evaluación de la motivación y rehabilitación

7/28/2019 Evaluacin de la motivacin y Rehabilitacin

1/48

Evaluacin de la motivacin y RehabilitacinHabilidades cognitivas como el Programa de DesarrolloImplementado en Juvenil ISP en Colorado08 1996

Escrito por

Suzanne PullenPreparado por la Divisin de Justicia Criminal de ColoradoKim Ingls, Director de InvestigacinBill Woodward, director de la DivisinPatrick C. Ahlstrom, Director Ejecutivo del Departamento de Seguridad Pblica

Este documento fue preparado bajo la subvencin nmero 93-IJ-CX-K017 Instituto

Nacional de Justicia, EE.UU.Departamento de Justicia y el nmero de concesin 93-JD-14-14 de la Justicia de

Menores y ColoradoPrevencin de la Delincuencia Ley del Fondo.Los puntos de vista en este documento

son las de los autores yno representan necesariamente la posicin oficial del Departamento de Justicia de

EE.UU., el ColoradoJusticia Juvenil y Prevencin de la Delincuencia del Consejo, o el Departamento de

Salud Pblica de ColoradoLa seguridad, la Divisin de Justicia Criminal.

Pgina 22

Pgina 3Reconocimientos

Nos gustara agradecer a todo el personal de la Oficina de Servicios de Libertad

Condicional, los jefes,supervisores, instructores certificados, y en especial a los oficiales que participaron enJISPy siempre a nuestro personal con la informacin que poda. Este proyecto fuelos miembros del equipo de evaluacin que se sentaba a travs de muchas reuniones en

las que martilladodiscutieron los resultados a lo largo del camino. Esperamos que este informe ser msTambin nos gustara dar las gracias al Instituto Nacional de Justicia, los monitores de

la concesin,Horney y el Dr. Tim Bynum, para trabajar con nosotros en este proyecto. Por ltimo,Consejo por su ayuda mediante la financiacin de la parte de la integridad del programa

de estePor ltimo, queremos agradecer a la Sra. Elizabeth Fabiano y el Dr. Frank PorporinoReentrenamiento para los funcionarios previamente capacitados para impartir el

programa, quepara revisar las sesiones grabadas en video de la ejecucin del programa, que era unacrtica

Pgina 44

Pgina 55

Tabla de contenidos07


2/48

Prlogo09

Resumen Ejecutivo13Captulo 1

Antecedentes del Programa de Habilidades Cognitivas en Colorado15Captulo 2Descripcin del Razonamiento y RehabilitacinEl Razonamiento y RehabilitacinRazonamiento y el contenido del Programa de RehabilitacinExpectativas de los participantesExpectativas de los Entrenadores21Captulo 3Mtodos de investigacin: Procesos y Evaluacin de Resultados

Evaluacin de DiseoLimitaciones o deficiencias de los instrumentosMedidas de aplicacinProceso de Evaluacin de Procedimientos para la recoleccinResultado procedimientos de recopilacin de datosAnlisis de Datos31Captulo 4Resultados de la InvestigacinLos oficiales de libertad condicional particip en el estudioLos clientes que participan en el Programa de R & RResultados de la InvestigacinResumen41Captulo 5Recomendaciones45

Bibliografa47

ApndiceA la entrega del programa de Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin

HorarioB Evaluacin Juvenil del instrumento de riesgoC pre y posprueba EntrevistaHorarios, Protocolo, yConfidencialidad de la InformacinDeclaracin

Pgina 66D Evaluacin de la Implementacindel Razonamiento y RehabilitacinPrograma para la cognitiva JISP

Programa de EvaluacinPgina 7


3/48

7PrlogoUna de las conclusiones presentadas en este informe tiene implicaciones importantes

para ambosjusticia penal los administradores del programa y los evaluadores del programa. A

pesar de que el informeuna variedad de hallazgos de este estudio multifactico, de la importacin central es elhecho de queel programa probablemente no fue implementado como fue diseado originalmente.

Nuestroevaluacin se identificaron una serie de explicaciones que pueden explicar este

hallazgo.Por ejemplo, la semana 18, grupo cerrado (es decir, todos los participantes deben

comenzar aal mismo tiempo) es difcil de implementar en un entorno donde la tpicaduracin de la estancia es inferior a seis meses, las habilidades del grupo de facilitacin

no puede venirnaturalmente, a los oficiales de libertad condicional que tradicionalmente pueden

trabajar uno-a-uno, yestructurados los mecanismos de control de calidad no exista en el momento del

estudio (1994 -, 1995). La comprensin de estos problemas de ejecucin que nos ayuden en la

explicacin de todos loslos resultados decepcionantes resultados: en promedio, los jvenes que participaron en

elprograma puede haber mejorado sus habilidades cognitivas, pero no lo hizo mejor enalgunos denuestras medidas de resultado en comparacin a los menores similares que no

participaron enel programa cognitivo. En unas cuantas medidas, incluyendo la reincidencia, lo

hicieronalgo peor.Tenemos la suerte de que nuestros financiadores de investigacin - el Instituto Nacional

de Justicia y elColorado Consejo de Justicia Juvenil - junto con el Departamento Judicial del Estado, ylas agencias de libertad condicional que participaron en el estudio, cree que el alcance

de

Esta investigacin debe ser lo suficientemente amplio como para hacer todas laspreguntas pertinentes. Estecolaboracin dio lugar a nuestra realizacin de un proceso y una evaluacin de

resultados, ynos impidi la conclusin de que el razonamiento y el programa de rehabilitacin seno un impacto positivo en los menores de edad en nuestro estudio.La investigacin de evaluacin por lo general se centra en el programa de un

delincuente siguiente comportamientola participacin. De particular inters, por supuesto, es si el delincuente esdetenido de nuevo despus de un perodo de tiempo especificado. Si el delincuente

vuelve a la delincuencia despus de

participacin en el programa, podemos suponer que el programa no fue eficaz, o puedeque


4/48

la conclusin de que era un mal ajuste entre las necesidades del delincuente y lo que elprogramaproporcionada. Estas conclusiones depender de la conducta del infractor despus del

programaterminacin.

Pero hay cuestiones crticas provisional. La cuestin fundamental essi el programa se llev a cabo como estaba previsto originalmente. Este es el clsicoproceso de evaluacin de la pregunta, una pregunta que a menudo se eludi con el finderealizar una investigacin real: la recopilacin de datos nueva detencin de un grupo de

delincuentes queparticiparon en el programa en comparacin con un grupo que no lo hicieron.Ejecucin de programas y gestin son tareas difciles. El presente informedocumentos de algunas de las dificultades, y el estudio pone de relieve el valor delas evaluaciones de proceso a los administradores de programa y de la justicia criminal

ms grande

de la comunidad.Pgina 8

8Pgina 9

1 El programa de R & R es obligatoria para todos los clientes JISP a menos que seanconsideradas por el perodo de pruebaoficial a ser muy perjudicial o tienen caractersticas que les impiden beneficiarse deel programa.9Resumen Ejecutivo

Este informe presenta los resultados de la evaluacin de la Divisin de JusticiaCriminal deel razonamiento y la Rehabilitacin (R & R) cognitiva programa de desarrollo de

habilidades,desarrollado por Ross y Fabiano (1985), ya que se entrega a los menores colocados enJuvenil de Libertad Condicional de Supervisin Intensiva (JISP) en Colorado. El

programa R & Res un componente del programa obligatorio de JISP.1El impacto del programa de R & Renlos adultos se ha evaluado en varios sitios (incluyendo una evaluacin de Colorado),

pero slo se ha evaluado sobre una muestra de adolescentes infractores, y este estudioocurri en una institucin correccional adolescentes en Espaa. Aunque los resultados

dela evaluacin de los adolescentes eran favorables, los resultados no son generalizables aColorado.Las preguntas de investigacin que guan la investigacin en curso fueron los

siguientes:1) Es el programa entregado correctamente?2) Es la integridad del programa de lograr y mantener?3) El programa de trabajo para cambiar las actitudes y comportamientos?4) El programa tiene un impacto en las tarifas de terminacin posterior de la

reincidencia?5) En caso afirmativo, qu tipo de delincuentes le funcion mejor?


5/48

El estudio se llev a cabo en tres fases. Para hacer frente a la integridad del programapregunta (# 1 un # 2 arriba), sesiones de grupo fueron grabadas en vdeo y revisado porunde los desarrolladores originales del programa de R & R, Elizabeth Fabiano.

Responder

la pregunta # implic la administracin de cuestionarios pre-test post-test / a losclientes JISP 3,la mitad de los cuales participaron y la otra mitad de los cuales no participaron en laR & R del programa. Los datos fueron recogidos tambin por los jvenes de

entrevistas antes y despusel programa. Nueva detencin se recogieron datos sobre cada individuo en la muestradireccin de la pregunta # 4 en relacin con los cambios en la reincidencia.

Finalmente, para abordar la pregunta# 5 inclua la identificacin de subgrupos pertinentes delincuente durante la fase de

anlisis deel estudio. Las principales conclusiones del estudio se resumen a continuacin.

