issues in incarceration.

❑ Developing job skills to establish independence.

❑ Providing onsite supervised visitation of children during incarceration.
60

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Providing onsite counseling for problems that prevent residents from

reentering society, holding a job, and managing their families.

❑ Offering materials that teach inmates how to be better parents.

Program Components

Family-Oriented Programming

The program’s 8-week parenting course strives to reunite families. Education in developing parenting skills includes both group education and individual counseling sessions. Parenting skills are key elements in the

program: The women make a commitment to being good parents who

want to do more for their children. The program teaches participants to

take a strong positive role in their family. If individuals are strong parents

and provide a structured environment, both parent and child benefit. Enhancing parenting skills leads to lower recidivism rates and lower probability that children of participants will enter the criminal justice system.

Counseling staff at the Dismas program’s Family Resource Center work

with residents to develop a support network for them in the areas of substance abuse, education, and work experience. The counselors develop a

relationship with the schools their clients’ children attend, for example,

and a Girl Scouts Behind Bars Program has been started that allows mothers and daughters to meet together at the center. Mothers receive leadership training, and daughters are active in a troop in their community.

Another family program, Camp Dismas, brings children to the center each

month to give them and their mothers an opportunity to build stronger

relationships.

Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment

A full-time counselor uses group and individual counseling sessions to address all areas of substance abuse and codependency. Narcotics Anonymous groups meet each week to discuss narcotics addiction and its

consequences. Substance abuse is strictly monitored, and staff administer

approximately 850 tests for alcohol and other drugs each month. In addition, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings are held at the center weekly,

and residents are sponsored by AA members from their home areas. These

sponsors support residents on furlough and after they have been released

from the program.

Counseling

The facility has three counselors on staff to provide counseling services to

residents. These services include family counseling for all or part of the

residents’ families, and counselors focus on preparing residents to return

to their families. Group and individual sessions are conducted for residents who have been sexually abused, and victims of domestic violence
61

Programs in Correctional Settings

are offered biweekly group and individual counseling. All residents entering the program are required to take a 6-week course on controlling anger.

Education

General Equivalency Diploma (GED) classes are offered by the Owensboro

City School System in coordination with the Longfellow Adult Learning

Center. Opportunities for a higher education are available through the

Owensboro Community College and private colleges in the community. A

literacy program is offered onsite by VISTA volunteers and the Longfellow

Adult Learning Center to residents who need additional skills to obtain

their GED.

Vocational Education and Experience

The program uses skills testing and evaluations to determine residents’ vocational needs. A mandatory work program assigns residents to work in

the community. Government-funded agencies and nonprofit organizations

provide assistance in areas the program is unable to fund. Residents work

approximately 9,000 hours per month.

Religion

Nondenominational religious services conducted by church leaders in the

community are available to residents. The services are conducted twice a

year.

Arts and Crafts

To give residents an opportunity to enjoy a creative hobby, volunteers

from the community offer arts and crafts activities at the center.

Volunteer Advisory Board

The center’s Volunteer Advisory Board comprises 15 community leaders

who volunteer to help staff develop additional programming and meet the

needs of the center.

Medical

Nursing services are available to meet residents’ immediate medical needs

and to educate them about women’s health issues.

Halfway Back

When appropriate, the program seeks community-based sanctions for offenders because they provide intensive accountability and treatment in

lieu of prison. Referrals are made to Halfway Back by parole officers for a

period of 30 to 120 days.
62

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Tracking

Residents are evaluated when they begin and complete the program and

then tracked for 5 years to determine the program’s effectiveness.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

A long-term study of the Dismas program will assess its impact on the

lives of participants. The study includes a survey of participants about the

program and tracks recidivism rates after residents are released. More specifically, the survey will investigate whether:

❑ The program changes residents’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors

about parenting.

❑ Residents believe that they possess the skills to be effective parents.

❑ Residents believe that they are emotionally equipped to be effective

parents.

❑ Residents leave the program with greater self-confidence.

❑ Residents know that they are having a significant impact on their

children's lives and that their children need them.

❑ Residents learn strategies to enhance their children’s growth.

❑ Residents understand the importance of education.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Building credibility for the Dismas program was difficult. As time passed,

however, the program became increasingly recognized and accepted. The

program faces financial constraints, but aggressively pursues funding activities to ensure an adequate level of staffing and programming efforts.

Finally, the program’s family-oriented activities have been hindered by

commuting difficulties of some families. In response, the program began

providing transportation services, and the center’s executive director persuaded the city to offer bus service near its facilities.

Successes and Accomplishments

Although the long-term study of program effectiveness is not yet complete

(the third year of the examination of the program concluded June 30, 1997),

both anecdotal evidence and objective measures suggest that the program

is accomplishing its goals. More than 300 women have completed the pretest portion of the study, and 185 participants have finished the posttest

portion. The program is corresponding with 144 women who have left

Dismas. Thus far, the data indicate that the program is having a significant

positive impact on the following:
63

Programs in Correctional Settings

❑ Inmates’ belief that they have the skills to be effective parents.

❑ Inmates’ belief that they are emotionally equipped to be effective

parents.

❑ Inmates’ confidence in their ability to be effective parents despite

having been incarcerated.

❑ Inmates’ knowledge that they are important to the well-being of their

children and that their children need them.

❑ Inmates’ belief that they know specific strategies to enhance their

children's growth.

❑ Inmates’ belief that education is important for their children.

Prospects for Replication

Replicating this program requires strong community relations, a location

in a city or business district, patience, positive attitudes, and a committed

staff.

Contact Information

William Gesser

Director

Dismas Charities, Inc.

530 Carlton Drive

Owensboro, KY 42303

Phone: 502–685–6054 or 4712

Fax: 502–685–0081
65

Programs in Correctional Settings

Massachusetts:

Stress Reduction and

Awareness Training in

Corrections and the Criminal

Justice System

Statement of the Problem

The origins of criminal behavior are related to an inadequate ability to deal

effectively with severe stress, deprivation, and low self-esteem. Lack of development in this area, including lack of moral development, abnormal

states of mind, and strong negative feelings such as fear, frustration, anger, hatred, and greed can quickly lead to overt aggressive and violent behavior. This causal chain is severely compounded by use of alcohol and

other drugs, which impair or completely eliminate normal levels of awareness and impulse control. Social forces such as peer pressure and codes of

behavior exhibited by certain groups such as gangs magnify this problem.

Maladaptive human development leading to criminal behavior can be corrected in some individuals, however, through intensive stress reduction

training and strong social and environmental reinforcement. The core of

mindfulness-based stress reduction is intensive training in moment-tomoment awareness (mindfulness). The regular practice of meditation and

mindful stretching can help individuals discover unrealized inner capabilities to feel good without the use of drugs or other chemical substances.

Goals and Objectives

The overall goal of this initiative, which is operated jointly by the Massachusetts Department of Corrections (DOC), a treatment vendor, and the

University of Massachusetts Medical Center (UMMC), is to develop a comprehensive plan for implementing and maintaining mindfulness-based

stress reduction training programs in the Massachusetts corrections, criminal justice, and law enforcement systems. The initiative’s specific objectives are to design and implement:

❑ A training program with a professional staff capable of conducting

stress reduction programs in correctional environments.

❑ A stress reduction program for offenders and Massachusetts DOC

professional staff.
66

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ A stress reduction program for law enforcement officers in training.

❑ Research and evaluation components.

Long-term objectives for these programs include giving inmates greater opportunities for learning, growth, and self-development; reducing recidivism

rates of released inmates; and limiting addictive and impulsive behaviors.

Long-term objectives for DOC staff and law enforcement personnel include

improving communication skills, job satisfaction, home life, and quality of

life, as well as eliminating addictive and impulsive behaviors.

Program Components

Project Team Planning, Development,

and Implementation

The model for the State’s stress reduction programs was developed by

staff members from the State DOC, the treatment vendor, and UMMC. The

team created a plan to implement the program in the State’s corrections,

criminal justice, and law enforcement systems.

Teacher Training Program

The teacher development training program supports experienced and new

teachers. The program offers teacher supervision, onsite supervision, and

site visits to assess program effectiveness.

Offender Stress Reduction Programs

Stress reduction classes for offenders are held twice a week for 6 to 8

weeks. The classes are offered at five medium security, one minimum

security, and one prerelease security DOC sites.

Offender Orientations

Program orientations are held every 6 to 8 weeks. During these sessions,

preprogram and postprogram evaluations are administered to inmates.

Staff Stress Reduction Programs

Stress reduction classes for criminal justice staff, conducted by DOC and

vendor staff, are held at DOC training facilities once a week for 8 weeks.

Preprogram and postprogram evaluations are administered to program

participants before the first class and after the eighth class.

Project Teaching Staff Meetings

At each DOC facility, weekly meetings are held to discuss the situation at

each site, offer support to instructors, facilitate efficient gathering of data,
67

Programs in Correctional Settings

and troubleshoot problems. These meetings are attended by instructors

and project management staff.

Treatment Team Meetings

Meetings are held as needed to discuss the status of the program, inmates,

and support team members. The team comprises DOC corrections officers

and treatment and classification staff, vendor representatives, and UMMC

staff.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Performance measures for the program include:

❑ Subjective and objective tests such as the Profile of Moods (POMS),

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Orientation to

Life, and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory to measure individual

progress.

❑ Compliance and attendance levels.

❑ Behavior changes such as hostility and violence reduction, impulse

control, awareness of mood states, positive attitudes and behaviors,

stress management, and a sense of coherence.

Performance measures for inmates include long-term behavior changes

such as reduced recidivism and drug-seeking behaviors and increased

positive attitudes and behaviors, as well as increased use of opportunities

for learning, growth, and self-development.

Individual performance measures for DOC, vendor, and criminal justice

staff are improvements in communication skills, job satisfaction, home life,

and quality of life and reductions in addictive and impulsive behaviors.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Several vendors managing the treatment units originally viewed the program

as recreational and did not take its objectives seriously. For example, they

were unwilling to schedule time for participants to attend classes or to practice stress reduction techniques. This lack of support and cooperation had a

negative impact on the program’s implementation and operation.

In July 1994, the Massachusetts DOC selected Spectrum Addictions Incorporated to run all of the program units. The philosophy of treatment

within the DOC treatment units changed, and the focus of treatment

shifted from substance abuse to criminogenic behavior. Within this new

model, the holistic health component (including stress reduction) became a

mandatory component of the treatment paradigm.
68

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Another obstacle was the inability of program participants to practice stress

reduction activities outside the classroom. An important component of the

program requires each participant to practice the activities outside of class 45

to 60 minutes per day. Audiotapes are provided to aid in this process, but inmates were not permitted access to audiotape players. To overcome this obstacle, the program was modified. The number of classes increased from one

to two per week, and arrangements were made for the group to practice three

times per week using the audiotapes set up in a classroom.

Successes and Accomplishments

The Stress Reduction Clinic at the University of Massachusetts introduced

a mindfulness-based stress reduction training program into the Massachusetts corrections and criminal justice systems between 1992 and 1996.

Nearly 2,000 inmates participated in at least 1 of the 120 program cycles at

6 Massachusetts DOC sites, including 1 women’s facility, 1 minimum security facility for men, and 4 medium security facilities for men. A similar

program was provided to approximately 200 DOC staff members.

Of those inmates who began the program, 69 percent met the criteria for

program completion (i.e., attended more than 80 percent of the cycle’s sessions), 40 percent attended 100 percent of the sessions, and 82 percent attended more than 50 percent of the sessions. Data from the more than 1,000

participants who completed preprogram and postprogram questionnaires

measuring hostility, self-esteem, sense of coherence, and mood disturbance

are being analyzed.

Prospects for Replication

The prospects for replicating this program are excellent if the following criteria are met: a teaching staff with a solid grounding in mindfulness meditation, orientation and ongoing training of the teaching staff within the

correctional environment, and strong support for mindfulness-based intervention from DOC management and the treatment team.

Contact Information

Michael A. Bratt

Director of Research

Center for Mindfulness in Medicine, Health Care, and Society

University of Massachusetts Medical Center

55 Lake Avenue North

Worcester, MA 01655–0267

Phone: 508–856–1205

Fax: 508–856–1977
69

Programs in Correctional Settings

New York:

Taconic Correctional Facility

Nursery Program

Statement of the Problem

Since 1901, the State of New York has operated a nursery program in the

New York State Reformatory for Women. The program is located at the

Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, a maximum security facility for

women. In 1930, Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt signed legislation allowing women in prisons and reformatories to keep their infants, up to 12

months of age, with them while they served their sentences. In some instances, the legislation allowed infants to stay with their mothers until 18

months of age. Over the years, it became evident that the 24-bed nursery at

Bedford Hills Correctional Facility could not handle the increasing numbers of pregnant women committed to the New York Department of Corrections. The female inmate population began to increase after 1985 due to

the large number of women with substance abuse problems being sentenced to felony terms. As a result, the number of pregnant inmates in the

system also increased. The waiting list for nursery beds continued to grow,

and the Department faced a pressing need to create an additional nursery

program. By 1990, 22 pregnant women at Bedford Hills awaited entry into

the nursery program, and an additional 14 pregnant women awaited transfer to Bedford Hills from local jails.

