National Institute of Justice Office of Correctional ...

The DelawareDepartmentof Correction Life Skills

Program

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

DEP

ARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OF

FIC

E OF JUSTICE PRO

GR

AM

S

BJA

N

IJOJJ DP BJS

OV

C

P r o g r a m F o c u s

National Institute of JusticeOffice of Correctional EducationNational Institute of Corrections

PROGRAM FOCUS

2 National Institute of Justice

The Delaware Department ofCorrection Life Skills Programby Peter Finn

Prisons have been offering academicand life skills programs to inmates formany years. However, the DelawareDepartment of Correction has imple-mented an innovative 4-month LifeSkills Program for prison inmates thatdoes much more than teach traditionalacademic and applied life skills.

Delaware’s Life Skills Program isoffered in its four State prisons. In1997, these facilities housed 5,000inmates (including 930 pretrial detain-ees—Delaware has no jails). Eachyear, as many as 300 inmates enrollsystemwide, and nearly 85 percent ofthem graduate.

Why Offer Life Skills?In the fourth or fifth week of the pro-gram, we watched a video that showed[a program graduate] buying a house—and he’s someone who’s never doneanything right. But he got himself ajob. So I realized they [program staff]weren’t blowing smoke in my face. The

— A program graduate

HighlightsThe Delaware Department of Correction of-fers a 4-month Life Skills Program twice ayear to up to 150 minimum- and medium-security inmates during each cycle. The pro-gram, which meets for 3 hours every weekday,has three major components: academics, vio-lence reduction, and applied life skills.

The core of Delaware’s Life Skills Program isMoral Reconation Therapy (MRT), which is asystematic, step-by-step process of raising themoral reasoning level of students through aseries of moral and cognitive stages. Studentsread How to Escape Your Prison, a workbookdeveloped especially for inmates, that includesgroup exercises designed to achieve this goal.

Although MRT was designed as a tool for reduc-ing violence, the five Life Skills teachers gearmuch of their academic and applied life skillswork around MRT exercises and principles.

Research in other prisons suggests that MRTmay be effective in reducing recidivism. An

independent evaluation of the Delaware LifeSkills Program found that, for the first pro-gram cycle, 19 percent of Life Skills studentsin the four State prisons reoffended within1 year after release, compared with 27 percentof a group of inmates who did not participate.However, the number of students and nonpar-ticipants examined was small, and the differ-ence in recidivism rates between them was notstatistically significant. Further analysis ofexisting data and ongoing data collection willshed new light on any correlation between theDelaware Life Skills Program and reducedrecidivism.

Begun with a 3-year, U.S. Department ofEducation grant from the Office of Correc-tional Education totaling more than $900,000,the program is now funded entirely by theDelaware legislature at a cost of $145,000 infiscal year 1997, or $577 for each of the 252students who graduated that year.

The program helped in every aspect of my life—for example, on buildingself-esteem and not letting incidents get violent. When I decided to get a divorce, mywife took the kids, but I learned not to let my self-esteem get destroyed and to controlmy rage. So I didn’t go do drugs. I still have the Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT)book. I looked at it on Thanksgiving Day. I saw it on the shelf, and it seemed to besaying to me “Come here!” I looked over the sketches of where I had wanted tosee myself in 1, 5, 10, and 15 years. I’ve been out 2 years, but I’m already where Iwanted to be in the book for my 15-year goals. My 20-year goal was to own my ownbusiness, but I already own my own home and I have a good job and a loving family.

Program Focus 3

PROGRAM FOCUS

program was for real. It’s a uniqueprogram for a prison, because inmatesalways perform for the establishmentwhile they’re locked up, but this wasthe first evidence that I saw of a pro-gram working on the outside withsomething that started on the inside.

— A program graduate

In an attempt to give inmates the tools toavoid reoffending (and to keep them

A literature review failed to identify stud-ies that have examined whether life skillsprograms have resulted in reducedrecidivism.a A large number of studies havereported that adult academic education pro-grams for inmates result in reduced recidi-vism. However, most of these studies havebeen inconclusive because of methodologi-cal weaknesses, such as small samples orshort postrelease followup periods. In ad-dition, many studies failed to assign in-mates randomly to treatment and controlgroups, compare the characteristics of stu-dents with the characteristics of inmateswho did not participate, or use statisticaltests to ensure that the findings did notoccur by chance. As a result, the research-ers could not prove that students did wellafter release because the programs changedthe inmates’ behavior rather than becauseinmates who enrolled in them were sohighly motivated to succeed that they wouldnot have reoffended even if they had notparticipated in the programs.b

Several methodologically adequate stud-ies concluded that some educational pro-grams may result in reduced recidivism forsome inmates. For example, after eliminat-ing selection bias, a study of Federal in-mates found that those who participated ineducation programs were significantly lesslikely than other inmates to reoffend for aslong as 3 years after release. A study ofWisconsin inmates found that prison edu-cation programs were cost-effective interms of reduced rates of return to prisonand increased time until reincarceration.c

However, other methodologically adequatestudies have shown no correlation between

The Link Between Educational Programs and Reduced Recidivismparticipation in educational programs andrecidivism.d

Studies suggest that education programs aremost likely to succeed if students are housedseparately from other inmates (as is done inone of the Delaware prisons), if the pro-grams involve followup after release, and ifthey teach skills relevant to the marketplace.e

The U.S. Department of Education’s Officeof Correctional Education and the Correc-tional Education Association are jointlyworking on a project that examines the im-pact of correctional education on the rate ofrecidivism. A total of 3,000 offenders, ran-domly selected from Maryland, Ohio, andMinnesota, who were within 3 months ofrelease, were chosen for this 18-month study.Answers to the following research questionsare anticipated: What is the relationship be-tween correctional education and postreleaseemployment? Are certain types of correc-tional education programs more effectivethan others in reducing recidivism and pro-moting employment, and does their effec-tiveness differ for groups with differentcharacteristics? Findings from this study areanticipated in late 1998.

Notesa. See, for example Gerber, J., andE. J. Fritsch, “Adult Academic and VocationalCorrectional Education Programs: A Reviewof Recent Research,” Journal of Offender Re-habilitation 22 (1995): 119–142.

b. See reviews of the available research,including Bushway, S., and P. Reuter, “La-bor Markets and Crime Risk Factors,” in

Sherman, L.W., D. Gottfredson, D.MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, S. Bushway,Preventing Crime: What Works, WhatDoesn’t, What’s Promising, Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office ofJustice Programs, 1997; Flanagan, T. J.,“Prison Education Research Project FinalReport,” Huntsville, Texas: Sam HoustonState University, 1994; and Office of Cor-rectional Education, “Recidivism StudySummaries,” Washington, D.C.: U.S. De-partment of Education, 1986–1993.

c. Harer, M.D., “Recidivism Among Fed-eral Prison Releasees in 1987: A Prelimi-nary Report,” Unpublished Paper, Wash-ington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,Federal Bureau of Prisons, Office of Re-search and Evaluation, March 1994; Piehl,A.M., “Learning While Doing Time,” Un-published Paper. Cambridge, Massachu-setts: Harvard University, John F. KennedySchool of Government, April 1994. Seealso, Adams, K., K.J. Bennett, T.J.Flanagan, J.W. Marquart, S. Cuvelier, E.J.Fritsch, J. Gerber, D.R. Longmire, andV.S. Burton, Jr., “Large-Scale Multidimen-sional Test of the Effect of Prison Educa-tion Programs on Offenders’ Behavior,”Prison Journal 74 (4) (1994): 433–449;Gerber and Fritsch, “Adult Academic andVocational Correctional Education Pro-grams” and Flanagan, “Prison EducationResearch Project Final Report.”

d. Gerber and Fritsch, “Adult Academic”;Flanagan, “Prison Education.”

e. See, for example, Gerber and Fritsch,“Adult Academic”; and Flanagan, “PrisonEducation.”

occupied), most State and Federalprisons, including those in Delaware,typically offer a range of educationalprogramming. Several studies havereported that offenders who participatein educational programs while incarcer-ated are less likely to reoffend than in-mates who do not enroll in educationalprograms (see “The Link Between Edu-cational Programs and Reduced Recidi-vism”). However, many inmates have

serious handicaps besides difficultyreading and writing that make it hard forthem to reintegrate into society, includ-ing little or no experience in job hunting,uncontrolled anger, inability to establishhealthy personal relationships, and fail-ure to establish realistic—or any—goals.Many offenders also appear to lack theability or willingness to choose ethicalbehavior over unethical behavior.1

PROGRAM FOCUS


To address these additional barriers tosuccess, a number of corrections depart-ments have implemented so-called lifeskills programs that provide inmateswith the knowledge, skills, and attitudesthey need to maintain strong family ties,find and keep good jobs, manage theirfinances, and lead productive lives (see“A Sample Life Skills Class”).

