May newsletter

Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.

2nd Edition

May 2016

During the week of April 24-30, federal jurisdictions and states across the nation recognized reentry efforts in many ways. Using evidence-based practices and providing bridged resources to offenders makes for successful reentry. As a critical measure of Minnesota Department of Corrections success, we focus on the recidivism rate – the 34% of offenders who commit new offenses and end up back in our corrections system.

All throughout National Reentry Week and beyond, let’s celebrate the 66% of people who have changed their lives and are moving forward in our communities. Throughout reentry week, we published reflections of reentry success from formerly incarcerated people. They shared some insights about their reentry experiences and brought us up to date on their new lives outside of corrections.

Supervision Strategies Comparative Analysis

MNSIRR supported a comparative analysis of current Intensive Supervised Release (ISR), Challenge Incarceration Program (CIP), and Work Release criteria, practices and policies and how they align with research-based and effective practices in correctional supervision.  Through a competitive process, Ericson & Associates was awarded the contract to complete the analysis.  They reviewed data from 2014 DOC releases, compared policies and practices with National Institute of Correction’s eight established evidence-based principles, conducted interviews with supervisors and agents in the targeted programs, and met monthly with the MNSIRR Supervision Strategies work group to review progress, discuss challenges, and receive feedback on their methodologies and recommendations.  In January of 2016, Ericson & Associates issued a final report of their findings, including 39 recommendations for aligning the targeted programs with evidence-based supervision strategies. 

In April, 12 of the recommendations were presented to the MNSIRR Executive Team.  These recommendations concentrated mostly on using risk, as determined by the MNSTARR assessment, as a driver for an offender’s level and dosage of supervision and participation in ISR, CIP, and Work Release.  The DOC is currently discussing small scale pilots of practice and policy changes based on these recommendations to better identify resource and political impacts of the recommendations. 

For further information, please contact MNSIRR Project Leader Bridget Letnes at bridget.letnes@state.mn.us.   

Combined Application Form Accomplishments!

By Terencio Safford and Kris Kelley

The mission of the Combined Application Form (CAF) workgroup focuses on identifying major gaps in the pre-release application for treatment and service processes which could  directly or indirectly unfavorably affect an individual’s complete rehabilitation.

This workgroup believes that the CAF process for pre-release offenders is a critical component to expected survival outcome of criminally vulnerable offenders released back into the community.  We find it necessary because of fragmented service provided to offenders, to establish more effective and efficient alternatives that would (A) provide continuity of services from incarceration to the community, (B) require minimal administrative effort on behalf of the county and state agencies and (C) encourage and support long-term success in offender rehabilitation.  

In order to provide qualitative recommendations, the CAF group searched for evidence in practice, or a favorable ideal.  The most compelling evidence in support of our goals was found in “An Evaluation of the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP) Pilot Project”, authored by Grant Duwe, Ph.D of the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

Under the premise that successful offender reentry into society begins as soon as an individual is admitted to prison, MCORP emphasized increased collaboration between prison caseworkers and supervision agents to provide planning, support and direction for offenders to address their strengths and needs both in the institution and the community by providing continuity between the offender’s confinement and return to the community.  The MCORP pilot project had a statistically significant effect on 3 of the 5 recidivism markers.  The evaluation shows that MCORP significantly reduced the risk of recidivism by 37% for re-arrest, 43% for reconviction, and 57% for new offense re-incarceration.

Based on these and other similar findings, the CAF workgroup collaborated with county and state workers, community service providers and invested organizations to formulate a system of recommendations that could help improve not only the process by which offenders apply for benefits and services, but how to most effectively engage this process in a way that maximizes the potential for reduced recidivism and re-incarceration.

The most vital components to optimize CAF application process:

• Create a population-specific application process

• Identify a single point-of-contact at each county

• Build facility and county level infrastructure

• Increase offender investment

The CAF workgroup findings and recommendations were presented at the MNSIRR Executive Meeting in April.  The components outlined above were given unanimous approval to move forward.  This group welcomes additional people to the table, especially helpful are those with experience in the reentry jail/county models known as RAP (Reentry Assistance Program).  To learn more about becoming involved with the Combined Application Form workgroup, please contact Anna McLafferty from the Department of Corrections at anna.m.mclafferty@state.mn.us.

Exploring “What Works” 

Featured in each newsletter, we'll explore concepts of "what works" to change lives.  

These terms and their basic understanding lay the foundational skills for staff to be an “effective intervention” in our everyday work and conversations with offenders. Staff not only hold offenders accountable by enforcing rules but enforcing a change in their behavior through using these proven strategies. 