Many of the pregnant women in the New York correctional system, especially those committed for drug offenses, did not require a maximum security facility. Instead, a nursery program in a medium security facility was

needed to address the needs of female inmates with substance abuse histories who give birth while incarcerated. Taconic Correctional Facility was

chosen for the new nursery program in 1990.

Goals and Objectives

The goals of the program are to develop a nursery program at a medium

security facility, create additional nursery space to serve incarcerated

women with drug-dependency problems, and provide substance abuse

treatment services in conjunction with education in parenting skills.

The program was implemented with the following objectives:

❑ Establish and operate a nursery program at the Taconic Correctional

Facility.

❑ Provide drug counseling services for incarcerated mothers identified as

substance abusers.
70

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Evaluate, monitor, and treat babies born to mothers with histories of

substance abuse.

❑ Teach parenting skills to and improve family relationships of incarcerated mothers.

❑ Increase the likelihood that released participants will lead drug-free

lives, thereby reducing recidivism.

Program Components

Staffing

The nursery at the Taconic facility received funding to provide staff to work

exclusively in the nursery program. The staff included a nursery manager,

pediatric nurses, a Comprehensive Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment

(CASAT) counselor, additional correctional officers, and a psychologist.

Screening

The following screening procedure was implemented for all prospective

nursery program participants. Inmates with drug-dependency problems

submit an application to the nursery counselor. The counselor summarizes

the case and makes a recommendation, which is reviewed by three deputy

superintendents. Approval is based on the inmate’s ability to benefit from

the nursery experience. Denials can be appealed to the superintendent of

the Taconic facility. Inmates who have babies in the local county correctional nursery program may also apply if they are sentenced to the State

prison system.

Policymaking and Decisionmaking Committee

Each month, the Nursery Interdisciplinary Committee meets to address

operational problems, make policy changes, and discuss any cases of participant maladjustment. The committee comprises the deputy superintendents of security, program services, and administrative services and the

nursery manager, counselor, psychologist, and nurse administrator.

Comprehensive Alcohol and

Substance Abuse Treatment

Taconic Correctional Facility is the only female correctional facility in New

York that operates the CASAT program. Authorized by the State legislature, this drug treatment program provides a continuum of treatment beginning in the correctional facility and continuing after an offender’s

release into the community. Nursery participants are required to participate in CASAT.
71

Programs in Correctional Settings

Parenting Curriculum

The parenting program consists of mother’s groups, child development

classes, maternal/child health workshops, community meetings, and special seminars with outside speakers.

Public Health Nurse

Although not formally part of the nursery staff, a public health nurse is

provided by the Westchester County Department of Health to conduct biweekly prenatal and postpartum health classes for pregnant women and

nursery mothers.

Psychologist Services

The psychologist assigned to the nursery meets with nursery mothers individually. Other services include psychological assessments and individual

and group psychotherapy.

Medical Care

Medical staff provide the following services: primary health care to all babies; monitoring of growth and development using the Baley Scales of Infant Development; referrals to specialty clinics; selection and procurement

of educational materials; education and counseling for mothers; development of clinical protocols; pediatrician visits; and infant CPR training for

inmates and staff.

Infant Center

Once admitted to the nursery program, mothers keep a busy schedule.

Because mothers are required to participate in parenting and CASAT programs daily, baby care must be provided in their absence. To meet this

need, an Infant Center was established. The day care center is housed in

the facility school building and is staffed by trained, carefully screened, inmate babysitters. The inmates are supervised by the nursery manager, who

is also an early childhood teacher.

The center requires that inmate mothers simulate the discipline of single

mothers in the community. Mothers must schedule their babies’ feeding

and nap times around their program schedule. They must have the babies

fed, dressed, and ready to go to the center when programs are scheduled,

and they must return quickly to the center to pick up their children at the

end of the program day. An escort officer is provided to accompany the

babies to the center, and this escort accompanies infants whenever they

leave the unit for activities such as attending church with their mothers or

medical appointments. For security purposes, babies are not permitted to

associate with the facility’s general population without an escort.
72

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

New York’s correctional nursery program measures success through the

following criteria: the number of participants who successfully fulfill their

role as a parent upon returning to the community; the number of participants who do not return to the correctional system; the results of individual progress reviews; the number of participants who successfully

complete the program; and the number of children living with mothers after they are released. Other expected results from the program are:

❑ Through CASAT, participants will gain enough coping skills to live

drug-free lives. Familial interactions, community adjustments, and the

overall quality of participants’ lives will improve.

❑ The parenting curriculum and the infant’s presence will lead to a

strong attachment and bonding between mother and child. Developing

a strong bond will give the mother a strong incentive to change her behavior, and she will more likely make full use of the program’s opportunities during her incarceration. The parenting program will teach the

mother about her child’s physical, social, and cognitive development,

leading to better parenting.

❑ The infant will receive appropriate medical attention and have access

to a positive, socially stimulating environment. Through this supportive environment, the infant will develop a strong sense of trust, which

will serve as a positive factor in the child’s development.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Perception by nonparticipating inmates that nursery participants were a favored, pampered group generated a great deal of resentment toward the program in the facility’s general population. Moreover, the nursery program was

implemented at a time when the State was experiencing severe budget cuts,

including staff layoffs, and staff attitudes were not positive toward what was

viewed as another example of catering to inmates’ needs while neglecting the

staff. After a few months of operation, the implementation problems were resolved as both staff and the general inmate population came to view the nursery program as a positive addition to the facility.

Successes and Accomplishments

From 1990 to 1994, 168 women and 163 infants participated in the program. During those years, 113 women were either paroled or went to community reintegration programs with minimal or no separation from their

children, and only 16 women were removed from the program for disciplinary reasons. Overall, the program reports that infants were healthy

and well cared for, no infant was removed for medical reasons, no miscarriages occurred, and pregnant women enjoyed healthy confinements.
73

Programs in Correctional Settings

A followup study of the program’s first 27 participants conducted by the New

York State Division of Parole revealed that the majority of the women were

still caring for their children: 81 percent of the children were living with their

mothers, 15 percent were living with grandmothers, and only 1 child was in

foster care. Anecdotal evidence from volunteers, community contacts, and

calls and letters from released mothers indicates that most participants have

continued to follow the program’s concepts in their communities.

From 1995 to 1997, 124 mothers and babies participated in the program. Of

these, 77 mothers were released to parole supervision or entered a workrelease program, 27 babies were sent to other caretakers and their mothers

were removed from the program because they failed to follow the program’s

rules, and 20 mothers and babies are currently in the nursery program.

An important part of the nursery program’s successful implementation

were the efforts of a task force that worked to ensure that the nursery was

operational and equipped with appropriate supplies when the program

began. The task force comprised staff who were parents. The program also

benefited from the creation of the nursery team and the Nursery Interdisciplinary Committee, comprising oversight groups that review policy, resolve problems, and monitor participant progress. By allowing inmate

participants and staff to establish strong relationships, these groups have

proved to be an invaluable tool in managing the nursery.

The Taconic Correctional Facility Nursery Program is widely considered a

model program. The program has been highlighted in a number of news

articles and television presentations throughout the United States, as well

as in Japan. Representatives of numerous State correctional systems have

visited the Taconic facility to observe the program, and Attorney General

Janet Reno visited the nursery in October 1993.

Prospects for Replication

This program can be replicated in some form in all prison systems. The

program has great potential to positively affect incarcerated women and

their children and incarcerated women who are pregnant.

Contact Information

Bridget Gladwin

Correction Superintendent

Department of Corrections

Taconic Correctional Facility

250 Harris Road

Bedford Hills, NY 10507

Phone: 914–241–3010

Fax: 914–242–3010, ext. 209
75

Programs in Correctional Settings

Ohio:

Oriana House, Inc., Residential

Treatment Services Program

Statement of the Problem

Addressing the problems of prison and jail crowding is a priority in Ohio.

In Summit County, the usually steady number of offenders sentenced to

the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) has increased dramatically in recent years due to drug-related arrests. This surge

in offenders led to overcrowding in local jails and increased probation

caseloads.

The State’s correctional system lacks effective drug and alcohol treatments.

According to an ODRC study, treatment for substance abuse is the greatest

need of the majority of probationers. In Summit County, 66 percent of probation violations are related to substance abuse, and more than 90 percent

of residents in a local halfway house were assessed as requiring some type

of substance abuse service. Probation officers became increasingly frustrated attempting to secure timely substance abuse treatment for offenders.

Summit County responded to these problems through the Residential

Treatment Services (RTS) program, a continuum of sanctions to address

the needs of both the community and the substance-abusing probation violator. The program is provided through Oriana House, Inc., a private, nonprofit community corrections agency whose mission is to deliver effective

treatment services to offenders without jeopardizing public safety. Oriana

House operates residential centers, substance abuse treatment programs,

nonresidential programs, and numerous support services.

Goals and Objectives

The primary goal of the RTS program is to reduce the number of probationers committed to State prison for substance abuse-related probation

violations. The program strives to meet this goal by pursuing the following

objectives:

❑ Immediate placement of at-risk probationers into a residential setting

to reduce the opportunities to abuse drugs and alcohol.

❑ Enrollment in onsite State-certified substance abuse treatment and

aftercare.

❑ Continuation of supervision and services with mandated participation

in a day reporting program following release from the residential

center.
76

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Provision of ancillary services to meet employment and educational

needs.

❑ Implementation of supervision techniques appropriate to the offender’s

level of community involvement.

Program Components

The RTS program takes approximately 1 year to complete and involves a

progression through three program components: halfway house placement, intensive outpatient treatment and aftercare, and participation in a

day reporting program. RTS has 475 residential beds and plans to make

another 100 available. Participants are referred to the program if they encounter problems while on probation. The program targets minority offenders, especially African-American offenders. RTS accepts nonviolent,

adult felony, misdemeanor, and traffic offenders who need long-term rehabilitation and who have shown motivation toward self-improvement to

courts, probation departments, ODRC, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Separate facilities are maintained for male and female offenders. Program

placement is in lieu of incarceration or part of efforts to reintegrate offenders into the community.

Halfway House

The program’s halfway house provides residential services for 160 RTS

participants. In-house programming includes educational classes and

General Educational Development (GED) testing, employment readiness

and placement assistance, 12-step programs, life skills training, drug testing, financial management education, and recreational activities. Residents

are released from the facility only for verified employment, education, and

other authorized activities or for earned pass time. Once employed, residents pay a per diem to offset the cost of the program. Residents enter into

performance contracts with case management staff to set behavior goals

geared toward their successful return to independent community living.

Residency typically lasts at least 90 days.

Intensive Outpatient Treatment and Aftercare

RTS clients participate in intensive outpatient treatment and aftercare for

substance abuse during their halfway house residency. Treatment, available in morning, afternoon, and evening sessions, is delivered in 16, 5- to

6-hour sessions, which are held 4 days a week for 4 weeks. Elements of

outpatient treatment and aftercare include:

❑ Initial and comprehensive assessments to determine the client’s

strengths and weaknesses and to acquire the information essential to

individualizing treatment interventions.
77

Programs in Correctional Settings

❑ Individual counseling sessions to build client/counselor rapport, identify problem issues, devise negotiated strategies for problem redemption, and assess individual treatment progress.

❑ Group counseling sessions that serve as the primary treatment modality. The sessions match clients with others who have similar problems

and encourage self-disclosure, peer confrontation, and feedback.

❑ Presentations that provide clients with information on chemical

dependency.

❑ Self-help groups to involve clients with others who can reinforce the

concepts essential to long-term recovery.

All clients are referred to ongoing aftercare groups following successful

discharge from treatment. Discharge summaries with aftercare plans are

generated and distributed to the probation officer and caseworkers to assist in a consistent continuum of treatment.

Day Reporting

The program’s day reporting component serves as a bridge from the institution to the community, following halfway house placement. All case

management activities are transferred to the day reporting staff. Clients

report to their caseworkers daily, maintain established curfew hours, and

are visited by staff at their job sites. Electronic monitoring is often used as

a sanction for clients whose positive behavior warrants early release from

the halfway house. Gradual decreases in reporting requirements are made

as appropriate. Drug testing is continued, as is monitoring for compliance

to drug treatment plans. All programs available to clients at the halfway

house remain available to day reporting participants. Offenders must

show progress toward rehabilitative goals to be successfully released from

the program. Upon release, participants remain on probation in a less restrictive mode.

