Norval Morris Project

Change the people or change the system?

Joshua Stengel — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 21:20:18 GMT

As we consider the idea of “Transforming the Workforce” in corrections, I have to wonder if changing thousands and thousands of people is easier than just changing the system and letting “natural selection” take place. Seem to me that transforming the average person would take longer than the current average career span in corrections.

Even at 10%+ unemployment levels, I’m betting recruitment is still tough in corrections. There is a whole pool of talent seeking employment right now-good quality people that the private sector just can’t afford. Neither can corrections, you say? I say the right people doing the job right will be cheaper and more effective than the wrong people doing the wrong job all day long.

I would cast a vote for turning this into the “Transforming Employment in Corrections” topic. Corrections needs to be profession capable of attracting the best and brightest and not just the cheapest or most willing. A sustainable employment environment in corrections is the real key to transforming the workforce IMHO (in my humble opinion).

New article from James Jacobs now available

Joshua Stengel — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:38:08 GMT

Fellow member, James Jacobs, of the Norval Morris Project and member of the Workforce Transformation Team has written a short article, recently published in the Federal Sentencing Reporter, about Norval Morris. A copy of this article has been made available for download in the shared files library. Follow this link to download the article.

Excerpt:

"Norval Morris, Julius Kreeger Professor of Law and Criminology at the University of Chicago Law School for four decades (and a former dean), was the exception who proves the rule. More than any other sentencing theorist of his generation, Norval Morris understood that an incarcerative sentence involves both duration of confinement and conditions of confinement. He argued that the actual penal sanction, as it was experienced by convicted offenders, should not be left to arbitrary decision making, budgetary contingencies, or bureaucratic competencies. Rather, it should be a matter of policy and of jurisprudence. The guiding principle should be to treat the imprisoned inmate as a citizen behind bars, to respect his or her dignity and humanity, and to encourage (not coerce) self-change."

Technology

Joshua Stengel — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:08:39 GMT

In a recent discussion of Workforce Transformation topic, the role of technology in corrections was brought up. It seems like corrections struggles with taking advantage of technology.

My questions to the group are...What are the perceived and actual barriers to adopting new technology? What technologies do you think have the most potential for positively transforming the corrections workforce?

Please feel free to invite others you know or others from your agency to join this online discussion!

Reducing the Corrections Population Safely and Effectively

Nancy Cebula — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:00:07 GMT

"How can we safely and systematically reduce the correctional population by half in eight years?"

The Population Reduction Topic Team has been formed as part of the National Institute of Corrections Norval Morris Project, a project designed to expedite the circulation of innovations and knowledge throughout the field of corrections. The project brings together people both inside and outside the field of corrections by developing interdisciplinary teams to develop, refine, and expand upon critical challenges facing corrections. As discussed below, this topic team is focusing on the issues surrounding reducing by half the total number of people incarcerated in prisons or jails and supervised in the community. To date, the initial work group has begun examining the main drivers of increasing populations, including the factors influencing admissions and readmission, length of supervision, and the role corrections may play in prevention. This document is a follow up to a previous invitation to participate in this topic team and provides further background and an update of progress.

Background

In 1980, there were 1.84 million persons in the U.S. under some form of correctional supervision, either incarcerated in a prison or jail or being supervised in the community by probation or parole agencies. Today, nearly 30 years later, over 7.5 million people are incarcerated or being supervised in the community. This includes over 1.5 million prisoners and another 780,000 jail inmates. Based on a U.S. population of 303 million, this means the U.S. incarceration rate is 762 inmates per 100,000 in the population. By comparison, the most recent available estimates indicate there are more than 9.8 million people incarcerated worldwide. Based on a world population of 6.7 billion people, the world incarceration rate is 145 inmates per 100,000 in the population. No other country, including many that have higher victimization rates, has a higher incarceration rate than the United States.i

In 2007, the Pew Charitable Trusts released a report estimating that the U.S. prison population would reach 1.7 million by 2011 and that the prison incarceration rate for the same year would be 550 inmates per 100,000 population.ii Incarceration rates have continued to rise even though sentence lengths have become shorter, because offenders spend more time under correctional supervision due to decisions made after adjudication.iii This Norval Morris Project Population Reduction Topic Team, in keeping with the spirit of Norval Morris' work, will focus on pragmatic approaches to problem solving and strategies available to corrections practitioners to reduce the total correctional population by half iv.

