Implementing The Life Line Concept: Report Of The Task Force On Long Term Offenders

1. In-Reach Services

Principles

The Task Force found that the following principles apply in examining Life Line services:

• Persons with life sentences have unique characteristics by virtue of their sentence which call for a specialized approach in sentence management, productive use of their time, interpersonal intervention and services.
• The partnership among the Correctional Service of Canada, the National Parole Board and Life Line National Resource Group is the foundation of the Life Line Concept.
• The Life Line Concept consists of three components: In-Reach, Community Resources, Public Education.
• Many of the services within components of the Life Line Concept are applicable to other long term offenders.
• The components of the Life Line Concept are rooted in community-based, non-profit organizations.
• Lifers and long term prisoners, when they have demonstrated a history of successful reintegration into the community themselves, are effective interveners.
• There is commitment to the continuous building of the relevant body of knowledge through learning and research of "what works".
• The success of the In-Reach and Community Resources components is dependent on effective implementation of the Public Education component, based on a strategy of building awareness and support throughout the government and community services, the community-at-large and the media, on the basis of "what works".
• There should be consistency in the services delivered to all offenders and equity in the treatment of personnel delivering those services.
• Offenders may choose to receive Life Line services, but they are not obligated to do so.

 

Link to Correctional Service of Canada Mission

It should be noted that law-abiding behaviour is expected of offenders, whether or not they are released to the community, and, while community reintegration is an important goal for all offenders, the Mission also applies in the situation where an offender is unlikely to be released. Life Line services relate to the following core values and strategic objectives of the Correctional Service of Canada Mission Document:

• Core Value 1: We respect the dignity of individuals, the rights of all members of society, and the potential for human growth and development.
  • 1.6 To provide opportunities for offenders to contribute to the well-being of the community.
  • 1.7 To respect the social, cultural and religious differences of individual offenders.
• Core Value 2: We recognize that the offender has the potential to live as a law-abiding citizen.
  • 2.2 To ensure that the special needs of female and native offenders are addressed properly.
  • 2.4 To ensure that offenders are productively occupied and have access to a variety of work and educational opportunities to meet their needs for growth and personal development.
  • 2.12 To mobilize community resources to ensure that offenders, upon release, are provided with support and assistance.
• Core Value 3: We believe that our strength and our major resource in achieving our objectives is our staff and that human relationships are the cornerstone of our endeavour.
• Core Value 4: We believe that the sharing of ideas, knowledge, values and experience, nationally and internationally, is essential to the achievement of our Mission.
  • 4.5 To encourage and support research and evaluation which will contribute to the continued development of our knowledge and information base.
• Core Value 5: We believe in managing the Service with openness and integrity and we are accountable to the Solicitor General.
  • 5.3 To be partners with agencies within the Ministry in the development of common and consistent policies, and plans for the management of offenders.
  • 5.4 To foster good relationships with other components of the criminal justice system, including police, and to ensure they are consulted in the development of key policies.

Link to National Parole Board Mission

Life Line services relate to the following core values and strategic objectives.

• Core Value 1: We contribute to the attainment of a just, peaceful and safe society.
  • To promote the safe integration of every offender who is conditionally released by imposing necessary release conditions and by responding, as appropriate, to significant changes in risk.
  • To work in collaboration with the Correctional Service of Canada and others in identifying better ways to attain shared goals of preventing crime and protecting society."
• Core Value 2: We respect the inherent potential and dignity of all individuals and the equal rights of all members of society.
  • To ensure the rights of each individual involved in the conditional release process are protected.
  • To ensure that each person is treated in a manner that recognizes and responds to individual needs and characteristics.
• Core Value 3: We believe the contribution of qualified and motivated individuals is essential to promoting the achievement of the Parole Board's Mission.
  • To develop and maintain opportunities with the Correctional Service of Canada and others, to exchange information and ideas that will contribute to the establishment of improved practices and shared values.

Link to Life Line National Resource Group Mission

Services Currently Available

1. In-Reach Services

Following the September, 1997 meeting of In-Reach Workers, reports on activities for the previous year were provided, which give an overview of services and activities currently available in the regions.

Atlantic:

Genesis Society has two In-Reach Workers, based in Halifax. They are visiting all institutions in the region on a monthly basis, and conducted 751 interviews with offenders in the past year. Fifty-three meetings were held with Correctional Service of Canada staff, and they attended 43 meetings of lifers' groups. In the community, they participated in 157 meetings, interviewed 12 people and held consultations with 377 persons.

Quebec:

The region will have its first In-Reach Worker by March 31, 1998, and services will be phased in over the next year, beginning with minimum security institutions. A second worker will be hired in the new fiscal year.

Ontario:

Life Line has two workers, one of whom is the senior In-Reach Worker, and both are based in Kingston. Over the last year, they provided services at nine institutions to 501 long term offenders, 453 of whom are lifers. They assisted or participated in 26 transfers, 31 case conferences, the development of 69 correctional plans, one judicial review and 31 National Parole Board hearings. They participated in 5 public education events. Services are provided to families, but they do not currently collect statistics on this.