Una revisin de las sesiones grabadas en video de la ejecucin del programa revel queel programaentregados por los entrenadores JISP apenas cumplido con las normas de los creadores

del programa R & R.Los resultados de esta revisin es que, mientras que el contenido del programa fueentrega, elproceso de la realidad, transmitir conocimientos y competencias a los

infractoresapenas se produjo. Varias deficiencias se observaron en la cinta de vdeo evaluador,tales como la no vinculacin de la informacin esencial, la falta de preparacin de

clases, la imposibilidad deexplicar conceptos o conceptos que explican de forma incorrecta, inapropiada

combinacin desesiones del programa, y no hacer el programa correspondiente a los adolescentes.Los resultados de la evaluacin del proceso indican que los agentes no JISPsuficiente para preparar la ejecucin del programa. Muchos oficiales informaron que elexigencias de sus tareas ordinarias de trabajo JISP no disponer de tiempo para la

leccin largala preparacin. Adems, de acuerdo a la Sra. Fabiano, los entrenadores no rutinaria

Pgina 1010"Vender" R & R y sus beneficios para los participantes del programa y, en cambio, la

mayora de los funcionarioshizo hincapi en el hecho de que la participacin en el programa cognitivo era unaobligatoriacomponente de JISP.Los resultados de la evaluacin de resultados proporcionan pruebas limitadas para

sugerir quelos delincuentes en JISP que participaron en el programa R & R mejora las habilidades

cognitivasactitudes pro-sociales o el aumento de los niveles de habilidad cognitiva. Una prueba

que mide las actitudesy habilidades que se indican mejora en tres de las nueve reas de la habilidad medida,

en comparacin


6/48

a ninguna mejora entre los miembros del grupo de control. Sin embargo, cuando seutiliza unde distintos instrumentos para medir las mismas actitudes y habilidades, todos los

cambios significativosen las actitudes y los conocimientos entre los miembros del grupo experimental y

control fueronnegativos, lo que sugiere que las habilidades cognitivas y actitudes pro-socialesempeoraron paralos que participaron en el programa R & R, as como para aquellos que no

participar.En cuanto a los cambios de comportamiento criminal, no hay evidencia para sugerir

quedelincuentes que recibieron el programa de R & R eran menos propensos a reincidir

despus determinacin de JISP.Los resultados de los resultados deben tomarse con cautela, sin embargo, debido a que

elprograma que pareca ser mnimamente a cabo en JISP durante el perodo deel estudio en abril de 1994 diciembre de 1995. Los datos del proceso de evaluacin se

reflejaproblemas importantes en la administracin del programa, incluyendo la falta deformacin,imponer el papel del entrenador en el oficial de libertad condicional, y una cierta

confusin sobrelas normas de carga de trabajo.RESUMEN DE LAS RECOMENDACIONESLa Divisin de evaluacin de menores de Supervisin Intensiva de ColoradoDe libertad condicional (JISP) Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin indica el programafue mnimo en vigor en 1994 y 1995, en Colorado. Aunquecapacitacin de oficiales de libertad condicional para entregar el programa parece ser

muy importantea los administradores del estado, el programa careca de una adecuada organizacininfraestructura de apoyo a la institucionalizacin de la entrega de este cognitiva

especficadesarrollo del programa.Las siguientes recomendaciones se basan en los resultados del proceso yevaluacin de los resultados del programa de R & R como se aplica y se entregan a

JISPclientes en Colorado en 1994 y 1995.1) Si el Departamento Judicial del Estado tiene la intencin de seguir ordenando la

participacinen el programa, se recomienda que el gobierno de priorizar completay suficiente implantacin del programa. Con este fin, el departamentodebe revisar su enfoque de la formacin actual, reasignar los recursos para I + Rejecucin de los programas se da prioridad y control, y un institutomecanismo de control de calidad con el propsito explcito de construir yel mantenimiento de R & R la integridad del programa.

Pgina 11

112) El Departamento Judicial debera patrocinar una reunin para modificar el


7/48

programa para adolescentes. En esta reunin se incluyen la libertad condicionaladministradores, R & R del programa instructores, entrenadores R & R, de libertad

condicional juveniloficiales, y otras partes interesadas que quisieran trabajar con el programadiseador.

3) Los agentes no pueden ser adecuadas o estn interesados en presentar el programa R& Ra los clientes. Para ayudar en el proceso de seleccin de los entrenadores, una

herramienta de deteccinque las tasas de las caractersticas del programa de entrega de los oficiales de libertad

condicional antes desiendo capacitados para impartir el programa R & R podra ser desarrollado yinstituido.4) Incrementar el apoyo administrativo para el programa de R & R y proporcionar acontinuidad de la atencin entre la libertad condicional JISP y regular, el personal de

libertad condicional

(Funcionarios, administradores y personal de supervisin) que no estn entrenadoscomo entrenadoresdeberan estar obligados a participar en un entrenamiento que las revisiones de la basefilosofa, los principios, las habilidades y requisitos (preparacin, recursos yhabilidades) de la motivacin y el programa de rehabilitacin.5) Para mejorar la ejecucin de los programas y la integridad, se recomienda que elOficina de Servicios de Libertad Condicional organizar el seguimiento de cursos de

capacitacin paranuevos entrenadores que tienen lugar entre el 30 y 45 das despus de la inicial R & R

programa de entrenamiento de la entrega. Como una "sesin de refuerzo" puedeeliminar lalas deficiencias detectadas en los exmenes de cinta de vdeo de la ejecucin del

programa JISPsesiones.6) La Oficina de Servicios de Libertad Condicional debe complementar R & R

ejecucin de los programasformacin con la instruccin en las habilidades bsicas de facilitacin de grupos. Esto

es particularmenteimportante, ya que los oficiales de libertad condicional no puede tener las habilidades

necesarias para serfacilitadores de grupo efectivo.

7) A fin de mejorar y supervisar la aplicacin del programa, y la calidad de R & Rsistema de control debe ser desarrollado y utilizado por Judicial del Estado.Ese sistema podra incluir:PA sistema de certificacin para entrenadores, desarrollado con la ayuda de lalos desarrolladores de programas;PA proceso de seleccin para la identificacin de potenciales entrenadores con un

prometedorhabilidades yP El desarrollo y uso de un formulario de evaluacin para los infractores de velocidadLa eficacia de R & R del entrenador en la ejecucin del programa.8) Se recomienda que un coordinador a tiempo completo cognitiva se encuentra en la

Oficina Judicial del Departamento de Servicios de Libertad Condicional (OPS) paracontrolar


8/48

la implementacin del programa, coordinar las sesiones de entrenamiento, para revisarel programa yformas de evaluacin tcnico, y para servir como un recurso para los oficiales de

campo y otrosinvestigadores que tengan preguntas sobre la implementacin del programa y el

programaentrega.Pgina 12

129) El Departamento Judicial del Estado debe alentar a los departamentos de libertad

condicionaldefensor de participacin de los padres en el desarrollo del adolescente de la cognitivahabilidades. Esta participacin puede mejorar la retencin de habilidades, as comoaumentar la participacin de los padres en el proceso de los jvenes correccional.Personal 10) En las jurisdicciones donde el tamao del personal son limitadas, o donde

el inters porel cumplimiento del programa R & R no existe, los departamentos de libertad

condicional podracontrato con un entrenador de la libertad condicional no-oficial para ejecutar las

habilidades cognitivasprogramas.

Pgina 1313Captulo 1Antecedentes de las habilidades cognitivasPrograma en Colorado

En enero de 1991, el Departamento Judicial de Colorado incorporado el razonamientoy Rehabilitacin (R & R) el desarrollo de habilidades cognitivas del programa en unpiloto de granproyecto de demostracin (llamado el Programa de Medicamentos Delincuentesespecializados, o ADP)de los delincuentes adultos que abusan de sustancias. Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin

es underechos de autor del programa de educacin que se centra en la enseanza de los

siguientes cognitivahabilidades a los delincuentes: la solucin de problemas, el pensamiento consecuencial,

medios-fines razonamiento,

sociales la toma de perspectiva, el razonamiento crtico, el razonamiento abstracto, elpensamiento creativo

y los valores (Ross y Fabiano, 1985). Cuando el programa de R & R fue seleccionadoen1991 para su uso en el programa de Autodesarrollo de los Pueblos, que era el nico

programa de habilidades cognitivasdisponibles en la industria de las correcciones, de acuerdo con el Administrador del

Estado para elOficina de Servicios de Libertad Condicional. El programa R & R fue evaluado como

parte de unEstudio de ADP en 1992, y fue encontrado para mejorar el xito del programa entre

ciertosgrupos de personas (Johnson y Hunter, 1992). Hunter en particular, y Johnson


9/48

encontr que las tasas de revocacin de los delincuentes en el programa demedicamentos especializados delincuentefueron 50% inferiores a los de la libertad condicional regular, y las tasas de revocacin

de Autodesarrollo de los Puebloslos delincuentes en el grupo cognitivo en general fueron inferiores, todava. Adems,

elevaluacin se observ que los delincuentes que recibi el Autodesarrollo de los Puebloscon el desarrollo cognitivocomponentes eran ms propensos a mejorar en una serie de "factores de creencia

positiva" ypuntuaciones de la disminucin en los "factores de creencia negativa" que erandelincuentes en libertad condicional ono cognitivos delincuentes ADP.Basado en esta investigacin, en 1992 la Oficina de Servicios de Libertad Condicional

incorporado laR & R del programa como un requisito para los jvenes delincuentes colocan de