The U.S. Department of Education’sOffice of Correctional Education hasfunded 18 of these programs.2 TheDelaware Department of Correction LifeSkills Program is one such program—now funded (see “Program Costs”)entirely by the State of Delaware—thathas been carefully evaluated.

The Delaware Life Skills Programruns 3 hours a day for 4 months. Eachof 5 teachers conducts a morning andan afternoon course with 12 to 15 stu-dents in each course. Offered twiceannually, with a 2-month interval be-tween cycles, the program can accom-modate 300 students each year. Thereis one teacher in each of the threeminimum security institutions and two

for the first part of the exercise; other membersof the class helped the student do the math.Then a second student repeated the presenta-tion. Companiony handed out a second exer-cise sheet on financing the car. The classrepeated the procedure. The exercises involvedcalculating percentages and multiplication—for example, calculating monthly payments ona $4,400 loan at 13 percent for 4 years.

At 9:30 a.m., Companiony called a 15-minute break. At 9:45 a.m., class resumedand focused on an MRT exercise called“trading places,” which requires studentsto identify someone with whom they wouldlike to trade places temporarily. By forcingstudents to figure out exactly what they likeor admire about that person, the exercisehelped them determine what they valuemost in life.

Isabel Companiony teaches Life Skills inDelaware’s only prison for women. Onthis particular day, class began at 8:30a.m. with a session on buying a car. Aftera brief explanation of the “blue book” ofcar prices, Companiony distributed a hand-out of exercises in which students calcu-late how much they could offer to pay fora car based on specified percentagesabove the wholesale price. The handoutprovided retail and wholesale prices ofsix different cars. Companiony explainedthe exercise and passed out calculators.

Some women completed the exercise as agroup, others individually. A few studentsasked another student for help. Companionywalked around the room checking on thestudents’ progress and offered assistance asneeded. Then she asked one student to go tothe board and write down her calculations

A Sample Life Skills ClassOne student volunteered to get up in front ofthe class to talk about why she would like tobe her brother—because he has been verysuccessful in life. However, talking abouther envy helped her realize that she does notgive herself enough credit for what she hasdone. After the student’s presentation,Companiony asked her to leave the room,and the other students voted on whether shehas “passed” one of MRT’s 16 stages or“steps.” (See “What Is MRT,” page 5.)After a brief discussion, they agreed that shepassed. Companiony told them, “I’ve seenher help you guys with your math, so tell her,‘I appreciate the help,’ to help build her self-esteem.” The student returned to the room toapplause from the rest of the class. Otherstudents then volunteered to speak to theclass and the same procedure was followed.The class ended at 11:30 a.m.

Program CostsThe Delaware Life Skills Program was established through a 3-year grant from the U.S.Department of Education’s Office of Correctional Education awarded in November1993, for a total of more than $916,000. The budget breakdown appears below.

When the State of Delaware took over funding, it provided $145,300, including$136,500 for five teachers’ salaries for a 10-month year and $8,800 for supplies such asinstructional materials, videotapes, and MRT workbooks. The program survives withless money than when the Department of Education funded it due to elimination of theprogram administrator’s position, reduced need for staff training, and other economies.

The program’s cost per graduate was $1,260 under Federal grant funding and $577 underState funding.

Item Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Personnel $236,308 $243,008 $221,988

Fringe Benefits * * $76,494

Travel $10,075 $13,261 $2,000

Equipment $1,800 $1,800 0

Supplies $28,130 $31,627 $5,000

Other $1,461 $1,461 $1,471

Indirect Costs $8289 $8,677 $8,289

Training $7,545 $7,545 0Costs/Stipends

Total $293,608 $307,379 $315,242 * Staff received no fringe benefits the first 2 years because they were contracted consultants.

Program Focus 5

PROGRAM FOCUS

in the medium security facility.3 Thecurriculum consists of three principalcomponents—academics, violencereduction, and applied life skills.

Academics

● Reading comprehension

● Mathematics

● Language expression

Violence Reduction

● Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT)

● Anger management

● Conflict resolution training

Applied Life Skills

● Credit and banking

● Job search

● Motor vehicle regulations

● Legal responsibilities(e.g., restitution)

● Family responsibilities(e.g., child support)

● Health issues

● Social services

● Educational services

● Cultural differences

● Government and law

The Core: MoralReconation Therapy(MRT)The MRT steps helped me the most in LifeSkills, beginning with the first step ofhonesty. That step is as clear in my mindtoday as if I just read it. I always felt,stealing, lying—politicians and preachersdo it, so why not me? But I learned to dothe right thing. Now I work for an em-

ployer who trusts me with the keys to hishouse. —A program graduate

Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT), atool for reducing violence, is the coreof the Delaware Life Skills Program.To many students, MRT is the LifeSkills Program. Elaine Hawpe, a LifeSkills teacher, says, “The bulk of whatI do every day is MRT.” George Dean,another teacher, reports, “I tie most ofmy teaching around MRT.”

Instructors typically spread the MRTexercises across the 16-week LifeSkills Program, devoting part of everyclass to MRT, spending the entireclass on MRT, or skipping MRT en-tirely in a class to concentrate on otherparts of the curriculum.

What Is MRT?Moral Reconation Therapy is a nontra-ditional, cognitive-behavioral treat-ment for offenders, substance abusers,batterers, and other individuals with“resistant” personalities (see “Sourcesfor Further Information” in order tocontact Correctional Counseling, Inc.,

MRT’s developer). The course usesa step-by-step process of raising themoral reasoning level of studentsthrough a series of 16 hierarchicallygraded moral and cognitive stages.4

The course is taught primarily bymeans of group and workbook exer-cises. The exercises are designed toachieve therapeutic goals througheducational means—that is, to alter theway individuals act by changing theway they think. A typical exercise asksstudents to draw pictures of their big-gest problem areas and pictures of thethings that they believe will lead themto happiness. Another exercise asksthem to identify the five most satisfy-ing and the five worst experiences intheir lives and to consider what madeeach event good or bad. Yet anotherasks them to systematically examinehow they spend their time. Each stu-dent shares his or her results with therest of the class.

The program is used in correctionsfacilities such as prisons, halfwayhouses, and community correctionsprograms, as well as in drug courts

A student shares with the class what he has learned from an MRT step.

Ph

oto

by L

ew

is C. T

idb

all P

rod

uctio

ns

PROGRAM FOCUS


and probation departments in 32States. More than 20,000 studentsparticipate each year. Instructors at-tend a 4-day training workshop duringwhich they complete the exercises inthe 128-page student workbook them-selves. The workbook, How to EscapeYour Prison, is designed specificallyfor inmates and written at a sixth-grade reading level.5

As part of MRT, students also:

● Establish goals and identify thetools they will need to achieve them,including doing the right things in theright way.

● Assess the quality of their currentrelationships with other people andformulate a strategy for repairing andproceeding with valued relationships.

● Complete 20 hours of volunteerwork.

Does MRT Work?The developers of MRT first imple-mented it in the 1980s at a correctionalfacility in Shelby County, Tennessee.Starting in 1988, they followed 70felony drug offenders who participatedin the program, comparing them with82 inmates who volunteered to partici-pate but were rejected because therewas no space. The developers includedevery third person on the waiting listin the control group. The two groupshad the same average age, sentencelength, and ethnic composition. Bycomparing the two groups, the devel-opers found that, although “MRTtreatment suppresses recidivism by 50percent or more . . . [for] 1 or 2 yearsafter treatment. . . . The initially largetreatment effect clearly appears to

level off and stabilize approximately 2to 3 years after treatment.” However,even after 7 years, MRT participantsstill had a statistically significantlower recidivism rate than nonpartici-pants—44 percent compared with 60percent.6 Recidivism was defined asbeing sentenced to prison or jail forany reason, including any violation ofconditions of supervision.

