Performance Assurance

Report on the Evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers Initiative

394-2-36

Evaluation Branch

Performance Assurance Sector

March 2005

 

Acknowledgements

The evaluation team would like to express appreciation to volunteers who participated in telephone interviews, as well as participating staff, volunteers, and offenders at the following sites: Westmorland Institution, Moncton Parole Office, John Howard Society Moncton, Établissement Ste-Anne des-Plaines, Montreal community, Warkworth Institution, John Howard Society Kingston, Toronto Community, Ottawa Parole Office, Edmonton Community, Vancouver Parole Office, Abbotsford/Fraser Valley Parole, Victoria Parole Office, and all Regional Headquarters offices. Interviewees for the site visits included: community partners, Regional Volunteer coordinators, social program officers and local staff, NVA members, offenders, Senior Management at the regional level, and National Headquarters staff from the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector and from Chaplaincy, Correctional Operations & Programs. Their insights and contributions were most valuable and appreciated. Special thanks to Audrey Concilio and Judith McGee, from the Audit Branch, and to staff from the Evaluation Branch, for their significant contributions to the data collection component of the project.

Evaluation Team Members

Christa Gillis
Evaluation Manager
Evaluation Branch, Performance Assurance
Correctional Service Canada

Marie-Lynn Beriau
Analytical Assistant
Evaluation Branch, Performance Assurance
Correctional Service Canada

Marlene Pepin
Analytical Assistant
Evaluation Branch, Performance Assurance
Correctional Service Canada

Mark Nafekh
Evaluation Manager
Evaluation Branch, Performance Assurance
Correctional Service Canada

Michael Jeffery
Statistical Information Analyst
Evaluation Branch, Performance Assurance
Correctional Service Canada

 

Report on the Evaluation of the Enhancing
Community Corrections Infrastructure:
Volunteers Initiative

 

SIGNATURES

Cheryl Fraser
Assistant Commissioner
Performance Assurance

Original signed by 2005-03-31

___________________________
Date

 

Thérèse Gascon
Director General
Evaluation Branch

Original signed by 2005-03-24

_______________________________
Date

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Evaluation Team Members

SIGNATURES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

EVALUATION CONTEXT

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDICES

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

Five years ago, CSC identified two main difficulties in maintaining a robust cadre of volunteers. The volunteer base was aging and was not sufficiently representative of Canadian diversity. Furthermore, at that time, CSC had very little in terms of infrastructure. A submission was therefore included as part of the Effective Corrections Initiative for funding to enhance community corrections infrastructure, with $1.3 million allocated over 5 years. This period ends in March 2005.

The Effective Corrections Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure funding was used to help build a more diverse volunteer base and to build capacity and infrastructure to support and sustain CSC's volunteer core. The purpose of the evaluation was to explore the extent to which infrastructure had been created, as well as opportunities for improvement, from the perspective of CSC (staff, management, Volunteer Coordinators), community partners, volunteers, and National Volunteer Association (NVA) members.

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation was conducted by the Evaluation Branch, CSC, in consultation with members and stakeholders from the Citizen Engagement and Community Initiatives Branch of the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector.

A multi-source, multi-method approach comprised of three major components was used to collect information for the evaluation: 1) interviews with a sample of stakeholders; 2) analysis of the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database; and 3) a national roll-up of activities related to training, recruitment and recognition and a financial roll-up for activities linked to CSC management capacity (e.g., training CSC staff, training NGO staff), recruitment activities (e.g., advertisements), volunteer capacity (e.g., recognition activities), and connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers (e.g., meetings and NVA regional activities).

The sites having received the main portions of funding from the Effective Corrections Initiative for the purposes of recruitment, training, and/or sustaining served as the sample for the evaluation, including community partner sites, surrounding parole offices and institutions (one minimum security, and two medium-security institutions), and regional and national headquarters. The following groups were consulted: community partners (n=3), Regional Volunteer coordinators (n=19), CSC staff (n=21), NVA members (n=10), offenders (n=4), Senior Management at the regional level (n=6), and National Headquarters staff from the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector and from Chaplaincy, Correctional Operations & Programs (n=4).

The evaluation was initiated in April 2004, methodology, questionnaires and surveys developed from April 2004 through September 2004, terms of reference finalized in November 2004, and data collected by January 2005. Data were analysed from January through February, and a final report completed in March 2005.

Financial Expenditures:

An important component of effective reintegration is sound infrastructure to support programs and initiatives designed to facilitate the safe and effective community reintegration of offenders. The volunteer cadre in the institutions and in the community is an important component of that structure. CSC has 6,181 volunteers registered in HRMS-Manage Volunteers, with 5,596 (90.5%) identified as active1. CSC was allocated $1.3 M from 2000-2001 to 2004-2005 to develop infrastructure in the following areas of volunteer management:

  1. information management,
  2. CSC volunteer management capacity,
  3. recruitment,
  4. volunteers' capacity to volunteer, and
  5. connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers.

1 HRMS-Manage Volunteers database, January 2005

KEY FINDINGS:

The following results are presented under their respective Evaluation Objectives.

Objective 1: Relevance:

  • The Effective Corrections Volunteers Initiative is consistent with CSC priorities. The reach of volunteers is extensive, with contributions to many activity areas that align with CSC's Mission, Core Values and Corporate Objectives2. Volunteer work is most often associated with contributing to the effective reintegration of offenders to the community.

2 The Correctional Service of Canada's Mission Statement, Core Values and Corporate Objectives can be referenced at http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca.

Objective 2: Success:

Efficiency:

  • Treasury Board Secretariat funds were appropriately allocated towards the development of efficient infrastructure and implementation tools.
  • Support, commitment, training and meaningful work were identified as key components to an efficiently running volunteer program. Improvements to efficiency were identified in the areas of funding, support, resources, and training.

Effectiveness:

  • Recruitment activities successfully identified appropriate volunteer candidates who were motivated in the areas of contributing to a safe society, assisting offenders, and becoming involved in their respective communities.
  • Volunteer recruitment is demanding. Although the pool of volunteers has increased, there remain challenges in the recruitment process, including the level of funding, the recruitment of volunteers with the appropriate profile, and lack of interest from the community.

Objective 3: Cost Effectiveness/Value-for-Money:

  • Based on an average wage replacement value of $22, and using an average of 2.5 hours per week volunteer time, it is estimated that volunteers provide the Service a value of over $12 million each year in support services, demonstrating very good value-for-money.
  • Volunteers contribute to many activities, including Aboriginal development, arts and crafts, Citizens' Advisory Committees, citizen escorts, ethno-cultural development, individual counselling, instruction/education, recreation/entertainment, religious programs, self-help, translation, visitation, and working with women. The highest percentage of volunteers contributes to religious programs, followed by self-help, visitations, and citizen escorts.

Objective 4: Implementation

  • A comprehensive data collecting system was created, providing an excellent source of information for the first time to CSC on this valuable resource. The evaluation results indicate the need to address difficulties encountered in populating the database to date.
  • Treasury Board funding was used to create the capacity to manage the program in the form of salary for national, regional and local staff, dedicated in full or in part to recruiting, training, sustaining, recognizing and managing volunteers. Training for more than 55 staff members was completed to address volunteer recruitment and training activities.
  • Although management/staff and volunteer coordinators are well aware of the National Volunteer Association (NVA), this does not extend to the volunteers at the local level.

Objective 5: Unintended Findings

  • No systematic unanticipated outcomes were revealed through the interviews, nor did any become apparent in the analysis phase of the evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

  • Effective Corrections funds were used to create infrastructure to manage volunteers. Implementation in each of the five building capacity areas has occurred, and significant progress made over the past five years. There remains a need to address some key issues to increase the effectiveness and to further enhance the infrastructure to support volunteers.
  • Evaluation findings indicated that volunteers are viewed by CSC management, staff and volunteer coordinators as providing important contributions to offenders, to the Service, and to the community. Volunteers are recognized as providing many important services and results for CSC and more broadly, the community, in their contribution to the safe reintegration of offenders. Moreover, volunteers cost relatively little, yet provide the Service an estimated $12 million each year in support services.
  • Volunteer Coordinators are fundamental to maintaining management capacity, defined in the current evaluation as the effective management of human resources, to enhance the capacity to attract and retain volunteers.
  • Volunteers require information and training to effectively contribute to achieving correctional results.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

  • Recommendation #1: That CSC ensures the completion of data entry as volunteers begin their volunteer work with the Service, including detailed information that is currently missing, and any backlog that exists. That CSC ensures access to HRMS-Manage Volunteers for volunteer coordinators and/or designates for data entry and updating, as required.
  • Recommendation #2: That CSC reviews the existing structure and resources for managing volunteers, particularly at the local and regional levels, and explores options to best support volunteers.
  • Recommendation #3: That NHQ and RHQ provide continued support for outreach endeavours, including targeting specific ethno-cultural/ age/gender groups, when recruitment is identified as a need by local sites.
  • Recommendation #4: That CSC continues to provide ongoing training (e.g., on operational issues, including security awareness and requirements, and on boundaries), including activity-specific (e.g., escort training) training to volunteers when identified as a need by volunteer coordinators and/or management.
  • Recommendation #5: That CSC adapts orientation training for community volunteers to reflect the realities of working with offenders in a community setting, by using the community-based training developed by the Ottawa Parole Office as an example.
  • Recommendation #6: That CSC (i.e., volunteer coordinators, in collaboration with managers) ensures training and sustaining capacity exists before recruiting new volunteers. Also, that CSC ensures Volunteer Coordinators are allocated time to match volunteer interests with specific activities, so volunteers are offered the opportunity to participate in meaningful activities that make use of the volunteer's skills and experiences.
  • Recommendation #7: That CSC provides awareness training for institutional and community-based staff on the role and contributions of volunteers, including how they complement staff in contributing to offenders' reintegration process.
  • Recommendation #8: Some sites offer consistent and ongoing recognition of volunteers, whereas others are less consistent. It is recommended that where such ongoing recognition does not exist, CSC take measures to ensure that initiatives take place.
  • Recommendation #9: That the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector include communication with regional and local (institutional and community-based) staff and volunteers about the National Volunteer Association, as a component of their in-reach and outreach communication strategy.

 

INTRODUCTION

«  The voluntary sector and the millions of Canadian volunteers are essential contributors to the quality, fairness and vitality of our communities. »

Speech from the Throne to Open the Third Session of the Thirty-Seventh Parliament of Canada: February 2, 2004

Program Profile and Logic Model

The services offered by volunteers are beneficial in many ways to the community, to offenders, and to the Correctional Service Canada (CSC) and its staff. CSC provides a supportive correctional environment that encourages offenders to become law-abiding citizens. The Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA) provides direction to CSC and clearly states that "the Service will facilitate the involvement of members of the public in matters relating to the operations of the Service." CSC's Mission states that it will "ensure volunteers form an integral part of our program delivery in institutions and the community3."

Recognizing the value that local citizens can contribute to the correctional process, CSC encourages greater volunteer involvement. Volunteers help bring a new perspective to the organization. They help CSC to keep in touch with the community and become aware of issues surrounding its facilities. Volunteers play an important role in making our communities and our country safe.

Research and experience demonstrate that longer incarceration periods do not result in greater public safety. Research also shows that gradual release of offenders into the community, based on treatment programs, quality risk assessment and release decision-making, and effective supervision and support, is the best strategy for public safety4. Offenders are best able to commit to changing their lives when they can find positive role models to whom they can relate. Volunteers can play this role in a way that CSC staff will never be able to because of their role in the correctional process.

An important component of effective reintegration is sound infrastructure to support programs and initiatives designed to facilitate the safe and effective community reintegration of offenders. The volunteer cadre in the institutions and in the community is an important component of that structure. CSC has 6,181 volunteers registered in HRMS-Manage Volunteers, with 5,596 (90.5%) identified as active5. CSC was allocated one million three hundred thousand dollars (1.3 M) from 2000-2001 to 2004-2005 to develop infrastructure in the following areas of volunteer management: i) information management, ii) CSC volunteer management capacity, iii) recruitment, iv) volunteers' capacity to volunteer, and v) connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers. Regions were allocated various amounts of funding and resources to contribute to their respective initiatives, based on proposals/business plans they submitted.

In terms of current infrastructure, volunteers at each operational unit report to a local staff member who acts as volunteer coordinator in addition to his/her other duties as CSC staff. In addition, regional volunteer coordinators (CSC staff) exist within each region. The volunteer portfolio, while managed locally, is championed at the national level by the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector. This sector supports volunteer initiatives across the country by interacting with the regional volunteer coordinators6. At National Headquarters the volunteer portfolio is managed under the direction of the Assistant Commissioner, Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector, the Director General, Community Initiatives Division, the Director, Citizen Engagement and Community Initiatives Branch and a Project Officer assigned to the file.

Ultimately, the role of volunteers is to contribute to the quality of the correctional process, thus facilitating offenders' progress toward safe community reintegration. Subsumed under this broad objective are volunteers' contributions to: modeling and mentoring; program delivery; establishing and maintaining community contact; and providing continuing support to offenders in the community. A graphic depiction of the activities, outputs and impacts is provided in Appendix A, along with a brief description of the logic model.

3 CSC (April 2004). Mission of the Correctional Service of Canada

4 Decision of the Treasury Board - Meeting of July 27, 2000

5 HRMS-Manage Volunteers database, January 2005

6 The five regional Volunteer Coordinator positions are funded internally with the exception of the half-time coordinator position in the Atlantic region during fiscal year 2003-2004, funded through Effective Corrections.

EVALUATION CONTEXT

As noted in the TB Decision letter, the Service faces two difficulties in maintaining a robust cadre of volunteers. The volunteer base is ageing and it is not sufficiently representative of Canadian diversity. Effective Corrections funds were allocated and used to implement and evaluate infrastructure, training and service efforts to help sustain a robust and representative cadre of volunteers for the future. Initiatives include the production of information products, workshops, conferences, presentations and other outreach efforts to locate and recruit volunteers from various language, cultural, racial and abilities segments of the Canadian population. Moreover, CSC identified the need for enhanced recruitment and training of volunteers, as well as providing supervision and support to monitor the contribution of these volunteers. Additionally, funds were used to develop and implement various mechanisms that would contribute to CSC's ability to sustain volunteers. Initiatives linked to infrastructure development and implementation include: an automated system to capture and maintain a comprehensive and accurate database profiling volunteers (Human Resource Management System-Manage Volunteers), the creation of a National Volunteer Association and the development of a National Reference Handbook to provide a consistent message to volunteers.

Prior to the Effective Corrections Initiative, CSC had no systematic way of capturing the profile of its volunteers in terms of, for example, experience, training, ethnic background, linguistic profile and distribution. Such information helps to inform effective recruitment, training and retention strategies and would therefore allow CSC to continue to be responsive to changing offender needs.

The purpose of the evaluation was to explore the extent to which infrastructure had been created, as well as identify opportunities for improvement, from the perspective of CSC (staff, management, Volunteer Coordinators), community partners, volunteers, and NVA members. Results from the present evaluation will be used as a blueprint for the Citizen Engagement and Community Initiatives Branch (i.e., to provide direction) as to where they may direct their energy in improving the Volunteer program. Likewise, the information will be valuable to CSC overall, providing feedback on the ways in which the Service can facilitate the endeavors of Volunteers. Within CSC, the results have potential implications for volunteers, management, staff, and offender groups, both in institutions and in the community. Other stakeholders potentially impacted by the evaluation include families, nongovernmental organizations, other criminal justice agencies, and the community.

The current evaluation was summative in nature, simultaneously exploring issues of relevance, success and cost-effectiveness7, in addition to implementation issues and unanticipated findings. Embedded within the exploration of relevance and cost-effectiveness, where relevant, were the seven policy test questions from the Expenditure Review Committee, namely:

  • Public Interest - Does the program area or activity continue to serve the public interest?
  • Role of Government - Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in this program area or activity?
  • Federalism - Is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces?
  • Partnership - What activities or programs should or could be transferred in whole or in part to the private/voluntary sector?
  • Value-for money - Are Canadians getting value for their tax dollars?
  • Efficiency - If the program or activity continues, how could its efficiency be improved?
  • Affordability - Is the resultant package of programs and activities affordable? If not, what programs or activities would be abandoned?

7 Relevance: Does the policy, program or initiative continue to be consistent with departmental and government-wide priorities, and does it realistically address an actual need? Success: Is the policy, program or initiative effective in meeting its intended outcomes, within budget and without unwanted negative outcomes? Cost-effectiveness: Are the most appropriate and efficient means being used to achieve outcomes, relative to alternative design and delivery approaches?

 

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

A multi-source, multi-method approach consisting of interviews, telephone surveys and database analysis was used to gather a broad range of information. Thus, the Volunteers evaluation was comprised of three major components: 1) interviews with a sample of stakeholders; 2) analysis of the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database; and 3) a national roll-up of activities related to training, recruitment and recognition and a financial roll-up for activities linked to CSC management capacity (e.g., training CSC staff, training NGO staff), recruitment activities (e.g., advertisements), volunteer capacity (e.g., recognition activities), and connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers (e.g., meetings and NVA regional activities).

Interviews

Participation in interviews was solicited by way of a request to contribute information relevant to the evaluation through telephone interview or face-to-face meetings. Visits to selected community partner sites, surrounding parole offices and institutions (one minimum and two medium-security institutions), and regional and national headquarters were undertaken to conduct interviews8 with the following groups: community partners (n=3), Regional Volunteer coordinators (n=19), CSC staff (n=22), NVA members (n=10), Senior Management at the regional level, and National Headquarters staff from the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector and from Chaplaincy, Correctional Operations & Programs (n=9)9. The sites having received the main portions of funding from the Effective Corrections Initiative for the purposes of recruitment, training, and/or sustaining served as the sample for the evaluation10. Participation was solicited by way of a telephone request to the Volunteer coordinators, followed by requests to specific staff and community partners, to contribute observations through an on-site interview. Separate interviews were developed for staff, management11, and Volunteer Coordinators/Community Partners/National Volunteer Association members (see Appendix B). In total, 63 interviews were conducted, with 36 in the community, 18 in institutions, and 9 at either regional or national headquarters.

8 See Appendix B for questionnaires used in the interviews.

9 Four interviews were conducted with offenders, but due to the small number, statistical analyses are not presented in the report. Although some other groups are small (e.g., community partners), their questionnaire was the same as that used for NVA members enabling their responses to be presented within the larger grouping of respondents.

10 See Appendix D for the list of interview sites.

11 Staff and management responses were grouped for the data analysis, given their similarity in response patterns.

Telephone Surveys

A random selection of volunteers (n=200) was identified through HRMS-Manage Volunteers, and these volunteers were requested to participate in a telephone survey, after being notified by Volunteer Coordinators that they had been selected to participate via a random selection process. Telephone surveys and the corresponding data analysis were conducted by consultants acting on behalf of the Evaluation Branch. Attempts to contact people on the list derived from HRMS-Manage Volunteers were made a minimum of four times, and the final participation rate was as follows: 8412 volunteers completed the interview, 39 volunteers declined to participate (citing primarily the length of the interview [approximately 30-45 minutes] as reason for non-participation), 34 volunteers received a minimum of four telephone calls but did not reply (a message was left, when possible, describing the project and providing a 1-800 contact number for the contractors), 19 interviews were not possible as the volunteer was inaccessible (e.g., deceased or traveling), and 35 phone numbers were erroneous. Thus, a total of 84 volunteers participated (of the original 200 on the list), for a participation rate of 42%. When the 35 erroneous phone numbers, as well as the 19 interviews that were not possible, were removed from the original list of 200 volunteers, the actual participation rate is 58% (with 84 of a possible 146 participating).