Prairies:

Stony Mountain and Rockwood are served by one In-Reach Worker, who dealt with 106 lifers and 13 long term offenders in the last year. He attended 27 case conferences, 9 National Parole Board hearings, two judicial reviews; and conducted 923 interviews with offenders. In the community, there were 58 speaking engagements, two radio talk shows and one television interview. He assisted 26 families of lifers.

In Alberta, the Lifers Transition Team began operations on April 1, 1997 and has two workers, one serving as coordinator. They are based in Calgary and serve all institutions in the province, with the primary focus in the first year of operation on the south. There were 327 interviews, 12 lifers group meetings, 15 presentations to Correctional Service of Canada staff, 8 National Parole Board hearings and 12 case conferences.

Pacific:

LINC (Long Term Offenders now in the Community), based in Abbotsford, has two workers, serving 338 long term offenders, 138 of whom are lifers, in 8 institutions (including Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women). In the last year, they attended 53 National Parole Board hearings, and assisted with at least 32 transfers, and 50 case conferences or correctional plan development. There were 5 public education events.

Summary:

A national summary of services available to offenders, as well as an understanding of the nature of those services, cannot be easily achieved because the reports of In-Reach Workers did not use the same approach or definitions in compiling work statistics. This in turn stems from differences in the specific deliverables in the various contracts related to the scope of work and reporting.

Consistency is most important at the operational level, where local Correctional Service of Canada contract managers, In-Reach Workers and their agencies need a clear quantitative picture of what services are being provided. With consistency in the basic deliverables and scope of work, statistics would have a direct relationship to the work, while rolling them up would give a more useful assessment of the operations and effectiveness of In-Reach services, locally, regionally and nationally. The following table represents an ideal summary of services, and can only be completed to the extent that current information allows.

SUMMARY OF CURRENT IN-REACH SERVICES

	ATLANTIC	QUEBEC =	ONTARIO	PRAIRIES	PACIFIC	NATIONAL
Institutions *	4	12	13	11	9 @	49
Life Inmates *	187	607	736	369	506	2406
Other L-Ters *	152	787	556	344	339	2178
Lifers Served	?		453	?	138
L-Ters Served	?		48	?	200
I-R Workers	2		2	3	2	9
Interviews	751		?	1250	?
Case Conf's	?		31	39	50
Corr'l Plans	?		69	?	32
Lifers' Groups	43		?	?	?
Meet w/ Staff	53		?	?	?
Judicial Review	?		1	?	?
NPB Hearing	?		31	17	53
Public Educ'n	12		5	?	5
Comm'y Rel'ns	157		10	?	?
Family Contact	?		?	?	?

* - Total number in region, excluding CCCs - figures for offenders are those men and women incarcerated as of December 3, 1997.

= - Services to commence in 1998-99

@ - Includes Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women

? - data either not reported, or not reported consistently within a region

2. Community Programs And Services

There are few community-based residential facilities that do not accept lifers or long term offenders as clients. A limited number of Community Residential Centres may, because of agreements with the community in which they are located, limit the type of offenders accepted to specific types related to offence (e.g. sex offenders or "violent" offenders could not be accepted). In terms of length of stay, few CRFs limit the stay, except for those where the specific program is time-limited, after which extension of stay would have no added value.

Two of the In-Reach contracts (LINC and Lifers Transition Team) require community-based support networks to be established by the agencies. In addition, the basic service of In-Reach usually includes referral to community services and programs or to CRFs.

The only community-based service that operates specifically according to the Life Line Concept is the centre operated by St. Leonard's House in Windsor. Since 1993, its Community Admissions Committee had reviewed 41 files by September 1997, accepting 27, deferring 9, rejecting 5. Of those accepted, 17 had actually been released to the House, 7 of whom were on day parole between 18 and 30 months prior to full parole eligibility date. The Life Line Residential Centre in Windsor had 8 residents in September. In 1996-97, 8 referrals were reviewed and 7 offenders were accepted. There have been six graduates (four to full parole on their eligibility dates and two who were already on full parole when accepted). It is receiving a growing number of referrals of non-life-sentenced long term offenders.

A key general observation about community-based services is that the community population usually is widely dispersed. The number of offenders of any sentence length going to most communities, and who need the same kind of programs and residential services at the same time, is extremely limited. This makes the development of specialized services that require large target groups to operate nearly impossible. Programs and services that are flexible enough to meet the immediate needs of a variety of offenders, or community-based programming strategies that use the available resources to their best advantage, are potentially more useful. It is difficult to envision the probability of total residences or parts of a large number of other residences dedicated exclusively to lifers; rather, the creative use of traditional community resources is more likely in most instances.

3. Public Education

In-Reach

All In-Reach Workers participate in community public education events. Some of these opportunities are generated by In-Reach Workers or their agencies actively seeking contacts with various community agencies, and/or by the fact that as the In-Reach Workers' expertise on the issues become known, more invitations are generated. National attention was also generated in 1997 through a Man Alive documentary involving the assistance of Genesis Society, first aired on CBC in January, 1997 and re-broadcast several times throughout the year.

The specific issue that has required or involved Life Line and/or In-Reach Workers this year has been the judicial review provisions of s. 745 of the Criminal Code. Local and national news outlets have received the help of In-Reach Workers to provide background and context to the issues.

