A DESCRIPTWE STUDY E‘éF THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS m MRCMGAM’S JUVENILE COURTS Thesis for the fiegrse of M S. WCWGM STATE. BNWERSIW SYBELE. M. SPSNNER 1913 MICHIGAN bTAT’: vat‘ermH'Y JAMES J. BRENNAN ?»‘.i.‘.".\;:~;;AL LIBRARY SCHOOL OF CRIMINAL JUSTfCE EAST LANSING, MiCHIGAN 48-323 u z ‘ r- z :- 3"!an BY L... n‘ 1 HMS & SONS' BOOK BINDERY INB. LIBRARY BINDERS SPIIISMBT. IICIIIGAI ‘2" A - .1‘ NHCHtGAN STATE UNIVERSIT: .31 5? 3. FILQ’CHN ,‘vTLXJJKE/‘Ji LIL-,fi. i‘VCn-JC‘L OF QQITJJGL JcSlriQt Adl— LANSING, MICHiGAN 46623 A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF’THE USE OF‘VOLUNTEERS IN MICHIGAN'S JUVENILE COURTS By Sydell M. Spinner An Abstract of a Thesis Submitted to The College of Social Science Michigan State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1973 M» Mt»: Dr. William Goldberg, Chairman 74. as» Professor Louisifiadelet W Approved: ABSTRACT A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS IN MICHIGAN'S JUVENILE COURTS By Sydell M. Spinner In the past decade, the volunteer court movement has developed from an attempt on the part of a few isolated courts to improve their services, to a major emphasis in the treatment and rehabilitation of juvenile and young adult offenders. Currently, over one thousand adult mis- demeanant and juvenile courts are utilizing volunteers in the provision of services to offenders, with the number of courts planning or beginning programs increasing daily. This rapid development, generated by the encouragement of national leaders in the movement, by the example of existing programs and by a desire on the part of local com-. munities to achieve something tangible in the solution to the "crime problem", has often exceeded a systematic and orderly accumulation and sharing of knowledge about program planning, operation and evaluation. The subsequent diffi- culties encountered by new programs as a result of this knowledge gap has frequently decreased potential program effectiveness. Attempts have been made in the last two years by agencies concerned with this problem, to gather information on volunteer programs throughout the country and to develop some basic standards and guidelines for program operation. Although results of the national Sydell M. Spinner assessment have provided important information, individual states are still uncoordinated and uninformed in their efforts to institute effective volunteer programs. The objective of this study was to assess the progress and current level of operation of the volunteer court move- ment in Michigan's juvenile courts, in order to add to the overall body of knowledge available on volunteer programs and to facilitate the development of a state-wide coordinat- ing committee on volunteer programs. A twenty-one item questionnaire, adapted from one used in a recent national survey, was sent to all juvenile courts in Michigan having' volunteer programs. Questions were directed at determining the extent of the volunteer programs, the services offered through the use of volunteers and problem areas encountered in volunteer programs. The major findings of the study revealed that the development of volunteer programs in Michigan has occurred primarily within the last two years, to a much greater degree than programs across the country. The data also revealed that the majority of programs in Michigan 1) are located in cities with populations under fifty-thousand 2) are relatively small, utilizing one hundred volunteers or less and 3) are using volunteers to a very limited extent with less than fifty percent of the offenders the courts are responsible for. Volunteer programs in Michigan are experiencing various degrees of difficulty related to volunteer turnover rate Sydell M. Spinner and, recruitment and supervision. However, it is generally felt that the benefits of a better relationship to the client provided through the use of volunteers justifies the program. Positive changes in offenders attitudes toward themselves and others, better school attendance, and lower recidivism rates have also been attributed to the effect of volunteer programs in Michigan's juvenile courts. A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS IN MICHIGAN'S JUVENILE COURTS By Sydell M. Spinner A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1973 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. William Goldberg for his assistance and advice throughout my graduate course of study and during the development of this thesis. Apprecia- tion is also due to Professor Louis Radelet and Dr. Robert Trojanowicz for their participation as committee members and to Marilyn Frost for her assistance and concern during this project. I would like to extend a special thanks to Bill McMillan for his generous sharing of resource materials and for his friendship and support. Finally, this thesis would not have been completed without the patience and encouragement of my husband, Jonathan, and without the early support, financial and otherwise, of my parents, Esther and Harry Horowitz, who instilled in me the value of education. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION THE PROBLEM OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY DEFINITION OF TERMS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE VOLUNTEER COURT MOVEMENT THE NEW VOLUNTEER COURT MOVEMENT Royal Oak, Michigan Boulder, Colorado Denver, Colorado Other Programs State Involvement In Volunteer Programs THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS IN COURT THE VOLUNTEER PROCESS Recruiting Screening Orientation and Training The Volunteer-Client Relationship Supervision Evaluation iii Page 10 15 15 19 23 2a 25 28 31 31 32 3a 35 36 37 iv Chapter Page Funding and Finance 39 THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS IN COURT ”0 H DESIGN OF THE STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA H7 POPULATION AND SAMPLE H7 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION H9 ANALYSIS OF THE DATA 51 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS 77 IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS ' 79 AREAS FOR FUTURE STUDY 83 FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 8” CONCLUSION 90 BBIBLIOGRAPHY I , l 91 APPENDICES Appendix A. Survey of Michigan's Volunteer Courts 97 B. Age Of Volunteer Programs By Geographic Distribution 101 C. Location Of Volunteer Programs By Population Size 102 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Length of Time Agency Has Had Volunteer Program 2 Number of Volunteers Used by Respondent Agency 3 Frequency of Volunteer Services u Number of Offenders Agency is Currently Responsible For 5 Percentage of Offenders Served by Volunteers 6 Kinds of Volunteer Activities 7 Methods of Volunteer Recruitment 8 Requirements Volunteers Must Meet 9 Type of Orientation Volunteer Receives 10 Number of Hours of Supervision Provided by Court Staff 11 Staff Acceptance and Understanding of Volunteer Program 12 Main Reasons for Staff Acceptance of Volunteer Program 13 Reasons Why Staff Do Not Accept or Understand Volunteer Program 1n Main Problem Areas Needing Improvement 15 Indicators of Volunteer Program Impact on Clients Page 53 55 55 56 57 59 61 63 6M 66 68 69 72 73 76 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION "Experts agree that society's agencies and institutions must undergo critical self- examination to see how they can better serve millions of children who need help. The problems of these children in trouble can be resolved. But not until the peOple of America understand and begin to care."1 In recent years, a variety of issues and incidents have focused public attention on the criminal justice system as a whole, and on the juvenile justice system in particular. Battles over legal rights for children, high rates of juve- nile crime and recidivism, and exposes such as Howard James' Children In Trouble: A National Scandal, have demonstrated in some manner the failure of the system to fulfill its goals of providing effective rehabilitative care and control through a system of individualized justice. The Challenge of Crime In A Free Society noted that "the juvenile court has not succeeded significantly in rehabilitating delinquency or in bringing justice to the child."2 In 1970, the number of juvenile delinquency cases handled by the juvenile court reached an all time high of 1,052,000, lHoward James, Children In Trouble: A National Scandal, (New York: David McKay C6., Inc., 19697: p. 328. 2The President's Commission On Law Enforcement And Administra- tion of Justice, The Challenge of Crime In A Free-Society (Washington: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1967), p. 80. 2 and if increases continue based on a projected rate derived from actual figures for 1965—1970, the number of cases being handled by the courts in 1977 will increase by 5096.3 Yet despite the growing dimensions of the problem, "all available evidence shows that most juvenile courts face a continuing overload situation in which they cannot handle more than a small proportion of all potential cases because of resource or manpower limitations."” The recognition of this increasingly critical situation in the juvenile courts and the implications it carries for detrimental effects on juveniles under the courts' jurisdic- tion, has led both to self-examination and public re-assessment of the courts' operations and effectiveness. As a result of I this, a number of new approaches have been developed by local, state and federal government in the areas of prevention, diversionand correction. Such concepts as Youth Service Bureaus on the local level and the more comprehensive, feder- ally sponsored Youth Service Systems attempt to divert juveniles from the court system by more apprOpriate screening and by maximizing use of existing resources. 3Robert Gemignani, "Youth Services Systems: Diverting Youth From The Juvenile Justice System," Delinquency Prevention Reporter, Special Issue (July-August, 1972). “President's Commission On Law Enforcement and the Administra— tion of Justice, Task Force Report: Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Crime (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 87. 3 In addition to these governmental approaches to prevention and diversion, there has been a considerable escalation of citizen cencern and involvement. "Although the nation has neglected its criminal justice system as a whole, there is growing evidence of a new interest on the part of the public to improve the entire system, . . ."5 The most significant indicator of this public interest is the rapid growth of the volunteer movement in courts. In the last decade, volunteer programs in courts have grown "from virtually 0 to over 1,000 adult misdemeanant and juvenile courts."6 This expansion has not only encompassed an involvement in more programs, but in more kinds of programs as citizens discover the range of their abilities in helping juvenile courts to provide better, more individualized treatment for juveniles. Experts in the juvenile justice field have noted that the increased involvement of citizens in corrections has a number of major implications; among which are the provision of a new manpower source for the courts and an essential role in the re-integration of the offender into the community. From a program standpoint in the provision of services, volunteers 5United States Chamber of Commerce, Marshaling Citizen Power To Modernize CorrectiOns (Washington: GovernmentIPrinting Office, 197?), p. I: 6Volunteers In Probation, Inc., Volunteers and the Rehabili- tation of Criminal Offenders: Conference RepOrt (RoyaIJOak 1970), p. S. u offer a manpower source of great potential that can, at least, begin to address some of the problems caused by insufficient personnel. "The service gaps in the system of juvenile justice and the rehabilitation of the offender traditionally and primarily have been attributed to (1) lack of sufficient numbers of well- trained and highly qualified personnel, and (2) the lack of adequate community services upon which the courts are partly, if not entirely dependent. As such, understaffed, underpaid, and overburdened probation departments arer unintentionally undermining the rehabilitative efforts of courts and correctional agencies."7 Volunteers can both augment and complement existing court services and allow for Optimal use of professional probation officers' time and skills. Perhaps even more significant is the role that volunteers play in the re-integration of the offender into the community. "One major reason why voluntary efforts should be expanded is that corrections has too long been isolated from the main- stream of community activity. The direct contact of the volunteer with the correctional system provides a means of countering this situation."8 The involvement of volunteers in the correctional process also has great potential as a force for social change. As the community becomes educated about the problems and restraints 7Ivan Scheier, Volunteers In Court: A Manual (Washington: U.S. Department of Health,'Education and Welfare, 1971), p.]” 8President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administra- tion of Justice, Task Force Report: Corrections (Washington: Government Printing Office,'I967), p. 108. 5 of the criminal justice system through actual contact and experience, it can help mobilize the action necessary for change and reform and, as Mr. James stated in the opening quotation, can provide a means through which "the peOple of America understand and begin to care."9 THE PROBLEM Although, as indicated in the preceding section, the value of volunteer involvement in corrections has been well- recognized, in a manner typical of many "grass—roots" move- ments, it has expanded at a rate that has exceeded an orderly and systematic development of theory and practice and a comprehensive evaluation of results. Dr. Ivan Scheier, one of the national leaders of the court volunteer movement states that: Since 1960, when volunteer services were first extended to the court setting, the growth of this movement has continued at a rapidly accelere ated rate. The primary problem facing the court volunteer movement has not been the lack of enthusiasm or support, But rather the inability of knowledge and information gained as a result of experience to keep pace with the rate of growth. Results of a 1970 survey showed that "20-25% of all juvenile courts in the United States currently reported having volunteer programs, with an additional 10-15% seriously planning them?"ll 9James, op. cit. 10Scheier, p. v. llIvan Scheier and Louise Allen, Volunteer Courts In America: The New Decade {Boulderz National Information Center on Volunteers In Court, 1970), p. 3. 6 Michigan has been no exception, either to the rapid growth or to the accompanying lag in the accumulation and sharing of knowledge. In conversations with this author, two national leaders of the court volunteer movement who have done their most direct work in Michigan, and who continue to be highly involved in develOpments locally and nationally, could not give a definitive answer as to the extent of the volunteer movement in Michigan's juvenile courts. Both expressed an interest in having such information available and commented on the difficulties involved in obtaining up—to—date information on program developments. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY_ The main objective of this study is to fill the void in existing information by examining the nature and extent of volunteer programs in Michigan's juvenile courts. In order to place the development of Michigan's programs in perspective, the paper will begin in Chapter II by tracing the historical development of the volunteer court movement and by highlight- ing selected programs across the country. A review of the literature in the field, which consists primarily of descriptive articles, manuals, etc. written by the National Information Center on Volunteerism and others involved in the movement, rather than articles in professional journals, will be incor- porated into Chapter II for historical and specific program information and in Chapter III which will deal with general Principles and operations of court volunteer programs. 7 Chapter IV will present the results of a survey conducted of juvenile courts in Michigan and will consider such variables as the extent of existing volunteer programs, methods of recruitment and training of volunteers, types of activities and services provided by volunteers, relationship of volunteers to professionals and the effectiveness of volunteer programs as related to client outcomes. Chapter V will conclude with a discussion of the use of volunteers in the juvenile justice system and some implications for possible program development. This chapter will also include some projections as to future directions of the volunteer court movement and delineate areas for future study. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY. In order to insure its viability and credibility as a preventive/rehabilitative technique, the court volunteer move- ment must begin, or continue where it has already begun, to document its develoPment, theory, practice and effectiveness. This study will, on a broad level, by adding to the body of knowledge currently available, help to further legitimize the use of volunteers in court settings. More specifically, it will provide information which courts and communities in Michigan will be able to use in developing programs for their Own areas by sharing the experiences of existing courts. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY_ .The major limitation of this study may be the rapid _growth rate of the volunteer court movement. A survey aimed at providing "up-to-date" information may lose some of its import if the rate of program development advances more quickly than the rate of documentation. A survey of this nature is also limited by its local setting. Conclusions as to rates of development, types of programs, etc., must be confined to Michigan, although parallels may exist elsewhere. Lastly, the need for prompt response and easily accountable information, pre-empts detailed examination of some aspects of volunteer programming. Many areas worthy of exploration and consideration could only be touched upon briefly within the confines of this study. DEFINITION OF TERMS Volunteer This term refers to any individual or organization who provides services, materials, or facilities without pay. In certain instances, however, the donation of professional services, such as psychological testing for minimal fees, is considered a volunteer service. In this paper, the use of the term volunteer will refer primarily to the donation of services without fees. Court Volunteer Movement This term will be used interchangably with the volunteer court movement to denote the growth of volunteerism in the courts since 1960. CHAPTER II THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE VOLUNTEER COURT MOVEMENT The provision of voluntary services to assist offenders can be traced back to the origins of probation in this country. John Augustus, a Boston shoemaker active in the middle of the nineteenth century, is commonly acknowledged as "the father" of modern probation due to his extensive voluntary efforts at assisting and rehabilitating offenders in Boston from 1891 to the year of his death in 1859. Through his own resources and example, Augustus was able to assist approximately two thousand offenders in this period.12 By offering to post bail and personally assist offenders who promised to reform, Augustus instituted the foundations of current probation practices which "suspend sentence" while the offender remains in the community under the guidance of a probation officer. Augustus received no official sanction or remuneration for his work. He defined his rather unique position as follows: I devote my time daily, and often a large portion of the night in the performance of the various labors which fall within my province. I am no agent for any sect, society or association what- ever. I receive no salary, neither have I ever received a dollar for any service as a salary, nor do I know of any individual who ever became responsible to me, even to the amount of a dollar; E; 12David Dressler, Practice and Theory of Probation and Parole (New York: ColumbiEUniversity Press, 1969), p. 20. 10 11 I am therefore not accountable to any sect, society or individual for the manner in which my efforts have been applied. The favorable outcomes that resulted from his energetic efforts, and the focus on the plight of offenders brought about partially by his activities, gave impetus to the development of the first laws providing probationary services to children and adults. In 1869, a Massachusetts law was passed authorizing the State Board of Charities to investi- gate cases of children tried before criminal courts. An agent was to attend the trial, receive children for placement when directed by the court and visit them periodically after a placement was obtained. These functions are incorporated and expanded in the role of today's juvenile probation officer.1”‘ In 1878, Massachusetts passed another law towards the provision of probationary services by authorizing the mayor of Boston to appoint a paid probation officer. His duties , were similar to those that John Augustus had performed and included social investigations and recommendations to the judge as to "which persons. . .may reasonably be expected to be reformed without punishment."15 "From that beginning, the authorized use of probation spread to all the courts of “Charles L. Chute and Marjorie Bell, 'Cr‘im‘e‘, Courts' and 'Pro-. bation (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1956), p. #0. 1'"Dressler, p. 27. 1-50harles L. Chute, "The Development of Probation In The United States" in Probation and Criminal'JuStice (New York: The MacMillan~Company, 1933), p. 229. 12 Massachusetts, to other New England states and gradually to states westward and southward, to England and to other European countries."16 . The development of probation in England during this period, bore many similarities to the early development in the United States. In Birmingham, during the l8u0's, an informal agreement between the justices of the peace and the Watch Committee, in effect, provided probation for juvenile offenders. ". . .Three probation officers were appointed; cases were suspended and juvenile defendants placed under supervision."17 Probation in limited form was introduced into English statute law in 1879. Preceding this, and during the period between the 1879 law and the subsequent 1887 probation law, volunteers from the Church of England Temperance Society and other societies performed much the same function in England's police courts as John Augustus had in Boston's court. In addition, efforts on the part of the voluntary Howard Associa- tion through an 1891 paper entitled "Juvenile Offenders", influenced the further development of probation. The ideas expressed in the Howard Association paper were incorporated into an 1886 version of the probation law, which although not 16National Probation Association, John Augustus: First Probation Officer (New York: 1939), p. v. 17William A- Goldberg, English Adult Probation and Aftercare (Michigan State University, 1971), p. 10. 13 passed by both houses, was the forerunner of the approved 1887 bill. 18 Thus, volunteers played a significant role both in the provision of direct services to offenders an in promoting the expanded and increased use of probation throughout England. Coinciding with other developments of this era in the treatment of the offenders, was the inception of the juvenile court movement in the United States. This movement which began around the turn of the century served to accelerate the development of probation, for probation "was an integral part of the program of these special courts."19 The law establishing the first juvenile court in Cook County, Illinois in 1899, provided for a probation officer to be appointed by and responsible to the judge. It is significant to note that the first probation officers were volunteers; "they were not paid out of public funds partly because of the dubious assumption that to offer salaries would attract individuals interested only in compensation."20 As the responsibilities, duties and caseloads of probation officers increased, so accordingly did the drive for profession- alism. It became apparent that the demands of treating a specialized population such as young and adult offenders could not be handled adequately by volunteers who had nothing to lBIbid., p. 7. 19Dressler, p. 28. 201bid. 14 offer except their good will. ". . . it took almost twenty- five years before probation develOped from a system confined to volunteers and inefficient workers who because of lack of training and experience were not qualified to give probation services, to a highly organized and professional service."21 The use of volunteers in assisting offenders in court, which stemmed from the early activities of John Augustus, .gave way to paid, trained professionals performing much the same functions. However, rising juvenile crime rates, increased use of probation and accordingly higher caseloads and demands for time, soon diminished the effect of professional skills on the delivery of probation services to juveniles. By 1925, all states had laws providing for juvenile probation, but as recently as 1967, a survey done by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency indicated that to a large extent, there is little more than "paper" probation offered in many areas. "In 165 counties in four states, no juvenile probation services at all were available. Seventy-four percent of all counties in the U.S. theoretically had such service, but in some it was quite minimal."22 In addition to the absence of probationary services in some localities, even those areas that do provide service face a serious manpower shortage. The Task Force Report: 21June Morrison, The Use of Volunteers in Juvenile Courts In the United States (Arizona: University of Arizona, 1970), p. 2. 22National Council on Crime and Delinquency "Corrections In the United States," Crime and Delinquency, XXXIV (January, 1967), p. ug-so. 15 Corrections, notes that "more manpower is needed for probationary services then is now available" and that despite recommended caseloads of thirty-five, fewer than four percent of the probation officers in the country are carrying caseloads of forty or less.23 The need to alleviate this situation and to allow probation to be used more significantly as a treatment approach, encouraged the expanded use of volunteers in court settings. Volunteers today constitute a significant work force in the criminal justice system, as indi- viduals and in groups. At present estimates, the citizen volunteer outnumbers paid workers in the system four or five to one. Exclusive of law enforcement agencies, and above the midsemeanant court level, approximately 70% of criminal justice agencies have some sort of volunteer program. v THE NEW VOLUNTEER COURT MOVEMENT There is no agreed upon explanation for the sudden and spontaneous re-emergence of the volunteer court movement in the early 1960's. It is apparent, however, that in different locations across the country, the concept of volunteer courts was being examined by judges and others in a number of court settings. Three programs in particular, Royal Oak, Michigan; 23Task Force: Corrections, p. 30. 2L'Ivan Scheier and others, Guidelines And Standards For The Use Of Volunteers In CorrectionaI Programs (Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, 1972), p.Iiii. 16 Boulder, Colorado; and Denver, Colorado, can be considered vanguards of the new court movement although each dealt with a different dimension of the problem of rising youth crime and insufficient rehabilitative resources. Royal Oak, Michigan .The pioneer volunteer program with young misdemeanant offenders was begun by Judge Keith Leenhouts in Royal Oak, Michigan. The program at Royal Oak developed out of Leenhouts' personal awareness that the potential for rehabilitation of young adult offenders who received nothing more than a fine or imprisonment was extremely limited. The absence of any formal probationary services in Royal Oak led Judge Leenhouts to seek other alternatives. In April, 1960, the Michigan State Corrections Commission approved the judge's plan to utilize eight personally chosen volunteers in working with five man caseloads to provide individualized attention to those young offenders the judge believed could benefit from it. A chief probation officer was appointed and volunteers began seeing probationers once a week. The basic concept behind the program was to provide an "inspirational personality" for young offenders and to offer them someone who would listen to their problems and care about them. Within the first year, the program expanded to, thirty-five volunteers, reducing the caseloads sufficiently to allow for a one-to-one relationship between volunteer and probationer. In addition, two retirees were hired at 1? salaries equivalent to their social security, to provide administrative support for the program and to conduct more detailed pre-sentence investigations. Initially, program costs involving the retirees salaries and nominal fees for donated psychiatric services were contributed by local business- men and concerned citizens. Soon, however, community attention aroused by the program prompted the city government to assist in financing the program. The city contributed half of the first year's costs for a total cf $2200. At Leenhouts' request, the other half of the Operating expenses were to continue to be obtained from local citizens. Thus, "the vital element of community awareness and participation was maintained, but the problem of meeting the cost of the program was simplified."25 As the program grew, Leenhouts augmented the volunteer probation officer staff by utilizing the volunteer services of professionals, such as doctors and psychiatrists, and by utiliz- ing existing community resources for treating young offenders. Specialized services such as a Driver Violators School, marriage counseling, an alcoholic program, group therapy, and vocational rehabilitation were instituted or made available to the young misdemeanants in the Royal Oak court. In 1965, the Royal Oak program attracted the attention of the Board of Social Concerns of the Methodist Church. The church was sufficiently impressed with the Royal Oak program and 25Joe Alex Morris, First Offender: A Volunteer Program For Youth In Trouble With The Law (New YOrk} 7W. W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1970), p. 101. 18 philosophy to offer Leenhouts $29,000 to "spread the idea of volunteer citizen participation in probationary rehabili- "26' It was decided to utilize the money for travel, tation. production of films and literature and other means to fam— iliarize courts around the country with the concept of volunteer programs in courts. The effort was called Project Misdemeanant and continued from 1965 through 1969. By 1969, Leenhouts had enlisted the support of a prominent Chicago businessman who agreed to finance the judge's activi- ties for a two year period if the judge "would resign from the t bench and devote full time to spreading the concept of the volunteer probation system."27 This new program effort was ‘4 called Volunteers In Probation, Inc. whose purpose is "to stimulate the develOpment of effective citizen participation in court and rehabilitative programs."28 The foundation is a clearinghouse of information, sponsors training, provides speakers and consultants and conducts an overall effort to further the use of volunteers in court settings. Currently, the program at Royal Oak uses an average of one hundred volunteer probation officers plus a network of professional and community services in providing rehabilitative services for young adult offenders. The total cost of the program is $28,000, of which $17,000 is contributed by the 26Ibid., p. 131. 27Ibid., p. 1u5. 281bid., p. 1u7. 19 city. In return, "the community of Royal Oak received services from the probation program that otherwise would have cost, at a conservative estimate, some $300,000 a year."29 The effectiveness of the Royal Oak program was tested . under the auspices of a five year grant awarded by the National Institute of Mental Health in 1965. An experimental group at the Royal Oak court was compared to a control group in a comparably sized and populated court in another state that did not have intensive volunteer probation services. Results derived from testing conducted over an eighteen month period, indicated on tests designed to evaluate aggressiveness, type and degree of hostility and general social and anti-social attitudes, that of Royal Oak's probationers 73.8% improved, 15.3% showed no change and 11.7% regressed.) Of the control court's probationers, 17.8% improved, 3H.2% showed no change, and 98% regressed. An additional study of all 1965 proba- tioners at Royal Oak and the control court indicated an over— all recidivism rate of 1u.9% for Royal Oak and H9.8% for the control court.30 Studies such as these are beginning to document the impact of volunteer programs and give impetus to the further growth of the movement. Boulder, Colorado One of the characteristics of the early court volunteer movement was the relative isolation in which the programs 291bid., p. 112. 301bid., p. 129. 20 develOped. In several places across the country, the volunteer concept was beginning to take hold, but each program was with- out the benefit of support or experience of similar attempts. While Judge Leenhouts was initiating his efforts with young adults in Royal Oak, Judge Horace B. Holmes of Boulder's Juvenile Court decided to meet the growing crisis of youth crime by expanding the probationary services available to juveniles. Although Boulder had two full—time probation officers, the judge felt that more effective services could be provided by "having volunteers work correctively and pre- ventively with juvenile offenders."31 Under the supervision of the professional probation officers, the Boulder program began by using volunteers in a one-to-one relationship with juvenile offenders. The range of services provided by volunteers gradually expanded to encompass tutoring, testing, administrative responsibilities, group discussion leaders, and legal, psycho— logical and other professional services. The court currently uses about one hundred volunteers and has added two additional professional probation officers for supervisory purposes. The professional probation officers conduct pre-sentence investi- Vgations and make recommendations to the judge as to the suite ability of the traditional probation approach or of the one or more specialized probation programs involving volunteers. The 311bid., p. 18”. 