NCJ Number
165057
Journal
Forum on Corrections Research Volume: 8 Issue: 3 Dated: September 1996 Pages: 30-31
Date Published
September 1996
Length
2 pages
Annotation
This review of offender programs by the Auditor General of Canada indicates the current thrust of the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) is to focus resources on offender programs that research demonstrates have the most potential for reducing recidivism.
Abstract
Some offender programs try to influence attitudes and behavior indirectly by conveying information, while other offender programs try to change behavior directly. The CSC's treatment of sex offenders, for example, varies considerably by region. A high-risk sex offender may receive a year of treatment in a psychiatric facility in one region but may receive just 6 months of nonresidential treatment in another region. Costs of sex offender programs also vary widely, even within the same risk level. In general, because a disproportionate amount of resources may be spent on a few offenders, the CSC needs to focus on the most cost-effective correctional programs. In addition, the CSC needs to establish a continuum of programs that adequately support offenders in their transition from the institution to the community. Many of the CSC's community-based programs are essentially duplicates of those offered in institutions. Because research indicates offenders who find good jobs after release are less likely to be reincarcerated, the CSC offers educational, vocational, and employment programs to help offenders acquire job skills. Both educational and vocational training programs are less expensive per inmate than institutional employment and appear to better target those who need such programs, whereas offenders placed in some form of institutional employment do not necessarily need this type of training. The CSC has improved its programs and its efforts to reduce recidivism through strong rehabilitation programming are laudable. However, the CSC has only limited cost information on overall programming efforts and correctional managers do not focus sufficient attention on determining the best match of resources to the overall objective of reintegrating offenders safely into the community. 1 note