Participants are terminated from RTS if they commit a new crime, have behavioral problems, use drugs, or assault the staff. Violators may be referred to a secure community-based correctional facility or to prison.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Implementation of the RTS program should result in a decrease in the number of probation revocations and prison commitments among the target

population. Performance measures include: the number of probationers who

successfully complete the program, the number of treatment sessions attended, the number of drug and alcohol tests conducted, the number of recurrent substance abuse-related revocations and convictions, and the number of

prison commitments for substance abuse-related violations.
78

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Implementation Problems and Successes

Implementation problems were minimal because the program’s three

components had previously operated as independent programs. The most

serious initial concern was inadequate communications among the components to ensure that RTS participants moved smoothly through the three

phases. Another obstacle was overcoming staff resistance to the additional

paperwork, meetings, and documentation.

Physical space requirements presented challenges with the formation of

additional treatment groups. The problem was resolved by developing

open-ended treatment sessions at different times during the day and renting additional office space.

Finally, RTS staff have struggled to overcome the reluctance of some probationers to enter residential programs. These offenders view treatment

more as punishment than as therapy, and the program is working to educate them about the program’s therapeutic mission and potential benefits.

Moreover, role conflict between treatment and supervision is a recurrent

issue between program and probation staff. To improve the treatment of

clients, the program conducts cross-training sessions and encourages regular contact between treatment and supervision staff personnel.

Successes and Accomplishments

In its first 30 months of operation, RTS exceeded its goal of serving 50 probationers annually, with a substance abuse treatment completion rate of 89

percent. To date, 136 probationers have been served.

Probationers at risk of violating probation have been able to enter substance abuse treatment within 1 week of referral, a significant improvement from past practices when probationers spent months on waiting lists

before securing a slot. Monitoring systems have been established to track

program graduates as they continue on probation. Data collection has been

ongoing, and analysis will begin after a full year of operation. In addition,

the program has secured funding to continue operating.

Prospects for Replication

Oriana House had a unique advantage in implementing RTS, because all program components were already fully operational. The coordination of services from a single agency is much easier to replicate than is the brokering of

services from several agencies or the creation of a new residential center that

includes both drug treatment and day reporting services.

An important aspect of replicating the program is obtaining the cooperation of the criminal justice system. This cooperation can be secured by providing a cost-effective service for a group of people the system does not

want to work with, such as offenders on work release or those with mental
79

Programs in Correctional Settings

health problems. Program staff must provide copious information to all

stakeholders including judges, sheriffs, and city commissioners. Each

stakeholder should be contacted at least once every 6 months.

Contact Information

James Lawrence

President and CEO

Oriana House, Inc.

49 East Glenwood Avenue

P.O. Box 1501

Akron, OH 44309

Phone: 330–535–8116

Fax: 330–996–2233
81

Programs in Correctional Settings

Oklahoma:

Department of Corrections

Enid Community Learning and

Family Center

Statement of the Problem

The U.S. Department of Education estimates that approximately one out of

every five American adults, or 20 percent, cannot read at the sixth-grade

level. These individuals are functionally illiterate and cannot read street

signs or warning labels on medicine bottles, fill out job applications, or

perform other daily tasks. Another 34 percent of American adults are marginally illiterate, meaning they cannot read above the eighth-grade level.

Forty-three percent of the combined illiterate population is between the

ages of 20 and 29, an important child-rearing period in most people’s lives.

Oklahoma is heavily affected by illiteracy, ranking fourth in the Nation in

proportion of functionally illiterate residents. Using 1990 census data, an

estimated 461,000 Oklahomans were identified as functionally illiterate

and another 785,000, as marginally illiterate. Oklahoma ranks third in the

Nation in per capita incarceration rates. Sixty-two percent of all Oklahoma

inmates did not complete high school and 70 percent read below the 12thgrade level.

The correlation between crime and illiteracy is well documented in correctional literature. In 1993, recognizing the need to combat illiteracy, the

Oklahoma Department of Corrections District V Probation and Parole

Office, proposed establishing a community-based education program to

serve as an alternative to incarceration. At the same time, the Enid Metropolitan Area Human Services Commission conducted a community needs

assessment that indicated that a large number of young families were in

need of coordinated and comprehensive social services. Coincidentally, a

substantial number of District V’s probationers/parolees were identified

as belonging to that population. A unison of missions occurred, and the

Department of Corrections Enid Community Learning and Family Center

was established.

Goals and Objectives

The Enid Community Learning and Family Center plays both a preventive

and rehabilitative role in the fight to break the cycle of criminal behavior

perpetuated by poor education and lack of services and resources.
82

Bureau of Justice Assistance

In working toward this goal, the Learning and Family Center has identified the following objectives:

❑ Provide, prior to adjudication, substance abuse and educational assessments to all persons charged with a crime and forward the assessments

to the court to divert appropriate offenders to treatment programs as a

condition of probation or parole.

❑ Refer families and neighborhoods to Family Center activities that

address their needs.

❑ Establish the Learning Center, a community-based literacy program for

offenders, their families, and other citizens in the area.

In meeting these objectives, the Enid Community Learning Center abides

by the beliefs that the learner’s needs must be met and that the learner

should have a sense of control over his or her learning.

Program Components

Once clients have entered the program, they can access either the Learning

Center or the Family Center; the centers share a coordinator and administrative support. Learning Center instructors and Family Center advocates

work cooperatively to help clients access services most appropriate to their

individual needs and goals.

The Learning Center focuses on providing educational services to the offender population and to the community at large, literacy, adult basic education (ABE), and General Education Development (GED) classes are

offered to all individuals free of charge. The center’s methods of instruction differ according to skill levels: one-on-one instruction for students

functioning at the literacy level, small group and lecture instruction for

students functioning at the ABE or GED level, and a customized computerassisted education program for students at all levels. These modalities enable students to become independent learners in the areas of reading,

math, language, writing, sciences, and social studies.

Workplace Skills Enhancement Program

The Learning Center helps meet the needs of workers and employers in

Enid by providing a continuing education program, with emphasis on

work-related skills. The Workplace Skills Enhancement Program allows

those already in the workforce to upgrade skills for more effective job performance. Classes and individual instruction link work-related lessons

with job-specific materials and situations, providing both theoretical and

vocational training. Other classes allow employees to improve basic skills

in reading, writing, and mathematics and prepare for GED examinations.
83

Programs in Correctional Settings

Summer Enrichment Program

This program is a voluntary, 2-month service for selected young people in

the community. The program offers youth workplace training, part-time

employment, and half-day educational instruction. The Learning Center

provides educational instruction in reading and math. Instructors teach the

classes using nontraditional teaching methods in a creative environment.

Youth Opportunity Task Force Program

This initiative provides intervention services to first-time juvenile offenders. A recent community survey found that the average first-time offender

was more than two grade levels behind his or her peers in academic competency. Working in cooperation with Family Center advocates and other

community agencies, the Learning Center provides this group with educational instruction. The objectives of the program include decreasing the

crime rate of juveniles by 25 percent, decreasing gang activity by 20 percent, and increasing community involvement with youth through participation in community service projects.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Given the orientation of the center toward the provision of resources and

referrals, performance measures cover both the number of participants and

qualitative indicators of success, including:

❑ Number of offenders diverted to the program.

❑ Number of citizens in the area using the program’s resources.

❑ Number of referrals made by the Family Center.

❑ Number of placements in service and followup programs.

❑ Average increase in Learning Center participants’ achievement levels.

❑ Number of participants receiving GEDs or completing educational

programming.

❑ The Learning Center’s effect on illiteracy and the local crime rate.

❑ Level of community support.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Initial implementation problems were a result of the fragmented nature of

resources and services that existed prior to the establishment of the center.

Developing a collaborative effort among agencies as extensive as the Metro
84

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Commission, the Department of Corrections, and the Department of Education meant overcoming a number of “turf” issues. In particular, the ABE

and GED coordinator for the area was resistant to the Learning Center because he believed it threatened the need for his services. Time was required to explain that the program sought not to exclude any individual or

program but rather to bring individuals together and expand programs to

provide more convenient and effective services. Teams were not developed overnight; it was through the perseverance of center advocates that

working relationships were developed based on trust, flexibility, and a

common vision.

A problem still being addressed concerns preadjudication assessments for

probation clients. Currently, preadjudication assessments are not mandatory and occasionally overlooked. However, the center is working with the

county sheriff to create a consistent process whereby if bond is made, the

client immediately visits the center for assessment; or, if bond is not made,

an assessment is conducted at the county jail.

Finally, the center could have a deeper impact if probation and parole

agents referred more clients to the center. The lack of referrals has been the

result of poor understanding of what services are offered at the center. It is

hoped that ongoing communication between the center and probation and

parole agents will rectify this situation.

Successes and Accomplishments

In the 2 years the Learning and Family Center has been in operation, adults

and children have benefited from readily accessible services in a community

setting. Often, offenders and citizens are not skilled at obtaining the services

they need, a problem compounded by service bureaucracy. The center’s onestop shopping concept allows easy access to critical, needed services. In addition, collaboration has made services more economical, curbed redundancy,

and improved the quality of life in the community. Success is also evident in

the diversity of citizens turning to the center for assistance and in their individual and group accomplishments. Through the center, appropriate offenders have been diverted from prison to community programs, and, at the same

time, the corrections system has had a model that demonstrates that community programs can be successful.

Two local employers, Singer Steel and the city of Enid, took advantage of

the Workplace Skills Enhancement Program, which offers classes designed

to meet individual and company requirements. Interaction between the

employers and the Learning Center ensured that the skills and training

needs of both employers and employees were met. Singer Steel completed

its skills enhancement program in FY 1993–94, and the city of Enid began a

program in FY 1994–95. In addition, the program recently hired a job

placement agent to perform career assessments and to help direct

individual's to services.
85

Programs in Correctional Settings

The Summer Enrichment Program proved to be very successful. Upon entering the program, each student was given an ABE test. The test was administered again at the end of the program and each student gained a

minimum of 2 months in at least one subject, some increasing their skill

level by as much as several years.

In addition to the adult clients referred through the Enid Community Corrections Center and through the District V Probation and Parole Office, the

Learning and Family Center serves an increasing number of clients referred from the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Autry Vo-Tech,

and area churches. The Learning Center recently began serving more

people from the local community than from the Department of Corrections. Since it opened, the Learning Center has held two graduations and

awarded more than 100 GEDs.

More than 600 individuals and families have been affected by the services

offered. A privately funded outgrowth of the Family Center’s Parents as

Teachers Program has brought selected parents of 3-year-olds into the center for learning enhancement. While the parents learn skills as varied as

reading improvement and basic computer skills, their children attend St.

Paul’s Preschool. It is the Learning Center’s hope that family literacy will

be strengthened by the Learning and Family Center partnership.

Collaboration with the center on community projects has also improved

the public’s perception of the Department of Corrections and its mission.

Prospects for Replication

Positive media attention, community enthusiasm, and the support of a

State representative living in the area have resulted in a legislative proposal requiring the State’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Safety and Security, and Secretary of Education to submit a plan to

the Governor for the development of family service centers throughout the

State. The centers would serve local residents and offenders being supervised in the community by coordinating services of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Department of Health, and Department of

Corrections. The legislation has passed in the Oklahoma House of Representatives. In addition, the Department of Corrections plans to establish

additional learning centers throughout the State. When grant funds were

exhausted on June 30, 1997, the Department of Corrections assumed funding the Enid Community Learning Center, thereby ensuring continuation

of the project.

Other States interested in replicating the Enid Community Learning and

Family Center should consider the following issues:

❑ Community services and programs must already exist to make referrals

to the Family Center.
86

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Advocates must have the time and perseverance to overcome the

hurdles of developing relationships with agency personnel who may

feel threatened by a centralization of services.

❑ All agencies and their personnel working with the center must understand its mission and services for the center to have optimum effect.

Contact Information

Jan Walton

Director

Department of Corrections

Enid Community Learning and Family Center

2615 East Randolf

Enid, OK 73701

Phone: 405–242–6600

Fax: 405–234–3554
87

Programs in Correctional Settings

Oregon:

Turning Point Alcohol and

Drug Program

Statement of the Problem

National studies have revealed the effects of alcohol and drug abuse on

crime and prison overcrowding. For example, the Bureau of Justice Statistics 1991 Survey of State Prison Inmates found that 31 percent of inmates report committing their offense under the influence of drugs, 62 percent

report regular use of illicit drugs, 32 percent report committing their offense under the influence of alcohol, and inmates sentenced for drug offenses account for 44 percent of the recent increase in prison population.

Alcohol and drug problem screening data from Oregon prison inmates

present a similar picture. For example, 85 percent of incoming inmates report some history of illegal drug use; 53 percent report regular, sustained

use of an illicit drug; 36 percent report regular, sustained use of alcohol; 39

percent report use of illicit drugs at least once weekly prior to incarceration; 38 percent report severe mental problems including hospitalization,

depression, and hallucinations caused by alcohol or drugs in the past year;

and 63 percent report serious social problems caused by alcohol or drugs

in the past year.