Estimates of the national cost of corrections routinely exceed $50 billion a year. In January 2009, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that two-thirds of the states, as well as the District of Columbia, are facing serious budget shortfalls, even after making major cuts last year. That number will no doubt grow in the coming months as additional states have indicated that they will also face budget crises this year.v As leaders at all levels and in each branch of government deal with the effects of the finical crisis, they are also reexamining policies that have driven the extraordinary growth of the corrections population.vi While we may have differing perspectives on the philosophy of justice that should motivate the corrections system, all recognize that the system should calibrate punishments to fit both the crime and the offender while remaining effective and humane. A key question is how much punishment is required to serve justice and how much, beyond that level, is now being imposed that is both too costly and very often counterproductive.

      Ironically, against the backdrop of the continuing growth of correctional populations is the fact that crime rates in the U.S. have been dropping for over a decade. In its last release of Uniform Crime Reports data, the FBI reported that the violent crime rate in the U.S. had fallen to the lowest rate since the early 1970s, while property crime rates have fallen to their lowest levels since the late 1960s. The incapacitation effects of high levels of incarceration were partly responsible for this historic drop in crime, but the question remains whether it is still the appropriate strategy in an era of declining crime rates.vii Added to this is the fact that the current level of incarceration carries with it both enormous social costs and substantial opportunity costs as resources that states and local jurisdictions could use for other purposes are diverted to corrections.viii

NIC's Norval Morris Project

      In September 2008, the Keystone Group of the National Institute of Corrections' Norval Morris Project met to discuss the ways we could, in keeping with the spirit of Dr. Morris's vision, move toward a more "just, efficient, and humane" correctional system. This group of experts and leaders within and outside of corrections explored the challenges and trends facing corrections today.   Instead of presenting their own answers, the Keystone group posed two provocative questions;

1.     "How can we safely and systematically reduce the correctional population by half in 8 years?"
2.     "How can we transform correctional leadership and the workforce to empower staff to prevent recidivism and promote prevention?"

     Initial working groups for each topic teams have been formed and work has begun, but now is the time to engage others who have specific expertise in these areas and are willing to help develop strategies around the topics, implement them, and foster communication about them.

Reducing Corrections Populations Topic Team

    The working group that met to develop this topic during the Keystone Group's September 2008 meeting discussed several aspects of the corrections population, including such areas as public policy, legislation and government, race, gender, families and communities, and public safety. The team set a goal of working to reduce the U.S. incarceration rate by 50 percent, using as its initial inspiration a recommendation from the 2007 report entitled "Unlocking America: Why and How to Reduce America's Prison Population." ix Shortly after the Keystone Group meeting, the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) commissioned James Austin, the lead author of "Unlocking America", to produce "Reducing America's Correctional Population: A Strategic Plan." In it, Austin notes that "all correctional populations are the result of two key factors-admissions and length of stay (or LOS)." These two factors have driven the growth of correctional populations in the past and will be the keys to population reductions in the future.ix

As a practical matter, this means that reducing correctional populations overall will require a change at each decision point in the criminal justice system away from the practices of the recent past. In recent years, there has been a trend toward a greater likelihood that a conviction will result in a sanction involving correctional supervision (in the community or by incarceration) and for a longer period of time. The challenge in reversing these trends will be to reduce the likelihood that decision makers throughout the criminal justice system will "step up" to greater levels of supervision and for longer periods when they have the option. Instead, at each decision point in the system, greater weight would be given to decisions that produce a "step down" to less supervision for shorter periods. Relatively small changes at key decision points in the system, applied systematically over time, will reduce the total correctional population by 50 percent within the proposed timeframe and without jeopardizing public safety.

The key to the success of such strategies is that they must be data driven. Correctional agencies can analyze their past practices to estimate what their long range impacts have been on population growth. Existing, legally relevant defendant/offender and case characteristics can form the basis of such data. Armed with such precise information, an agency could estimate how the long-term affect of new decision making practices compare to their past choices. For example, a diversion program could be kept from "widening the net" if those offenders who otherwise would have been brought into the criminal justice system or been "stepped up" to incarceration could be precisely identified. Combining this analysis with validated risk assessment tools and existing population projection techniques would amplify the power of this type of evidence-based decision making.

