Commissioner's Directive

Progress Against the Correctional Plan

RESPONSIBILITIES

1. The Parole Officer will:
   1. assist and support the inmate in actively participating in meeting the objectives of his/her Correctional Plan
   2. document all interactions, interventions, observations and assessments
   3. maintain and update the Correctional Plan in consultation with the inmate
   4. monitor the inmate's behaviour and compliance with court-ordered obligations
   5. inform the inmate about his/her rights pursuant to sections 81 and 84 of the CCRA
2. The Correctional Officer II/Primary Worker will:
   1. maintain regular interactions and interventions with the inmate in order to enhance and strengthen dynamic security
   2. document all interventions, observations and assessments
3. The Aboriginal Liaison Officer will:
   1. maintain regular interactions and interventions with the inmate
   2. act as liaison between Aboriginal communities and the Case Management Team
   3. document and share the Elder's observations with members of the Case Management Team and the inmate
   4. support and promote the provision of sections 81 and 84 of the CCRA, pursuant to Guidelines 712-1-1 – CCRA Section 84: Application Process
   5. provide input to the Parole Officer regarding the Correctional Plan for the inmate following a healing path, consistent with the Aboriginal Corrections Continuum of Care Model
4. The inmate is expected to:
   1. participate in the consultation process when updating his/her Correctional Plan
   2. actively participate in meeting the objectives identified in his/her Correctional Plan
   3. obey the penitentiary rules, lawful orders and supervision requirements
   4. comply with the requirement to submit to urinalysis

PROCEDURES

Initial Interview Case Conference

5. The Parole Officer will arrange an initial interview case conference to review the Correctional Plan and interview the inmate as soon as is practicable, but no later than 10 working days after his/her arrival at the institution or case reassignment. The interview will include the inmate, Parole Officer, Correctional Officer II/Primary Worker when available, and when applicable, other members of the Case Management Team to ensure continuity of the correctional planning process. The Parole Officer will document this interview in a Casework Record.
6. At minimum, the following will be addressed:
   1. progress against the Correctional Plan
   2. roles and objectives for the Case Management Team
   3. objectives and expectations for the inmate, including court-ordered obligations
7. The Aboriginal Liaison Officer will interview inmates who express an interest in working with an Elder or in following a healing path as soon as is practicable after their arrival at the institution, and document in a Casework Record.
8. Subsequent interviews by staff will occur regularly based upon the inmate's risk and needs, and will be documented.
9. Any updates to the Correctional Plan will require a case conference with the inmate, and other applicable members of the Case Management Team.

Casework Records

10. All case conferences will be documented in a Casework Record entitled "Case Conference".
11. Members of the Case Management Team will record all information that is related to the Correctional Plan in a Casework Record as soon as is practicable, but no later than seven working days from receipt of information.
12. The Correctional Officer II/Primary Worker will meet with the inmate and complete a Structured Casework Record as outlined in Annex B within 45 days of admission to federal custody, arrival at an institution or case reassignment, and every 45 days thereafter.

Correctional Plan Update

13. The Correctional Plan Update is comprised of two sections:
    1. Objectives/Expected Gains
    2. Analysis of Current Request
14. The Objectives/Expected Gains section contains the analysis of key ratings, the objectives, the expectations established for the inmate, as well as the overall sentence planning (see Annexes Annex C and Annex D).
15. The Analysis of Current Request section will contain, when required, the purpose and/or the reason for the report, as indicated in Annex D.
16. The Parole Officer will update the Correctional Plan in consultation with the inmate whenever there is a need to:
    1. make a change to the key ratings
    2. add or delete a program pursuant to CD 726 – Correctional Programs
    3. amend the objectives of the Correctional Plan, or
    4. request a Community Strategy

ENQUIRIES

17. Strategic Policy Division
    National Headquarters
    Email: Gen-NHQPolicy-Politi@csc-scc.gc.ca

Commissioner,

Original Signed by:
Don Head

ANNEX A

CROSS-REFERENCES AND DEFINITIONS

CROSS-REFERENCES

CD 700 – Correctional Interventions
CD 701 – Information Sharing
CD 702 – Aboriginal Offenders
CD 705-6 – Correctional Planning and Criminal Profile
CD 710 – Institutional Supervision Framework
CD 715-4 – Case Preparation and Supervision of Women Offenders with Children Residing at a Community-Based Residential Facility
CD 726 – Correctional Programs
CD 730 – Inmate Program Assignment and Payments
CD 767 – Ethnocultural Offender Programs
CD 803 – Consent to Health Service Assessment, Treatment and Release of Information
CD 840 – Psychological Services
CD 843 – Management of Inmate Self-Injurious and Suicidal Behaviour
CD 850 – Mental Health Services

DEFINITIONS

Aboriginal Corrections Continuum of Care Model: a care model that provides specific approaches to address the needs of Aboriginal offenders.

