:33: :: ' \‘ | ' 1 " I \I V , 4 E I ' 4 L -’ "' . l J ‘.'.’" I ' h Qabul li’ ill-i;- UAiLIfiItliQ“ U5“ UL}. .WLV¢.¢1 .uawUAvs‘au Us THE. meii‘eu PMLEJL$ OMICLL 0.3%? THE; ‘-". ’ 1’. . .\ -' ,.“-» 51:3.u-1iuius uiulngtimudbub u: CoauguAk-anu £3" David Roscoe d<€rfl A PROJH ST REP QT Submitted to the Schnol of Social work hicnigun abaue Unchrslny in Pa rtial Fulfillment of the uaqulraments ior the Degree of ungl i f;:- 343151.. Hm J mm 19 U1 0; ? ‘ \ ‘ \ l . t . - . , ‘. . . (‘ . L _ - : 7 I .. V , .‘1 I\‘ l ‘ N 5 ‘ ~ .4 ‘ a ‘ 1 ~ fi' Director of School "--' ‘.-x.r, . ""44. ‘ 1"! _- “C. a ff'hxn-‘aubjunr-r 43% Mix? a VI. '. E! f...” 5‘: ,3 "Q ~i1‘ t; ." ' § .22} 11. Va. 4' h «f. ‘ '~. .30 - ‘ a “D‘ x~ ' I I ’0. .4 O ‘ v. a .Cfl:$.::.fi VECG'MM‘ - a Ufii‘v‘CK’Sfly g 4 TH ESIS 9 r .f 'x a. -. ' ”1‘2“ 3"d‘ilisni’l tJ I." th’:{T ‘"i" 1_E . ».§N .E 14.15...) TIL Juan anvil-s you! 1%.}. d .1 ‘ f- 44' ‘ .' n ‘ v. an‘ ‘ v'_ .j, 3 . v - ~ .A I ‘ .1 '| E , . a -. "Y ' 3 .‘ . ~I . ' ,4‘ a. ‘ tab . Jaws.- 4.1.4 9 k.'-3§-.¢ "3:5,; 2th.!” .3 a} g .. .J.-.‘ .. ‘ ‘3“ EEEE giEEE t4 th E *' f." i. 2 ~ .2. " w. I‘ -. 'v‘ . g ‘1“, u- .3 Vs 1...! E a tu «Betta-As. ELK-3"»: a “ml ha ".7; 45422710.? in Um: CELEEIE EL”: {15 3:19 r-Eagmr‘éh E;EEE:0 EggrEEiaiiea 15 EEErEEEEE IE: AEEEirEEiEu IEEEEUEJ frEE LE. flordEn Alanii SEEErviEEd aha EELEEE in 333 EEEEEEE? L3 vriau LAEE ”a; ”It. "5. _ l . ' . _ . , . ' , _.. ‘ . .. ..~. .1 ., £ .. .’ ~. 3‘ ‘ . .. E; )0 . ._ . _. _. 5 _ a: g . h E: ..~ ; . . 'x V ‘. ll ”1;. toiddar “My, b; 59 Mini “Jotajfi‘fi‘i. ’ofl‘fiwr’hl’ Uri“,- “git-“JO :, 0' ”3-5:“ :4 '2.» 0":5- or '5 9. 45* -......,»’ "mm-.- *3 in ‘62.!“ 95‘ “‘6’ ”9": b.‘ v‘Dgu‘dfi" 23:1 H.i.‘..«. h. .55 «I ‘2' ;; «a. £3 1' {2 ,_. ’0 G» I 9 OJ .A .31 a; A par ‘ 9'." ""{. r- pt . ‘\ . ‘ ’ . .1 :4 . ‘ 4 4 - a ‘ .; HA. 5‘ £1). E.‘ 12.5 :3. :21 -‘ a'H‘EP-ltfi ‘..'.E.3."JJ.. :9 an. Ethan-Ea ,. -: a .; null." E“ F .7 e . ‘. ‘ E-fi 0‘ ‘r. a. -‘.\A_ EJ’E‘ 0" H" E AXLZ‘ g1 igli‘J ~4. .’ I “wi‘f’J ‘. Jr 3 i’fi- .3 :";.‘. ”3.1,. ‘21 ”-;~ - ul‘ 5. fl..=‘):." ’ ‘ P_»¢‘-,'- "Hr | ut-fi“-'-¢,it$ “a 3.. “3.2«i' . - 4 ‘ -. 5, . .n E ‘ ‘ 1 “' ET. .‘H J r- ‘ -EEEE E} .E. EEEE: EEEEE Ear EEE «Lia ’ s‘n .u" h ’ ‘. i , .0. r. . E *d T ‘5 ~ ‘ ‘ ... ..:'i.::&.iE-..~:1:3 171 1-x: 'V'J."::..};.,. ‘93...”1'1 33):. E213 fa)“ .41“. 91‘- s 't‘r‘uv -~'~ ;-' -. ‘. ! 1 ‘~-':‘.‘l '\ .‘LV..‘OJNHEJJ\IEJ Lani.) Q Q o 0 CHAPTER I. INTAODUCTION. . . II. SUAYJY u? LITERATUQJ III. THE SETTING . . . IV. PROSJJURES . . . V. RESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF DATA VI. CJHSLUJIEJ E H” A “ . 1‘." "I «:11. 1 HHJIA. . g . BIBLIOGRAPHY . 0 1'5 ‘ “‘I' v Aid—[ugh C1 10 26 30 3k C uh I"? Hi I 13:32:333 CTI OH This project is a study of referrals in a parole agcncy to determine if adequate use is being made of com- munity resources. Evaluation of society‘s resources is an ongoing procecc, and is one of the ways through which society adjusts and changes to meet evolving community needs. Ono of the main areas now being evaluated in the field of corroctionc. The goal or this rccearch in to csscss advance: in the social sciences, evaluate techniqucc. and determine what courses of action best meet the needs of this setting. In selecting referrals as tho focus of thin study, the writer has tho concern of both the clicnt and society in mind. By this study, it is hoped that in a limited area we can View the meeting of the needs of the client through community resources, and determine if the avail- able resources are being utilized to the fullest extent. Bocausc of the lack of sufficient supervisory personnel, and due to the definition of the service offered in a parole setting. it becomes increasingly vital to use community resources. In examining the caseloads that , . E. w p u E E .. .. .0.