the corrections journal for nj-acanjaca.org/documents/njacanewslettersummer-fall07.pdf ·...

The Corrections Journal for NJ-ACA

A MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

I am profoundly saddened that my first message as Chapter President must follow the recent passing of George Yefchak. As you know, George had been the NJACA Chapter President for the 12 year period of 1994 – 2006. It was indeed a personal and professional privilege for me to have been a member of the Board under George’s leadership and later serve as First Vice President.

The next edition of our Quarterly Journal will be a tribute to George. It will also launch a new name for the Journal. Henceforth, the publication will be known as the George Yefchak NJ-ACA Corrections Quarterly.

This edition of the Chapter’s Journal continues to demonstrate our commitment to keeping members abreast of cutting edge correctional practice and theory. An article on the BI DRC is a wonderful example of what can be accomplished when the Public and Private sectors collaborate to provide programming and training that translates into opportunities.

Long standing NJ ACA Board colleague Mike Isreal makes a contribution from Washington, D.C. You will enjoy an excellent profile of NJ DOC Commissioner George Hayman. Dave Wolfsgruber discusses the exciting NJ State Parole Board P.R.O.M.I.S.E. Project. Journal Editors Dr. Matthew Sheridan and Steve Troyanovich are to be commended for their hard work and contributions.

Finally, as your new Chapter President, I look forward to continuing the progressive leadership that so typified the George Yefchak era.

Thank you,

Gary J. Hilton, President, NJ-ACA

THE CORRECTIONS JOURNAL THE CORRECTIONS JOURNAL FOR NJFOR NJ--ACAACA

Volume 2, Number 1 Summer/Fall 2007

Our Mission: To shape public policy and provide information, training, and networking opportunities, thereby promoting professional growth and organizational effectiveness in New Jersey’s criminal/juvenile justice system.

In This Issue

Message from the President…………………1

BI-program review …….……………………2

Federal Crime Policy ………………………..4

George Hayman…………….……………….6

P.R.O.M.I.S.E……………..……………..….7

Lessons from the Twilight Zone…………....8

VOA-DV approach………………………….9

Book Review……………………………….11

President Gary Hilton

1st Vice President

Dominic Lisa

2nd Vice President Richard Marazo

Recording Secretary Margie Brown

Corresponding Secretary

Cindy McGovern

Treasurer James Hemm

Welcome New NJ-ACA Executive Board Members

In Memorium

GEORGE YEFCHAK

President NJ-ACA

1994-2006


PAGE 2

Stephen Owens, 35, says his addiction to drugs consumed his life and became the underlying reason for his criminal convictions, which landed him in several New Jersey prisons—from Rahway to Riverfront to Yardville—earlier in his life.

After spending nine years behind bars for robbery, Mr. Owens was referred by the New Jersey State Parole Board to the Elizabeth Day Reporting Center (DRC), an innovative program opened in 1998 and operated by BI Incorporated, a company that works with more than 1,000 correctional agencies nationwide and many in New Jersey, including the New Jersey Judiciary, Juvenile Justice Commission, Probation Services and the Parole Board.

Mr. Owens says he went into the program with his eyes closed and his mind already made up. Yet, after immersion into the program, he dropped his guard, opened up and started to learn about himself. Mr. Owens spent 120 days going to the BI Elizabeth DRC before graduating from the program in 2005. He has stayed busy since, earned his Commercial Drivers’ License and maintained a job driving trucks for an occupational center. BI staff was instrumental in helping Mr. Owens make the connection with the state Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services to get this driving instruction. He has stayed free and clean from drugs since his release—a top goal of New Jersey public safety officials.

As New Jersey continues to move toward a public safety and correctional system that demands accountability from offenders but also keeps an eye toward successfully transitioning them back into communities, it sometimes works closely with community-based providers such as BI Incorporated to achieve its goals.

BI Incorporated has worked with probation, pretrial, and parole agencies at the federal, state, and local level since 1985. Few states have integrated the alternatives to detention that BI provides—from electronic monitoring equipment and program support to intensive reentry programs for juvenile and adult offenders transitioning back to community life—better than New Jersey.

Realizing its prisons and local jails were overcrowded, New Jersey officials made it a goal to reduce recidivism so that former prisoners, such as Mr. Owens, could become contributors to their local communities versus individuals who commit repeat offenses, generate new victims, and further stretch a tight state budget.

Mr. Peter Barnes, recently appointed chairman of the State Parole Board, vowed to continue to target recidivism rates when he took office in March for retired Judge John D’Amico, a strong proponent of the DRC system. “Our goal is the successful reentry of ex-offenders back into society. Under my Chairmanship, the Parole Board will focus on the main obstacles that lead ex-offenders to turn to crime: Lack of

employment opportunities; lack of education and job skills; lack of strong family connections; drug addiction; and mental illness,” said Mr. Barnes.

Electronic Supervision Drives Compliance to Supervision Orders

BI supports correctional agencies in New Jersey with a variety of products and services. First, BI provides electronic supervision technologies to monitor about 1,000 adult and juvenile offenders daily in New Jersey communities with many technologies, including systems that use Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking technology, traditional Electronic Monitoring systems, in-home systems that monitor for offender sobriety, and more. BI’s technology helps closely monitor offenders in the community for adherence to court- and agency-ordered schedules, curfews, and patterns of behavior. In particular, these systems ensure offenders are where they are supposed to be at certain times or additional sanctions can be applied.