In-Reach Workers spend varying amounts of their time in giving speeches, presentations, media interviews and so on. This will contribute in general to a better appreciation of the needs of lifers over time. However, this is not meant to demonstrate that there is a public education strategy in place. Since a strategy by definition requires at least the tasks of planning, goal-setting, targeting audiences, defining messages, building partnerships, measurement of progress, etc., it is unrealistic to expect In-Reach Workers (or anyone) to do this alone. They can contribute considerably because they put a human face on the issue by their presence in the community. However, if it was their responsibility to develop and maintain a public education strategy, the time and effort required to do this would take away from their ability to work with lifers and other long term offenders.

Life Line Residential Centre, Windsor

Service to the community is an important aspect of the Individual Plan of Care of all Life Line residents. These activities allow for the residents to feel they are giving something back to the community. It helps them to find constructive activities at which they are good, and therefore helps them to learn to feel positive about themselves. On the receiving side of this service, these interactions with community members help to put a human face to offenders, to interact with the offenders on a more personal basis, to gain more understanding of the issues, to express anger and fear, or their support, in a safe environment - in the final analysis, to become more informed and therefore less fearful.

Most residents express a desire to work with young offenders and/or youth at risk and have organized social activities, clean up projects, and speaking engagements with certain populations of youth. They also: help to raise funds for the AIDS Committee of Windsor and the Alzheimer's Association; donate clothes, toys, food and other essentials to families at Christmas; accept numerous speaking engagements at schools, the university and college, and community organizations; coach team activities at the local YMCA; visit local nursing homes; volunteer with other community agencies; join in The Downtown Mission's Christmas dinner to the homeless and volunteer at the Special Olympics.

The Centre also publishes an inside/outside newsletter quarterly: "Life & Times", which is edited by a lifer resident. Articles are solicited primarily from the residents and inmate lifers, and also the Volunteer Coordinator and the volunteers. Some 400 copies are distributed to the residents, staff and volunteers at the House, interested members in the community, all lifers' groups and institutions in the Ontario Region and all lifers in correspondence with the Life Line Residence. The library also includes a number of video presentations on the subject at hand, including that made by Correctional Service Canada in 1992, which is still relevant today.

In November 1997, St. Leonard's House-Windsor gave some national exposure to Life Line through the Ken Bolton Symposium. Included in the Symposium were:

• the Commissioner of Corrections as keynote speaker;
• the Chair of the Life Line National Resource Group as the guest speaker at the 35th Anniversary Banquet, reminding of his challenge re: the lifer population at the new building's official opening in 1982, and his keynote address on the community opposition to the Life Line residence proposal in 1992;
• a resident lifer being a presenter in one of the main sessions, which was Moderated by an In-Reach Worker (René Durocher);
• the same resident lifer, Ron DeRoches, receiving the St. Leonard's' Society of Canada's Libby Award during the Banquet for his college education;
• a lifer/ In-Reach Worker (Brian Gough) being a presenter in the All Saints' Church Forum on the Role of the Faith Community in Restorative Justice.

 

Expansion Of Life Line Services

Feasibility

The feasibility of expanding Life Line services depends on serious attention to a number of factors or issues.

1. The status of Life Line as a correctional service must be clarified.

In examining the current services and developing standards for these services, it became readily apparent to the Task Force that Life Line is a service to offenders. As such, to be solidly founded in what is commonly understood to be "good corrections", there are a number of critical elements which should define the service clearly. These are:

• a defined target group;
• overall objectives and objectives for individual offenders;
• the development of law-abiding behaviour by offenders as the major goal;
• standards for quality and level of service;
• ways to monitor standards compliance; and
• evaluation of results.

It is recommended that Life Line be recognized as a service to offenders as part of the overall strategy for working with long term offenders.

2. The question of target group must be resolved. Most In-Reach service providers target mainly life sentenced offenders, and they recently agreed to add offenders with indeterminate sentences. Others target the larger group of long term offenders. Correctional Service of Canada's 1991 Task Force spoke to a target group of all offenders serving sentences of ten (10) years or longer.

There are good reasons for each of these approaches. However, when moving from general policies to specific operations, the definition becomes more than an academic question. It makes a difference not only in the numbers to be served, but also in the identification of the programs and services required. The key to resolution of this issue may be to focus on the group of offenders who will have the most difficulty adapting to long periods of incarceration and in obtaining and maintaining successful reintegration. It is recognized that life sentenced and long term offenders have similar needs, but together they form a very large group (nearly 4600 in federal institutions). The Task Force therefore considers it useful to start with a target group of more manageable size consisting of life and indeterminate sentenced offenders and after gaining experience in working with this group, consider adding more offenders.

It is recommended that the initial target group for Life Line services be offenders who do not have a warrant expiry date.

It is recommended that once In-Reach services have been extended to this target group and some time has passed to gain experience and analyze the impact, as well as complete the research recommended in this report, this target group could be reviewed to consider adding offenders serving ten years or more.

