Increasing Participation in rehabilitation programs

Published on
Scene 1 (0s)

Increasing Participation in rehabilitation programs

Presented by Kelsey Hoch

Scene 2 (18s)

In scientific terms

Population Those incarcerated in state or federal prisons. Gender, race, and age vary IV Maximizing participation through incentives model/rewards system DV Level of participation Various types of offenders

Scene 3 (33s)

Why is this important?

Research indicates that participation in these programs lowers recidivism. Also contributes to a positive prison environment with appetitive behavior.

Scene 4 (3m 35s)

Current Statistics

“The same studies that emphasize the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral psychoeducational programs; also suggest that including a cognitive component are twice as effective in reducing recidivism rates” ( Brazão, da Motta & Rijo, 2013). “ This qualitative analysis indicated that program success is largely a function of program type, size, and length. In addition, factors such as inmate age, criminal history, and maturational level were key issues in program success” ( Piotrowski & Lathrop, 2012).

Scene 5 (4m 1s)

Current Participation

“Results indicated that often female prisons were more likely to offer programs and women were more likely to participate in many programming options compared with male prisons and men, respectively” (Crittenden & Koons-Witt, 2017). “For male inmates, membership in any type of organized group activity was found to predict greater educational program usage in college and vocational education programs” ( Tietjen et al., 2018).

Scene 6 (4m 24s)

Suggestions for improving the level of participation:

Offer incentives Create a sense of urgency Make it hyper-relevant

Scene 7 (4m 35s)

Incentives

A group of people sitting around a table Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Reduced sentence Freedom Support Trusted roles Improved living conditions Visitation

Scene 8 (5m 8s)

Wristwatch face

Urgency

Time limits as to when these programs are available and how long. Seasonal Rotate programs Allows for control

Scene 9 (5m 40s)

Large skydiving group mid-air

Hyper-relevant

By making these programs hyper-relevant, various programs can be in effect at different times of the year so they can attend to the individual’s needs. Instead of having only one program that is offered year-round, that's centered towards sex-offenders.

Scene 10 (5m 59s)

Examples of Differential Offender Needs

“ One source found that prison-based peer programs  provided leadership, support, and guidance for female offenders, and not only created a prosocial environment, but fashioned an entire community” ( Collica , 2010).

“ A large percentage of inmates in the U.S. federal prison system have serious drug problems and need treatment before they return to society” ( Van Wormer & Persson, 2010).

Scene 11 (6m 43s)

Toy plastic numbers

Participation Leads to Desirable Behavior

“Results indicate that inmates who participated in college programs and inmates who participated in other types of educational programs received fewer “tickets” for rule violations while incarcerated” (Lahm, 2009).

Scene 12 (7m 22s)

In Conclusion

By creating this sense of urgency and applying a reward system, the prisoner’s behavioral aspects will make them more cognitive, so they are more likely to engage in behavior beneficial to the prison.

Scene 13 (8m 8s)

References

Brazão , N., da Motta, C., & Rijo , D. (2013). From multimodal programs to a new cognitive–interpersonal approach in the rehabilitation of offenders. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(6), 636–643. https://doi-org.lib-proxy.radford.edu/10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.018 Collica , K. (2010). Surviving Incarceration: Two Prison-Based Peer Programs Build Communities of Support for Female Offenders . Taylor & Francis. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639620903004812. Piotrowski, C., & Lathrop, P. J. (2012). Prison-Based Educational Programs: A Content Analysis of Government Documents. Education, 132(3), 683–688. Van Wormer, K., & Persson, L. E. (2010). Drug Treatment within the U.S. Federal Prison System: Are Treatment Needs Being Met? Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 49 (5), 363–375. Crittenden, C. A., & Koons-Witt, B. A. (2017). Gender and programming: A comparison of program availability and participation in US prisons.  International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology ,  61 (6), 611–644. https://doi-org.lib-proxy.radford.edu/10.1177/0306624X15601432 Tietjen , G. E., Garneau, C. R. H., Horowitz, V., & Noel, H. (2018). Showing up: The gendered effects of social engagement on educational participation in US correctional facilities.  The Prison Journal ,  98 (3), 359–381. https://doi-org.lib-proxy.radford.edu/10.1177/0032885518764921 Lahm, K. (2009). Educational Participation and Inmate Misconduct.  Journal of Offender Rehabilitation ,  48 (1), 37–52. https://doi-org.lib-proxy.radford.edu/10.1080/10509670802572235 Melnick, G., De Leon, G., Thomas, G., Kressel, D., Wexler, H. K., Melnick, G., De Leon, G., Thomas, G., Kressel, D., & Wexler, H. K. (2001). Treatment process in prison therapeutic communities: motivation, participation, and outcome.  American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse ,  27 (4), 633–650. https://doi-org.lib-proxy.radford.edu/10.1081/ADA-100107660

Scene 14 (9m 15s)

Thank you

Smiling Face with No Fill