Menores intensivosLibertad de supervisin (JISP), y los oficiales JISP fueron capacitados por el programadiseadores (Ross y Fabiano) para impartir el programa. Despus de que el programa

fueimplementado, la informacin anecdtica obtenida el ao siguiente durante un proceso

deevaluacin de JISP (Ingls, 1993), despert el inters en la evaluacin del programa.En concreto, los datos de la entrevista revel que algunos jvenes estaban tan

entusiasmados conel programa R & R que se les pide que traigan a los grupos de amigos. Por otra parte,oficiales de libertad condicional "coaching" a los grupos informaron de que los

miembros del grupo: (1)unidas entre s en ms pro-social formas de lo que se ha demostrado, (2)se interes por los acontecimientos actuales, y (3) demostraron una voluntad y unaafn de expresar sus propios puntos de vista. Adems, oficiales de libertad condicionalinform que los padres dieron cuenta de las diferencias de comportamiento y solucin

de problemasen los juveniles que han participado en el programa.El R & R (y adaptaciones cierre del programa) ha sido evaluada enlos adultos participantes del programa (Fabiano, Robinson, y Porporino, 1990; Lucas,Raynor, y Vanstone, 1992; Porporino, Fabiano, y Robinson, 1991a, 1991b;

Robinson, 1995; Robinson, Grossman y Porporino de 1991, y Ross, Fabiano,y Ewels, 1988), incluyendo una evaluacin de Colorado (vase ms arriba), pero elprograma ha sido evaluado en una sola muestra de los jvenes (Garrido y

Pgina 142 Este programa es una adaptacin del modelo cognitivo desarrollado por Robert Ross

y ElizabethFabiano en su libro Tiempo de Pensar 1985: un modelo cognitivo de Prevencin de la

Delincuencia y laRehabilitacin de delincuentes, que combina tres de las tcnicas identificadas como la

produccin de positivosresultados en la rehabilitacin de delincuentes. Los resultados obtenidos de este

estudio experimental que inclua


10/48

un total de 31 sujetos, con una edad media de 13,6 aos fueron favorables. Elexperimentalgrupo obtuvo resultados significativamente mejores entre las puntuaciones pre y post-

test que el controlgrupo en cuatro de las seis mediciones: la empata, significa, la deteccin de problemas

y generacin desoluciones alternativas. Adems, el grupo experimental mejor significativamente susresultados en un nio de nuevepunto de una escala de actitudes en ocho de los artculos. Comparativamente, el grupode control mejor en slouna de las nueve reas evaluadas en la escala de comportamiento.3 Esta capacitacin se llev a cabo en la oficina principal del Estado del Departamento

Judicial de 1302 en Pennsylvania,Denver, Colorado, 14 a 16 marz 1994.14Snchez, 1991). Este estudio solo a los menores se produjeron en Espaa, y mientras

que ellos resultados fueron favorables,2la muestra del estudio era muy pequeo, y los resultados no puedenser generalizables intercultural. Queramos saber a los delincuentes juveniles enISP en Colorado:1) Es el programa entregado correctamente?2) Es la integridad del programa de lograr y mantener?3) El programa de trabajo para cambiar las actitudes y comportamientos?4) El programa tiene un impacto en las tarifas de terminacin posterior de la

reincidencia?5) En caso afirmativo, qu tipo de delincuentes le funcion mejor?El Instituto Nacional de Justicia, financiado por la Divisin de Justicia Criminal de

Coloradopara llevar a cabo una evaluacin del programa de Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin, yaque seimplementado en JISP. El Colorado de Justicia Juvenil y Delincuencia del Consejoaumenta este esfuerzo de evaluacin mediante la financiacin (por parte del Estado

frmula subvencin delos EE.UU. Oficina de Justicia Juvenil y) un componente especfico de laevaluacin del proceso, la evaluacin de la integridad del programa. Por ltimo, el

Estado de ColoradoDepartamento Judicial de pagar por la Sra. Elizabeth Fabiano, uno de los objetivos delprograma

desarrolladores, para llevar a cabo una "reconversin" de sesin para los entrenadoresJISP en las jurisdiccionesparticipar en esta evaluacin.3El enfoque de esta reconversin fue poner al daentrenadores en las revisiones ms recientes para el contenido del programa y la

entregamtodos. Este informe presenta los resultados de los esfuerzos de evaluacin. La

informe est organizado de la siguiente manera: el captulo 2 se presenta unadescripcin de la


11/48

programa, el captulo 3 describe las preguntas de investigacin y la metodologa, elcaptulo 4presenta los resultados de la evaluacin, y presenta el captulo 5recomendaciones para el desarrollo del programa como en la aplicacin y el futurola investigacin.

Pgina 1515

El programa de I & R esbasado en una importantecuerpo de investigacinque concluye quemuchos delincuentes se hanhabilidades cognitivas dficitque impiden suel xito del ajuste

para incorporar socialesexpectativas.Captulo 2Descripcin del Razonamiento yPrograma de RehabilitacinEl razonamiento y rehabilitacinEl programa de Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin se compone de 35 mdulos

secuencialespara ser entregados a los delincuentes en grupos de seis a ocho delincuentes. Hay diezmdulos, cada uno de los cuales contiene varios de desarrollo de habilidades cognitivas

de las sesiones. Cada

sesin ensea un nuevo sub-habilidad que se basa en las habilidades aprendidas en lassesiones anteriores.Los mdulos cubren las siguientes ocho reas: resolucin de problemas, habilidades

sociales,habilidades de negociacin, manejo de emociones, el pensamiento creativo, los valoresmejora, el razonamiento crtico y ejercicios cognitivos.Los mtodos tradicionales de rehabilitacin de los delincuentes se centran en cambiar

la manera de los delincuentesactuar. Sin embargo, el concepto fundamental detrs de los modelos cognitivos de

delincuentela rehabilitacin es que "dado que los patrones de pensamiento defectuosos impulsan

hacia los delincuentesla reincidencia, los programas deben tratar de cambiar la forma en que los delincuentesy no a laactan "(Fabiano, Porporino y Robinson, 1991:108). En concreto, elRazonamiento y Rehabilitacin de entrenamiento cognitivo se basa en dos premisas:Delincuente P tienden a ser menores de socializacin. Es decir, que carecen de los

valores, actitudes,razonamiento y las habilidades sociales que se requieren para pro-social de ajuste, yP habilidades de socializacin se puede ensear (Ross y Fabiano, 1991:3).El programa R & R se basa en un cuerpo de investigacin que concluye quemuchos delincuentes tienen dficit de habilidades cognitivas que impiden su xito

ajuste para incorporar las expectativas sociales. En 1985, Ross y Fabiano vinculadosel diseo de cada mdulo a los datos empricos que documentan el dficit de muchos


12/48

los modelos tradicionales de tratamiento correccional y el valor de orientacincognitivo-intervenciones como mtodos eficaces de reducir la reincidencia.El programa R & R fue diseado para proporcionar los delincuentes la oportunidad deaprender y experimentar nuevas habilidades cognitivas y conductuales. Este programa

essupuestamente para ensear las habilidades necesarias para manejar los delincuentesuna vida sin msla actividad criminal. "La principal premisa del modelo cognitivo es que lo que y cmoun delincuente piensa, cmo ve su mundo, que tan bien entiende la gente, lo queque los valores, la forma en que las razones y la forma en que los intentos de resolver

los problemas tiene unpapel importante en su conducta criminal "(Fabiano, Robinson, y Porporino,1990:4). Los desarrolladores de objetivos mensurables del programa deseado para

llevar a cabo incluyencambios en las creencias y actitudes en torno a pensar pro-social y criminal, y una

reduccin de la reincidencia. El objetivo principal del Departamento Judicial deColoradofue la reduccin de las tasas de reincidencia, segn datos de la entrevista.

Pgina 1616

El programaplan de estudios enfatizadiscusin de grupo, role-

jugar, juegos,puzzles y razonamiento

ejercicios que sediseado para desarrollar habilidadesy ser divertido para loslos participantes del programa.RAZONAMIENTO Y PROGRAMA DE REHABILITACINCONTENIDOEl programa R & R se compone de 35 sesiones de 90 a 120 minutos, entregado por un

JISPoficial, citada por Ross y Fabiano en el razonamiento y la rehabilitacin: Manual

para la enseanza de habilidades cognitivas (1991) como el "entrenador". El plan deestudios del programa

hace hincapi en la discusin en grupo, juegos de rol, juegos, rompecabezas yejercicios de razonamientoque estn diseados para desarrollar habilidades y ser divertido para los participantes

del programa. Ochomdulos temticos ensear habilidades especficas que se describen en la Tabla 2.1.