3. There is a need to consolidate and organize In-Reach services. In-Reach must be placed on a solid footing as a client-based operational service, with consistent objectives, activities and reporting. At present, eight In-Reach Workers, with two more soon to be added, could be expected to meet the broad range of needs of over 2400 lifers in federal institutions. To meet this challenge, the existing service requires the policy framework provided by standards and guidelines that will define much more clearly the real job to be done, both for those already involved in the service, as well as for those who are considering offering it in the future. This is addressed in the standards and guidelines proposed in this report.

4. The support of staff and managers throughout the correctional system is essential to the success of any endeavour. This applies to staff within Correctional Service of Canada, staff and members of the National Parole Board as well as to those working in non-governmental agencies. The Task Force must also emphasize that such support does not develop through statements in reports, or through orders from senior management, but rather through demonstrated need for the new idea, and through ensuring it provides staff and managers' with options for dealing with offenders that they need, and that make sense to them. As well, clear indication of line management support at all levels for new initiatives allows the chance to gain credibility among line staff. This can be as simple a gesture as the Warden or other line managers introducing a new In-Reach Worker around the institution.

5. The support and involvement of a broad range of national and local community-based correctional agencies must be obtained. This will be of importance to expand and sustain expansion of the Life Line Concept. Many of these agencies are already involved in serving lifers and long term offenders, even if they do not "specialize" in dealing with the specific needs of this group. Many of them also are the source of advice and service to meet the special needs of certain offender groups (e.g. women, Aboriginal offenders, ethno-cultural groups), and they should be given the opportunity to demonstrate they can adjust to the particular needs of lifers and long term offenders within these groups. Finally, there are few individual agencies that have operations in each and every community where federal offenders may be released, therefore, the network of agencies involved in Life Line must be as broad as possible to ensure the reintegration of lifers and long term offenders can be supported in all regions of Canada.

6. There is a need to expand the community resources for lifers and long term offenders, especially during the initial part of their release. The Task Force has not focused on this area to any significant extent, as much more consultative study is required, particularly within Correctional Service of Canada's community corrections operations. There may be a need for more financial assistance if an offender is unable to gain employment during the first six (6) months or so after release - financial desperation should not be allowed to become a factor precipitating an offender's return to much more costly incarceration. In this same vein, the provision of training and/or employment opportunities also needs to be addressed.

7. Public education would be improved by better identification of what issues will become important and when, and by attracting a wide range of partners representing the various interests within (and "outside") the criminal justice system. The ability to predict in advance when possible difficulties would be likely to arise, and to identify the most common areas of concern needs improvement in order to time-frame contacts and to facilitate the delivery of appropriate programming needs. This knowledge needs to include the experiences of lifers and long term offenders in different residential settings, as well as those from different ethnic and cultural groups. This effort promises to add to our knowledge base of "what works". Examples of a wide range of partners would include victim advocacy organizations, restorative justice organizations or initiatives, the faith community, Citizens Advisory Committees, the Canadian Federation of Municipalities, and so on. There is a need for the development of specific resources such as pamphlets/brochures and other printed materials, speakers pools, the use of audio-visual resources, and the production of public service announcements, among other needs. Further study should be given to these related needs and the costs in the development of the communications strategy.

Prerequisites For Successful Delivery

1. In-Reach

a) Scope of Work

The purpose of In-Reach work is to "reach-in" to institutions under the sponsorship of an established non-profit community based correctional agency in order to provide prisoners with hope, sensitivity, and continuity throughout lengthy prison sentences. With the objective of contributing to the successful reintegration of long term and life sentenced offenders, the In-Reach Worker, who ideally will be a successful lifer or long term offender, will contact, motivate, and assist lifers to derive optimum benefit from correctional planning and program participation.

The unique understanding and relationships of an In-Reach Worker should assist him/her in preparing lifers to understand the realities and positive potentials of their sentences. The In-Reach Worker should be prepared to contribute to the introduction of additional institutional programs and act as a resource to institutional staff. The In-Reach Worker should also provide encouragement and support to lifers in order to derive maximum potential from legal processes such as Parole Board hearings, Temporary Absence applications, and Judicial Reviews.

A model scope of work for In-Reach Workers is included as Appendix A. To meet these general responsibilities, there is a series of specific activities, which illustrate that this is a client-based operational service, provide the basis for ensuring it is consistently carried out across Canada, and establish a firmer foundation for expansion of the services.

It is recommended that the general responsibilities in the scope of work for In-Reach Workers be as follows:

• 1. Establish contact with newly sentenced or re-admitted lifers during the reception and initial placement stage of their sentence.
• 2. Actively encourage individual lifers to contribute to the management of their own sentences by informing them of the programs available, the case management process, and other appropriate resources in institutions and in the community; and by encouraging offenders' meaningful participation in conditional release programs for which they are eligible.
• 3. Maintain a regular interview and contact schedule with lifers and provide encouragement and advice throughout their sentences.
• 4. Maintain ongoing liaison with case management staff and keep up-to-date on Correctional Service Canada and National Parole Board policies in order to assist in the co-ordination of the lifer's correctional plan, productive use of institutional time, preparation for release and reintegration into the community.
• 5. Assist lifers with preparation for legal hearings and, by mutual consent, attend or participate in such hearings.
• 6. Participate in education and awareness sessions for Correctional Service Canada and National Parole Board staff and managers, community organizations and the general public.