12 51 interviews were conducted by the contractors, and 33 pilot interviews, by the Evaluation & Review Branch.

The 84 volunteers who participated in the telephone survey were asked several demographic questions, to compare their profile with that of the overall population of volunteers, from HRMS-Manage Volunteers. The gender distribution was slightly different to that of the national group volunteers, with 54% female and 46% male. The age distribution was comparable, with 70% aged 45 and older, and 22% aged 34 and younger. More than half (55%) were married, and the majority (74%) spoke English as their first language; 24% indicated that French is their first language, and 4%, other. A total of 7% said they were Aboriginal (First Nations, 5% and Métis, 2%) and 10% indicated they were a member of a visible minority group. Educational attainment was high, with 20% having obtained a college diploma, and 42% a university or post-graduate degree. Nearly one-third of the sample of volunteers were retired, with the next highest percentage (12%) working in a field related to social science, education, or religion, and 7% were students. Interestingly, when asked how far they live from the institution/parole office with which they volunteer, the highest percentage (42%) indicated over 30 km. Just over one-quarter (27%) said they live within 10 km from the institution or parole office. The majority (69%) participate in other volunteer activities outside of CSC, primarily in the areas of church activities (34%), health and counseling services (21%) and other miscellaneous activities (28%). Volunteers reported volunteering an average of 13.2 hours per month in institutions, and 7.2 hours per month in the community. Furthermore, institution-based volunteers reported that they have volunteered an average of 6.6 years with CSC, and community-based volunteers, an average of 4.7 years. This survey sample of volunteers seems be quite reflective of the population of volunteers, based on analysis of the HRMS-Manage Volunteers data presented later in the report.

Analyses

Interview/Survey Analyses

Many questions employed a five-point Likert scale, ranging from "Not at all" (1) to "Very much" (5) to evaluate respondents' opinions on various issues related to recruitment, training, and sustaining/recognition initiatives. The five-point scale was collapsed to simplify the presentation of responses. Responses of 1 and 2 were collapsed to indicate "Little/no agreement" with the question posed, 3 indicates "Some" level of agreement and 4 and 5 were collapsed to depict "Agreement/high level of agreement". Mean, or average, responses were also calculated for each response based on the 5-point scale and are presented with the 3-point collapsed responses. Qualitative (i.e., open-ended) responses were examined and codes assigned to answers representing distinct ideas, or themes. These themes were then counted and the number of people endorsing each theme is also presented in the data tables found in Appendix C. Other questions used a dichotomous (i.e., categorical) yes/no format for responding; these responses are presented and compared, where possible, to other group responses, although statistical comparisons are not possible, given the small number of respondents.

Results from the site visit component of the evaluation may not necessarily generalize to all sites, as a purposive sample was selected for the evaluation, focusing on institutions and parole offices in urban centres, having received larger portions of ECI funding. The evaluation contains very limited input from offenders, given the site selection (i.e., primarily community sites). Any future evaluations of the overall volunteers program should consider the input of offenders, particularly as it relates to specific volunteer activities and their impacts.

Moreover, the small sample and extent of missing data (primarily due to "don't know" responses) limits the statistical analyses that can be conducted. Given the small number of participants, the presentation of percentages can be misleading; readers are asked to consider this factor in reviewing the data, and to examine the overall trends in the results. Furthermore, the relatively small number of participants in the management and volunteer coordinator groups, the small number of operational sites, and the need to maintain the confidentiality of individual operational sites, precludes more detailed analyses of results by region.

A total of 84 volunteers participated in the surveys, which constitutes only 1.5% of the total active volunteer population (84 of 5596). Participants were randomly selected from all potential operational sites, not just those having received Effective Corrections funding, and the sample is similar to the overall population of volunteers (see Section 4.1 for profiles).

Database Analysis

The HRMS-Manage Volunteers database, created by Human Resource Management in consultation with the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector to capture and maintain information on active volunteers, was analyzed to explore the national and regional profiles of volunteers.

The analysis of the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database was not as fruitful as initially anticipated, as the database is not yet populated with detailed information for all volunteers. This limits some of the conclusions that may be derived, particularly those relating to the specific activities of volunteers.

National Roll-Up of Activities and Financial Allocations

A national roll-up of activities related to training, recruitment and recognition and a financial roll-up for activities linked to CSC management capacity (e.g., training CSC staff, training NGO staff), recruitment activities (e.g., advertisements), volunteer capacity (e.g., recognition activities), and connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers (e.g., meetings and NVA regional activities) was undertaken by the Citizen Engagement and Community Initiatives Branch in December 2004, and completed in February 2005.

KEY FINDINGS

Key findings are presented below by groupings of questions responding to relevance, success and cost effectiveness, with the 7 Expenditure Review Committee (ERC) policy test review questions embedded within each of the sections, when relevant. Appendix C contains data tables displaying detailed information on specific questionnaire responses, with the primary findings for each set of responses presented in the body of the report.

Objective 1: Relevance:

  • The Effective Corrections Volunteers Initiative is consistent with CSC priorities. The reach of volunteers is extensive, with contributions to many activity areas that align with CSC's Mission, Core Values and Corporate Objectives13. Volunteer work is most often associated with contributing to the effective reintegration of offenders to the community and therefore directly linked to public safety.

Examination of the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database revealed volunteers' extensive reach, with contributions to many activity areas, including: Aboriginal development, Citizens' Advisory Committees, working with women, citizen escorts, ethno-cultural development, individual counseling, instruction/education, arts and crafts, recreation/entertainment, religious programs, self-help, translation, and visitation. These activities involve community members in various facets of the rehabilitation process, ultimately contributing to offenders' capacity to successfully reintegrate in the community. Thus, volunteers play an integral role in working toward the realization of our Mission and Mandate.

13 The Correctional Service of Canada's Mission Statement, Core Values and Corporate Objectives can be referenced at http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca.

Table A presents the distribution of volunteers by activity category, derived from the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database. Information is available for 2763 active volunteers, which represents 49.4% of the active volunteer population. As shown in Table A, the highest percentage of volunteers (40%) contributes to religious programs, followed by self-help (18%), visitations (15%), and citizen escorts (8%).

Table A: Active volunteers by activity category14

Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Total

Atlantic

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

1

 

 

 

 

3

Ontario

3

 

 

1

1

 

53

22

7

48

 

 

 

135

Pacific

48

8

17

208

10

102

38

45

411

168

2

286

27

1370

Prairie

14

2

17

 

 

12

10

19

335

30

 

75

 

514

Quebec

6

 

20

4

7

3

1

52

350

257

 

41

 

741

Total 71 10 54 213 18 117 102 140 1104 503 2 402 27 2763

All respondents (managers/staff, volunteer coordinators/NVA members, and volunteers) were asked to describe what they perceived to be the role of volunteers; these data are presented in Table 1, Appendix C. Approximately two-thirds of all of the respondents mentioned "provide support to offenders" as one of the primary roles of volunteers. Approximately two-thirds of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members also mentioned "help offenders readjust to community life", and providing "a link to the community". Managers/staff also identified "participating in/assisting with community outreach activities" (50%) as a key role for volunteers. In addition to providing support to offenders, volunteers identified "listening to offenders" as one of their primary roles. More than two-thirds of management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members (and 88% of volunteers) felt that volunteers have a "good to very good" understanding of their role (Table 2).

14 Categories are: 1) Aboriginal Development, 2) Arts and Crafts, 3) Citizens' Advisory Committee, 4) Citizen Escort, 5) Ethno-cultural Development, 6) Individual Counseling, 7) Instruction/Education, 8) Recreation/Entertainment, 9) Religious Programs, 10) Self-help, 11) Translations, 12) Visitations, 13) Working with Women.

All groups of respondents "agreed/strongly agreed" (i.e., from 65% to 95% endorsing this category) that volunteers: contribute to effective offender reintegration, serve as good role models for offenders, contribute to social program delivery, contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders, contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders, and provide continued support to offenders in the community (see Table 3).

Manager/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members were also asked about the major contributions of volunteers (see Table 4). One-half of each of these groups of respondents listed: "commitment to offenders", "knowledge and experience", "bringing the community in to offenders" and "assisting in offender reintegration" as the foremost areas of contribution. Managers/staff also listed "enthusiasm" as a key contribution of volunteers.

As demonstrated in both responses to the role and contribution questions, all groups feel that volunteers play a key role in public safety, as their work is most often associated with contributing to the effective reintegration of offenders to the community. These key perceived contributions of volunteers tie in well with three of the four ERC questions related to relevance, namely, public interest (i.e., interest in safe communities), role of government, and partnership15. The entire volunteer portfolio is, in fact, a partnership with the community, including formal and informal relationships with the private and voluntary sector, consistent with the government-wide Voluntary Sector Initiative (VSI)16.

15 The issue of federalism (i.e., is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces) is not relevant in the context of volunteers contributing to the federal correctional system.

16 See Partnering for the Benefit of Canadians: Government of Canada - Voluntary Sector Initiative at http://www.vsr-trsb.net/publicaions/pub/june09 for details on the VSI.

Objective 2: Success:

Efficiency:
  • Treasury Board Secretariat funds were appropriately allocated towards the development of efficient infrastructure and implementation tools.

Prior to the Effective Corrections initiative, there existed no consistent information that could be provided to volunteers at registration. Effective Corrections funds were used to:

  • produce a user-friendly Volunteer Handbook , initially on a CD and now available on CSC`s Website (2003-2004). Hard copies were distributed to all CSC operational sites in fiscal year 2004-2005.
  • develop Community Training for the Ottawa District to be delivered by 2004-2005. This District has seen an increase in volunteers active in offender supervision from one in 1999 to twenty eight in 2003.
  • deliver or have NGOs delivered information and training sessions at local and regional levels (approximately 400 from 2000-2003) to community volunteers working with federal offenders.

Effective management of human resources results in greater capacity to attract and retain volunteers. Effective Corrections dollars were used to fund:

  • 50% of the salary of one resource dedicated to working with volunteers in the Atlantic Region
  • four part time community trainers in the Pacific Region
  • one year salary of a dedicated Project Officer at NHQ (2002-2003)
  • training activities on management of volunteers including the co-development and one-time delivery by CSC and Volunteer Canada of a two-day session with 20 CSC, NGO and volunteer participants (2002)
  • training of 36 staff CSC staff by either a community college or external volunteer organization.

All stakeholders, staff members, managers and volunteer in the sample were asked to rate whether they think volunteers feel CSC holds them back in carrying out their duties (Table 5). Almost one-half (48%) of management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members said "no/not at all" and 70% of volunteers said that CSC does not hold them back in carrying out their duties.

  • Support, commitment, training and meaningful work were identified as key components to an efficiently running volunteer program. Improvements to efficiency were identified in the areas of funding, support, resources, and training.

All respondents were asked two questions that addressed the efficiency issue. First, they were asked: "What factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program" and secondly, to think of "any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program".

As shown in Table 6, management/staff identified "support and commitment from CSC" (56%) as the foremost factor contributing to a well-functioning volunteer program, followed by "training for staff and volunteers (44%), "clear expectations/meaningful work for volunteers" (33%) and "respect/appreciation/recognition" for volunteers (33%). Similarly, volunteer coordinators/NVA members identified "support and commitment from CSC" (40%), "training for staff and volunteers" (35%), and "clear expectations/meaningful work" (30%). Volunteers indicated that "communication and cooperation" were most important for a well-functioning program.

Table 7 presents themes obtained for the question exploring areas to be addressed, and demonstrate significant overlap between management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members. Both groups identified "dedicated and trained full-time volunteer coordinators at each site" (39% and 47%), "funding" (48% and 33%), "support and commitment from CSC" (32% and 47%) and the "need for materials/resources (e.g., time, transportation, meeting locations, tools, etc.)" (39% and 27%) as key areas that would improve program effectiveness. Volunteer coordinators/NVA members also mentioned "proper and ongoing specific training for volunteers and volunteer coordinators (e.g., train the trainer instruction)" (47%), the need for "recognition and appreciations of volunteers more than once a year" (37%) and "staff attitudes and awareness" (30%). Volunteers identified "volunteer appreciation", "recruitment and awareness", and "training" as the most important areas to address to improve the volunteer program.

Effectiveness:
  • Recruitment activities successfully identified appropriate volunteer candidates who were motivated in the areas of contributing to a safe society, assisting offenders, and becoming involved in their respective communities.

Volunteers were asked several questions regarding how they came to volunteer with CSC. One-third of the 84 volunteers surveyed said they became aware of volunteering opportunities with the Service through a friend, or through another organization. When asked why they chose to volunteer with CSC (Table 8), the highest percentage (32%) indicated they wanted to contribute to a safe society, followed by assisting offenders (26%) and community involvement (23%).

  • Volunteer recruitment is demanding. Although the pool of volunteers has increased, there remain challenges in the recruitment process, including the level of funding, the recruitment of volunteers with the appropriate profile, and lack of interest from the community.

No comparisons on volunteer profiles pre- and post-Effective Corrections are possible, as comprehensive data on volunteers was not available prior to the initiative, and the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database was only populated in fiscal year 2003/2004. A profile of volunteers entered in the system is presented below.

As of January 2005, a total of 6181 volunteers were entered in HRMS-Management Volunteers, the vast majority (n=5596) listed as active volunteers (90.5%) and only 585 as inactive. Just over one-half (n=2982) of the volunteers are men (53.3%), 2483 are women (44.4%) and information is not available for 131 volunteers (2.3%). With respect to active volunteers by equity group, a total of 2483 self-identified as women (44.3%), 80 as persons with disabilities (1.4%), 142 as belonging to a visible minority group (2.5%), and 80 as Aboriginal (1.4%). Nearly two-thirds (64.9%) of active volunteers are 45 and older, and only 20% of active volunteers 34 years of age and younger.

Statistical data from Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada were used to compare volunteers to the offender population17. With regard to the offender population, women comprise a small number of the total admissions (approximately 5.6%) and only 14% of the federal incarcerated offender population is age 50 or over. The majority (70.1%) of offenders identify themselves as Caucasian, 11.1% as members of visible minority groups, and 16.1% as Aboriginal (2.7% are unknown).

17 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (December 2004). Corrections and Conditional Release Statistical Overview .

The evaluation team found that for some variables in the database, 100% of the information was complete, and for others, from 49% to 97% of the data was missing. The missing information is mainly in the areas of volunteer activities (see Objective 1: Relevance), and demographic data, including marital status, official language, and education, as shown in the following tables.

Table B presents the distribution of active volunteers by age group. Notably, nearly two-thirds (64.9%) of active volunteers are 45 and older, and only 20% of active volunteers 34 years of age and younger.

Table B: Active volunteers by age group

Age group Number Percentage

<18*

9

0.2%

18-24

380

6.8%

25-34

722

12.9%

35-44

852

15.2%

45-54

1268

22.7%

55-64

1222

21.8%

65+

1143

20.4%

Total 5596 100.0%

*The age of majority is a requirement for volunteering with CSC. However, positive parenting/role modelling is a component of some mentorship programs, and thus some children of volunteers may have been entered into the HRMS system.

Of the information that is available in HRMS, nearly 20% of volunteers indicated they are single, and 13% married (Table C). Over two-thirds of the marital status data were missing.

Table C: Active volunteers by marital status

Marital Status Number Percentage

Common-Law

12

0.2%

Divorced

17

0.3%

Married

730

13.0%

Separated

9

0.2%

Single

1026

18.3%

Unknown

3790

67.7%

Widowed

12

0.2%

Total

5596

99.9%

Note: Numbers do not total to 100% due to rounding.

As shown in Table D, the language distribution of volunteers, as reflected in HRMS, was primarily divided between English (28%) and French (15%). The majority of the data (57%) on volunteers' official language were not available.

Table D: Active volunteers by official language

Official Language Number Percentage

AN

4

0.1%

CC

1

0.0%

CH

7

0.1%

DU

2

0.0%

EN

1576

28.2%

FE

1

0.0%

FR

812

14.5%

GR

1

0.0%

IH

1

0.0%

IT

1

0.0%

SP

3

0.1%

Unknown

3187

57.0%

Total

5596

99.9%

Note: Numbers do not total to 100% due to rounding.

The distribution of active volunteers by region is presented in Table E. This distribution is similar to that of the offender distribution by region, with 9.6% of offenders in the Atlantic region, 25.3% in Quebec, 27.3% in Ontario, 23.1% in the Prairies region, and 14.7% in the Pacific region.

Table E: Active volunteers by region

Region Number Percentage

Atlantic

556

9.9%

Quebec

1099

19.6%

Ontario

1258

22.5%

Prairies

1289

23.0%

Pacific

1394

24.9%

Total

5596

100.0%

Given that almost all of the data (97%) on education level attained are unable, they will not be compared to offenders' educational attainment, nor will they be compared to the education of the survey sample of volunteers.

Table F: Active volunteers by level of education attained

Education Level Number Percentage

2-year college degree

24

0.4%

Bachelor's level degree

86

1.5%

Doctorate (academic)

3

0.1%

Doctorate (professional)

2

0.0%

HS graduate or equivalent

13

0.2%

Less than high school

1

0.0%

Master's level degree

14

0.3%

Not indicated

5424

96.7%

Some college

23

0.4%

Some graduate school

4

0.1%

Technical school

2

0.0%

Total

5596

99.7%

Note: Numbers do not total to 100% due to rounding.

Key informants were asked if they believed enough volunteers are recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives (Table 9). Nearly one-half of management/staff said "yes/very much", whereas less than 25% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members and volunteers replied "yes/very much" (with 31% and 26%, respectively, indicating "somewhat"). However, as shown in Table 10, one-half of both management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members said "yes/very much", in response to the question of whether they believed there is a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past five years. About one-quarter of volunteers indicated "yes/very much" and another 27% said "somewhat". Notably, only one-half of the volunteers were able to respond to this question. Both groups of CSC respondents felt that public awareness/outreach/networking was a way to better recruit volunteers, followed by allocating more resources (e.g., time, money, and people). Just over one-third (35%) of volunteer coordinators/NVA members, when asked if CSC had increased its capacity for recruiting as a result of recruitment activities over the past five years, said "yes/very much" (Table 11).

Volunteer coordinators indicated that volunteers are typically selected following referral from another volunteer (35%), word of mouth (32%), or community outreach (29%). One-half of volunteer coordinators/NVA members and volunteers indicated they were "satisfied/very satisfied" with the recruitment process. When asked if any difficulties were experienced at the site with recruitment (Table 12), 60% of managers/staff indicated "few to none", and only 12% said there were significant challenges (i.e., "difficulty to a lot of difficulty"). Volunteer coordinators/NVA members, however were divided in their responses, with 52% saying they had experienced "few/no difficulties" and 48%, "difficulty/a lot of difficulty". As shown in Table 13, approximately one-third of each group of respondents felt lack of funding to be an issue, and volunteer coordinators/NVA members also mentioned bring in the right people (29%) and a lack of interest from the community (24%) as challenges they faced in recruiting volunteers.