Ultimately, the solution to reducing correctional populations is to reduce the number of offenders by preventing crime. This addresses the second question the Keystone group posed: "How can we transform correctional leadership and the workforce to empower staff to prevent recidivism and promote prevention?" It is an essential companion to the population reduction topic. Reducing the correctional population is not an end in itself if it does not involve reorienting corrections toward a different role. For example, the siblings and children of incarcerated people are known to have a very high risk of becoming offenders. Corrections is well positioned to use strength-based approaches that give equal weight to the skills and resources offenders and their families have or can develop in working with them to reduce recidivism by the offender and prevent involvement in the criminal justice system by others. For instance, the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and Family Justice have partnered to create a strength-based approach for family-focused community supervision that provides a model for other agencies.x

The bold question that opened this topic description, "How can we safely and systematically reduce the correctional population by half in 8 years?" became the focal point for the Keystone Group and the departure point from which work has proceeded. In his report, Austin estimates the long term impact of specific strategies to influence the two drivers of correctional populations; admissions and length of stay. To those could be added prevention, including first admissions to any part of the criminal justice system and readmissions as a result of new sentences or revocations. The next step is to engage others to help develop strategies and share results with the widest possible audience. The products of this phase include:

·     Drafting comprehensive position papers on effective ways to safely and systematically reduce the correctional populations.
·     Identify relevant research and bodies of knowledge from many different fields to inform the process.
·     Develop strategies for sharing this knowledge with wider audiences to build support for the work.
·     Engage policy makers and others across the country.

Summary

    An effort of this magnitude touches on every aspect of correctional policy and practice. It means a qualitative change in the mission of corrections, a fundamental reorientation of its operations and practices, and a transformation of its workforce similar to what has occurred internationally.xi It requires redefining corrections' relationship to families and communities, other governmental and nongovernmental human service organizations or systems, and the private sector. Such an undertaking demands the full support of legislative and judicial bodies as well as executive leadership in every state, including those at the local level. The purpose of the Norval Morris project is to develop the framework to find pathways corrections can follow to lead the country to a future very different from the one implied by current projections.

We look forward to your comments and discussion.

_______________________

iWalmsley, R., "World Prison Population List, Eight Edition", International Centre for Prison Studies, King's College London; Van Dijk, J., van Kesteren, J., and Smit, P., Criminal Victimisation in International Perspective, Key findings from the 2004-2005 ICVS and EU ICS, United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice
Research Institute, 2008.
ii Public Safety Performance Project. (February 2007) Public Safety, Public Spending: Forecasting America's Prison Population, The Pew Charitable Trusts.
iiiBureau of Justice Statistics, Prison Statistics Online, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/njs/prisons.htm.
iv Morris, N. and Hawkins, G., The Honest Politician's Guide to Crime Control, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1969.
v Johnson, N. January (2009) Budget Cuts or Tax Increases at the State Level: Which is Preferable During a Recession? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
vi Crary, D. (January 10, 2009) Budget woes prompt states to rethink prison policy. Associated Press.
vii See "The Impact of Incarceration on Crime: Two National Experts Weigh In", Pew Public Saftey Performance Project, April, 2008; Spelman, W. "The limited importance of prison expansion", in Blumstein, A. and Wallman J. (Eds). The Crime Drop in America, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006
viii Clear, T., Imprisoning Communities, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.
ix Austin, J., et al. (2007) Unlocking America: Why and How to Reduce America's Prison Population. The JFA Institute.
x Jones, J. and Shapiro, C. (Winter 2007). The Oklahoma Family Justice Project: Improving Community Supervision Outcomes One Family at a Time. Perspectives - American Probation and Parole Association.
xi McNeill, F., et al., 21st Century Social Work: Reducing Re-Offending: Key Practice Skills, G.S.o.S. Work, Editor. 2005, Scottish Executive: Edinburgh.