Delincuentedesarrollar habilidades de pensamiento que les permitan aumentar su gama de opciones

a la horafrente a problemas o cuestiones que les han causado problemas en el pasado. Estesucede con la introduccin de una habilidad, luego de repetir que el material junto con

un

habilidades cognitivas similares, pero nuevas. Este enfoque interactivo requiere que elprograma


13/48

se entregarn de acuerdo con el calendario establecido por la Ross y Fabiano.Los desarrolladores creen que la adhesin a la secuencia de mdulos es un factor crticocomponente de la efectiva ejecucin del programa, y se ha especificado elsecuencia en el Plan de Entrega del programa (ver Apndice A). Adems, para permitir

que

los participantes a integrar el material en sus vidas, los desarrolladores de destacar queuna sola sesin debe ser entregado por la reunin de grupo. Finalmente, Ross yFabiano destacar que el programa debe ser entregado de acuerdo a un horarioque permita un mnimo de dos sesiones por semana.Tabla 2.1Los mdulos del programa y descripcin de las habilidades cognitivas ImpartidoMDULODESCRIPCIN DE LOS COMPONENTES DE LA HABILIDAD DEL MDULO Y

COGNITIVOResolucin de ProblemasLos delincuentes se les ensea a reconocer cuando hay un problema, definir un

problema verbal, identificar los sentimientos asociadoscon problemas, separar los hechos de las opiniones, reunir la informacin necesaria

para generar alternativas problemasoluciones, tenga en cuenta todas las consecuencias, y seleccionar la mejor solucin.Habilidades SocialesLos delincuentes se les ensea las habilidades necesarias para actuar pro-sociales en

vez de anti-social. Las habilidades incluyen: pedir ayuda,expresar una queja, persuadir a otros, respondiendo a los sentimientos de los dems, y

responder a la persuasin,fracaso, mensajes contradictorios, y las quejas. Cinco pasos se utilizan para ensear

estas habilidades: la formacin previa *,modelado, juegos de roles, la retroalimentacin y la transferencia de la formacin

(utilizando las habilidades en situaciones de la vida real).Habilidades de NegociacinLos delincuentes se les pidi que identificaran su propio mtodo de gestin de

conflictos interpersonales. Se les ensea habilidades paracompromiso en situaciones de conflicto, en particular mediante la identificacin de

opciones a los problemas, identificar las consecuencias dediversas opciones, y la simulacin de la informacin mediante el uso de juegos de rol,

prctica y retroalimentacin.La gestin de

EmocionesLos delincuentes se les ensea las habilidades para manejar sus emociones al respondera los conflictos interpersonales. Estas habilidadespuede evitar responder a los conflictos de la ira u otros estados emocionales fuertes. Enconcreto, sese centran en el reconocimiento de sus emociones en estos contextos, y el uso de

habilidades tales como la respiracin y el control auto-hablara controlar sus emociones.El pensamiento creativoEste mdulo responde a los dficit cognitivos bsicos en la capacidad de un delincuente

para desarrollar puntos de vista alternativos de

situaciones y mtodos alternativos de resolucin de problemas o el logro de objetivos.Se ensea al infractor sistemtica


14/48

procesos de pensamiento.ValoresRealceLos delincuentes tienen el reto de examinar sus creencias y considerar sus puntos de

vista, junto con los puntos de vista

otros. No hay valores bien o mal que se promulguen en este mdulo. El principalmtodo utilizado para examinar los valoreses el uso de escenarios de dilema moral, sin embargo, los valores y creencias son

discutidos a lo largo del programa,que se presenten.

Pgina 174 Modificaciones al contenido de los programas y mtodos de entrega se proporciona a

los entrenadores durante elsesin de reciclaje llevadas a cabo entre 14 a 16 marzo, 1994 y patrocinado por la

Judicial del EstadoDepartamento. Local entrenadores certificados tambin estuvieron presentes durante la

sesin de reciclaje para aprenderacerca de estas modificaciones al programa de R & R.17

El programa sediseado para ser uninteractiva y

participativaexperiencia - no en unque los participantesconferencias "a", pero

lugar en el quede forma activaparticipar y adquirirhabilidades.Razonamiento crticoEn este mdulo, los delincuentes se les ensea a pensar con cuidado, como es lgico y

racional. Este mdulo est diseado paraaumentar la curiosidad de los delincuentes intelectual, la objetividad, la flexibilidad,

buen juicio, mente abierta, decisin,y el respeto a otros puntos de vista.* Pre-entrenamiento consiste en explicar al grupo por qu es importante para aprender

la habilidad particular se ensea en cada sesin, y el rol de un escenario en el que elhabilidad en particularno se utiliza.Adaptado deRazonamiento y Rehabilitacin: Un manual para la enseanza de

habilidades cognitivas, Volmenes 1 y 2 del Manual y suplementos, producida ydistribuida por T3Associates, julio de 1991.EXPECTATIVAS DE LOS PARTICIPANTES DEL PROGRAMALos participantes del programa se espera que asistan dos veces por semana sesiones,

durante 18 semanas. Laprograma est diseado para ser una experiencia interactiva y participativa - no en unque los participantes se dio una conferencia "a", sino uno en el que se activa

participar y adquirir conocimientos. Los participantes se espera que comience elprograma de


15/48

juntos y permanecer en el programa de la duracin.Expectativas de los EntrenadoresEl programa R & R requiere que todos los entrenadores se les ensea a aplicar el

programa deinstructores certificados. Como parte del paquete de capacitacin, cada entrenador

recibe una nuevacopia delManual para la enseanza de habilidades cognitivas, que incluyedescripciones de lasLa teora en que se basa el programa, toda la informacin que se les debe ensear, ydescripciones de lo que los delincuentes deben aprender, al igual que todo el

entrenamiento visualcomplementos necesarios para ejecutar el programa.4De acuerdo con elManual(1991:2), los entrenadores deben tener las siguientes habilidades y caractersticas

personales:

1) Por encima del promedio habilidades verbales;2) Habilidad para relacionarse positivamente y con empata a los delincuentes, pero aAs, mientras que el mantenimiento de una relacin que no ponga en peligrode normas, reglamentos y misin de la agencia correccional;3) La sensibilidad a la dinmica de grupo y su capacidad para estimular a los grupos y

promover el inters y los altos niveles de actividad, manteniendo adecuadosla disciplina;4) Capacidad para hacer frente a los delincuentes sin degradar los mismos;5) Por encima del promedio habilidades interpersonales, y, en particular, lahabilidades sociales / cognitivas que l / ella desea adquirir;una empata) (egocentrismo versus)

b) Resolucin eficaz de problemasc) los valores bien desarrolladosd) el razonamiento racional y lgicae) La apertura a nuevas ideas (frente a la rigidez)6) Experiencia exitosa en gestin de grupos de la falta de motivacin

personas que pueden ser pasiva o agresiva hostil o crtico;Pgina 18

5 Dos oficiales de libertad condicional adicionales han completado los requisitos delcurrculo de formacin, salvopara la presentacin de las cintas de vdeo para su revisin por la Sra. Fabiano. La

crtica positiva de las cintas de vdeoes el ltimo requisito necesario para la certificacin de entrenador.6 Estas son las tarjetas desarrollado por Edward de Bono como un mtodo para

estimular y recordar a las personasaplicar sistemticamente estrategias creativas de pensar en muchas situaciones. Estas

tarjetas son similares atarjetas de memoria flash utilizada para aprender matemticas simples y presentan una

"herramienta" por tarjeta junto con unexplicacin de las herramientas y ejemplos de su uso.7 escrpulos es un juego utilizado en el mdulo de mejora de los valores del programa.

En este juego

los participantes frente a dilemas de la vida moral real. Este juego requiere que losparticipantes anticipan


16/48

opciones de otros jugadores ticos y morales, as como sus sentimientos y valores.Para tener xito en lajuego, los jugadores deben participar activamente, y aprender las habilidades que seensean en el programa de R & R.8El juego del dilema se utiliza en el mdulo de mejora de los valores del programa y

en ella se establece unescenario en el que los participantes deben tomar en cada uno de los papelesparticulares y debe tomar una decisin de grupo

sobre el destino de todos los participantes.18Un plan de leccin por separadodebe estar preparado paracada sesin, y unmnimo de dos horasse debe permitir que

preparar dichos planes.

7) La humildad - la voluntad de considerar puntos de vista (de los participantes ylos desarrolladores de programas) que pueden no concordar con su cuenta;8) El entusiasmo y9) Conocer a fondo del modelo cognitivo.Los materiales, actividades, y las disposiciones administrativas necesarias paraentregar el programa R & R en JISP Colorado se describen a continuacin.Capacitacin de los oficiales de libertad condicional. Todos los entrenadores deben

ser entrenados por un certificadoR y R entrenador. La formacin dura una semana, y se centra en explicar lateoras, mdulos y role-playing/feedback relativas a la prestacin de sesin.En Colorado, dos oficiales de libertad condicional han sido certificados como R & R

entrenadores.5

Las instalaciones fsicas. El programa R & R deben ser entregados de manera adecuadasala de formacin. De acuerdo con Ross y Fabiano (1991: 7) el programa

should be delivered in a room that is large enough for the students toview any visual material, and where they can adequately hear discussions

by all program participants. According to interview data, it is importantthat the room not be too large that the students can get lost, or canmaintain an aloofness. The room also should not be too cramped, so asto invade participants' personal boundaries and safety.