One of the intentions of the recruitment strategy was to bring in volunteers who were more reflective of the diversity of the offender population. Whereas the majority (63%) of management/staff felt that volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population, volunteer coordinators/NVA members were divided in their perception, with 48% indicating "yes" and 52%, "no" (Table 14). Similarly, 45% of volunteers said "no", and 55%, "yes". All groups felt an effective strategy to address the issue is to target specific ethno-cultural/age/gender groups, as required (Table 15). As will be shown using data from HRMS-Manage Volunteers (see Objective 4: Implementation), volunteers are not fully reflective of the diversity of the offender population.

  • Results indicate that the initiative has raised awareness of the need for volunteers, with offenders rated as most aware.

All groups were asked if they believed there had been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years (Table 16). Whereas about one-half of management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members indicated there was higher awareness ("awareness to a lot of awareness"), volunteers' responses were evenly divided among the three response options (31% "little awareness to not at all", 31% "some", 37% "increased awareness to a lot"). When asked about the awareness levels of specific groups of staff (Table 17), management/staff felt offenders were most aware, followed by programs staff, with "other" staff displaying the lowest levels of awareness (based on the average response). Volunteer coordinators/NVA members also rated offenders as most aware of the need for volunteers, along with management. They felt line staff is least aware of the need for volunteers. Consistently, both groups rated the public as least aware of the need for volunteers in corrections.

  • The majority of management, staff members, Volunteer Coordinators and NVA members indicated they were aware of information materials produced through the initiative, and felt it was effective in providing information to orient new volunteers. Volunteers were less aware of the information.

Interview/survey respondents were asked several questions about the orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook", to ascertain its availability, and utility/effectiveness. The majority of management/staff (86%) and Volunteer Coordinators/NVA members (97%) were aware of the manual (Table 18), with over 80% having received a copy (Table 19). When asked to rate the effectiveness of the manual in providing information to orient new volunteers (Table 20), managers' most prominent answer was "effective/very effective" (58%) with about one-third saying it is "somewhat" effective. The only consistent suggestion from managers/staff (28%) was that the manual needs to be simplified (Table 21). Over one-half (56%) of managers/staff indicated the manual is "good as is". Likewise, two-thirds (67%) of volunteer coordinators rated the manual as "effective to very effective", with over one-third claiming it is "good as is". Volunteers were less aware of the Reference Handbook, with 43% responding they were aware, and of the 35 volunteers who had heard about the manual, 23 had received a copy (see Tables 20 and 21). Given that so few volunteers in the sample received the manual, the effectiveness ratings for this group are not useful.

  • The vast majority of volunteers felt that the training available to them was effective. Volunteers, managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members all identified similar areas for improvement, including more hands-on training as well as additional time and resources.

Managers/staff, volunteer coordinators/NVA members, and volunteers were also asked if they felt there is sufficient training offered to volunteers (Table 22), and one-half of each group said "yes" (50% of managers/staff, 45% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members, and 50% of volunteers). Managers/staff advocated the following to improve training for volunteers (Table 23): more time and resources (54%); more "hands-on" training (50%), including the offender, staff and volunteer perspective in training sessions (e.g., role plays and relevant scenarios); more security/boundaries awareness training (32%); and more frequent and timely training sessions, including follow-up sessions (32%). More time and resources (38%) and more hands-on training (31%) were also identified by volunteer coordinators/NVA members, as well as additional specific training with more detailed information (28%).

Regarding training effectiveness (Table 24), nearly two-thirds of volunteers felt training was "effective/very effective. To improve CSC's ability to train volunteers, they suggested program development and training (38%), in addition to developing training material (36%). Managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members advocated more training for volunteers, with most (72% and 76%, respectively) indicating that training was "effective/very effective".

Volunteers were also asked if they had access to (or if they had accessed) additional training. Given the small number of volunteers indicating "yes" for additional training (14 of 83), the details regarding this training will not be presented. Volunteer coordinators/NVA members were also asked if additional training sessions are offered to volunteers for ongoing training purposes; 70% said yes, with the majority (72%) indicating that the focus of the training was to provide information and/or orientation. Of the 17 volunteer coordinators who responded, 14 (82%) rated the ongoing training as "effective/very effective".

  • Volunteers are accepted and recognized by offenders, and are satisfied with their work. Although the vast majority of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members also expressed satisfaction with volunteers' work, they conceded that levels of support, recognition and appreciation for volunteers can be improved upon.

All participants were asked to rate whether they felt there had been an increased acceptance of volunteers in CSC over the past five years in CSC and in the community (Table 25). They were also asked to rate what they perceived to be the level of acceptance of volunteers among the following groups: management, line staff, case managers, programs staff, other staff, offenders, and the public (Table 26).

The highest response endorsed by each group, with respect to increased acceptance of volunteers in CSC was "increased/very much increased" acceptance, with one-half of the managers/staff (54%) and volunteer coordinators/NVA members, and volunteers endorsing this response option. With respect to increased of volunteers by the community, 77% of management/staff, 50% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members, and 49% of volunteers, felt acceptance had "increased/very much increased".

When asked about acceptance among specific groups, managers/staff and volunteer coordinators consistently rated managers and offenders as most accepting of volunteers (with average scores of around 4 "accepting"), with line staff and other staff18 rated as least accepting (with average scores in the 2 to 3 range - "not accepting" to "somewhat" accepting). The public was rated as only "somewhat" accepting of volunteer in corrections by managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members, with average scores of 3.1 and 2.6, respectively (i.e., in the "somewhat" range). However, a high percentage (84%) felt offenders were "accepting/very accepting" and over one-half (58%) indicated that the community was "accepting/very accepting". All groups, when asked how to increase acceptance of volunteers in corrections (Table 27), responded that the Service should focus on staff (e.g., through orientation) and public (e.g., through outreach) awareness of the contributions and benefits of volunteers.

18 "Other" staff refers to staff other than line staff, management, case managers and program staff.

All groups were also asked to rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives from CSC over the past five years (Table 28). The majority of managers/staff (45%) and volunteer coordinators/NVA members (41%) said "support/a lot of support", with one-third of each group also indicating there was "some" support. One-third of volunteers felt there was "support/a lot of support" from CSC. The primary types of support described by managers/staff included "support from CSC management and staff" (52%) and Effective Corrections funds (29%). Volunteer coordinators/NVA members noted "support from CSC staff" as the main area of assistance (43%), whereas there were no specific areas of support noted by volunteers (Table 29).

Respondents were also asked to rate the overall level of support from the CSC local, regional, and national levels, as well as that offered by the National Volunteer Association (NVA) (Table 30). The local level was consistently regarded as providing the highest level of support, followed by national and then regional. Volunteers felt they were unable to rate the support provided by regional and national headquarters, and by the NVA, with only 10 to 15 people responding to these questions (most answered "don't know").

Interview/survey respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they felt volunteers feel recognized by: CSC overall, management, staff, and offenders (Table 31). By far, most groups indicated that they think volunteers feel most recognized by offenders (with over 80% of each group indicating "recognized/very much recognized"). Interestingly, almost half (47%) of the volunteers felt that staff "recognize/very much recognize" the contributions of volunteers. CSC overall was rated across the groups "recognize/very much recognize" the contributions of volunteers at around one-third.

All groups were asked to rate the extent to which they believed volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC (Table 32). The most frequently endorsed response for managers/staff and volunteers were that they believe volunteers feel "appreciated/very much appreciated", at 48%, whereas 30% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members endorsed this response option. A total of 44% of managers/staff, and 47% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members felt volunteers feel "somewhat" appreciated. More than one-half (54%) of volunteers said they feel "valued and appreciated/very much valued and appreciated" and 33% said they feel "somewhat" valued/appreciated.

Over 80% of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members said they were "satisfied/very satisfied" the work of volunteers and 90% of volunteers, likewise, expressed a high degree of satisfaction with their volunteer work (Table 33).

All groups of respondents "agreed/strongly agreed" (i.e., from 65% to 95% endorsing this category) that volunteers: contribute to effective offender reintegration, serve as good role models for offenders, contribute to social program delivery, contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders, contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders, and provide continued support to offenders in the community (see Table 3).

Manager/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members were also asked about the major contributions of volunteers (see Table 4). One-half of each of these groups of respondents listed: "commitment to offenders", "knowledge and experience", "bringing the community in to offenders" and "assisting in offender reintegration" as the foremost areas of contribution. Managers/staff also listed "enthusiasm" as a key contribution of volunteers.

The groups were also asked to describe the types of support required by volunteers (Table 34). Managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members most often listed "more support, recognition, and appreciation" (56% and 63%, respectively), followed by the need for a full-time volunteer coordinator (44% and 38%, respectively) and more orientation and ongoing training (44% and 33%). Approximately one-third of each of these groups said "staff education/respect from staff" was an important source of support for volunteers, and one-third of the managers (and 21% of volunteer coordinators/NVA members) listed financial support (e.g., money for hospitality, etc.). Volunteers listed "communication and compassion" (29%) most frequently, as the type of support they require.

  • All stakeholders agree that volunteering is time well spent, both in the institution and in the community. Areas identified for improvement were mostly security related issues with work in the institutions, or communication issues with staff members.

Each group of respondents was asked to rate the extent to which they think volunteers feel their time volunteering is time well spent. Managers/staff, volunteer coordinators/NVA members and volunteers strongly endorsed (90% or greater) the idea that volunteers feel their time is well spent in institutions (Table 35). Virtually all volunteers (97%) agreed/strongly agreed that their time in the community was well spent (Table 36). Moreover, volunteers were asked if they had accomplished the goals that brought them into CSC to volunteers, and nearly three-quarters (73%) responded "yes".

Respondents were also asked about obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC (Table 37). Whereas over 90% of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members felt volunteers face obstacles, just over one-half (60%) of volunteers said they face obstacles. Both managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members most frequently endorsed "difficulty with security issues" (64% and 58%, respectively), "lack of credibility with staff" (48% and 46%, respectively), and "poor communication with staff" (32% and 38%, respectively), with "lack of training" (48% and 27%, respectively) and "lack of resources" (28% and 23%, respectively) also identified as issues (Table 38). Of the 46 volunteers who said they face obstacles, issues were evenly distributed among "poor communication with staff" (24%), "difficulty with security issues" (24%) and "lack of credibility with staff" (22%). When asked to list the top three obstacles faced by volunteers (Table 39), all groups listed "security" (e.g., access to institutions, passes, etc.). Managers/staff also mentioned a "lack of support/recognition/appreciation", and "lack of training". Volunteer coordinators/NVA members, like managers/staff also mentioned "lack of training", in addition to "lack of respect and credibility from staff". Likewise, volunteers felt they experience obstacles with respect to "staff communication and credibility".

  • Although 92% of volunteers interviewed indicated that they intend to continue volunteering, managers/staff and Volunteer Coordinators/NVA did not respond as strongly, citing frustrations with official procedures and lack of support as some of the reasons why they foresee difficulties in the areas of volunteer retention.

Managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members were asked if the institution/parole office had experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers (Table 40). Responses were split among managers/staff, with 43% indicating "no/none at all" and 43%, "some" (only 14% said "yes/very much"). A similar set of responses was obtained for volunteer coordinators/NVA members, but with a higher percentage (24%) endorsing the "yes/a lot" option (44% indicating "no/none at all" and 32%, "some"). The main reasons postulated by managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members as to why volunteers leave included "frustration with the bureaucracy" (53% and 50%, respectively) and a "lack of support from CSC" (42% and 65%, respectively). Volunteer coordinators/NVA members also cited "personal reasons" (50%) as an explanation for why volunteers leave (Table 41). When asked directly about retention, a total of 92% of volunteers indicated that they intend to keep volunteering.

Objective 3: Cost Effectiveness/Value for Money:

  • Based on an average wage replacement value of $22, and using an average of 2.5 hours per week volunteer time, it is estimated that volunteers provide the Service a value of over $12 million each year in support services, demonstrating very good value-for-money.

Cost-effectiveness explores the following issue: "Are the most appropriate and efficient means being used to achieve objectives, relative to alternative design and delivery approaches?" Encompassed within cost-effectiveness are the ERC questions 5 and 6 (i.e., value-for-money and efficiency).

Table G displays the resource allocation for each year of the initiative, from 2000-2001 through 2004-2005.

Table G: Fiscal allocations for the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure Volunteer Initiative

Fiscal Allocations 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Total

TB Allocation

200

500

200

200

200

1,300

Adjustments

-

(70)

70

-

-

-

Actuals

174

430

250

200

200

1,254

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pacific

-

78

30

39

35

182

Prairies

-

65

21

25

20

131

Quebec

-

50

65

41

35

191

Ontario

-

119

5

17

25

166

Atlantic

-

60

27

39

35

161

NHQ

174

58

102

39

50

423

Variance

(26)

-

(20)

 

 

(46)

Fiscal 2000-01: $26,000 was lapsed
Fiscal 2001-02: a carry-forward of $70,000 to fiscal 2002-03 was identified
Fiscal 2002-03: $70,000 was carried forward from fiscal 2001-02 and $20,000 was lapsed

Table H presents the financial roll-up for activities linked to CSC management capacity, recruitment activities, volunteer capacity, and connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers (i.e., NVA activities). As shown in Table C, the highest amounts of money were allocated for training (CSC staff and volunteers), outreach (public engagement/forums), the NVA, and national and regional infrastructure areas for program sustainability.

Table H: Financial roll-up for building infrastructure initiatives

Fiscal Allocations 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Total

CSC management capacity

 

 

 

 

 

 

A) Fund salary directed to portfolio

23,000

88,633

116,700

72,750

26,000

327,083

B) Training CSC staff

-

-

2,000

51,031

28,663

81,694

C) Training NGO staff

-

4,000

-

6,500

7,000

17,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recruitment activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

A) Advertisements

-

10,395

2,600

-

100

13,095

B) Public engagement / forum

-

50,361

18,000

13,500

10,900

92,761

C) Public appearance

-

8,000

3,800

10,500

1,100

23,400

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Volunteer capacity

 

 

 

 

 

 

A) Manual/guide

-

1,253

200

3,000

32,500

36,953

NVA Strategic Plan

-

-

-

-

6,000

6,000

Evaluation (PSEP)

-

-

10,000

-

-

10,000

B) Training for volunteers

-

53,082

3,480

8,658

2,300

67,520

C) Recognition

-

5,235

2,397

2,210

-

9,842

Award-related

-

3,314

2,000

4,466

10,600

20,380

Non award-related

-

1,375

-

1,142

3,650

6,167

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers

 

 

 

 

 

 

A) Meetings

-

6,448

3,200

500

500

10,648

B) NVA regional activities

-

5,969

15,250

100

1,500

22,819

C) NVA national activities

-

-

19,000

-

-

19,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

National and regional infrastructure areas for program sustainability

177,000

153,170

7,869

30,365

26,687

395,091

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,159,953

Fund salary directed to portfolio includes contract or other.

Training for volunteers includes both direct and indirect training.

Table I depicts the estimated value of CSC volunteer activity, a calculation of the annual cost savings associated with the contributions of volunteers, which addressed both value-for-money and affordability. Based on an average replacement value of $22, and using an average of 2.5 hours per week volunteer time, it is estimated that volunteers provide the Service a value of over $12 million each year in support services, demonstrating very good value-for-money.

Table I: Estimated Value of CSC Volunteer Activity

 

Average # of hours per week

Average hourly replacement wage

Total

Per volunteer

2.5

$22.0019

$55.00

Average weekly total

14,85520

$22.00

$326,810

Yearly average

549,635

$22.00

$12,091,97021

19 Average hourly replacement wage from Statistics Canada - Average hourly wages of employee characteristics, profession and by province, unadjusted data, October 2004.

20 Average weekly total number of hours derived from HRMS-Manage Volunteers

21 $22.00 per hour x 2.5 hours x number of active volunteers x 37 weeks per year.

 

Objective 4: Implementation

  • A comprehensive data collecting system was created, providing an excellent source of information for the first time to CSC on this valuable resource.

Prior to the Effective Corrections Initiative, CSC had no systematic way of capturing the profile of its volunteers in terms of, for example, experience, training, ethnic background, linguistic profile and distribution. Such information helps to inform effective recruitment, training and retention strategies and would therefore allow CSC to continue to be responsive to changing offender needs.

This development of this data system is the first essential step toward effectively managing the volunteer program, with the capacity to track and administer volunteer applications, capture demographics, validate locations, specify activities, capture training and associated costs and provide summary reports. Over the 5 years of the initiative, the database was created, and staff was trained to operate and enter data into the system.

The evaluation team found that for some variables in the database, 100% of the information was complete, and for others, from 49% to 97% of the data was missing. The missing information is mainly in the areas of volunteer activities (see Objective 1: Relevance), and demographic data, including marital status, official language, and education, as shown in the following tables.

The missing data may be explained, in part, by the fact that the information is voluntary, and volunteers may not feel comfortable disclosing personal information. Furthermore, when asked if they use HRMS-Manage Volunteers, three-quarters (74%) of the 19 volunteer coordinators said "yes", with four indicating they don't have access. Nine of 15 (60%) said they had problems with using HRMS-Manage Volunteers, citing primarily a lack of training/requirement for clarification on the process and lack of resources (e.g., staff, technical support).

To be optimally effective as an information management tool, there is a need to ensure not only that all volunteers are reflected in the HRMS-Manage Volunteers database, but also, that detailed data entry is completed, including specific activities undertaken at the local and regional levels. Also, to ensure data is entered on a regular basis, volunteer coordinators or a CSC designate, must have access to HRMS, as feedback from the site interviews indicated that some coordinators do not have access.

  • Treasury Board funding was used to create the capacity to manage the program in the form of salary for national, regional and local staff, dedicated in full or in part to recruiting, training, sustaining, recognizing and managing volunteers. Training for more than 55 staff members was completed to address volunteer recruitment and training activities.

Recruitment activities have included advertisements, publication of the volunteer profile; presentations, forums; conferences; and one-one-one interactions. Some activities targeted specific cultural and ethnic groups. Hundreds of citizens have been canvassed. The most current HRMS-Volunteer status report indicates that there are currently:

  • 6181 volunteers registered in the system of which 5, 596 (90.5%) are identified as active. This represents an increase of between 14% - 19% of our traditional estimate.
  • 4946 active volunteers registered in the institutions and 238 in the community (many community units have not finalized the entry of data), and 412 in locations other than community or institutions (e.g., headquarters, etc.).
  • 2483 of active registered volunteers have self identified as members of the equity groups: 44.3% are women; 1.4% is Aboriginal; 2.5% are from a visible minority group; and 1.4%, persons with disabilities.

Full implementation of the HMRS-Manage Volunteers database will permit CSC to better recruit, manage and retain volunteers.

Table J presents the national roll-up of recruitment activities undertaken over the past 5 years (over 200), which resulted in a total of 1200 volunteer applications.

Table J: National roll-up of recruitment activities

Region Events Number of applications

Atlantic

138

-

Ontario

12

150

Prairies

14

1050

Pacific

66

-

Total

230

1200

When asked about initiatives over the past five years that were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers (Table 42), managers focused on community outreach (54%) and partnerships with community groups (46%). Volunteer coordinators/NVA members, likewise, mentioned community outreach (38%), but advertisements were rated most frequently (48%) as effective for recruiting. Volunteers viewed outreach (i.e., "social awareness activities" [36%]) as the most effective recruiting technique.

Training was offered to CSC staff (internal), NGO staff (external) and volunteers, under the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure initiative. As shown in Table K, over 1200 hours of training were offered to CSC staff and partners, with 178 CSC staff and 315 partners participating.