“ c ‘1. E. 1 E. on gEroEo o--Ec rs Carry,‘hc Elna tuou 341 are handliuc caswloads far abovo tho idEEl Eat forth by tho *E-fi- .—.- ~ , .. . 4.2.... E, ,4 e , 1-1., .3 J. - -, + ..Q EEEiunai :roLa-Enn Sui :Erole associécion in Lint? EEuny ., >II. ’. _.g 3. ' M i o v «x v. ' ‘ ”a o o 0 ‘1'; 9" rcgEirEmonts for emylaymaht oi {?role cEiicers i; Liciiran .- . V. are rntker w ,r ‘ C A 4 \u' - a 1v .9 A. . . . S 4. E J .3 yr. 4.. 1,. . E. t . a 4 ‘7 1 ‘ .' I ’ r: -‘ .‘ V 3 -¢ -‘ “ f. . . .... " I ’ . ‘ ., I 3‘ «. r . 7’ - n", v fro: ‘3 :‘lid).-“A»LL Sh ZJITI “.81‘V‘ :‘C B it; -- “J dual-“J “ a L‘ffc 1:: 4...": ’ 5‘ L’ ?.:_:‘ 3.3% fin 03% of thc Eociel sciancos; however, we find Eoma with degrees from otxcr disci EctErE load us to an evaluation of tho roles and function 0? the yfirola officor, Qua to the flcmanfis o; a“ exrofEive caseload, and du? in part to limited training, Emmy era Emails to give naedad ccszcrk services to thE client, tho yarolce. Althoujh n broai principle, the carolc "Fl OEEECEr 13 responsitl ti- for all aspects of thE phralma's 116E, the liritctiona mEntionEd force a reliance uyon Coxmunity cgcncias and resourccs to enable him to function at on .p‘imum level. If the concern is cervice to the client, & naximur was of the pcrolo officer, and thp tax dollar, we rust viow the parole officer as not only utiliz- ing reforrrl as a technique, but cctuxlly orpioying this technique core frequcntly than no would see it used in sure other settings. lfiational Probation.&.Parolo Association, Egrort to tho chcrto '5 gtudz Qommicoionm State of Eichigan, KNEW -3. Referral in carractfians to flflt a one way prncwan however. finher anciatal reaources 1nd farce: arm in- V01?fld in thin £150. fiocial aggnciua harm every right to 11$.it intéké nnu «ALoLLiau 50113 of the & ency, but to dany warvica to a cli1nt bacausa his behaviar has brourht him inns £9.2131tcz uitlz Lha law is net canaissant with LEM exy-cacbax’tgiextzw oi" wciaty 1am} may c;1:.:1wt axclszfia n1? dang him prereaalaa11 fiarvican far this rafiavn. $10, a lack a: vusrguvsn an.tha par: of & rfifarring *rancy and rfiluct$nce to accept 1 referral fins to this renamn 1a. likfifl‘ififl 1m 1.111111131131113 14311139161: for m 1]! cat; 31.11,-..3' wreaflcy. A cancarn 0v“? thm pr9c1aa $31 “3% of retarrgi in carrectiana ngvuciaa lad this writer Lo exaana this pro- 6%53. 111k 1am» awarenass of Lha functiana 0: .ha pfirnlo officar ‘13:! the 531 31:11:13 212' Stacie" -3 an $113113 313911213313 cf the involveranas of Lbs clignt, in was decified Lhfit tflia Lap1c 0% mid he studind w: L:.in thm fraaaw¢rk a? fbrn gal rauearch. 351M “r inning this stuiy firs tdn boxic hypozhsses. Firat, thm hypnthafiia Lhfit inadaquaho usa 13 made of com» munity reaaurc$n by Lha paroln officar. Thia 1: Ln say that fcr a.multi§ icity of reaagns rafarral as a tee: nigue is littla used in Lhia aatting. Spercbinfi frwm thn pasnulata nh%t Lha function of’the parole ofELCer ahauld inczuda can-arm with rafe§rfils, it 13 the writar'a balls! that this erLiuular asggct of tho rain of the ;&P019 Ck- officer is 111 11131 113101111 11: 111 11 111 11L1131 611111. Saauaily. it 13 Lypabfia1izad 131: r1f1rr1ls to 11111111y 15411115 1g1 =3-11r1111 and.e;;;qp:1111 in 1 pdrnls 111111;. Th: 1112115 of 1 eroia 1g1nc; 1:5 1111. 11: 11 no: 15 of 1.111113 1 my 1111: no ciianta 11'13 in any 02:13? 1:12:11111113 1';3.".;.\' 3.3:. I’M-HS £31111 at?” 1.111.533} awe-m PM! -. La: 1114:-uani 1111. 11111311111 13 a 1Lrolo 11111; ““3 q 3142 iz‘tra ,.