Many State prison inmates have severe alcohol and drug problems that

contribute significantly to their criminal history. Prison alcohol and drug

treatment programs have been effective at addressing these problems. For

example, the Stay ‘N Out Program in New York followed more than 2,000

offenders over a 10-year period and found large reductions in arrests and

parole revocations for treated offenders when compared with untreated

offenders. In Oregon, the Cornerstone Program found large reductions in

arrests, convictions, and returns to prison that are directly attributable to

time spent in treatment.

Goals and Objectives

The goal of the Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Program is to provide

residential therapeutic community treatment to reduce recidivism of inmates who have severe alcohol or drug problems and an established pattern of criminal behavior. Specific program objectives are:

❑ Maintaining program utilization at a minimum of 90 percent of capacity and providing residential alcohol and drug treatment to at least 200

inmates yearly.
88

Bureau of Justice Assistance

❑ Providing residential alcohol and drug treatment services at levels

required for licensing by the State Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Programs.

❑ Helping 90 percent of inmates abstain from alcohol and illicit drug

use during treatment (as measured by urinalysis).

❑ Achieving a completion rate of 60 percent for at least two-thirds of

the treatment objectives before discharge.

❑ Referring 80 percent of inmates completing the program to a community treatment program and enrolling them in that program.

❑ Assisting program graduates with employment skills so that at least 50

percent demonstrate improvements in employability at discharge.

❑ Reducing arrest rates of program graduates by at least 25 percent,

conviction rates by at least 25 percent, and incarceration by at least

25 percent.

Program Components

Opened in November 1990, Turning Point is housed within the Columbia

River Correctional Institution. The program is operated by ASAP Treatment Services, Inc., of Portland. The facility is divided into 2 50-bed

units—1 for women and 1 for men. Establishing a therapeutic community

within the confines of an institution requires developing close working relationships among treatment staff and correctional staff. A therapeutic

community is a 24-hour living environment in which people with similar

problems learn to work and live together, thereby learning the skills they

need to work and live outside the institution. The inmates, called residents,

help staff manage the unit, create guidelines for living, and solve problems

in the unit. Residents are treated as decisionmaking adults. Peer and support groups operate 24 hours a day, creating a powerful learning environment.

Activities include education, therapy, family counseling, parenting skill

training (with sessions involving residents’ children), therapeutic community meetings, work crew, and work release. Successful transition to the

community is enhanced by vocational planning; development of a support

system involving family, friends, and self-help groups such as Alcoholics

Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous; and connection with an outpatient aftercare drug treatment program. Residents move through five program phases, beginning with a 30-day assessment and evaluation phase

and ending in the work release phase and parole. Ideally, residents are in

Turning Point for 6 to 12 months prior to parole. Program components are

as follows:
89

Programs in Correctional Settings

❑ Stress Management—learning self-management and self-care skills.

❑ Community Meeting—learning basic problem-solving skills, making

commitments to change behaviors, and practicing leadership roles.

❑ Core group—participating in process-oriented group therapy that

emphasizes recognizing and challenging errors in thinking.

❑ Lectures—attending educational presentations on alcohol and drug

addiction and recovery, health issues, interpersonal skills, and living

skills.

❑ Life skills workshops—participating in sessions designed to teach and

practice complex life skills such as assertiveness, anger management,

goal setting, managing criminality, and changing thinking errors.

❑ Leisure development—learning to enjoy leisure time without alcohol

and drugs.

❑ Family program—enhancing relationships with family and significant

others through family counseling and parenting skills training.

❑ Employment preparation—screening for vocational interest and

personal objectives, writing resumes, preparing for job interviews, and

planning for short- and long-range career goals.

❑ Release planning—developing a recovery plan, aftercare plan, shortand long-range goals, and money management skills.

❑ Relapse prevention—understanding the relapse process, developing an

individual relapse prevention plan, and learning strategies for avoiding

and responding to offers of alcohol and drugs, and handling a relapse.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The performance indicators for the program are program use, professional

standards, abstinence during treatment, treatment completion, community

referral, employability, and recidivism.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The men’s unit experienced a turnover in the unit manager position during

the first year of operation, requiring an extended period to fully develop

staff teamwork and program structure. Both units continue to adapt to

changes in the State Department of Corrections (DOC) such as work release policies and prison overcrowding. The women’s unit has often found

it necessary to provide shorter term treatment than planned because of the

short sentences given to many female inmates.
90

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Successes and Accomplishments

The program’s accomplishments were summarized in the State Licensing

Review Report dated April 17, 1995:

❑ The program is exceptionally well managed at all levels of leadership.

❑ Open records are uniform in structure; information is easy to locate.

❑ Staff interviews suggest that morale is high.

❑ Diversity of staff is a strength.

❑ Management is highly supportive of professional growth and

development.

❑ The program works well with the Department of Corrections and

communicates effectively with DOC staff at all levels.

❑ The women’s unit is exceptionally astute at identifying issues specific

to the population and responding to the needs of women participating

in treatment.

❑ The program provides a good mix of clinical and cognitive

programming.

❑ The program’s quality assurance process appears effective in identifying strengths and weaknesses regarding documentation, course of

treatment, and outcomes.

In addition to alcohol and drug treatment, services provided by staff at

Turning Point range from family counseling and parenting skills training

to mental health case management. Over the past year, female clients have

presented an increasing number of mental health issues. The program has

responded by hiring a mental health staff, coordinating and communicating with health services, and initiating comprehensive staff training. The

program focuses primarily on transitional planning and has hired staff to

coordinate transitional services for inmates prior to release from custody.

Results for FY 1996–97 were:

❑ Program utilization—97 percent (423 individuals treated annually).

❑ Professional standards—State licensing obtained.

❑ Abstinence during treatment—99 percent.

❑ Treatment completion—45 percent.

❑ Community referral—81 percent.

❑ Employability—52-percent improvement.

❑ Recidivism—48-percent decrease in arrests, 61-percent decrease in

convictions, and 28-percent decrease in incarcerations.
91

Programs in Correctional Settings

Prospects for Replication

Turning Point is one of several prison-based residential therapeutic programs implemented across the country in recent years. Intensive alcohol

and drug treatment programs in prison address a critical need and have

been shown to be effective. Unique aspects of this program are the support

it receives from the institution and other corrections programs, the dual

emphasis on drug treatment and intervening in criminal thinking, the provision of parenting skills training, the use of relapse prevention planning,

and the program’s emphasis on transition to postprison supervision and

treatment.

Contact Information

Gary Field Barbara Aho Grider

Administrator Executive Director

Counseling and Treatment ASAP Treatment Services

 Services Division 2130 Southwest Fifth Avenue

Oregon Department of Corrections Portland, OR 97201

2575 Center Street NE. Phone: 503–224–0075

Salem, OR 97310 Fax: 503–274–7642

Phone: 503–378–8373

Fax: 503–378–5118

Kevin Hormann

Manager

Alcohol and Drug Program

Columbia River Correctional Institution

9111 Northeast Sunderland Avenue

Portland, OR 97211

Phone: 503–280–6663, ext. 240

Fax: 503–820–6012
93

Programs in Correctional Settings

Pennsylvania:

OPTIONS Women’s

Therapeutic Center

Statement of the Problem

The Philadelphia Prison System (PPS) is a large, urban correctional system

with a tradition of offering full-service alcohol and other drug treatment

programs, including therapeutic communities, to its residents. In the past,

the main recipients of these services have been male inmates. The opportunity to participate in the therapeutic community, also referred to as intensive treatment, was not available to female inmates.

There were compelling reasons for establishing programming specifically

for women in PPS. The number of women entering the system who abused

alcohol and other drugs was increasing, and the number of chemically dependent incarcerated male offenders was believed to be as high as 80 percent. Alarmingly, in the Philadelphia area, the number of female offenders

needing substance abuse treatment was even higher. Additionally, there

was a desire on the part of the agency staff to make women’s substance

abuse programming equal to that for men. This desire coincided with a

court order to PPS to provide alcohol and other drug treatment services to

any sentenced inmate who wanted treatment, with equitable programs for

men and women.

Goals and Objectives

The Women’s Therapeutic Center is a 70-bed program that operates within

the framework of a systemwide chemical dependency treatment effort

known as Opportunities for Prevention and Treatment Interventions for

Offenders Needing Support (OPTIONS). The broader objective of the program is to interrupt the cycle of addiction, criminal activity, and incarceration. Related objectives support the maintenance of a program atmosphere

that facilitates the development of the client’s potential. At the same time,

the program encourages participants to assume and share leadership and

responsibility in nonauthoritarian and nonabusive ways within a nontraditional therapeutic community setting.

Programming goals are designed to educate and support abstinence and

recovery, as well as teach and reinforce coping skills that make community

reintegration successful.
94

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Program Components

The primary goal of the OPTIONS Women’s Therapeutic Center is to provide gender-appropriate treatment to incarcerated women who are chemically dependent. Clients are referred to the program by court stipulations;

by self-referrals, which are based on staff and program participants’ descriptions of the program during new inmate orientation or advertising

about the program within the institution; or by referrals by social workers

or other staff.

The assessment process determines whether the offender has an alcohol or

other drug problem and if she is interested in treatment. Assessment is accomplished primarily through interviews by program staff using a modified version of the Addictions Severity Index. The interviewer seeks to

determine the severity of any psychiatric problems and the woman’s ability to handle the contact-intensive nature of the therapeutic community.

The psychiatric unit provides consultations when necessary. Selfevaluation of treatment needs also contributes to the assessment process.

The program uses the therapeutic community as its primary treatment format. However, it uses a communal, noncompetitive approach rather than

the traditional, hierarchical structure typically employed by therapeutic

communities. Group therapy is the principal mode of treatment, with individual counseling and 12-step meetings offered as support services. Family

therapy is available through Target Cities funding from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) for clients who are legally eligible for a

special early release program.

Treatment is offered in 8-week cycles. Each cycle is designed around recovery and related issues. Staff discovered that certain issues, such as

abuse, self-image, parenting, and codependency, remain constant. However, a client’s readiness and level of recovery are continually assessed

when designing and presenting material.

Participants enter the program at the cycle in progress at that time. The

number of cycles a client completes during her time in treatment is not dependent on the curriculum being offered but on the number of 8-week periods she remains in treatment. To graduate from an 8-week cycle, a client

must adhere to the rules and regulations of the program and participate

regularly in program activities. Materials used in each cycle are designed

with the special needs of the current population in mind. Core cycle activities often include developing trust among members, facilitating adjustment to community living, and providing an opportunity to learn and

practice new communication skills.

Admission to the program is continual, and clients enter at different points

in a cycle. Because the county prison population experiences rapid turnover, staff must place new clients in ongoing treatment activities. To do

this, all new admissions are oriented to the program and to the group
95

Programs in Correctional Settings

therapy process through participation in a newcomers’ group. In this

group, staff have the opportunity to assess the client’s needs and adjustment problems and to confer with other group leaders about suitable

placement.

Committees give participants the opportunity to exercise leadership, practice cooperation, and realize their creative potential within a specific program area. Program committees deal with parenting enrichment, the

recovery journey, the whole woman, 12-step fellowship, special resources,

and special projects that involve all the women in activities such as the

production of a play, a graduation presentation, or a program newsletter.

Each cycle culminates in a graduation ceremony, which rewards, reinforces, and fortifies staff as well as clients when the difficult work of a

cycle is completed. These ceremonies have become a cherished tradition of

the program and are well attended by custody and administrative staff,

community members, and OPTIONS treatment staff. Family members,

dignitaries, service providers, and former successful program graduates

are encouraged to attend the yearly anniversary graduation, which celebrates the anniversary of the program as well as the graduation of current

cycle participants.

Two successful initiatives assist in securing the best possible outcome for

clients upon release. The first involves the assignment of an OPTIONS outreach coordinator to develop community resources for clients. These resources often deliver educational seminars to program members as well as

provide services upon their return to the community. As of July 1997, approximately 278 speakers had presented 564 seminars to inmates in the

OPTIONS program.

The second initiative involves access to community treatment slots, many

specifically designed for the female offender, through a combined criminal

justice effort for early parole known as the Forensic Intensive Recovery

(FIR) Project. The FIR Project depends on the cooperation of agencies that

traditionally have not worked together. For instance, biweekly meetings

are attended by representatives from the mayor’s office, the court, the district attorney, the public defender, mental health providers, alcohol and

other drug counselors, probation and parole officers, prison officials, and

other criminal justice and city agencies. PPS was able to secure, through

the auspices of Target Cities from CSAT, a criminal justice grant to offer

family therapy to clients who are awaiting release to the FIR Project. These

clients receive a minimum of 20 hours of family therapy while participating in OPTIONS.