Staff Retention Strategies

Nancy Cebula — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:06:48 GMT

As I read Bob Trestman's post on the Successful Corrections Worker Recruitment Strategies 'thread', I was struck by his mention of training staff in 6 Sigma methodology. This quality improvement process, originally developed for manufacturing environments, focuses on finding and dealing with errors in various types of processes. I am fascinated by how some organizaitons, in Corrections and outside, can take something developed for a very specific purpose and adapt it for use in other industries/areas.

I would be interested in hearing what other methodologies/processes that Corrections organizations have adapted for use in this field - and what those adaptations look like. And, Bob, I would like to hear how you are using 6 Sigma more specifically in your agency and what adaptations were made to ensure its applicability to your organization.

Prisons feeling budget crunch

Brad Bogue — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:41:28 GMT

More good reasons to get serious about systematically reducing the US corrections population. Please see the recent Washington Post article "Budget woes prompt states to rethink policy"

http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2009/01/10/2296347-budget-woes-prompt-states-to-rethink-prison-policy

There is the humanitarian question: morally, are we justified in incarcerating people at a higher rate than any other country in the world?

There is the efficacy question: how do high rates of incarceration effect public safety (see the Washington Public Policy Institute work on this question) and the separate but somewhat related question: what is the effect of incarceration on risk and protective factors of inmates?

And finally there is the economic question: how can we afford to continue supporting high rates of incarceration?

What do you feel about these questions? Are they relevant to your work and if so how?

Successful corrections worker recruitment strategies?

Jennifer Diebel — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:10:14 GMT

During the Keystone Group meeting and some of the follow up conversations, it seems like folks had some good ideas about new possibilities for recruiting corrections workers who are capable of supporting the broad range of skills and programs recommended by EBP and What Works literatures. Folks talked about creating a "Corrections University" and doing outreach to middle schools, high schools, and colleges to raise awareness about corrections job possibliities. In addition to some of these new ideas, I am wondering if any of you have stumbled upon recruitment and training strategies within current corrections systems that have been effective in consistenly recruiting and cultivating these kinds of workers.

Questions about the Workforce Transformation Topic

Jennifer Diebel — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:23:47 GMT

Dear Friends of the Norval Morris Project

Before NIC and J-SAT start engaging the team that will focus on the Workforce Transformation topic posted to Friends forum a few weeks ago, we wanted to get your feedback on the topic itself. We'd welcome your responses to any of the following questions:

- What feels most important to you about this topic?

- What additional factors or related topics should this team consider as they begin their work?

- In light of the systemic, economic, and ideological barriers that this team might face, what creative strategies might you recommend for them to be able to move forward effectively?

- What specific products or initiatives would you like to see emerge from this team?

- What else?

We look forward to hearing from you within the next few weeks!

Sincerely,

Jennifer Diebel, J-SAT Norval Morris Project Staff

Workforce Transformation

Nancy Cebula — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:25:05 GMT

Corrections is tough work and staff need to be prepared for it accordingly.

Topic Background

The field of corrections, like other human service disciplines, depends heavily on qualified staff to ensure that operations run smoothly, offenders are managed effectively, and public safety is maintained. With the predicted increases in the offender population, one of the most important indicators of the quality of future correctional services will be the quality of future personnel.[1]

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over 550,000 people were employed in direct adult offender management in 2006.[2] Another 300,000 were employed as frontline workers with juvenile offenders.[3] As these numbers do not account for those who are employed in administrative, staff, or support roles, it is not surprising that personnel costs comprise a major portion of this $50 billion industry.

There is an impending crisis in staffing within federal, state, and local government entities. The baby boomers are beginning to retire, taking their knowledge and skills out of the workforce. Following this experience drain, agencies around the country are now facing the challenges of succession planning. Generally, public service is not on the minds of our country's young people. Those who are interested in public service find the government hiring process to be complex and contorted compared to the private sector.[4] Recruiting and hiring qualified staff to replace those who are aging out of the workforce is now a substantial part of human resource work in corrections agencies.

In 2003, the American Correctional Association conducted a survey of corrections administrators and human resource managers across the country. They found that 72% of the respondents reported some difficulty in recruiting new hires, while 64% said that retention of employees was difficult. Some states and correctional agencies reported that they are continually short staffed, leading to security issues and other challenges.[5]

Unlike their predecessors, today's young workers will average nine jobs between the ages of 18 and 32.[ 6 ] This more mobile workforce presents challenges to those who are responsible for filling open positions in prisons, jails, community corrections agencies, and parole and probation offices. The Corrections turnover rate in the first year on the job is 19.92%,[7] resulting in high costs for recruiting, hiring, and training new staff.