Day Reporting Expanded in NJ

Secondly, BI offers Day Reporting programs. BI helped the state open the Elizabeth DRC—the one that Mr. Owens attended—for high-risk parolees who were likely to fail conditions of parole and return to prison at high expense to Garden State taxpayers. Since opening in 1998, more than 3,500 offenders have worked their way through Elizabeth’s intensive treatment and training program. In fact, the Elizabeth DRC was so well received that it prompted New Jersey to partner with BI to open three additional Day Reporting Centers in Plainfield, Atlantic City, and Perth Amboy in recent years.

(Continued on page 3)

BI and New Jersey: Retain Common Goal of Enhanced Public Safety Through Innovative Offender Supervision

One of the core missions of the Day Reporting Centers that BI operates in New Jersey is to help offenders to become self-sufficient in the community through vocational connections and training. At the Atlantic City DRC, BI has teamed with service union Local 54 to provide culinary training for qualified offenders. Above, a culinary program graduate and DRC participant receives a completion certificate.


Each of these BI DRCs provides supervision, treatment and training programs for adults and juveniles. The Centers are typically in close proximity to the state’s parole offices (in Elizabeth the DRC is in the same building as Parole), allowing for close collaboration and coordination of services.

The community-based DRCs have been successful in stabilizing parolees released to community supervision, helping them deal with addictions and obtaining and maintaining employment. Today, more than 200 individuals go to a BI-operated DRC daily in New Jersey.

“Our DRCs deliver a balanced program that stresses intensive supervision, accountable treatment, and a strong emphasis on connecting parolees with long-term resources in the community, including employers and educational institutions, so that these individuals live crime-free lives,” says John Thurston, BI’s VP of Reentry and Field Services.

Changing Behavior, Developing Skills

While highly structured, each BI DRC tailors its community integration efforts to match local needs. For example, in Atlantic City BI teamed up with Local 54, a powerful 17,000-member service worker union, to develop an intensive chef training program—right in the Atlantic City DRC office. Parolees who completed the culinary training are finding employment in some of Atlantic City’s best restaurants and casinos.

In Elizabeth, the Day Reporting Center developed a close relationship with Ford Motor Co. for an automotive certification program, and more recently the office is working with a local community college to begin a Next Step college curriculum for ex-offenders. The cooking program, connection with the automotive program, and collaboration with the local community college are only one component of the DRC programming for the adult parolees and juvenile offenders.

Specifically, each BI DRC follows a three-phase approach to working with clients: supervision is most intense in the first several weeks; treatment and training is maximized during the central portion of the program; and then the client is prepared for more independent status as they prepare for transition to traditional parole status.

Clients participate in the program from several months up to a year, with progress performance based. Many clients return after they complete the DRC programming to consult with counselors or offer words of encouragement to new participants. “When you’re doing negative things, you can’t really see the light on the other side of the tunnel. Today, I’m like a shining light,” says Mr. Owens proudly.

Each BI DRC demands daily check-ins and uses sophisticated electronic compliance technologies (as needed), advanced drug testing techniques, computerized data collection and intensive case management. The DRCs in New Jersey are open six days a week and participants attend classes such as:

• Substance abuse education and treatment

(Continued from page 2)

PAGE 3

• Adult basic education and GED preparation

• Life Skills classes

• Cognitive skill training

• Parenting and family classes

• Anger management

• Employment skills building and career development counseling

• Aftercare

BI’s offender classes and approach follows research that finds cognitive behavioral programs get the best results. BI’s DRC model is based on evidence-based practices to target client risks and needs. For example, the cognitive skill training, a core component of the DRC program, includes Moral Reconation Therapy, developed by Dr. Gregory Little and Dr. Ken Robinson. MRT targets observable characteristics related to criminal offending and aims to alter how offenders think, how they make judgments and decisions about right and wrong, and to promote actions and behaviors focused on changing negative relationships. Many of the graduates of the DRC remark this cognitive skills training has had a strong impact on their lives. Through the BI DRC classes, the goals of the program include:

⇒ Reducing recidivism

⇒ Targeting 100 percent employment or full-time school enrollment upon program completion

⇒ Generating significant savings for taxpayers through lower incarceration costs

⇒ Altering the parolees’ attitudes and behavior through (Continued on page 7)

Each time a participant reports to the Center, he or she is monitored for drug and alcohol use to ensure compliance with court and agency conditions of release.


By: Mike Israel

In 2002 I retired from Kean University as Criminal Justice Director and moved to the Washington area to write a newsletter on national crime policy. I gave it up this year because somehow many people managed to live without it, and to write a book on this insane asylum where federal crime policy is made.

A little while ago, I showed my Jersey colors (scarlet) and drove the 30 miles to Annapolis, Maryland, to see Navy play Rutgers in football. You know what happened, 34-0, our side. But I want to describe a moment of illumination. Rutgers, with the ball at mid-field, punted into the Navy end zone, thus being a touch back and giving Navy the ball at their own 20 yard line. That’s the rule. Also, by rule, their first down was the 30 yard line. After three plays the ball was about a foot short of the 30 yard line. It was close, but clearly the ball did not touch the white line. Fourth down, right! But wait, the referee called for the chains to measure to see if there was a first down. I thought, how absurd, to review with a measurement what was by rule not in dispute! Out came the chains, the measurement, and sure enough, fourth down, Navy had to punt.

I was aghast, but upon reflection, I should not have been. That was simply the Washington culture, transposed, with the referee doing what everybody here does, reach for cover, terrified to exercise any judgment.