At the Community College of Philadelphia/OPTIONS Campus, a special

four-course mental health/social service curriculum is offered to eligible inmates and funded by penalty money the district court was compelled to pay

due to overcrowding in the PPS. Classes, which are attended by women from
96

Bureau of Justice Assistance

the therapeutic community, include topics such as child abuse, substance

abuse, interpersonal communication skills, and domestic violence.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The implementation of the Women’s Treatment Center was expected to increase the number of women receiving treatment in jail, as well as upon

release. Additionally, it was assumed that disciplinary infractions would

decrease within the treatment unit as compared with the period before the

program’s inception. Other performance measures include the number of

cycles completed, the number of cycle graduates, and the number of seminars provided by community resources. Random urinalysis is an important measure of program integrity. Clients are given a questionnaire to

assess their satisfaction with program and staff services.

Implementation Problems and Successes

A major achievement was the program’s successful implementation amid

rampant sabotage and undercutting. The transfer of certain key custody

staff within the female unit became necessary to implement services and to

root out negative attitudes and behavior toward female inmates. Initially,

the staff did not believe that a therapeutic community would work for female offenders. An all-female staff was chosen for the program and trained

to understand the potential of a therapeutic community for women.

Staff struggled with the question of providing treatment for pregnant inmates who needed to be housed together for security and medical purposes. It was decided that the women’s therapeutic unit would house this

population. On occasion, the unit must deal with clients who do not comply with program rules and regulations yet cannot be removed from treatment. These inmates are dealt with on a case-by-case basis and given time

out of program activities for failure to comply with program guidelines.

Successes and Accomplishments

From October 1992 to the end of July 1997, 1,696 women were processed

through the program. More than 65 percent of these women graduated

from at least one cycle. Additionally, four anniversary graduations were

held. Urinalysis tests have been administered to inmates approximately six

times a year, with 25 to 30 clients tested each time. Of those inmates tested

from October 1995 to July 1997, nine tested positive. During the same period, 16 inmates received disciplinary reports. All of the women who leave

the therapeutic community are referred to community agencies, and 55

percent have attended treatment. Moreover, several women who have

graduated from the therapeutic community unit and are in strong recovery

come back to the unit to chair Narcotics Anonymous meetings and offer

recovery seminars to active clients.
97

Programs in Correctional Settings

The Women’s Therapeutic Center was a popular choice for student placement, and four graduate and three undergraduate students spent time at the

center during the years reported on in this publication. One student was a

correctional officer working on an undergraduate degree in social work.

Prospects for Replication

This program is relatively simple to duplicate. Information is abundant

on correctional alcohol and other drug programming. Information on

women’s treatment issues, although not abundant, is available. The crucial

element is the selection of both correctional and treatment staff. More specifically, the attitude and energy of staff will make the most notable difference in the outcome of treatment efforts. Therapeutic community work is

emotionally and mentally arduous. Considering the stressful environment

of a prison setting, staff commitment, integrity, and compassion are paramount to the healing process. It is important that prison administrators

support treatment efforts and treatment staff, and cross-discipline training

and communication must be provided and sustained.

Contact Information

Deborah Raddock

Director

OPTIONS

Philadelphia Prison System

8301 State Road

Philadelphia, PA 19136

Phone: 215–685–7111

Fax: 215–685–7199
99

Programs in Correctional Settings

Rhode Island:

Discovery Substance Abuse

Treatment Program

Statement of the Problem

Approximately 37 percent of the female population incarcerated by the

State of Rhode Island has been sentenced for drug-related offenses, and

more than 87 percent of these women have serious substance abuse problems. The issue of substance abuse must be addressed comprehensively to

prepare female offenders for release from incarceration.

Prior to 1993, substance abuse treatment for women incarcerated in Rhode

Island was sporadic or nonexistent. The need for an intensive residential

program based on gender-specific issues with a strong aftercare component was critical. Sixty-seven percent of Rhode Island’s female prison

population is serving less than 1 year. They tend to be repeat offenders

who are highly resistant to treatment. For these offenders, incarceration is

a window of opportunity to participate in intensive treatment.

According to a study of recidivism rates and Rhode Island statistics released by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) in March 1989, failure

rates are highest in the first year after release. Recognizing the complicated

needs of women, as well as the opportunity for introduction to substance

abuse treatment and education during the period of incarceration, the

Rhode Island Department of Corrections (DOC), in collaboration with the

Office of Substance Abuse, used Federal funds made available through the

Governor’s Justice Commission to introduce onsite, comprehensive substance abuse treatment to a group of women incarcerated in the DOC minimum security unit.

Discovery, a 24-bed residential unit, is the result of a contract awarded to

Talbot Treatment Centers, a community-based drug treatment agency. The

program began admitting clients in February 1994, and employs four bilingual, bicultural, gender-appropriate counselors.

Because Rhode Island has no jails, all incarcerated women are housed in

the DOC Women’s Facilities. Inmates with sentences of 2 years or less (or

who have 2 years or less remaining to serve) and classified as minimum

security are eligible. There is no age restriction; the population is between

19 and 40 years of age. Approximately 80 percent of the women in the program are mothers of dependent children, and most are single and involved

with the State’s Department for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF). The

majority of the women are prior offenders of nonviolent crimes. Fifty percent belong to racial or ethnic minority groups, and a significant number
100

Bureau of Justice Assistance

have histories of both physical and emotional abuse. Nearly all are

multiple-drug users, usually a combination of cocaine, alcohol, and heroin.

In developing the program, factors contributing to substance abuse were

recognized and addressed. These factors include histories of sexual and

domestic violence, illiteracy or lack of a high school education, undiagnosed or untreated learning disabilities, the need for parenting education,

undeveloped work ethic, lack of job skills or meaningful employment,

health and mental health problems, lack of education about preventing

sexually transmitted disease and tuberculosis, and lack of access to safe,

affordable, and substance-free housing. Underlying all these factors is an

overwhelming lack of self-esteem.

The potential impact of a woman’s success in the program is evident well

beyond the prison and the criminal justice system. Learning to live drugand crime-free brings social and financial benefits to the entire community.

When a woman succeeds, children are removed from State custody; health

care, unemployment, and welfare costs are decreased; and homelessness is

reduced. Although it is unrealistic to expect that long-term success will be

widespread and sustainable for every client, a sound intensive treatment

program, with realistic aftercare plans in place and community support

available, has a greatly enhanced chance for success.

Goals and Objectives

The overall goal of the program is to educate and counsel women about

the disease of addiction.

The program’s objectives are as follows. First, introduce the offender to a

gender-specific and culturally relevant residential therapeutic community

to alter substance abuse, criminality, and self-destructive behavior. Second,

provide her with a structured continuum of care as an alternative to incarceration that prevents relapse and reoffending. Third, successfully facilitate her reintegration into the community.

Program Components

The paucity of research on the treatment needs of women with substance

abuse problems has been a serious impediment to the development of empirically validated treatment programs for female offenders. Currently, enough

evidence supports the hypothesis that substance abuse treatment can be effective, efficient, and economical. Studies suggest that when gender-sensitive

treatment is offered to women, treatment outcomes improve. Outcome studies funded by BJA indicate that the therapeutic community approach to drug

treatment appears to be the most popular form of intensive drug treatment

under development within correctional institutions.
101

Programs in Correctional Settings

The program is structured into four phases of treatment: orientation, recovery, relapse, and transition. Discovery is a well-coordinated, multidimensional treatment program modeled after the current Talbot Treatment

Centers’ Women’s Program. Discovery has a static capacity of 24 and a dynamic capacity of 100. The program is presented by a well-trained treatment team that is knowledgeable about gender and cultural issues.

Comprehensive and individualized at the same time, Discovery treatment

interventions address alcohol and other drug dependency, criminality, institutionalization, relapse, and gender-related treatment issues such as

guilt, shame, physical and sexual abuse, parenting, and codependency.

The program addresses these issues through individual, group, and family

counseling, life skills training, leisure time and nutrition activities, and vocational and career counseling. To maximize the program’s impact, Discovery staff collaborate with support services for women and children in

the prison. The average length of stay is 3 months, but women may stay in

the program at the facility until their release from prison.

Discovery’s treatment emphasizes planning for release, which involves

individual and family aftercare planning, including coordination with

DCYF. The program facilitates referrals to the Talbot Treatment Centers’

network and other community-based treatment and social service programs in the State. Talbot Treatment Centers have signed integrated service and affiliation agreements with more than 60 health organizations,

schools, and treatment, housing, and service agencies.

Discovery provides ongoing assessment and case management to determine readiness for movement to the transition phase or to a communitybased setting. Determination of readiness for movement is based on

satisfactory completion of mutually agreed-upon treatment goals. The inmate should be able to demonstrate an ability to deal more effectively with

the stresses of everyday living. It is hoped that the need to use alcohol or

other drugs to alleviate stress in anxiety-producing situations will have

been reduced by teaching the inmate more positive coping skills. Indications of this are 12-step involvement, improved social skills, improved

parenting skills, knowledge about substances and their effects, development of leisure-time activities, and improved self-concept.

The integration of physical activities into group and individual sessions is

important as women move through the treatment stages. Their weekly

schedule includes groups focusing on emotions, cognitive restructuring,

relationships, women’s health, art therapy, stabilization and withdrawal,

relapse prevention, self-esteem, substance abuse education, and social

skills. In addition, community meetings and relaxation measures, as well

as recreational activities such as softball, volleyball, weight training, and

dance, are led by the program team. Outside consultants provide domestic

violence education, advice to trauma groups, and aerobic classes. Other

support services provided to the women by DOC are mentoring,

parenting, general educational development (GED) preparation, life skills

training, discharge planning, job preparedness, and self-help groups.
102

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Women who participate in the program retain job responsibilities on the

wing as well as regular visitation rights with lawyers, psychologists, DCYF

social workers, and family members. The women attend a 6-week series on

early childhood development, as well as a scheduled parenting component

on weekends. Program staff conduct case reviews with child care and custody workers from DCYF, meet with attorneys if necessary, and work with

the women’s families. Many of these women would not be admitted for

treatment in community-based modalities. Many are already diagnosed

and on supervised medications and would not meet the admission criteria

of an agency-managed program. Most of the women have complicated

medical histories, and some have been diagnosed HIV-positive and are

receiving treatment while incarcerated.

Talbot Treatment Centers, Inc., the parent organization of Discovery, provides a full continuum of care consisting of six separate programs. The organization operates three outpatient programs in different parts of the State, as

well as detox; residential, day treatment for women; and long-term care programs. Discovery clients participate in that network and can be admitted to

the next level of care through prison staff after they are released.

The furlough program allows women to leave the facility for treatment at

Talbot one night each week. Through the program, women form links with

the outpatient counseling staff so that they are on familiar turf once released. Offenders are more likely to continue treatment after release if they

are familiar with the staff and surroundings. Women in medium security

receive services without the intense environment or schedule of the residential component. Their group participation is approximately 6 hours a

week, compared with 20 to 25 for the residential program. Many of the

women in medium security are transferred to the community-based residential program upon release.

Work release, another component of the program, allows women who

have reached the transitional phase and are classified work release, to join

the workforce while in treatment. Women in this component may work

nights and weekends and some daytime hours, but must remain in the

program for a minimum of 3 days a week.

Women are removed from the program if disciplinary action is taken; if

they do not conform to their treatment plan and refuse to sign a behavioral

contract; if they are asked to leave because of rule infractions; or if they request dismissal from the program.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The success of the Discovery program can be measured quantitatively and

qualitatively. The program’s evaluation has been designed to demonstrate

compliance with licensing regulations and to collect and study internal
103

Programs in Correctional Settings

program data. Internal data include documentation of all patient/client information, such as medical actions, intake assessment, treatment plans,

counselor progress notes, and referrals. Other documents collected include

reports on daily census, monthly admission and discharge, and quarterly

and year-end site and programmatic reports. These reports contain information on client demographics, program volume and other program variables, service gaps and needs, and program outcomes.

Implementation Problems and Successes

The program encountered some implementation problems. There was resistance to treatment from the correctional staff and the institution personnel. Traditionally, little or no meaningful treatment existed within the

institution, and officers resented the presence of counselors as authority

figures and perceived them as challengers to their own authority. Counselors resented the structure inherently necessary in institutional management. A relatively low initial census allowed for training and acclimatization of each group. Over the course of the first year, a mutual respect

and tolerance evolved.

Regarding the program’s schedule, startup plans called for a 7-day, 7 a.m.

to 8 p.m. schedule. Staffing was thin and supervision sparse. Within the

first year, the schedule was revised to a 5-day, 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m regimen.

The change created a tighter routine during the week, with Alcoholics

Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous groups during the evenings and

assignments and leisure time on weekends.

When the Discovery program’s original grant funding ended, it was included in the DOC budget. The program was awarded a 4-year grant,

renewable for 5 years, on July 1, 1997.