In addition to generational changes, the corrections workforce is increasing in gender and racial diversity. In 2001, national surveys found that 79% of correctional officers were male and 72% were white, as opposed to 1992, when 82% were male and 65% were white.[ 8 ]

In 2001, the number of inmates per corrections officer in adult corrections institutions ranged from 10.8 in Alabama to 2.6 in the District of Columbia.[9] Since then, average ratios of inmates to prison staff have increased from 4.8 to 5.1 for each staff worker.[10] Caseload size for probation officers varies across and within agency jurisdictions, with smaller numbers for specialized caseloads or higher risk offenders. Many officers now manage caseloads ranging from 20 to 100 active cases.[11]

According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the education and training that human service workers get does not match their role requirements and their job demands, as people who take on frontline human service jobs tend to have lower levels of scholastic achievement.[12] Corrections staff education levels vary from sector to sector. Most probation officers are required to have a bachelor's degree. But only 10% of corrections officers in prisons have a bachelor's degree. An additional 10% have associate degrees, while 35% have attended but not completed college, and 43% have only a high school diploma.[13]

Corrections agencies are faced with the combined challenges of modest education levels, lower scholastic performance, increased inmate to staff ratios, high turnover, changing staff demographics, baby boomer retirements, and recruitment and hiring issues. This combination provides significant challenges for the development of the skilled, reflective corrections workers who are capable of supporting the field's shift to evidence-based programs that reduce recidivism and increase public safety.

NIC's Norval Morris Project

In September of 2008, the Keystone Group of the National Institute of Corrections' Norval Morris Project met to discuss the ways in which they would like to see the field of corrections move in a more "just, efficient, and humane" direction. This group of experts and leaders within and outside of Corrections explored the challenges and trends facing Corrections today.

The group chose two topics that would honor the work of Dr. Morris and help Corrections to become more just, effective, and humane:

Reducing the Corrections Population Safely and Systematically
Transforming the Corrections Workforce.

Now that initial teams have formed around each topic and work has begun, it is time to engage others who have expertise in these areas and are willing to help develop strategies around these topics, implement them, and foster communication about them.

Workforce Transformation Team

Taking into consideration the growth of the corrections population and the awareness that corrections workers are the field's best asset for facing coming challenges, this topic team's initial discussion focused on two questions:

How can the ability, morale and motivation of Corrections staff be maintained in the face of such high offender failure rates (e.g., 67% for parole)?
Under these conditions, how can we suggest that we aren't just hiring warehouse workers?

In discussing these questions, it was clear that members of this initial topic team placed a high priority on empowering corrections staff. They agreed that improving the field and making correctional agencies employers-of-choice would require significant changes to current recruiting, hiring, and development practices and policies. Endeavoring to determine whether the corrections field is approaching this impending workforce crisis comprehensively and creatively, they noted that a variety of conventional strategies for transforming and upgrading the field of corrections have really never been tried. These include:

Developing longer-term recruitment strategies (starting at grade six);
Creating a national Corrections College, based on the War College and Teach for America models;
Having veteran corrections leaders and academics visit high school or college students to generate interest and convey accurate information about the field;
Re-imagining the existing constellation of labor boards, unions, and human resource divisions in solution-producing ways;
Increasing and improving training requirements for managers;
Creating new kinds of national certification and educational incentives;
Providing system-wide cross-training in evidence-based practice and implementation methods; and
Exploring new strategies and methods for organizational development (top down) and community development (bottom up).

In addition, several non-conventional strategies for transforming and upgrading the field of corrections were suggested:

Exploring, clarifying, and building staff competencies around boundaries and roles through communities of practice;
Creating social network-driven enterprises, including virtual interdisciplinary issue policy groups and communities of practice;
Developing regional inter-agency, team-managed, real-solution projects;
Investigating possibilities for green prisons and green jobs;
Linking funding to results, such as giving workers bonuses for recidivism reductions that fall below baseline levels;
Collapsing the boundaries between custodial, treatment, and services staff to increase active involvement in the change processes that boost offender success and reduce recidivism.

