Corrections Community

Hi there. I am tasked with defending the need for training within the Department of Corrections. As we all know, training is often the first place to make cuts when the budget gets tight. I am trying to write a report with both qualitive and quantative research on why training is needed by the department. It is easier to defend training when you show dollar signs, but how do we defend training in other ways? Any help or resources would be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks!

Tracy Napier

Montana Department of Corrections

Training Specialist

tnapier@mt.gov

406-846-1320 ext 2420

one word for you: LIABILITY

Without proper training up front and continuing education your staff are not properly trained to do the job which results in a major liability issue. For example, use of force instances: inmate resists, use of force is used, staff severely injure inmate by using improper tactics or too much force, inmate sues, your facility is paying out $$. The list could go on and on:

Inmate/Staff relations, Suicide Awareness, Searches, Communication, etc...

 

 

Assuming there is at least some acknowledgement for at least basic training, I am assuming your question is directed at more specialized training (supervisor training, EEO, Safety, CPR) etc. The presence or absence of training can impact virtually everything from the cost of litigation, legal/monetary judgements for violation of a variety of conditions of confinement, employee turnover, employee competence to perform their duties, etc. It very much becomes a pay me now or pay me later proposition. I believe that many agencies have been lulled into a complacent posture based on the Prison Litigation Reform Act and the subsequent additional barriers for inmates in challenging agency and employee behaviors in court. The reduction/elimination of trainng however will/is leading to a resurgence in inmate initiated litigation that will ultimately be more expensive for agencies than acting proactively by training employees in the first place. I would recommend doing some research on any judgements that have occured in either your jurisdiction or neighboring ones that found for an inmate or inmate family against the agency. Particularly look at smaller agencies (jails/community corrections) that typically have very limited resources for training, and determine which judgements can be directly attributed to failure to train (sexual harassment, PREA violations, and use of force) are most typical.

This is great. I will do more research on judgements against various facilities, but I am looking for any ideas that are not related to $$$. It is easy to prove the need for training with money, but what about employee satisfaction and moral? How do we prove that with proper training in areas such as communication and professionalism/ethics, the staff treat offenders more respectabily hence less violent, etc? I am looking for ideas outside of the world of money. Thanks!!

This seems like something that as trainers we are always addressing. First, there is a need because of liability which is specifically addressed in the Supreme Court's decision of the City of Canton v. Harris. (There is a synopsis of this case here: http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/128567.html) Administrators should also be told that they can be held personally liable if they assume a stance which exhibits deliberate indifference. "Deliberate indifference" is a standard of fault that requires a showing that government policy makers acted with conscious disregard for the obvious consequences of their actions. This was identified in the following: - 'failure to train amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights of persons with whom subordinates come into contact' and the failure has actually caused the injury of which the plaintiff complains." Id. at 1397, quoting in part Popham v. City of Talladega, 908 F.2d 1561, 1564-65 (11th Cir. 1990). Finally, without training the organization becomes stagnant. Tenured staff loose critical knowledge and skills while new employees are never provided the necessary tools to do the job effectively.

That is a powerful question and one, as trainers, to which we take the answer for granted.  Does what we do really make a difference?

There's a big movement in the training community that centers around evaluation and "trianing on trial."  We think it makes a difference, but if we had to prove it. . .well, we may need OJs defense team to do it.  We need some sort of evalaution and data to be credible.

 Here are some authors whose work will be useful to you in training evalaution:

• Robert O. Brinkerhoff --- 'Telling Trainings Story' and 'The Success Case Method: Find Out Quickly What's Working and What's Not'
• Donald and James Kirkpatrick
• Jack Phillips
• Josh Bersin

Brinkerhoff will enable you to get a quicker measure, but it takes a good deal of time and planning to come uop with some credible answers.

Off the top of my head, you might be able to come up with some numbers on

• cost avoidance (liability, insurance, turnover, and safety---do these training show a drop,or lower  rate of increase, in these costs?)
• the value of process improvements as a result of training (efficiency, improved value/service delivery)
• value of inmate programming in reducing recidivism

Other things may be even more complicated.

The long-term answer is an ongoing, systematic assessment and evalaution system for training, especially the key postions and high-cost programs.  In addtion to the results, this can also let you know how to improve the programs and what to focus on.

Drop me an e-mail if you need some clarification.

 

 

Check with the NIC Information Center to see if they have any information on which agencies conduct cultural assessments. Most of those address the question of "...how prepared are you to do your job?" that should get to retention, job satisfaction, feelings of safety, etc