*l¢1.r.h. 1111.1, £5qu 61171; 02111.11»; 0 .4 (.- ’J ‘I‘ k . ‘5: 3:: n c P .14 c, Q c135111' in 1 K3331? 11113i111 1331311 111 1111 cuubocfi 1111.111 111. L1r~1 c111r .1 ,111141n8 1111:111 1111 11141. 11:11, anunleg3e a: 110 1111L1.13 11111 11:1.1i15 111% a. 14'1...‘.131'1Lly 1.1114 £113" T3.{-J.-».‘F13. 1:01.111 Ln! u..1.1,.;i:w.z.-.J.;1.; i.” 11113131... .1310 1.11.11. 1.11 3.31-2.18 61' 3.12.5 11.4.57. 22:. 1.31.1.1, 11,111.17, -111 Law 1,11 1: 1111114.1111 rufurrJé. has 1113, 131 111111 11: :1111111 1f 1 yuxslaé La 1 01.131-123.133 61,5}...11'13’ 1.14.1.1 33:13.11 1;.) L211 52-31"::1,.Li;;} 31" L143 1111111 Ly L11 111111 1.ii11:. £1 11 13111 1111 111:: 111 411119111 "ty111‘ 1; :1.iu.zkla 111 i; 11 31.11124 LL19 if LLL 511111 cgzicura .Lfgxzai 1411? 1111413 :1 ' L. 1111:? .u “1:11 £1111 c :isfiy cf gssil~11 in uu.ld 11111 L1 111 11111111 1 511211 oif1111'1 crnce,cisn 03 tho 1:11111 pi r;(ur1.21. 31111, datarwian‘LSn a? 111 1ff1c- L1111111 1f rLfazitl 11 iaiqrtant in 1vhlu.tinv this cawica. L 1 :;:’311 of Lima 131 11113 LrahiLiLLd 11111- natian of r1f1rr113 11 any 11:51 11111, ans requirunanLn of research 1111 pointed Lo limiting thin oxgior1tory study. The present system of record keaping of the Lichigan Department of Corrections make: it somewhat difficult to verify some aspects of parole records. Due to these limitations, the writer decided that the most appropriate office for tha study would be in the city of Lansing of the state at Michigan. This office will be discussed later in terms of composition, limits. at cetera. Easentially, this atudy has as its base the goals and values of social work. This implies that referrals made in tha Lansing parole office‘will be viewed frtm the frame of reference of social work. Referral as a process has been deveIOped by the field or aocial work and is a well dafined and structured process; For the purrssa of this study it was believed that a contact of a persanal nature by a'paroio officer with a.memher of a cnmmunity agency for a predetermined 5011 such as tangi- ble aid did not constitute a referral. To illustrate. it does not fall within the detinitian of a referral if a parole officer calls an agency for a bed for the night for a paroles just released from prison. This is utili- zetion of tha community resaurce to aid 1 client but it does nat {all within the definitien of a referral. In this incident the client or parole. ha: no choice in determining his destiny. ?ha social work framework includes several basic -6- postulates that must be kept in mind fully to uaderstand the proc 11 of rLferral. Further, 1 referral; can only be 3151. civa 1ft tnesa Leliafa undarscore the process. A belief in t.Le dam. t is prncaaa and 511111 in the client's xight to participate in flat Liuiniaw hia own destiny are b at two of these valuea.1 Implicit in this is be- lief in tha inherent war th of the individual, and reapact for the client's ca; 1Lfl Ht ea in meeting his naeda.2 Thaaa prin- C1§les point up some of the axpectationa and pitfalls of raferzw ”.3. Another important principle deals with the utilizatisn of caumunity resources to meet a given need. During the paried that social agancies ware firét estab- liah1d rgferral was not well used, but 13 urLLn areas and their reamltant agencies inL r911 ed in 5111, the need for rafarral became evident and waa e; 1ploitcd. If community ressurces are utilized adequately by profaasional workers, it aids both the clie at 11nd the communit*. Overlap in serviceS'wili be reduced with better focus upon meeting ttia nee‘i 3 cf tLe client in :iew of available communit' rcaaurceso