In addition to suggesting these specific ways of transforming the workforce, this team concluded that professional leaders who understand corrections are essential to the creation of humane and effective prisons, jails, and community corrections agencies. Leaders have the potential to do more than effectively manage organizations and staff. They can work to improve the field, rethink our responses to crime, and inspire others to become the next generation of leaders.[14] The corrections field needs leaders who can help others find meaning in their work and understand how their efforts fit into the larger societal picture.[15] This happens most effectively when leaders choose a positive focus, rather than the traditional problem-focused approach, paving the way for true transformation in those within the field and those who the field serves.

Following this discussion, the topic team moved on to the next steps of:

Reviewing relevant literatures,
Drafting a comprehensive position paper based on the best approaches for the field of corrections to use as a model for transforming its workforce at the state, local, and national levels; and
Developing strategies for improving employee recruitment, hiring, development, and retention across the field of corrections.

We look forward to hearing your experiences with and your comments on this topic.

[ 1] Stinchcomb, J. B. (2005) Corrections: Past, Present, and Future. American Correctional Association.
[ 2] Bureau of Labor Statistics (2006) Occupational Employment, Training and Earnings.
[ 3] The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2003) The Unsolved Challenge of System Reform: The Condition of the Frontline Human Services Workforce. The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
[ 4] Volcker, P. (2003) Urgent Business for America: Revitalizing the Federal Government for the 21^st Century. National Commission on the Public Service.
[ 5] American Correctional Association and Workforce Associates Inc., 2004. A 21^st Century Workforce for America's Correctional Profession. American Correctional Association.
[ 6] Arthur, D. (2001) The Employee Recruitment and Retention Handbook. American Management Association.
[ 7] Hill, C. (2007) Corrections Compendium. American Correctional Association.
[ 8] American Correctional Association and Workforce Associates Inc. (2004).
[ 9] Criminal Justice Institute. (2001) Corrections Yearbook. Criminal Justice Institute.
[10] Stephan, J. (2008) Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 2005. Bureau of Justice Statistics.
[11] Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2008-2009 Edition. Bureau of Labor Statistics
[12] The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2003)
[13] American Correctional Association and Workforce Associates Inc. (2004)
[14] Jacobs, J. and Olitsky, E. (2003-2004) Leadership & Correctional Reform. Pace Law Review, 24(5).
[15] Cameron, K. (2008) Positive Leadership. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Welcome to the Friends Forum

Nancy Cebula — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:34:13 GMT

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Dear Friends of the Norval Morris Project,

The NIC’s Norval Morris Friends forum is now up and running. So we wanted to update you on recent Project progress and inform you about upcoming engagement opportunities on the Friends Forum.

As you may recall, earlier this year we interviewed candidates for the Norval Morris Keystone Group, an interdisciplinary advisory body to this Project. This spring, we empanelled the following members:

Verna Allee, President, Verna Allee Associates

Kim Cameron, Professor, University of Michigan

Pat Caruso, Director, Michigan Department of Corrections

Harold Clarke, Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Corrections

Dean Fixsen, Research Professor, National Implementation Research Network

Glenn Goord, Commissioner (ret), New York Department of Corrections

Robert Guy, Director, North Carolina Department of Community Corrections

Jim Jacobs, Professor, New York University School of Law

Justin Jones, Director, Oklahoma Department of Corrections

Joe Lehmann, Secretary (ret), Washington Department of Corrections

Fleet Maull, Founder/President, Prison Dharma Network

Lucia Meijer, President, Vispassana Prison Trust

Chase Riveland, Secretary (ret), Washington Department of Corrections

Linda Rosenberg, CEO, National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare

Bob Trestman, Executive Director, Connecticut Correctional Managed Health Care

Melissa Van ***, Investigator, National Implementation Research Network

Art Wallenstein, Director, Montgomery County (MD) Department of Corrections

Diane Williams, President, Safer Foundation

At the Keystone Group’s Kick-Off Event in September, the group developed two topics for the Project to work on for at least the next year. Within the next two weeks, these topics will be posted sent out to all the Friends and also posted on the Friends Community Forum on NIC’s website.