Flowing from this, the Task Force also determined that a basic ratio should be developed to calculate the number of In-Reach Workers required to meet the needs of the offender population. The In-Reach Workers consulted suggested that they could deal with a ratio of 1:125, since it is clear that not all offenders (lifers and indeterminate sentences) will opt to use the services of In-Reach Workers. Among those who do require the services, the workload will fluctuate over time. This ratio does not imply a caseload, rather it will allow Correctional Service of Canada operational managers and contract providers to mutually determine the level of human resources required to deliver In-Reach services.

It is recommended that the planning ratio of In-Reach Workers to offenders be set at 1:125. This ratio should be reviewed every three (3) years to ensure it remains realistic and feasible.

b) Qualifications

It is recommended that the qualifications for In-Reach Workers be as follows:

In-Reach Workers should:

• be lifers or long term offenders who have demonstrated successful reintegration by responsible, crime-free living in the community while on full parole for a minimum of five years;
• be accepted and recognized by Correctional Service of Canada, National Parole Board, lifers, and the community as a responsible role model;
• demonstrate an understanding and appreciation of the needs of lifers and long term offenders during the incarceration and community phases of their sentences, as well as a knowledge of the correctional system;
• possess effective verbal and written communication skills;
• demonstrate the ability to work both independently and within a team;
• demonstrate the willingness to conform to the rules governing the operation of Correctional Service of Canada institutions, Escorted and Unescorted Temporary Absences and parole supervision; and
• be eligible for enhanced reliability security screening.

Training and/or experience in the field of social sciences, communications, or community development is advantageous but not a prerequisite.

Not all the above qualifications are equally easy to measure, however, together they describe the individual who can successfully work in this area. One of the more straightforward ones involves the length of time that demonstrates successful reintegration. The second criterion is of critical importance, and also it is the one that may be hardest to assess with confidence. However, all the criteria together constitute the minimum requirements that would lead to a high quality of service.

For ease of reference, and to facilitate future consultations, Appendix A contains the model scope of work and qualifications.

c) Compensation

Currently, the compensation received by In-Reach Workers varies by almost 100%. This difference is significant and does have an impact on the morale of the lower paid In-Reach Workers. If standardization of In-Reach services within the Life Line Concept is accepted, and if the program is expanded to reach all offenders in the proposed target group in a consistent, coherent, and comprehensive manner, then the matter of standard compensation should be addressed.

In this regard it is suggested that the principles that were applied in determining compensation for Aboriginal liaison workers be applied to In-Reach Workers. Specifically, a national minimum level of compensation should be developed, and it is appropriately placed within the WP-2 salary band. The minimum level would be $38,000 for full-time work on an annual fee-for-service basis, and this would include the value of related benefits. Benefit packages would depend on the employment policies of the contracting agencies, and any compensation levels above this minimum would be subject to local contract negotiations.

It is recommended that the minimum level of compensation for an In-Reach Worker be set at $38,000 per year for a full-time worker.

d) Orientation and training

While there is much about prison life for which In-Reach Workers require little or no orientation, there is also much that they will be required to learn and understand in order to carry out the Scope of Work they have agreed to provide. It is critical for the In-Reach Workers to appreciate the sensitivity of their position and understand the necessity for walking a very careful line in order to build and maintain credibility with offenders, staff, agencies, and the general community. To do this they must not only have a sound knowledge and appreciation of the Life Line Concept, its history and strategic objectives, but they must also look at the corrections and parole process from a somewhat different point-of-view than they previously did. There are specific skills that are required to do the work. As well, they need to know how government and private agencies operate and how to get things done within them.

Professional development and training activities are critical to the success of the Life Line Concept. Given that In-Reach Workers are widely dispersed, their training and development activities could be organized on two levels. First, there are individual training and development activities that are based on the core competencies of In-Reach work and on learning needs specific to the various jurisdictions in which they operate. Second, there are universal needs that are required to maintain consistency with the Life Line Concept which can be served most effectively by group training activities organized specifically for In-Reach Workers. Through sharing experiences, and group problem solving, they can enhance the learning experience.

An outline of a three part (required reading, skills training, on-the-job training and orientation) process is included as Appendix B. Participation of individual In-Reach Workers in training or development will have to be part of the responsibilities of the contract agencies employing them. This can be facilitated through the participation of In-Reach Workers in relevant training courses offered at Correctional Service of Canada Staff Colleges or other formal training sessions organized by Correctional Service of Canada or the National Parole Board in the field, attendance at courses offered by the Canadian Training Institute, provincial agencies, community colleges or CEGEPS, or justice training institutes. In terms of ongoing development, the above training sources should be tapped, and part of the time spent at national In-Reach Workers meetings should be set aside for formal training sessions on new issues, policies, etc. or on specific skill areas that have been identified as a common need.

It is recommended that there be an initial orientation period for new In-Reach Workers of up to six weeks in duration, and that Appendix B to this report be the basis for developing a common approach to orientation and ongoing training.

e) Services for Aboriginal offenders:

There is a strong overlap between the types of services expected of In-Reach Workers and those expected of the Aboriginal liaison service. Indeed, the Task Force saw the existing Correctional Service Canada guidelines for liaison services for Aboriginal offenders as an extremely useful starting place to help define clear standards and guidelines for In-Reach services.