Successes and Accomplishments

More than 150 women have successfully completed treatment. Each

participant’s length of stay is individualized to adapt to the length of her

sentence. Women may go on work release and remain on the wing, becoming senior peers if appropriate. The program has been revised from a

three- to a four-phase model. Women in medium security now receive

group and individual treatment. Scheduling has been condensed to 5 days

a week, allowing for a tighter, more closely controlled program. Women in

work release are allowed to work nights, weekends, and some day hours,

but are required to participate in the program for a minimum of 3 days a

week. Recreation programs have been expanded; they now include softball

and volleyball teams, a project in which inmates who are victims of domestic violence decorate t-shirts displayed locally, and a project in which

women work on a panel for the national AIDS quilt. New projects in the

program involve nutrition and food preparation and a Rhode Island Arts

Council Grant to fund the design and painting of a mural for the program.
104

Bureau of Justice Assistance

No positive toxicology screens have been submitted to date, nor have there

been any incidents of violent or other negative behavior on the Discovery

wing since the program began. The program has created a model treatment environment with a positive atmosphere and is increasingly requested by inmates. The recidivism rate for women completing the

treatment program appears to have dropped to approximately 20 percent,

compared with 45 percent for the facility’s general population.

Prospects for Replication

The prospects for replication of this program are excellent provided the

following factors are in place:

❑ A prison environment receptive to treatment.

❑ A willingness by the corrections administration to provide training and

cultivate tolerance as treatment agencies begin assimilating into the

prison setting.

❑ Support from existing prison treatment staff.

❑ Cooperation from prison classification staff who select and encourage

women to participate.

❑ Teamwork among institutional program staff and Discovery

counselors.

❑ A blueprint for helping women remain in treatment for as long as

possible both inside the institution and after release.

Institution staff are working on a regional training program for the New

England States to facilitate information sharing among managers of female

offenders.

Contact Information

Roberta Richman Maureen Simmons

Warden Program Director

Rhode Island Department of Discovery Drug Treatment

 Corrections Rhode Island Department of

Women’s Facilities Corrections

P.O. Box 8312 P.O. Box 8312

Cranston, RI 02920 Cranston, RI 02920

Phone: 401–464–2366 Phone: 401–464–2129

Fax: 401–464–1842 Fax: 401–464–1108
105

Programs in Correctional Settings

South Dakota:

Corrections Substance Abuse

Program

Statement of the Problem

Prior to 1988, substance abuse programs in South Dakota State correctional

facilities were nearly nonexistent. There were three chemical dependency

counselors in the entire system, which includes two prisons, two trustee

units, and three juvenile facilities. The only substance abuse services provided in the institutions were referrals to self-help groups, reference and

reading materials, and minimal crisis intervention services. Only two correctional facility chemical dependency programs had State accreditation,

and maintaining that accreditation was problematic because of inadequate

staffing and programming.

In 1988, through the use of chemical dependency assessments and adult

and juvenile offense histories, the South Dakota Department of Corrections

(DOC) determined that a minimum of 70 percent of adults and 60 percent

of juveniles housed in South Dakota correctional institutions had alcohol

and/or drug problems that were not being treated. Adequate communitybased treatment services for individuals prior to or following incarceration

were not available. The assessment data demonstrated that a majority of

these individuals, if they were to be treated in community-based programs, would need inpatient treatment services because of the severity of

their alcohol and/or drug use and the lack of a stable community support

system. To address this need, DOC applied to the South Dakota Attorney

General’s Task Force on Drugs for funding for chemical dependency programming in correctional facilities under the State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Programs Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. The Corrections

Substance Abuse Program was also established in 1988.

Since its implementation, the program has expanded, and it now provides

a continuum of chemical dependency services for offenders throughout the

State’s correctional facilities. The program’s staff includes 22 State employees and 3 part-time chemical dependency counselors. Of the 22 State employees, 19 are counselors who provide chemical dependency treatment

and related services, 2 provide clerical support, and 1 is the program’s administrator. All of the program’s personnel were employees of the South

Dakota DOC from 1988 until August 1995, when they became employees

of the Department of Human Services, Division of Alcohol and Drug

Abuse. A memorandum of understanding was developed between the two

departments to address supervision, funding, and program issues.
106

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Goals and Objectives

The goal of the South Dakota Corrections Substance Abuse Program is to

provide a continuum of chemical dependency services to adults and juveniles sentenced, paroled, or adjudicated to DOC. These services offer offenders an opportunity to develop the skills they need to abstain from

chemical use and to successfully reenter the community upon release from

custody or supervision.

To achieve this goal, the following objectives were defined:

❑ Establish chemical dependency program units in six DOC facilities.

❑ Complete thorough chemical dependency assessments of all adult

and juvenile offenders who enter DOC facilities.

❑ Establish a continuum of program components and base admission to

them on the results of chemical dependency assessments and program

availability.

❑ Develop program format and content according to the characteristics of

the chemically dependent offender.

❑ Develop programs that meet the needs of females and Native

Americans.

❑ Gather, summarize, and analyze data for program evaluation annually.

❑ Refer all adults and juveniles involved in chemical dependency services

in DOC facilities to community-based chemical dependency services

upon discharge.

Program Components

Assessments

Assessment of an offender’s substance abuse treatment needs consists of

the completion of a variety of screening and assessment instruments, a

structured interview, an analysis of the effects of chemical use upon critical

life areas, and an examination of chemical use and criminal histories. Diagnoses are based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders:

DSM-IV, fourth edition (Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1994), criteria for substance-related disorders.

Intensive Outpatient Chemical Dependency Treatment

Adults and juveniles who have chemical dependency diagnoses are eligible for outpatient treatment. The program ranges from a 60-hour, 5-week

program to a 100-hour, 6-week program, depending on which correctional

facility the participant resides in. Programming components include ed-
107

Programs in Correctional Settings

ucational presentations, group and individual therapy, and individual assignments based on the needs and goals established in the treatment plan.

Outpatient treatment is followed by treatment in the institution component focusing on relapse prevention strategies.

Modified Therapeutic Community

This program offered at the Springfield State Prison, a medium-security

unit, provides chemical dependency treatment to inmates grouped together in a therapeutic community. The criteria for entering and remaining

in the program are chemical use, criminal history, and individual motivation and progress in the program.

Specialized Programming for Juveniles

In addition to the intensive outpatient treatment program described above,

the following program components are available in the State’s three juvenile correctional facilities: prevention education groups, pretreatment

groups, and groups for juveniles who have been affected by the chemical

use of parents or guardians.

Specialized Programming for Women and Girls

Female juvenile offenders are placed either at the Lamont Youth Development Center, a correctional facility for girls, or at the State Training School,

a coed facility with a separate cottage for girls. At the Springfield State

Prison, a coed medium-security facility, women are housed in a separate

unit and attend group therapy sessions covering subjects that include eating disorders, parenting issues, prenatal substance use, abuse issues, and

codependency, as well as topics that are not gender specific.

Specialized Programming for Native Americans

Although a separate institutional treatment program for Native Americans is

not available, chemical dependency counselors in all South Dakota State correctional facilities receive training on the “Red Road” approach, and topics

related to Native American cultural and spiritual beliefs are presented during

the treatment program. Voluntary programs such as People in Prison Entering Sobriety, sweat lodges, and powwows are also available.

Program Content for the Offender Population

To make programming more relevant to the needs of chemically dependent offenders, treatment offered through the program focuses on errors in

thinking and cognitive restructuring using the Criminal Thought Process.

This model addresses the unique psychosocial characteristics of offenders

and is used in conjunction with materials from 12-step programs. The

model’s philosophical and practical emphasis is that chemical use and

criminal activity are choices that can be confronted and disrupted throughout the treatment process and beyond.
108

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Case Management Services for Juveniles

Before entering a juvenile corrections facility, adjudicated juveniles receive

case management services in their communities. Services include chemical

dependency screenings, assessments, and community-based chemical dependency services.

Discharge and Referral Services

Upon Institutional Release

All adults and juveniles who complete institutional chemical dependency

treatment are referred to community-based chemical dependency agencies

for aftercare services upon discharge. Community-based services include

aftercare, individual and family therapy, transitional residential programming, and case management. The purpose of case management is to establish treatment plans and sanctions for noncompliance through face-to-face

meetings with treatment service providers, parole agents, and parolees.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The final component of the program is evaluation and followup. Three areas of evaluation are conducted for both adult and juvenile programs: a

participant evaluation of the treatment program, an evaluation of the

participant’s progress during treatment by the primary counselor, and a

survey completed by Court Services for juvenile offenders and by parole

agents for adult offenders. The surveys, which are completed 3 months following release for juveniles and 1 year following release for adults, contain

the following information:

❑ Where the offender is living.

❑ Whether the offender is working and/or attending school.

❑ Whether the offender is using chemicals.

❑ Whether the offender has been tested for drugs and the results.

❑ Whether the offender has reoffended.

❑ How the offender is progressing in all aspects of the program.

The results of the three evaluation components are compiled and analyzed

annually by an independent researcher.
109

Programs in Correctional Settings

Implementation Problems and Successes

Program Support. Since its inception, the program has been strongly supported by the Secretary of the Department of Corrections. She has fought

for the creation of new chemical dependency counselor positions within

DOC and ordered that substance abuse treatment programs be implemented within the State’s adult and juvenile corrections institutions. Support was weak among some administrators and security staff. Staff from

the educational and vocational programs were concerned that chemical dependency programs would reduce their time and programming efforts

with inmates. However, as the program became operational, tension

gradually evolved into adjustment and accommodation in all institutions.

The efforts of program staff and the program’s results were primarily responsible for diminishing opposition to chemical dependency treatment

services. First, chemical dependency staff made an effort to cooperate with

other institutional support areas such as security, food services, and medical units. They operated under the caveat that institutional security was

priority and programming must conform to security needs. Second, security and other program staff noticed that offenders were easier to work

with and more motivated to participate in programs after they completed

chemical dependency treatment.

Institutionwide support for the program has expanded its range. Inmates

who need chemical dependency services are now required to complete the

recommended programming before moving through the prison system.

Chemical dependency counselors now sit on inmate classification boards

and disciplinary hearing teams and provide information to the parole

board. In the State’s institutions for juvenile offenders, where there is

greater overall therapeutic emphasis, chemical dependency units are integrated into facilitywide programs and chemical dependency counselors

are an integral part of the offender’s treatment team.

Criminal Thought Process Programming. Many of South Dakota’s chemical

dependency counselors came to the corrections system from communitybased programs where they had infrequent contact with offenders. These

counselors attempted to implement the same program content and philosophy they had applied in community settings and were frustrated with the results. To address this problem, all State correctional chemical dependency

counselors and employees are required to attend training on the Criminal

Thought Process, a practical approach to working with offenders that is based

on criminal personality research and the principals of 12-step programs.

Since 1992, the Criminal Thought Process approach has been integrated

into all correctional chemical dependency program components in South

Dakota, and training on how to use its techniques is required for all new

corrections employees. Many counselors have become Corrective Thinking

Specialists and are training others in the model. Parole agents throughout
110

Bureau of Justice Assistance

the State and many counselors from community-based agencies have also

been trained in the model. In addition, Criminal Thinking self-help groups

have been initiated in the prison system by inmates, and several inmates

plan to implement groups in their communities after release.

Agency Collaboration. When adults and juveniles who have been treated

for chemical dependency are released from custody, they are referred to

community-based agencies for aftercare services. Juveniles are supervised

by Court Services officers, and adults are supervised by parole agents.

However, correctional officials discovered a breakdown in aftercare was

sometimes occurring when juveniles returned to their communities. They

often did not contact the community-based agency assigned to provide

their aftercare, and their court services officers either were not aware of the

referral or need for aftercare or did not follow through when learning of

the individual’s failure to participate. Many adults on parole did not receive community-based aftercare services because funding for the services

was not available and because parole agents were reluctant to insist that

parolees attend aftercare services that they could not afford.

In response to these problems, the following steps were taken. For juveniles, an interagency agreement was developed with DOC, the Department of Human Services, and the Unified Judicial System. The agreement

delineated the responsibilities of each agency for making sure that juveniles released from institutions under court supervision would attend

community-based aftercare. To treat the adult situation, a pool of money

was made available for community-based chemical dependency services

through the Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse. In addition, directors

of State-accredited service providers signed agreements delineating their

responsibilities and agreed to develop services specific to offenders.

Despite these steps, however, instances still exist in which juveniles and

adults do not receive needed aftercare services. Parole agents need more

education on the nature of chemical dependency and the benefits of aftercare, and the community-based agencies require more information on the

special characteristics and needs of offenders.

Successes and Accomplishments

Since its inception, the South Dakota Corrections Substance Abuse Program has reported these accomplishments:

❑ Approximately 900 adults and 250 juveniles are assessed eachyear, and

550 adults and 150 juveniles receive treatment.