Within two weeks of the positing/emailing of the topics, we will ask the members of the Friends Forum to give feedback on the topics through the Community Forum. If you have not yet had a chance to enroll in the on-line forum or have questions about how to respond through the forum, email Nancy Cebula at nancy@j-sat.com and she will get you set up or help you navigate through the forum process.

We look forward to a lively exchange of ideas and innovative thoughts!

Sincerely,

Nancy Cebula and Jennifer Diebel

Invitation to join a Topic Team

Nancy Cebula — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:28:10 GMT

Norval Morris Project: 2009 Topic Introduction

"Invitation to the Friends and others to join a Topic Team"

This invitation is to request your participation in one of the two Topic Teams now being organized as part of the National Institute of Corrections' Norval Morris Project. As many of you know, this project is a unique effort being carried out by the NIC through cooperative agreements with Justice System Assessment & Training (J-SAT). The project is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Norval Morris who was instrumental in founding NIC and remained a guiding influence as a charter member of the NIC Advisory Board. Dr. Morris believed a major shortcoming in correctional policy and practice was that the field did not make effective use of research, and among his keenest interests was the issue of effective dissemination of research findings to inform the field.

The project functions through a structure that brings together people both inside and outside the field of corrections to develop interdisciplinary approaches and draw on professional networks that cut across academic, private sector, and public sector boundaries. The first formal meeting of the Project, by a steering committee we have named the "Keystone Group", took place in September 2008 with 19 thought leaders-half of them corrections practitioners-plus NIC senior staff and J-SAT project staff.

The Keystone Group explored many topics of interest to corrections and formulated two broad questions for further development; one focusing on reducing correctional populations responsibly and a second on transforming correctional leadership and the workforce. The next step of the process, which begins now with this invitation, is to assemble Topic Teams to function as standalone working groups to continue to develop, refine, and expand upon these two questions. The topic areas are intentionally designed to be far-reaching in their change implications, representing, in the broadest sense, the knowledge strategies that will drive future innovations in the field. The two topic teams are being organized around the two questions detailed below.

Reducing the Corrections Population

The first topic that emerged from the Keystone Group as a focus for future work was posed in the question, "How can we safely and systematically reduce the correctional population by half in 8 years?" The last complete count of correctional populations reported that over 7.2 million persons across the United States were under supervised parole or probation or were incarcerated in prisons or jails. Most were on probation (4.2 million), while almost 800,000 were under parole supervision. Over 760,000 were in jail on an average day, and close to 1.5 million were in prison. These numbers are expected to continue growing.

Estimates of the national cost of corrections routinely exceed $50 billion a year at a time when governments at all levels are under tremendous financial strain. Many state and local governments are facing significant shortfalls in the current fiscal year despite having already made substantial cuts in spending. There is every reason to believe that these challenges will also grow and expand in the coming months.

At the same time, reported crime rates have continued to decline almost uninterruptedly for the last thirteen years. In September 2008, the FBI released Uniform Crime Reports data showed that the violent crime rate in the United States had fallen to 466.9 crimes per 100,000 in the U.S. population-the lowest rate since 1974. Property crime rates have retreated to the level of the late 1960s. The clear implication is that correctional strategies designed to combat rising crime rates have become disconnected from their original purpose. We are faced with a "corrections bubble" created by continued growth generated by the criminal justice system itself. The inescapable conclusion is that, one way or another, corrections is going to experience a contraction. If corrections professionals choose, they can lead the effort rather than have it forced upon them.

Cutting the correctional population in half, would return it to where it was in 1988. The year marked the end of an eight-year period of rapid growth during which the correctional population doubled from 1.8 million in 1980 to 3.6 million. It also marked the first time the correctional population had reached such levels. If it is possible for the correctional population to double in 8 years, in theory it ought to be feasible also for it to shrink by half in 8 years.

Transforming the Corrections Workforce

The second question posed by the Keystone Group was, ""How can we transform correctional leadership and the workforce in ways that empower staff in reducing recidivism and promoting prevention?" This question emerged out of discussions concerning correctional leadership and staff competencies and skills, morale, motivation, and understanding of or commitment to agency missions. In examining these and related issues, the group identified as the central issue the concept of empowering corrections staff.