Table K: National roll-up of staff training

Internal training
Region Hours Participants

Atlantic

32

26

Quebec

21

45

Ontario

49

78

Prairies

840

28

Pacific

48

1

Sub-total

990

178

External training

Atlantic

163

8

Quebec

6

125

Prairies

96

4

Sub-total

265

137

Total

1255

315

Table L presents the overall number of hours of volunteer training, and the number of participants involved in the training, over the past 5 years. Over 5000 hours of volunteer training occurred, with over 1600 participants (which constitutes about 30% of all active volunteers).

Table L: National roll-up of volunteer training

 

Hours Participants

Community

3178

599

Institutional

1832

1025

Total

5010

1624

Nearly two-thirds (63%) of volunteer coordinators/NVA members indicated that there are staff positions dedicated to providing training to volunteers. Regarding the extent to which they believe staffing resources meet training requirements, 42% said "no/not at all" and 46% indicate they "meet/meet very well" the requirements, with 7 of 17 (41%) citing good support from management/use of in-house trainers.

As part of the telephone survey, volunteers were asked if they attended any training sessions over the past 5 years. Nearly two-thirds (65%) responded "yes", with the average number of 1.5 training sessions, and less than 1 workshops and conferences (each with an average of 0.4). Nearly three-quarters of the sessions (73%) were to provide information and/or orientation, and the next highest percentage (20%) indicated that their training was activity-specific. When asked if they believe there is sufficient training offered to volunteers, responses were fairly evenly divided among "no" (35%), "yes" (35%) and "don't know" (29%).

The police parole workshops presented in the Quebec, Ontario and Pacific regions are an example of some of the wide-reaching specific training provided using Effective Corrections funds, reaching more than 500 people working or volunteering in the criminal justice field.

Table M: National roll-up of police parole workshops

Region

Volunteers

Others

Quebec

90

152

Ontario

60

10

Pacific

10

245

Total

160

407

  • Although management/staff and volunteer coordinators are well aware of the NVA, this does not extend to the volunteers group at the local level.

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers provides opportunities for support and sharing of lessons learned. To that end, funds were used to:

  • create a National Volunteer Association (NVA) with two volunteers from each Region and CSC regional and national representation (2001).
  • develop and share the NVA mandate that clarifies CSC and volunteers respective roles and responsibilities.
  • hold three face-to-face meetings (2001-2003).

The NVA has developed a 2004-2007 Strategic Plan to guide both volunteers and CSC in developing an effective and sustainable volunteer cadre.

The National Volunteer Association was created to connect CSC staff and volunteers to volunteers, and to share lessons learned. Data obtained from the site interviews and volunteer surveys indicate that approximately 80% of management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members have heard about the NVA, whereas only 13% the volunteer sample was aware of the NVA (Table 43). Additionally, only 38% report having any contact ("some" or "contact/a lot") with the NVA (Table 44). The NVA was not rated highly by management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members in connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions and in the community , but were rated better by managers/staff in providing support to volunteers and sharing lessons learned (Table 45). However, so few managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members responded that these results should be interpreted cautiously. Volunteers were unable to rate the effectiveness of the NVA, indicating that their reach, to date, appears to be limited primarily to the national and regional levels.

Another means of building volunteers' capacity is to recognize their contribution to corrections. To that end, funds were used to:

  • create the Taylor Award (2001) for outstanding volunteers. Three have been recognized (2001, 2002 and 2003) to date.
  • organize regional activities to recognize the contribution of volunteers to safe communities.

Official methods for recognizing volunteers, such as the Taylor Award and regional activities to recognize the contribution of volunteers to safe communities, were supported under the Effective Corrections initiative. Also important in recognizing volunteers are the everyday experiences of volunteers as they contribute to the functioning of institutions and community operations. These include the level of acceptance for volunteers, support, and recognition, which, in turn, are postulated to impact on volunteer retention.

Acceptance - Overall, all groups felt there had been an increase in acceptance of volunteers over the past five years, with the highest level of acceptance from offenders. All groups, when asked how to increase acceptance of volunteers in corrections, responded that the Service should focus on staff (e.g., through orientation) and public (e.g., through outreach) awareness of the contributions and benefits of volunteers.

Support - All groups rated the level of support from CSC relatively favourably (i.e., in the "some" support range), with the local level (i.e., institutions and parole offices) consistently regarded as providing the highest level of support, followed by national and then regional. Most types of support required by volunteers, as listed by staff and volunteers, were linked to recognition and appreciation from staff, and resources, including a full-time volunteer coordinator and financial support for volunteer activities and initiatives. Notably, volunteers simply said they wish for communication and compassion. All groups were asked if they believed CSC holds volunteers back in carrying out their duties; one-half of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members said "no/not at all" and most (70%) volunteers said they did not feel CSC holds them back.

Recognition - The national roll-up of recognition activities showed that 117 events involving 3,878 participants, had taken place over the past five years (see Table N). With respect to interview/survey findings, all evaluation participants (managers/staff, volunteer coordinators/NVA members and volunteers) believed volunteers feel most recognized by offenders (among choices of CSC overall, management and staff). Importantly, though, one-half of the volunteers surveyed feel staff recognize the contributions of volunteers. Similarly, one-half of the volunteers surveyed indicated they feel appreciated by CSC. The vast majority (over 80%) of managers/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members expressed satisfaction with the work of volunteers, as did volunteers, themselves.

Retention - An overwhelming majority (92%) of the volunteers surveyed indicated they intend to keep volunteering, even though over one-half mentioned encountering obstacles in their work with CSC. Security issues (e.g., lack of access to institutions, passes, etc.), lack of training and staff issues (e.g., lack of respect from staff, lack of credibility with staff) were listed by management/staff, volunteers coordinators/NVA members, and volunteers themselves, as the top barriers volunteers face.

Table N: National roll-up of recognition events and participants

Region Events Participants
Institutions

 

 

Atlantic

37

700

Quebec

35

1,737

Ontario

5

235

Prairies

1

75

Pacific

 

 

Sub-total

78

2,825

 

Community

 

 

Atlantic

8

242

Quebec

4

180

Ontario

3

125

Prairies

1

60

Pacific

23

446

Sub-total

39

1053

Total 117 3,878

Objective 5: Unintended Findings

The final dimension to be mentioned under the evaluation objectives is unanticipated outcomes; no systematic unanticipated outcomes were revealed through the interviews, nor did any become apparent in the analysis phase of the evaluation.


CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Effective Corrections funds were used to create infrastructure to manage volunteers. Implementation in each of the five building capacity areas has occurred, and significant progress made over the past five years. There remains a need to address some key issues to increase the effectiveness and to further enhance the infrastructure to support volunteers.
  • Evaluation findings indicated that volunteers are viewed by CSC management, staff and volunteer coordinators as providing important contributions to offenders, to the Service, and to the community. Volunteers are recognized as providing many important services and results for CSC and more broadly, the community, in their contribution to the safe reintegration of offenders. Moreover, volunteers cost relatively little , yet provide the Service an estimated $12 million each year in support services.
  • Volunteer Coordinators and information management are fundamental to maintaining management capacity.

Management capacity for the purpose of this evaluation is defined as effective management of human resources, to enhance the capacity to attract and retain volunteers. Many evaluation participants indicated that although volunteers are "free", it costs money to run an effective and efficient program. To maintain the current program, and to expand the role and potential impact of volunteers, many respondents mentioned the importance of retaining volunteer coordinators, and ensuring that they are able to focus solely on coordinating volunteer activities (and not to have the volunteers portfolio as an "add on" to another base position).

Recommendation #1: That CSC ensures the completion of data entry as volunteers begin their volunteer work with the Service, including detailed information that is currently missing, and any backlog that exists. That CSC ensures access to HRMS-Manage Volunteers for volunteer coordinators and/or designates for data entry and updating, as required.

Recommendation #2: That CSC reviews the existing structure and resources for managing volunteers, particularly at the local and regional levels, and explores options to best support volunteers.

Recommendation #3: That NHQ and RHQ provide continued support for outreach endeavours, including targeting specific ethno-cultural/age/gender groups, when recruitment is identified as a need by local sites.

  • Volunteers require information, training, support and recognition to effectively contribute to achieving correctional results.

Prior to the Effective Corrections initiative, there existed no consistent information that could be provided to volunteers at registration. Effective Corrections funds were used to produce a user-friendly Volunteer Handbook , initially on a CD and available on CSC's Website. Hard copies were distributed to all CSC operational sites in fiscal year 2004-2005. Community Training for the Ottawa District was developed, and delivered in 2004-2005, and information and training sessions at local and regional levels (approximately 400 from 2000-2003) delivered by CSC or by NGOs, to community volunteers working with federal offenders. Results from the site interviews with management/staff and volunteer coordinators/NVA members indicated that the "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" is regarded as effective in providing information to orient new employees. Volunteers who were surveyed were less familiar with the Handbook, but the majority of those who had received it found it to be effective.

The vast majority of volunteers felt that the training available to them was effective. Volunteers, managers, staff, volunteer coordinators and NVA members all identified similar areas for improvement, including more hands-on training as well as additional time and resources.

Recommendation #4: That CSC continues to provide ongoing training (e.g., on operational issues, including security awareness and requirements, and on boundaries), including activity-specific (e.g., escort training) training to volunteers when identified as a need by volunteer coordinators and/or management.

Recommendation #5: That CSC adapts orientation training for community volunteers to reflect the realities of working with offenders in a community setting, by using the community-based training developed by the Ottawa Parole Office as an example.

Recommendation #6: That CSC (i.e., volunteer coordinators, in collaboration with managers) ensures training and sustaining capacity exists before recruiting new volunteers. Also, that CSC ensures Volunteer Coordinators are allocated time to match volunteer interests with specific activities, so volunteers are offered the opportunity to participate in meaningful activities that make use of the volunteer's skills and experiences.

Recommendation #7: That CSC provides awareness training for institutional and community-based staff on the role and contributions of volunteers, including how they complement staff in contributing to offenders' reintegration process.

Another means of building volunteers' capacity is to recognize their contribution to corrections. To that end, funds were used to create the Taylor Award (2001) for outstanding volunteers, with three recognized to date (2001, 2002, and 2003). Funds were also employed to organize regional activities to recognize the contribution of volunteers to safe communities.

Recommendation #8: Some sites offer consistent and ongoing recognition of volunteers, whereas others are less consistent. It is recommended that where such ongoing recognition does not exist, CSC take measures to ensure that initiatives take place.

Recommendation #9: That the Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector include communication with regional and local (institutional and community-based) staff and volunteers about the NVA, as a component of their in-reach and outreach communication strategy.

These ideas and suggestions are consistent with practices advocated by the Voluntary Sector Knowledge Network22 and Canadian Centre for Philanthropy and Volunteer Canada23. These groups suggest that managing volunteers is similar to other types of human resource management, with the exception that it is essential for organizations and managers to "go the extra step" to acknowledge the contributions of volunteers. They advocate the importance of understanding why volunteers are there (e.g., most often because they "buy into" the mandate of the organization) and using that information to successfully manage them. For instance, most volunteers surveyed for the current evaluation of volunteers in CSC indicated that they are there to support offenders in their reintegration efforts. It is critical that CSC acknowledge their contributions to this endeavor, and that the Service provides volunteers with meaningful work that allows them to further offenders' rehabilitation efforts.

These organizations further promote good record-keeping as an imperative component of an efficient volunteer program, as it can not only assist in identifying training and other learning opportunities that would assist volunteers in their activities but also guide managers in implementing meaningful and personal recognition. For instance, it enables managers to quick access to information for reference letters. The HRMS-Manage Volunteers database has this capacity to provide critical support to Volunteer Coordinators in maintaining management capacity.

22 http://www.vskn.ca/hrm.htm

23 See McClintock, N. (2004). Understanding Canadian Volunteers: Using the National Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating to build your volunteer program Canadian Centre for Philanthropy. See also Handy, F., Mound, R., Vaccaro, L., & Prochazka, K. (2004). Promising Practices for Volunteer Administration in Hospitals. Canadian Centre for Philanthropy .

 

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Logic Model

Logic Model

The main objective behind the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure portion of the Effective Corrections Initiative is manage information to assist in building infrastructure for (i.e., building capacity to support) CSC's volunteer base. The three activities of recruiting, training and sustaining are built around the need to develop a more representative and diverse group of volunteers that more accurately reflects the ever changing diverse ethno-cultural needs of offenders.

Recruit Volunteers Volunteers are recruited through different processes/methods such as publications and advertising campaigns or though forums and community awareness sessions. These methods are the outputs of this activity.

Train Volunteers Following the recruitment process, volunteers require information and an orientation to corrections, the Criminal Justice System, and the institutional and community correctional environments. Additionally, training may be activity-specific (e.g., citizen escorts), skills related (e.g., First Aid, CPR) or may be linked to personal and/or professional development. Effective training is linked to the development of orientation materials, offering training sessions and/or workshops, and through the provision of operational and staff support.

Sustain volunteers As sustaining volunteers is a challenging area, specific strategies as well as broad-based recognition and support, are essential for successful volunteer retention. The various activities and initiatives associated with building infrastructure (e.g., ongoing training) and offering support contribute to the Service's enhanced capacity to sustain volunteers.

Impacts

Impacts refer to program goals or what program activities intend to change and/or create. As illustrated in the logic model, impacts are grouped into immediate, intermediate and long-term goals. In the following section, immediate and intermediate impacts of the three primary activities designed to build infrastructure (i.e., recruit, train, and sustain volunteers) are described together, given their logical interconnection.

Immediate and Intermediate Impacts

The various recruitment initiatives and methods (i.e. publications and advertising campaigns, forums and community awareness sessions) should result in an increase in the number of volunteer applications, which should contribute to a larger, more representative pool of volunteers. Moreover, the various recruitment initiatives that occurred should result in building recruiting capacity for CSC.

An anticipated impact of training is an effective and knowledgeable group of volunteers who recognize CSC's commitment to training. These factors should impact on staff and offender acceptance of volunteers. Furthermore, the various training initiatives that occurred should result in building training capacity for CSC.

Moreover, through the development and the potential for ongoing monitoring of an automated system to manage information on volunteers (i.e., HRMS-Manage Volunteers), the Service ultimately can build sustainability capacity and establish a volunteer support structure.

Long-term Goals

The activities, immediate and intermediate impacts eventually lead to the ultimate goal of volunteers contributing to the quality of the correctional process through: (1) modelling and mentoring, (2) social program delivery, (3) establishing and maintaining community support, and (4) providing continued support in the community.

 

Appendix B: Questionnaires and Surveys

 

VOLUNTEERS EVALUATION SURVEY

MANAGEMENT

Text Box: ID: _______________________  Date of interview: ___________  Interviewer:________________  Name: ____________________  Position: __________________  Province/  Territory: __________________  Site: ______________________  Region: ___________________

Please select one:

[1] Community

[2] Institution

This evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers is being conducted to meet Treasury Board Secretariat reporting requirements. We are examining activities and initiatives linked to recruiting, training, retaining and recognizing volunteers, as well as exploring your perceptions of the contributions of volunteers.

Your participation is voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential. If there are questions that you do not feel comfortable answering, do not feel obligated to answer them.

This survey will take approximately 1 hour to complete. We would like to thank you for participating in this important study. Your time is greatly appreciated.

SECTION A: RECRUITMENT

1.  What are the main ways volunteers were recruited under the Effective Corrections initiative? (check all that apply)

[1] Publications (if recruited by publications, please go to Question2)*
[2] Advertisements (if recruited by advertisements, please go to Question 3)*
[3] Forums / community awareness sessions (if recruited by forums/community awareness sessions, please go to Question 4)*
[40] Not applicable - we did not focus on recruitment (go to section B)

*Note: If more than one was used, then complete each of the questions in Section A.

2.  What types of publications were produced? (check all that apply) :

[1] Pamphlets
[2] Flyers
[3] Posters
[4] Internet-based
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

A.  Which type of publication was the most effective for recruiting volunteers? ( check only one .)

[1] Pamphlets
[2] Flyers
[3] Posters
[4] Internet-based
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  Who was the target audience for the publications described above (check all that apply) and what type of publication was used (circle the option[s] that apply) :

[1] Other volunteer groups

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

[2] Schools / universities

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

[3] Faith groups

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

[4] Ethno-cultural communities

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

[5] General public / community

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

[6] Other (please specify below):

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other: ___

[20] Don't know

C.  Overall, how effective were the publications in recruiting volunteers? Please circle the response below that best describes how effective they were.

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

Note: If publications were the only way volunteers were recruited, go to Question 5.

3.  What types of advertisements were produced? (check all that apply)

[1] Newspapers
[2] Signs / billboards
[3] Television
[4] Internet-based
[5] Other (please specify): ______________________

A.  What type of advertisements was the most effective in recruiting volunteers? (check only one)

[1] Newspapers
[2] Signs / billboards
[3] Television
[4] Internet-based
[5] Other (please specify): ______________________

B.  Who was the target audience for the advertisements described above (check all that apply) and what type of publication was used (circle the option[s] that apply):

[1] Other volunteer groups

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

[2] Schools / universities

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

[3] Faith groups

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

[4] Ethno-cultural communities

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

[5] General public / community

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

[6] Other (please specify below):

Pamphlets

Flyers

Posters

Internet-based

Other:___

[20] Don't know

C.  Overall, how effective were the advertisements in recruiting volunteers (please circle the response below that best describes how effective they were)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

Note: If advertisements were the only way volunteers were recruited, go to Question 5.

4.  What types of forums / community awareness sessions were held (check all that apply):

[1] Media interviews
[2] Presentations to community groups
[3] Arranging tours of CSC facilities
[4] University / college presentations
[5] Liaising with criminal justice partners (e.g., police, legal) and/or NGO criminal justice partners (e.g., John Howard Society, Elizabeth Fry Society)
[6] Forums targeted toward recruiting volunteers
[7] Hosting or participating in public forums to enhance community awareness and education
[8] Hosting an open house at the institution / CCC
[9] Other (please specify): _________________________

A.  What type of forums / community awareness sessions was most effective in recruiting volunteers (check only one):

[1] Media interviews
[2] Presentations to community groups
[3] Arranging tours of CSC facilities
[4] University / college presentations
[5] Liaising with criminal justice partners (e.g., police, legal) and/or NGO criminal justice partners (e.g., John Howard Society, Elizabeth Fry Society)
[6] Forums targeted toward recruiting volunteers
[7] Hosting or participating in public forums to enhance community awareness and education
[8] Hosting an open house at the institution / CCC
[9] Other (please specify): _________________________

B. Who was the target audience for the forums / community awareness sessions described above: (check all that apply)

[1] Other volunteer groups
[2] Schools / universities
[3] Faith groups
[4] Ethno-cultural communities
[5] General public / community
[6] Other (please specify): ____________________________

C. Overall, how effective were the forums / community awareness sessions in recruiting volunteers (please circle the response below that best describes how effective they were)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

[20] Don't know

5. How are volunteers typically selected at _______ (insert name of site)? (check all that apply)

[1] Telephone interview
[2] Personal interview
[3] References
[4] Referral from management team
[5] Referral from other staff
[6] Referral from Volunteer Coordinator
[7] Referral from other CSC source
[8] Referral from another volunteer
[9] Other (please specify): ________________________

6.   How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the volunteer recruitment process?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Satisfied   Somewhat Satisfied   Very Satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

7.  Has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties recruiting volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. If yes , what types of difficulties have been experienced with the recruitment process? (check all that apply)

[1] Lack of interest from the community
[2] Bringing in appropriate people (i.e., people there for the right reasons)
[3] Lack of diversity (i.e., same occupation, SES, ethnicity)
[4] Lack of funding for recruitment activities
[5] Geographic location (e.g., large territory)
[6] Other (please specify): ____________________

8. In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of awareness of the need for volunteers, among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify):
___________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

9.   In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1

2

3

4

5

Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very much

[20] Don't know

A. What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

10.  In your opinion, has CSC increased its capacity for recruiting as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

11. In your opinion, do volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

12. Please describe any initiatives over the past 5 years that you feel were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers (including publications, advertising campaigns and/or forums / community awareness sessions).