21 judge sets the rules for probation, but the volunteer assigned to the juvenile can request changes or adjustmEnts. Volunteers report weekly to regular staff. One of the most innovative concepts to develop out of the Boulder program was the Boulder County Attention Homes. Attention Homes provide short—term placements for juveniles rather than necessitating the use of detention or jails. Although the houseparents receive salaries, materials, and supplies, the educational and recreational programs are primarily provided by volunteers. The "drive to establish the Attention Home was started on the theory that community participation should be total involvement rather than just donations of money--that is, the community should provide volunteer services as well as facilities and materials sufficient to support the rehabilitative program."32 Publicity and interest attracted by the program prompted the Youth Development and Delinquency Prevention Agency (YDDPA) of the Department of Health,Education and Welfare to award a two year demonstration grant, starting in 1966, to the Boulder Court. Under the directorship of Dr. Ivan Scheier, the court was to explore new aspects of court volunteer services while documenting and evaluating existing practices. Part of the process included contacting other courts involved with volunteer programs and establishing a National Information Center on Volunteers In Court (NICOVIC). "Its purpose was to develop k 321bid. , p. 187. 22 funding resources privately from clients, in order to serve nationil information and idea exchange functions as distinct from any specific grant."33 In 1967, the first conference of volunteer courts was organized by Dr. Scheier in Boulder. This was the first major step in the continuing efforts of the National Information Center to promote idea and information exchange among volunteer courts. The inception of the Volunteer Courts Newsletter in 1967 served to further promote this goal. A subsequent grant from YDDPA provided money for the development of materials and guidelines for training and Operation of court volunteer programs. An evaluation of Boulder's program effectiveness was also sponsored by YDDPA with results indicating "that volunteers reduce the need for local and state incarceration, while still keeping recidivism down. Delinquency proneness, as measured by a nationally standardized test is either held steady or decreased in our probationers when volunteers are used. When volunteers are not used, delinquency proneness increases between the beginning and the end of probation."37 Although, both the Boulder and the Royal Oak programs began as responses to local problems, their significance was sOon recognized on a national level and their efforts were expanded accordingly through the National Information Center 33The National Information Center On Volunteers In Court, NICOVIC (Boulder: November, 1971). u 3 Morris, p. 191. 23 and Volunteers In Probation, Inc., to meet the growing needs Of the volunteer courts movement for improved information and training. Denver, Colorado Early efforts with volunteer programs in courts had expanded from Royal Oak and Boulder to other lower courts and juvenile courts in communities with populations under 200,000. Problems of coordination, organization and a per- ceived lack of community interest and identity, tended to discourage attempts at instituting volunteer court programs in big cities. However, in 1966, encouraged by Judge Leenhouts, Judge William Burnett of the Denver County Court, decided to I '9 pursue the idea with the help of a U.S. Department of Justice grant. "Burnett proposed a probation department that would utilize the services of professional counselors and therapists, but would also mobilize and utilize community resources, including lay persons (volunteers) acting as probation counselors."35 The prOposal also incorporated a training component for volunteer probation officers to be designed and conducted by the Graduate School of Social Work of the Univer- sity of Denver and a research component which would "determine ‘the success of the demonstration and its national implications fox‘lower courts Operating on limited budgets."36 35Ibid., p. 168. 35Ibid. 29 The evaluation of Denver's program was highly encouraging. The control group of misdemeanants who were given tests at the beginning and end of the two year period but were not placed on probation, had a slightly higher mean number of arrests (3.17) prior to the study. At the end of the study, this group showed very little improvement, with an arrest rate of 3.00 per year. The experimental .group, which took the test at the same times but were placed on probation, had approximately the same arrest rate (2.90) at the beginning Of the study, but significantly reduced it during the two years to 1.36. 7 Denver's success has led to the development of volunteer efforts in other large cities, including Houston, Texas and Seattle, Washington. Other Programs The example of the three programs just described, combined with the efforts of the National Information Center on Volunteers In Court, Volunteers In Probation, Inc., and the support of federal agencies such as YDDPA, have given impetus to the rapid develOpment of volunteer programs in misdemeanant and juvenile courts all over the country. In 1961, only three or four courts were using volunteers. In 1965 it had grown to twenty-five; by 1967 to one hundred and twenty-five and by 1969, between three and four hundred courts were recorded as using volunteers.38 The 1971 edition of the volunteer courts directory lists approxie Jnately six hundred courts having volunteer programs, and from all indications, the number has exceeded that by now. Dr. Ivan 37Ibid., p. 177. 38Morrison, p. 3. 25 Scheier of NICOVIC, estimated that by 1972, 60—75% of all courts would be using volunteers in some capacity. The pr0portion of juvenile courts having volunteer programs, although smaller than the figure projected by Dr. Scheier, is still substantial. As of 1970, 20—25% Of all juvenile courts in the United States reported having volunteer programs, with an additional 10—15% seriously planning them.39 In view of the limited nature of probationary and other rehabilitative services in many juvenile courts, particularly those serving low population areas, the projected figure is quite significant. The variety of ways in which volunteers are used has also grown rapidly, from the basic one-tO—One relationship role which was the foundation Of the early programs, to one hundred and fifty different jobs which volunteers have actually per- formed to date in various courts."0 Major programs around the country now use volunteers to impact on a number of aspects of the probationer's life in addition to interpersonal relation- ships. Educational and tutoring programs, family and_group counseling, vocational testing and placement, health services and marriage counseling are just a few of the broad areas of services and programs provided through the efforts of volunteers. State Involvement In Volunteer Programs The expansion of volunteer programs in juvenile and ndsdemeanant courts and its implications for program and service 39Scheier, Volunteer Courts In America, p. 3 ”OIvan Scheier and Judith Berry, ServinggYouth As Volunteers (Boulder: National Information Center On Volunteers In Court, 1972), p. 15. 26 delivery, has led to a number of state actions to coordinate and regulate volunteer programs. In 1968, Florida became the first state to sponsor a state-wide system of volunteer services as a part of a newly created Department of Community Services, under the auspices of the Probation and Parole Commission. Volunteers work with probation and parole supervisors in local areas. The volunteers assist in improving the educational and vocational goals and achievement of probationers and parolees. In addition, they work with professional staff members in making routine investigations and in conducting supervisory activities. They receive formalized training before and during their volunteer assignments from local community colleges. By September 1969, the program had approximately 2,000 volunteers registered, with some 1,500 actually being used."1 In addition to the use of individual volunteers, volunteer advisory committees are being organized in each area. "The advisory committees are made up of community experts with edu- cational, professional and business backgrounds. They function as diagnostic bodies for case presentations and recommendations and handle many phases of volunteer recruitment and screening. These committees coordinate the services of community resource organizations to help reintegrate the Offender into the community.""2 The state of Washington has also initiated a state-wide volunteer system similar to Florida's. "1Charles Unkovic and Jean Davis, "Volunteers In Probation and Parole," Federal Probation, XXXIII (December, 1969), p. 93. "ZIbid., p. us. 27 Other states are beginning to look at the implications of volunteer programs on a broader scale. In 1972, Massachusetts amended its probation law to read "the commissioner shall initiate and deve10p volunteer programs in consultation with probation officers throughout the commonwealth and shall super— vise and evaluate programs within the probation service.""3 The previous wording read "may". Also in 1972, Georgia created a Commission on Volunteerism to assess and evaluate the use of volunteers and to promote a state-wide effort. Fifteen states currently have some official involvement in state—wide volunteer coordinative efforts with an additional twelve in various stages of planning."" l"3VIP Examiner, Volume II, Number 1 (Winter, 1973), p. 2. ””Scheier, Volunteer Courts In America, p. 23. CHAPTER III THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS IN COURT The rapid growth of the volunteer court movement and of recent state involvement in the coordination and Operation of volunteer programs can be construed as a recognition of the potential that volunteers offer for upgrading and improving existing services. There are a number of recognized ways in which the use of volunteers can accomplish this. The most frequently cited means is through diversification of services. Services previously limited by the time and skill of profesf sional staff can be greatly expanded by the addition of volunteers. Volunteers assist in improving the quality as well as the quantity of available services, particularly through offering intensive individualized attention to pro- bationers. Currently, there are approximately one hundred and fifty different jobs that volunteers have actually performed in courts around the country.”5 It is significant to note that the kinds of volunteers and volunteer services available span a broad spectrum of occupations, professions and class levels and are not confined to housewives and students, although these two groups are heavily represented in many programs. The diversification aspect of volunteer programs is usually the most sought after component of service improvement, ”5Scheier, Serving Youth As Volunteers, p. 15. 28 29 possibly because it is the most tangible. The kinds of roles volunteers can play in fulfilling this function as it relates to clients and youth serving agencies or the cOmmunity can be considered under the following general categories. "In direct contact with youth the volunteer can Offer such services as l) 'support-friendship; sincere warmth; 2) "mediation", facilitation of social-physical , environment; 3) behavior model, good example; H) limit—setting, social control, conscience; 5) teacher-tutor of skills, academic, vocational or social; 6) Observation-information-diagnosis-understanding (extra eyes and ears) a) on the probationer, b) on the community, c) or even on court Operations and; 7) advisory or”decision-making participation in formulation or modification of probation or other treatment plan. Volunteers can also do many things not primarily involv— ing direct contact with probationers. Among these are: 8) administrative- Office work and related facilitation; 9) help recruit, train advise and supervise other volunteers; 10) expert consultant to regular staff; 11) advisor to court or similar youth agency, participation in policy making--formally or informally, the volunteer as a source of ideas; 12) public relations, public education and related impact on the community; and 13) contributions of money, materials; facilities or help in securing these from others.”6 Volunteers can also provide an "amplification of services", particularly in situations where the professional staff is overburdened. Generally, it is accepted that one hour of professional time put into supervison or consultation can l45113131., p. 1n. 30 produce fifteen hours of volunteer time Spent with probationers as a result of skillful directiOn and monitoring.'47 The direct impact on the client can be seen in the role that volunteers play in the "humanization of services." Typically, high caseloads and administrative paperwork may severely hamper the professional probation officer's efforts at individualized treatment. Because volunteers generally have more time to spend with the particular youth assigned to him or her, a more personalized approach and relationship is possible. From the client's point of view, volunteers do not bear the stigma of being an official authority or agency person and because they are not paid for spending time with the probationor, there is often a greater readiness to accept the fact that the volunteer is involved because he actually cares. In addition to these implications for the client, volunteers can provide courts with an invaluable link to the community. PrOperly led, experienced volunteers constitute a court constituency for constructive change and realistic education to the problems of juvenile probationers and youth in general. . .They have enormous potential as knowledgeable court ambassadors to the community, articulating needs for problem youth, establishing climates Of acceptance and molding Opinion. Volunteers, in effect, become a community change agent, facilitating the understanding and development of programs for all youth in the community. "7Scheier,Guidelines. . ., p. 27. ”BScheier, Serving Youth As Volunteers, p. 9. 31 THE VOLUNTEER PROCESS The experiences of Royal Oak, Boulder, and other programs, combined with the efforts of leaders in the field and support from the federal government, have led to a consolidation of knowledge and an attempt to standardize the basic elements of volunteer programs. Although the literature, as well as the leaders, stress flexibility and the need for tailoring programs to specific communities, a number of basic components of volun- teer programs have emerged and have been acknowledged as essential. The potential effectiveness and value of volunteers in any program can be protected by a systematic and planned approach to integrating them into the agency through the use of good 1) recruiting 2) screening 3) training and orientation u) relationships to clients 5) supervision 6) evaluation and 7) funding. Recruiting Courts may employ a variety of methods for recruiting volunteers, depending on their resources and their needs. "The volunteer himself is often said to be the best recruiter,"”9 although some courts prefer to use only selected volunteers or regular personnel to conduct recruiting. Courts also use mass media such as newspapers, radio and t.v. or may design special advertising campaigns to assist in the recruitment effort depend— ing on the number and kinds of Volunteers they are interested in ugGary Auslander, "The Volunteer In The Court" (Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Illinois, 1969), p. 35. 32 recruiting. Universities and local service and professional groups have often been the target of these efforts, although greater attempts are now being made to attract more minority group volunteers. As reported in a recent survey, volunteers in correctional agencies were: 57% professionals, executives or other white collar workers and 26% housewives; over 50% have incomes over $10,000, almost 50% are college graduates and more than 90% of present volunteers are white.50 A study conducted for the U.S. Department of Justice and the data derived from the survey included in this thesis, indicate that many courts do not take an active role in recruit- ing the volunteers they desire. Despite the fact that diffi- culties in later volunteer performance can be avoided by careful recruitment and screening, courts Often do not accord the recruitment effort the priority that it merits. Certain courts, however, conduct such a broad scale campaign that they are guilty Of "over-recruiting." This can lead to a diminishing of community support and enthusiasm if people are not utilized in close time proximity to the recruitment campaign and in the roles that are described for them. Screening Although screening tends to be a somewhat informal process, most courts have a combination of application forms and inter- views used to assist in the selection of volunteers. The interviews are often conducted by the volunteer program director 50Morrison, p. H. 33 who may be a volunteer himself, or more likely, by a regular paid staff member.‘ The amount of staff time available often determines the depth of the interview. The basis of selection of volunteers varies from court to court, but may take into consideration the following kinds of variables: 1) interest 2) emotional maturity 3) ability to relate to others 9) depend- ability 5) education 6) sense of adherence to accepted ethical and moral standards 7) availability of time to devote and 8) sensitivity, warmth.51 These kinds of criteria often tend to bias volunteer selection towards middle-class volunteers, creating some problems and questions as to their effectiveness in working with lower-class delinquent children. One of the most recent areas of examination relative to the screening process is the matching of volunteers to offenders. Considerable effort and research are still needed in this field to discover the viability of appropriate matching to maximize volunteer effectiveness in relation to clients. Certain juvenile correctiOnal programs such as the Robert Kennedy Youth Center in Morgantown, West Virginia, have utilized an elementary matching device in assigning volunteers to young offenders within their program. Staff and treatment methods are also matched to specific behavioral types of young offenders to provide Optimal support across all aspects of program. 