Core Correctional Practice (CCP): A combination of practices that corrections staff can use to more effectively interact with offenders and manage their behavior. These practices include the following eight concepts:

1)    Effective Alliance: consists of professional relationships and how successful staff can talk with, behave toward, and work with offenders.  Effective Alliance is a collaborative relationship between the corrections professional and the offender that facilitates positive change and the foundation for offender motivation to change.  Evidence Based Practices show corrections professionals who are successful in working with offenders toward change are: firm but fair, model and reinforce prosocial attitudes, teach problem solving skills, act as an advocate (broker of services) in connecting the offender with needed information/services and possess certain relationship factors.  Relationship factors are those staff characteristics that encourage positive offender interaction: attentive, respectful, sense of humor, authentic, empathic, active listener, directive, optimistic, strength-based, articulate, confident and trustworthy.  Offenders are less likely to reoffend or break the rules when Effective Alliance, particularly those relationship factors listed above, is present. 

2)    Effective Use of Authority: We first rely on the use of our power (power of uniform, position, control) to gain compliance in many situations. It is quick and often easy but, in itself, does little to positively modify future behaviors.  Research has shown that an offender’s negative thoughts and behaviors can be changed more effectively when we use our “authority” differently. Effective Use of Authority can be accomplished by not only using our direct and specific directions/commands in a normal voice, but stating the specific choices and the consequences of those choices. It’s also important that we provide some guidance towards compliance and be sure to praise compliance or timely enforce any consequence.  

3)    Effective Reinforcement:  is a form of operant conditioning. It involves putting together positive and negative reinforcements to influence future behavior.  Positive reinforcement occurs when a reward occurs after an action. That reward can be verbal praise, a small token or other favorable outcome. Negative reinforcement is the removal of a something, often an unpleasant situation or “stimulus”, which helps increase future behavior.  This concept can be tricky, but don’t confuse negative reinforcement with punishment or sanctions. If an offender on a behavioral status is compliant, negative reinforcement is the removal of restraints or the release from segregation - taking away the negative stimulus. We use positive and negative reinforcements when we want to see a particular response or behavior strengthened and likely to happen again. Positive reinforcement doesn’t contradict or even compromise the accountability. When used properly, it can make your job easier and prevent future “bad” behavior.  We use formal and informal consequences when necessary, yet should look for ways to reinforce pro-social or wanted behavior more frequently. 

4)    Effective Disapproval:  aims to reduce undesirable behavior through the use of punishment or sanctions. Punishment is the process of reducing a behavior through either providing consequences (positive punishment) or removing a desirable situation or stimulus (negative punishment).  For example, an offender engaging in bad behavior may be given community service hours (positive punishment) or have certain privileges taken away (negative punishment) in order to reduce the likelihood of that behavior in the future. Effective disapproval is further bolstered or hampered by the Effective Alliance or existence of a professional relationship between staff and the offender.

5)    Cognitive Restructuring: In offenders, it is irrational, antisocial thinking which leads to antisocial or disruptive behaviors.  When we target and replace this type of thinking with rational or prosocial thinking, it will help create positive behavioral change. Cognitive Restructuring is the process of replacing harmful thoughts with prosocial thoughts.  The process of Cognitive Restructuring can be completed in three steps: identify thinking errors, challenge those and replace with prosocial thinking.  Cognitive Restructuring is particularly useful when an offender's behavior is tied to excessive antisocial thinking.  

6)    Anti-Criminal Modeling: refers to the ability of correctional professionals to serve as a model and source of reinforcement for prosocial attitudes and behaviors in offenders. In short, criminal and prosocial behaviors are learned behaviors and can occur through observation and direct instruction. People aren’t “born criminal” but learn those behaviors over time. The underlying goal of this approach is that offenders will learn prosocial and anti-criminal attitudes and behavioral patterns from their regular interactions with staff. In other words, offenders need to have anti-criminal behavior and positive behaviors modeled and appropriately reinforced for changes to be effective. Staff members who reinforce or do not counteract pro-criminal sentiments or behaviors may undermine the integrity of rehabilitative efforts. 

7)    Structured Learning/Skill Building: The focus of structured skill building is to develop skills through a process of teaching, practice and feedback by using a combination of individual, group and structured activities. Offenders learn a concept in group ( problem-solving techniques, etc), see staff or other offenders use those same skills, and then practice those skills themselves throughout their everyday interactions in many different settings. It’s important that they receive feedback from staff (remember those positive and negative enforcers?) regarding their performance in applying those skills, too. Cognitive-based programs (those programs that work to change offenders thinking and behaviors using skill-building) are some of the best drivers for reducing recidivism. 

8)    Problem Solving Techniques: are used to help offenders solve their own problems in a positive manner. Developing problem solving is an important part of creating lasting prosocial behavioral change. Once learned, Problem Solving Techniques are applicable to a wide range of situations and will follow an offender from the institution situations into a home or community environment. Problem Solving Techniques include identifying immediate problems versus longer term challenges (costs or benefits now or later). They also help offenders slow down or stop their behaviors in order to think of a solution before acting.  Finally, Problem Solving Techniques help offenders become more independent in their thinking and actions once they begin solving their own problems.

Submitted by Chris Busche, MNSIRR Regional Coordinator