The absence of judgment is not always so benign. Allow me a sentencing story, and lest you think this is an exceptional aberration that I cite for emphasis, unfortunately it is not. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, from a concurring opinion, the judge who wrote this did not vote to overturn the sentence,

saying he had no choice. A woman named Marion Hungerford was the girl friend of one, Dana Canfield, who pled guilty to seven armed robberies and was sentenced to 32 years. But although Hungerford was 52 years old, had no prior criminal record, was diagnosed as mentally disturbed and borderline retarded, she was sentenced to 159 years in prison. Assuming she gets the federal 15 % off for good time, she will be 187 years old when she gets out.

Her real crime was that she did not plead guilty, which the U. S. Department of Justice wanted her to

do and roll on Canfield, which was unnecessary because of other evidence. It was clear from her statement at sentencing that she understood nothing about the law of aiding and abetting and since she did not hold the gun, received no money, never confronted a victim (she was the driver), she believed that she did not commit any armed robberies so she did not plead guilty. She did not comprehend the quid pro quo either.

The sentencing judge said he was acting pursuant to statute, and acting like the referee who brought out the chains, actually read to her the terms of her supervised release—report within 72 hours, undergo urinalysis tests, et al—which will be around the year 2115. In the appellate concurring opinion, this sentence was described as “immensely cruel, if not barbaric . . . and irrational, inhumane, and absurd,” but was upheld because it was the law.

The Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1984 created a sentencing guidelines concept for many federal crimes, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission was to set the prison terms, within fairly narrow windows

for judicial discretion. The idea of guidelines to protect defendants and society from unpredictable variations from judge to judge, and a professional commission to actually set the number of months, was an idea that was about 10 years in development (although the states were there first) and had wide bi-partisan support. The idea still does. Federal s e n t e n c i n g , h o w e v e r , w i t h enhancements and Justice Department policy, has become what can only be repeated from the Hungerford opinion, “cruel, barbaric, irrational, inhumane, and cruel,” and these sentiments have

been echoed with anguish throughout the federal courts for most or the 20 years of the statute.

O n e t h o u g h t l e s s enhancement was in 1994 to virtually double drug crimes committed within 1000 feet of a school, clinic, park, agency; but in urban areas that is almost everywhere. The Department of Justice has made its own sentencing policy with an approximate 5-1 ratio for those who go to trial compared to those who plead guilty. For the Enron and World Com white collar defendants, two in their 50’s who went to trial got 24 and 25 years, while those who testified got five and six years. That was the aforementioned girl friend (trial) – boy friend (testify) ratio, regardless of their role.

Criticisms of federal sentencing laws have also been repeated from the bench, including Supreme Court Justices, and in briefs, papers and forums from about 200 advocacy groups in Washington that have been fighting these laws without success. I must say, however, that they are getting better at what they do,


PAGE 4

Notes from the Insane Asylum

Federal sentencing... has become what can only be repeated from the Hungerford opinion, “cruel, barbaric, irrational, inhumane, and cruel,” and these sentiments have been echoed with anguish throughout the federal courts...


and a real sentencing reform movement is only a year or two old.

The guidelines were to go into effect in 1986, but in June of that year a University of Maryland basketball player named Len Bias died of a drug overdose two days after he had been the first draft pick of the Boston Celtics, number two overall. He became the poster boy for get-tough-on crime and drugs in particular. Tip O’Neal, the Democratic Speaker of the House, went home to Boston over the long July 4th weekend, heard all he wanted to hear about drugs, came back and called a meeting of his party’s leadership, and said that he wanted a drug bill before Labor Day, and he got it. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 was passed without hearings, without any expert input or research, no amendments allowed, scant debate, and both parties had an issue to run on in the fall Congressional elections.

That bill created the infamous 100-1 crack-cocaine sentencing disparity. The sentence was based on the weight of the drugs dealt (crack is much heavier for the comparable powder hit), not the role, or the harm level, or the cost, and has a powerful racial impact since about 80% of crack defendants have been African American and powder users are even more so white. This bill created statutory sentences just as the sentencing commission was starting.

This and other statutes created the mandatory minimums, and the consecutive sentencing rules, which in effect put the sentencing power into the hands of federal prosecutors, not judges. Downward departures are almost entirely for “cooperation,” which is the prosecutors’ call, as it was for Marion Hungerford. The Justice Department loves to have that leverage and has become in effect a powerful lobby to maintain both the guidelines and what has been called the “cracked justice” sentencing statutes.

These policies were made in a time of political hysteria while both parties rushed to get out in front of the war on drugs, and little has changed. Year by year the sentencing commission ratchets up sentences, all while writing reports to Congress recommending changing the cracked justice laws, which Congress ignores. I attended one sentencing commission meeting where they passed two sentencing enhancements, as instructed by Congress, so they said. The meeting took 12 minutes, no one but the chair spoke, no questions.

The sentencing commission provides cover for Congress, and Congress is cover for the USSC. There is no dearth of criticism, but each one says the other one does it. One USSC staffer said to me that they didn’t need cover, for public opinion wants tough-on-crime sentences. I wondered how they know.