51Auslander, p. 38. 3H Orientation and Training The quality and scope of training programs for volunteers vary as much as the kinds of programs in which volunteers are involved. It is, however, a key element in program success. "Recruiting, screening and training of volunteers should not be considered separately. They aregpart and parcel of the Same process: putting the right volunteer, properly prepared, in the right job."52 Court training programs vary from simple brochures designed to familiarize the volunteer with the program, to three day sessions with ongoing monthly meetings, utilizing a range of lectures, discussions, films, slides, role-playing and case studies. The Denver County Court, described in the previous chapter, has perhaps the most sOphisticated training program which was designed by and is offered in cooperation with the Denver University Graduate School of Social Work. Results of a recent survey done on a national level, indicates that "some sort of training has actually been installed in about 97% of the programs. Moveover, staff voiced as a high priority the need for more training materials and aids, and better organized training."5'3 Training is considered most complete and effective when it familiarizes the volunteer with aspects of the volunteer role, of the court system and of the problems of the offender. In addition, some training programs incorporate skill training in areas such as counseling and 52Scheier, Guidelines. . ., p. 62. 53Ibid., p. 77. 35 community resources orientation, which familiarizes the volunteer with programs and services available to assist the Offender. Many programs include onegoing or in-service train- ing for volunteers, varying from weekly to monthly sessions. The Volunteer-Client Relationship The different roles which volunteers may play in relation to clients have been enumerated in a previous section. Within those roles, the volunteer-client relationship is generally characterized by an attitude of acceptance and friendship through which an atmosphere conducive to attitude change and self-examination can be created for the young Offender. Court programs differ as to the amount of official authority vested in the volunteer. In certain programs, volunteers are sworn in as officers of the court and are expected to perform the duties of a regular probation officer, including reporting law violations to the police. However, most programs choose to divorce the volunteer from the authority role, feeling that maximum benefit can be obtained through a more informal image. Most courts have incorporated some basic rules or suggestions for volunteeraclient relationships into their orientation and training materials. The Hennepin County, Minnesota program, one Of the more carefully develOped programs in the country, includes in their volunteer manual six basic elements of the volunteer-client relationship: 1) Individualization - recognizing the client's uniqueness and treating him or her as an individual. 2) Self-Determination - offer alternatives but allow the client to decide for himself. 36 3) Non—Judgemental Attitude - don't judge on the basis of looks or acts. 8) Acceptance — of the client as a human being with the right to be respected and understood, though not necessarily accepting his behavior or values. 5) Confidentiality — have an agreement with the client as to what is private and what is public information. 6) Controlled Emotional Involvement - modulate your involvement so that you assist but don't take over. The relationship should be one of support, not dependency. Within these broad guidelines, volunteers are encouraged to use their individual talents, skills and techniques in working with the client. Supervision The element of supervision has Often been neglected in volunteer programs, however, there is growing proof that "the “ quality of a volunteer program ultimately depends on the quality of the people who manage it."55 One of the responsibilities of the agency to the volunteer is the provision of adequate and appropriate supervision. Programs may utilize an existing staff member, usually a probation officer, on a part-time or full-time basis to supervise and coordinate volunteer activities and to maintain records on volunteer involvement. Generally, larger programs have established a new, paid position of volunteer coordinator or director of volunteer programs, although this position, in some cases, is also filled by a volunteer. 5"Hennepin County Minnesota, Volunteer Program, n.d., pp. 20—26. 55Scheier, Volunteers In Court, p. 16.. 37 Supervision for volunteers encompasses helping the volunteers maintain interest and enthusiasm, helping them marshall their personal resources and more effectively use their skills, providing ongoing feedback and recognition of well-performed tasks. "The effectiveness of the volunteer's performance will depend upon the investment of time and care— ful planning in training and supervision."56 This sentiment is further supported by Dr. Scheier in his statement that "contrary to popular misconceptions, volunteers are not a free gift: they must be earned by the agency, in previous accept- and more than that, in positive leadership. Thus, volunteer impact potential is for naught unless the juvenile court does its part to provide both opportunity and leadership for volunteers--a positive partnership for progress in youth services."57 Evaluation In the enthusiasm that characterized the new volunteer court movement, the drive to operationalize programs frequently overshadowed the desire to examine their effectiveness. Early programs often neglected to build in a systematic way of assessing volunteer performance and the effect of programs on clients. Royal Oak, Boulder and Denver were each in existence for several years before the various federally-sponsored research and evaluation projects were applied to their programs. 56Volunteers In Probation, Inc., Conference Report on Volunteers and The Rehabilitation of Offenders, 1973, p. 39A. 57Scheier, Serving Youth As Volunteers, p. 18. 38 Today, documenting the effectiveness of volunteer programs has become a high priority nationally, as the volunteer move— ment enters its second decade. Guidelines and Standards for the Use of Volunteers in Correctional Programs emphasizes that "evaluation is for everyone, for these reasons a) Increasingly, program sponsors and financers demand it, whether they be local, state or national, private or governmental, and whether it be initial funding or re-funding b) Evaluation is the only way we're going to preserve what's good in our programs and imporve what's not. . c) changing the needs to change with the changing times. . . d) morale of the concerned program leader."58 Evaluation of programs is now encompassing such factors as number of hours, costs, and staff time invested, value of mater- ials and facilities, and offender related variables such as number of police contacts, recidivism, revocation and insti- tutionalization rates, number of jail days saved, job continuity statistics, parole failure rates, etc.59 Quantitative measures like these are important dimensions of evaluation, but quali- tative aspects of programs must also be considered, despite the considerable difficulty involved in measuring them. Most evaluations done to date have focused on the volunteer and the probationer. Future areas of exploration may encompass volunteer impact on staff, judges and the community. 53 i , Guidelines. . ., p. 12”. 59Ibid., p. 125. 39 Funding and Finance Although volunteer programs provide a maximum amount Of services for a small investment, some dimension of continuing financial support to provide that investment is necessary. Funding for volunteer programs can come from a variety of sources or can employ a combination of funding resources. Federal agencies such as LEAA and HEW have financed all or part of several volunteer programs and monies from state criminal justice planning agencies can provide seed money for local programs. Generally, it is felt that volunteer programs 7 should begin to lay the groundwork for continuing funding : almost immediately. Failure to do so may result in an Operational program being abandoned in "mid-stream", with resulting loss of community trust and support for the court and its programs. Programs such as Royal Oak, receive financial support from the city government and from private contributions Of community members. Private foundations also support the efforts of local volunteer programs. An approximate estimate of the cost of volunteer programs is "$100-$150 per volunteer per year for an adequately super- vised and supported program. To go substantially below this figure would risk a stunted, thwarted program, inadequately supported and not prOperly accountable to the agency."60 The various aspects of the volunteer process discussed above, provide a brief overview of the factors that will 5°Ibid., p. 139. HO influence the successful operation of volunteer programs. The survey results discussed in the next chapter reveal some of the dimensions and problems of the volunteer process as it exists in Michigan's juvenile courts. Before considering elements of a specific nature, however, the next section will {17 ._-_'2- ' ‘s . discuss some general perceptions of volunteer programs. The Positive and Negative Aspects of the Use of Volunteers In Court The standardization of elements in the volunteer process, to some extent, addresses itself to minimizing the problems W_"‘.I7— " ' '1' .3. ‘m.-. and difficulties that can develop as a result of poorly planned and executed programs. However, just as certain aspects of utilizing volunteers in court are acknowledged as beneficial and potentially positive, the court volunteer concept is also viewed as having certain disadvantages and negative aspects. The problem area most frequently described in the literature on court volunteerism is the relationship between the volunteer and the professional and the implications of the use of volunteers on staff roles. Ideally, volunteers are seen as augmenting and complementing existing staff services, but professionals often view volunteers as supplementing or replacing them. The professional may view the volunteer as a threat to his status within the agency and within the community and refuse to acknowledge that the volunteer is capable of performing some of the same functions. In some instances, volunteers are also perceived as lowering the standards of the agency by allowing "less qualified" peOple to deal directly with clients. This can lead to a patronizing attitude on the part of the professional ’41 and an unwillingness to utilize the skills and talents that volunteers may have to offer. Professionals can also view volunteers as a reflection on the quality of work that they are doing; in effect, the agency saying "what you are doing is not enough." Basically, the leaders of the volunteer court movement acknowledge the difficulties that volunteers may create in relationships with professional staff, but it is felt that ways of addressing this problem can be developed and incor- porated into individual programs, as well as into broad guidelines and standards. Dr. Ivan Scheier has capsulized the issue in the following quote: ". . .the problem of modern volunteerism differs crucially from the problem Of early volunteerism in corrections, for it becomes an issue of relationship between volunteer and paid professional, a problem of defining Optimum roles for each in a productive probation partnership."61 The task of defining the limits and conditions of a, OOOperative role for professionals and volunteers becomes that of.a skillful and informed agency administration. The coopera- tive role depends on thesupport of administration and its ability to communicate to volunteers and professionals and reinforce the OOOperative model. This can be facilitated by involving staff in the planning process for initiating any volunteer programs, by involving staff in training sessions 61Ivan Scheier, "The Professional and the Volunteer In Probation: An Emerging Relationship," 'Federal Probation, XXXIV (June, 1970), p. 19. QLLV i ! i U 1+2 and in helping the volunteer to understand the role and functions of the agency and staff. The develOpment of specific volunteer job descriptions and continuing discussion sessions between volunteers and staff can also help to ease the way. As volunteers assume some of the functions of the professional, the professional is able to expand and diversify his role by l) maximizing the use of his skills on more difficult cases, 2) by assuming supervisory and consultant roles in relationship to the volunteer and 3) by shifting his emphasis to more direct involvement with the community. Thus, the professional's role can be enhanced and expanded as a» result of the use of volunteers, rather than limited or demeaned. Another Of the areas of concern relative to the use of volunteers is the relationship of the volunteer to the client. Although volunteers have proven themselves in a range of situ- ations with a variety of clients, there is Still considerable concern over possible negative effects that a volunteer may have on a client, either through inadequate skills, by setting a bad example, by involving a client in an activity that will be viewed negatively by the community, by violating confident tiality, or by becoming "overinvolved" with the client and creating a dependency situation. The protection of the client from these possibilities and from the ulterior motives of volunteers with disturbed or deviant backgrounds first becomes the task of good screening and recruiting practices, and subsequently of, good training and adequate supervision. H3 Volunteer turnover rate is still another problem that agencies must deal with if they are involved with volunteer programs. Certain volunteer populations, such as students, may be prone to short—term involvements due to the nature of school year schedules. Courts must attempt to insure a minimum time commitment from the Volunteer to provide a mean- ingful experience for the client. A high volunteer turnover rate, however, may also be related to the way volunteers are utilized in a particular agency. If volunteers are perceived of only as "freeing professionals from drudgery", and not as individuals with a positive contribution of their own to make, they may lose interest in participating and subsequently drop out of the program. The problem of adequate control over volunteers is also one of concern to courts. Because volunteers are not paid, they are not as directly accountable to the agency for their actions or Opinions. Yet, it may be difficult for a court to achieve the proper balance of supervision. "Not enough control can result in the volunteers not being committed to the goals and philosoPhy of the agency and not getting supervision when. needed. Too much control can result in a loss Of freedom and responsibility."62 Again, training and orientation can help to minimize some of the dimensions of the problem, as can good supervision. 62Auslander, p. 29. an In summary then, the disadvantages of using volunteers relate primarily to the definition of roles and responsibilities of the volunteer, the professional and the court. Although the problems briefly discussed here have been and continue to be real problems in existing programs, they are not insur- mountable, and may be of diminishing concern as the volunteer process and experience are standardized and proven through research and evaluation. The rapid expansion of the volunteer court movement can be interpreted as a desire on the part of the courts to "gamble" on volunteer programs despite the possible difficulties that may result. The potential and actual value of volunteer programs have been widely acknowledged, and some of the advantages such as diversification, amplification and humaniza- tion of services, as well as provision of community education and liaison have been discussed in an earlier section of this chapter. There are additional advantages, however, specifically for clients. The use of volunteers, particularly in a one-to- one relationship allows for a greater number of contacts and more individualized treatment than is ordinarily possible under a standard probation program. A large number of delinquent children suffer from unstable family relationships and are in need of a long-term relationship with an adult, that can be provided by a vOlunteer, to help in the formation of a positive self-concept and to serve as a role model. Because of the more intensive involvement that results from volunteer contacts, courts find that they are able to 1+5 shorten probation periods. "The use of volunteers who are not identified as court Officials, allows the court to with- draw efficially at an earlier point, lessening the danger of re-inforcing the delinquent self-concept and still meet the needs of the child."63 In many cases, the population from which volunteers are drawn, particularly college students, allows for an easier identification due to age or sociO—cultural factors,betweenl A 1 volunteer and client, than between official court personnel ' and client. However, the overrepresentation of middle-class volunteers may create problems of identification in courts that deal with large minority—group client populations. Volunteer programs can also provide positive factors for the volunteer himself. "One thing is clear:. the youth— serving volunteer becomes more sophisticated about the prob- lems Of youth, delinquency and social control. . .he also becomes more sophisticated about the workings of the court system."6” This personal knowledge gain is one aspect of the volunteer's participation. Volunteers often indicate that a desire to help others is their main motivation for involvement in a volunteer program. A sense of personal growth and development, through the helping process, is frequently cited by volunteers as a benefit of working with young Offenders. In addition, many volunteers are able to test out their interest 63Jewel Goddard and Gerald Jacobson, "Volunteer Services In A ' Juvenile Court," Crime and Delinquency, XIII (April, 1967), pp. 3H2-3H3. 