Case conference: a formal meeting, consultation or discussion about an offender between two or more individuals.

Case Management Team: the individuals involved in managing an offender's case, which includes at minimum the Parole Officer and the offender, and in institutions, the Correctional Officer II/ Primary Worker.

Dynamic security: regular and consistent interaction with offenders and timely analysis of information and sharing through observations and communication (e.g. rapport building, training, networking, intelligence gathering and strategic analysis). Dynamic security is the action that contributes to the development of professional, positive relationships between staff and offenders and, is a key tool to assess an offender's adjustment and stability.

ANNEX B

STRUCTURED CASEWORK RECORD – REPORT OUTLINE

1. INSTITUTIONAL ADJUSTMENT/ATTITUDE

   • Document any institutional charges, incidents, including observations of the inmate's involvement in any illicit and gang activities.
   • Describe any observed changes in the inmate's behaviour and/or attitude based on the behavioural/attitudinal identified goals.
   • Assess any changes in the inmate's behaviour/attitude as a result of program involvement, counselling, intervention, or any other activity.

2. INMATE'S USE OF TIME

   • Identify any relevant programs, interventions or activities in which the inmate has participated during the previous 45 days. These may include correctional programs, education, spiritual/cultural activities, support groups, leisure activities, counselling, temporary absences, work releases, regular visits, private family visits, or any other activity in which the inmate is involved that demonstrates engagement and progress towards meeting the goals of his/her Correctional Plan.
   • Describe the inmate's employment. If the inmate is not employed, discuss why and if applicable, what the inmate must do/demonstrate to gain employment.
   • Identify any new programs, activities or interventions that the inmate will be involved in during the next 45 days.
   • Confirm the inmate's next of kin and emergency contacts information, and update the Offender Contact information.

3. INMATE CONTACTS/CONSULTATIONS

   • Describe your interactions with the inmate over the past 45 days. In addition, summarize any consultation comments from staff and/or other collateral contacts that have had interactions with the inmate during the previous 45 days. Consultations must include but are not limited to: Parole Officer and when applicable, Employment Supervisor, Correctional Program Facilitator, Correctional Manager, Psychologist, Elder, Chaplain, Spiritual Advisor, Security Intelligence Officer, Psychiatrist, health care personnel, volunteers, Visits and Correspondence Officers.

4. OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND OBJECTIVES

   • Establish the goals with the inmate for the next 45 days based on:
     1. the inmate's self-assessment in meeting the objectives of his/her Correctional Plan and what he/she believes is needed to maintain/further progress
     2. your overall assessment

5. PAYMENT LEVEL REVIEW

   • If applicable, provide the rationale and indicate the payment level recommendation as completed on the Offender Pay Review (CSC/SCC 1138-1) and in accordance with CD 730 – Inmate Program Assignment and Payments.

ANNEX C

KEY RATINGS REASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

Level of Intervention Based on Static Factors

A review of static factors [i.e. based on historical information related to risk that is available at the time of the inmate's admission to federal custody, such as rating on the Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale – Revised (SIR-R1), criminal history record, offence severity record, sex offence history, detention criteria] produces a reliable estimate of the probability and severity of re-offending. This estimate, originally determined at intake, appears as a rating of level of intervention based on static factors. Unless a reassessment is warranted, the rating is normally accurate throughout the inmate's period of incarceration and for the first six months of supervision on conditional release, at which time dynamic factors related to performance on release become increasingly dominant.

The predictive accuracy of this rating can be improved in some cases by reviewing the following factors:

1. time since the inmate's release
2. existence of collateral contacts that could assist in the supervision
3. significant disciplinary problems, suspensions or police intervention in the last year
4. inmate's progress and motivation to participate in his/her Correctional Plan

Only a significant and sustained change in the inmate's performance or situation justifies an increase or a decrease in the level of intervention based on static factors. Guidelines for adjusting the level are as follows:

1. LOW
   • If the previous rating was LOW and there has been no significant changes in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there have been significant and sustained improvements in the above factors
2. MEDIUM
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there has been no significant changes in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was HIGH and there have been significant and sustained improvements in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was LOW and there has been significant and sustained deterioration in the above factors
3. HIGH
   • If the previous rating was HIGH and there has been no significant change in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there has been significant deterioration in the above factors

Level of Intervention Based on Dynamic Factors

Reassessing the level of intervention based on dynamic factors begins with the reassessment of each of the dynamic factors, by examining each of the following areas:

1. progress related to the Correctional Plan
2. anything else that may affect the intensity of the dynamic factor (e.g., changes in personal situation, health, etc.)