❑ A continuum of chemical dependency services has been developed and

implemented for chemically dependent adults and juveniles in all

South Dakota Department of Corrections facilities.

❑ A system for providing community-based aftercare services has been

developed and implemented for adults and juveniles discharged from

correctional facilities.
111

Programs in Correctional Settings

❑ Chemical dependency programs in the State’s correctional institutions

have evolved to address characteristics and needs specific to the

offender population.

❑ The program evaluation and outcome data indicate that institutional

chemical dependency treatment is successful. Court Services officers

report that 59 percent of juveniles did not use drugs or alcohol while on

supervision following institutional discharge. Parole agents report that

58 percent of parolees had not used drugs or alcohol 1 year after

release.

❑ A therapeutic community for female adolescents in minimum-security

facilities with chemical dependency diagnoses was implemented in

November 1996.

Prospects for Replication

Replication of various aspects of this program could be accomplished with

relative ease. However, much of what makes the program successful involves the formal and informal relationships that have been established

within the State’s correctional facilities and within and between State and

private nonprofit agencies. These relationships evolve slowly, and maintaining them requires attention and coordination. However, interagency

agreements that clarify the roles of each agency at the outset are good

starting points.

Copies of program descriptions, interagency agreements, Memorandums

of Understanding, summaries of assessment data, and the program’s FY

1995 executive summary are available from the South Dakota Department

of Human Services.

Contact Information

Laura Lewis

Administrator

Corrections Substance Abuse Program

Department of Human Services

Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Hillsview Properties Plaza

East Highway 34

c/o 500 East Capitol

Pierre, SD 57501–5070

Phone: 605–773–3123

Fax: 605–773–5483
113

Programs in Correctional Settings

Wisconsin:

Rock County Education and

Criminal Addictions Program

Statement of the Problem

Rock County, Wisconsin, is composed on an interesting urban and rural

population mix. Beloit has a large African-American population and has

experienced a decline in the heavy industry that provided employment

for many years. Janesville, where the Rock County Sheriff’s Department

(RCSD) jail is located, is the home of a General Motors assembly plant and

has a predominantly white population. The remainder of the county is rural, and nearly 10 percent of the county’s population lives below the poverty level.

Rock County has experienced rapid growth in criminal activity and increases in jail sentences. Rock County’s crime rate ranks fifth in the State of

Wisconsin. In 1994, 7,643 serious and 364 violent crimes were reported for

a population of 139,510. Recent gang activity in the county is attributed to

the area’s proximity to Rockford and Chicago, Illinois, and to its convenience as a drug drop-path between Chicago and Madison, Wisconsin.

Drug- and alcohol-related crimes now account for 80 percent of the

county’s total crimes. The number of criminal offenders housed at the Rock

County Jail increased 400 percent between 1988 and 1991, and the average

daily jail population from June 1996 through July 1997 was 463.

Recidivism at the county level was estimated to be between 65 and 70 percent

when the Rock County Education and Criminal Addictions Program

(RECAP) was instituted in November 1992, with the assistance of a U.S.

Department of Education correctional education grant. RECAP was designed

to reduce recidivism in Rock County by providing education and rehabilitation to incarcerated offenders through the expertise and professional commitment of three local agencies: RCSD, Blackhawk Technical College (BTC), and

Rock Valley Correctional Programs (RVCP), Inc. RECAP partners believe that

the county is the least costly and most effective site to reduce recidivism and

that comprehensive programming is required to meet inmates’ many needs.

Single-approach programs are not effective in redirecting inmate lifestyles.

Although only a 4-month program, RECAP attempts to demonstrate the impressive effects that vocational and literacy instruction, on-the-job training,

community service, and alcohol and drug rehabilitation can have on the lives

of serious criminal offenders.
114

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Goals and Objectives

RECAP’s foremost goal is to provide a comprehensive educational and rehabilitation program to county inmates that significantly reduces recidivism. The objectives for reaching this goal are divided into program/

operational objectives and educational/participant objectives.

The program/operational objectives are to:

❑ Obtain and maintain the combined expertise of the law enforcement,

education, and treatment communities.

❑ Ensure that RECAP represents and is responsive to the needs of participants and the community by establishing a broad-based advisory committee that meets regularly to discuss RECAP issues.

❑ Ensure that resources to meet the needs of the program are located

and secured.

❑ Conduct an evaluation of the program that measures program effectiveness and improvement and assists other jurisdictions with

replication.

The educational/participant objectives are to:

❑ Provide educational and rehabilitation opportunities to approximately

120 individuals a year.

❑ Give RECAP participants opportunities for instruction and rehabilitation that will prepare them for a changed life upon release.

❑ Conduct vocational instruction based on competency attainment in a

variety of training areas including food service preparation, food safety

and sanitation, custodial training, landscaping or lawn care, construction, painting, chain saw operating, and wildlife assisting.

❑ Arrange community service and on-the-job training to participants

to provide atonement, vocational training, and service.

Program Components

RECAP profiles for the past 3 years show an average participant age of 27.

Thirteen percent of participants were female and 51 percent minority.

Eighty-nine percent entered with a demonstrated drug or alcohol problem.

More than 70 percent had not graduated from high school, and many required remedial instruction.

Male and female inmates housed in the Rock County Jail as a condition of

probation, sentenced by the courts, and Huber-qualified (those with workrelease privileges) are eligible to participate. The program is limited to 38

men and 8 women. Preference for admission is given to inmates who are
115

Programs in Correctional Settings

sentenced to 120 days or more, are unemployed, have special educational

needs, and have documented alcohol and drug abuse needs. Juveniles are

not accepted into the program unless they are sentenced as adults. The

program runs in 4-month cycles with an intensive 40-hour week schedule.

RECAP partners share responsibility and financial obligations for delivering the program’s services. The components and partners assuming major

responsibility are shown in the box below.

Program Component Responsible Partner

Work Experience and RCSD

 Community Service

Criminal Thinking Group RVCP

Employability Skills BTC

Literacy and General Equivalency BTC

 Diploma (GED) Instruction

Vocational Education BTC

Construction Instruction RCSD

Aftercare Services BTC

An advisory committee with broad community support that includes representatives of treatment, employment, educational, and organized labor

organizations meets monthly, providing advocacy, advice, and expertise.

To meet a need for training in upper level vocational skills, RCSD sought and

received assistance and financial resources from the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance (OJA). To meet an evolving need for an alternative high

school, BTC sought assistance from the Adult Education Act to develop the

Scans High School Equivalency program. An aftercare component was proposed and funded by the State Department of Education/Correctional Education to address the unmet needs following incarceration.

Vocational instruction is competency based. Certificates of skills in the areas of food service, construction assistant, custodial assistant, and other

fields are given at graduation ceremonies. Alcohol and other drug abuse

(AODA) group participation is an extensive part of the program. On-thejob training, community service, literacy, and employability instruction are

also components of the program.

Vocational offerings began with custodial, food service, landscaping, and

other on-the-job training. More than half of the participants do not have

any significant work experience. RECAP training compensates for work
116

Bureau of Justice Assistance

experiences that seventh to ninth graders in other circumstances often obtain as a part of their development. Employment opportunities in these areas are plentiful in Rock County. There was an unmet need, however, for

higher level vocational skills that demand higher wages in the job market.

As a result, construction assistant opportunities were provided through

the encouragement and financial help from OJA. Community service and

on-the-job training opportunities were expanded as well with OJA assistance. These additions to the program not only help inmates develop

broader vocational skills, but expand public knowledge of RECAP through

their visibility in the community.

To successfully complete the program, participants must meet the following criteria:

❑ Attend and participate in all scheduled class and group sessions.

❑ Raise two or more grade levels in reading, math, or writing.

❑ Complete or work toward a high school equivalency diploma, if

needed.

❑ Watch academic skills videos as assigned.

❑ Complete a criminal inventory.

❑ Complete an autobiography.

❑ Complete a lifeline.

❑ Complete a victim script.

❑ Create an aftercare and relapse prevention plan.

❑ Attend support groups.

❑ Complete at least one on-the-job training.

❑ Display appropriate work attitudes in all community service

experiences.

❑ Complete the employability skills course.

❑ Achieve a final evaluation of 32 points or better.

❑ Receive a recommendation from a RECAP staff member.

❑ Fulfill probation and parole and/or court recommendations.

The Inmate Review Committee meets weekly to assess student progress.

The committee performs the following functions: intake review, progress

review, termination or graduation review, exit review, determination of

entry and exit dates, and establishment of a recall system that permits an
117

Programs in Correctional Settings

inmate’s case to be reviewed for progress after release. The committee

comprises the treatment manager, the education manager, the jail/work

release supervisor, and the jail liaison from the Department of Corrections.

An inmate can be dropped from the program by the committee for possessing contraband, presenting discipline problems, absconding from the

program, threatening staff, testing positive in urinalysis screens, showing a

lack of courtesy, and refusing to attend the program.

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

Staff collect participant and program information on a data system and use

this information for program improvement. Data collected include literacy

scores before and after the program, work histories, drug and alcohol histories, basic job skill levels, autobiographies, notes from vocational counseling, reports by participants, and written weekly evaluations by the

participants’ employers. The third-party evaluator uses these data and followup information to provide objective program analysis. Yearly reports

are distributed for public information and internal use. A study of the program using a control group and participant followup was conducted during all 3 years of RECAP activities by the University of Wisconsin, Center

on Education and Work. Among the study’s conclusions were the following:

❑ Compared with RECAP graduates, RECAP clients who completed less

than 3 months of the program were twice as likely to have an unsuccessful probation outcome.

❑ Compared with the study’s control group, RECAP clients were 2 times

more likely not to commit a new crime.

❑ Members of the study’s control group were five times more likely to be

unemployed than RECAP graduates after release to the community.

❑ Excluding probation holds, members of the control group on average

had twice as many contacts with the Rock County Jail as did RECAP

graduates.

❑ Overall, after 4 months of training, RECAP graduates increased grade

levels on standardized tests in the following subjects: reading (one

grade level), mathematics (two grade levels), and writing (one grade

levels).

Implementation Problems and Successes

All programs, and particularly new, innovative programs, have problems

to overcome on the path to becoming long-term programs. RECAP is no

exception. Problems that require creative solutions include:
118

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Obtaining Adequate and Ongoing Funding. Comprehensive programming requires a variety of resources and a large investment of time to meet

the needs of inmates adequately. Companies use free inmate labor for 2

weeks. Employers give a portion of the wages the inmates would have

earned to the program in the form of a donation if they are satisfied with

the inmates’ work.

Obtaining Individual and Program Statistics. Obtaining and maintaining

program data, which are important elements for evaluation and program

improvement, require intensive staff involvement and access to adequate

computer programs.

Scheduling Program Activities. Scheduling requests for inmates for community service and other projects requires extensive staff time and coordination.

Maintaining Core Program Numbers. Designated program space determines the size of groups that can be served. Referrals from the courts are

not always received in a consistent fashion, and inmates are sometimes removed for infractions. Every time the number of participants drops below

the maximum number that can be served, the program cost is raised.

Making Time for Communication. Considerable time is required to allow

staff to communicate and build a stronger program. The Inmate Review

Committee meets weekly to assess student progress, and the partner agencies are required to communicate daily with each other.

Successes and Accomplishments. RECAP provided services to 327 inmates in its first 3 years, and 49 percent of program participants graduated. In addition, 89 percent of individuals receiving assistance had a

recognized AODA need; 56 participants earned a high school equivalency

diploma (71 individuals partially completed an equivalency diploma and

many others received literacy or remedial instruction); and 194 individuals

met the requirements to complete the course in 3 years. As of July 1997, the

program had provided programming to 521 individuals.

Inmates also achieved the following accomplishments in the program’s onthe-job training courses: 92 received food service preparation certificates,

53 received food safety and sanitation national certification, 123 received

custodial training certificates, 64 received landscaping or lawn care certificates, 41 received construction certificates (third year only), 32 received

painting or chain saw certificates (third year only), and 15 received wildlife

assistant certification (first and second years only). In addition, from 1995

to 1997, RECAP participants earned 276 competency certificates in construction, custodial services, lawn care, food sanitation, painting, and historical preservation and renovation.

The RECAP/Alpha OJA construction grant completed its first year of operation, and 41 inmates completed the vocational program. Using community donations of building supplies worth more than $18,000, inmates
119

Programs in Correctional Settings

constructed a large storage garage. The Scans High School Equivalency has

been approved by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and is

assisting students. The county board funded RECAP for the interim period

and included RECAP in its 1996 budget. County support in 1996 was

$75,000; in 1997 it increased to $100,000.

Each RECAP participant earned an average of 105 hours of community service, and program participants earned a total of 694 days of good time at a

savings to the county of $38,170. The RECAP/Alpha OJA grant has enhanced opportunities that can be provided to inmates in this area. More

than 11,000 hours of on-the-job training and community service were provided at 21 sites from March to September 1995. The number of sites remained at 21 in 1997.