However the idea of genuine empowerment comes to be defined, and one of the first tasks of the Topic Team will be to define it, it will involve profound changes in any correctional organization. It will require an alteration of the existing constellation of labor boards, unions, and human resource divisions and a redefinition of the boundaries between custodial, treatment, and support staff and services so that all are actively involved in the change processes necessary to increase offender success, reduce recidivism, and promote prevention. It will affect recruiting, hiring, and workforce development practices or policies and offer significant opportunities to improve the field and make correctional agencies employers-of-choice.

A wide variety of strategies for transforming correctional leadership and the workforce were discussed and may be considered by the correctional workforce topic team. These include many previously proposed responses such as; long-term recruitment strategies; national certification, educational incentives and training standards for managers; a national Corrections College; system-wide cross-training; and the application organizational development and community development strategies and methods to workforce issues. Many innovative strategies for transforming correctional workforce were also suggested; using communities of practice to explore, clarify and build staff competencies around boundaries and roles; social network driven enterprises; regional inter-agency team-managed solutions; funding for results by providing incentives to individuals for organizational performance. All of these ideas, and any others the correctional workforce topic team develops, will on the table for further examination.

The teams will explore bodies of knowledge, synthesize the knowledge most useful to the field, translate it into accessible forms appropriate for its differing audiences, and guide efforts to disseminate that knowledge through multiple approaches and communication vehicles. These two topic teams will have the potential to drive new policy initiatives that strategically bind science and practice to achieve their goals.

A more detailed description of each topic will be available by the end of January 2009 by email or through the Norval Morris Project's online community discussion forum on NIC's website or by clicking on this link: http://nicic.gov/FriendsForum.

Summary

Efforts of these magnitudes outlined in either of the above topics would touch on every aspect of correctional policy and practice. These could mean a qualitative change in its mission, a reengineering of its operations and practices, and a transformation of its workforce. It would require a reorientation of corrections in its relationship to families, communities, other governmental and non-governmental human service organizations or systems, and the private sector, as well as to its staff. It would require corrections to expand its mission beyond just reducing recidivism to embracing prevention. Such an undertaking would demand the full support of legislative and judicial bodies as well as executive leadership at the Federal, State, and local level and require increased transparency and collaboration throughout corrections.

The purpose of the Norval Morris Project is to find the pathways corrections can follow to lead the country into a future very different from the one we confront today. The spirit of the Norval Morris Project is to draw on every available body of knowledge, whether from within or outside the criminal justice arena, to develop practical responses to the challenges confronting the field. In keeping with the inclusive spirit of Norval Morris, both topic teams are looking for additional members who can offer insight, creativity, energy, information, and some good work. These initiatives will take the effort of many people, the engagement of a multitude of agencies, and the good will of various movers and shakers within corrections, the political arena, and the rest of the country.

How to "Enlist" in a Topic Team

If you are interested in lending your expertise and effort to one of these, please contact the J-SAT staff liaisons: Jennifer Diebel (Jennifer@j-sat.com ) or Nancy Cebula (nancy@j-sat.com ) on by calling (303) 544-9876.

Much of the work by the two topic teams will be done through the NIC Website. This invitation is posted on the main Norval Morris Project page (http://www.nicic.org/Norval ) and also on the Norval Morris Community Forum site (http://nicic.gov/FriendsForum) where you will also find responses and comments from other Friends of the Norval Morris Project.

Instructions for participating in this forum will follow in a separate message.

Cheatsheet for the Norval Morris Project forum

Web Services Manager — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:29:24 GMT

A one-page "cheatsheet" has been posted online that you can download and print. This sheet contains information about:

How to get to the forum
How to post a new message
Making sure you are getting email from the forum
Helpful links like finding your username/password and updating your email address
How to get technical support
Contact information for the forum's moderator
A place to write in your sign in information
Tips for gettings started and using the forum

Please download this document, and if you have any questions, suggestions, or problems, please let me know. There is also a comprehensive guide to using the system in general that you can also use as a reference.

Cheatsheet: http://community.nicic.org/files/folders/help_documents/entry7138.aspx
Illustrated User's Guide: http://community.nicic.org/files/folders/help_documents/entry5416.aspx