The rating for each dynamic factor is based on the level of need required to address each dynamic factor domain as outlined in Annex D of CD 705-6 – Correctional Planning and Criminal Profile:

1. High Need – Factor seen as high need for improvement
2. Medium Need – Factor seen as moderate need for improvement
3. Low Need – Factor seen as low need for improvement
4. No Immediate Need – Factor seen as no immediate need for improvement
5. Asset to Community Adjustment – Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment

Reassessment of the overall rating can then be conducted by examining the number and seriousness of the dynamic factors.

The overall rating should change only if there are some changes in the reassessment of the individual dynamic factors. The overall rating may be:

1. LOW
   • No identified dynamic factors (e.g., factors seen as an asset to community adjustment and/or no immediate need for improvement)
   • Relatively few identified dynamic factors and rated as "some need for improvement"
2. HIGH
   • Few identified dynamic factors but rated as "HIGH Need for improvement"
   • Multiple dynamic factors identified (regardless of degree or severity of needs)
3. MEDIUM
   • Any combination of dynamic factor severity and number that lie outside of either the LOW or HIGH guidelines as identified above

During the reassessment process, it is possible to identify new dynamic factors for which intervention may improve the chances for the inmate's eventual reintegration.

Accountability

Accountability is the level of involvement of the inmate in his/her Correctional Plan in relation to the obligation to modify behaviours identified as being problematic. Attitude, behaviour and insight are critical components to accountability.

The following criteria are used to assess an inmate's level of accountability:

• level of acceptance of responsibility for his/her criminal behaviour
• level of remorse and victim empathy
• institutional adjustment and/or behaviour under community supervision
• conduct that demonstrates respect for other persons and property
• communication to his/her Parole Officer of his/her willingness to engage in his/her Correctional Plan
• active participation in setting and achieving the objectives of his/her Correctional Plan
• an understanding of his/her offence cycle
• an understanding and commitment to his/her relapse prevention
• the meeting of court-ordered obligations

Overall Level of Accountability

The guidelines for establishing the overall level of accountability are as follows:

LOW – Inmate rejects responsibility for his/her actions and fails to recognize his/her problems. Does not disclose emotional states, display guilt or victim empathy with evidence indicating a high level of denial and cognitive distortions.

MODERATE – Inmate may not fully accept responsibility for his/her actions but recognizes some of his/her problems. Displays some guilt and victim empathy with some evidence of denial and cognitive distortions.

HIGH – Inmate accepts responsibility for his/her actions and recognizes his/her problems. Willing to self-disclose, displays guilt and victim empathy with evidence indicating a low level of cognitive distortions.

Motivation

Motivation is the desire or willingness to change.

The following criteria are used to assess an inmate's progress in relation to motivation:

• recognition that a problem exists with lifestyle, behaviour and resulting consequences
• level of comfort with problem and its impact on the inmate's life
• level of feeling of personal responsibility for the problem(s)
• willingness to change, i.e., expression of wish to change, or intention to fully participate in Correctional Plan
• possession of skills, knowledge required to effect change in behaviour, i.e., is ready to change
• level of external support from family, friends or other community members
• past history related to demonstrated change

Overall Level of Motivation

The guidelines for establishing the overall level of motivation are as follows:

LOW – Inmate strongly rejects the need for change or is unwilling to participate in recommended programs or other interventions

MEDIUM – Inmate may not fully accept overall assessment but will participate in recommended programs or other interventions

HIGH – Inmate is self-motivated and is actively addressing his/her problem areas

Responsivity

Responsivity is the presence of a characteristic(s) that influences the inmate's capacity to benefit from the targeted intervention(s).

Responsivity indicators are identified as "Yes", "No" or "Unknown".

The following factors are used to assess an inmate's responsivity:

• language barrier interferes with learning, work or intervention
• basic reading and/or writing skills problematic
• concentration problems are evident
• introverted/shy
• displays chronic antisociality
• may have a learning disability (LD)
• low self-esteem
• intellectually disabled
• may have other issues that would interfere with programming
• suicide attempts/self-injury history
• grief and loss
• has unique cultural communication style
• expresses interest in strengthening culture, or
• any other factor

Overall Responsivity is identified as "Yes" or "No".