Corrections, not originally involved with social work, remained somewhat aloof to theaa techniques and preoccues, and it has been only in recent yeara that 1Gordon Hamilton d a ti 19$ “ (New York: C1 1L 1 univeralty ixesa, 2Ibid., pp.7-9 - 7 - social work and corroctiona h1v1 drawn together, recog- nizing their common goals and moods. Romy forces were at work that closed the gap between corrections and social work. One of the primary forces in corrections has been tho re1lization tnat punishment per 11 has lit- tle effect on the offender. lhe code 0” H1111 aui es- tablished both br01d and Specific principles that were adhered to for centuries, prevailing soueuh1t even to this day. Evaluation of those principles, 11 they 13- fact the ofrenuer, gave the impetus for reforms and ul- timately tne idea of treating the criminal through vari- ous techniques. The idea is to facilitate the adjust- ment of tho oifender returned to society. Sometimes nis involves not only rehabilitotion, but h1bilitation itself and due to this fact many disciplines have been drawn into the field of corrections. Some limitations of this corrections agency have already been noted. In understanding how these limitaoiona affect this area of investigation, it is necessary to explore tno causes. some of the limitations of the parole office are inherent due to the structure and nature as defined by law. This agency is charged with several functions, some of wnich at first glance agpear to conflict with one anoth- er. It is the responsibility of this agency to protect the rights of society, and enforce its standards.1 In a 1Thia is a basic assumption underlying the parolc sense than, a police function is inherent 1; :ha super- vision of paroleas. Similarly, the parole officer is chargefi with the well being of the parole? in guidance and Servica to affect all araaa of his life.1 This maana that when the paroles entara the office there are limita- tions intrinsic in his relationship with his parole of- ficer that are seldom seen in any other 5eLning in which social work is applied. The pirolee 13 given a set of rules which he must live by and the parole officer is charged with rasyonsibility for seeing that the parole. abides by thesa rulen.2 They cover such daily activities as place of work, communication, transportation, and deal with the relationships of the parolee.3 The parolae may not marry witnaut per&iszi¢n of his parole officar, nor drive a car, nor leave the county. Cthar aimil&r regula- tions are highly reatrictive of the client's everyday activitiea.L fis 13 aware that if he doefi not abidc by theae rules he may spend time in the county jail, or be returned to prison. This authority inherent in the situa- tion p983: limits to the relationship and is a reflection process as is evidenced by the legal nature of the parole contract and the penalties (legal) for violation of this cantract. 1Act 232 P.A. 1953. Mich., C.L. 19L8, Sec. 791.231, Subs. 31. 21b1d. 3390 Certificate of Parole in Appendix. hgbid. -fl.w'w “ma war ,tl'zsftnti‘ .839} 9'» m “visiting up: ‘io gated £12m :d‘: .1 W “a? ‘a‘rfl'ow '10 can: 1...: 3961.16 ‘1 w I‘ll mac ”nab 0.53 319323» 93:18:31 as “WW nu..- thtéoixgila't 03". a: 914m #1:} We“: We gm- n: Luv->6 schism 9‘18 20.8“ I ‘nccia :1 ”£91m; od‘l‘ .SIfiqua at u .682“ gxom' warms; .146 mu Jaw :9! . m on: an: ante“ ml :Jtimuvwan r OM“! 1118:; data «vagina? 3.:aL1 and mm .flOJuJ‘mq’mlu “solduoluumaoo ‘L-l‘iOh uh aim at?" (.95an 9:33 '}o magnum“ m Milne 016’an am '10 schema-.5 JUL-.- .1 «AIM Wm sumac .wmw an: .ms.‘ .oa . W5 1.8116110 M: '10 sviaoi'zass'x {£4131 “W «a no» “1 '13. 3'3.