The National Institute of Justice spon-sored a study of MRT’s effects oninstitutional behavior and recidivismamong Oklahoma prison inmates afterthe Oklahoma Department of Correc-tions implemented the program in1993 throughout the system. Examin-ing the histories of 65,390 individualsunder department of corrections super-vision (nearly two-thirds probation-ers), the researchers tried to comparethe behavior of inmates who partici-pated in the MRT program with indi-viduals who did and did not participatein other Oklahoma correctional pro-grams while in prison. However,because inmates were not assignedrandomly to the three groups, it was

impossible to know whether programparticipants exhibited better behaviorsimply because they were more moti-vated to change than the other inmates.

Despite this significant limitation, bylooking at participants’ behavior beforethey enrolled in MRT, the researcherswere able to examine how the students’subsequent behavior compared with theproblem behavior they could have beenexpected to exhibit if they had not par-ticipated. The researchers drew thefollowing conclusion:

The majority of the analysis resultsstrongly suggested that initiation [of]and participation duration in MRTwere associated with reduced risk ofproblem behavior (misconduct [whilein prison] and recidivism incidents) onthe part of the individuals who partici-pated in it.7

The promising results of these evalua-tions—and the enthusiasm of both stu-dents and instructors for MRT—needto be treated as preliminary. The re-search conducted by MRT’s developers

Teacher Carol Eagle asked the class togather in small groups and take part in anexercise. She described a hypothetical situ-ation in which a killer typhoon is about tostrike an island and asked each group todetermine which 5 of the following 10people they would allow to board a smallraft and survive—and why: minister, doc-tor, mechanic, ocean scientist, farmer,judge, sports hero, journalist, teacher, andfamous movie star. After 10 minutes ofanimated discussion, each group reportedits selections to the rest of the class.

One group included the journalist “be-cause he can write about the ones whodidn’t survive.” Another group includedthe minister “because the survivors willneed spiritual guidance in a time of crisisand he can pray for the ones who die.” Yet

A Sample MRT Exercise onMoral Reasoning

another group reported, “We don’t wantanyone to die—we’re trying to think posi-tive and not have the moral burden ofconsigning someone to die—so we puteveryone in a hollowed-out tree trunk.”

Eagle then tied the exercise to real lifescenarios.

Eagle: “But what if you have to cut loose oldbuddies when you get out?”

Student: “That’s not analogous.”

Eagle: “It is—what if it’s your brother? Areyou going to sink with him?”

Student: “If he’s going to get arrested, I’mleaving him.”

Another student: “I’ll go down with him.”

Program Focus 7

PROGRAM FOCUS

involved very small samples, and nei-ther their study nor the study sponsoredby the National Institute of Justice ran-domly assigned ex-offenders to treat-ment and control groups. A breakdownof recidivism by original conviction(e.g., violent offenses, sex offenses,drug offenses) would also be helpful injudging the effectiveness of MRT fordifferent offender populations.

How DelawareUses MRTDelaware’s Life Skills teachers oftenintegrate academics and applied lifeskills with Moral Reconation Therapyexercises to reinforce MRT goals andto lend relevance to these other sub-jects.8 For example, Life Skills teacherGeorge Dean reports, “In my unit oninvestments and credit, I raise ethical

issues when students say they can beatthe system by not paying the balanceon a credit card. When I teach O. Henryshort stories (and I tell them he spenttime in jail as an embezzler), I have thestudents put all the characters on theboard and ask what stage of moralbehavior each one has reached in theMRT system, so I tie the reading intocharacter building. The idea is to chal-lenge their belief system repeatedly sothey begin to think in terms of what isthe right thing to do.” (See “A SampleMRT Exercise on Moral Reasoning”for a description of a 3-hour class.)Carol Eagle, another teacher, agrees:“In every aspect of the program, I al-ways ask them, ‘Did you do the rightthing?’ ” Eagle illustrated her point:

I had a student who had been in prisonseveral times. During the family visit

day, I asked everyone, including one ofhis children who came, “What do youmiss most about the member of yourfamily who’s in prison?” This student’sson answered, “My daddy belongshome. I miss him.” There was a hushin the room, as the father began crying.Now, the father makes fewer excusesabout not doing the right thing becauseI can remind him that there are peopleout there who need him—so “do good.”

The Life Skills teachers integrate otherimportant MRT themes into the entireprogram:

● Caring for others (see “LifeSkills Fosters Caring”).

● Being honest.● Taking responsibility.● Planning for the future.

Several students have made specialmention of this last focus on planning:

Usually, you only think about whenyou’re going to leave prison, but MRTforces you to think beyond the date ofrelease.

The most important part of the [LifeSkills] course is writing out your goals—what is the first thing you’ll do when youget out, the second thing, and so on. Mygoals are to (1) get all the identification Ineed for a job and school; (2) attendadult high school to get a diploma andcomplete a course for nursing; (3) workfor the Visiting Nurses’ Association withmy sister; and (4) get a bank account andsave $50 a week. I never thought I couldwrite down goals like this. If I feel I’mslipping up, I can go back to the [MRT]book and review them; I already do thathere in prison. My whole life—my pastand future—is in this book.

Life Skills teachers make a sustained effortto get students to start to care about otherpeople. One way they nurture caring is byrequiring peer teaching. Teachers and stu-dents alike explain that, because studentsmust complete workbooks as part of theircourse work, those who have difficultyreading and writing will need help fromother students who have more advancedskills. According to one student:

Ms. [Carol] Eagle explains things on theboard but then tells everyone to help eachother: ‘If you see someone needs help, gohelp them.’ And she mixes small groups withmore and less experienced people. Everyone’sreceptive to being helped—it amazed me. Inever thought she would get peer participa-tion. Even a guy who can’t read at all, no onelaughs at him, not even after class.

Another student put it this way:

Life Skills Fosters CaringAt first, I was shaky on that [helping otherstudents], because I wasn’t used to it. ThenI learned to care. For example, if Martin ishaving a problem with fractions, a coupleguys help him out. At first, the teacher hadsomeone sit with him to help. Now guysoffer help spontaneously. Also, if a brothersees a guy slipping back into an argumen-tative mode, he might tell him to be careful:“Look, man, you’re becoming defensive fornothing; Joe’s entitled to his opinion . . . usehis criticism or ignore it.

Fostering caring is also built into MRT,which requires 20 hours of documentedvolunteer work within the institution. Forexample, students clean the classroom,tutor other inmates outside of class, ordraft letters for inmates who cannot write.The person who is helped signs a specialform that the student submits to the teacherfor credit.

PROGRAM FOCUS


Although MRT is the program’s core,the teachers devote considerable atten-tion to the other Life Skills compo-nents. Instructors are required toteach applied life skills and to use theAmerican Correctional Associationvideotapes and handbook, Cage YourRage: An Inmate’s Guide to AngerControl.9 Beyond this, teachers haveflexibility in what and how they teach,including selecting their own text-books and classroom materials.

Teachers are also free to determine theamount of time spent on each of thethree components. For example, twoteachers estimated they spend roughly65 percent of classroom time on vio-lence reduction (principally MRT),20–25 percent on applied life skills,and 10–15 percent on academics. Allthe teachers devote the least time toacademic skills because students canstudy them in other courses in theprison. According to Bruce Hobler,the former department of correctiondirector of education who set up theDelaware program, “After the firstprogram cycle, we found a lot of stu-dents were in or had already takenbasic education programs. So ratherthan duplicate that, I allowed theteachers to spend more time on theother two components.”

Life Skills Involvesthe CommunityThe teachers themselves added twoother elements to the Life Skills Pro-gram—involving family members andbringing in guest speakers.

The Life Skills Program in general andMRT in particular place a strong em-phasis on students reestablishing or

improving ties with their families asone critical element of leading produc-tive lives—whether in prison or on theoutside.10 Teacher George Dean tele-phones the family of every student atleast once to inform them of theinmate’s progress. “They’re dumb-founded when I call,” he says.

Then they ask if he [the inmate] isreally okay, because they know he’slying when he tells them he’s okay.Sometimes the family member tells meshe cries herself to sleep. . . . So I re-assure her. I end up talking with someof them for 90 minutes. But I say onlypositive things to family members, andI try to enable the parent and kid to behonest with each other. But the familymembers end up talking later to theirsons, telling them, “I want you to doreally well in this program,” whichgives me more clout in the classroom.In addition, the students thank me forputting their moms at ease, because itmakes them feel less guilty about whatthey’ve done to their families.

The calls also challenge inmates’ notionthat people do things only if they expect

a reward. Dean calls from his homephone on weekends or evenings, usinghis own time and money (see “TeachersInnovate—On Their Own Time”).

Two students attested to the value ofpromoting family ties. One said:

Because of the program, I’ve beenable to talk as a father and friend tomy two adult daughters. My conversa-tion is more open now with them andmy mother. In the past, I never saidmuch. Now I can tell them who I amand that I need their support to helpme change. As a result, my daughters’attitudes toward me have changed.They used to visit me, but the visitswere just a formality. Now I’m moreinteractive with them, so they are too.Life skills has been that—making methink about what I did 20 years agoand what I’ll do in the future.

Another said:

I had never had a relationship with mydad. I was raised by a working mom. Iblamed my father for my having stolenguns and ending up in jail. The pro-

Teachers Innovate—On Their Own TimeOne day, teacher Isabel Companiony no-ticed a cross that a former student hadmade out of canvas and satin ribbon. Thatevening she stayed up until 2 a.m. writinga proposal for her students to start a smallfor-profit business making the crosses. Thewarden approved the plan and arranged asmall cash advance to buy enough materi-als for 500 crosses.

After her students made an initial produc-tion run of 100 crosses, Companiony sold75 at two State education workshops. Shealso contacted churches to solicit their

interest in purchasing and reselling thecrosses. The students sold the crosses for$1 each; of that, 12–15 cents went toreimburse the prison for materials, 50cents was credited to individual inmateaccounts for each cross they made thatsold, and the churches that retailed thecrosses kept the balance.

The activity has enabled Companiony toteach her students practical business skills(e.g., the concept of overhead) and createmotivating math exercises (e.g., calculat-ing profits).

Program Focus 9

PROGRAM FOCUS

gram changed my hatred for my fa-ther. Because of the program, I calledhim up. He was shocked to hear fromme. I realized that I had neglected mydad—he didn’t just neglect me.

Teachers in three of the institutions hosta well-attended family event such as apicnic or inmate presentation followedby socializing during each programcycle. (Security considerations at theState’s Multi-Purpose Facility makefamily days impossible to arrange.)Andrew Freeman, a student, explained:

Ms. Eagle invited family members twiceto come to the prison. On one occasionshe had the family members and stu-dents break into small groups—I wasn’tin the same group with my mom—todiscuss what various family membersshould do when an inmate comes homevery late at night. Then each group re-ported its solutions to the whole class.In my group, a mom actually had a sonwho was going through this problem.The groups help each family to see howother families would solve the problem,and they also help everyone to see thateveryone has the same problems.

All the teachers invite family membersto attend graduation ceremonies. Typi-cally, one or more students tell the

assembly how theLife Skills Pro-gram has made adifference in theirlives. On oneoccasion, threestudents sang a1950s-style popsong they com-posed in honor ofthe program. The

governor has spoken at three gradua-tions; other speakers have includedjudges and State senators.

On their own initiative, teachers alsobring in outside speakers to talk tostudents, primarily about making thetransition to freedom after release. Rep-resentatives of the State’s Departmentof Labor explain how ex-offenders canfind decent jobs, entrepreneurs discusshow to start a small business, staff fromthe Department of Motor Vehiclesexplain how to get a driver’s license orget a suspended license back, and thehead of a polytechnical school de-scribes how to enroll in free vocationalcourses after release from prison.

According to students, the speakers givethem hope that they can succeed afterrelease. A skeptical inmate reported:

I had my family call the polytech guy toverify it was true about the free classes.It was. I never thought there were anyopportunities besides selling drugs andworking at fast food joints. So you can’tgive the lame excuse, ‘Man, there’snothing out there.’ But it starts in here.You can’t wait until you’re ready forrelease to change your thinking andbehavior and attitude.

Program OperationsThere are four structural componentsof the Life Skills Program’s opera-tions: recruiting, staffing, housing, andfollowup.

Recruiting StudentsDuring the 3 years the Life Skills Pro-gram was funded by the U.S. Depart-ment of Education, the course wasoffered only to minimum- and medium-security inmates with at least 6 but nomore than 22 months remaining ontheir sentences. These limits were cho-sen to schedule graduation approxi-mate to release, to avoid enrollinginmates who would remain in prisonfor many years after completing thecourse, and to make sure that therewould be enough applicants to makeit possible to statistically analyze theevaluation data.

Once the State took over the programin 1996, these limitations were droppedto accommodate the many long-termminimum- and medium-security in-mates who expressed a strong interestin the program.

The institutions’ classification teamscontinue to screen out the few appli-cants with serious behavioral, mental,or physical problems that would inter-fere with attendance. Teachers, andsometimes the institutions’ educationsupervisors, then screen applicantswith personal interviews to make surethey are serious about doing the workrequired. Difficulty in reading or writ-ing is no barrier to enrolling. In fact,applicants are not even tested for basicskills until after they have enrolled.

Students help each other in a small-group exercise.

Ph

oto

by L

ew

is C. T

idb

all P

rod

uctio

ns

PROGRAM FOCUS


Initially the programhad difficulty gettinginmates to apply. Theprogram was advertisedthrough posters indining halls and by eachinstitution’s educationsupervisor during infor-mation sessions withinmates. According toJohn Liptak, theprogram’s first director,“Inmates wanted to know, ‘What’s inthis for me?’ Some of the men threwthe program flier on the floor, saying,‘I don’t need this!’ ” In response,Liptak and other staff members de-scribed the program, the opportunity forearning additional “good time,” and thepossibility of more favorable consider-ation at parole hearings. In addition toinmates’ skepticism about the program,Life Skills had to compete with otherinstitution programs for students.

By 1997, enrollment was no longer aproblem. In fact, today’s students con-sistently report that they heard aboutthe program from other inmates whowere attending or had graduated. As aresult, word of mouth is the only out-reach method now being used—andthere is still a waiting list at some insti-tutions for each new cycle. Interestedinmates write letters to the teachersasking to enroll and explaining whythey are interested in the program.

Why does the Life Skills Program nolonger have a shortage of applicants?As described, inmates can get goodtime for participating in the program.Furthermore, inmates in the Multi-Purpose Facility, where Life Skillsstudents are housed together in a spe-cial pod (see the section on housing),

reported that one attractive feature ofthe program is the chance to live in anenvironment that is better regulated,more peaceful, and cleaner than in theother housing units. According to aprogram graduate, “The initial attrac-tion for me was that the pod was aphysically safe environment—for ex-ample, there was less stealing.” Someinmates in the women’s facility enrollbecause they have more freedom thanin the other units: they are allowed towear street clothes and walk unescortedto the medical unit and cafeteria. Afterthe first cycle, however, most studentsreported they enrolled in the programbecause other inmates recommended it.

StaffingWhen the Life Skills Program began in1994, staff members included a full-timeprogram administrator and five full-timeinstructors. As part of their regular du-ties, the education supervisors in theprisons assist with student recruitment.Bruce Hobler, former Life Skills projectdirector, estimates that he also spent 50to 60 percent of his time on the programduring its first year and 40 percent of histime the following years. “It took a lotmore time than I ever expected—beingsupportive, giving talks, making a video-tape—but I’m glad I did it.”

Students in the women’s prison work on a math exercise together.

Ph

oto

by

Le

wis

C.

Tid

ba

ll P

rod

uct

ion

s

When the 3-yearFederal demonstrationproject grant endedin 1996 and the Statepicked up the bill(see “Teamwork andEvaluation Win theDay”), the position ofprogram administratorwas dropped. However,Hobler continued asacting program admin-

istrator until he resigned from thedepartment in August 1997.

HousingBruce Hobler believes it would be idealif all Life Skills students in each institu-tion lived together in housing unitsaway from the general population.“Life Skills is a 24-hour program,” hesaid. “Students need to apply what theylearn in class to their everyday lives inprison and receive positive reinforce-ment for their changed behavior fromother inmates.” (Research tends toconfirm this view—see “The LinkBetween Educational Programs andReduced Recidivism.”) However, withthe exception of the multipurpose facil-ity, none of the other institutions wereable to establish such a housingarrangement.

Inmate movement presented a problemat Delaware’s Multi-Purpose Facilitybecause, with 32 housing units, in-mates would have to come from allparts of the prison to attend classes—a logistical nightmare. When one ofthe institution’s Life Skills teachers,Leroi Coit, explained the dilemma tothe warden, the administrator agreedto move all Life Skills students intoone minimum/medium pod, accommo-

Program Focus 11

PROGRAM FOCUS

dating 60 inmates near the classroom.Although half the residents were notcurrent Life Skills students, most ofthem were program graduates withtime left to serve.

Coit screened the officers who super-vise the pod, because he wanted onlythose who would support the program.For example, officers would be re-quired to enforce quiet time for studyhall, restricting even nonprogram resi-dents from watching TV during thistime. Officers would also be asked torecommend inmates who should bedropped from the program because ofpoor behavior in the unit or even inthe corridors. Coit appointed four LifeSkills graduates living in the pod aspeer counselors, who helped studentswhen problems arose, assisted themwith homework, and prevented disre-spectful behavior (see “GraduatesWho Remain in Prison Still BenefitFrom Life Skills”).

At a brief reunion, four program gradu-ates—all now working full time in thecommunity—reminisced about theirexperiences when living in the pod.

Graduate A [a member of the first classto live in the pod]: When we weregraduating, it was a big concern forme whether I would be forced backinto a negative environment. Butbecause of Leroi Coit, we could stayin the pod’s positive environmentbefore we hit the streets. You can’tuse the tools you learn in Life Skillsas well if you get put back into [thegeneral prison] population.

Graduate B: By remaining in the pod,the [Life Skills] graduates acted asrole models for the new students.

Graduate C: Thirty people ended upbonding together. When someonebegan slipping—for example,cussing—we would talk to him—“Pull up on your language.”

The commissioner of the Delaware De-partment of Correction had long been in-terested in correctional education. Whenthe U.S. Department of Education issued aRequest for Proposals to fund inmate edu-cation programs, the commissioner sup-ported Bruce Hobler’s interest in submit-ting a proposal. The department receivedits funding in November 1993.

Hobler asked a planner with the DelawareCriminal Justice Council, the State’s crimi-nal justice planning agency, to put to-gether under his supervision what becamethe Life Skills Program curriculum. Hoblerhired a project director in March 1994 andfive instructors in April. The first LifeSkills cycle began in June 1994.

Hobler also formed an Oversight Com-mittee, which he chaired, that included thecommissioner of corrections, the bureauchief of prisons, the education supervisorsin each of the four institutions, the head ofVeterans Affairs in Delaware (a bilingualspecialist and educator), and a representa-

Teamwork and Evaluation Win the Daytive of the State Department of Labor. Thecommittee was especially useful for gettingthe prisons’ senior administrators to cooper-ate with the program, because thecommissioner’s highly visible participationon the committee made it clear that he fullysupported the program. As a result, Hoblerreports, “We had a much easier time gettingwhat we needed for the program. For ex-ample, we were able to get inmates classi-fied to the program in a short period of timeand hold graduation ceremonies within theinstitutions with family members in atten-dance.” Having the data processing centerdirector on the committee with the commis-sioner also enabled the program to get thenames of eligible inmates statewide in timeto set up the first program cycle before wordof mouth became the primary outreach ap-proach. The committee met monthly fromlate 1993 until late 1994, then every 2 or 3months until it was disbanded in 1995.

Before Federal funding ran out, Hobler pre-pared a budget that would support four in-

stead of five teachers. However, the com-missioner presented the programevaluator’s preliminary results regardingLife Skills’ promising impact on recidi-vism to the legislature’s Joint FinanceCommittee, and the program receivedfunding for five teachers—all new moniesfor the department. (See “Program Costs”for a breakdown of the first 3 years.)

According to Representative RichardDavis, Chair of the legislature’s Joint Fi-nance Committee, the program’s prelimi-nary evaluation results were influential inmotivating the legislature to take over theprogram’s funding. “The budget commit-tee looks hard at programs begun withFederal funding to determine whether theyare producing good results. The informa-tion we had on the Life Skills Program wasthat it was helping to prepare inmates toleave prison and not come back. We don’thave a lot of prison programs that have agood handle on reducing recidivism, so ifLife Skills had any chance of reducingrecidivism, we felt it was worth keeping.”

Graduates WhoRemain in PrisonStill Benefit FromLife SkillsIdeally, the program is best suited to stu-dents who are released soon after the courseends. However, even inmates who remainincarcerated for years after the programends appear to benefit. According to cur-rent student Andrew Freeman, “I don’t getreleased until 2009, but Life Skills willhelp me deal with my time in jail—to bemore patient, not be upset at little things Ican’t control, recognize that I’m not al-ways right, be more tolerant. I used to beargumentative—I had to be right and I tookeverything personally. Now I’m more laidback. For example, when I suggested that aguy in class try not to keep saying “uh . . . uh”during a mock interview, he told me to goget some Noxema for my acne. But I didn’treact hostile like I would have in the past.I’ve learned to walk away from peoplewho just want to argue.”

PROGRAM FOCUS


Graduate D: You knew that if youcried, you wouldn’t be held as asissy, because we’d all had thesame classroom experiences.

Followup“One area in which the program isweak,” according to Bruce Hobler,“is in the transition to the communityafter release.” Hobler had originallyplanned for Life Skills graduates tocomplete the first 12 steps of MoralReconation Therapy in prison and thefinal 4 under the supervision of spe-cially trained probation officers.However, even though funding wasobtained for training the officers inMRT and one officer received trainingand began holding group sessions, theplan was abandoned because the pro-bation system did not allow for LifeSkills graduates to be assigned tospecific probation officers.

As a result, Leroi Coit took it uponhimself to create an opportunity forgraduates within easy travel distance ofthe State’s largest city, Wilmington, tomeet for mutual support after release.The meetings also served as an earlywarning system to identify emergingproblems that he and the group couldhelp short circuit. Coit obtained permis-sion from a local community center touse a conference room 1 hour a weekfor these meetings. He opened themeetings to program graduates from allfour institutions and sent them all fliers.Usually only 5 or 6 graduates come toeach meeting—although as many as 12have attended—because they developtime-consuming commitments to workand family.

Coit remembers a graduate who hadbeen out of prison for a year telling the

group that he was starting to have prob-lems making ends meet with his un-skilled job. “He had been a drug dealer,and he began wondering whether heshould start dealing again. Anothermember of the group said, ‘Why don’tyou come with me to see Ed Lucus [anemployer relations representative withthe Department of Labor who had beena guest speaker in the class]?’ Thegraduate met with Lucus, was placed inelectrical school for 3 months, found ajob, and was licensed.”

The Importance ofFinding QualifiedStaffAccording to Bruce Hobler, “Thepower of the program lies in its capac-ity to hire and train correctionaleducators who are motivated to helpincarcerated students.” The teachersneed to be qualified to provide instruc-tion in adult basic education, but, aspreviously noted, they spend most oftheir time teaching MRT and appliedlife skills. As a result, more importantto their success than any formal cre-dentials are thorough training in thesetwo areas and, above all, the followingpersonality characteristics:

● Creativity (e.g., linking charactersin a short story to the MRT stages ofmoral development).

● Flexibility (e.g., switching backand forth, as needed, between MRT,life skills, and academics).

● Stamina (teaching two 3-hourclasses a day with often outspokenand unhappy students).

● A willingness to extend themselvesbeyond the technical requirements ofthe job (e.g., telephoning relatives inthe evenings and on weekends).

The instructors have to be especiallytalented to teach MRT properly. Forexample, they have to be able to:

● Handle the intense emotions MRTexercises can elicit among students(see “Tension—and Improvisation—in a Life Skills Class).

● Model the behaviors they try toinstill in their students, including open-ness, honesty, and not always acting inthe expectation of a material reward.

● Challenge students constantly tolive up to their own stated prioritiesand goals.

In fact, while they are in the program,and in many cases for their entire pe-riod of incarceration, students spendmore time with their Life Skills teach-ers than with anyone else.

Because obtaining unusually capableinstructors was of the utmost impor-tance, Hobler instituted a lengthyscreening process. He first assembledan eight-member panel that includednot only the four institutions’ educa-tion supervisors but also the directorof the State Department of Veterans’Affairs (a former educator) and theState supervisor of adult education.Panel subgroups shared the work ofnarrowing down the 95 applicants to20, mindful of the two most importantqualifications—experience with bothadult and correctional education. Theentire panel then interviewed each ofthe 20 remaining candidates, individu-ally rating each applicant’s responses

Program Focus 13

PROGRAM FOCUS

Janet Lopez, a former Life Skills teacher,tells the following story to illustrate anumber of features of the program, in-cluding the need to address students’ im-mediate needs, the highly charged emo-tions the course can elicit, the value ofstudent honesty and trust in each other, theneed to learn to control violent behavior,and the importance of caring for others.

When I noticed that a big-time drugdealer was extremely upset during oneclass, I took him outside the room to askwhat was going on. He told me that he hadjust learned that his 15-year-old daughterhad gotten pregnant while he was in prisonand was moving out of their home. He wasso angry he wanted to hit someone, so hefelt he should go off by himself so hewouldn’t have the opportunity. Instead, Iproposed that he return to class and doa role play of the situation, but I empha-sized that he could not hit anyone. “Youcan curse and scream if you need to,” Isaid. He agreed to give it a chance. So Iexplained the problem to the class andasked for two volunteers to play his daugh-ter and the daughter’s boyfriend. Severalmacho inmates offered to be the daughter!

Tension—and Improvisation—in a Life Skills Class

to a common set of questions on a1 to 5 scale with written comments.

Teaching two 3-hour classes 5 days aweek for 4 straight months and oftendealing with emotionally charged is-sues can be exhausting and stressful.As one teacher said, “Sometimes I’mso drained from doing MRT in mymorning class that I just don’t do itin my afternoon class.” Despite thesechallenges, on their evaluation formsstudents routinely rate the teachersvery highly—from 3.57 to 3.77 on a4-point scale. Students also commentspontaneously about how energizedand caring the instructors are:

Miss Eagle teaches everything for 3hours, and she’s always pushing us.Where does she getthe energy?

—A Life Skillsstudent

After 2 months, Ididn’t want to haveto get up so earlyany more, butMiss Izzy [IsabelCompaniony] cameand woke me up for2 straight weeks. Iwas very impressedthat she wouldbother to do that.Another time, I be-

An inmate in the women’s prison writes her answers to a mathexercise on the chalkboard for other students to check.

The father, playing himself, started out byasking his “daughter,” “You know I loveyou, you’re my baby. Why did you dothis? You’re so young!” He then begancrying, repeating, “I love you.” Then heturned to the “boyfriend” and yelled,“How dare you! You’re stealing my daugh-ter. How can you provide for her?”

“Boyfriend”: “But I love her.”

Father: “But you’re a child. How can yousupport her?”

“Boyfriend”: “By working in my family’sconstruction business. I’m sorry, but I willtake care of our child.”

Eventually, the father got up and held his“daughter,” saying, “Please don’t leavethe house, I’ll help you.” Then he began tocalm down. He never did hit anyone. In-stead, after he graduated, Leroi Coit andI made him a peer counselor in the pod.After his release, he took classes to be-come a cook, and now he’s a chef. Hereconciled with his daughter right afterhis release. His daughter did move out,but her child’s father is supporting herand the baby. He told me, “You saved mewith that role play.”

Ph

oto

by L

ew

is C. T

idb

all P

rod

uctio

ns

came very frustrated and said I wasquitting, but she offered me help afterclass and that made me see it through.

—A Life Skills Student

Evidence ofEffectivenessStudents and teachers alike are enthu-siastic about Delaware’s Life SkillsProgram.

I was on my unit doing nothing—gambling and talking slick and hus-tling inside the institution—the samethings I did on the outside, and I gottired of it. So when my friend enrolled,I decided to enroll. It broke the mo-notony of jail, gave me structure. TheCage Your Rage book and videos, andacting out prison scenes—for example,someone knocking over your cup ofcoffee—helped me deal with my anger.I used to get angry if someone on thebasketball court called a foul. Theprogram taught me a different per-spective—considering the conse-quence of my actions.

—A released program graduate

PROGRAM FOCUS


Many family members of inmates havetold me they see improvements in theirson (or brother), such as more fre-quent and honest communication, andletters thanking them for taking care oftheir children and talking about theirplans when they are released. Somefamily members tell me, “This is thefirst program he’s ever stuck with.”

—George Dean, Life Skills teacher

What do the evaluation data say? Dur-ing the first 6 program cycles betweenJune 1994 and November 1996, 826students enrolled in the program. Nearly85 percent of enrollees graduated—699inmates. Of the 15 percent (127 enroll-ees) who dropped out, most (64) leftbecause of institutional movement (e.g.,to work release centers) or early release.Forty-four students dropped out, and 19were expelled for behavior problems.

Of the 826 students enrolled in theprogram, 68 percent were African-American, 5 percent Hispanic, and 26percent non-Hispanic white. Nearly halfthe students (49 percent) were betweenthe ages of 20 and 29, and more thanone-third (35 percent) were between 30and 39 years old. Thirty-eight percent ofstudents were sentenced for a crime ofviolence; 39 percent were convicted ofnonviolent drug offenses.

Marsha Miller, an outside evaluator,established two principal impactobjectives for the Life Skills Programand then collected the data and as-sessed how well each objective wasachieved during the program’s first3 years.11 To measure achievement,Miller attempted to establish controlgroups of inmates in each of the fourinstitutions by randomly assigningapplicants to the program or to a con-trol group. However, because of the

small pool of eligible inmates in theprisons and other reasons, she wasable to establish a control group onlyfor the first program cycle at two pris-ons (with 25 inmates and 23 inmates,respectively) and for the third programcycle at a third prison (34 inmates).In the fourth institution, the women’sprison, Miller used sentenced inmatesleaving the institution in 1989 as acomparison group. The principalobjectives for the program follow.

Objective 1: Better Scores.After graduation, students will have asignificantly greater average score inacademic and applied skills than con-trol group inmates. Because nearly athird of the sentenced inmates in Dela-ware participate in other educationalprogramming, any increases in academicperformance among Life Skills Programstudents might have been due to theirother course work. Therefore, comparingstudents’ scores with those of other in-mates would have been the next step inevaluating the program’s effects. How-ever, most inmates in the control groups,all of whom had been tested before theywere excluded from the Life Skills Pro-gram, refused to answer additional surveyquestions once they learned they couldnot enroll. Pretest and posttest resultsamong Life Skills participants did showstatistically significant improvements inself-esteem, more appropriate expressionsof anger, and constructive attitudes to-ward finding employment after release(e.g., planning to rely on a job searchrather than on luck).

Objective 2: ReducedRecidivism.Student recidivism will be 7 percentagepoints lower than the control group. The

program defined recidivism as a pendingcharge or a misdemeanor or felony convic-tion in the first year following release.Marsha Miller concluded that 7 percentwas the minimum reduction in recidivismthat would enable the State to recoup thecosts of the program by avoiding criminaljustice system expenses to arrest, pros-ecute, and incarcerate this percentage ofex-offenders.

The data for program participantsinclude information on inmates whofailed to graduate. Because controlgroup members were free to attendother programs, Miller could assessonly the value of the Life Skills Pro-gram as an enhancement to existingcorrectional programs, not theprogram’s value compared with norehabilitation programming.

Overall, the recidivism objective wasmet. For the first program cycle, therate for Life Skills students in all fourprisons was 19 percent, and for thecontrol group members, it was 27percent—a reduction of eight points.However, at one of the four prisonsthe recidivism rate was higher for LifeSkills students than for control groupmembers. Students in this prison re-mained incarcerated longer after pro-gram graduation than students in theother prisons; the program may be lesseffective when too much time elapsesbetween graduation and release.

The recidivism objective was met atthree of four institutions. However,there was difficulty establishing controlgroups for every cycle in every institu-tion. This leaves open the possibilitythat the program achieved its recidi-vism objective because it served themost motivated or capable inmates.

Program Focus 15

PROGRAM FOCUS

In addition, the numbers in allfour institutions are smallbecause as of 1996 few in-mates had been released intothe community for at least 1year. As a result, even whencycle one students from allthree institutions and controlgroup members are combined,the recidivism difference isnot statistically significant.

As more students and control groupmembers have lived in the communityfor at least 1 year, it will be possible toprovide more valid assessments of theprogram’s impact on recidivism. Further-more, Miller is now comparing recidi-vism rates between the groups over a2-year period. The cumulative second-year results for female students (com-pared with the 1989 baseline females)and for male students (compared with thecontrol group members) in the program’sfirst cycle are promising. Whereas only3 of 20 female Life Skills participantshave been charged or convicted 2 yearsafter release, 171 of 335 females in thecomparison group (51 percent) haverecidivated after 2 years. Similarly, 9 of40 male Life Skills participants haverecidivated in the 2 years since their re-lease, compared with 10 of 20 controlgroup members. Miller concludes, “If the2-year cumulative recidivism resultscontinue to be so promising when allinmates from the first program cycle canbe included (once they have been re-leased into the community for at least2 years), then Life Skills will have morethan met its recidivism objective and theresults will be statistically significant.”

Replicating theProgramThe following keys to implementingDelaware’s program successfully arewithin the grasp of any jurisdiction:

● Involve local stakeholders (e.g., arepresentative from the State Departmentof Labor) and other top prison officials(e.g., the commissioner and head ofsecurity) in planning the program.

● Hire highly qualified teachers,send them for MRT training, andencourage them to be creative.

● House students in the same pod orwork with security staff to arrange fortheir timely transport to and from class.

In replicating the program, John Liptak,its first director, warns against assumingthat every prison in a State system oper-ates similarly. He found that each insti-tution in Delaware was unique, with itsown informal rules and regulations. “Soyou have to deal with each facility as anindependent, unique entity, rather thanassuming that the commissioner will beable to arrange for consistent treatmentfor the program in every facility,” Liptaksaid. Furthermore, for the evaluation tobe valid, it is essential that the programoperate consistently within each institu-tion—for example, inmates are recruited

using similar methods, teachershave the same supplies andfacilities, and the same numberof inmates participate in eachclass.

Liptak advised, “Work closelywith the wardens. Meet withthem in advance to describewhat you wish to do so they

understand your plans and can anticipatepotential problems at their institutions.”For example, although the commissionersaid that students would be entitled togood time for participating, one wardenfelt that the program did not qualify forgood time. Some institutions, but notothers, were concerned about suchthings as teachers having scissors.Liptak reported, “I spent the majority ofmy time the first year dealing with war-dens, deputy wardens, and captains iron-ing out all these issues.”

Building in evaluation from the startand developing an effective approachto supporting students after they arereleased from prison are importantwhen replicating a Delaware-style LifeSkills Program. Delaware’s programincorporated an evaluation that playeda major role in motivating the legisla-ture to provide funding after FederalGovernment support ended. Althoughthe program was unable to implementa postrelease support component, pro-grams in other jurisdictions have man-aged to develop aftercare servicesusing funding from their departmentsof corrections and from grants.12

Other jurisdictions seeking help inadopting Delaware’s approach to alife skills program can find additionalresources in “Sources for FurtherInformation.”

Students review the instructions for completing an MRT exercise.

Ph

oto

by

Le

wis

C.

Tid

ba

ll P

rod

uct

ion

s

PROGRAM FOCUS


Sources for More InformationFor information on implementing aDelaware-style Life Skills Program,contact:

Bruce Hobler, Ph.D.Former Project DirectorDelaware Life Skills Program2653 Abington RoadWilmington, DE 19810Telephone: 302–475–1496

The Delaware Department of Correc-tion used part of its Federal funding todevelop a videotape, largely as a tool fortraining its instructors in MRT but also topromote replication of the program in otherjurisdictions. For a copy of the tape andthe final evaluation report, contact:

Anthony R. FarinaChief of Media RelationsDelaware Department of Correction80 Monrovia AvenueSmyrna, DE 19977Telephone: 302–739–5601Fax: 302–653–2853E-mail: [email protected]

The Office of Correctional Education(OCE) within the U.S. Department ofEducation was created by Congress in1991 to provide technical assistance, grantfunding, and research data to the correc-tions and correctional education fields. Tospeak with a program specialist and toreceive relevant publications such asChoosing Life Skills: A Guide for Select-ing Life Skills Programs for Adult andJuvenile Offenders, contact:

Richard SmithDirectorOffice of Correctional EducationOffice of Vocational and Adult EducationU.S. Department of Education600 Independence Avenue S.W.MES 4529Washington, DC 20202–7242Telephone: 202–205–5621Fax: 202–401–2615World Wide Web site: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE/OCE

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) isthe research and development agency ofthe U.S. Department of Justice. For infor-mation about NIJ’s efforts in corrections,program development, and corporate part-nership development, contact:

Marilyn C. MosesProgram ManagerNational Institute of Justice810 Seventh Street N.W.Washington, DC 20531Telephone: 202–514–6205Fax: 202–307–6256

The National Institute of Justice establishedthe National Criminal Justice ReferenceService (NCJRS) in 1972 to serve as anational and international clearinghouse forexchange of criminal justice information.For more information about topical searches,bibliographies, custom searches, and otheravailable services, contact:

NCJRSP.O. Box 6000Rockville, MD 20849–6000Telephone: 800–851–3420 (8:30 a.m. to 7p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday)E-mail: [email protected]

For specific criminal justice questions orrequests via the Internet, send an e-mailmessage to the above address.

The Office of Correctional Job Trainingand Placement (OCJTP) within the Na-tional Institute of Corrections was created inMarch 1995 to:

● Cooperate with and coordinate the ef-forts of other Federal agencies in the areas ofjob training and placement.

● Collect and disseminate information onoffender job training and placement pro-grams, accomplishments, and employmentoutcomes.

● Provide training to develop staff compe-tencies in working with offenders and ex-offenders.

● Provide technical assistance to State andlocal training and employment agencies.

For more information, contact:

John E. MooreCoordinatorOffice of Correctional Job Training and PlacementNational Institute of Corrections320 First Street N.W.Washington, DC 20534Telephone: 800–995–6423, ext. 147

The National Institute of Correctionsoffers literature searches and free techni-cal assistance regarding prison and jailprogramming. Contact:

NIC Information Center1860 Industrial Circle, Suite ALongmont, CO 80501Telephone: 800–877-1461

The Correctional Education Associa-tion (CEA) , affiliated with the AmericanCorrectional Association (ACA), is aninternational professional organizationserving education program needs withinthe field of corrections. Membershipincludes teachers and other communitycorrections program personnel. Membersreceive a quarterly journal and newsletter,an annual directory, and a yearbook. CageYour Rage: An Inmate’s Guide to AngerControl videotapes and handbooks areavailable from ACA’s Division of Com-munications and Publications (see note 9for details). Annual conferences are heldin each of CEA’s nine regions and manyof its State chapters. One of the regionshosts an international conference withworkshops on successful instructionalstrategies. Contact:

Alice TracyAssistant DirectorCorrectional Education Association4380 Forbes BoulevardLanham, MD 20706Telephone: 301–918–1915Fax: 301–918–1846

Correctional Counseling, Inc. staff de-veloped the materials and training forMoral Reconation Therapy (MRT) andoffer MRT training courses and publica-tions, such as How to Escape Your Prison,for correctional educators. In addition,they offer other publications on topicssuch as anger management, counselingapproaches for offenders, relapse preven-tion, job readiness, family support, andothers. Additional information may beobtained from:

Ken Robinson, Ed.D.President, Correctional Counseling, Inc.3155 Hickory Hill Road, Suite 104Memphis, TN 38115Telephone: 901–360–1564Fax: 901–365–6146E-mail: [email protected]

Program Focus 17

PROGRAM FOCUS

Notes1. The literature on moral reasoning

and criminal justice is reviewed inMacKenzie, D.L., and R. Brame,“Moral Reconation Therapy andProblem Behavior in the Okla-homa Department of Corrections,”Unpublished Paper, College Park:University of Maryland, n.d.: 6–7.

2. All 18 programs were required toevaluate their efforts. However,the Delaware Life Skills Programwas chosen to be the topic of aProgram Focus because its evalua-tion was thorough and it showedpromising results. In addition, theState agreed to fund the programafter Federal support ended.

3. Because the minimum-security areaat the Delaware Correctional Centeris a separate part of the prison, onlyminimum- and medium-securityinmates were able to enroll in theprogram. As a result, during prepa-rations for the third program cycle,one Life Skills class was placed in amedium-security area in the institu-tion, while the other remained in theminimum-security area.

4. The MRT curriculum is based onresearch into stages of moral andcognitive development previouslyexplored, particularly by LawrenceKohlberg and Jean Piaget. SeeKohlberg, L., “Moral Stages andMoralization: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach,” inMoral Development and Behavior:Theory, Research, and SocialIssues, ed. T. Lickona, New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1976:31–53; Piaget, J., and B. Inhelder,

The Psychology of the Child, NewYork: Basic Books, 1969.

5. Little, G.L., and K.D. Robinson,How to Escape Your Prison,Memphis, Tennessee: Eagle WingBooks, Inc., 1986. To obtain cop-ies, contact Correctional Counsel-ing, Inc., listed in the Sources forFurther Information section.

6. Little, G.L., K.D. Robinson, K.D.Burnette, and E.S. Swan, “Seven-Year Recidivism of FelonyOffenders Treated with MRT,”Cognitive-Behavioral TreatmentReview 4 (1995): 6.

7. MacKenzie, D.L., R. Brame, A.R.Waggoner, and K.D. Robinson,Examination of the Impact ofMoral Reconation Therapy in theOklahoma Department of Correc-tions, Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Justice, NationalInstitute of Justice, 1996, NCJ163413. For free copies, contactthe National Criminal JusticeReference Service, Box 6000,Rockville, MD 20849–6000,call 800–851–3420, or [email protected].

The researchers estimated partici-pants’ likelihood of “failure”while in prison (i.e.,misconduct)by comparing the number of inci-dents they were involved in beforeenrolling in MRT with the numberthey committed after graduation.The researchers also estimated aprobability of failure based oninmate characteristics that areknown to be associated withmis-conduct, such as sex, age, andcriminal history. The researchers

estimated participants’ likelihoodof failure after release (recidivism)in two similar ways. The research-ers also examined whether pro-gram participants enrolled in MRTwho were serving a second prisonsentence reoffended a third timeafter release. For programparticipants who were first-timeoffenders, the researchers usedcharacteristics known to be associ-ated with recidivism to determinewhether the releasees could havebeen expected to recidivate if theyhad not enrolled in MRT.

8. Marsha Miller, the program’sindependent evaluator, suggeststhat to be most effective MRTneeds to be incorporated into a lifeskills program. “First,” she says,“inmates become adept at sayingwhat MRT instructors want tohear—for example, verbalizingsuch goals as getting married andfinding work—but without neces-sarily making the commitment toachieve these goals. When MRTis part of a life skills program,instructors have the opportunity toverify whether inmates are actu-ally taking the steps necessary toachieve their goals, such as sign-ing up for a GED or Adult BasicEducation course or enrolling in aprison industry program. Second,inmates usually have no ideaabout how to go about meetingtheir goals—they don’t haveinformation about education andtraining programs available tothem after release, about how toopen a checking account andbalance their checkbook, andabout all the other informationand skills most citizens take for

PROGRAM FOCUS


granted. A life skills program isnecessary to give inmates the toolsthey need to achieve their goals.”John Liptak, the program’s firstdirector, observes, “Life Skills isthe best way to run the entire prisonsystem education department.Abolish GED courses and othereducation classes and integratethem into a life skills program,because developing academic skillsis not enough for inmates. Theyalso need to learn decisionmakingskills, how to write a resume, andother practical skills that will en-able them to succeed after release.”

9. To obtain copies of Cage YourRage: An Inmate’s Guide to AngerControl, write the American Cor-rectional Association (ACA),Division of Communications andPublications, 4380 Forbes Boule-vard, Lanham, MD 20706, or call1–800–222–5646. The book is$10 for ACA members ($12.50 fornonmembers), and the package offour videotapes is $368 for mem-bers ($460 for nonmembers).

10. Few studies have examinedwhether inmates who maintain orimprove ties with family membersare less likely to reoffend thaninmates who do not keep theseties. One study found that inmateswho had continuing visits fromfamily members had lower recidi-vism rates than inmates who didnot. The researchers reported thatdifferential motivation among theinmates who maintained familyties was unlikely to have beenresponsible for the reduced recidi-vism rates because the inmates didnot exhibit increased motivation in

other respects. For example, theyhad the same rates of disciplinaryreports and participation in treat-ment programs as the other in-mates. (Holt, N., and D. Miller,Exploration in Inmate-FamilyRelationships, Report No. 46,Sacramento: California Depart-ment of Corrections, January1972.) Another study examined400 inmates who participated in afamily reunion program in a NewYork State prison that includedmeeting privately with familymembers on facility grounds. Thisstudy found that program partici-pants who had been released forat least 1 year had a significantlylower recidivism rate (19.6 per-cent) than the rate projected forthe overall population of inmates(26.5 percent) (MacDonald, D.G.,“Follow-Up Study Sample ofFamily Reunion Program Partici-pants,” Albany: New York StateDepartment of Correctional Ser-vices, Division of Program Plan-ning, 1986). Findings of at leasttwo other empirical studies sug-gest there may be a relationshipbetween inmate-family ties duringincarceration and recidivism(Hairston, C.F., “Family Ties Dur-ing Imprisonment: Do They Influ-ence Future Criminal Activity?”Federal Probation 52 (1) (1988):48–52). While suggestive, none ofthese studies involved the use of acontrol group, so it remains pos-sible that the inmates who main-tained their family ties would haveexperienced relatively low rates ofrecidivism even if they had notkept in touch. They may havesimply been more motivated to

succeed, or there might have beena nurturing family structure wait-ing to support them after release,regardless of whether they hadmaintained family ties whileincarcerated.

11. Miller, M.L., “Evaluation of theLife Skills Program,” Wilmington,Delaware: Division of Correc-tional Education, Department ofCorrection, 1997.

12. See, for example, the followingProgram Focuses from NIJ: Texas’Project RIO (Re-Integration ofOffenders), NCJ 168637;Chicago’s Safer Foundation: ARoad Back for Ex-Offenders, NCJ167575; and Successful Job Place-ment for Ex-Offenders: The Centerfor Employment Opportunities,NCJ 168102. For free copies, con-tact the National Criminal JusticeReference Service, Box 6000,Rockville, MD 20849–6000,800–851–3420. For online copies,access NIJ on the World WideWeb (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij).

Program Focus 19

PROGRAM FOCUS

The National Institute of Justice is a compo-nent of the Office of Justice Programs, whichalso includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance,the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,and the Office for Victims of Crime.

The Office of Correctional Education is adivision of the Office of Vocational and AdultEducation, U.S. Department of Education.

The National Institute of Corrections is acomponent of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

NCJ 169589 August 1998

About This Study

This document was written by PeterFinn, Senior Research Associate, AbtAssociates Inc. Findings and conclu-sions of the research reported here arethose of the author and do not neces-sarily reflect the official position orpolicies of the U.S. Department ofJustice.

On the cover: Students listenattentively to another student makingan important point about an MRTexercise.

(Photo by Lewis C. Tidball Productions,New Castle, Delaware).

JUSTINFO — the online newsletter of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service

JUSTINFO

Important news from the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the Office of JusticePrograms — National Institute of Justice • Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention• Office for Victims of Crime • Bureau of Justice Statistics • Bureau of Justice Assistance

★ Grants and solicitations— Where, when, and how to apply

★ Recent publications— Content summaries and ordering information

★ Upcoming conferences— Themes, speakers, andregistration information

★ Other information you need to do your job well— Distributed on the 1stand 15th of every month

Get the latest JUSTice

INFOrmationJUST when you need it!

★ Send an e-mail to [email protected].★ Leave the subject line blank.★ In the body of the message, type

subscribe justinfo your nameFor examplesubscribe justinfo Jane Smith

Subscribing is easy:Subscribing is easy:

No online access?Call 800-851-3420 to request thecurrent issue via Fax-on-Demand.

Or read JUSTINFO online athttp://www.ncjrs.org/justinfo/

National Institute of Justice Office of Correctional ...

Documents

Transcript of National Institute of Justice Office of Correctional ...