Recently at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which happened to be on suspension of habeas corpus in the Military Tribunal Bill, at a moment of pause nine people wearing orange tee shirts rose in unison and stood quietly, but on their shirts were the letters N-O-T-O-R-T-U-R-E, although the bill wasn’t about torture. They did it twice, which was ineffective, but the second time the chair, Senator

(Continued from page 4) Arlen Specter, harshly admonished them as disruptive “of the serious debates going on in this chamber.” Serious debates! There were only three Senators in the room, from a committee of 18, and absolutely no one in that room was in any way undecided. There were interesting testimonies, to be sure, but there was no remote chance to change anyone’s mind. The full Senate voted down the bill to protect habeas corpus by 51-48, almost entirely along party lines. Every vote is the same, in committee and on the floor, almost entirely by party.

Party government is not undemocratic, but the transparency of the debate myth is amazing. I stalk the House and Senate judiciary committees. Most crime bills have originated in the House where the chair, James Sensenbrenner, uses his scheduling power to control. Once, when a new federal death penalty enhancement was on the agenda, Sensenbrenner noted the lack of a quorum (21 of 40 members) but allowed debate to start. As several members drifted in, Sensenbrenner stopped the debate, said we now have a quorum, called for a voice vote, it was mumbled, some yeas, and then the debate continued—on the bill that had already passed. (The bill seems to have died.) During the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act Sensenbrenner was annoyed when Democrats tried to raise questions about Guantanamo so he abruptly turned off the microphones and walked off, gavel in hand.

Sentencing bills are added to must-pass bills, like military appropriations, and thus have to sail through. Floor amendments, amendments added in the Conference, unanimous consent bills, authorization bills passed without money appropriated, all are familiar parts of the crime policy process. Mark Foley, the erstwhile former Florida Congressman, introduced three bills in the last year and a half dealing with problems of exploiting children sexually. All three have been swept into one comprehensive bill

called the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act with Sensenbrenner named as sponsor, which treads old ground and reinforces Megans Law with an internet element. Perhaps nothing illustrates the shallowness of the legislative process more than the possibility that an ex Congressman could be prosecuted (when out of rehab) for breaking a law that he introduced.

This is a culture of hiding safely behind a premise that tough-on-crime will never leave you vulnerable at election time that has paralyzed crime policy. A bill to reduce the crack-cocaine disparity to 20-1 was introduced with strong bi-partisan support, but hearings were never scheduled. A prisoner reentry bill took two years to reach a bi-partisan consensus, finally passed Sensenbrenner’s


PAGE 5

Crime policy making in Washington has for 20 years been, in the word I often hear, “madness.”


Even for a seasoned Corrections veteran like Co mmiss ione r George Hayman, August 4 would prove to be one of those days that would test his mettle and determination. Indeed, since he took over the reins of the department last January, Hayman’s tenure has run the gamut of correctional and political challenges. From Governor Jon Corzine’s visits to prisons, to an escape, to a loaded f i rearm being discovered at New Jersey State Prison, to Budget and Appropriations hearings, to a government shutdown,

Hayman has, of necessity, successfully dealt with a multitude of issues some Commissioners have not encountered in years of leadership, never mind months.

However, adversity and George Hayman are hardly strangers. Born the fourth of ten children to a career Army officer and his wife, Hayman was raised a true citizen of the world, as the family lived on military bases in Japan, Germany and all over the United States. “I was always the new kid on the block—as were my brothers and sisters. But that was really a blessing, because we developed a deep appreciation for different cultures and peoples. I learned early on that building a consensus and exercising tolerance could smooth most any hurdle in life and relationships.”

Commencing his career 23 years ago as a social worker at New Jersey State Prison in Trenton, Hayman had ample opportunity to employ the lessons of childhood as he labored among the state’s most notorious murderers, rapists and thieves. A co-worker at the time describes a young man who was cool under pressure, unable to be intimidated by his “clientele” and devoted to his family. Rising through the ranks by dint of hard work and progressive ideas, Hayman was tapped to be the first director of the AIDS unit at New Jersey State Prison. Another colleague at the prison describes that scenario.

“Fear was running rampant at the prison. No one was sure how AIDS was contracted, and nearly every month brought new recommendations from the CDC (Center for Disease Control.) Just like the rest of society at the time, the prison population—inmates and staff—was confused and anxious. Hayman took charge and led by example. He was calm and unflappable, a demon for details, but always willing to listen to and address the concerns of those around him.” It came as no surprise, then, that Hayman was brought to Central Office in Trenton to lend his expertise in the operations arena.

Promoted to Assistant Commissioner for Operations and ultimately confirmed by the Senate on January 8, 2007 as Commissioner of Corrections, Hayman’s style is unchanged from his days behind “The Wall.” (Staff nickname for the prison in Trenton) Cool and methodical, he credits his father (a retired New Jersey Correction Officer) and the military upbringing with his approach to the weighty responsibilities of Commissioner of the second largest department in the state.

And so it was that the evening of August 4 would bring to life the worst of correctional nightmares—the discovery of a loaded firearm within the secure perimeter of the aforementioned New Jersey State Prison in Trenton. Home to the Capital Sentencing Unit (Death Row) and the worst offenders in the state, “The Wall” has seen much violence in more than a century of operation—violence that Hayman had been privy to.

The first order of business was to order a lockdown of the prison, followed by one of most intense searches ever undertaken in the history of the department. And while the investigation, thankfully, yielded no more firearms, Hayman took the opportunity to effect an extensive review of inmate movement schedules, policies and operational issues at New Jersey State Prison to enhance safety and security for staff and inmate alike.