“ u’mws «5i. 0‘“ J “1’ $11an ’60 M 0:14 kaoqr. rum '5 WW“ 3mm: without“ sin”: Joann W p; I! Mo «lanouain wt! .~,;; «and; __ I. . _ __ A ‘ Q 1' ' v——v W W V . ”“330 ‘ lo. 01 ed: yd banana”. 3! '- I #953319 v 103 16:91) "alum; om .- afle .8421 .1.G "dam .8229! . .fl. 9632 5 .IE .ad of the limits of the avancy. As has b¢¢n previously noted ccwr tionsr mainnd snmewfiet 8130? to 0 he com- munity arenciea 82d consequently tended to orerete ou‘ of ccntfict with corwunity széncies. This attituda has b99n rfli“’0”69” b" °b~~ y*fi’o°"*01ui werkars in every Cor-P‘tnity {and this tn?» is r: fit-.2: hive of Fan w’t‘fif'y "i it. The yarzla officer is farcad ta work 310nm and aépears to havet the f:c1i fig that o‘fier afirmunity agencies are not interested in this particVIar are and the prcblama F? that th e clie .ta yre:ent. Due to this fact, historically, there has been a lack of conru unicstion and irterchange betas en the ccrrectiane warker and otficr (”"ULuity yorkars. CHAPTER II ...... An was noted in Chapter I, referral an a process has ite roots in the field of social work. Mary Richmond wae the firet to define and point up tho need for refer- ral in eocial work.1 From her initial efforts atoms the foundation for tho thinking now prevalent in the field regarding the proceee or referral. tollowing Kory Rich- mond, the process of referral evolved to the point where it hoe becomo an integral part of agency limit and doti- nition. The correction: letting, being somewhat removed from social work, has not given the matter of’reforral much consideration.- The literature is sparse in thie area and it has been contributed primarily by social workers in the corrections setting. In 1957 Harleigh Trackor identified the need {Or referral in a discussion of the use of community agenciee in probation work.2 luory Richmond, Social Diornoeie (new York: tussoll Sago Foundation, I9I75, 51: p. zfiarloigh Tracker, ”The Use of Community Agencies in Probation work,“ Federal Probation, Vol. XI, (October- December, 19L7). p.2 e -11- Three main pointe are to be noted: (1) A wide range or agenciee and programs in available to render eorvioe to the noede of persons with social adjustment probleme; (2) More effective coordination of those agenciee must be arranged eo that their maximum energies may be mobi- lieod and brought to boar systematically and continuously in behalf‘ct the people with whom they work; (3) Many poroone are being eorvod by one agency, and need addi- tional help from one or eevornl other ogancioe. The complex organization of social welfare re- sources makee it difficult, and in none ceees impossible, flor people to utilize available prograne without help from professional workore.’ In diecueeing referral, Tracker pointe out that the corroctione eetting nodifioe some aspects of rotorrel, but that five major points should be kept in mind: (1) The referrel aunt nlwaye bo individualised because each referral 1: different due to the individual and hie noede; (2) The purpose of the referral ehould be clearly understood by the worker, the individual being referred, and the receiving agency; (3) Referrals should be personalized.' The worker should be aware of the purpose, function, proceduree, and personnel of the agency to which the individual in being referred; (5) Preparation of the individual for referral and prepa- ration of the agwncy to receive the individual is very important. The worker should interpret the individual -12.. being referred to the receiving agency, and should share orally or in writing, pertinent information required by the receiving agency) (5) Immediately after the referral