5"Scheier, Serving Youth As Volunteers, p. 12. H6 and desire to work in the juvenile corrections field on a long-term basis and concurrently, the court is able to assess and evaluate the performance of the volunteer, with an eye towards recruiting the volunteer for a full-time position. The overall balance sheet between disadvantages and advantages of volunteer programs seems to favor the positive side, even if at this point in the development of the move— ment, the negative aspects have not been totally eliminated.’ CHAPTER IV DESIGN OF THE STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA This study is a descriptive investigation of the volunteer ‘ programs currently Operational in Michigan's juvenile courts. An examination of the "state of the art" as it exists in Michigan today, will contribute to a systematic and planned approach to further program development and help promote a valuable information exchange between existing programs. POPULATION AND SAMPLE The total potential target population for this study consisted of the juvenile and/or probate courts in the eighty- three counties of Michigan that are responsible for handling delinquency cases. In order to elicit information only from those courts that already had vOlunteer programs, the eighty— three potential respondents were narrowed down in the following manner. As a starting point, the author made contact with two national leaders of the volunteer court movement who reside in Michigan and requested a list of the juvenile courts known to them as having volunteer programs. This source did not produce complete information, although one leader was able to supply a brief listing of cities in which he thought the juvenile courts were using volunteers. Letters were sent to all courts on that list. In addition, the most recent edition of the volunteer courts directory, published by the National u7 ”8 Information Center on Volunteerism was consulted for possible additions in Michigan, however, the directory does not differ- entiate between adult and juvenile courts and lists only the city in which the program is located. A third source of program location information was the eight Regional Offices of the Michigan Office of Youth Services, each encompassing a geographical area of approximately ten counties. Community Youth Service Specialists in these regions, members of the Regional staff, were contacted and asked to identify the counties in their regions that were utilizing volunteers in working with delinquents in juvenile court. This source was relied upon heavily in determining which counties received questionnaires. Finally, phone calls were made by the author to a number of counties that were suggested as locations of volunteer programs, in order to confirm whether or not programs were underway in these areas. In total, twenty-seven surveys were mailed to juvenile courts, with a high probability that all existing volunteer programs were included within this sample. For purposes of this study, the author chose not to include those counties whose volunteer program consisted of five volunteers or less since programs of this size which came to the authors attention tended to lack any formal organization and were only used sporadically. H9 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION The data for this study were gathered through the use of a survey questionnaire form. The survey form was adapted from one used in compiling data for the publication of Guidelines And Standards For The Use Of Volunteers In Correctional Program . The decision to adapt the existing survey form 3 rather than design a new one was based on two factors. First, 'seventy-five percent of the items on the existing form had already been pre-tested with "satisfactory statistical distri- WL- a... bution" resulting.65 Due to the desire to complete the current survey within a short time period, pre—testing of items for a new survey form would have substantially delayed the actual survey process. In addition, items on the existing questionnaire encompassed the major areas of information that a new survey form wOuld have addressed. Items that were eliminated dealt with factors such as age of offenders, that this survey had predetermined by the decision to focus only on juvenile courts, as Opposed to adult and juvenile programs included in the national survey. One item was added to the adapted survey form to elicit general information on program effectiveness as perceived by the volunteer coordinator directing the volunteer program. This area was not addressed at all in the national study, possibly because of the difficulty in obtaining documented evidence of program results. 65Scheier, Guidelines. . ., p. 3. 50 The second factor influencing the decision to adapt the existing survey form was an interest in comparing the results of the survey done in Michigan to the results of the national survey, for an indicatiOn of similar trends, problems, etc. It was felt that utilizing the same basic questionnaire would facilitate statistical and other comparisons. The original questionnaire contained twenty—four items; the adapted version contained twenty of the original twenty- four items plus the added question referring to program effec- tiveness. The twenty-one items were structured so that E respondents could check the category or description that applied to their agency. An open-ended category of "other" with a corresponding blank line was included with certain questions to allow for description of possible program differ- ences that had not been anticipated. An additional open—ended section was included as the last item (not numbered) in the questionnaire, in the event that respondents wished to add any comments or provide more detail relative to program descriptions. The questionnaire was mailed during the first week of March, 1973 to volunteer coordinators at the twenty-seven courts comprising the survey population, with a request for return by March 23, 1973. A cover letter accompanied the questionnaire explaining the author's interest in the subject area and the purposes of the study. A stamped, return— addresSed envelope was also included to encourage response. Appendix A contains the survey questionnaire form used in this study. 51 ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Of the twenty-seven instruments sent out to selected juvenile courts in Michigan, a total of twenty were re- turned, representing in actuality, twenty-two counties, due to the fact that two courts operating jointly sponsored programs with an adjoining county responded for both counties involved in the program. One of the counties that did not return the questionnaire, but from which some information was available, had just begun recruiting for a new volunteer program. Since the majority of questions on the survey form were applicable only to programs that were already Operational, this county did not respond. Available information pertain- ing to factors requested on the questionnaire was nOt incor- porated into the data compilation, except in representing the total number of programs in the state. Thus, the twenty- three programs presently in existence represent twenty-eight percent of the total number of juvenile courts in Michigan. This coincides with national trends revealed by a 1969 survey reporting that approximately 25% of the juvenile courts in the United States had volunteer programs};6 However, the more recent study conducted for the publication Of Guidelines and Standards For The Use of Volunteers In Correctional Programs, ". . .indicates, that today, 75% of the juvenile courts have volunteer programs."67 If this estimate is 66Morrison, p. 8. 67Scheier, Guidelines . . ., p. 6. 52 accurate, the development of volunteer programs in Michigan would appear to be substantially below the national rate. Age Of Volunteer Programs The growth of volunteer programs in Michigan's juvenile courts seem to have occurred primarily within the last two years. A full 73% of the existing programs fall within this category, while 36% Of the total have been implemented only within the last year. Although category distictions of "six months to one year," and "one to two years" were not listed in question one of the survey, this finer breakdown of the "six months to two years" category could be derived by refer- ring tO subsequent questions (#11-13) which asked only those programs in existence for more than one year to respond. Thus, respondents who checked the "six months to two years" category but did not complete questions 11-13, had programs of less than one year's duration. Approximately one fourth of the volunteer programs have been underway for more than two years, while 9% of the programs have existed for more than five years. Table 1 contains a breakdown of the age of existing programs. 53 Table 1 Length of Time Agency Has Had Volunteer Program Age of Program N* %* Less than six months 2 9 Six months to two years 6 27 One to two years 8 37 Two to five years n 18 More than five years 2 9 Total 22 100 Michigan's figures differ substantially from the national trends revealed in the Guidelines survey which showed that "Fifty-six percent of the reporting volunteer programs are two years old or more. Almost 30% of the programs are eight or more years old, and only 9% are less than six months old."68 Despite the fact that Michigan was one of the centers of the new volunteer court movement in the 1960's, apparently growth in juvenile court programs has been largely a phenomena Of the 1970's. It is interesting to note, as displayed in Appendix B, that many of the more recent programs have grown up in geographic proximity to the Older programs. This, more than likely, reflects the influence of the success of existing programs on surrounding areas, and on the availability of resources, consultants and model programs on which to base new efforts. 58Ibid., p. 12. * unless otherwise specified, N refers to the number of res- pondent programs and % refers to the percentage of total respondent programs. 59 Size and Frequency of Volunteer Services The categories indicating number of volunteers currently being used by the agency were grouped by fiftys. This may have been detrimental in determining the size of smaller volunteer programs since the first grouping was 1-50. Question four of the survey, which requested a breakdown of volunteer activity by number was included to elicit greater detail than question one, however, a number of respondents failed to supply the requested information. More than half of the programs surveyed utilized fifty volunteers or less. From corollary information determined by question four, it was found that 38% of the programs (N=5) used less than twenty-five volunteers, 38% used between twenty- five and fifty volunteers, and 29% were undetermined. Thirty- four percent of the programs were a substantial size, using between fifty and two hundred volunteers, while only two programs or 9%, used more than two hundred volunteers. The Guidelines survey shows that in this category, trends in Michigan are similar to nationwide trends which indicated ". . .51% of the programs have twenty-five volunteers or fewer."69 69Ibid., p. 13. 55 Table 2 - Number of Volunteers Used by Respondent Agency Number of Volunteers Ngq % 1-50 13 59 50-100 3 1n 100-150 3 19 150~200 1 U Over 200 2 9 Total 22 C~100 The frequency with which volunteer services were donated varied from two or three times a week, to once a month. NO programs utilized volunteers on a less than once a month basis. The major proportion of programs had volunteers who donated services at least once a week, while an additional 23% of the courts had volunteers contributing services more than once a week, and the remaining 9% less than once a week, but not less than once a month. Table 3 Frequency of Volunteer Services Amount of Time N % 2 or 3 times a week 5 23 Once a week 15 68 Once a month 2 9 Less than once a month 0 0 Total 22 100 56 Number and Percentage of Offenders Served by Agency and Volunteers Although 73% of the agencies responding served over fifty Offenders, only H1% had over fifty volunteers, (Table 2) indicating a low frequency of using volunteers on a one-tO-one basis with the major proportion of Offenders. Table 4 Number of Offenders Agency is Currently Responsible For 2 OP Number of Offenders 50 or less 6 27 51-199 7 32 150-300 8 .18 301-950 2 9 Over #50 3 19 Total 22 100 This is further supported by Table 5 which shows that 96% of the respondent agencies used volunteers in working with half, or less than half of their Offender pOpulation. These figures are substantially higher than those Of the national survey which showed that 68% of the programs used volunteers in working with half, or less than half of the offender popu- lation. None of the programs in Michigan were using volunteers with 75-100% of their Offender populations, as Opposed to 16% in this category nationally.70 The "inferential conclusion" 7°Ibid., p. 18. 57 Table 5 Percentage of Offenders Served by Volunteers Percentage of Offenders N % Under 25% 12 55 25-50% 9 Ml 50-75% 1 - u 75-100% 0 0 Total 22 100 of this data, however, is quite similar to the national data. "Only a distinct minority of programs can claim to be render- ing regular volunteer service to a majority of offenders."71 Population of Cities Housing Volunteer Programs, ' As a point of interest related to size of volunteer programs and number Of Offenders served by the agency, the‘ size of the cities where respondent ppograms were located was tallied. Although the survey form itself did not request this information, it was readily available and was examined in order to compare Michigan to the 1969 study of. juvenile courts in the United States which concluded that ". . .the proportion of agencies using volunteers decreases as the size Of the population served decreases."72 Although Michigan does not contain a large number of high population areas, particularly if one defines the term as a 711bid., p. 15. 72Morrison, p. 11. 58 city of over 300,000 population, there was still a high percentage of smaller cities using volunteers. Fifty- seven percent, or thirteen out of twenty-three programs, were located in cities with less than 50,000 population. Cities with populations of 50,000-100,000 housed 22% of the respondent programs, as did cities with populations over 100,000. Although all of Michigan's larger cities had volunteer programs, the substantial number of smaller cities having programs would seem to indicate that size alone is not the determining factor in the location of volunteer programs in Michigan. Appendix C contains a map displaying the geographic distribution of volunteer programs in Michigan's juvenile courts according to the size of the cities in which the courts are located. How Volunteers Are Used A_total of fourteen categories plus "other" were provided for reSpondents to note the ways in which volunteers were being used in their programs. The respondents could check as many of the categories as were applicable. A total of 103 responses were made to this question. Volunteers are being used in all of the fourteen categories listed on the questionnaire, plus an additional seven categories that were written in under "other." Table 6 displays the rank order listing, by frequency of response, of volunteer job categories. 59 Table 6 Kinds of Volunteer Activities Total % of Volunteer Job Category Responses Respondents Sponsorship/Visitation 13 59 Counseling and Guidance ll 50 Recreation ‘ 10 95 Entertainment 9 91 Teaching/Tutoring 7 32 ‘Arts and Crafts 7 32 Family Counseling 6 27 Assisting Offender Self-Help Groups 6 27 Contributions of Materials, Supplies 5 23 Religious Programs 9 18 Job Placement 3 19 Vocational Training 2 9 Other . a. Public Speakers 5 23 b. Volunteer Probation Officer 3 19 c. Providing Transportation 2 9 d. Clerical 2 9 e. Court Room Aids 2 9 f. Family Visiting 2 9 . Financial Reviewer 1 9 Pre-Release Preparation 2 9 Contributions of Professional Services 1 9 Total 103 22 respondents In certain cases, respondents indicated that the same volunteer performed a number of different jobs in his relation- ship with the client. For example, a volunteer working in a one-to-one relationship with a client may also provide enter- tainment or recreation, or visit the client's family. However, it would appear that those respondents who chose to interpret the role of the volunteer within a single category, most likely conceive of the volunteer as having responsibilities primarily within that category. 60 The volunteer job positions that involve direct contact with the Offender (sponsorship, counseling, tutoring) are clearly the most frequently employed by programs in Michigan. In addition to the top four categories, it is significant to note that the category of Volunteer Probation Officer, although only specified by three programs, actually included the largest number of volunteers in any one category, approximately five hundred.' No other category, despite the frequency of response, employed even one third that many. Volunteer Recruitment and Screening Respondents were presented with five categories plus "other" which described methods of recruitment, and were asked to check those that were applicable to their programs. All respondents checked at least two methods of recruiting. The two most frequent responses depended on volunteer initiative in making contact with or referring other people to a program. This may reflect a somewhat passive approach on the part of the agencies. There still seems to be consid- erable reliance on organized groups such as Kiwanis and Lions to offer services as volunteers. 