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION B: TRAINING

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Currently, are there staff positions dedicated to providing training for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, please indicate the type of position, and number of positions:

[1] Part-time

# of positions: ______

[2] Full-time

# of positions: ______

[3] Other (please specify): _______________

# of positions: ______

If no, were there (in the past) staff positions dedicated to providing training for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

B.  If yes, please indicate the type of position, and number of positions:

[1] Part-time

# of positions: ______

[2] Full-time

# of positions: ______

[3] Other (please specify): _______________

# of positions: ______

2.  Using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which staffing resources meet volunteers' training requirements:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

3.  What was the primary focus of staff with respect to training (check all that apply, and rank in order of importance in the space provided):

  Rank order

[1] Developing training materials

______

[2] Delivery of training sessions

______

[3] Adapting existing training materials for use with volunteers

______

[4] Coordinating logistics and delivery of training

______

[5] Other (please specify): __________________

______

4.  Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.   If no, which area(s) need to be improved?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5. Overall, how effective are training sessions in training volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

What could be done, if anything, to improve the training sessions?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  How many training sessions were conducted over the past 5 years?

_________ Training sessions

_________ Workshops

_________ Conferences

8.  Who was the target audience for the training sessions? (check all that apply)

[1] Existing volunteers
[2] New volunteers
[3] Other volunteer groups
[4] Schools / universities
[5] Faith groups
[6] Ethno-cultural communities
[7] General public / community
[8] Other (please specify): ______________________________

9.  What was the focus of the training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

10.  What types of materials were used for the training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

11. Are you aware that an orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" was developed for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

A. If yes, did you receive a copy of this manual?

[0] No [1] Yes

B.  If yes, how would you rate the effectiveness of this manual in providing information to orient new volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

12. Were any other orientation materials developed over the past 5 years?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what types of orientation materials were developed? (check all that apply)

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What was the focus of the orientation materials (check all that apply) :

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

C.  Who was the target audience for the orientation materials? (check all that apply)

[1] Existing volunteers
[2] New volunteers
[3] Other volunteer groups
[4] Schools / universities
[5] Faith groups
[6] Ethno-cultural communities
[7] General public / community
[8] Other (please specify): ______________________________

13.  How would you describe CSC's capacity for training over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Very poor   Adequate   Very Good

[20] Don't know

14.  Do you think volunteers have a good understanding of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very good

[20] Don't know

15.  What do you see as the role of volunteers?

(allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Help offenders adjust to prison
[2] Help offenders readjust to community life
[3] Provide support
[4] Listen to offenders
[5] Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution
[6] Serve as a role model
[7] Serve as an advocate for offenders
[8] Help with programs
[9] Serve as tutors
[10] A link to the community
[11] To assist with the offender's case management process
[12] To supervise escorted passes
[13] To help offenders prepare for release
[14] To assist with hobbies / leisure time
[15] To assist with faith-based issues
[16] To participate in / assist with community outreach activities
[17] Other (please specify): ________________________

16.  Do volunteers advise the staff and the offenders of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Never   Sometime   Always

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, how? (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Word of mouth
[2] Use of notice boards
[3] Meetings with staff
[4] Meetings with offenders
[5] Forums
[6] It is understood, because they have been involved for so long
[7] Other (please specify): _____________________

17.  In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

In CSC

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

In the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

18.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): ___________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

SECTION C: SUSTAINING AND RECOGNITION

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Are additional training sessions offered to volunteers for ongoing training purposes?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, why not?

____________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If yes, what is the focus of the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

C.  What types of materials are/were used for the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

D.  Overall, how would you rate the effectiveness the additional training sessions for ongoing training with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

E.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

2.   How many additional training sessions were conducted for ongoing training over the past 5 years?

_________ Training sessions

_________ Workshops

_________ Conferences

3.  How would you rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives (i.e., staff, resources, time, etc.) from CSC over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If "some" or higher, please describe the type(s) support provided for volunteer initiatives?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If none, please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

C.  Please describe the type(s) of support required by volunteers.

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

How would you rate the level of overall support for volunteers from the groups listed below?

1 2 3 4 5
No support at all   Some support   A lot of support

CSC local level (e.g., institution, parole office)

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC regional level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC national level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

National Volunteer Association

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

4.  Do you think volunteers feel that CSC holds them back in carrying out their duties?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  Please indicate the extent to which you think volunteers feel recognized by each of the following groups:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

CSC Overall

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

6.  I think volunteers feel their work in institutions is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

7.  I think volunteers feel their work in the community is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

8.  Using the scale below, please rate the following statements on responsiveness to volunteers:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

I think CSC staff in institutions are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC staff in the community are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think the community is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC in general is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think offenders are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

9.  Has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what do you think is/are the main reason(s) volunteers leave? (check all that apply)

[1] Too time consuming
[2] Frustrated with the bureaucracy
[3] They don't feel they are contributing
[4] Not enough direct contact / work with offenders
[5] Personal reasons (e.g., illness)
[6] Lack of support from CSC
[7] Other (please specify): _________________________

10.  To what extent do you think volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

11.  Are there mechanisms in place to ensure continuity in the volunteer program (e.g., is there a way to ensure corporate memory for volunteers)?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

If yes, please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

12.  Have you heard of the National Volunteer Association (NVA)?

[0] No [1] Yes

13.  Have you had any contacts with the NVA?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Some   A lot

Please describe:

__________________________________________________

[40] Not applicable

14.  Using the scale below, how effective would you rate the NVA in:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know  [40] Not applicable

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know  [40] Not applicable

Providing support to volunteers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know  [40] Not applicable

Sharing lessons learned

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know  [40] Not applicable

 

SECTION D: CONTRIBUTION OF VOLUNTEERS

1.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

1. Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers serve as good role models for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4.  Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5.  Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

6.  Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

1. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Modeling and Mentoring.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Social Program Delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Establishing and Maintaining Community Support.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4.  Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5.  Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the institution.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Please explain: (Complete if respondent freely generates)

__________________________________________________

3.  Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all satisfied   Somewhat Satisfied   Very Satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

4.  In your opinion, do volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC?

(allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Lack of privacy
[2] Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities
[3] Breaches of confidentiality
[4] Inadequate office space
[5] Poor communication with staff
[6] Lack of credibility with offenders
[7] Lack of credibility with staff
[8] Lack of credibility with management
[9] Lack of access to information
[10] Difficulty with security issues (e.g., access in the institution, passes, etc.)
[11] Lack of training
[12] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What are the 3 biggest obstacles?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers?

(allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Their commitment to offenders
[2] Their enthusiasm
[3] Their understanding of corrections
[4] Bringing the community in to offenders
[5] Their fresh perspective
[6] Their involvement with staff and/or management
[7] Their knowledge and/or experience
[8] Providing support in accessing social services
[9] Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities
[10] Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc
[11] Mentoring relationships in community setting
[12] Help develop personal and family support networks within community
[13] Assist offenders to access employment resources
[14] Assist in offender reintegration
[15] Other (please specify): ______________________

6.  In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program? (What works, what doesn't)

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

Do you have anything else you would like to add?

__________________________________________________

 

Thank you for your time

 

VOLUNTEERS EVALUATION SURVEY

STAFF

Text Box: ID: ____________________  Date of interview: _________  Interviewer:______________  Name: __________________  Position: ________________  Province/ Territory: ________________  Site: ____________________  Region:_________________

Please select one:

[1] Community             

[2] Institution  

This evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers is being conducted to meet Treasury Board Secretariat reporting requirements. We are examining activities and initiatives linked to recruiting, training, retaining and recognizing volunteers, as well as exploring your perceptions of the contributions of volunteers.

Your participation is voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential. If there are questions that you do not feel comfortable answering, do not feel obligated to answer them.

This survey will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. We would like to thank you for participating in this important study. Your time is greatly appreciated.


SECTION A: RECRUITMENT

1.  Has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties recruiting volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, what types of difficulties have been experienced with the recruitment process?
(check all that apply)

[1] Lack of interest from the community
[2] Bringing in appropriate people (i.e., people there for the right reasons)
[3] Lack of diversity (i.e., same occupation, SES, ethnicity)
[4] Lack of funding for recruitment activities
[5] Geographic location (e.g., large territory)
[6] Other (please specify): ____________________

2.  In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of awareness of the need for volunteers, among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify):________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

3. In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

4. In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers?

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  In your opinion, do the volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, what could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

Please describe any initiatives over the past 5 years that you feel were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers (including publications, advertising campaigns and/or forums / community awareness sessions)?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION B: TRAINING

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, which area(s) need to be improved?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

2.  Overall, how effective are training sessions for volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

What could be done, if anything, to improve the training sessions?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

3.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

4.  Are you aware that an orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" was developed for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If yes, did you receive a copy of this manual?

[0] No [1] Yes

B.  If yes, how would you rate the effectiveness of this manual in providing information to orient new volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  Do you think volunteers have a good understanding of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very good

[20] Don't know

6.  What do you see as the role of volunteers (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)?

[1] Help offenders adjust to prison
[2] Help offenders readjust to community life
[3] Provide support
[4] Listen to offenders
[5] Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution
[6] Serve as a role model
[7] Serve as an advocate for offenders
[8] Help with programs
[9] Serve as tutors
[10] A link to the community
[11] To assist with the offender's case management process
[12] To supervise escorted passes
[13] To help offenders prepare for release
[14] To assist with hobbies / leisure time
[15] To assist with faith-based issues
[16] To participate in / assist with community outreach activities
[17] Other (please specify): ________________________

7.  Do volunteers advise the staff and the offenders of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Never   Sometime   Always

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, how? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Word of mouth
[2] Use of notice boards
[3] Meetings with staff
[4] Meetings with offenders
[5] Forums
[6] It is understood, because they have been involved for so long
[7] Other (please specify): _____________________

8.  In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

In CSC

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

In the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

9.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): _________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

SECTION C: SUSTAINING AND RECOGNITION

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  How would you rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives (i.e., staff, resources, time, etc.) from CSC over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If "some" or higher, please describe the type(s) of support provided for volunteer initiatives?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If "none", please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

C.  Please describe the type(s) of support required by volunteers.

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

2. How would you rate the level of overall support for volunteers from the groups listed below?

1 2 3 4 5
No support at all   Some support   A lot of support

CSC local level (e.g., institution, parole office)

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC regional level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC national level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

National Volunteer Association

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

3.  Do you think volunteers feel that CSC holds them back in carrying out their duties?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

4.  Please indicate the extent to which you think volunteers feel recognized by each of the following groups:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

CSC Overall

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  I think volunteers feel their work in institutions is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

6.  I think volunteers feel their work in the community is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

7.  Using the scale below, please rate the following statements on responsiveness to volunteers:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

I think CSC staff in institutions are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC staff in the community are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

I think the community is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC in general is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think offenders are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

8.  To your knowledge, has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, what do you think is/are the main reason(s) volunteers leave? (check all that apply)

[1] Too time consuming
[2] Frustrated with the bureaucracy
[3] They don't feel they are contributing
[4] Not enough direct contact / work with offenders
[5] Personal reasons (e.g., illness)
[6] Lack of support from CSC
[7] Other (please specify): _________________________

9.  To what extent do you think volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

10.  Have you heard of the National Volunteer Association (NVA)?

[0] No [1] Yes

11.  Have you had any contacts with the NVA?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

Please describe:

__________________________________________________

[40] Not applicable

12.  Using the scale below, how effective would you rate the NVA in:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Providing support to volunteers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Sharing lessons learned

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

 

SECTION D: CONTRIBUTION OF VOLUNTEERS

1.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

1. Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers serve as good models for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

6. Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

1. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Modeling and Mentoring.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Social Program Delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Establishing and Maintaining Community Support.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4.  Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5.  Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the institution.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Please explain: (Complete if respondent freely generates)

__________________________________________________

3.  Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not satisfied at all   Somewhat satisfied   Very Satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

4.  In your opinion, do volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Lack of privacy
[2] Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities
[3] Breaches of confidentiality
[4] Inadequate office space
[5] Poor communication with staff
[6] Lack of credibility with offenders
[7] Lack of credibility with staff
[8] Lack of credibility with management
[9] Lack of access to information
[10] Difficulty with security issues (e.g., access in the institution, passes, etc.)
[11] Lack of training
[12] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What are the 3 biggest obstacles?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Their commitment to offenders
[2] Their enthusiasm
[3] Their understanding of corrections
[4] Bringing the community in to offenders
[5] Their fresh perspective
[6] Their involvement with staff and/or management
[7] Their knowledge and/or experience
[8] Providing support in accessing social services
[9] Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities
[10] Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc
[11] Mentoring relationships in community setting
[12] Help develop personal and family support networks within community
[13] Assist offenders to access employment resources
[14] Assist in offender reintegration
[15] Other (please specify): ______________________

6.  In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program? (What works, what doesn't)

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

8.  Do you have anything else you would like to add?

__________________________________________________

 

Thank you for your time

 

 

VOLUNTEERS EVALUATION SURVEY

VOLUNTEER COORDINATORS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS

Text Box: ID: ____________________  Date of interview: _________  Interviewer:______________  Name: __________________  Position: ________________  Province/ Territory: ________________  Site: ____________________  Region:_________________

Please select one:

[1] Community             

[2] Institution   

This evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers is being conducted to meet Treasury Board Secretariat reporting requirements. We are examining activities and initiatives linked to recruiting, training, retaining and recognizing volunteers, as well as exploring your perceptions of the contributions of volunteers.

Your participation is voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential. If there are questions that you do not feel comfortable answering, do not feel obligated to answer them.

This survey will take approximately 1 hour to complete. We would like to thank you for participating in this important study. Your time is greatly appreciated.

SECTION A: RECRUITMENT

1.  How are volunteers typically selected at the various sites? (check all that apply)

[1] Telephone interview
[2] Personal interview
[3] References
[4] Referral from management team
[5] Referral from other staff
[6] Referral from Volunteer Coordinator
[7] Referral from other CSC source
[8] Referral from another volunteer
[9] Other (please specify): ________________________

2.  How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the volunteer recruitment process?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Satisfied

 

Somewhat Satisfied

 

Very Satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

3.  Have institutions/parole offices experienced any difficulties recruiting volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, what types of difficulties have been experienced with the recruitment process?
(check all that apply)

[1] Lack of interest from the community
[2] Bringing in appropriate people (i.e., people there for the right reasons)
[3] Lack of diversity (i.e., same occupation, SES, ethnicity)
[4] Lack of funding for recruitment activities
[5] Geographic location (e.g., large territory)
[6] Other (please specify): ____________________

4.  In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of awareness of the need for volunteers, among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): ________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

5.  In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6. In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  In your opinion, has CSC increased its capacity for recruiting as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

8.  In your opinion, do volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, what could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

9.  Please describe any initiatives over the past 5 years that you feel were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers (including publications, advertising campaigns and/or forums / community awareness sessions).

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION B: TRAINING

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Currently, are there staff positions dedicated to providing training for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, please indicate the type of position, and number of positions:

[1] Part-time

# of positions: ______

[2] Full-time

# of positions: ______

[3] Other (please specify): _______________

# of positions: ______

If no, were there (in the past) staff positions dedicated to providing training for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

B.  If yes, please indicate the type of position, and number of positions:

[1] Part-time

# of positions: ______

[2] Full-time

# of positions: ______

[3] Other (please specify): _______________

# of positions: ______

2.  Using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which staffing resources meet volunteers' training requirements:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

3.  What was the primary focus of staff with respect to training (check all that apply, and rank in order of importance in the space provided):

  Rank order

[1] Developing training materials

______

[2] Delivery of training sessions

______

[3] Adapting existing training materials for use with volunteers

______

[4] Coordinating logistics and delivery of training

______

[5] Other (please specify): __________________

______

4.  Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers?

[0]No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, which area(s) need to be improved?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  Overall, how effective are training sessions for volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

What could be done, if anything, to improve the training sessions?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6.  What could be done to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Are you aware that an orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" was developed for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If yes, did you receive a copy of this manual?

[0] No [1] Yes

B.  If yes, how would you rate the effectiveness of this manual in providing information to orient new volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

8.  Were any other orientation materials developed over the past 5 years?

[0]No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what types of orientation materials were developed? (check all that apply)

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What was the focus of the orientation materials (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

C.  Who was the target audience for the orientation materials? (check all that apply)

[1] Existing volunteers
[2] New volunteers
[3] Other volunteer groups
[4] Schools / universities
[5] Faith groups
[6] Ethno-cultural communities
[7] General public / community
[8] Other (please specify): ____________________________

9.  How would you describe CSC's capacity for training over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Very poor

 

Adequate

 

Very good

[20] Don't know

10.  Do you think volunteers have a good understanding of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very good

[20] Don't know

11.  What do you see as the role of volunteers? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Help offenders adjust to prison
[2] Help offenders readjust to community life
[3] Provide support
[4] Listen to offenders
[5] Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution
[6] Serve as a role model
[7] Serve as an advocate for offenders
[8] Help with programs
[9] Serve as tutors
[10] A link to the community
[11] To assist with the offender's case management process
[12] To supervise escorted passes
[13] To help offenders prepare for release
[14] To assist with hobbies / leisure time
[15] To assist with faith-based issues
[16] To participate in / assist with community outreach activities
[17] Other (please specify): ________________________

12.  Do volunteers advise the staff and the offenders of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Never   Sometime   Always

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, how? (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Word of mouth
[2] Use of notice boards
[3] Meetings with staff
[4] Meetings with offenders
[5] Forums
[6] It is understood, because they have been involved for so long
[7] Other (please specify): _____________________

13.  In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very much

In CSC

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

In the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

14.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): ________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

SECTION C: SUSTAINING AND RECOGNITION

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Are additional training sessions offered to volunteers for ongoing training purposes?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, why not?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  What is the focus of the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): ____________________

C.  What types of materials are/were used for the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): ______________________

D.  Overall, how would you rate the effectiveness of the additional training sessions for ongoing training with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

[20] Don't know

E.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

2.  How many training sessions were conducted for ongoing training over the past 5 years?

_________ Training sessions

_________ Workshops

_________ Conferences

3.  How would you rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives (i.e., staff, resources, time, etc.) from CSC over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If "some" or higher, please describe the type(s) of support provided for volunteer initiatives?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If "none", please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

C.  Please describe the type(s) of support required by volunteers.

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

How would you rate the level of overall support for volunteers from the groups listed below?