has been made, the follow-up process should begin. The initiating worker should seek to establish cooperative relationships with the receiving agency. In this article,- Trecker discusses the meaning of refe rel and feels that it is an integral and inherent pert of’the treatment pro- cess. He feels that the worker must take sufficient time in conference with the individual and with the receiving agency to define the reason for the referral and entici- pate results. One paragraph best states his position:1 It is increasingly evident that prevention, treatment, and eventual control of delinquency rests with the community. The cooperative, intoragency approach on e case-by-caee referral basis will do much to weave together our network of community resources. The results will be demonstrated not only in improved services for the individuals, important as this is, but also in more effective cormunity organization. When professional workers accept the fact of their own limitations and begin to use the community re- sources to the full, the actually build professional practice beyond the specialized level to the level of integration....All or us at one time or another need some help from community resources. Kenneth L. M. Prey contributed a pioneer article to corrections dealin: with the role of social can ework and its processes.2 He points up the basic assumption lzéid.’ p.22. 2Kenneth L. M. irey, "The Princi; loo 0 Social Cece Work as Apzfl led to [rotation and Parole " Foderel Probation, Vol. Ix, Mo. 2, (April-June, lQLSl, p. -13- of social work that "Change enforced upon an individual from outsida is, in all truth, no change at all. no will in tho and do only what he himoolf ganuinely wants to do, from his own motivations, to achieve his own satisfactionarl He sees the role of the probation and parole officer as being primarily enabling. Pray points out that one of the pitfalls and misconceptions that some probation and parole officera are saddled with is tainted to the client in his social setting. Ha states, ”Tho social worker's preoccu- pation with the inner life of the individual, with the personality problem, if you please -~ his effort to respond to the client's own personal need, without outer limit or definition -~ seems to leave out of account the community's stake in ito own protection against individual violation of its own rules.”2 It is an established principle that the community does have a stake in probation, parolo, and other nocial work settings. It is also believed that tho worker in each of those settings must be cognizant of the community agencies and ha both willing and able to use them to their highest degree of effectivenenl. In regard to this, Pray feels that the basic function of probation and parolo in protection of the community. It. concern for the individual in as a member of the community. Pro- bation and parole arc Justified only because tho community 11b1d o . P. 15. 21b1d.. p.17. -15.. is convinced that its own protection against crime io boat achicvcd through individualized trcatmcnt of tho offender. That treatment conciatc in affording the of- fender opportunity and help, in the community rather nan outside or in Opposition to these limitations. The limitations remain, however; they are not abrogated or denied. This is compatible with the conviction that the individual must, and in any event will, accept rccponsi- bility for his own behavior; that no decisions nado under duress are final or binding; that no bohavior hasod upon fear is likely to he maintained when danger is past. The parole officer munt always be aware of the community's