1 In the "other" category, the most significant addition, added by five nespondents, was the use of colleges and universities as a source of volunteers. Table 7 shows the total number of responses to each category. Only one program specified that the Volunteer Coordinator actively recruits volunteers, although this might be interpreted as a possible meaning of the response of "contact with agency -.—;-—ma _n~ rvy 61 staff." However, the one respondent listing recruitment by the Volunteer Coordinator also checked the "contact with agency staff" category, indicating that active recruitment was an addition to, not a substitute for, staff contact recruiting. y Table 7 ’ Methods of Volunteer Recruitment Number % Recruiting Method of Responses Reppondentsq E ! Volunteer approaches us 17 77 One volunteer tells another 17 77 Use TV, radio, etc. 13 59 Organization membership 12 55 (Lions, etc.) , Colleges 5 23 Volunteer Bureaus 2 9 Volunteer Coordinator recruits l 9 Total 67 22 respondents In the question dealing with volunteer screening, respondents were asked to check all the categories from "interview, reference check, fingerprinting or none" reflecting the screening methods applicable of their programs. All respondents listed at least one method of screening. All programs used interviewing in their screening procedure, with the majority (69%) using both interviewing and screening. Only one program checked "fingerprinting" as a screening method. 62 Part of the screening process involves the general requirements that programs look for in their volunteers. Respondents were asked to indicate the factors that are definitely weighted in the choice of volunteers for their programs. Approximately one fourth of the programs require volunteers to meet both educational and experience standards, although 36% require that they meet neither. This may indicate, pas is the case with many programs around the country, that personal qualities such as ability to communicate, warmth and understanding, are the determining factors in who is chosen. Approximately 50% of the respondents to the Guidelines survey indicated that they used neither experience nor education requirements in choosing their volunteers.73 The remaining 91% of Michigan's respondents require either education or experience, although other factors may also be considered. 73Scheier, Guidelines. . ., p. 19. 63 Table 8 Requirements Volunteers Must Meet General Requirements N % Neither education nor experience 8 36 Both education and experience 5 23 Experience only 5 23 ~ Education only 9 l8 ‘ Total 22 100' , l | Volunteer Orientation Volunteer coordinators were asked to check all of the nine categories describing orientation/training methods that applied to their agencies. All respondents used some form of orienta- tion and all used at least two of the categories on the list. Over 65% of the programs provide volunteers with written materials and instruction from staff. Over 60% also provide a formalized Orientation program and in—servicetraining at least once a month. Interviews with supervisors or other agency personnel appears to be a fairly standard element of volunteer orientation found in 81% of the programs. A less frequently used method of orientation involved other volunteers instructing new volunteers. The specific figures are displayed in Table 9. 69 Table 9 Type of Orientation Volunteer Receives INumBér % of Category of Responses Respondents Interview with supervisor 18 81 Written directions 15 68 Instruction from staff 15 68 Formalized orientation 19 69 In-Service Training at least once a month 19 ~ 69 Instruction from volunteers 9 91 In-Service training less than once a month 1 9 Training provided by other agencies 0 0 Total 86 22 ’ respondents Program Turnover Rate The success of volunteer programs is often linked to the continuity of services that are provided to clients by volun- teers. Therefore, volunteer turnover becomes a significant factor in demonstrating how well a volunteer program is run. Questions 11—13 on the survey form were aimed at determining the extent of ongoing volunteer involvement in programs that had been in existence for one year or more. Turnover rate is considered a significant index of program success. If the rate is high, it is usually a reflection of problems in program leadership and volunteer motivation. Fourteen of the twenty-two respondent programs fell into the one year or longer category. However, only twelve of these answered question 13 which asked at what point volunteers 65 generally dropped out of programs. The fourteen respondents had been using a total of 965 volunteers one year ago from the date Of response to the survey. Of these 667 were still with the programs, showing a turnover rate of 33%. This is somewhat better than the national figure of 50%7”, and may be a reflection of Michigan's programs having learned from the experience Of earlier programs by building in ways to maintain volunteer involvement. Of the programs answering question 13, 50% indicated that volunteers dropped out of their programs within the first three months, while 66% (including the 50% in the first category) indicated that volunteers dropped out of their pro- grams within the first six months. These figures cO-incide closely to national trends which showed that "90% of volunteers dr0p out within three months of beginning service while 62% drop out prior to six months. . . . .Initial enthusiasm has worn off, and the realities of on-going service begin to weigh upon the imprOperly screened or poorly prepared Volunteer."75 Program Supervision Questions 19 and 15 were included to determine the extent of supervision in each program, reflecting the amount of agency investment in the volunteer program. Table 10 lists the per- centage of programs with full or part time, paid or unpaid supervision according to the number of hours spent on supervising 7”Ibid., p. 29. 75Ibid., p. 31. 66 the volunteer program. None of the respondents indicated using either a subsidized volunteer for supervision or having no supervision at all, therefore, these categories are not included in the table. Three courts filled in the "other" category with position titles (such as Court Director) that could be classified as full-time paid court employees. These "other" entries were included in the "full—time, paid" category for purposes of tabulation. Table 10 Number of Hours of Supervision Provided by Court Staff Number of Number of Number Of Courts Using Courts Using Courts Using Number of Paid ‘ Paid Unpaid Hours of Part-Time Full-Time Volunteer Supervision Supervision Supervision ‘ Supervision 5 hours or less 6 6-10 hours 1 11-20 hours 9 1 21-90 hours 1 3 Over 90 hours 5 Undetermined 1 Total 12 8 2 The results of this question clearly indicate that while almost all of the programs (91%) pay their Director of Volun- teer Services, only 36% provided supervision on a paid, full- time basis. Approximately one third of the programs provided less than ten hours a week supervision. The size Of the volunteer programs in Michigan, as indicated by Table 2, showed that 91% of the courts used over fifty volunteers in their 67 programs. Although Guidelines and Standards For The Use of Volunteers In Correctional Programs recommends at least one full-time, paid Director of Volunteer Services for Optimal supervision of programs using more than fifty volunteers, it is apparent that Michigan's programs are operating under less than ideal supervisory conditions. This may be one of the factors influencing the volunteer turnover rate. Staff Perception of Volunteer Programs The relative strengths and weaknessess of the volunteer program and the general level of acceptance of the program as perceived by staff, were addressed in questions 16-20 on the survey form. As a response to the "yes or no" question (number 16) asking whether staff accepts and understands the volunteer program, 59% of the respondents answered affirma- tively. .This is slightly higher than the 50% positive res— ponse Obtained in the national survey.76 Although more than half of Michigan's programs had a satisfactory level of staff acceptance, it is important to note that 36% Of Michigan's respondents felt that staff understanding and acceptance needed improvement, with one court indicating that staff did not accept or understand the program at all. The figures for these categories are outlined in Table 11. 75Ibid., p. 29. 68 Table 11 Staff Acceptance and Understanding of Volunteer Program Category N % Yes, Satisfactorily 13 59 Needs Improvement 8 36 NO, staff do not » accept program 1 5 Total 22 - 160 The percentages in the last two categories might be interpreted in light of the relative newness of the majority of Michigan's programs. All eight respondents in the "Needs Improvement" category had programs operating from six months to two years, while the one program reflecting no staff acceptance and understanding had been in existence for less than six months. All of the programs that were two years Old or Older felt that staff accepted and understood the volunteer program. This may be an area that needs more attention in the planning and development of new volunteer programs. In order to assess, ingreater detail, those elements of the volunteer program that were the main reasons for staff acceptance, question 17 provided a list of generally acknowledged positive aspects of volunteer programs, and asked respondents to check all categories that were applicable to their programs. A category of "other," with a corresponding blank line was included in this question to promote response, 69 in the event that the items listed were not applicable to a particular court. A breakdown of the categories by frequency of response is included in Table 12. Table 12 Main Reasons for Staff Acceptance of Volunteer Program Number 9% of Category of Responses Respondents More attention given to Offender 18 81 Better chance for volunteer to form good relationship with Offender 12 55 Volunteer help to free staff from routine jobs 11 50 Volunteer helps to tap in to available community resources 8 36 Volunteers are a source of good, new ideas ' 7 32 Volunteers provide better contact with the community 7 32 Volunteers have a range of special skills 6 27 Other: Lower caseloads possible with use of volunteers 1 9 Total 70 22 Respondents The twenty-two re3pondents provided a total of seventy responses, for an average of slightly over three main reasons for program acceptance per respondent. The two major reasons indicated for staff acceptance are both reflections of the volunteer's role in interpersonal relationships. The highest response rate, encompassing 81% of the programs, pertained to the client receiving more attention as a result of volunteer involvement. The second main reason for staff acceptance of 70 programs, encompassing 55% of the courts, was the volunteer's Opportunity to form a better relationship with the client as a consequence of his unpaid status. Each category listed, however, had at least 27% of the respondents indicating it as a reason for program acceptance. One respondent included "lower caseloads" in the "other" category, although this might possibly be interpreted as a means of providing more attention to offenders. One of the more frequently indicated responses, and one which might be expected as a strong reason for staff acceptance, was the role volunteers play in freeing up staff from routine jobs. Fifty percent of the answering courts checked this category. It is possible to interpret this response, however, as an indication that volunteers are not being used in creative roles in these agencies and some orientation of staff as to thediversification and potential uses of volunteers might be suggested. Question 18 was structured similarly to question 17 and requested respondents to check all applicable main reasons why staff did n9: accept and understand the volunteer program. Ten respondents did not reply to this question since they had- indicated in the previous questions that staff did positively accept their volunteer programs. The twelve courts answering question 18 listed a total of twenty-two responses, for an average of 1.8 main reasons for non-acceptance per program. The two most frequently noted reasons, with.five responses each,were: l) Volunteers are too naive, they don't know what 71 it's all about and 2) Volunteersget overinvolved with offenders. Both of these issues could be addressed and controlled through pr0per volunteer training. The third most frequently listed reason for staff non- acceptance of the volunteer program was that "staff felt out of touch with the program." Again, this is an indication of a need for increased staff involvement and orientation to the volunteer program. There seems to have been relatively little concern expressed by the programs responding to this question, as to the problems of control of volunteers and competition with professionals that are Often cited as negative aspects Of volunteer programs. The breakdown of responses for this question is displayed in Table 13. 72 Table 13 Reasons Why Staff DO Not Accept or Understand Volunteer Program *Number % of Category of Responses_ Respondents NO response 10 95 Volunteer are too naive 5 23 Volunteers get overinvolved 5 23 E Staff feels out of touch 9 18 . Volunteers interrupt routine 2 9 E Volunteers are overly critical of system 2 9 Volunteers take more time than their output justifies 2 9 Volunteers make it harder to , control offenders 1 9 ' Volunteers are viewed as "good ‘guys" while regular staff are viewed as "bad guys" 1 9 Total 32 22 Respondents In order to assess the overall perception of the need for inprovement in their volunteer programs, respondents were asked to indicate, by checking "yes or no" whether their volunteer programs could be improved in any significant way. Seventy- three percent Of the respondents answered that their programs could be improved, 23% indicated that they did not need improvement and 9% did not respond. Question 20 then addressed itself to a more specific delineation of the areas that needed improvement by asking respondents to check all categories applicable to their programs. Eighteen out of twenty-two programs answered this question, providing a total of fifty- eight responses; an average of 2.8 areas needing improvement _‘__.—_ _ _._N 73 per program. Table 19 outlines the figures for specific categories, ranked by frequency of response. Table 19 Main Problem Areas Needing Improvement Number % of Category - Need: of ResponSes ‘Respondents 1.Better reporting of volunteer activities 10 95 2.More volunteers 7 32 3.Improved volunteer orientation 7 32 9.More appropriate kinds Of volunteers 6 27 5.More jobs for volunteers 5 23 6.Better staff supervision 9 18 7.More dependable volunteers 9 l8 8.To improve relationship with regular staff 9 18 9.More money 3 l9 10.Better overall organization 3 19 ll.Better screening 2 9 12.More volunteer contact with offenders 1 9 13-To give volunteers more responsibility 1 9 l9.To improve community relations 1 ' 9 Total 58 22 Respondents The single most frequently acknowledged category, with ten responses, was the need for better reporting of volunteer activities. However, it is probably more appropriate to consider this factor as part of the overall organization and supervision of volunteer programs. Two additional categories related to this were 1) Need fOr better overall organization of program, three responses and 2) Need for better staff super— vision Of volunteers, four responses. The sum of responses then, relating to program supervision and operation was 7n seventeen, or approximately one third of the total number. Clearly, however, the most significant number of responses were related to the group of categories dealing with volunteer screening, recruitment and training; numbers 2,3,9,5,7 and 11 in the rank order listing in Table 19. The two most frequent responses in this area, with seven each, were the need for improved orientation and training and the need for more volun- teers. The need for more appropriate volunteers, a function of screening, had six responses. Eighty-four percent Of the total number of responses were encompassed within these six categories. Although eight respondents had indicated earlier (Table 11) that staff understanding and acceptance of their programs needed improvement, only four indicated that this was a significant aspect of the overall program that could be improved. Effectiveness of Volunteer Programs The final question on the survey form touched an area not dealt with by the national survey, but of some interest and concern to the author; namely, the effect of the volunteer program on the agency's clients. Realizing the difficulty most volunteer coordinators would have in assembling reliable statistics on client outcomes, they were asked to check all categories that they considered indicators Of program effec# tiveness for their clients. Although the reSponses do not 'provide any "hard data" as to program effectiveness, they do reflect, to some extent, those aspects of the client's 75 behavior or environment perceived by the volunteer coordinator as having changed as a result of the volunteer program. Respondents were asked to check all categories applicable to their program results. A total of forty—nine responses were provided by nineteen programs. Three programs did not respond at all to this question, possibly because of a lack Of information or an unwillingness to "venture a guess." "Changes in offender attitude toward self" was the most frequently indicated factor, having thirteen responses. "Changes in Offender attitude towards others" was second with ten responses. These two categories combined accounted for 99% of all responses. Lower recidivism rates were also acknowledged as an indicator of program effectiveness and represented 18% of the total number of responses. Table 15 contains the complete listing Of program effectiveness categories. Only one program responded to the open—ended section requesting any additional comments which ended the survey, by simply stating "It works!" 