1 2 3 4 5
No support at all

 

Some support

 

A lot of support

CSC local level (e.g., institution, parole office)

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC regional level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC national level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

National Volunteer Association

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

4.  Do you think volunteers feel that CSC holds them back in carrying out their duties?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

A lot

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  Please indicate the extent to which you think volunteers feel recognized by each of the following groups:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

A lot

CSC Overall

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

6.  I think volunteers feel their work in institutions is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

7.  I think volunteers feel their work in the community is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

8.  Using the scale below, please rate the following statements on responsiveness to volunteers:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

I think CSC staff in institutions are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC staff in the community are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think the community is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC in general is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think offenders are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

9.  Have the institutions/parole offices experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what do you think is/are the main reason(s) volunteers leave? (check all that apply)

[1] Too time consuming
[2] Frustrated with the bureaucracy
[3] They don't feel they are contributing
[4] Not enough direct contact / work with offenders
[5] Personal reasons (e.g., illness)
[6] Lack of support from CSC
[7] Other (please specify): _______________________

10.  To what extent do you think volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

11.  Are there mechanisms in place to ensure continuity in the volunteer program (e.g., is there a way to ensure corporate memory for volunteers)?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

If yes, please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

12.  Have you heard of the National Volunteer Association (NVA)?

[0] No [1] Yes

13.  Have you had any contacts with the NVA? (Note: Do not ask NVA member):

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

Please describe:

__________________________________________________

[40] Not Applicable

14.  Using the scale below, how effective would you rate the NVA in:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Providing support to volunteers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Sharing lessons learned

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

 

SECTION D: CONTRIBUTION OF VOLUNTEERS

1.  Do you use HRMS - Manage Volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If no, why not?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If yes, have you experienced any difficulties with HRMS - Manage Volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

C.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

2.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

1. Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers serve as good role models for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

6. Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

1. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Modeling and Mentoring.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Social Program Delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Establishing and Maintaining Community Support.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the institution.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Please explain: (Complete if respondent freely generates)

__________________________________________________

4.  Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all satisfied

 

Somewhat satisfied

 

Very satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  In your opinion, do volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC?

[0]No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Lack of privacy
[2] Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities
[3] Breaches of confidentiality
[4] Inadequate office space
[5] Poor communication with staff
[6] Lack of credibility with offenders
[7] Lack of credibility with staff
[8] Lack of credibility with management
[9] Lack of access to information
[10] Difficulty with security issues (e.g., access in the institution, passes, etc.)
[11] Lack of training
[12] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What are the 3 biggest obstacles?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6.  What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Their commitment to offenders
[2] Their enthusiasm
[3] Their understanding of corrections
[4] Bringing the community in to offenders
[5] Their fresh perspective
[6] Their involvement with staff and/or management
[7] Their knowledge and/or experience
[8] Providing support in accessing social services
[9] Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities
[10] Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc
[11] Mentoring relationships in community setting
[12] Help develop personal and family support networks within community
[13] Assist offenders to access employment resources
[14] Assist in offender reintegration
[15] Other (please specify): ______________________

7.  In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program? (What works, what doesn't)

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

8.  Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program?

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

9.  Do you have anything else you would like to add?

________________________________________________

 

Thank you for your time

 

 

VOLUNTEERS EVALUATION SURVEY

VOLUNTEERS

Text Box: ID: ____________________  Date of interview: _________  Interviewer:______________  Name: __________________  Position: ________________  Province/  Territory: ________________  Site: ____________________  Region:_________________

Please select one:

[1] Community             

[2] Institution                                                          

This evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers is being conducted to meet Treasury Board Secretariat reporting requirements. We are examining activities and initiatives linked to recruiting, training, retaining and recognizing volunteers, as well as exploring your perceptions of the contributions of volunteers.

Your participation is voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential. If there are questions that you do not feel comfortable answering, do not feel obligated to answer them.

This survey will take approximately 1 hour to complete. We would like to thank you for participating in this important study. Your time is greatly appreciated.

INTRODUCTION: DEMOGRAPHICS

1.  Are you a member of a CAC?

[0] No [1] Yes

2.  How far do you live from the institution/parole office with which you are associated (check one):

[1] < 1 km [3] 11-20 km [5] Over 30 km
[2] 1-10 km [4] 21-30 km
[20] Don't know
[30] No comment

3.  Gender (check one) :

[1] Male
[2] Female

4.  Age (check one) :

[1] <18 [3] 25-34 [5] 45-54 [7] 65+
[2] 18-24 [4] 35-44 [6] 55-64
[30] No comment

5.  Current marital status (check one) :

[1] Single [4] Divorced
[2] Married [5] Separated
[3] Common-Law [6] Widowed
[30] No comment

6.  Are you Aboriginal (First Nations, Métis, or Inuit) (check one) :

[1] Yes, First Nations [3] Yes, Inuit
[2] Yes, Métis [4] No
[30] No comment

7.  Are you a member of a visible minority group ( NOT including Aboriginal)?

[1] Yes [2] No
[30] No comment

8.  What is your primary language (i.e., language you speak at home) (check one) :

[1] English
[2] French
[3] Other - specify _______________
[30] No comment

9.  What is the highest level of education you have completed (check one) :

[1] Grade school [3] College Diploma [5] Post-graduate degree
[2] High school Diploma [4] University degree [6] Other - specify: __________________
[30] No comment

10.  Current profession (check one) :

[01] Sales and service
[02] Trades, transport and equipment operation
[03] Business, finance and administrative occupations
[04] Criminal justice (e.g., legal personnel, police, court personnel, security officer)
[05] Government service (non-criminal justice)
[06] Social science, education and religious
[07] Student
[08] Retired
[09] Other - specify: ____________________________

 

SECTION A: RECRUITMENT

1.  How did you become aware of volunteering opportunities at CSC? (check all that apply)

[1] Through a friend
[2] Advertisement (e.g., local newspaper)
[3] Pamphlets
[4] Internet
[5] Community Forum
[6] Through someone in CSC
[7] Through another organization (Name of organization: ___________________)
[8] Other (please specify): _________________________
[30] No comment

2.  Why did you become a volunteer at CSC? (check all that apply) :

[1] Community involvement
[2] Assist offenders
[3] Learn about the criminal justice system
[4] Related to my studies/profession
[5] Contribute to safe society
[6] Other (please specify): ________________________
[30] No comment

3.  How did you become a volunteer (check one) :

[1] Asked by a Citizen Advisory Committee member 
[2] Asked by someone in CSC  
[3] Asked by another organization 
[4] Own initiative  
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________
[30] No comment

4.  Do you participate in other volunteer activities outside CSC?

[0] No [1] Yes [30] No comment

Please describe: (eg. Organization and activities)

__________________________________________________

5.  How were you selected at _______ (insert name of site)? (check all that apply)

[1] Telephone interview
[2] Personal interview
[3] References
[4] Referral from management team
[5] Referral from other staff
[6] Referral from Volunteer Coordinator
[7] Referral from other CSC source
[8] Referral from another volunteer
[9] Other (please specify): ________________________

6.  How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the volunteer recruitment process?

1 2 3 4 5
Not satisfied at all

 

Somewhat satisfied

 

Very satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

7.  In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

8.  In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

9.  In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

10.  In your opinion, do volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, what could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

11.  Please describe any initiatives within the last 5 years that you feel were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers (including publications, advertising campaigns and/or forums / community awareness sessions).

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION B: TRAINING

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Did you attend any training sessions for volunteers over the past 5 years?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If yes, how many training sessions did you attend?

___________ Training sessions

___________ Workshops

___________ Conferences

B.  If yes, what was the focus of this training? (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

2.  Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, which area(s) need to be improved?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

3.  Overall, how effective were the training sessions in your training as a volunteer?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

4.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  Are you aware that an orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" was developed for volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If yes, did you receive a copy of this manual?

[0] No [1] Yes

B.  If yes, how would you rate the effectiveness of this manual in providing info to orient new volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

6.  Do you have a good understanding of your role?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very good

[20] Don't know

7.  What do you see as your role as a volunteer? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Help offenders adjust to prison
[2] Help offenders readjust to community life
[3] Provide support
[4] Listen to offenders
[5] Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution
[6] Serve as a role model
[7] Serve as an advocate for offenders
[8] Help with programs
[9] Serve as tutors
[10] A link to the community
[11] To assist with the offender's case management process
[12] To supervise escorted passes
[13] To help offenders prepare for release
[14] To assist with hobbies / leisure time
[15] To assist with faith-based issues
[16] To participate in / assist with community outreach activities
[17] Other (please specify): ________________________

8.  In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very much

In CSC

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

In the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

9.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): _________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

SECTION C: SUSTAINING AND RECOGNITION

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Do you have access to or have you accessed additional training sessions offered to volunteers for ongoing training purposes?

[0] No [1] Yes

A.  If no, why not?

____________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

B.  If yes, how many additional training sessions did you attend?

_________ Training sessions

_________ Workshops

_________ Conferences

C.  If yes, what is the focus of the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] To provide information and/or orientation
[2] Activity-specific training (e.g., citizen escorts)
[3] Skill development (e.g., First Aid, CPR)
[4] Personal and/or professional development
[5] Other (please specify): _______________________

D.  What types of materials, if any, are/were used for the ongoing training sessions (check all that apply):

[1] Manuals
[2] Handbooks
[3] Modules
[4] Presentations (formal and interactive, e.g., role plays)
[5] Other (please specify): _________________________

E.  Overall, how would you rate the effectiveness of the additional training sessions for ongoing training with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

2.  How would you rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives (i.e., staff, resources, time, etc.) from CSC over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
None at all   Some   A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  If "some" or higher, please describe:

__________________________________________________

B.  If "none", please describe:

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

C.  Please describe what type(s) of support you require as a volunteer.

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

3.  As a volunteer, how would you rate the level of overall support you have received from the groups listed below?

1 2 3 4 5
No support at all

 

Some support

 

A lot of support

CSC local level (e.g., institution, parole office)

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC regional level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

CSC national level

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

National Volunteer Association

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

4.  Do you feel that CSC holds you back in carrying out your duties as a volunteer?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

A lot

[20] Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

5.  Please indicate the extent to which you feel recognized by each of the following groups:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

CSC Overall

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

6.  I feel my work as a volunteer in institutions is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

7.  I feel my work as a volunteer in the community is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

8.  On average, how many hours per month do you volunteer:

In the institution: ______ hours     [20] Don't know
In the community ______ hours     [20] Don't know

9.  How long have you been a volunteer?

Institution

Community

___ Years
___ Months

[20] Don't know

___ Years
___ Months

[20] Don't know

_____# of institutions in which you have volunteered

[20] Don't know

 

10.  Have you accomplished the goal(s) that brought you in to CSC to volunteer?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Maybe

 

Definitely

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

11.  Do you intend to continue volunteering?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Maybe

 

Definitely

[20] Don't know

A. If no or don't know, what are the main reasons why you would leave? (check all that apply)

[1] Too time consuming
[2] Frustrated with the bureaucracy
[3] Don't feel I'm contributing
[4] Not enough direct contact / work with offenders
[5] Personal reasons (e.g., illness)
[6] Lack of support from CSC
[7] Other (please specify): _________________________

12.  To what extent do you feel valued/appreciated as a volunteer by CSC?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

13.  How would you rate the extent to which the additional training has contributed to your feeling energized?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

A lot

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

14.  Have you heard of the National Volunteer Association (NVA)?

[0] No [1] Yes

15.  Have you had any contacts with the NVA?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

Please describe:

__________________________________________________

[40] Not applicable

16.  Using the scale below, how effective would you rate the NVA in:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective   Somewhat effective   Very effective

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Providing support to volunteers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Sharing lessons learned

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

 

SECTION D: CONTRIBUTION OF VOLUNTEERS

1.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

1. Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers serve as good role models for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

6. Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2.  Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteering?

1 2 3 4 5
Not satisfied at all

 

Somewhat satisfied

 

Very Satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

3.  In your opinion, do you believe volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Lack of privacy
[2] Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities
[3] Breaches of confidentiality
[4] Inadequate office space
[5] Poor communication with staff
[6] Lack of credibility with offenders
[7] Lack of credibility with staff
[8] Lack of credibility with management
[9] Lack of access to information
[10] Difficulty with security issues (e.g., access in the institution, passes, etc.)
[11] Lack of training
[12] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What are the 3 biggest obstacles?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

4.  What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers? (allow respondents to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Their commitment to offenders
[2] Their enthusiasm
[3] Their understanding of corrections
[4] Bringing the community in to offenders
[5] Their fresh perspective
[6] Their involvement with staff and/or management
[7] Their knowledge and/or experience
[8] Providing support in accessing social services
[9] Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities
[10] Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc
[11] Mentoring relationships in community setting
[12] Help develop personal and family support networks within community
[13] Assist offenders to access employment resources
[14] Assist in offender reintegration
[15] Other (please specify): _________________________

5.  In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program? (What works, what doesn't)

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6.  Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program?

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Do you have anything else to you would like to add?

________________________________________________

 

Thank you for your time

 

 

VOLUNTEERS EVALUATION SURVEY

OFFENDERS

Text Box: ID: _________________________  Date of interview: _____________  Interviewer: __________________  Name: ______________________  Institution/  Parole office: ________________  Group: [1] Inmate committee  	[2] Lifer group  	[3] Community group   	[4] Individual  	[5] Other: ____________  Province/  Territory: ____________________  Site: ________________________  Region: _____________________

This evaluation of the Enhancing Community Corrections Infrastructure: Volunteers is being conducted to meet Treasury Board Secretariat reporting requirements. We are examining activities and initiatives linked to recruiting, training, retaining and recognizing volunteers, as well as exploring your perceptions of the contributions of volunteers.

Your participation is voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential. If there are questions that you do not feel comfortable answering, do not feel obligated to answer them.

This survey will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. We would like to thank you for participating in this important study. Your time is greatly appreciated.


INTRODUCTION

1.  Are you aware that there are volunteer services being offered in this institution/parole office?

[0]No [1] Yes

If yes, are you aware of the type of volunteer services being offered?

[0]No [1] Yes

Have you ever needed / used volunteer services?

[0]No [1] Yes

If yes, how many times? _______________

If no, why not? (check all that apply)

[1] No need for any services
[2] Service needed not being offered
[3] Not interested
[4] Other (please specify): _________________________

What type of volunteer service(s) have you used?

________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION A: RECRUITMENT

1.  Has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties recruiting volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

A. If yes, what types of difficulties have been experienced with the recruitment process?
(check all that apply)

[1] Lack of interest from the community
[2] Bringing in appropriate people (i.e., people there for the right reasons)
[3] Lack of diversity (i.e., same occupation, SES, ethnicity)
[4] Lack of funding for recruitment activities
[5] Geographic location (e.g., large territory)
[6] Other (please specify): ____________________

2.  In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   A lot

[20] Don't know

3.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of awareness of the need for volunteers, among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): _________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

4.  In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

A. Please explain:

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very

[20] Don't know

A.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

6.  In your opinion, do volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers?

___________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

 

SECTION B: TRAINING

Note: In this section training sessions include: training, workshops and conferences.

1.  Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers?

[0] No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If no, which area(s) need to be improved?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

2.  What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

3.  Do you think volunteers have a good understanding of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very good

[20] Don't know

4.  What do you see as the role of volunteers (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)?

[1] Help offenders adjust to prison
[2] Help offenders readjust to community life
[3] Provide support
[4] Listen to offenders
[5] Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution
[6] Serve as a role model
[7] Serve as an advocate for offenders
[8] Help with programs
[9] Serve as tutors
[10] A link to the community
[11] To assist with the offender's case management process
[12] To supervise escorted passes
[13] To help offenders prepare for release
[14] To assist with hobbies / leisure time
[15] To assist with faith-based issues
[16] To participate in / assist with community outreach activities
[17] Other (please specify): ________________________

5.  Do volunteers advise the staff and the offenders of their role(s)?

1 2 3 4 5
Never   Sometime   Always

[20] Don't know

A.  If yes, how? (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Word of mouth
[2] Use of notice boards
[3] Meetings with staff
[4] Meetings with offenders
[5] Forums
[6] It is understood, because they have been involved for so long
[7] Other (please specify): _____________________

6.  In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very much

In CSC

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

In the community

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A. If no, what could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Please indicate, in your opinion, the level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very much

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Line staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Case managers

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Programs staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

The public

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Other (specify): _________________

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

SECTION C: SUSTAINING AND RECOGNITION

1.  Please indicate the extent to which you think volunteers feel recognized by each of the following groups:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

A lot

CSC Overall

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Management

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Staff

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

Offenders

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

A.  Please explain:

__________________________________________________

2.  I think volunteers feel their work in institutions is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

3.  I think volunteers feel their work in parole offices is time well spent:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know [40] Not applicable

4.  Using the scale below, please rate the following statements on responsiveness to volunteers:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very

I think CSC staff in institutions are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC staff in the community are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

 

I think the community is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think CSC in general is responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

I think offenders are responsive to the work of volunteers.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know

5.  To your knowledge, has the institution/parole office experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all

 

Somewhat

 

Very Much

[20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what do you think is/are the main reason(s) volunteers leave? (check all that apply)

[1] Too time consuming
[2] Frustrated with the bureaucracy
[3] They don't feel they are contributing
[4] Not enough direct contact / work with offenders
[5] Personal reasons (e.g., illness)
[6] Lack of support from CSC
[7] Other (please specify): _________________________

6.  To what extent do you think volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

 

SECTION D: CONTRIBUTION OF VOLUNTEERS

1.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all   Somewhat   Very much

1. Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers serve as good role models for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

6. Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2.  Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using the scale below:

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all effective

 

Somewhat effective

 

Very effective

1. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Modeling and Mentoring.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

2. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Social Program Delivery.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

3. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Establishing and Maintaining Community Support.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

4. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the community.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

5. Volunteers are effective in contributing to effective offender reintegration through Providing Continued support in the institution.

 1  2  3  4  5  [20]  Don't know
[40] Not applicable

Please explain: (Complete if respondent freely generates)

__________________________________________________

3.  Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteers?

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all satisfied

 

Somewhat satisfied

 

Very satisfied

[20] Don't know

Please explain:

__________________________________________________

4.  In your opinion, do volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC?

[0]No [1] Yes [20] Don't know

A.  If yes, what are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC? (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Lack of privacy
[2] Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities
[3] Breaches of confidentiality
[4] Inadequate office space
[5] Poor communication with staff
[6] Lack of credibility with offenders
[7] Lack of credibility with staff
[8] Lack of credibility with management
[9] Lack of access to information
[10] Difficulty with security issues (e.g., access in the institution, passes, etc.)
[11] Lack of training
[12] Other (please specify): _________________________

B.  What are the 3 biggest obstacles?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

5.  What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers? (allow respondent to generate their own answers, and check all that are listed)

[1] Their commitment to offenders
[2] Their enthusiasm
[3] Their understanding of corrections
[4] Bringing the community in to offenders
[5] Their fresh perspective
[6] Their involvement with staff and/or management
[7] Their knowledge and/or experience
[8] Providing support in accessing social services
[9] Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities
[10] Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc
[11] Mentoring relationships in community setting
[12] Help develop personal and family support networks within community
[13] Assist offenders to access employment resources
[14] Assist in offender reintegration
[15] Other (please specify): ______________________

6.  In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program?

(What works, what doesn't)

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

7.  Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program?

__________________________________________________

[20] Don't know

8.  Do you have anything else you would like to add?

__________________________________________________

 

Thank you for your time

 

Appendix C: Data Tables

Volunteer Evaluation Survey

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 1            
What do you see as the role of volunteer? 28   32   84  

Help offenders adjust to prison

5

18%

6

19%

9

11%

Help offenders readjust to community life

17

61%

21

66%

22

26%

Provide support

20

71%

18

56%

51

61%

Listen to offenders

12

43%

14

44%

53

63%

Provide staff and/or management with the "pulse" of the institution

6

21%

3

9%

3

4%

Serve as a role model

13

46%

12

38%

31

37%

Serve as an advocate for offenders

4

14%

3

9%

6

7%

Help with programs

10

36%

10

31%

15

18%

Serve as tutors

6

21%

6

19%

10

12%

A link to the community

20

71%

19

59%

28

33%

To assist with the offender's case management process

4

14%

9

28%

3

4%

To supervise escorted passes

5

18%

7

22%

10

12%

To help offenders prepare for release

8

29%

12

38%

17

20%

To assist with hobbies / leisure time

13

46%

8

25%

10

12%

To assist with faith-based issues

10

36%

8

25%

28

33%

To participate in / assist with community outreach activities

14

50%

10

31%

18

21%

Give alternative view to CSC

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

Transportation

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Provide assistance to CSC staff

3

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Help CSC achieve it's mission

4

14%

0

0%

0

0%

Ambassadors to CSC in community

3

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Social skills coaches for offenders

5

18%

0

0%

0

0%

Bring hope and normalicy to inmate

4

14%

0

0%

0

0%

Assist in offender reintegration

3

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Continuity in and voice of community

4

14%

0

0%

0

0%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

30

36%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 2            
Do you think volunteers have a good understanding of their role(s)? 23 100% 29 100% 83 100%

Not at all

0

0%

3

10%

2

2%

Somewhat

8

35%

6

21%

8

10%

Very

15

65%

20

69%

73

88%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.8

 

3.8

 

4.5

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 3            
Extent to which you agree with the following statements:            

Volunteers contribute to effective offender reintegration.

26

100%

30

100%

73

100%

Not at all

2

8%

0

0%

2

3%

Somewhat

2

8%

2

7%

10

14%

Very

22

85%

28

93%

61

84%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.3

 

4.5

 

4.4

 

Volunteers serve as good models for offenders.

25

100%

30

100%

82

100%

Not at all

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

Somewhat

0

0%

2

7%

4

5%

Very

24

96%

28

93%

78

95%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.5

 

4.4

 

4.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Volunteers contribute to social program delivery.

22

100%

28

100%

66

100%

Not at all

1

5%

2

7%

2

3%

Somewhat

5

23%

5

18%

10

15%

Very

16

73%

21

75%

54

82%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4

 

4

 

4.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Volunteers contribute to the establishment of community support for offenders.

24

100%

30

100%

70

100%

Not at all

1

4%

0

0%

1

1%

Somewhat

2

8%

2

7%

12

17%

Very

21

88%

28

93%

57

81%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.3

 

4.4

 

4.3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Volunteers contribute to the maintenance of community support for offenders.

22

100%

30

100%

71

100%

Not at all

2

9%

0

0%

0

0%

Somewhat

4

18%

3

10%

14

20%

Very

16

73%

27

90%

57

80%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.1

 

4.3

 

4.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Volunteers provide continued support to offenders in the community.

23

100%

29

100%

69

100%

Not at all

1

4%

1

3%

6

9%

Somewhat

7

30%

5

17%

13

19%

Very

15

65%

23

79%

50

72%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4

 

4.1

 

4.1

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 4        
What do you think are the major contribution(s) of volunteers? 19   19  

Their commitment to offenders

10

53%

12

63%

Their enthusiasm

10

53%

6

32%

Their understanding of corrections

2

11%

4

21%

Bringing the community in to offenders

12

63%

11

58%

Their fresh perspective

5

26%

7

37%

Their involvement with staff and/or management

4

21%

3

16%

Their knowledge and/or experience

12

63%

9

47%

Providing support in accessing social services

4

21%

3

16%

Assist offenders to re-acquaint themselves to communities

8

42%

7

37%

Support in finding community resources - support programs, drop-in centres etc

7

37%

6

32%

Mentoring relationships in community setting

7

37%

7

37%

Help develop personal and family support networks within community

4

21%

3

16%

Assist offenders to access employment resources

6

32%

5

26%

Assist in offender reintegration

11

58%

13

68%

Public education

0

0%

1

5%

Non CSC outlet for offenders

2

11%

0

0%

Help CSC achieve it's mission

1

5%

0

0%

Assist in program delivery/success

2

11%

0

0%

Social skills coaches

1

5%

0

0%

Share information/link between CSC, offenders & community

2

11%

0

0%

Assist CSC staff in their work

1

5%

0

0%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 5            
Do you think volunteers feel that CSC holds them back in carrying out their duties? 25 100% 27 100% 81 100%

Not at all

12

48%

13

48%

57

70%

Somewhat

8

32%

10

37%

11

14%

A lot

5

20%

4

15%

13

16%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.6

 

2.4

 

1.9

 

Please explain:

19

 

19

 

22

 

Lack of freedom in their actions & involvement (e.g. wants to attend CMT meetings)

6

32%

0

0%

0

0%

Good as is / no holding back

5

26%

6

32%

0

0%

Lack of respect & support from staff (e.g. staff attitude)

2

11%

6

32%

8

36%

Too much bureaucracy / policies too strict

3

16%

2

11%

0

0%

Lack of resources (e.g. money)

3

16%

1

5%

0

0%

Security/boundaries issues (e.g. Ion scanner, access & searches at gate, etc.)

6

32%

6

32%

6

27%

Lack of commitment from CSC

1

5%

0

0%

0

0%

Lack of understanding of part of volunteers re: security/policy issues

0

0%

2

11%

0

0%

Obstacles

0

0%

0

0%

7

32%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

5

23%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 6            
In your opinion, what factors are most important for a well-functioning volunteer program? 27   20   72  

Share experiences/resources

1

4%

3

15%

0

0%

Flexibility & consistency

3

11%

4

20%

0

0%

Clear expectations/meaningful work linked to our Mission/matched skills & interests

9

33%

6

30%

0

0%

Respect/appreciation/recognition

9

33%

4

20%

10

14%

Skilled volunteers & volunteer coordinators (e.g. people skills, etc.)

5

19%

4

20%

0

0%

Training for staff & volunteers

12

44%

7

35%

17

24%

Support & commitment from CSC / supervision

15

56%

8

40%

10

14%

Good recruitment & screening processes

6

22%

5

25%

0

0%

Funding/financial resources

6

22%

1

5%

4

6%

Resources (e.g. office space, phone, time, etc.)

7

26%

0

0%

0

0%

Good communication/information/contact

6

22%

0

0%

21

29%

Knowledge-base/expertise/ commitment & diversity of volunteers

2

7%

0

0%

0

0%

Public awareness (e.g. media, etc.)

2

7%

0

0%

0

0%

Continuity

0

0%

2

10%

0

0%

Keep volunteers involved

0

0%

1

5%

0

0%

Interest on part of offenders

0

0%

1

5%

0

0%

Information and accessibility

0

0%

0

0%

8

11%

Consistency and commitment

0

0%

0

0%

8

11%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

37

51%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 7            
Can you think of any areas that, if addressed, would improve CSC's volunteer program? 31   30   72  

Dedicated and trained full-time volunteer coordinators at each site (e.g. to recruit, train, sustain, support, recognize volunteers

12

39%

14

47%

0

0%

Evaluation volunteers (e.g. here for right reasons, do they have adequate support, meeting mandate, etc.) - supervision & follow-up

5

16%

3

10%

0

0%

Volunteers meetings to help team building

1

3%

2

7%

0

0%

Funding (e.g. hospitality, compensation, etc.)

15

48%

10

33%

0

0%

Provide consistency

1

3%

3

10%

0

0%

Recognition / appreciation (more than once a year)

7

23%

11

37%

0

0%

Support & commitment from CSC (e.g. ongoing support, keep volunteers as a priority)

10

32%

14

47%

0

0%

Continuity between institution & community

1

3%

5

17%

0

0%

Need material/ resources (e.g. time, transportation, meeting locations, tools, etc.)

12

39%

8

27%

0

0%

Staff attitude/ awareness - culture of respect

4

13%

9

30%

0

0%

Bureaucracy/ accountability too challenging

7

23%

3

10%

0

0%

Proper & ongoing/specific training for volunteers & volunteer coordinators (e.g. train the trainer)

6

19%

14

47%

0

0%

More & better recruitment

5

16%

5

17%

0

0%

National standard

2

6%

2

7%

0

0%

Address operational & security issues (e.g. access to institutions, clearances, etc.)

2

6%

4

13%

0

0%

Community outreach/public awareness (e.g. media, etc.)

3

10%

5

17%

0

0%

Good communication/share information

3

10%

1

3%

6

8%

More autonomy to volunteers

1

3%

0

0%

0

0%

Provide volunteers with work descriptions

0

0%

1

3%

0

0%

Address HRMS issues

0

0%

2

7%

0

0%

Tailor NHQ contacts to regions' specific needs

0

0%

1

3%

0

0%

Training

0

0%

0

0%

16

22%

Recruitment and awareness

0

0%

0

0%

19

26%

Staff / Management

0

0%

0

0%

11

15%

Safety and security

0

0%

0

0%

5

7%

Volunteer appreciation

0

0%

0

0%

3

4%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

17

24%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 8            
Why did you become a volunteer at CSC? N/A N/A 84  

Community involvement

 

 

 

 

19

23%

Assist offenders

 

 

 

 

22

26%

Learn about the criminal justice system             

 

 

 

 

8

10%

Related to my studies/profession

 

 

 

 

14

17%

Contribute to safe society

 

 

 

 

27

32%

Other

 

 

 

 

40

48%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 9            
In your opinion, are enough volunteers recruited to assist with CSC social programs and initiatives? 26 100% 29 100% 68 100%

None at all

10

38%

13

45%

40

59%

Somewhat

4

15%

9

31%

18

26%

Very much

12

46%

7

24%

10

15%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3

 

2.6

 

2.3

 

Please explain:

28

 

24

 

46

 

Recruitment process difficult & long

3

11%

3

13%

0

0%

Lack of volunteer pool / public needs awareness

7

25%

8

33%

0

0%

Good as is

14

50%

5

21%

0

0%

Lack of volunteer support (from staff, difficulty getting in, etc.)

5

18%

4

17%

0

0%

Lack of resources

8

29%

2

8%

0

0%

Not enough active volunteer

2

7%

0

0%

0

0%

Increase volunteer opportunities to more programs/areas

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

Lack of interest by offenders

0

0%

1

4%

0

0%

Not enough active volunteers

0

0%

2

8%

0

0%

More volunteers needed

0

0%

0

0%

24

52%

More than enough volunteers

0

0%

0

0%

4

9%

Awareness and strategies

0

0%

0

0%

15

33%

Desire and motivation

0

0%

0

0%

3

7%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

6

13%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 10            
In your opinion, is there a larger group of volunteers to draw from as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years? 26 100% 28 100% 41 100%

None at all

7

27%

12

43%

20

49%

Somewhat

7

27%

2

7%

11

27%

Very much

12

46%

14

50%

10

24%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.3

 

3

 

2.6

 

What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit volunteers? 24   24   37  

Allocate more resources (e.g. money, people, etc.)

8

33%

9

38%

4

11%

Simplify recruitment process

2

8%

1

4%

8

22%

Good as is

1

4%

1

4%

0

0%

Public awareness / outreach to specific groups / networking

15

63%

13

54%

9

24%

Staff awareness

2

8%

2

8%

0

0%

CSC's commitment to volunteers at all levels (local, regional, national)

5

21%

5

21%

0

0%

Full-time volunteer coordinator position (not just an add-on responsibility)

6

25%

5

21%

0

0%

Implement recruitment activities

6

25%

4

17%

0

0%

Advertising and promoting

0

0%

0

0%

8

22%

Church involvement

0

0%

0

0%

4

11%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

11

30%

 

  Volunteer Coordinator
Table 11    
In your opinion, has CSC increased its capacity for recruiting as a result of recruitment activities over the past 5 years? 23 100%

Not at all

12

52%

Somewhat

3

13%

Very

8

35%

 

 

 

Mean

2.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 12        
Has the institution/parole office experience any difficulties recruiting volunteers? 25 100% 21 100%

Not at all

15

60%

11

52%

Some

7

28%

0

0%

A lot

3

12%

10

48%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.4

 

2.9

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 13        
What types of difficulties have been experienced with the recruitment process? 15   17  

Lack of interest from the community

4

27%

4

24%

Bringing in appropriate people

1

7%

5

29%

Lack of diversity

4

27%

1

6%

Lack of funding for recruitment activities

5

33%

5

29%

Geographic location

3

20%

2

12%

Time issue

2

13%

1

6%

Changes in general population

0

0%

2

12%

No Volunteer coordinator

1

7%

1

6%

Lack of information

0

0%

1

6%

CSC policy

0

0%

1

6%

Lack of volunteer opportunities

1

7%

0

0%

lack of dedication from staff/management

1

7%

0

0%

Issues with process itself

1

7%

0

0%

Operational issues following recruitment

1

7%

0

0%

Communication issues

1

7%

0

0%

Community outreach/capacity issues

1

7%

0

0%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 14            
In your opinion, do the volunteers reflect the diversity of the offender population? 24 100% 29 100% 67 100%

No

9

38%

15

52%

30

45%

Yes

15

63%

14

48%

37

55%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 15            
What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to recruit more representative volunteers? 19   15   14  

Target specific ethno-cultural/ age/gender groups

13

68%

4

27%

8

57%

Develop partnerships with ethno-cultural associations

2

11%

2

13%

0

0%

Allocate more resources (e.g. money, etc.)

4

21%

3

20%

0

0%

Community outreach

4

21%

5

33%

0

0%

Full-time volunteer coordinator position dedicated to recruitment

1

5%

3

20%

0

0%

Implement a recruitment strategy

5

26%

1

7%

5

36%

Good as is (no need for representative ness)

5

26%

1

7%

0

0%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

2

14%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 16            
In your opinion, has there been an increased awareness of the need for volunteers in corrections over the past 5 years? 25 100% 28 100% 70 100%

None at all

4

16%

7

25%

22

31%

Some

9

36%

6

21%

22

31%

A lot

12

48%

15

54%

26

37%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Means

3.6

 

3.4

 

3.1

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 17        
Level of awareness of the need for volunteers, among each of the following groups:        

Management

21

100%

26

100%

None at all

2

10%

5

19%

Some

3

14%

5

19%

A lot

16

76%

16

62%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.9

 

3.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Line staff

21

100%

24

100%

None at all

6

29%

12

50%

Some

10

48%

3

13%

A lot

5

24%

9

38%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3

 

2.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case managers

21

100%

23

100%

None at all

4

19%

4

17%

Some

5

24%

9

39%

A lot

12

57%

10

43%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.5

 

3.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

Programs staff

20

100%

26

100%

None at all

4

20%

4

15%

Some

1

5%

9

35%

A lot

15

75%

13

50%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4

 

3.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other staff

20

100%

25

100%

None at all

6

30%

12

48%

Some

12

60%

5

20%

A lot

2

10%

8

32%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.8

 

2.9

 

Offenders

22

100%

25

100%

None at all

2

9%

4

16%

Some

3

14%

5

20%

A lot

17

77%

16

64%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.1

 

3.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

The public

22

100%

26

100%

None at all

13

59%

15

58%

Some

3

14%

7

27%

A lot

6

27%

4

15%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.5

 

2.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other

6

100%

9

100%

None at all

0

0%

0

0%

Some

0

0%

1

11%

A lot

6

100%

8

89%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.9

 

4.1

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 18            
Are you aware that an orientation manual "Volunteering in the Correctional Service of Canada - Reference Handbook" was developed for volunteers? 29 100% 30 100% 81 100%

No

4

14%

1

3%

46

57%

Yes

25

86%

29

97%

35

43%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 19            
Did you receive a copy of this manual? 26 100% 31 100% 36 100%

No

4

15%

5

16%

13

36%

Yes

22

85%

26

84%

23

64%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 20            
How would you rate the effectiveness of this manual in providing information to orient new volunteers?            

Not at all

2

11%

3

14%

2

11%

Somewhat

6

32%

4

19%

7

37%

Very

11

58%

14

67%

10

53%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.8

 

3.9

 

3.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 21            
Please explain: 18   19   14  

Need to add information and update it (e.g. contact list, security, etc.)

1

6%

4

21%

0

0%

Has not read/ used/ received it

1

6%

3

16%

0

0%

Not appropriate for community-type work

1

6%

3

16%

0

0%

Too much focus on "don'ts"/ not enough hands-on

2

11%

1

5%

0

0%

Manual not flexible enough/ should allow for local specific ads-on

2

11%

2

11%

0

0%

Good as is

10

56%

7

37%

0

0%

Needs to be simplified

5

28%

0

0%

0

0%

Good for corrections/ institutions

0

0%

2

11%

0

0%

Program development and training

0

0%

0

0%

3

21%

Training material

0

0%

0

0%

5

36%

Church

0

0%

0

0%

6

43%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 22            
Do you think that there is sufficient training being offered to volunteers? 24 100% 29 100% 58 100%

No

12

50%

16

55%

29

50%

Yes

12

50%

13

45%

29

50%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 23            
Which area(s) need to be improved? What could be done, if anything, to improve the training sessions? What could be done, if anything, to improve CSC's ability to train volunteers? 28   29   42  

More security/boundaries awareness training (i.e. Ion scanner) & Do's & Don'ts

9

32%

5

17%

0

0%

More hands-on training/include offender, staff and volunteers perspective in

 

 

 

 

 

 

training sessions (e.g. role plays, scenarios, job shadowing, etc.)

14

50%

9

31%

0

0%

National Training Standard

4

14%

4

14%

0

0%

More time & resources (e.g. money, staff, computer, space, hospitality, etc.)

15

54%

11

38%

0

0%

Dedicated volunteer coordinator position for volunteers

5

18%

2

7%

0

0%

Expand geographic area to offer on-site training

2

7%

4

14%

0

0%

Trained, skilled, and specialized trainers (e.g. presentation skills, etc.)

3

11%

6

21%

0

0%

Tailor training to site & individual (e.g. community focused & volunteer

 

 

 

 

 

 

background, etc.)

2

7%

5

17%

0

0%

Additional specific training (e.g. mental illness) and more detailed information

 

 

 

 

 

 

(e.g. link to correctional results)

5

18%

8

28%

0

0%

Offer more frequent and timely training sessions/follow-up training/consistency

9

32%

5

17%

0

0%

Increase coordination between regional & local training (i.e. to avoid overlap)

3

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Identify training requirements & progress (e.g. personal development)

3

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Less bureaucracy in training sessions

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

Program development and training

0

16

0

0%

16

38%

Training material

0

15

0

0%

15

36%

Church

0

3

0

0%

3

7%

Awareness

0

7

0

0%

7

17%

Other

0

8

0

0%

8

19%

Financial Resources

0

4

0

0%

4

10%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 24            
Overall, how effective are training sessions for volunteers? 25 100% 25 100% 56 100%

Not at all

1

4%

3

12%

11

20%

Somewhat

6

24%

3

12%

11

20%

Very

18

72%

19

76%

34

61%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4

 

4

 

3.7

 

Please explain:            

Specifics needed (e.g. security/boundaries, correctional issues, communication

 

 

 

 

 

 

skills, Do's & Don'ts, community resources available, etc.)

1

6%

5

28%

0

0%

Community-specific issues not addressed

1

6%

1

6%

0

0%

Good as is / provides good overview

10

56%

12

67%

0

0%

Need to offer additional/more frequent training sessions

3

17%

1

6%

0

0%

Need more/skilled trainers to be effective

4

22%

0

0%

0

0%

Need additional training materials (e.g. package) / resources (e.g. money)

2

11%

0

0%

0

0%

Could be improved

2

11%

0

0%

0

0%

More hands-on, less on policy

0

0%

3

17%

0

0%

Not sufficiently tailored to individuality of recruits

0

0%

1

6%

0

0%

Follow-up training needed

0

0%

1

6%

0

0%

Informative / extensive

0

0%

0

0%

14

56%

Information non-sufficient / not-extensive

0

0%

0

0%

7

28%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

6

24%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 25            
In your opinion, has there been an increased acceptance of volunteers over the past 5 years:            

In CSC

26

100%

26

100%

60

100%

 

Not at all

2

8%

5

19%

13

22%

 

Somewhat

10

38%

8

31%

17

28%

 

Very much

14

54%

13

50%

30

50%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.7

 

3.4

 

3.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the community

26

100%

24

100%

41

100%

 

Not at all

0

0%

8

33%

8

20%

 

Somewhat

6

23%

4

17%

13

32%

 

Very much

20

77%

12

50%

20

49%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4

 

3.2

 

3.3

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 26            
Level of acceptance of volunteers among each of the following groups:            

Management

22

100%

27

100%

50

100%

Not at all

0

0%

2

7%

7

14%

Somewhat

2

9%

4

15%

14

28%

Very much

20

91%

21

78%

29

58%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.4

 

4

 

3.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Line staff

20

100%

25

100%

48

100%

Not at all

5

25%

10

40%

9

19%

Somewhat

7

35%

8

32%

12

25%

Very much

8

40%

7

28%

27

56%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.3

 

2.8

 

3.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case managers

21

100%

22

100%

19

100%

Not at all

2

10%

5

23%

1

5%

Somewhat

6

29%

9

41%

6

32%

Very much

13

62%

8

36%

12

63%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.7

 

3.1

 

4

 

Programs staff

22

100%

26

100%

47

100%

Not at all

3

14%

2

8%

3

6%

Somewhat

2

9%

8

31%

14

30%

Very much

17

77%

16

62%

30

64%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.1

 

3.6

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other staff

19

100%

26

100%

42

100%

Not at all

4

21%

10

38%

4

10%

Somewhat

8

42%

10

38%

14

33%

Very much

7

37%

6

23%

24

57%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.2

 

2.8

 

3.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Offenders

23

100%

26

100%

69

100%

Not at all

2

9%

2

8%

2

3%

Somewhat

2

9%

7

27%

9

13%

Very much

19

83%

17

65%

58

84%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.1

 

3.9

 

4.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The public

20

100%

22

100%

52

100%

Not at all

7

35%

8

36%

10

19%

Somewhat

5

25%

12

55%

12

23%

Very much

8

40%

2

9%

30

58%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.1

 

2.6

 

3.5

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 27            
What could be done, if anything, to increase the level of acceptance of volunteers? 10   13   20  

Increase CSC staff awareness (e.g. add in employee orientation

6

60%

5

38%

0

0%

Increase public awareness (e.g. publicity, benefits of volunteers, etc.)

4

40%

7

54%

0

0%

Management endorsement of volunteers

2

20%

1

8%

0

0%

Need additional resources

3

30%

0

0%

0

0%

Need to humanize corrections

2

20%

0

0%

0

0%

Not an issue

0

0%

1

8%

0

0%

Need more national/regional events

0

0%

1

8%

0

0%

Awareness / communication

0

0%

0

0%

10

50%

Staff concerns

0

0%

0

0%

6

30%

Support

0

0%

0

0%

4

20%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

4

20%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 28            
How would you rate the level of support for volunteer initiatives from CSC over the past 5 years? 29 100% 27 100% 64 100%

None at all

5

17%

7

26%

22

34%

Some

11

38%

9

33%

22

34%

A lot

13

45%

11

41%

20

31%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.3

 

3

 

2.9

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 29            
Please describe the type(s) of support provided for volunteer initiatives? ("some" or higher) 21   14   27  

Material resources (e.g. handbook, time, money, vehicle, cell phone, etc.)

3

14%

1

7%

0

0%

Additional appreciation events/gifts - recognition

3

14%

2

14%

0

0%

Support from CSC staff & management (e.g. training, volunteer activities, etc.)

11

52%

6

43%

0

0%

Volunteer coordinator position created/funded to provide support

3

14%

2

14%

0

0%

Effective Corrections' funds

6

29%

2

14%

0

0%

Verbal support and meetings for volunteers

1

5%

1

7%

0

0%

Support for specific activities (e.g. CAMS)

2

10%

0

0%

0

0%

Activities / food and drink

0

0%

0

0%

3

11%

Tools and supplies

0

0%

0

0%

3

11%

Cooperation and organization

0

0%

0

0%

7

26%

Shortcomings - programs and staff

0

0%

0

0%

10

37%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

6

22%

If "none", please describe:            

Volunteer coordinator position isn't full-time/lack of supervision

1

25%

1

20%

0

0%

Lack of support/recognition

1

25%

1

20%

0

0%

Lack of resources (e.g. money for training, hospitality, etc.)

2

50%

2

40%

3

27%

Overall staff cuts (e.g. SPOs)

2

50%

0

0%

0

0%

Lack of training

0

0%

2

40%

0

0%

Communication and staff

0

0%

0

0%

4

36%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

5

45%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 30            
How would you rate the level of overall support for volunteers from the groups listed below?            

CSC local level

24

100%

27

100%

59

100%

No support at all

0

0%

6

22%

11

19%

Some support

9

38%

4

15%

20

34%

A lot of support

15

63%

17

63%

28

47%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.7

 

3.7

 

3.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CSC regional level

21

100%

26

100%

15

100%

No support at all

6

29%

5

19%

10

67%

Some support

5

24%

10

38%

3

20%

A lot of support

10

48%

11

42%

2

13%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.1

 

3.3

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CSC national level

20

100%

25

100%

12

100%

No support at all

5

25%

6

24%

9

75%

Some support

4

20%

6

24%

2

17%

A lot of support

11

55%

13

52%

1

8%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.4

 

3.5

 

1.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

National Volunteer Association

10

100%

19

100%

10

100%

No support at all

1

10%

4

21%

7

70%

Some support

1

10%

1

5%

2

20%

A lot of support

8

80%

14

74%

1

10%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.2

 

3.9

 

1.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 31            
Please indicate the extent to which you think volunteers feel recognized by each of the following groups:            

CSC Overall

24

100%

30

100%

61

100%

Not at all

5

21%

9

30%

10

16%

Somewhat

10

42%

10

33%

24

39%

Very much

9

38%

11

37%

27

44%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.3

 

3.1

 

3.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management

21

100%

30

100%

50

100%

Not at all

3

14%

7

23%

13

26%

Somewhat

6

29%

11

37%

14

28%

Very much

12

57%

12

40%

23

46%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.5

 

3.3

 

3.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Staff

23

100%

29

100%

71

100%

Not at all

5

22%

7

24%

13

18%

Somewhat

9

39%

11

38%

19

27%

Very much

9

39%

11

38%

39

55%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.2

 

3.2

 

3.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Offenders

24

100%

29

100%

83

100%

Not at all

0

0%

1

3%

5

6%

Somewhat

3

13%

5

17%

11

13%

Very much

21

88%

23

79%

67

81%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.4

 

4.2

 

4.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 32            
To what extent do you think volunteers feel valued/appreciated by CSC? 27 100% 30 100% 72 100%

Not at all

2

7%

7

23%

9

13%

Somewhat

12

44%

14

47%

24

33%

Very much

13

48%

9

30%

39

54%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.4

 

3

 

3.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 33            
Overall, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with volunteers? 27 100% 29 100% 82 100%

Not at all

1

4%

0

0%

1

1%

Somewhat

4

15%

4

14%

7

9%

Very

22

81%

25

86%

74

90%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.2

 

4.3

 

4.5

 

Please explain:            

Room for improvement

3

20%

5

33%

0

0%

Great value / things are good

14

93%

4

27%

0

0%

Effective, dedicated, committed

5

33%

6

40%

0

0%

Only a few isolated incidents

0

0%

2

13%

0

0%

Hard to recruit & maintain

0

0%

1

7%

0

0%

Positive experience

0

0%

0

0%

8

25%

Personal satisfaction

0

0%

0

0%

10

31%

Desire to do more

0

0%

0

0%

5

16%

Obstacles

0

0%

0

0%

7

22%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

5

16%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 34            
Please describe the type(s) of support required by volunteers. 25   24   49  

More orientation and ongoing training

11

44%

8

33%

0

0%

Need full-time contact person / volunteer coordinator

11

44%

9

38%

0

0%

More support, recognition & appreciation (e.g. diners, xmas cards, feeling part of

 

 

 

 

 

 

CSC, emotional support, etc.)

14

56%

15

63%

11

22%

Need to be kept informed/have meaningful work

5

20%

3

13%

0

0%

Resources (e.g. vehicles, photocopiers, etc.)

4

16%

0

0%

0

0%

Staff education / respect from staff

8

32%

7

29%

0

0%

Need for supervision and feedback on their work

7

28%

3

13%

0

0%

Financial support (e.g. money for hospitality, compensation, etc.)

8

32%

5

21%

5

10%

CSC's commitment to volunteers

3

12%

0

0%

0

0%

Accommodation/ administrative support

0

0%

2

8%

0

0%

Increase communication

0

0%

1

4%

14

29%

Training

0

0%

0

0%

10

20%

Information and Organization

0

0%

0

0%

10

20%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

16

33%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 35            
I think volunteers feel their work in institutions is time well spent: 22 100% 23 100% 79 100%

Not at all

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Somewhat

1

5%

2

9%

3

4%

A lot

21

95%

21

91%

76

96%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.5

 

4.5

 

4.7

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 36            
I think volunteers feel their work in the community is time well spent: 24 100% 24 100% 37 100%

Not at all

0

0%

0

0%

1

3%

Somewhat

0

0%

3

13%

0

0%

A lot

24

100%

21

88%

36

97%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.5

 

4.5

 

4.8

 

Responsiveness to volunteers:            

I think CSC staff in institutions are responsive to the work of volunteers.

17

100%

18

100%

 

 

 

Not at all

3

18%

4

22%

 

 

 

Somewhat

7

41%

8

44%

 

 

 

Very

7

41%

6

33%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.3

 

3.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think CSC staff in the community are responsive to the work of volunteers.

16

100%

15

100%

 

 

 

Not at all

3

19%

2

13%

 

 

 

Somewhat

5

31%

4

27%

 

 

 

Very

8

50%

9

60%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.4

 

3.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the community is responsive to the work of volunteers.

18

100%

17

100%

 

 

 

Not at all

7

39%

4

24%

 

 

 

Somewhat

5

28%

4

24%

 

 

 

Very

6

33%

9

53%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3

 

3.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think CSC in general is responsive to the work of volunteers.

18

100%

19

100%

 

 

 

Not at all

3

17%

4

21%

 

 

 

Somewhat

8

44%

3

16%

 

 

 

Very

7

39%

12

63%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

3.2

 

3.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think offenders are responsive to the work of volunteers.

18

100%

19

100%

 

 

 

Not at all

2

11%

1

5%

 

 

 

Somewhat

1

6%

3

16%

 

 

 

Very

15

83%

15

79%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

4.1

 

4.1

 

 

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 37            
In your opinion, do volunteers face any obstacles in their work with CSC? 28 100% 29 100% 77 100%

No

2

7%

3

10%

31

40%

Yes

26

93%

26

90%

46

60%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 38            
What are the obstacles volunteers face in their work with CSC? 25   26   46  

Lack of privacy

2

8%

3

12%

6

13%

Lack of knowledge of other volunteering opportunities

1

4%

4

15%

8

17%

Breaches of confidentiality

1

4%

0

0%

4

9%

Inadequate office space

2

8%

4

15%

4

9%

Poor communication with staff

8

32%

10

38%

11

24%

Lack of credibility with offenders

2

8%

1

4%

0

0%

Lack of credibility with staff

12

48%

12

46%

10

22%

Lack of credibility with management

4

16%

2

8%

5

11%

Lack of access to information

6

24%

4

15%

5

11%

Difficulty with security issues

16

64%

15

58%

11

24%

Lack of training

12

48%

7

27%

7

15%

Lack of resources

7

28%

6

23%

0

0%

Time constraints

1

4%

2

8%

0

0%

Lack of understanding

1

4%

2

8%

0

0%

Lack of appreciation/support

4

16%

2

8%

0

0%

Bureaucracy

5

20%

2

8%

0

0%

Changing offender profile

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

CSCs structure, volunteer program & communication

3

12%

0

0%

0

0%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

22

48%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 39            
What are the 3 biggest obstacles? 20   24   40  

Bureaucracy (e.g. paperwork, etc.)

4

20%

4

17%

 

0%

Security issues (e.g. access to institutions, clearances, etc.)

11

55%

9

38%

13

33%

Processes are too long and no consistency

1

5%

4

17%

0

0%

Lack of resources (e.g. staff, vehicles, space, etc.)

3

15%

6

25%

0

0%

Too much control over what they do

2

10%

1

4%

0

0%

Lack of respect & credibility from staff

4

20%

9

38%

0

0%

Lack of support/recognition/appreciation

6

30%

5

21%

0

0%

Lack of communication & information

5

25%

4

17%

0

0%

Lack of training

6

30%

9

38%

0

0%

Lack of funding

4

20%

4

17%

0

0%

Lack of use of their capacity

1

5%

0

0%

0

0%

Lack of awareness of their role and value

4

20%

0

0%

0

0%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

12

30%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Training

 

 

 

 

5

13%

Staff communication and credibility

 

 

 

 

14

35%

Resources

 

 

 

 

5

13%

Information and organization

 

 

 

 

10

25%

Privacy

 

 

 

 

3

8%

Time

 

 

 

 

3

8%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 40        
Has the institution / parole office experienced any difficulties retaining volunteers? 21 100% 25 100%

Not at all

9

43%

11

44%

Some

9

43%

8

32%

A lot

3

14%

6

24%

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.5

 

2.8

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 41        
What do you think is/are the main reason(s) volunteers leave? 19   20  

Too time consuming

2

11%

3

15%

Frustrated with bureaucracy

10

53%

10

50%

They don't feel they are contributing

3

16%

1

5%

Not enough direct contact/work with offenders

4

21%

5

25%

Personal reasons

2

11%

10

50%

Lack of support from CSC

8

42%

13

65%

Geography

1

5%

1

5%

Security issues

5

26%

2

10%

Lack of information/structure

4

21%

3

15%

Not what they thought it would be

0

0%

2

10%

Regular attrition/turn over

3

16%

0

0%

Inappropriate action

1

5%

0

0%

Lack of interest/motivation

2

11%

0

0%

Training issues

1

5%

0

0%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 42            
Please describe any initiatives over the past 5 years that you feel were particularly effective in recruiting volunteers? 24   21   28  

Community outreach (e.g. fairs, forums, cultural events, etc.)

13

54%

8

38%

0

0%

Referral done by current volunteers / CSC staff

8

33%

3

14%

0

0%

Go through Chaplaincy to attract volunteers

1

4%

1

5%

0

0%

Advertisements (e.g. internet, newspapers, local TV/radio stations, etc.)

9

38%

10

48%

4

14%

Open house (institutions, parole offices)

1

4%

0

0%

0

0%

Partnerships with community groups (e.g. Volunteer Victoria, etc.)

11

46%

1

5%

0

0%

Public speaking / presentations

6

25%

3

14%

0

0%

Dedicated recruitment resources / recruitment strategy

2

8%

0

0%

0

0%

Match needs with interests

0

0%

1

5%

0

0%

Open house

0

0%

1

5%

0

0%

None

0

0%

4

19%

0

0%

Word of mouth

0

0%

0

0%

4

14%

Publication

0

0%

0

0%

3

11%

Church

0

0%

0

0%

6

21%

Social Awareness activities

0

0%

0

0%

10

36%

Other

0

0%

0

0%

5

18%

Training

0

0%

0

0%

4

14%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer
Table 43            

Have you heard of the National Volunteer Association (NVA)?

29

100%

24

100%

84

100%

No

6

21%

3

13%

73

87%

Yes

23

79%

21

88%

11

13%

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator Volunteer

Table 44

 

 

 

 

 

 

Have you had any contacts with the NVA?

24

100%

19

100%

17

100%

None at all

15

63%

10

53%

14

82%

Some

5

21%

2

11%

2

12%

A lot

4

17%

7

37%

1

6%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean

2.2

 

2.7

 

1.4

 

 

  Staff & Management Volunteer Coordinator
Table 45        
How effective would you rate the NVA in:        

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in institutions

7

100%

12

100%

Not at all

3

43%

8

67%

Somewhat

4

57%

3

25%

Very

0

0%

1

8%

 

 

 

 

 

Connecting CSC staff and volunteers in the community

7

100%

13

100%

Not at all

2

29%

7

54%

Somewhat

4

57%

3

23%

Very

1

14%

3

23%

 

 

 

 

 

Providing support to volunteers

7

100%

14

100%

Not at all

2

29%

6

43%

Somewhat

1

14%

3

21%

Very

4

57%

5

36%

 

 

 

 

 

Sharing lessons learned

8

100%

12

100%

Not at all

2

25%

7

58%

Somewhat

2

25%

2

17%

Very

4

50%

3

25%

 

 

Appendix D: Interview Sites by Region

The primary sites that received larger portions of funding from the Effective Corrections Initiative for the purposes of recruitment, training, and/or sustaining served as the sample for the evaluation.

Atlantic:
Moncton

Focus:
Moncton Reintegration Project (Moncton Community Coalition and Networks of Support)

RHQ: Atlantic

Community:
John Howard Society
Moncton Parole

Institution:
Westmorland Institution

Ontario:
Kingston/Warkworth, Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa

Focus:
Kingston, Institution/Warkworth, recruitment, recognition, sustaining; Hamilton, training; Toronto, recruitment/community/ethnocultural; Ottawa, training

RHQ: Ontario

Community:
John Howard Society Kingston
Hamilton Parole
Toronto Downtown Parole
Ottawa Parole

Institution:
Warkworth Institution

Quebec:
Montreal, Laval

Focus:
Train, sustain, recognition

RHQ: Quebec

Community:
ARSQ (Volunteer)
CCC Martineau
Lafontaine Parole Office (Montreal Metro)

Institution:
Établissement St-Anne des Plaines

Prairies:
RHQ, Edmonton

Focus:
Training and Sustaining (Volunteers' Conference)

RHQ: Prairies

Community:
Edmonton Parole

Pacific:
RHQ/Mission, Vancouver, Victoria

Focus:
Community

RHQ: Pacific

Community:
Community Corrections
Fraser Valley Parole
Vancouver Parole
Victoria Parole

 

National Headquarters
Focus:
Train, sustain, recognition - with a focus on infrastructure

Community Engagement Citizen Engagement Sector and Chaplaincy staff

Examples of Community Partners 24
Elizabeth Fry Society
John Howard Society
Salvation Army
L'Association des services de réhabilitation sociale du Québec (ASRSQ)
Association de rencontres culturelles avec les détenus ( ARCAD )
St. Leonard's Society
M2W2

 

24 Community partners varied by initiative, so different partners were requested to participate in different regions.