Training materials. Materials such as flip charts, overhead projector, deBono CORT cards,6

and the games Scruples7

and theDilemma Game8necesario

be provided by each local probation department. Some training materials(eg overhead charts and figures, photographs, worksheets, and role playscenarios) and order forms for the materials that must be purchased are

provided in the training manual.Class preparation . Thorough lesson preparation on the part of all coaches


17/48

is necessary for appropriate program delivery. Coaches are trained thatpreparatory steps must be taken before the program can be delivered for

la primera vez. Specifically, a separate lesson plan should be prepared foreach session, and a minimum of two hours should be allowed to preparesuch plans. Preparation time for future program delivery should not be

quite as extensive. The program developers estimate that approximately70 hours are required for preparation before staff are able to deliver theirPgina 19

9 Information provided by Ms. Fabiano during R&R program delivery training,sponsored by theColorado Judicial Department, 1301 Pennsylvania, Denver, Colorado, March 14through 16,1994.19

Developers suggestthat the programshould be delivered ata pace of no fewerthan two sessions perweek, but could bedelivered more

frequently, particularlyin residential settings,if desired by thecoach.first program (Fabiano and Porporino, 1995:4). Further, the Guide to

Lesson Preparation identifies the following preparation steps:P Identifying and sequencing learning objectives;P Outlining the session flow and linking with objectives and methods;P Planning introductions, conclusions and summaries for each session;y

P Identifying reference points for sequencing.More about Program CoachesCoaches are taught to follow the structure of the Handbook, but not to readverbatim from the book. Coaches must have a clear understanding of the material

before they can successfully present it to students. Coaches are expected todeliver the content of the program by linking concepts across modules with

content that is personally relevant to the participants. Coaches are expected tofacilitate and contain discussions. Coaches must be very assertive in their programdelivery style: They must take opportunities to challenge participants' thinking, forthis is the heart of the program. They must clearly and correctly communicate tostudents how and when to use the tools learned in the program.The challenge to the coach is to make each session relevant to the participants.This occurs by asking participants to apply skills and concepts to real lifesituaciones. Further, coaches should be able to assess whether participants are

grasping the material and, if not, must be able to change delivery strategies whenthey are not working.The program developers are clear that the program's content, material and

schedule of delivery are not to be altered (see Appendix A for schedule ofdelivery). Failure to follow the required sequencing of the sessions may not only


18/48

interfere with the offender's progress, it will also confuse and frustrate him andprevent cognitive development (Ross and Fabiano, 1991:5). However, examplesused within the program may be changed to fit local vernacular, customs, culture,ethnicity, gender, and the age of the group of participants. Developers suggestthat the program should be delivered at a pace of no fewer than two sessions per

week, but could be delivered more frequently, particularly in residential settings, ifdesired by the coach.According to Fabiano (March, 1994),9

coaches should assure that participantgroups be as homogeneous as possible. Under no circumstances should genders

be mixed, and coaches should strive to keep the age groups as similar as possiblein any group. Coaches are expected to deliver their first group within 30 to 60days after training, and should have organized personal training materials andlesson plans prior to program delivery (Fabiano, March, 1994).In sum, the program is well documented in the Handbook (1991), and

Pgina 2020

modifications to the original program were provided during the retraining of JISPcoaches that occurred prior to the commencement of this evaluation. Adems, elJudicial Department sponsored an additional training immediately prior to thecommencement of this research project, so that the JISP coaches in the researchsites would be prepared to deliver the program within the time frame of the datacollection for this evaluation. The research design and data collection approachare described in the following chapter.

Pgina 21

10 As discussed previously, according to the Probation Supervision Manual, alloffenders placedin JISP are expected to receive the R&R program unless the juvenile cannot benefit orunless the

juvenile offender's presence or participation is determined to be potentially disruptive tothegrupo. Offenders determined by the probation officer to be inappropriate for group

placementwere excluded from the study.21Captulo 3

Research Methods: Process andEvaluacin de resultados

EVALUATION DESIGNThe evaluation design includes two components: (1) an outcome evaluation thatused an experimental design to measure changes in experimental and controlgroups in terms of attitudes measured pre and post program delivery and in termsof differences in recidivism between the two groups, and (2) a process evaluationwhich looked at program implementation and delivery issues. Sites involved inthe outcome evaluation and the process evaluation differed, and are identified inTabla 3.1. The outcome and process evaluation components are described indetalle a continuacin.

Tabla 3.1Evaluation Sites for Two Evaluation Components


19/48

JUDICIAL DISTRICTEXPERIMENTAL DESIGNCOMPONENT PARTICIPANTSPROCESO DE EVALUACIN

COMPONENT PARTICIPANTS

1st (Jefferson County)XX

2nd (Denver County)XX

4th (El Paso County)X

8th (Larimer County)X

17th (Adams County)

XX

18th (Arapahoe County)XX

21st (Mesa County)X

Outcome Evaluation: Experimental DesignTo answer the question, Does the R&R program work to change attitudes,thinking patterns, and behaviors? we needed two groups, one who received theintervention , and a comparison group that did not. For this reason, we used anexperimental design and randomly assigned JISP clients upon their placement toeither participate or not in the cognitive program. This component included therandom assignment of all JISP placements in four sites: Denver County, AdamsCounty, Arapahoe County, and Jefferson County. Unless a juvenile wasconsidered by their probation officer to be inappropriate for placement in thecognitive program,10

every other juvenile sentenced to ISP in each jurisdiction wasassigned to the treatment group. Those not assigned to the cognitive skills

Pgina 22

11 The random assignment period was extended by one month from December 1994 toJanuary1995 because two sites intended to begin program delivery during the month of January,whichwould have enabled us to include more juveniles in the study. However, these groupsdid notstart during that month, and our project time limitations prohibited further extension oftherandom assignment period.22

Note that the size of

our sample groups isvery low (each group


20/48

contains 20 youth),thus our ability toconfidently generalizethe description ofthese groups is

limited.training group comprised the control group. In addition, each jurisdiction wasallowed to bypass the random assignment for specific cases in which they believedthe offender would be hurt by not receiving the treatment. In these cases (therewere three total), offenders were exempted from the study and were not tested onany of the instruments. Random assignment began in March, 1994 and continuedthrough January, 1995.11

To measure changes in attitudes, attitudes and skills of offenders in theexperimental and control groups were assessed before and after R&R programentrega. To measure differences in recidivism rates between the two groups,

convictions for new crimes occurring after JISP termination were compared.General JISP Caseload DescriptionTo compare the sample of juveniles in our experiment with all juveniles placed onJISP in Colorado, we collected data from official intake and termination files fromthe State Judicial Department's automated database. This database includes all

juveniles sentenced to JISP during fiscal years 1994 and 1995, and includes basicdemographic information, offense of conviction, as well as some basic assessmentde datos. These data allow us to determine if the sample was representative of the

state-wide JISP population.If the random assignment was successfully implemented, characteristics of theclients in our experimental and control group samples would mirror those of theJISP client population in Colorado.Table 3.2 compares characteristics of all juveniles placed on JISP in Coloradoduring fiscal years 1994 and 1995 with the sample of offenders in the two

jurisdictions that comprised the experimental and control groups for this study.Note that the size of our sample groups is very low (each group contains 20youth), thus our ability to confidently generalize the description of these groups islimitada. According to frequency distributions of demographic data and a

description of the samples, youths are generally similar in the random assignmentand intake groups. Three important exceptions are: (1) offense categoriesrepresented among the intake group indicate more property offenses and fewer

weapons offenses than either the experimental or control groups. Adems, elcontrol group had more violent offenders compared to the experimental orcontrol groups (40.0% compared to 20.0% and 24.7%, respectively), (2) theaverage risk score for the control group is nearly three points lower, and fallswithin the medium supervision range, compared to the experimental and intakegroups, whose average risk scores fall within the maximum supervision range, and(3) nearly 10% of the statewide JISP intakes were girls, but there are no girlsrepresented in either the control or experimental groups. The lack of females inthe study groups is a result of the need to keep the cognitive groups

Pgina 2312 The risk score is a composite of 8 scored items. The scored items include age at first

adjudication, prior criminal behavior, institutional commitments or placements, druguse, alcohol


21/48

use, level of parental control, education, and peer relations. A copy of the JuvenileAssessmentof Risk is attached as Appendix B.23

homogeneous. Since we randomly assigned clients to receive the cognitive group

treatment, girls were excluded from the study sample. The differences betweenthe groups in offender risk and offense type limit comparability in terms ofoffender seriousness. This difference is important, because Ross and Fabianosmodel has supported research findings (Fabiano, Robinson, and Porporino, 1990and Robinson, Grossman, and Porporino, 1991) on the risk principle of caseclassification (Andrews, Bonta and Hoge, 1990) which suggests that intensive

programming is most effective among offenders who are at higher risk ofrecidivism. Therefore, any differences found in recidivism outcomes betweenoffender groups might be due to either the treatment effect or the level ofoffender seriousness.Table 3.2

Frequency Distribution on Selected Characteristics forAll Juveniles Placed on ISP in Fiscal Years 1994 and1995 and Randomized Placement Samples of OffendersAll 1994 and 1995JISP Intakes (n=183)Grupo Experimental(N = 20)

Control Group (n=20)MEAN AGE15.716.316.5GNEROMasculino

90.2% (165)100.0% (20)100.0% (20)Femenino

9.8% (18)00

OFFENSE TYPEViolento24.7% (43)20.0% (4)*40.0% (8)*Propiedad

64.4% (112)55.0% (11)55.0% (11)Las armas

3.4% (6)

5.0% (1)5.0% (1)


22/48

Otro7.5% (13)20.0% (4)*0% (0)*AVG. RISK SCORE

1219.1319.2216.47

Source: JISP intake data from the State Court Administrator's Office of ProbationServices.* Indicates differences between experimental and control groups.Tamao de la muestra

Taking into account case flow in the four study jurisdictions, and allowing fornon-placement of approximately 25% of juveniles determined to be inappropriatefor the program, the design was expected to yield 75 juveniles each in the

experimental and control groups, for a total of 150. In the end, the randomassignment component of the study produced a total of 40 juveniles: 20 in theexperimental group and 20 in the control group.