76 Table 15 Indicators Of Volunteer Program Impact on Clients . % of Number Category of Responses Respondents Changes in Offender attitude ‘ toward self 13 59 Changes in Offender attitude toward others 10 95 Lower recidivism rates 9 91 Better school attendance 7 32 Change in family attitudes toward Offender 6 27 Lower arrest rates 9 18 Total 99 22 - Respondents .—_-a m CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS This study was directed at providing a descriptive analysis of the use of volunteers in Michigan's juvenile courts. Several major findings were determined as a result of the survey, relative to size and scope of the programs in Michigan. The data revealed: 1) 2) 3) The large majority of Michigan's programs (73%) are relatively new, that is, from six months to two years Old, in contrast to the national picture in which 99% of the programs are two years Old or 1ess.77 Over half of the volunteer programs in Michigan are located in cities with populations under 50,000. All Of Michigan's high pOpulation areas or largest cities also have volunteer programs, with 22% Of the programs located in cities of between 50,000-100,000 population and 22% located in cities with populations over 100,000. Programs in Michigan, however, are relatively small, with 59% using fifty volunteers or less and 73% using one hundred volunteers or less, despite the fact that the majority Of courts serve over fifty Offenders. 77 Op. cit. 77 9) 78 A full 96% of the courts surveyed provided volunteer services for less than half of the offenders they are responsible for. In relation to how volunteers are used in the program and perceived by staff: 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) The majority of programs used volunteers to provide regular services once a week, generally in direct relationship roles to clients through counseling, tutoring and volunteer probation officer activities. Approximately one out of three volunteers drop out of the volunteer program within the first six months of their involvement. The most significant advantage of using volunteers, as perceived by staff, is the creation of a better relationship with the Offender. Most courts surveyed indicated that their programs could use improvement primarily in the areas of volunteer recruitment, screening and supervision; and lastly, The feeling of respondents as to the effectiveness of volunteer programs, shows perceived positive changes in the offender's attitude toward himself and others, lower recidivism rates and better school attendance. 79 IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The major findings revealed by the data and summarized above, Suggest several areas for development and change. The presence of volunteer courts in many small population areas indicated the viability of such programs and suggests that other small communities need not be hesitant about beginning volunteer programs, especially if.they can benefit from the experience and models of existing programs. The poSsibility of joint programming between smaller counties might also be an area for future development since a satisfactory arrangement of this nature seems tohave been achieved by some respondents. A significant area Of development for existing programs in Michigan should be the expansion of the size of their programs and the proportion of offenders served by volunteers. The small investment required for funding volunteer programs and the apparently high returns in amount and quality of services and effect on the offender, would appear to merit an extended use Of volunteers with a larger percentage of offenders than are currently being served. National trends also reflect that "the growth rate within programs is not nearly as dramatic as the growth rate of new programs."78 The expansion of volunteer services would also require more extensive supervision than is presently being provided in programs. Survey results show that even in programs that 78Scheier, Guidelines. . ., p. 6. 80 are now using fifty volunteers or more,.the level of program supervision is below recommended levels of one full-time, paid supervisor for fifty volunteers, or more and should be increased. The existing level of supervision may be partially responsible for the substantial volunteer turn- over rate. "For the present we can only conclude that there is a serious deficiency in staff time committed to the full realization of volunteer potential in the criminal justice system."79 The ways in which volunteers are being used is also a possible area for expanded activity. Basically, the relation- ship between volunteer and client in Michigan's programs is concentrated in counseling, recreation, education and Volunteer Probation Officer roles. Although these roles are important ones, the fact that volunteers have been used in other programs in a total of one hundred and fifty different jobs, indicates some room for creativity in Michigan's programs. There is a developing sentiment in the volunteer court movement towards utilizing volunteers as regular, albeit unpaid staff members, in a capacity approximating a full professional, rather than in jobs of a complementary or less involved nature. This viewpoint is summarized in the following quote: 79Ibid., p. 23. 81 In their efforts to cope with the potential "dangers and threats" in using volunteers, professionals have narrowly defined the role of the corrections volunteer and have placed undue restrictions on the functions they are allowed to perform. . .many volunteers are capable of providing essentially the same services to offenders as those which would normally be made available by professional staff. This means that many volunteers with appropriate training and supervision can serve as a "substitute" for the professional and should no longer be viewed in the context of simply augmenting or complementing the work Of the agency.80 Some of Michigan's smaller counties might do well to consider using this interpretation of volunteer programs to signifi- cantly increase the level of probation services they are currently offering. The use of training programs and materials from larger counties could provide the necessary background for small county volunteers. The development of better and more extensive training materials for large and small counties, however, is indicated by survey results reflecting areas of improvement noted by respondents as desirable in their programs. Improved recruit- ing and screening methods and techniques are also indicated. Materials and consultants available for local program assistance through the National Information Center should minimize the necessity and difficulties in developing new materials. Programs might also consider the possibility of a formalized information and staff exchange program which would allow for "cross-fertilization" of ideas and expansion of successful techniques. 80Ira M. Schwartz, "Volunteers and Professionals: A Team In The Correctional Process," Federal Probation, XXXV (September, 1971), p. 99. 82 The possibilities of sharing information and techniques, points to the need for development in yet another area; the increased use of evaluation and research and adequate record- keeping to document program results. The inability Of all the courts responding to the final survey question, to provide hard data on program effectiveness reveals a noticable lack of sound evaluation procedures. This can seriously jeopardize a program's chances for expansion and refunding, and can damage its credibility with the community. Efforts must be made in the first stages of program design to build in evaluation as an on-going function of the volunteer program. Finally, the rapid growth of Michigan's programs during the last two years and for what is likely to be the next few years, points strongly to the need for a state-wide coordinat- ing and information exchange agency. Just since the comple- tion of the thesis survey, three additional programs in the planning stages or in the initial Operational stages have come to the attention of the author. The existence of a single organization with state-wide information would provide an invaluable resource for existing programs, for communities planning programs, for providing training and consultation, and for disseminating program ideas and evaluation results. Some movement in this direction has already been taken invOlving major program leaders and other interested volunteer coordinators. However, difficulties in locating a funding source and an administrative structure through which to 83 work, appears to have limited the scope of their involvement and activities. Consideration should be given to the develop- ment of appropriate legislative action to provide for a state sponsored and financed program. AREAS FOR FUTURE STUDY_ The information derived as a result of this survey, although one step in the documentation of Michigan's volun- teer court movement, merely skims the surface Of available information and program content. As stated previously, several programs have already materialized since the comple- tion Of this Survey, rapidly outdating the results. One area of study that might address itself to this particular problem, would be the design Of a statewide information system on volunteers to insure ongoing data collection and dissemination on new program develOpments and on the progress and growth of existing programs. On a more specific level, several components of the volunteer process merit more detailed examination, particu- . larly as they relate to the overall effectiveness of the volunteer program. Some possible studies in this area might consider 1) the effects of matching volunteers to clients by such variables as age, sex, educational or social level, 2) the effects of varying amounts and kinds of supervision on volunteer performance and program results, 3) the effects Of different types Of training, orientation and follow-up on volunteer performance and program results, 9) the determina— tion of the number Of hours of volunteer time and kinds 89 of volunteer activities that provide maximum impact on the client and 5) the effects of volunteer involvement on community attitudes and response to the offender. The need for "hard data" to document many aspects of the volunteer process is a pressing one, not merely to prove that volunteer programs work, but to demonstrate which ones work and why, and to utilize this information to modify existing programs, create new programs and provide a range Of alternatives from which programs can best be designed to meet a particular community's needs. As stated at the first "Institute on Research With Volunteers In Delinquency", ". . .Court volunteerism needs to move strongly from 'prove it' to 'improve it' research, from 'product sales' to 'product improvement research'."81 A study of the kind completed for this thesis can serve as a catalyst in identifying areas needing further study and research. FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Prevention and Diversion The use Of volunteers in juvenile courts has been an invaluable factor in the provision of expanded and improved services to juveniles. However, "A study of the needs of young people in trouble or about to get in trouble with the law has indicated to the National Information Center that for all practical purposes one cannot draw the line so as 81Paul Zelhart and John Plummer, eds., Institute on Research With Volunteers In Delinquency (Fayetteville: University Of Arkansas, 1970), p. 8. 85 to separate out the person already in the court system from the person who has the same problems, but as yet has not become enmeshed in the criminal justice system."82 The implications of this statement clearly point to the expansion of the use of volunteers from court settings to prevention and diversion programs; to the use of volunteers as inter- vention agents at critical points in the develOpment of children's behavior and attitudes. The recognition of the need for development of programs, materials and competence in these areas has led to the recent name change of the National Information Center on Volunteers In Court (NICOVIC) to the National Information Center on Volunteerism (NICOV). In the immediate future, the first major conference on "The Use Of Volunteers In Prevention And Diversion Programs" will be held in Boulder, Colorado, launching an effort that is in keeping with national priori- ties related to juvenile delinquency. The demands of this expanded role for volunteers will create an even greater need for programs that are expertly planned, managed and evaluated, but the potential for positively effecting the lives of young people at a critical point in their development will easily justify the effort. Programs in prevention and diversion have begun to focus on intervention in schools and families; the two most 82National Information Center On Volunteers In Court, NICOV, News Bulletin, n.d. 86 frequently cited factors relative to future delinquent behavior. Among the communities currently Operating such programs are Oakland County, Michigan which utilizes School Case Aides assigned to individual children to assist in academic and personal problems, and San Rafael, California using college students to work with small groups of elemen- tary school children who "showed indications of early depar- ture from school."83 Information and evaluation efforts on programs such as these will provide other communities with models for development of prevention programs in their own areas. Juvenile Institutions Although the importance of volunteer activities at the prevention and diversion stages cannot be underestimated, there are other points along the continuum of the juvenile justice system where the need for volunteer invOlvement is also great, particularly in institutional programs for delinquents and in juvenile parole and aftercare programs. The isolation of most juvenile institutions from surrounding communities and from people other than institutional staff is usually quite extensive. Volunteers working with juveniles in institutional settings provide an invaluable link to the "real world", and foster the kind of community concern and involvement with delinquents that is essential to the success of any rehabilitative approach. 830.8. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, VOlunteers Help Youth (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971), p. 5. 87 Several states around the country utilize volunteers in working with institutionalized youth, however, the need for more extensive and diverse uses of volunteers in these settings is substantial. The State Training School for delinquents at Red Wing, Minnesota has used volunteers in its programming for seven years. The superintendent of the school noted that "The assistance that the citizens have provided through our volunteer center is really immeasurable. The economic aspects could be computed but the impact upon boys and staff as well as the local community cannot be evaluated in terms of dollars."8” Volunteers in institutions can perform many Of the same tasks as volunteers in probation programs: tutoring, counseling, and special activities, but they can also provide a mechanism through which juveniles can keep in contact with the community and participate in aspects of ongoing community life. Juvenile Parole and Aftercare The area Of juvenile parole and aftercare has traditionally been a neglected one in the juvenile justice system, possibly as an indication of an attitude that the offender is beyond any real potential for change by this point. Aftercare is often viewed as a "holding action" until the juvenile reaches the age at which he can be discharged from state custody or until he is discharged for other reasons. In cases of dis- charge from jurisdiction, Michigan's system employs a term 8l+State Training School, Red Wing Minnesota, Volunteer Service Center, brochure, n.d. 88 called "maximum benefit," not to indicate that the youth has received the best possible program for his needs, but to note that the state cannot meet the needs of the youth through further investment and involvement in its program. This term is used in contrast to "satisfactory adjustment" which as a reason for discharge, indicates that the youth :33 $1, 'a p.'_—' has derived some expected benefit from his treatment plan. In 1972, approximately 20% of Michigan's delinquent state wards were discharged in the "maximum benefit" category. An additional 25% of delinquent state wards were either dis- rh— e \WI’a-Ic.