During this same time period, Hayman also tackled the cancellation of a controversial long-time Legislatively-mandated inmate training program, the security nightmare attendant to the harvesting of Charles (“Killer Nurse”) Cullen’s kidney and the tragic deaths of two officers in motor vehicle accidents. Normally a taciturn, soft spoken man, Hayman becomes animated when speaking of his wife, their three children and four grandchildren, and it is his family, he says, that keeps him balanced and focused. He freely admits to being a doting grandfather, and takes great pride in the accomplishments of his children.

Not given to self-promotion and reluctant to talk about himself, perhaps his co-worker of many years, Joanne Plumeri, says it best: “In my career I have had many qualified supervisors both male and female; however, at the end of my career, I feel that the best was saved for last. George Hayman is not only one of the most capable, skilled and fair individuals I have ever worked for, but he has a quality which resonates within him and that is compassion. At times working in this venue, the qualities of compassion and humaneness are difficult to find, however, George Hayman never has to search for it, for that empathy is there for his employees as well as for the inmate population trusted into his care.”

Commissioner George Hayman- A Compassionate Leader

PAGE 6

Commissioner George Hayman-

Calm and Compassionate Leader

under Pressure


By: David M. Wolfsgruber Studies indicate that, for mentally ill prisoners, re-entry treatment and related services after release are crucial to providing offenders with the best possible chance to become productive members of society. Former Governor Codey’s Task Force on Mental Health, in issuing their final report dated March 31, 2005, recommended and supported a budget proposal to pilot re-entry case management services for mentally ill offenders. As a result, the New Jersey State Parole Board received a small appropriation to begin implementation of the Program for Returning Offenders with Mental Illness Safely and Effectively (P.R.O.M.I.S.E.)

Following a competitive bidding process involving the selection of Volunteers of America – Delaware Valley as the service provider, PROMISE

became operational on April 1, 2006. Upon release, parolees with a documented history of serious mental illness participate in the Post-Release Acclimation Center at one of V o l u n t e e r s o f America’s Halfway Back Programs in Camden, NJ. While in the Post Release Acclimation Center, p a r o l e e s r e c e i v e services such as ongoing psychiatric assessments and care, m e d i c a t i o n a n d

medication monitoring, skilled nursing care, individual needs assessment, partial day care programming, vocational training/education, family education and parenting classes, linkages to employment, financial education and household management skills.

Following the completion of the Post Release Acclimation Center, parolees requiring residential housing placement are referred to Volunteers of America’s secured housing units in Sicklerville, NJ. While at the residence, each parolee’s basic needs including food, housing, health care, and mental health treatment will be met. Mobile multidisciplinary teams consisting of the Parole Officer Liaison, licensed psychiatrist, skilled nurse, and Volunteers of America caseworkers provide necessary services, in many cases at the parolee’s residence. Partial day programming is also utilized for those that qualify.

Key to the early success of PROMISE has been the unprecedented level of support and cooperation received by the New Jersey State Parole Board from the Office of Governor Corzine, New Jersey Department of Corrections, New Jersey Department of Human Services (Division of Mental Health Services), Department of Community Affairs and New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency. Each agency’s expertise and input have been welcomed and taken into consideration in the formulation of each phase of the program. While PROMISE is a small pilot program with the capacity to serve 30 parolees, it is hoped that through its demonstrated success, it will represent a model for future parole initiatives throughout the state of New Jersey.

About the Author: David Wolfsgruber is the Coordinator of Special Programs for the Division of Community Programs at the NJ State Parole Board.

PAGE 7

For Mentally Ill Offenders:

A Program with P.R.O.M.I.S.E.

treatment and training

“BI’s goal is to support busy probation and parole offices with programs for parolees who need extra attention. We want participants to remain crime-free, find and keep jobs, stay sober and avoid drug use. These outcomes produce big benefits to the community and the individual,” said BI’s Gregg Lynk, BI’s New Jersey State Director.

For more information about BI Incorporated please call 1-800-241-2911.

BI and New Jersey (Continued from page 3)

committee (he was on board), but never went to the floor, or the Senate. I have heard it said all the time, they know they made a mistake with those panic driven sentencing bills 20 years ago, but they don’t exercise judgment. There is no political will or mechanism for correcting mistakes. The ducks are in a row for a crack bill and a reentry bill, but there is no engine driving them.

Crime policy making in Washington has for 20

Insane Asylum (Continued from page 5)


PAGE 8

By: Steve Troyanovich

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man.

It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity.

It is the middle ground between light and shadow... — Rod Serling

If you are an educator of at-risk youth, adjudicated youth, or adult offenders, or know someone who is interested in trying out new activities in the classroom, you may be interested in exploring this strategy.

Most readers will be familiar with the classic television series, The Twilight Zone. Created by Rod Serling, this innovative visual anthology explored weekly the dynamics and perils of being human. Although the original series was broadcast from 1959-1964, the issues explored by Serling remain relevant—and troubling—today. Cable in the Classroom (CIC), the U.S. cable industry’s education foundation, utilizes cable content and technology to enhance learning. Each Sunday night/Monday morning at 5:30am, CIC offers episodes of The Twilight Zone for educational taping—complete with lesson plans.

Additionally, other educators have utilized The Twilight Zone to foster new learning experiences within the classroom. An example is “The Twilight Zone Vocabulary” (see: www.baggetta.com). See also: “Teaching in the Twilight Zone” by Chad Cain (www.rodserling.com/ccain2004.htm)

What may have virtually escaped the casual viewer of The Twilight Zone is its parallel relationship to the criminal justice system. Some of Serling’s recurrent themes include: inherent social evil(s); censorship; intolerance; conformity; capital punishment; survival; identity; alienation—and above all—prejudice. Serling referred frequently to the almost incessant need, perhaps both animalistic and social, to dislike someone other than yourself.

Like Fyodor Dostoyevsky, the great 19th Century Russian novelist, Serling knew that the full measure of any society could be ascertained by exploring the inner workings of its justice system.

There are a number of Twilight Zone episodes reinforcing this viewpoint. Listed below for consideration are a few examples. Please note that the dates in parenthesis indicate the original broadcast of the episode:

THE LONELY (11/13/59): Written by Rod Serling, this is an intriguing episode. Like many Serling works, it operates on various levels of complexity with the fundamental question here focusing on the relationship between what are perhaps the dual

illusions of “punishment” and “freedom.”

THE MONSTERS ARE DUE ON MAPLE STREET (3/4/60): This is perhaps one of the most familiar episodes in the series. Serling explores the dimensions of human paranoia. At the same time, it should be viewed as a reminder as to the fragility of any criminal justice system based on an imperfect understanding of the human condition.

PEOPLE ARE ALIKE ALL OVER (3/25/60): This episode should be mandatory viewing for all zealots convinced of the righteousness and nobility of their own “lock ‘em up forever” cause.

SHADOW PLAY (5/5/61): A surreal episode---but perhaps not as surreal as our own present day justice system.

THE OBSOLETE MAN (6/2/61): Another episode written by Rod Serling, this time exploring the precarious relationship between “the judged” and “the judge.”

FIVE CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF AN EXIT (12/22/61): Who really are these five characters---and what is the “exit”?

ON THURSDAY WE LEAVE FOR HOME (5/2/63): Assess the current criminal justice system through the eyes of William Benteen.

NUMBER TWELVE LOOKS JUST LIKE YOU (1/24/64): This episode combines several of the frequent themes of Serling’s work---namely the primal tension existing between the will of the individual and the perceived “common good” of social conformity.

I AM THE NIGHT---COLOR ME BLACK (3/27/64): What are the implications for a justice system if a society is fundamentally “unjust”?

Perhaps a closer look and greater appreciation of Rod Serling’s collective work might reveal additional clues for fixing our threadbare social fabric—for reinstating the common welfare of the human race—for reviving humanity’s social conscience.

Readers interested in learning more about the work and extraordinary social vision of Rod Serling are directed to: www.rodserling.com, the official website of The Rod Serling Memorial Foundation.

INTO THE TWILIGHT ZONE: A DIMENSION BETWEEN LIGHT AND SHADOW

To review a lesson plan and to learn more about this programming, please visit the following website: www.scifi.com/cableintheclassroom/twilightzone.

* This is a condensed version of this article. To read the full text, please visit the NJ-ACA website at www.njaca.org.


PAGE 9

By: Patricia McKernan, MSW, LSW

INTRODUCTION

Whereas the focus of federal, state, and local corrections agencies has been on issues related to custody, the community corrections provider’s focus has long been on re-integration and treatment. Even prior to the popular research on “what works” in corrections, community providers have been assisting offenders with finding employment, reuniting with families, staying drug free, and managing money responsibly.

Volunteers of America has provided services to offenders, ex-offenders, and their families since its inception in 1896. Volunteers of America operates multiple community corrections programs in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Our correctional programs are committed to providing evidence-based treatment interventions to offenders in an effort to reduce recidivism and promote public safety.

Volunteers of America has been assisting offenders in the City of Camden, New Jersey for more than 25 years. The agency currently operates six community corrections programs in Camden. Fletcher House (84 beds) and Hope Hall (175 beds) are residential community release programs serving adult male offenders who are preparing for release. Garrett House is a 47 bed residential community release program serving adult women. The Day Reporting Center opened in June 1998 and is contracted by the New Jersey State Parole Board. The Day Reporting Center serves up to 60 parolees, both male and female, making the transition from prison to the community. Volunteers of America serves up to 80 youth between the ages of 14 and 18 through our Ready4Work program, which provides case management, education and employment support, and linkages to faith-based mentors. The agency has recently been selected to pilot a Program for Returning Offenders with Mental Illness Safely and Effectively (PROMISE) with the NJ State Parole Board. Through PROMISE, parolees with chronic mental illness will be afforded comprehensive services including supportive housing. In addition to these traditional corrections programs, the organization also provides batterer treatment to male perpetrators of domestic violence in Camden City.

The goal of Volunteers of America Corrections Services is to provide clients with the skills needed to be successful as they transition back to the community. The agency has made a commitment to only providing treatment interventions that have empirical evidence demonstrating their effectiveness with offenders. All Volunteers of America Corrections Programs provide interventions from a social learning theory basis, utilizing cognitive-behavioral programming to address criminogenic needs. Employment is also an integral part of all

VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA DELAWARE VALLEY

AN EVIDENCED-BASED APPROACH TO COMMUNITY

CORRECTIONS SERVICES

Volunteers of America correctional programs. Clients are required to find full-time employment, demonstrate positive work habits, and transfer the skills learned in the classroom to real-life situations.

TREATMENT APPROACH Volunteers of America Delaware Valley redesigned its existing residential programs and designed subsequent programs aligned with the “Principles of Effective Intervention” espoused by Paul Gendreau. The agency offers intensive data-driven interventions focusing on salient criminogenic needs. More intensive services and supervision are provided for higher risk offenders. Attention is paid to responsivity issues between case managers and clients and clients are matched to programs that meet their needs and skills. In residential settings, the program has a unique opportunity to interrupt the criminal lifestyle and introduce and reward involvement in prosocial activities and link offenders to prosocial people in the community. The goals of the program are to provide opportunities to learn new problem solving skills, relapse prevention skills, promote alternative and consequential thinking, and challenge pro-criminal attitudes and orientations.

Comprehensive assessment is critical in service to offenders. In our adult corrections programs, the client and case manager complete a Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R.) Empirically, the best established predictors of criminal conduct include all of the following: antisocial attitudes, antisocial associates, antisocial personality, a history of antisocial and problematic behavior, and difficulties at home, work, school, and leisure (Andrews & Bonta, 1994). The LSI-R was created by James Bonta, PhD, and Don Andrews, PhD as a way to systematically bring together risk and needs information important to offender treatment planning and for assigning levels of supervision. The case management staff is charged with the task to assess the risk and need of the offender and create a service plan that focused on the dynamic or changeable risk factors.

All clients participate in substance abuse screenings upon arrival in the programs. The Alcohol Dependency Scale (ADS), the Problems Related to Drinking Scale (PRD), and the Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST) are utilized as substance abuse evaluators. These tools assess the severity of substance dependence that the offender has exhibited. Based on the assessed level of need, the client is referred to the appropriate treatment component.


“All Volunteers of America Corrections Programs provide interventions from a social learning theory basis, utilizing cognitive-behavioral programming to address criminogenic needs.”


PAGE 10

The assessed needs and risk of the client drive the creation of an individualized service plan. A goal is to develop a trusting relationship between the case manager and the client. Engagement is successful when the client begins to work with staff to establish personal goals. The client and case manager work collaboratively in developing an individualized service plan that is reviewed and updated throughout the client’s involvement in the program.

Goal setting with clients can be improved if the client is motivated to change his/her behavior. An intervention strategy that we use holds promising results with offenders is Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET). MET is based on principles of motivational psychology and is designed to produce rapid, internally motivated change (Miller, & Rollnick) by mobilizing the client’s existing resources.

Volunteers of America has borrowed heavily from its compatriots in Canada. Corrections Services of Canada has been an ally and a resource to Volunteers of America in the implementation of effective, data-driven interventions and staff training along with internationally renowned researchers and consultants such as Dr. Marilyn Van Dieten.

Clients’ needs are identified through the assessment battery and they are referred to treatment interventions based on those presenting needs. The types of treatment interventions or core curricula that are offered at Volunteers of America’s programs include Reasoning and Rehabilitation, SMART Recovery, Offender Substance Abuse Pre-Release Program/Pathways to Change, Choices, Family Violence Prevention, Moving On, CALM (anger management), adult basic education and GED preparation, life skills programming (budgeting, goal setting, etc.), job readiness, leisure and recreation programming.

⇒ Reasoning and Rehabilitation is a cognitive skills training program consisting of 72 classroom hours where offenders learn problem solving skills, social skills, alternative and consequential thinking, critical reasoning, negotiation skills, values enhancement, and emotions management.

⇒ The Offender Substance Abuse Pre-Release Program/Pathways to Change is a 26 session cognitive /behavioral program focusing on substance abuse relapse prevention skills. Pathways addresses alcohol and drug education, self-management training (risk identification), understanding behavior, problem solving, coping skills, communication and assertion skills, as well as social and employment skills.

⇒ Staff facilitates SMART Recovery groups which focus on building motivation, coping with urges, problem solving, and maintaining lifestyle balance. SMART is also a cognitive restructuring program based on the principles of Rational Emotive Therapy.

⇒ CALM is a 24 session skills building program that focuses on anger management through cognitive restructuring techniques using Rational Emotive Therapy constructs to help offenders manage their emotional responses. The goal of CALM is to reduce the frequency and intensity of anger episodes.

⇒ Moving On is a 30 session curriculum-based program that was developed exclusively for women. The primary goal of

(Continued from page 9)

LiOd (GoGiro

By:

Yorglarrespequaat aviolmonGovGondepafree

dilesaysAmbecoprobcloth

wortogeand cont

statecostRocrevonaticontfaciimp

womaccoin p

the program is to assist women in identifying, developing, and mobilizing both personal and community resources that will lead to a more satisfying lifestyle.

⇒ Clients that present with a history of domestic violence are referred to the Volunteers of America Family Violence Prevention Program as part of their treatment course. The Moderate Intensity Family Violence Prevention Program is a 26 session program focusing on motivational enhancement, social skills, awareness and education, managing thoughts and emotions related to abuse, relapse prevention, and healthy relationships.

OUTCOMES

Research utilizing Volunteers of America data from 516 clients released to Hope Hall, Fletcher House, Garrett House (prior to serving women) and the Day Reporting Center from January 2000 and July 2001 was conducted to assess the reliability and validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised and to evaluate recidivism. This research demonstrated that offenders participating in Volunteers of America’s Corrections Services programs are making significant progress toward addressing specific criminogenic needs that are associated with risk within the first six months after release to a halfway house. Clients risk and needs scores are significantly decreasing when compared to their initial risk score at entry. The LSI-R tool is used at entry, every six months, and at exit to assess risk/need.

In assessing outcomes for correctional programs, whether a client returns to crime is largely how the public evaluates the effectiveness of a program or a particular intervention. It is estimated that two-thirds (67%) of released State prisoners are expected to be rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within three years after release. The research conducted by Melinda Schlager, Ph. D, evaluated re-arrest and re-conviction rates for the 516 clients participating in Volunteers of America’s Corrections Services programs. Overall, 32% of the sample was rearrested and 23% of the sample was reconvicted within two years following release to a Volunteers of America program.

References:

Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J. (1995). LSI-R: The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, ON: MHS Multi-Health Systems.

Miller, W.R. & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change -Second Edition. New York, NY: Guilford Press. New Jersey Institute for Social Justice & New Jersey Public Policy Research Institute. (December 2003). Coming Home for Good: Meeting the Challenge of Prisoner Reentry in New Jersey.

Schlager, M. (2005). Assessing the Reliability and Validity of the level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) on a Community Corrections Population: Implications for Corrections and Parole Policy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Newark.

About the Author:

Patricia McKernan, MSW, LSW is the Chief Operating Officer for Corrections Services at Volunteers of America Delaware Valley, located at 235 White Horse Pike in Collingswood NJ 08107 (856-854-4660 ext 124) (fax: 856-854-0651)

* This is a condensed version of this article. To read the full text, please visit the NJ-ACA website at www.njaca.org


Life on the Outside: The Prison Odyssey of Elaine Bartlett (Gonnerman, J. (2004), New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux)

By: Matthew J. Sheridan, Ed.D.

The tough on crime philosophy produced the New York Rockefeller Drug Laws. “Life on the Outside” is a glaring example of one outcome from that approach to responding to a specific crime issue. Obviously we cannot equate tough on crime with smart on crime. Elaine Bartlett at age 26 was sentence to 20 to life for a first time non-violent offense of selling cocaine. She served 16 years, two months, two weeks, and four days of that sentence before Governor George Partaki granted her clemency. Jennifer Gonnerman has captured the intensity that accompanies departure from prison and the shock of encountering freedom.

Gonnerman’s fervent account details the many dilemmas that accompany the new found freedom. Bartlett says she “left one prison to come home to another.” Amazing the one thing that almost all convicts desire most becomes an almost intolerable and impossible burden. Her problems ranged from how to dress and how to obtain clothing to securing employment.

Bartlett was the mother of four young children working at least two jobs to keep the East Harlem household together. Her man and father of two of the children was in and out of jail for drug involvement and infrequently contributed to the household.

Her “bust” was the result of doing one deal for a state police informant and known drug dealer – a deal that cost her everything. Gonnerman reviews the history of the Rockefeller Drug laws that led the way in the United States revolution in criminal control. A revolution that pushed the nations prisons to unprecedented levels and that would continue to push the populations ever higher straining facilities and resources of manpower and supplies all without impacting on crime or reducing recidivism.

The problems of re-entry and especially those of women are the strength of the book. Her major prison accomplishments, and like others who spend significant time in prison, included successfully achieving the better jobs and

eventually passing the high school equivalency examination. Nevertheless, despite realizing the best that prison makes available, she is inadequately prepared for the rigors of society. Bartlett’s story will be recognizable to parole officers who struggle with the demands of supervising parolees who lack skills and communities that lack resources to assist them. Gonnerman’s narrative provides substance to the step by step dilemmas that almost all ex-convicts face upon return to society. In many ways, and while it can be used as a gender specific exploration, “Life on the Outside” is a blueprint for the preparations of convicts to return home.

Unlike so many stories that are told of “Life on the Outside,” Bartlett’s journey offers hope. Through a combination of luck, assistance and certainly personal fortitude and self determination, she is putting her life back together in society. “Life on the Outside” is on the one hand a criticism of knee jerk criminal justice policies while on the other a success story that offers hope to anyone who has survived “The Belly of the Beast.”

Commentary:

The US has the most aggressive system of imprisonment in the world. Elaine Bartlett was one of those persons caught up in it. Her sentence could be described as disproportionate, aggressive, excessive and unnecessary. A pre-sentence investigation surely revealed the stresses of living in East Harlem and what drives men and women to act in precarious ways that result too often in personal destruction. She was a non-violent offender who committed a non violent act. As a nation our prison population is pushing upward toward three million confined men, women and children. The average cost to a state has exceeded two billion dollars and steadily is moving toward the three billion dollar mark. A recent study has revealed that approximately 30 per cent of the US population has a criminal conviction. This is not an intent to decry conservative get tough measures but an encouragement to consider smarter alternatives that would discontinue excessive criminalization of behavior and excessive use of incarceration, the cost of which is affecting everyone’s standard of living.

The editors invite the membership to read “Life on the Outside” and send us your commentary for inclusion in future editions.

The editors also invite you send us your book critiques. The Corrections Journal is your “Journal.”

BOOK REVIEW

PAGE 11

The Corrections Journal NJ-ACA

Editors: Dr. Matthew Sheridan & Steve Troyanovich

Layout/Design: Julie K. Hanley

Questions, comments, and suggestions for future newsletter content can be e-mailed to [email protected]

Please visit the NJ-ACA website at www.njaca.org to view electronic versions of our newsletters.

New Jersey American Correctional Association

P.O. Box 7593

Trenton, NJ 08628

American American Correctional Correctional AssociationAssociation

New New Jersey Jersey

ChapterChapter

Visit us on the web at www.njaca.org

or call us (609) 393-7282

the corrections journal for nj-acanjaca.org/documents/njacanewslettersummer-fall07.pdf ·...

Documents