Pgina 2413 Video taping of group sessions only occurred in the random assignment sites. Ladiscussion of program integrity, though part of the process evaluation, only reflectsthree of thefour random assignment sites.14 It was important to assess program integrity to ensure that we were measuring theeffects of

the Reasoning and Rehabilitation program, and not some other intervention.24El proceso deevaluation focused on

providing a detaileddescription of theactual programoperation: How doesthe program work?

How is the programdelivered? Qu es

the nature ofprobation officer-clientinteractions? Qu esthe philosophy of eachlocal probationdepartment regardingthe use and delivery ofthe R&R program?Problems in achieving the sample size originally planned were due in part toestructura de la organizacin. Specifically, the problems related to slower than

anticipated case flow, the inability of particular jurisdictions to schedule the start-

up of cognitive groups, and the failure of one county to follow the randomassignment procedures. The random assignment procedure often hindered the


23/48

start-up of cognitive groups because it required between twelve and sixteenoffenders (6 to 8 offenders each in the treatment and control groups) to be placedon JISP within a relatively short period of each other. When placements to JISPwere slower than anticipated, many offenders terminated JISP before a cognitivegroup could commence.

Further, only two of the four sites produced cases for analysis. One site, Denver,did not deliver any cognitive groups during the 10-month random assignmentperodo. Officers in Arapahoe County began two cognitive groups, however, onewas canceled after ten sessions due to attrition, and all juveniles in the other groupwere excluded from the analysis because the random assignment protocol was notseguido.Proceso de evaluacin

The process evaluation was conducted in seven sites: the four sites where therandom assignment was administered, and three additional sites where the processevaluation was the sole method of evaluation. These sites were selected becausethey were the only additional sites in which all JISP officers had experienced

delivering at least one round of the cognitive program when the evaluation began.Interviews, group observation via video taped sessions,13

and client intake anddischarge information were used to collect process information data. El proceso deevaluation focused on providing a detailed description of the actual programoperation: How does the program work? How is the program delivered? Qu esthe nature of probation officer-client interactions? What are the goals of the R&R

program within JISP? What is the philosophy of each local probation departmentregarding the use and delivery of the R&R program?Group observation was used for the following purposes:1) To determine program integrity;14y

2) To observe program delivery and client responses. To measure programintegrity - that is, "Is the program being delivered to clients as it was designedto be delivered?" - coaches were rated on the following factors:

Pgina 2525

A team of localstakeholders

participated in thedesign of theevaluacin.This team

was comprised ofJISP officers, aprobation supervisor, achief probation officer,a judge, a statesenator, DCJ researchstaff, and two NIJ

project consultants.

a) Understanding of material;b) Ability to interact with clients; and


24/48

c) Presentation style.A total of 24 professionals were interviewed for this study: thirteen probationofficers, four JISP program supervisors, three chief probation officers, two stateJudicial Department administrators, and two certified R&R program trainers.Interviews were conducted to assess program delivery and client response. Es decir,

are coaches delivering a program that is in keeping with their jurisdiction'sphilosophy? Do the clients seem to be gaining skills from the program? Qu esthe nature and level of group participation?Evaluation Planning TeamA team of local stakeholders participated in the design of the evaluation. Esteteam was comprised of JISP officers, a probation supervisor, a chief probationofficer, a judge, a state senator, DCJ research staff, and two NIJ projectconsultores. This team met throughout the planning phase of the project to

discuss such issues as the focus of the evaluation, the feasibility of using anexperimental design, sample size, and the description of JISP clients. Una vez que el

basic design of the project was agreed on, the team met throughout the evaluation

to discuss program concepts and measurement issues, data collection items,logistical issues regarding random assignment and the process of conducting pre-and posttests, and to identify key people to interview for the process evaluation.The team met twice during the data collection phase of the evaluation for statusreports and to discuss and identify solutions to problems encountered. El equipomet on a final occasion to review the draft report of the findings of the evaluation.In addition to ongoing meetings with the local evaluation team, early in theevaluation planning phase, DCJ staff met with Elizabeth Fabiano and FrankPorporino, the proprietors of the Reasoning and Rehabilitation training. Lafocus of this meeting was to discuss the evaluation project, and, specifically toidentify what they believed to be the crucial components of the program, and theskills most critical to measure. At this meeting, Ms. Fabiano agreed to conduct avideo tape review of JISP coaches for the program integrity component of thisevaluacin.Las medidas de resultado

Reduction of recidivism is the overarching goal of the R&R program. Latheoretical basis of the R&R program holds that reduction in recidivism isachieved by reducing other factors associated with criminal behavior, particularlyimproving cognitive skills that allow offenders to change criminal behaviors andcriminal attitudes into those that are more productive and socially acceptable.To measure recidivism rates of juveniles in the sample, DCJ researchers

conducted interviews with JISP officers who supervised the offenders in thesample six months after termination from JISP. Recidivism was measured byrearrest for a new crime. It is important to note that juveniles who successfully

Pgina 2615 This instrument was pilot tested on a group of college students, and analyzed toassessclarity and the ability of the items to differentiate among respondents, and to constructscaleswith acceptable reliability levels and item-scale correlations (Johnson and Hunter,1992).26

terminated JISP were transferred to regular probation supervision, so they werenot necessarily free from supervision during this six-month follow-up. Aquellos


25/48

offenders who failed JISP supervision typically moved to a more strict form ofsupervision, perhaps boot camp, detention, or commitment to a State institution.Data on program termination were also collected.A second outcome measure was used to determine the extent of change incognitive skills and functioning among the sample the experimental and control

grupos. This was assessed by focusing on nine areas that are related to effectivecognitive functioning skills addressed by the R&R program and include:1) Ability to recognize problems exist;2) Ability to solve interpersonal problems;3) Ability to think of and develop alternatives;4) Awareness of consequences;5) Ability to set and achieve goals;6) Level of egocentricity;7) Social perspective taking;8) Level of impulsivity; and9) Cognitive style (rigid thinking versus the ability to think abstractly).

Two instruments were used in the pre and posttest interviews (copies of theseinstruments, the statement of confidentiality, and the interview protocol can befound in Appendix C). The first instrument, a semi-structured interview is aslightly modified version of the semi-structured interview developed by theauthors of the program as part of a larger cognitive skills assessment battery. Esteinstrument was chosen because its semi-structured nature allowed program

participants to expand on answers beyond a yes/no, which allowed for a widerange of answers and assessment of skill levels. This instrument, or variations ofit, has also been used in other evaluations of the R&R program (Robinson,Grossman, and Porporino, 1991 and Fabiano, Robinson, and Porporino, 1990)and was found to be useful in measuring change in relevant skill levels.The second instrument is a 70-item battery of statements measuring concepts orattitudes related to crime and criminal attitudes that respondents were asked torank on a Likert scale format. This instrument is a modified version of a 120-iteminstrument developed by Johnson and Hunter for their 1991 evaluation of theSDOP program in Colorado,15

one component of which was delivery of the R&Rdel programa. The items on the original instrument were selected either because they

had a theoretical relationship with delinquency, a logical association with a sociallyacceptable lifestyle, or because change in the factor was a specific objective of the

R&R program (Johnson and Hunter, 1992:3). The original instrument containedindicators of drug use which was not a concern in the present evaluation and werethus deleted for purposes of the current evaluation. Johnson and Hunter designedthe instrument so certain items could be combined into additive scales containing

Pgina 2727

The semi-structuredinterview instrumentused in the pre and

posttests did not leavethe respondent

enough room toanswer the questions


26/48

from his ownexperience.Lascenarios given werecontrived and possiblynot extremely relevant

to this group of youth.from three to eight items each to measure relevant program objectives. The 14concepts and attitudes, the questionnaire items used to develop each scale, and thedirection of desired change on each scale are described in Table 3.3.Table 3.3Concepts and Attitudes Measured by Pre- and Posttest QuestionnaireCONCEPT / ATTITUDE# OF ITEMS IN SCALEQUESTIONNAIRE ITEM #'sINCLUDED IN CONCEPT/ATTITUDEDESIRED DIRECTION OF CHANGE

Dominio de s mismo4

1+13+14+15Aumento

Normlessness3

2+3+7Disminucin

Susceptibility to Peer InfluenceToward Deviance3

4+5+6Disminucin

General Susceptibility to ExternalInfluencia5

8+9+10+11+12Disminucin

Powerlessness/Fatalism6

16+17+18+19+20+21

DisminucinProblem Solving Ability7

22+23+24+25+26+27+28Aumento

Rigidity and Closed-mindedness5

35+36+37+38+39DisminucinEmpata3

40+41+42Aumento


27/48

Acceptance of Rationalizations forCriminal Behavior7

48+49+50+51+52+53+54Disminucin

Awareness of Existence of Victims459+60+65+66Aumento

Commitment to Socially AcceptableObjetivos4

71+73+74+75Aumento

Positive Labeling5

81+82+83+84+85Aumento

Attitudes Opposing CriminalComportamiento6

87+88+89+90+91+92Aumento

Exposure to Criminal Peers8

93+84+85+86+87+98+99+100Disminucin

LIMITATIONS OR DEFICIENCIES OF INSTRUMENTSThe semi-structured interview instrument used in the pre and posttests did notleave the respondent enough room to answer the questions from his ownla experiencia. The scenarios given were contrived and possibly not extremely

relevant to this group of youth. Had we asked more direct and personally relevantquestions, such as how have you used any of the skills in your daily activities?,or Can you give me an example of how you manage conflict in your own life?

perhaps we would have received a greater variation in responses. Por el contrario, elquestions on the instrument too often afforded respondents the ability to answer a

question with a simple yes/no answer. For instance the question Do you feelyou have problems? was most often responded to with the answer no, ratherthan eliciting a response such as I have some problems, or not many, or yes,

but I wouldn't call them serious. Such questions would have also allowed theinterviewer to probe about the nature or level of problems.The appropriateness of the instruments was decided by the evaluation's advisorycommittee review. Reliability was managed by using instruments with fixed

Pgina 2816 The interview with Mesa County JISP officers was conducted over the telephone.Unappointment was made and two officers were interviewed.