‘mwretv - charged to be prosecuted in criminal court or were returned to juvenile institutions. These figures are significant indicators of the failure of the aftercare system to provide adequate support services for juveniles. The average cost of care for maintaining a juvenile in an institution for a year is upwards of $10,000, yet comparatively little effort and commitment of resources are directed towards "protecting this investment" by insuring adequate aftercare services to reinforce the rehabilitative treatment program begun in the institutions. The transition back to community life Often produces problems, strains and value conflicts that the juvenile is unable to cope with on his own. High caseloads and inadequate resources are frequently cited by aftercare workers as reasons for poor service delivery to juveniles on aftercare status. Volunteers can provide a source Of manpower to allow for individualized 89 attention to juveniles placed back in the community. This kind of attention can be, at least, as critical as the atten- tion given to pre-delinquents and probationers, and perhaps even more so with the possibilities of an adult criminal record resulting from its absence. Volunteers can also be the source of support services relating to the youth's educational achievement in the community. They can be used asliaisons and intervention agents with schools and families and as job finders or trainers in certain vocational skills. Yet, the Guidelines survey found "Existing evidence indicates that city municipal courts (courts of lower jurisdiction) and juvenile parole are the principal areas in the criminal justice system which have a low frequency of volunteer programs."85 The need for further program development in this area is evident. Washington, D.C.; Little Rock, Arkansas; and Fort Lauderdale, Florida are some of the locations that are utilizing volunteers to provide intensive and specialized aftercare and parole services for juveniles. An additional function of a state-wide coordinating and information agency might be to diffuse information on programs such as these from other states, and promote their develOpment in Michigan. 85Scheier, Guidelines. . ., p. 11. 90 CONCLUSION The emergence of the volunteer court movement in the early 1960's and its rapid growth and expansion since that time are signs of positive action and change within the criminal justice system. The standardization of elements and processes of volunteer programs such as those set out in Guidelines And Standards For The Use Of Volunteers In Correctional Programs, is a step towards the elimination of problems that courts have experienced to date, as a result Of_a lack of information and know-how. However, the need for more information on many aspects of volunteer programs is still a pressing one, as is the need to provide mechanisms to share and disseminate this information. New directions and programs will demand new materials and training, and provide a constant challenge to leaders in the field and others concerned with its advancement. The use of volunteers in corrections will, no doubt, face a continuing process of change and development, but it is a process that will have far reaching implications for the nature and quality of services available to children and adults in this country, as ". . .volunteers contribute not only to the welfare of individuals but also to the viability of corrections, now and in the future."86 86Joint Commission On Correctional Manpower and'Training, Volunteers Look At Corrections: Report On A Survey Made By Louis Harris and Associates (WaShifigton: 1969), p. 28. p BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Barr, Hugh. Volunteers In Prison Aftercare. London: George Allen and Unwin LimitedICIQTI. Chute, Charles. "The Development of Probation in the United States," Probation and Criminal Justice, Sheldon Glueck, editor. New York: TheiMcMillan Company, 1933. and Marjorie Bell. Crime, Courts and Probation. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1956. Dressler, David. Practice And Theory In Probation And Parole. New York: Columbia Universitnyress, 1969. Morris, Joe Alex. First Offender: A Volunteer Program For Youth In Trouble With The Law. New York: W. WT Norton and COmpany, Inc., 1970. Scheier, Ivan and Louise Allen. Volunteer Courts In America: The New Decade. Boulder: National Information Center on Volunteers In Court, 1970. and Judith Berry. Serving Youth As Volunteers. Boulder: National Information Center on Volunteers In Court, 1972. and Leroy Goter. Volunteers In Court: A Manual. Washington: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1971. and others. Guidelines And Standards For The Use Of Volunteers In Correctional Programs. WaShington: 7U.S. Déparifienf’of Justice,91972. 91 B. PERIODICALS Gemignani, Robert. "Youth Services Systems: Diverting Youth From The Juvenile Justice System," Delinquency Preven- tion Reporter, Special Issue (July—August, 1972). Goddard, Jewel and Gerald Jacobson. "Volunteer Services In A Juvenile Court," Crime and Delinquency, XIII (April, 1967), pp. 337-399. Gorlick, Elizabeth. "Volunteers In Institutions For Delin— quents," Children, XIV (July—August, 1967), pp. 197-151. Holmes, Horace B. "The Volunteer Returns To The Court," ~Juvenile Court Judges Journal, XVIII (Winter, 1968). Kirkwood, William, "Volunteers In Corrections," Information Review On Crime and Delinquency,-I (November, 1968), pp. 1‘21. Lee, Robert. "Volunteer Case Aide Program," Crime and Delinquenqy, XIV (October, 1968), pp. 331-336. Leenhouts, Keith. "Royal Oaks Experience With Professionals And Volunteer In Probation," Federal Probation, XXXIV (December, 1970), pp. 95-51. "The Volunteer's Role In Municipal Court ‘Probation:" Crime and Delinquency, X (January, 1969), pp. 29‘36. Morris, Joe Alex. "Royal Oak Aides Its Problem Youth," Reader's Digest, reprint (October, 1965). "Big Help For Small Offenders," Reader's Digest, reprint (April, 1968). O'Leary, Vincent. "Some Directions For Citizen Involvement In Corrections," The Annals Of The American Academy Of Political And Social Science, CCCLXXXIII (January, 1969), pp. gg-lOB. Otis, Jack. "Correctional Manpower Utilization," Crime and Delinquency, XII (July, 1966), pp. 261—271. Phelan, Joseph. "The Role of the Volunteer In a Residential Treatment School," Federal Probation, XXIII (September, Scheier, Ivan. "The Professional and the Volunteer In Proba- tion: An Emerging Relationship," Federal Probation, XXXIV (June, 1970), pp. 12-18. 92 JA____-.—_ _ __Ll 93 Schwartz, Ira. "Volunteers and Professionals: A Team In The Correctional Process," Federal Probation, XXV (September, 1971), PP. 96—50. Tyler, Ralph. "The Role of the Volunteer," California Youth Authority Quarterly, XVIII (October, 1968), pp. 331-336. Unkovic, Charles and Jean Reiman Davis. "Volunteers In Probation and Parole," Federal Probation, XXXIII (December, 1969), pp. 91—95. C. PUBLICATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. Volunteer Courts: A Child's Helping Hand. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, 1971. Volunteers In Law Enforcement Programs. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice,’1972: Morrison, June. The Use Of Volunteers In Juvenile Courts In The United States. Arizona: University of Arizona, 1970. National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Citizen Action To Control Crime and Delinquency. New York: 1968. National Probation Association. John Augustus: First Probation Officer. New York: 1939. . President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administra- tion of Justice. Task Force Report: Corrections. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. . Task Force Report: Juvenile Delinquency And Youth Crime. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. . The Challenge Of Crime In A Free Society. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967} Scheier, Ivan and others. Probation Diagnosis Without Money: The Use Of Professional And Non—Professional Volunteers In A Court Testing Program. Boulder: Boulder County Juvenile Court, 1968. Shelley, Ernest. Volunteers In The Correctional Spectrum: An Overview of Evaluation, Research and Surveys. Boulder: National Information Center On Volunteers In COurt, 1971. United States Chamber of Commerce. Marshaling Citizen Power To Modernize Corrections. Washington: 1972. ’ United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Volunteers In Court: Collected Pqpers. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971. Volunteers Help Youth. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971. 99 95 Volunteers In Probation, Inc. Volunteers And The Rehabilita- tion Of Criminal Offenders: Conference Report. Royal Oak: 1970. Volunteers And The Rehabilita— tion Of Criminal And JuveniIe Offenders: Pre—Conference Report And Directory 1972. Royal Oak} 1972. Zelhart, Paul and Jack Plummer, eds. Institute On Research With Volunteers In Juvenile Delinquency. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Rehabilitation Research and Training Center, 1970. D. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Anderson, Donald. "The Philosophy Behind The Use Of Volunteers In Juvenile Court." Paper presented at the Conference On Citizen Help To The Juvenile Courts. Battle Creek: August 1969. Auslander, Gary. "The Volunteer In The Court: A Review Of The Literature And A Survey Of Training Needs With An Analysis For Future Exploration." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Illinois, 1969. Branch-St. Joseph Counties. Volunteer Probation Officer Program and Volunteer TraininnganuaI. n.d. Cauley, John. "A Descriptive Study Of The Volunteer Probation Officer Program In The Ingham County, Michigan Probate Court." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1971. Goldberg, William A. "English Adult Probation and Aftercare." (draft) Michigan State University, School of Criminal Justice, June 1971. Hennepin County, Minnesota, Department of Court Services. Volunteer Program. n.d. Oakland County, Michigan. Volunteer Case Aide Program and Vplunteer Training ManuaI. n.d. State Training School, Red Wing, Minnesota. Volunteer Service Center. n.d. 96 APPENDIX A SURVEY OF MICHIGAN'S JUVENILE COURTS SURVEY OF MICHIGAN VOLUNTEER COURTS Name of Agency Mailing Address 1. How long has your agency had volunteer services without interruption? Less than six months __ 6 months to 2 years __ 2-5 years __ More than 5 years _( specify number) 2. What is the total number of volunteers your agency uses? 1-50 __ 50.100 __ 100.150 __ 150—800 __ over 200 _ 3. How often does your average volunteer contribute his services? 2 or 3 times a week __ once a week __ once a month __ less than once a month 9, What kind of work are your volunteers now doing? t of Blunteers involved #of Volunteers hatertainment I’m-Release 1 Preparation Teaching or Tutoring Arts & Crafts Contributions Religious of materials __ Programs or facilities Counseling Sponsorship/ 3. Guidance g Vi sitetion Job Placement Vocational . Training Contributions of Professional Assisting Services Offender Self-help groups Family Counsel... ins ___.. Recreation Other (Please Specify) 5. How mamr offenders is your agency currently responsible for? 50 51-199 150-300 301-950 over 950 97 6. 7. 9. 10. 9 8 What f of offenders were served by volunteers during this last year? under 25$ 25.50% 50-75% 75-1003 How do you recruit volunteers? (Check 2.11.. applicable) Volunteer approaches us Organisation membership (Lions, etc.) Contact with agency staff __ ‘ One volunteer tells Us. TV, radio, newspapers __ another Other (Please specify) . Method of screening volunteer applicants . (Check 3.11... applicable) None Interview Reference Check Fingerprinting What general requirements must your typical volunteer meet? (Check one) Experience Education Both Neither What type of orientation does your volunteer receive? (Check .a_1_l_ applicable) None Interview with supervisor Formalized orientation or other agency personnel program . __ Written directions and Training provided by instructions(ie. manual) other agencies Instruction from staff Inservice Training at least once a month Instruction from other volunteers Inservioe Training less often than once a month (mam QUESTIONS 11, 12 3.13 0111.! IF YOU'VE HAD A vowu'ram PROGRAM FOR A m OR MORE. OTHERHISE. $119 To QUESTION 1.) 11. 12. 13. How many regularlyaerving volunteers did you have on. year ago today? Best estimate of number . How many of these same 222;. (not including newer volunteers) are still with you today? Number of volunteers who started a year ago still with us today . When do most volunteers drop out? Please make your best estimate here. Mainly, between completion of orientation and beginning of assignment . Mainly, 0-3 months after beginning work . Mainly, 9.6 months after beginning work . Mainly, 7-9 months after beginning work . Mainly, 10—12 months after beginning work 99 lb. Mao acts as the supervisor of volunteers or Director of Volunteer Programs? (Check one ) No one Phid staff member, part time Paid staff member,full time Unpaid volunteer - Subsidised volunteer Other (Please specify) . 15. On the average, how many hours does the supervisor or director devote to administration of the volunteer program(s) each week? 5 hours or less 6.10 hours 11-20 hours 214.0 __ W 16. Do you feel regular staff accepts and understands the volunteer program? Yes, satisfactorily Needs improvement lo 17. Insofar as staff does accept and like your volunteer program, what are some of the main reasons they like it? (Check _al; applicable main reasons) Better contact with community , improves commity relations Volunteers help to free staff from routine Jobs Helps to tap into available comunity resources Volunteers are a source of good new ideas More attention given to offenders, via volunteers Because volunteer works free, has a better chance to form good relationship with offender Volunteers have a range of special skills which staff ordinarily doesn't have __ Other 3 (Please specify ) 18. Insofar as staff dislikes and does not accept your volunteer programs, what are some of the main reasons for thi-s'? (Check _all_ applicable main reasons) Volunteers interrupt the regular routine of the agency They make it harder to control offenders They are too naive, don't really know what it's all about Volunteers are undapendable, you can't count on them They take more time than their output Justifies They criticise the system too much, without understanding it They get to be viewed as the "good ms" while we become even more the “bad No; Volunteers get over-involved with offenders . - They get more credit than we do for the agency‘s accomplishments it. feel out of touch with the volunteer program Insofar as volunteers can do the Job without pay, there'll be less money for our salaries and general budget Other 3 (Please specify) 19. Could your present use of volunteers be improved in arm significant way? Yes No ( If 92, skip to question 21). 20. If you answered "yes" to the preceding question, what are some of the main problem areas needing improvement in your present volunteer program ? (Check all main problem areas) COITIIUED ON NEXT PAGE 100 20. lead more appropriate kinds of people as volunteers lead more volunteers lead better screening of volunteers lead improved volunteer orientation mraining lead more Jobs for volunteers lead more dependable volunteers (lower turnover) lead batter staff supervision of volunteers lead better reporting of volunteer activities lead better ovorall organisation of program lead more control of volunteer's relationship with offender lead more money to defray costs of volunteer program lead to allow volunteers to have more contact with offaaars __ lead to givo volunteers more responsibility and freedom lead to improve relations with regular staff lead to improve relations with the comunity Others (flease specify) _ 21. what would you consider the greatest indicator of volunteer effectiveness for offenders as it is reflected in your program ? (Check all applicable) Lower recidivism rates Lower arrest rates Changes in offender attitude towards others Changes in offender attitude towards self Batter school attendance Changes in family attitudes toward offender ____ Other: (Please specify ) Please enclose any supporting data you have readily available W cements you might wish to add on your volunteer programs would be most welcome. 'fiad or printed name '31gmture W PLEASE RETURN 8! MARCH 23 II was STAMP“), RETURN-W389 ENVELOPE PROVIDE FOR THAT PURPOSE. APPENDIX B AGE OF VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS BY GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION 101 , /’ /~’:"” / / {/4 ONTONACON OOOC.‘ HARL VOIX PHI! 0 I I. H NT- w mails; «WM . '75 i w" ‘ N KALKASKA R OSCODA ALCONA 008- N I w XMO IOOCO " ' AIRNAC I ; v mason LAMt oac LA '5‘ I "U Q; OCIAM 'tr' HICOST MONICALN TWCOLA _ .ANILAC Egg-“'2, ‘5‘”; an I‘ L . sma- " IONIA CLINTON Ml“ 59:: 0F VQLUNTFFR magmas: 3% months - two years ALLIOAN DAIRY [ATOM I easeeeae se . ‘1 w - . . :: ::: :......~“ '. | .-r I . -’ s . . ~: 0 - five years - fl .’ 1‘ . . O . .' 7":‘f-r % ,t} 3" . ’ . 0. g .. o A ht van ‘" "'5; ?- - - .:.‘:'1 MM “at : Over five years -~ %3 3335‘, . ' ,. o'.‘:.'.'.' I .7" . :3 g, "3 Q» '2' ”1 0 ae es a (t 5 In planning stance ”7.122- ‘ MEN 3 eavsss . . - MILUOA LI LI NAWIG I - - APPENDIX C LOCATION OF VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS BY POPULATION SIZE 10? -; / __ “a, / . 4’/ /’ ourouacou cootsuc nacwmac l CHIPPEWL OTSEGO OSCODA A LCONA ':"OLUI‘ITFE‘P PERFORM-’5‘, IN CI"'I'!".S WITH POI-‘IUJITIONI‘a : MONTCAIJA ‘5‘?” amino F...“ t .T mm 00 , 000-100 . 000 {if/7 'C; 0v m 100,000 m rm :2 50,000 LAIR LAPEER I / CALHOUN SDALE LE NAWEI . - I MICHIGAN STATE UNI‘VERSET‘.’ ll 'f‘ I r2.)"llk"‘.“ 'l 'l . ‘ '-' '. a,‘ s. .V.‘.‘ 1‘.‘.. \l .I, .9 _II.."\.- f ‘.I\l E . f‘ . . a | o ' bq_ . - -. ' VII- K4 V-l' ,Q‘.L 1 'xJI|.L_. I' “ADI LANSING, MICHIGAN 4wz3 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY .'.' <3! .. . - .‘ 4.1: ‘1‘)? " v .. a- .. v .- ~.,‘.“I'J1JL Ur LIIIMH‘riL IUQII’UE _A‘QT LANSING, I‘.IICHIGAN 466...} MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY JAMES J. BRENNAN MEMORIAL LIBRARY SCHOOL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48823 I I III III III II l 'l IIIIIIIII