Engagement

Engagement is the demonstrated willingness of an inmate to:

• actively participate in his/her assigned Correctional Plan
• be free of criminal and gang activity while under sentence
• display conduct that demonstrates respect
• obey the penitentiary rules and/or supervision requirement

Overall Level of Engagement

Determine the inmate's engagement in the Correctional Plan. In order to be engaged there must be a rating of either moderate or high in both accountability and motivation.

Engagement is identified as "Yes" or "No".

Reintegration Potential

The reassessment of reintegration potential is based on the analysis of the inmate's progress and the following elements:

• score on the Statistical Information on Recidivism – Revised (if applicable)
• level of intervention based on static factors
• level of intervention based on dynamic factors
• security reclassification
• level of motivation

The reintegration potential should only change if the above have changed, and should be rated as:

1. LOW
   • If the previous rating was LOW and there has been no significant changes in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there has been significant deterioration in the above factors
2. MEDIUM
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there has been no significant changes in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was HIGH and there has been significant deterioration in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was LOW and there have been significant improvements in the above factors
3. HIGH
   • If the previous rating was HIGH and there has been no significant change in the above factors
   • If the previous rating was MEDIUM and there have been significant improvements in the above factors

ANNEX D

CORRECTIONAL PLAN UPDATE – REPORT OUTLINE

Section 1 – OBJECTIVES/EXPECTED GAINS

CASE STATUS

Referencing the Key Ratings Reassessment Framework in Annex C , update relevant information and succinctly summarize the progress towards meeting the objectives of the Correctional Plan, as required.

STATIC FACTOR ASSESSMENT RATING – Low, Medium or High

DYNAMIC FACTOR ASSESSMENT RATING – Low, Medium or High

ACCOUNTABILITY RATING – Low, Moderate or High

MOTIVATION RATING – Low, Medium or High

RESPONSIVITY FACTOR – Yes or No

ENGAGEMENT RATING – Yes or No

REINTEGRATION POTENTIAL RATING – High, Medium or Low

PSYCHOLOGICAL/PSYCHIATRIC/MENTAL HEALTH INFORMATION (if applicable)

OFFENCE CYCLE

Update, if required, the offence cycle, and comment on any changes regarding the inmate's understanding of the cycle.

CORRECTIONAL AND SENTENCE PLANNING

In consultation with the inmate, update goals and expected results that support progress against the Correctional Plan.

Summarize progress and set/confirm the objectives for the next period. This is to be consistent with the overall continuum of sentence planning.

These objectives will be individualized, structured, timeframed and focused on the next review period while setting the framework for managing the sentence. The objectives will be prioritized based on:

1. institutional adjustment (include current security classification and ratings)
2. interventions required
3. public safety
4. safe reintegration
5. court-ordered obligations

Section 2 – ANALYSIS OF CURRENT REQUEST

Provide a brief summary of the current request, e.g. release, temporary absence, etc.

When the report is for a release, address the following:

• role played by this release in a long-term release strategy (unescorted temporary absence, day parole, full parole, statutory release)
• release details, i.e., proposed release destination (where applicable, identify if the inmate has expressed an interest in having an Aboriginal community involved in release planning pursuant to section 84 of the CCRA), accommodation, employment, family support
• inmate's current financial situation, cost of requested release, ability to meet the financial responsibilities as they relate to the requested release (e.g. escorted temporary absence)
• inmate's outstanding risk factors requiring intervention
• if completing the Correctional Plan Update for statutory release or long-term supervision order at warrant expiry date, review the early discretionary release and accompaniment criteria
• indicate whether a Community Strategy is being requested, and, if not requested, provide a rationale

RISK ASSESSMENT (only required in cases where a Community Strategy is being requested)

Summarize the inmate's risk as it relates to the elements of the proposed release plan consistent with the Correctional Plan, including any previous release history, the inmate's involvement in the development of the plan and whether he/she is in agreement with the proposed plan.

Review and integrate into the risk assessment any victim related considerations including, but not limited to:

• risk management concerns regarding potential future victims
• information and comments from sentencing judge with regard to community supervision
• restriction on travel as a result of the proximity of the victim's residence
• victim requests for non-association, any threats made either before or after sentencing
• other information, consented by the victim to share with the offender, that does not put the victim at risk

Do not document any information related to victim registration or notification.

Indicate whether or not the Case Management Team supports the inmate's release and why.