The general principle applied in delivery of services to Aboriginal offenders is that the essential first step of establishing rapport with Aboriginal offenders is much easier if the service deliverer is Aboriginal. An additional important principle is that service deliverers should have a strong rooting in the Aboriginal community and a broad range of contacts and support within that community. These two requirements play a much bigger role in the delivery of services that will assist reintegration for Aboriginal offenders than, for example, whether the service deliverer is an offender.

Given these principles, then, the critical issue is whether the existing Aboriginal liaison function is meeting the special needs of Aboriginal offenders serving life and other long term sentences. Answering this question adequately would require discussions and consultations with Correctional Service Canada and National Parole Board managers and staff, Aboriginal offenders and the agencies delivering liaison services. The role and advice of Elders is important, and it is necessary to seek this advice. It has been agreed with regional Elders that CSC should appoint a national Elder, and this appointment may take some time to complete. In the meantime, though, a great deal of work can be accomplished, as long as the partners (Correctional Service of Canada, National Parole Board and agencies) seek the advice of Elders and are open to future advice that may be given.

It is recommended that tripartite consultations take place involving Correctional Service of Canada, National Parole Board, liaison workers and their agencies, Aboriginal offenders, Elders and the CSC Aboriginal Advisory Committee to determine the best direction to take to meet the needs of Aboriginal lifers. This consultation would be most appropriately led by CSC's Director General, Aboriginal Issues.

It is also important that the overall strategy and the tripartite approach to the Life Line Concept reflect and respect the needs of Aboriginal offenders. The best way of doing this would be to include expertise on Aboriginal issues in the membership of the Life Line National Resource Group. This issue will be addressed later in the report.

f) Services for women offenders

While there is currently no specific Correctional Service of Canada policy for services to women serving long sentences, a literature review was completed in 1994 to provide the new facilities for women with information to help guide the development of their programs and services. A total of 11 Correctional Service of Canada institutions (7 facilities for women and 4 male institutions) house women serving sentences of ten years or more. All federal women in British Columbia are in the provincial Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women. They are therefore widely dispersed, and except for the three largest facilities (Joliette, Grand Valley Institution and Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women), make up very small numbers in each institution.

In-Reach services are provided by the same agencies or workers who serve male institutions in all regions but Ontario. The Ontario Elizabeth Fry Society has had preliminary discussions with Life Line Ontario regarding ways to meet the needs of women at Grand Valley Institution. Currently, only Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women is served by a female In-Reach Worker. Specific issues to take into account in providing In-Reach services for women are as follows:

• Correctional Service of Canada policy on programming and services for women offenders, while not precluding services by members of the opposite sex, does set guidelines according to the type of service offered and the level of "intimacy" of the context in which the service is offered. Services that rely on private one-on-one sessions that cannot be supervised by Correctional Service of Canada staff may require same-sex deliverers. However, parameters can be and have been developed at the operational unit level to allow for the delivery of In-Reach services by male workers.
• It is important to pay particular attention to the small numbers of women lifers currently housed in male institutions, to ensure the In-Reach Workers serving these institutions are aware of and sensitive to the needs of these women.
• For the most part, there are more similarities between men and women lifers than differences. There are only a few specific areas where the interests and needs of women lifers or long term offenders may be different from those of men.

Therefore, the implementation of the Life Line Concept needs to be enhanced and guided by the additional expertise of those with knowledge on women's issues.

It is recommended that the Deputy Commissioner for Women of Correctional Service of Canada take the leadership role in tripartite consultations and other work leading to developing services for women lifers and long term offenders.

The Task Force is also concerned that the ongoing elaboration of direction and policy applying to federal offenders in the Life Line Concept should address and reflect the special needs of women. As for Aboriginal offenders, the best method to ensure this happens is to include a subject matter expert in the membership of the Life Line National Resource Group. This issue will be addressed later in the report.

g) Information collection, sharing and protection

To conduct the activities defined in the Scope of Work, In-Reach Workers require access to information that is under control of the Government of Canada. Such information can be obtained, used, and stored providing that it is handled in accordance with Treasury Board and the Correctional Service of Canada policies.

Commissioner's Directive 782.16 specifies that:

Treasury Board policy regarding the security of information does not differentiate between employees, contractors, or volunteers, focusing rather on the information or assets that must be protected. Given that In-Reach Workers must be provided with all relevant information necessary to facilitate the offender's safe and effective community reintegration, government policy requires that they qualify for Enhanced Reliability status. In order to have access to such information they must then receive training in the relevant policies, practices, and procedures before access is granted to government information and assets. Such training must, at a minimum, cover the information and asset management policies of the government as well as threat-risk assessments of information and asset management.

Appendix B covers the need for training for In-Reach Workers on all aspects of this issue. In addition, as contract service deliverers, agencies under contract for the services of In-Reach Workers should have a number of detailed requirements laid out in contracts. This should serve to:

• ensure offenders receiving services understand the guarantees and limits of confidentiality;
• protect In-Reach Workers from having to make too many difficult decisions about confidentiality on their own; and
• provide the specific ways in which both the agencies involved and Correctional Service of Canada handle information in a way that:

Basically, this would involve provisions regarding:

• the type of information held by Correctional Service of Canada to which In-Reach Workers should have access;
• conditions when release or sharing of information requires the offender's permission;
• confidentiality agreements between In-Reach Workers and offenders, which should set out clearly the types of information Workers must report (e.g. threats to individuals or self, offences committed, child abuse incidents, etc);
• creation, maintenance and storage of private information records about offenders;
• type and frequency of reports to be submitted to Correctional Service of Canada about the offenders being served.

Standards addressing such requirements are included in Appendix C.

h) The impact of geography on service delivery

As with many services that have to be provided to several institutions and link offenders to the community, the distances spanned by Correctional Service of Canada operational units within all regions affects the level of service. Even in regions where there is a large concentration of institutions, there is always at least one institution that is a long distance from the others. In most regions, the institutions are concentrated at large distances from the urban centres where most offenders come from. Contract managers and contractors therefore have to jointly determine how much travel is required to meet the specific objectives for In-Reach services and fund this accordingly. There can also be too much travel, so that workers spend more time in cars than with offenders, which has to be taken into account when determining the geographical span of the service.

It is recommended that contracts for In-Reach services address funds required for compensation, travel and administration.

2. Community Programs and Services

a) Community Residential Centre staff development and training

Community Residential Centre staff currently dealing with life sentenced offenders may require training on:

• understanding violent clients and special lifer characteristics
• correctional planning and reintegration issues for life sentences
• anger management and crisis prevention/intervention
• social learning theory
• the use and abuse of power and control in relationships
• reinforcing positive, and diminishing negative, attitudes/behaviours
• cultural diversity and sex discrimination
• communications and team-building skills
• empowering through positive counselling and role-modelling.

Such information needs could apply to all Community-Based Residential Facilities. This also illustrates the need of ongoing developmental training, as the trends in behaviour and characteristics of the offender population change over time. For staff in Community Residential Centres not currently specializing in dealing with life sentenced offenders, issues related to longer term correctional planning and managing longer term residency are of importance.

b) Community Residential Centre staff support

To deal with increasingly difficult offender populations, agencies may have to provide more support to staff, for dealing with the aftermath of crises, community incidents or other situations. This could include formal Employee Assistance Programs, stress and burnout management, organized critical incident stress de-briefing and ongoing traumatic stress counselling.

c) Longer term residency

The Life Line Concept is based on a period of residency on day parole prior to full parole using the entire three-year window available to first and second degree murderers. The fundamental requirement is that the three year day parole eligibility period be used to implement a gradual, phased and planned process of community reintegration. In addition, the length of stay should be determined by the risk and needs of the offenders.

There are a number of factors affecting the feasibility of expansion beyond the existing one centre in Windsor:

• pressures from the community regarding the existence of halfway houses in neighbourhoods and the type of clientele that is "acceptable";
• pressures on all community-based residential facilities to accommodate a growing population of offenders on a wide range of types of conditional release that take precedence and require bed spaces.

Most Community Residential Centres , with the exception of those who have a time-limited length of stay based on program completion, would not object to day parole residency longer than six months. However, just as the longer incarceration term must be time-framed to avoid "warehousing" offenders and to make constructive use of their time, so would Community Residential Centres have to adapt the longer stay to make constructive use of three years.

There is a series of useful alternatives to a single specialized halfway house for lifers which should be pursued. Among these are:

• the use of "five-and-two" day parole;
• participation in community-based correctional programs;
• employment programs;
• moving from minimum security to a Community Correctional Centre to a Community Residential Centre to a satellite apartment;
• participation in peer support groups;
• private home placements as a final step in gradual release;
• attendance or drop-in centres.

It is recommended that the implementation of the Community component of the Life Line Concept consider combinations of community resources that will ensure a process of gradual, phased day parole leading to full parole.

d) Aboriginal offenders

Regarding community-based services and programs, the primary vehicles for addressing Aboriginal offenders' needs in the community will be agreements and projects under sections 81 and 84 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act². The development and implementation of agreements under s. 81 should also be addressing the needs of long term offenders from the Aboriginal community, to ensure Correctional Service of Canada uses these legislative tools to their full potential. Since they are based on the commitment of the community to take responsibility for offenders, the use of Ss. 81 and 84 also provides support, and an overall framework, to the Life Line Concept as it may apply for Aboriginal offenders.

The advice and role of Elders and communities will be useful in working within the traditions of various peoples to deal with offenders returning after incarceration, particularly those who shun or isolate offenders. The Elders may be the primary source of support in some traditional communities for returning lifers, and it is through their work and teaching that such offenders may be accepted back into community life.

e) Women offenders

In general, there is a need to develop a community infrastructure that better meets the needs of all women offenders on conditional release, in order to reduce the revocations that result from lack of programs or services that would prevent the behaviour leading to suspensions or revocations. This issue is highlighted to add that the women lifers on conditional release experience these same problems, and their needs would be addressed by an overall strategy addressing the lack of community infrastructure for women offenders.

Standards And Guidelines

A draft set of standards and guidelines is included as Appendix C, and covers the three elements of the Life Line Concept. This document contains relatively more detailed requirements for In-Reach services, as these are the most concrete part of the Life Line Concept. As well, the direct services to offenders are important enough to deserve a fairly high level of specificity, to be able to ensure that the services are being delivered at the level of quality desired.

In-Reach Service involves:

• service delivered by lifers or term-offenders with a history of demonstrating successful reintegration in the community, who are under contract to or employed by a community-based agency;
• In-Reach Workers who meet specific qualifications, are trained to perform their services professionally, and have a defined scope of work;
• most of the In-Reach work being done inside the prisons with outside community liaison on behalf of individual prisoners on each worker's caseload;
• Escorted Temporary Absence/Unescorted Temporary Absence accompaniment, as part of outreach work, including occasionally the transportation to or from a community residence;
• liaising with prisoners' families and residential and other community resources; and
• providing assistance at judicial reviews and National Parole Board hearings as appropriate.

The standards for community services would apply to facilities which opt to work with life sentenced offenders, whether or not they are specialized for lifers. These standards would not supersede or replace the current set of standards for community-based residential facilities agreed to between Correctional Service of Canada and non-governmental organizations, which should remain applicable to all Community-Based Residential Facilities.

The community resources:

• have personnel specialized on issues to life-sentenced offenders dedicated to Life Line services, and especially in residential programmes, have a dedicated parole officer;
• engage in long term pre-release visitations, screening and planning, including a series of Unescorted Temporary Absences/Work Releases to the residence, with at least the initial travel from and to the institution being accompanied by residence or In-Reach personnel;
• have an admissions advisory committee representative of the community, including the residence, parole office, community resources, the neighbourhood, victims and police;
• have a process of guided social reintegration, which includes the involvement of outside volunteers;
• provide for gradual, progressively independent 3-year day parole living arrangements;
• develop Individual Plans of Care which include use of specific program and counselling resources available from various sources, and volunteer work by the lifers, including a "buddy" system and community service;
• where applicable, provide liaison with and support of the lifers' families; and
• provide assistance at National Parole Board hearings as relevant.

The standards for public education cover the tripartite development and implementation of public education strategies at the national, regional and local level.

The standards describe a Public Education strategy which:

• functions within the tripartite partnership of the Life Line proponents, the Correctional Service of Canada and the National Parole Board;
• is delivered at the national, regional and local levels;
• is concerned with the audiences comprised of the offenders and staff in correctional institutions and other government agencies, the non-government service providers and resources, and the community-at-large, including the media; and,
• is responsive, open, consultative, and forthcoming.

This set of standards and guidelines was developed by the Task Force to be a starting point for broad consultations among Correctional Service of Canada, National Parole Board and non-governmental organizations. While the Task Force is confident that these standards may be useful in their entirety, they should not be considered to be the final and definitive standards in this area. It is also the case that few of the existing contracts, for In-Reach services as an example, conform completely to the draft standards. This package of standards serves as the ground work to help the various partners discuss, elaborate and further refine the Life Line Concept.

It is recommended that the draft set of standards developed by the Task Force be used as a starting point for broad consultations among Correctional Service of Canada, National Parole Board and all non-governmental organizations who are, or may be interested in, providing services under the umbrella of the Life Line Concept.

It is recommended that the review process that measures compliance to standards allow for the following steps:

• service providers conduct a self-audit to determine if they meet the standards;
• service providers make adjustments according to their review;
• external reviews be conducted to measure compliance;
• regular contract compliance reviews be undertaken by service providers and contract managers.

Resources for Implementation

At this stage, the Task Force determined that it is possible to estimate the costs of extending In-Reach service to all offenders in Correctional Service of Canada institutions within the recommended target group (offenders who do not have a warrant expiry date). The Task Force used the following formula to calculate the total cost:

Total offenders	= 2600
Offenders / 125	= 21 ( Number of In-Reach Workers)
Compensation per worker	= $38,000
Travel per worker	= 12,000
Sub-total	= 50,000
Administration cost per worker
@ 10% of sub-total	= 5,000
Total cost per worker	= 55,000
x total required workers (21)	=$1,155,000

Correctional Service of Canada currently spends $405,000 per year on In-Reach services provided by nine (9) In-Reach Workers.

This cost estimate applies to expanding In-Reach services to all life sentence and indeterminate offenders. It should be noted that, given our recommendations to consult widely on the best ways to meet the needs of Aboriginal lifers (who make up 12% of the incarcerated lifers, mainly concentrated in Prairies and Pacific regions), if it is decided to rely on the Aboriginal liaison function the increases in cost may be less than this total estimate. In addition, local agencies and Correctional Service of Canada contract managers may find that the number of workers they require and the funds for travel will vary considerably.

---

2 81. (1) The Minister, or a person authorized by the Minister, may enter into an agreement with an aboriginal community for the provision of correctional services to aboriginal offenders and for payment by the Minister, or by a person authorized by the Minister, in respect of the provision of those services.

84. Where an inmate who is applying for parole has expressed an interest in being released to an aboriginal community, the Service shall, if the inmate consents, give the aboriginal community

(a) adequate notice of the inmate's parole application; and

(b) an opportunity to propose a plan for the inmate's release to, and integration into, the aboriginal community.