28Video tape schedules


28/48

were set up to captureseven of the 35sessions. Copies ofthese video tapeswere forwarded to

Ms. Fabiano forreview and rating.preguntas. Interviewers were trained to further explain a question if requested,

but not to define the question for the respondent. Confiabilidad entre los evaluadoresfuemanaged by scoring all pre and posttests with all interviewers present.IMPLEMENTATION MEASURESCarefully developed programs can fail if proper implementation fails to occur. Enthis evaluation, we gathered information regarding the following three aspects ofla aplicacin:

1) Level of pre-program delivery planning and lesson plan preparation;

2) Amount of time between training/retraining and first program delivery; and3) Program integrity measured via reviews of video taped sessions of each coach

by T3 and Associates staff.These issues were selected because they are the most crucial factors ofimplementation for which the probation officer/coach has responsibility,according to Fabiano. Other factors that can impact program implementation,such as the probation officer's perceived level of support from departmentaladministrators, were also discussed in interviews with probation officer.PROCESS EVALUATION DATA COLLECTIONPROCEDIMIENTOS

Backup data for implementation measures were collected through interviews withall JISP officers, supervisors and in some jurisdictions Chief Probation Officers,state-level administrators, and certified local R&R trainers. Additional questionsregarding such issues as agency support for program delivery, degree of comfortin delivering the program, program preparation and training, perceptions of howthe program was received, and what factors contributed to successful programdelivery and poor program delivery were asked of individuals in each of thesegrupos. Interviews with probation staff, administrators, and R&R trainers took

place toward the end and after the random assignment period. Estas entrevistaswere semi-structured face-to-face interviews that lasted between 30 and 60minutos cada uno.

16Video tape schedules were set up to capture seven of the 35 sessions. Copies ofthese video tapes were forwarded to Ms. Fabiano for review and rating.

Pgina 2917 Prior to program delivery by each coach, a schedule of sessions identified for video-taping,along with their corresponding dates was created and reviewed by the coach and DCJinvestigadores.29

Table 3.4 shows which sessions were supposed to be video taped.17

DCJ researchstaff were available to video tape all assigned sessions. In one jurisdiction, a


29/48

probation officer offered to use his personal video camera to tape the appropriatesesiones. DCJ staff would call to remind him of which sessions to tape, and he

would set up the camera. At the end of the 35-week program, the tape was to beturned in to DCJ. However, this tape was inadvertently recorded over, thus onlyone session was captured for evaluation review. In the other two sites, officers

felt it would be disruptive to have DCJ staff present during the entire session, sovideo tape equipment was left for the probation officer (or group a member) tooperar. Sometimes, sessions were rescheduled without notifying DCJ research

staff, thus eliminating the ability to video tape the sessions as planned. En algunoscases, the equipment was either run incorrectly or not run at all. A finales dethe study period, each coach that conducted a group involved in this evaluation(including one coach whose cases were not used in the random assignmentsample) had at least one, and as many as four, video taped sessions that weresubmitted to T3 and Associates for review and evaluation of program integrity andejecucin de los programas.Tabla 3.4

Program Video Tape ScheduleR&R COGNITIVE SKILLS PROGRAM VIDEO TAPING SCHEDULEDay 04Problem Identification - Remembering and StatingEl da 15

AGO/Values EnhancementEl da 16

Dealing with AngerDay 19NegociacinDay 25Responding to FailureDay 28Review and Practice - Grab BagDay 29Propaganda and PersuasionOUTCOME DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURESThe purpose of the pre- and posttest interview was to assess the pre- and post-cognitive skill levels and attitudes of each juvenile offender in the study. Antes deeach interview, subjects were given a confidentiality of information form to read,which was also paraphrased by the interviewer. If the juvenile understood and

agreed with the contents of the form they were asked to initial for approval. Acollect pre- and posttest attitude information, juvenile offenders in both theexperimental and control groups were asked to participate in a 45 to 60 minuteinterview with a DCJ researcher prior the program start-up and again after

program completion.Recidivism data were collected from JISP officers twelve months after the randomassignment period ended. This allowed ample time for clients to complete

Pgina 3030

JISP and move on to regular probation. As with the interviews described above,an appointment was made in advance with the probation officers, and a list of

names was sent ahead of time, along with the data collection elements, so allrelevant data would be available during the interview. Interviewing the probation


30/48

officer to obtain recidivism data also allowed the data collector to gatheradditional anecdotal information about each case that might shed light on the

program performance of that individual.ANLISIS DE DATOS

Using SPSS for Windows, basic descriptive statistics (cross tabulations and

frequencies) were used to profile and describe each of the sample groups:Experimental and control groups and the population of cases sentenced to JISPstatewide during fiscal years 1994 and 1995. T-tests were used to measuredifferences in pretest and posttest results on the cognitive skills interview and theattitude questionnaire, as well as to measure differences in recidivism rates.

Pgina 3118 The State Judicial Department's JISP Supervision Guidelines state that (a)ll youthwill

participate in the cognitive learning groups unless determined that the youth cannotbenefit, orwould be disruptive to the groups (p. 14).19 The following judicial districts were selected as pilot sites: 1st (Jefferson County),2nd(Denver County), 4th (El Paso County), 10th (Pueblo County), 17th (Adams County),18th(Arapahoe County), and the 21st (Mesa County).20 Two officers are assigned JISP caseloads in Jefferson County, however, one officerwasreassigned during the duration of this project. The officer who took over that caseload

participated in the process evaluation interviews, and participated in the evaluationplanning

proceso.21 The officer trained in August 1994 was assigned a JISP caseload after this evaluationbegan.

31Captulo 4

Research FindingsThe Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R) cognitive skills program wasimplemented in Colorado as a mandatory18

program component of the newJuvenile Intensive Supervision Probation (JISP) program in 1992. JISP caseload

standards limit officers' caseloads to 15 clients. Implementation of JISP, waslimited at first to a pilot study in seven Colorado judicial districts,19

and a year laterexpanded to statewide implementation. In addition to conditions typicallyassociated with ISP programs, such as frequent contacts with the probationofficer, increased surveillance, random urinalysis, and strong enforcement ofconditions (Petersilia and Turner, 1993), the Colorado JISP program requires

participation of JISP offenders in the Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R)cognitive skills development program.JISP is a program designed for serious juvenile offenders, as a diversion from

incarceration in the State's commitment facilities. An evaluation of the pilot JISPsites found that JISP clients and juvenile offenders placed in commitment facilities


31/48

were not significantly different on the following factors: current age, age at firstarrest, prior criminal history, prior out-of-home placements, prior alcohol/drug

problems, risk scores and needs scores (English, 1993:ii). Thus, JISP clients aremore serious in terms of criminal history and criminogenic risk factors (asmeasured by the State's risk and needs scoring instruments) than juveniles placed

on regular probation in Colorado.PROBATION OFFICERS INVOLVED IN THE STUDYIn the four sites identified for participation in the experimental design phase ofthe evaluation, there were a total of ten probation officers: Three in DenverCounty, two in Adams County, two in Arapahoe County, and three in JeffersonCondado.20

Half of these officers (n=5) participated in the R&R retraining sessionconducted by Ms. Fabiano, four were trained for the first time in March 1994 bylocal certified trainers, and one was trained at the annual Colorado ProbationTraining Institute in August 1994.

21Four officers delivered the cognitive skills

program during this evaluation, each of these officers had conducted at least twoprevious sessions of the R&R program.

Pgina 3222 The Strategies for Juvenile Supervision (SJS) is a questionnaire used by probationofficers toassess juvenile offenders on the following dimensions: reasons for involvement in thecurrentcrime, school adjustment, interpersonal relationships, feelings, family attitudes, future

plans, andbrief criminal history information.23 All officers interviewed for this project and, indeed, the program developers agreethat

persons who are considered to be mentally retarded are not appropriate participants inthisdel programa.32

For the process evaluation phase of this project, seven of ten officers involved inthe experimental design phase of the program, and six JISP officers in threeadditional sites were involved in the process evaluation phase. Of these thirteen

officers, seven had delivered the R&R program at least twice prior to the time theevaluation began, and five had never delivered the program.CLIENTS INVOLVED IN THE R&R PROGRAMAccording to the Colorado Judicial Department Juvenile Intensive SupervisionPilot Program Guidelines (14:no date) all JISP clients are required to participate inthe R&R cognitive program unless they are considered to be unreasonablydisruptive or unable to benefit from the program for some other reason. Aconsistent method to detect those youth who would be disruptive or for whomthe program would not be beneficial has not been developed. Some officers usethe Strategies for Juvenile Supervision (SJS)22

classification to make thisdetermination, along with observation of the youth's behavior, attitude, and mental


32/48

capacidades.23RESULTADOS DE LA INVESTIGACIN

Program ImplementationThis section reports findings on program implementation. Specifically, we address

the issues of pre-program delivery preparation, officers' approaches to sellingthe program to adolescent clients, the amount of time between R&R training andfirst program delivery session, and program integrity--was the program delivered

by JISP officers in this study actually the Reasoning and Rehabilitation programdesigned by Ross and Fabiano? Finally, we present the perceptions of probationofficers, administrators, and trainers on how the R&R program could be improvedfor use with juveniles in Colorado.

