Gendered Adherence: Correctional Officers And Therapeutic Reform In A Reentry Facility

How do correctional officers (COs) adhere to changing workplace philosophy and practices during interactions with inmates? This study explores COs’ perceptions and interactions during organizational change to examine how different factors (such as gender, position/rank, and reason for interaction) affect implementation. Using observations and interviews with COs, our data suggest gender-based differences in CO adherence when implementing redesigned workplace practices. Gendered adherence to using evidence-based practices within custody environments is potentially impactful on the success of the reform. Future training and skill development should address these gender-based findings to improve adherence to organizational change processes

Adding positive reinforcement in justice settings: acceptability and feasibility.

Although contingency management (CM) approaches are among the most promising methods for initiating drug abstinence (S. T. Higgins, S. M. Alessi, & R. L. Dantona, 2002; S. T. Higgins, S. H. Heil, & J. P. Lussier, 2004), adoption and implementation of CM protocols into treatment programs are both challenging and infrequent. In criminal justice agencies, where roughly 70% of clients report substance abuse issues (F. S. Taxman, K. L. Cropsey, D. W. Young, & H. Wexler, 2007), CM interventions are virtually nonexistent. The Justice Steps (JSTEPS) study uses a longitudinal, mixed-method design to examine the implementation of a CM-based protocol in five justice settings. This article presents qualitative data collected during Phase 1 of the JSTEPS project regarding the acceptability and feasibility of CM in these justice settings. The study finds a level of acceptability (find CM tolerable) and feasibility (find CM suitable) within justice agencies, but with some challenges. These challenges are reflected in the following: (a) incorporating too many desired target behaviors into CM models; (b) facing intraorganizational challenges when designing CM systems; and (c) emphasizing sanctions over rewards despite the evidence-base for positive reinforcers. These findings have implications for advancing the dissemination, adoption, and implementation of evidence-based treatments (and CM in particular) in criminal justice settings

“I Just Don’t Know What to Believe”: Sensemaking during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Criminal Legal Involved Communities

During the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, those involved with the criminal legal system experience disproportionate vulnerability to infection, transmission, and mortality, facing additional systemic barriers due to criminal legal involvement (CLI) (e.g., prior incarcerations or probationary status affecting employability or housing security). We use Weick’s (1979) model of sensemaking as a theoretical framework to inform our examination of CLI individuals’ experiences during the pandemic. The primary objective of this paper is to explore the process of sensemaking amid misinformation, trust/mistrust, and vulnerability during the pandemic among CLI communities in three central states (Illinois, Louisiana, and Arkansas). We conducted seven online focus groups (n = 44), between December 2020 and January 2021, from the targeted communities about their awareness of misinformation, trusted or distrusted sources, attitudes about COVID-19 health behaviors (including testing, protective behaviors such as mask-wearing and social distancing, and vaccination), and experiences with the criminal legal system during the pandemic. The concept of equivocality was at the core of the narratives shared among participants, with uncertainty emerging as a meta-theme across all focus groups. The findings of this study should prove useful for those who are developing messaging to combat mis/disinformation and overcome mis/distrust with the medical system and government institutions among those who are disenfranchised

“I Just Don’t Know What to Believe”: Sensemaking during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Criminal Legal Involved Communities

During the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, those involved with the criminal legal system experience disproportionate vulnerability to infection, transmission, and mortality, facing additional systemic barriers due to criminal legal involvement (CLI) (e.g., prior incarcerations or probationary status affecting employability or housing security). We use Weick’s (1979) model of sensemaking as a theoretical framework to inform our examination of CLI individuals’ experiences during the pandemic. The primary objective of this paper is to explore the process of sensemaking amid misinformation, trust/mistrust, and vulnerability during the pandemic among CLI communities in three central states (Illinois, Louisiana, and Arkansas). We conducted seven online focus groups (n = 44), between December 2020 and January 2021, from the targeted communities about their awareness of misinformation, trusted or distrusted sources, attitudes about COVID-19 health behaviors (including testing, protective behaviors such as mask-wearing and social distancing, and vaccination), and experiences with the criminal legal system during the pandemic. The concept of equivocality was at the core of the narratives shared among participants, with uncertainty emerging as a meta-theme across all focus groups. The findings of this study should prove useful for those who are developing messaging to combat mis/disinformation and overcome mis/distrust with the medical system and government institutions among those who are disenfranchised

Community Correctional Agents\u27 Views of Medication-Assisted Treatment: Examining their Influence on Treatment Referrals and Community Supervision Practices.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol and opioid use disorders are common among adults under community supervision. While several medications (medication assisted treatment or MAT) are FDA-approved to treat such disorders, they are underutilized with this population despite established effectiveness at decreasing substance use. This paper examines how community correctional agents\u27 understanding of addiction and views of MAT influence their professional actions regarding addiction medications. METHODS: A total of 118 semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with community correctional agents taking part in the CJ-DATS MATICCE implementation study across 20 parole/probation offices in nine US states. Using grounded theory methodology and an iterative analytic approach, issues of role perception, views of MAT, current treatment referral and community supervisions practices were explored. RESULTS: Agents often had limited autonomy to make direct treatment referrals, regardless of their views of MAT, as they were required to follow court orders and their organization\u27s policies and procedures. Within some organizations community correctional agents held sufficient autonomy to make direct treatment referrals, with agents struggling to reconcile their desire to support their clients who needed MAT with concerns about the abuse potential of opioid agonist medications. Viewing MAT as a treatment of last resort was counterbalanced by the view that it was an effective evidence-based practice. Agents described how MAT impacted their ability to supervise clients and how their knowledge and understanding of MAT was directly influenced by watching their clients who were successful or unsuccessful on MAT. Even those agents who were more accepting of MAT were largely unsupportive of it long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: Community correctional agents\u27 views of MAT were influenced by their understanding of addiction as well as their experiences supervising clients receiving treatment with medications, but whether or not MAT referrals were made was not always within their control

Gendered Adherence: Correctional Officers and Therapeutic Reform in a Reentry Facility

How do correctional officers (COs) adhere to changing workplace philosophy and practices during interactions with inmates? This study explores COs’ perceptions and interactions during organizational change to examine how different factors (such as gender, position/rank, and reason for interaction) affect implementation. Using observations and interviews with COs, our data suggest gender-based differences in CO adherence when implementing redesigned workplace practices. Gendered adherence to using evidence-based practices within custody environments is potentially impactful on the success of the reform. Future training and skill development should address these gender-based findings to improve adherence to organizational change processes