Reducing recidivism in Rock County is the core measure of RECAP’s effectiveness. Second-year statistics showed a recidivism rate for participants of

17 percent as compared with the 70 to 80 percent recidivism rate estimated

for offenders in the county before the program began. The fifth-year recidivism rate was 26 percent. According to a third-party evaluator, RECAP

graduates are twice as likely not to return to jail or prison as those not participating in RECAP.

Recidivism, academic growth, and vocational attainment are measurable,

but do not provide a complete picture of program success. Other measures

of success include:

❑ Maintaining a qualified staff dedicated to change and motivation.

❑ Moving from grant to county funding.

❑ Continuing positive participant testimony and action.

❑ Receiving public acceptance by the media, community, and employers.

❑ Obtaining the dynamic assistance of a broad-based advisory

committee.

❑ Changing correctional officer attitudes toward education and

rehabilitation.

❑ Having probation and parole agents play an active and supportive role

because RECAP has provided assistance to their clients.

Prospects for Replication

RECAP can be replicated nationwide with the expertise and commitment

of local law enforcement agencies, community colleges, and the treatment

community. RECAP completed its fifth year of operation in September

1997. Partners are available to assist others with information and staff development useful in replicating the model. Since the inception of RECAP,

the partners have advocated for its development in other counties.
120

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Along with staff training possibilities, many program materials are available for distribution. All materials have been field tested and have undergone numerous revisions. Dissemination materials include course outlines,

AODA pretest and posttests, work contracts, student vocational certificates, SCANS high school equivalency curriculum, the RECAP participant

handbook, and the RECAP manual.

Results from the University of Wisconsin evaluation of RECAP will include a 3-year history of problems, successes, and recommendations. In

addition, RECAP will participate in a U.S. Department of Educationfunded research study on correctional education. The study’s findings will

be available upon completion of the project.

Contact Information

Erin Vince

RECAP Program Manager

Rock County Sheriff’s Department

200 U.S. Highway 14 East

Janesville, WI 53545–9684

Phone: 608–757–7991

Fax: 608–757–7997
121

Programs in Correctional Settings

Wyoming:

Department of Corrections

Honor Farm Wild Horse

Training Program

Statement of the Problem

To reduce the excess of wild horses in Wyoming, the State’s Bureau of

Land Management (BLM) office developed a horse adoption program

open to the public. However, because people were uneasy about adopting

wild horses, the horses required to be trained. In September 1987, the Wyoming Department of Corrections (DOC) and BLM signed a cooperative

agreement to establish the Wyoming Honor Farm, a minimum-security facility that gives inmates who have committed crimes ranging from simple

property offenses to first-degree murder an opportunity to train horses

and engage in personal development in a healthy, secure environment.

The farm is located in central Wyoming and houses 150 inmates and 34

staff members. The first shipment of horses arrived at the facility in February 1988.

The facility houses both long- and short-term inmates. Wyoming’s current

inmate classification system allows inmates to progress through the system

to minimum-security institutions and to community placement over time.

When this classification system began, long-term inmates who had been

placed at the Wyoming Honor Farm facility were allowed to stay through

a grandfather clause. Their presence gives stability to the facility’s inmate

population.

Goals and Objectives

The goals of the program are to provide a source of revenue, provide a

unique opportunity for the staff to utilize the philosophy of the institution

while managing offenders, provide legitimate work opportunities for the

inmate population, and encourage and assist offenders in becoming lawabiding citizens in a respectful, principle-centered, dignified manner while

exercising reasonable, safe, secure, and humane control.

In pursuit of these goals, the program has established the following objectives: research the institution’s physical plant needs for training and handling wild horses; select personnel to supervise the program; develop the

training program; develop a mechanism for dispersing adopted horses;

build trust, discourage lying, encourage individuality, and improve communication skills among inmates; teach anger management to inmates;

and connect the program’s philosophy to the State’s institutional counseling program.
122

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Program Components

The program was founded on four principles: respect, responsibility, cooperation, and communication. As the training facilities began to form, one of

the program’s most important objectives was selecting a training method

and a program manager. A decision was made to use a nonrestraint

method of training modeled after Ray Hunt’s innovative training philosophy. The tenets of his training philosophy are:

❑ Make the right thing easy and the wrong thing difficult.

❑ Be particular so the horse learns to be particular.

❑ Try soft firmness instead of hard tightness.

❑ Do not attempt to direct the horse’s attention if you do not have it.

❑ Notice the smallest change or the slightest attempt and reward the

horse.

❑ Know the difference between firm and hard.

❑ Let your idea become the horse’s idea.

This training method was selected because it coincided with the way in

which the inmate population is managed at the Honor Farm institution.

Some examples of this institutional philosophy are:

❑ Believe in inmates’ capacity to change their behavior.

❑ Give inmates legitimate opportunities to enhance their self-esteem.

❑ Treat inmates with respect and dignity.

❑ Treat inmates respectfully without compromising professional

distance.

❑ Do not impose rules, regulations, or regimentation that cannot be

reasonably tied to the need to maintain order and security.

❑ Send clear messages about behavior that is not tolerated.

❑ Punish swiftly and harshly behavior that threatens order and security.

Offenders typically classified to the institution have no experience training

horses. Their lack of preconceived ideas about the process is a benefit.

Usually, the horse teaches or trains the inmate. Horses experience problems during training similar to characteristics commonly displayed by offenders, and the training program attempts to address these problems.
123

Programs in Correctional Settings

Anger. Displaying anger is an important part of many criminals’ lives. By

responding angrily to anything they perceive as opposing what they want,

criminals attempt to control people and situations. The training program

takes advantage of this situation by showing inmates that success can be

achieved by remaining calm, listening to instructions from staff, and dealing with situations rationally. The horse demands that inmates behave

calmly and rationally. The staff strive to make the right thing easy and the

wrong thing difficult.

Uniqueness. Criminals emphasize their complete difference from other

people; they perceive themselves to be special. The training methods used

by the program are the same for every horse and for every inmate, and

when an inmate steps into the round corral with a wild horse for the first

time, he feels the way that every other inmate has felt in that situation.

Lying. For many criminals, lying is a way of life. It is incorporated into

their basic makeup and feeds other criminal patterns. Habitual lying is

more common than premeditated lying because the criminal automatically

defines reality through lies. In the training program, the “show me “ philosophy discourages any untruths. If the inmate states, “I can ride the

horse and pick up all of his feet, the staff response is “show me.”

Trust. Criminals often do not trust others, but they demand that others

trust them. Sometimes trust of others is sincere, but it is inconsistent. During training situations, trust is a serious issue. Survival of both the inmate

and the horse depends on trust throughout the relationship.

Counseling. All inmates are required to participate in counseling groups. Issues regarding anger, uniqueness, lying, and trust are reinforced by the counseling department in group situations. The program’s philosophy is blended

into practical application that benefits both the horse and the inmate.

Inmate Incentive. Inmates in Wyoming DOC institutions are required to

have a full-time job assignment. Participation in the Wild Horse Training

Program satisfies this requirement. Inmates are paid from the Inmate Incentive Pay Fund, with rates ranging from $25 to $95 per month. With this

money, they are expected to provide their own clothing and personal

items, excluding medical expenses.

Inspection and Dispersal of Horses. The inspection process ensures that

all horses ready for dispersal meet contract requirements. The BLM project

inspector checks each animal before it is adopted. The Honor Farm makes

the horses available to the general public and agencies. Three public adoption sessions are scheduled annually. Federal and State agency adoptions

are scheduled as needed.
124

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Results and Impact

Performance Measures

The program measures success by the following:

❑ Number of horses successfully trained, inspected, and dispersed.

❑ Number of horses receiving specialized training for adoption to emotionally and physically disabled children, U.S. Forest Service agencies,

and the Boy Scouts of America.

❑ Positive media coverage.

❑ Number of inmates successfully participating in the program.

❑ The progress inmates make in counseling programs using skills they

have learned in the program.

Implementation Problems and Successes

Implementation problems were minor. Developing a contract and satisfying the Federal and State attorneys involved in the project was time consuming. A larger concern was providing adequate security for a wild horse

adoption program open to the public and housed on the grounds of a correctional facility. To make security manageable, the Honor Farm developed a strict adoption system that allows the public to adopt horses three

times a year.

BLM originally asked that all horses assigned to the program be saddle

trained. This meant that a person adopting a horse would be able to take it

home, saddle it, and perform normal animal husbandry tasks. Saddle

training, however, is a very labor-intensive and time-consuming assignment, especially for the inexperienced trainer. The desired length of stay

for horses in the program is 60 days, but to meet BLM training requirements, they occasionally had to be trained for a longer period of time. To

expedite the process, horses are now only halter trained.

Successes and Accomplishments

Success in the implementation stage of the program was due to the efforts

of staff members who gave unconditionally of their time and knowledge.

Daily team meetings were held from the time the program was first considered until the first horses arrived from BLM. All problems were addressed within 24 hours.

Accomplishments to date are numerous. During the 10 years the program

has operated, approximately 381 inmates have worked with wild horses in

some capacity. The program has trained more than 1,600 wild horses.

Horses have been adopted by the U.S. Forest Service in Arizona, New
125

Programs in Correctional Settings

Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; the Boy Scouts of America; and the United

States Marine Color Guard. The program trains horses to work with emotionally and physically challenged children at the State Training School in

Lander, Wyoming, and the Kentucky Horse Park received 12 matched bay

horses to work with underprivileged and delinquent children. The experiment in Kentucky has been so successful that the horse park requested 12

more horses. In addition, interest in the training program from other correctional systems has been high. The Louisiana Department of Corrections

has adopted 30 horses to be trained by inmates in their system, and these

horses will be used to supervise maximum security inmates at the Angola

Unit. During the past year, six horses were trained for the U.S. Forest Service, Bloomfield, New Mexico, and five horses were trained for the Girl

Scouts of America. Additionally, five horses are being trained for the U.S.

Forest Service, Pinedale, Wyoming.

Media coverage of the program includes segments on TBS, CNN, and the

Today Show, and documentary filmmakers from France, Germany, and Japan have completed segments on the program highlighting the program’s

benefits for both the inmate and the horse. The program has also been

strongly supported by the private sector, which has made valuable donations of construction and training materials.

Prospects for Replication

Replication of this program would be difficult. The contract currently in

effect will expire in October 1997, and no major changes are anticipated.

BLM has promoted the Adopt a Horse Program so effectively that the public is willing to attempt to train the horses on its own. The original concept

behind the program and the involvement of correctional facilities was that

the training would make the horses more adoptable. Although this is still

true today, demand for horses has increased to the point where there is no

need for additional training to meet BLM management objectives.

The Honor Farm Institution developed a Registered Quarter Horse Program

to take the place of the BLM Wild Horse Training Program if funding was exhausted and the contract allowed to expire. However, the program is being

phased out because of weak local demand for registered horses. If local demands increase, the program will be reevaluated. If a contract can be secured

to develop a training program in another jurisdiction, it is important to involve all departments of the correctional institution, ranging from construction and security to counselors in case management programming.
126

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Contact Information

Tony Thornton

Deputy Warden

Wyoming Department of Corrections

40 Honor Farm Road

Riverton, WY 82501

Phone: 307–856–9578

Fax: 307–856–9015
Bureau of Justice

Assistance

Information

General Information

Callers may contact the U.S. Department

of Justice Response Center for general information or specific needs, such as assistance in

submitting grants applications and information

on training. To contact the Response Center,

call 1–800–421–6770 or write to 1100 Vermont

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005.

Indepth Information

For more indepth information about BJA, its

programs, and its funding opportunities,

requesters can call the BJA Clearinghouse.

The BJA Clearinghouse, a component of the

National Criminal Justice Reference Service

(NCJRS), shares BJA program information

with State and local agencies and community

groups across the country. Information

specialists are available to provide reference

and referral services, publication distribution,

participation and support for conferences, and

other networking and outreach activities. The

Clearinghouse can be reached by:

❒ Mail

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

❒ Visit

2277 Research Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20850

❒ Telephone

1–800–688–4252

Monday through Friday

8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.

eastern time

❒ Fax

301–519–5212

❒ Fax on Demand

1–800–688–4252

❒ BJA Home Page

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

❒ NCJRS World Wide Web

http://www.ncjrs.org

❒ E-mail

askncjrs@ncjrs.org

❒ JUSTINFO Newsletter

E-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org

Leave the subject line blank

In the body of the message,

type:

subscribe justinfo

[your name]
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

BULK RATE

U.S. POSTAGE PAID

DOJ/BJA

Permit No. G-91

BJA World Wide Web Address

For a copy of this document online,

as well as more information on BJA,

check the BJA Home Page at

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA