FORUM on Corrections Research

Correctional Research in Support of Key Strategic Challenges and Outcomes

Larry Motiuk¹

Research Branch, Correctional Service of Canada

Each fiscal year an approved program of corrections research related to policy, programming and management issues is conducted by the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC). While the main goal of the Service’s research efforts is to contribute to public, staff and offender safety, it does so in partnership with other sectors at National Headquarters and administrative regions of the Service, other government and non-government organizations as well as academia. Active research collaborations are deemed essential to the fulfillment of the Service’s mission and mandate.

This article offers an overview of the role and mandate of a research function for a correctional agency. More specifically, it describes how a comprehensive and integrated program of research is developed, then approved and subsequently carried out in support of key strategic challenges being faced by the Service. Examples of research initiatives underway are provided as well as some preliminary results that are being translated into correctional practice. Finally, a framework is presented that may possibly guide future measurement efforts towards the realization of a major objective for the Service — the safe and effective reintegration of offenders. For the three phases of the correctional process (admission, institutional placement and community supervision), reintegration activities are highlighted, anticipated results are hypothesized and measures offered.

The essential framework that guides the operational research efforts of the Service include the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Mission Document of the CSC, and the Estimates Part III — Report on Plans and Priorities. To date, the activities of the Research Branch of the CSC have been focused generally in this fashion. However, a number of other major research initiatives are undertaken throughout the fiscal year at the request of the Service’s Executive Committee (EXCOM) as well as the National Headquarters Management Committee because of their obvious relevance to important operational initiatives.

Key strategic challenges facing CSC include the following: changing offender profile, over-representation of Aboriginal offenders, need for community capacity to support offenders under supervision and beyond sentence completion to prevent re-offending, and need to realign and transform corporate practices and systems to meet these new demands in a fiscally responsible manner. In order to address these challenges the Service has identified four strategic outcomes (see Figure 1) to focus on over the next three years (2003/2006):

Figure 1

In support of the realization of these key strategic challenges outcomes, a 2003–2004 Research Program was designed and approved by EXCOM to provide the Service with accurate research-based information and analysis that can be used to facilitate operational planning and decision making. Consequently, the 2003–04 Research Plan outlines a list of national research projects directed towards advancing the Service’s mandate related to crime prevention and public protection. Moreover, an inventory of regional research initiatives by field practitioners is also provided that lists projects in progress or under consideration.

Research plans for 2003–2004

In general terms, the following highlights the Service’s research plans for 2003–2004:

Conduct research that contributes to the management of addictions and the harmful consequences of drug use in support of Canada’s National Drug Strategy;

Engage Aboriginal communities in Aboriginal focused corrections research;

Develop a protocol for assessing the characteristics and behaviours associated with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome/Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAS/FAE), the types of interventions required, and staff training needs;

Provide more research on targeted treatment to respond to offenders with mental health problems;

Assist in developing approaches to better integrate security, case management, and programming for offenders presenting similar risk/needs profiles;

Examine operational strategies to control the supply and reduce the demand for drugs;

Design and test of a climate indicators and profiling system to improve prediction, prevention, and management of critical incidents and emergencies;

Advance new research on strategic intelligence approaches to address the risks posed by offenders;

Explore the efficacy of the accommodation strategy for federally sentenced women;

Review community-based accommodation measures to help ensure the safe and timely reintegration of offenders;

Initiate research directed toward an integrated security, case management, and programming approaches targeted to smaller groups of offenders who share similar needs (in institutions, through transition to the community);

Carry out research and surveys on citizen engagement;

Review studies on restorative justice approaches in corrections;

Make available research that enhances processes and practices that will ensure a safe, healthy, and supportive workplace, and the effective management of CSC;

Offer research support to staff to manage the challenges of the correctional environment; and

Support Canada’s foreign policy priority in human rights and criminal justice matters through providing research expertise and helping establish safe and humane corrections.

Examples of research to action

1. Contributing to institutional and community safety:

A research-based Climate Indicator and Profiling System (CIPS) has been developed and implemented across the Service’s maximum-security institutions. Comprehensive information is being gathered during field trials to allow institutions to track how their population profiles are changing, so that they can better identify some of the factors that are most likely associated with institutional climate risk and make strategic changes. In addition, CIPS is responding to a recognized need to collect and track standard daily climate indicators of immediate institutional vulnerability, apart from longer term trends, in order to facilitate more immediate population management strategies. Outcome results are not yet available.

A High Intensity Substance Abuse Program (HISAP) has been developed, implemented and internationally accredited. Research results from the pilot programs showed that offenders who completed HISAP demonstrated a 69% reduction in institutional misconduct, a 19% reduction in re-admissions to prison and a 50% reduction in new convictions.

2. Contributing to effective Aboriginal corrections:

In collaboration with a number of First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations, a series of research studies have been conducted resulting in improved capacity to conduct Aboriginal-specific research within Aboriginal communities and raising operational awareness of the importance of delivering services that address the needs of different Aboriginal groups.

3. Contributions to gender responsive assessment and programming:

The Service’s classification tools used to allocate necessary controls and program resources for women offenders have been validated and re-validated for initial security placement, security reclassification, risk and needs assessment, reintegration potential assessment and reassessment. These offender classification instruments are critical to the effective and efficient risk management of women offenders while under federal sentence. Research-based gender responsive interventions (Dialectical Behavior Therapy, Psychosocial Rehabilitation, Spirit of a Warrior, Circles of Change) have been developed and implemented across the Service. Outcome results are not yet available.

A research-based Women Offender Substance Abuse Program (WOSAP) has been developed and implemented across the Service. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) is working in collaboration with the Service’s Addictions Research Centre (ARC) on this innovative program designed specifically to address the substance abuse needs of women offenders. Outcome results are not yet available.

With key strategic challenges as varied and complex as those that confront CSC, applied research has to attempt to inform and influence in different ways and at many levels. Understandably, within an operational agency focused on public safety, there are limited resources that can be exclusively dedicated to the conduct of applied corrections research. Nevertheless, the ever-expanding set of operational questions necessitates research priority setting, coordination of efforts, effective integration, communication of findings and implementation.

Reintegration — A research framework

Correctional service providers in collaboration with releasing authorities can and do affect the safe release of offenders into the community. The application of reintegration efforts should yield public safety dividends in terms of lower rates of incidents while in custody and criminal re-offending upon return to the community. Therefore, outcome questions flow logically from the three major components of the reintegration process — admission phase (orientation, assessment, planning), institutional phase (programming) and community phase (supervision, programming, community service utilization).

Whenever reintegration research is being undertaken, comparative analyses are conducted in relation to a matched group based on specified criteria. If possible, attempts are made to match on admission date, sentence length, and level of risk and need. This approach has the effect of introducing in the research design controls for the following —temporality, exposure and propensity. As well, reintegration outcome measures may include but not necessarily limited to such areas as: cost(s), programming involvement(s), security incidents, release type, supervision performance and return/re-offending rates. Data are obtained from five main sources: cost centres, case files, timeline interviews, participant/staff feedback questionnaires, and the Service’s Offender Management System (OMS).

The following three tables offer an overall reintegration research framework that provides a schematic representation of reintegration activities, anticipated results and measures.

Table 1

	Reintegration Research - Admission Phase
Reintegration Activities	Anticipated Results	Measures
Classifying Initial Security Level	Offenders will be appropriately placed to the least restrictive measures of confinement commensurate with their institutional adjustment risk, escape risk, and public safety risk	Initial security level designations Placement distributions Override rates Security incident rates
Profiling Reintegration Potential - At Intake	Identification of early release candidates Establishment of case preparation priorities	Initial security level designations Release risk distributions Programming requirements at admission Reintegration potential distributions
Developing Correctional Plans	Case plans upon which release is predicated will be produced in a timely manner	Correctional plans completion dates
Improving Institutional Program Motivation	Accurately assessing offender motivation will help to target offenders for program participation and to establish release priority	Motivation levels

---

Table 2

		Reintegration Research - Institutional Phase
Reintegration Activities		Anticipated Results		Measures
Increasing Institutional Program Participation		Assignment to programs where the need is identified Case preparation time and delays reduced Institutional program participation will improve institutional adjustment and likelihood of early release/post-release success Reduced costs given economies of scale due to increase in participants		Matching rates of needs to programs Program participation rates/costs Security incident rates Discretionary release rates Post-release success rates Cost per participant
Ensuring Institutional Program Completion		Completing programs will improve institutional adjustment and likelihood of early release/post-release success Reducing the number of program non-completions or dropouts will reduce costs in terms of wasted programming resources and in depriving motivated offenders program opportunities		Program completion rates Security incident rates Discretionary release rates Post-release success rates
Improving Institutional Program Performance		In-program outcomes or treatment gain will influence decisions to support early release, vary reintegration potential during incarceration and influence positive post-release adjustment		Program performance ratings Security incident rates Discretionary release rates Post-release success rates
Moderating Administrative Segregation		Reduced placement in administrative segregation for disciplinary or voluntary reasons can improve reintegration progress and influence early release		Non-voluntary segregation rates/reasons Voluntary segregation rates/reasons
Reclassifying Security Level		Reclassification and expeditious transfer of offenders to the 'least restrictive measures of confinement' will improve chances for discretionary release		Security reclassification designations Placement distributions Override rates Security incident rates
Increasing Successful Temporary Absences		Participation in either escorted or unescorted temporary absence programs will establish credibility for early release		Escorted temporary absence rates Unescorted temporary absence rates
Enhancing Case Preparation Activities		Achieving efficiencies at any one of the critical stages along the case management continuum will result in reductions in "days of incarceration" and corresponding increase in community supervision		Case preparation timelines
Profiling of Reintegration Potential - Pre-release		Identification of good candidates for pre-release and re-entry priorities will improve reintegration efforts		Reintegration potential distributions
Profiling of Reintegration Potential - At-release		Confirmation of re-entry priorities at time of release will facilitate successful community adjustment		Reintegration potential distributions
Enhancing Community Supervision		Effective use of frequency of contact guidelines, special conditions, community residential facilities, halfway house placements will improve offenders' successful reintegration		Community supervision levels Special conditions Residential placements
Moderating Suspension Warrants		Improving suspension efficiencies and narrowing disparities in practice will increase the potential to sustain more offenders in the community under supervision		Suspension warrant rates
Moderating Technical Violations		Understanding the technical revocation decision-making process an/or finding alternatives to revocation submissions and understanding the process may improve reintegration efforts		Technical violation rates/reasons
Increasing Community-based Program Participation		Assignment to community-based programs where the need is identified Community-based program participation will improve likelihood of post-release success		Matching rates of needs to programs Program participation rates/costs Community supervision completion rates
Ensuring Community-based Program Completion		Completing community-based programs will improve the likelihood of post-release success Reducing the number of program non-completions in the community will reduce costs in terms of wasted programming resources and in depriving motivated offenders program opportunities		Matching rates of needs to programs Community-based program completion rates Community supervision completion rates
Improving Community-based Program Performance		In-program outcomes or treatment gain will influence decisions to reduce frequency of contact, vary reintegration potential while under supervision sentence and influence positive community adjustment		Program performance ratings Community incident rates Community supervision completion rates
Improving Access to Community-based Services		Assignment to community-based services where the need is identified Community-based service utilization when required will improve likelihood of community reintegration		Matching rates of needs to services Service referrals Service utilization rates Community supervision completion rates
Reduced Re-offending		Reduced re-admissions to provincial and federal corrections		Reconviction rates/type Time to reconviction Re-admission rates

---

Table 3

	Reintegration Research - Community Phase
Reintegration Activities	Anticipated Results		Measures
Profiling of Reintegration Potential - At-release	Confirmation of re-entry priorities at time of release will facilitate successful community adjustment	Reintegration potential distributions
Enhancing Community Supervision	Effective use of frequency of contact guidelines, special conditions, community residential facilities, halfway house placements will improve offenders successful reintegration	Community supervision levels Special conditions Residential placements
Moderating Suspension Warrants	Improving suspension efficiencies and narrowing disparities in practice will increase the potential to sustain more offenders in the community under supervision	Suspension warrant rates
Moderating Technical Violations	Understanding the technical revocation decision-making process an/or finding alternatives to revocation submissions and understanding the process may improve reintegration efforts	Technical violation rates/reasons
Increasing Community-based Program Participation	Assignment to community-based programs where the need is identified Community-based program participation will improve likelihood of post-release success	Matching rates of needs to programs Program participation rates/costs Community supervision completion rates
Ensuring Community-based Program Completion	Completing community-based programs will improve the likelihood of post-release success Reducing the number of program non-completions in the community will reduce costs in terms of wasted programming resources and in depriving motivated offenders program opportunities	Matching rates of needs to programs Community-based program completion rates Community supervision completion rates
Improving Community-based Program Performance	In-program outcomes or treatment gain will influence decisions to reduce frequency of contact, vary reintegration potential while under supervision sentence and influence positive community adjustment	Program performance ratings Community incident rates Community supervision completion rates
Improving Access to Community-based Services	Assignment to community-based services where the need is identified Community-based service utilization when required will improve likelihood of community reintegration	Matching rates of needs to services Service referrals Service utilization rates Community supervision completion rates
Reduced Re-offending	Reduced re-admissions to provincial and federal corrections	Reconviction rates/type Time to reconviction Re-admission rates

Summary

Contemporary issues in corrections continue to direct research resources and focus efforts on offender classification, effective programming, and a plethora of crime reduction strategies. Since its inception, the research functions of the Service, like those in other jurisdictions, have made significant advances in their operations with increased and constantly improved offender assessment and intervention technology. The great amount of conceptual and practical work that has gone into evidence-based correctional practice is being documented in the literature. Consequently, applied research has contributed greatly to crime prevention and the modernization of corrections.

As we look at changing demographics, technologies and nature of criminal activities that are facing national and international corrections today, it is not surprising to find that the demand for sharing knowledge and specialized corrections expertise is high. The ultimate test of any correctional agencies research function, of course, will be whether further breakthroughs can still be made in reducing the likelihood of criminal futures.

---