How much time did probation officers prepare for program delivery?R&R program trainers teach that the ideal amount of time to adequately preparefor program delivery is 70 hours, or 2 hours for each of the 35 sessions. Raynorand Vanstone (1992:23) reported as a major evaluation finding that the R&R

program requires major investment and a high level of detailed preparation.Preparation includes gaining a clear understanding of the skills taught, preparinglesson plans for each session, and preparing overheads and other materials used inR&R group sessions.JISP officers involved in the process evaluation were asked how much time theyspent in preparation for program delivery. While their answers varied, and all

Pgina 3324 State probation administrators indicate that delivery of and preparation for the R&R

program isa regular job duty of JISP officers, not an additional duty.

33officers reported preparing some level of lesson plans, only two of the thirteenofficers interviewed reported spending an average of two hours of preparationtime per session. The other eleven officers reported spending an average of 30minutes preparing for each session. Often, this preparation was done immediately

before the session delivery. Officers in one jurisdiction reported they could onlyprepare lesson plans at home because there was no reduction in regular job dutiesto prepare for the additional work of delivering the R&R program.24

Officers inanother jurisdiction reported they met after every session to discuss process issues

of the most recent group session. These officers rotated responsibility for sessiondelivery, so overall lesson preparation time decreased.Did officers regularly sell the program to offenders?Preparation for program delivery includes preparing program participants. En sureport of New Mexico's implementation of the Ross and Fabiano program,DeMaret suggests that the program be introduced in such a way that it can beseen by potential students as an opportunity that is unique and special...It is feltthat mishandling of the critical introductory stage could seriously jeopardize

program success (DeMaret, 1991:11). Indeed, Ross and Fabiano's Handbook(1991) urges coaches to meet with each group member individually prior tocommencement of the program. Such meetings should be held to discuss the

training and respond to the participant's concerns regarding participation. "Estosindividual meetings should be viewed, not only as an opportunity for you to


33/48

develop a working relationship with them, but also as an opportunity to do somelobbying to get their support for the training program (Ross and Fabiano, 1991:9). A sample of the contents of this initial meeting is provided for coaches in theManual.

R&R trainers and seven JISP officers interviewed conceded that adolescents are

harder to sell the program to compared to adults. As one officer noted adults(on probation) know their lives are messed up, and have greater opportunities tounderstand that these skills work. They have more history with failure, and

probably more history with success as well. Juveniles may lack such lifeexperiences, however, one of the responsibilities of the coach is to discern theclient's strengths and weaknesses and market the program accordingly.While all officers interviewed believed the program helps teach young offendersuseful life skills, not all officers shared the same level of enthusiasm for the R&Rdel programa. Most JISP officers interviewed described the general program to clients

in an effort to pique interest in the group, but all officers reported they stressedmost heavily that participation in the program was a mandatory component of

JISP. In fact, one officer summed up his sales pitch like this: It's either groupor jail. In addition to stressing the cognitive program as mandatory, some officersdid describe their efforts at highlighting the benefits of the program. The effortsof two JISP officers at generating interest and excitement in the program aredescribed below:

Pgina 3434

Overall, theassessment of the

program integrity

component of thisevaluation concludedthat the R&R programwas only barelyimplemented...information was imparted butskills were notdeveloped (Fabianoand Porporino,1995:1, 5).One probation officer reportedly worked hard to inform incoming group

members of the benefits the program has to offer, claiming that it isessential for kids to buy-in up front. They need to buy it to changetheir life. This officer prepared flyers for all incoming group membersand their parents to describe the group process and the skills taught indel grupo.

Another officer reported selling the program by focusing on the group asa way to have fun and learn particular skills that can help participantsthink better and make better decisions.

How much time lapsed between coaches' training and program delivery?On average, a period of 3.2 months lapsed between R&R program training and

program delivery for the 13 JISP officers interviewed (data not presented). Este

average is skewed, however, by two officers: one waited a period of nine months,and one waited for twelve months before delivering the program for the first time.


34/48

In both of these cases, officers were prohibited from delivering the programbecause there were not enough juveniles to participate. Seven officers (53.8% ofthose interviewed) delivered their first program within two months of training,which is within the standard time frame of program training to deliveryrecommended by Ross and Fabiano. Three officers delivered the program within

three months of being trained.Did the program delivery meet the standards of Reasoning and Rehabilitation trainers?Overall, the assessment of the program integrity component of this evaluationconcluded that the R&R program was only barely implemented...information wasimparted but skills were not developed (Fabiano and Porporino,1995:1, 5).Findings from the review of video taped sessions indicate that, generally, thecontentof the program was delivered--often by reading directly from the manualand thereby not demonstrating understanding of the material--however, theprocessof actually imparting knowledge and skills to the offenders barely occurred,according to the video tape review (a copy of this report is attached asApndice D).

In general, the reviewers indicated that the video taped sessions they evaluatedwere on track with other first delivery performances they had seen, however,with more apparent effort being made and with superior style of delivery andrapport with the offenders (Fabiano and Porporino, 1995: 2). All coachesevaluated have excellent styles and they effortlessly portray all of thecharacteristics needed to bean effective 'coach.' Their buy-in with respect to the program and its goals isexcellent (Fabiano and Porporino, 1995: 5).Several shortfalls were identified in the report regarding program delivery and

program integrity. Estos incluyen:P Failure to link crucial program concepts together;

Pgina 3535

The most commonsuggestion forimproving the R&R

program for use withadolescents was toshorten the programduration.Libertad condicionalofficers, trainers and

administratorsinterviewed all agreedthat the R&R programis too long for this

juvenile population.P Cutting important discussions short and pursuing irrelevant tangents;P Explaining new skills incorrectly or in a confusing manner;P Failure to challenge thinking (while challenging values instead -- focus was oncontent rather than process);P Failure to deliver the program within 20 to 60 days following training (orretraining);

P Lack of lesson preparation;P Inappropriately combining sessions that were designed to be delivered


35/48

por separado, yP Failure to make the program relevant to juveniles.These shortfalls are important, and have the potential to undermine theeffectiveness of cognitive skills development and the effectiveness of the programen general. However, with some effort on the part of coaches, these problems can

se fija. The program delivery report sums the overall evaluation of programintegrity in the following way:The program is not easy to deliver and it is very much dependent on thetechnology of skills development. This is different from most

programs that simply allow groups to go with the flow, wander andpursue issues. We want to reiterate that (coaches') determination wasobvious...the coaches attempted to deliver (the program) as the manualespecificado. It is the process, and not the content which they now need tomaestro. They exhibited great effort in attempting to engage the

offenders.... What impact this may have had remains to be seen.With some attention to correcting process issues, with greater attention

to lesson-preparation (and the time and support of management tohave the required time available) and, continued practice in programdelivery, all will be excellent coaches. We believe the result will be agreater impact on the offenders and program outcome (Fabiano andPorporino, 1995:5).

How can the R&R program be improved for use with juveniles in Colorado?The most common suggestion for improving the R&R program for use withadolescents was to shorten the program duration. Probation officers, trainers andadministrators interviewed all agreed that the R&R program is too long for this

juvenile population. Some of those interviewed believed the program was asmuch as 50% too long. Probation officers reported that juvenile participants

began losing interest about half way through the 18-week program. Also, someofficers believed that two hours per session is too long for this population. Msofficers reported that 60 to 90 minute sessions would be optimal, for it was afterthat point that interest waned. Many officers reported spending a lot of timeredirecting the group members' attention to the material, because they were easilydistracted to other subjects.

Pgina 3636

Measures of Offenders' OutcomeTo measure program impact on key attitudinal and cognitive measures for

experimental and control group members, average scores from both instrumentsat pretest (before group participation) were compared with average scores atposttest (after group completion) to determine where change was significant.Both instruments measured similar attitudes and skill levels, however, results fromthe two tests are conflicting.Tables 4.1 and 4.2 display the results of the pre and posttest attitude and skillsinformation, as measured by two instruments: The interview information garneredthrough (1) a questionnaire with 9 scored responses whose scores ranged from 1(no need for change) to 5 (high need for change), and (2) a 70-item battery ofstatements, that respondents were asked to rank on a Likert scale format, whichmeasured concepts and attitudes related to crime. The respondent's answers were

combined to create composite measurements of 14 different attitudes orcomportamientos. Table 4.3 displays recidivism rates for the experimental and control


36/48

groups as measured by new crimes or technical violations committed while still onISP and new crimes or technical violations committed after termination from ISP(and during supervision on regular probation).Results generated fr

evaluación de la motivación y rehabilitación

Documents