ntnko in tho procecs in which he is engaged. He has a right and an obligation to utilize to the fullest the cormunity services avcilnblc in meeting a given clicnt’o hoods. Tho offender, whether probationcr or paroleo, must assume rccponsibility for himself in all areas and activi- ties, but is entitled to the help nnd sorvico of the worker in this setting. It is the achievement of celfbcontrol cud calf-responsibility that indicates when this service should be discontinued. Donald R. Taft points this Up well: Certainly an oxceccivo attitude of blame, excancivo reliance upon fear of commitment, and excccnivo re- strictions upon the voluntary activities of tho pro- bationor will defeat the main purpose of supervision -- namcly, the restoration of 'aelf-control’ through tho voluntary acceptance of social bohuvior as more satisfying than neocinl behavior....Probntion super- vision is casework in an authoritative setting., Eclinqucnto not needing restraint do not need proba- tion, and probationers who have achieved full -15.. calf-coztrol chonld be discharged, though they cry well need assistance.1 ' Louis Ziekind, in discussing the cprlication of social work in the correctional field, points out that many types of agencies are involved in roforrala.2 He feels that the corrections worker should be concerned, because of the nature of his netting and client, with all different types or community agencies. He ctntec: Since government is charged with the major responsi- bility for mFintRinin: the wcllmhning of its citizens, the public agencias do welfare work on a mass basis and predominate in the social welfare field. The private cqcncies operate primarily in those areas where pntlic cycncios do not funcnion or where because of opocialized interests, or arge gaps in either forscnnol or funds, some snfrlcncntary and cooperative sorvicc is desirable.3 Other than governmental agencies, he lists four separate types: (1) Soctnrian agencies with religious motivationn, such as the Volunteers of America, and the Salvation Army; (2) Soctarian agencies without direct church affiliation; (3) The non-sectarian agoncios with quasi-governmental status, such as tho ?ennsylvania Prioon Society, and tho New York Prison Society; (L) The non-sectarian cgnncion without any governmental status, such as the John Howard Societies which Operate throughout 1'Boncld Taft, Criminology, {New York: infilllin company, 1.950). DQLZfJ. 2Louis 3 skin1 "Sociol work and the Correctional Fizéd," Fodorol Probct on. Vol. XIV, no. 1, (Harsh, 1950), p. . 31bid. ”4.6- the United Statas and Cznada, 333 tfia Csbarn3 Atrcciatiofi (; of Haw York City. T113 3 rticla llustratsa well the fool in br33d function nit. which the carr‘c Hi mal we rker in the probation or parole ea tt H1 :3 Unlike com- munity chest agencies, 113.1t3d in sec-ye and p13p332, the corrections agency 13 forcad to View 311 re3rurces avail- able. Ellict Ltudt fallnwed 31 kind’s article with a di3sertat;on on c33333rk in the cn,rnr**' 31 fieldl In discu3 31135 the charactmristic3 of CPCI:W"rk in c3rrfictiona 8213 33.4.3 33".“. 22.31, , L392; t‘1-z wrrkfir in 3:21;- 33 .3er ty 35330133, thL ccrrecuiag3l wvrksr his 3 13:31 relaticn- ship to t. e c1133 . T13 13:;3‘ roll d. In this article she pointed out that there are both similar ties End diff arences in the clients that both ~5cncies 3331 wi h. 233 pointa nut that (1) 9 Neither society nor our c113nt3 define legally determkned ffendera 33 "p3t13nts." Cur correctional client is held within the supervim ry relationsLm hy 135 1 authority, 3nd he is defined by the community as an of fender against society; (2) g'any of the clients in the correctional lilliot Studt, "Casework in the Correctisnal Field, " “ouwr'l Frcbaticg. Vol. EVIII, No. 3, (heptem- her, 1953].“ -17.. casalaed ccme frsm laws. r~clr32 socio-acsncmlc level by re'a 333 f Lha aélective effecL which money and social status Exave in detexmir ing who Lhall commit certain of- fansea and who shall b3 caught and convic tad cffand ere. This fact places on the caseworker the reaponsibility far understanding some of the charaCLerisLics of this loweraclass group so LhLL he can co.*rmunicate comfortably with clients Who will ba less responsive to middle-class values and syabc ls Lh1n : 2ght LxeiL.ante in 83? a other agencies; {3) Furthermore, all clieuLs in correctiangl agencies will have been Lsraabd a se ries of "accultur- eLing ” “A, r- LC: 5, such as arrest, LLLenti on, trial. and institutionalization, which may well have left definite marks on ‘hair lives that must be recognized and dealt with if Lha caseworker is to help them; (A) Lithin the correctional caseload will be found a core group of offenders who evidence erssnaliLy pat Lerns noL well ur derstood by psychiatrists and other social scinL. ntists. Thus: person- aliLies are VLriLusly labeled "paychOpaLhic," ”dalinqusnt," "acting-out,” and "character discrders.” They all share characteristics of aggressive tendencies, high impulsivity, deep-lying hostility, inaccessibility to normal relation- ships, at ceLera; (5) Finally, we find on the correctional caselaads many indiviauala wh hava been exgosed to all of the traditiDnal 591vices of th%. cammunity \.ithout euccess- ful modificatian cf their behavior. Lhat this means for - 13 - sclecLicn of upiro; :riaLc hcl;ing tcchnigucc, and Icr our cull-imLJLLd c‘anccrda of success, must Be analyzed and dcacribcd if we arc to have any ccmfcrt in our wcrk with chic group of clients. Studt dao diccussw m1ird f actor which must be Lcken inLc canaidcracicn w an we desw be ccscwcrk in the ccrrchional ficld.1 This is the £3 ancy structure witllin which Lhc ochndcr-cupcrvicor relaLioaship Lukas plccc. lacuL 3..u“"ccl ch-ractc 'Asiica LIich the nLLch of the cacaLcrk 1:m353 as follows; (l) The carracti :31 a gency is par: 3 a L"*LLn cf crb 'ni"d cccial canrol. $313 means Lhct every chrLLLiLLal LcrkL r is rec 313331313 fcr Lcamwcrk rclacicnshipc with Mr51rz:.cl in law enforcameat and in the other processes of Justice, that 15, police, Judges, 3nd cLhers. (2) The agency in which the correc- Lional cascwcrkcr is amp eyed Lcs received a vsricLy of assignments from society, come of them contradict«1ry, and all cf them rL flccting tflc un31*cn hicLLrical dsvcl cpmcnt from the days of "let punishment fit the offends " to the modern approach of "Let Lb 3 LreaLmenL fit the cffcndcr.' Therefore. the correctional 3;;3cncy' 3 ca 3cuLivc m3 y find it difficult to set up any agency structura'which will 53pm wrt the casework :roccss .2 Thc cccmunity attitude is alao significant in Lhc A_.__. A 1ibid., p. 21. -13.. relationfihtp of tha Larr3ctianfil 1m 3*k3r 13L tbs clim Stuit b3113v32: A final factar which 1f Lats c3"3"1rk in the carrec- tional field is the community attitude toward tha worker 3nd th. client, and the stigwa from the cammuni y‘which affects them bnth. T313 factor r3— qnirLB t.h3t rnch 03 the focus of correctional casework will necessarily be concernei with helping the commxnity rn”3c%333‘a it:3 attitudms tow? rd offenders. the casLLQrker in correct ions will need to use the Luthsrity given to Him by the comrunity, not only to help Lha offender ch3n~o his ways, but 3130 La L313 thL r3j1c ting 333nznts of ths comnunity mndify their LtLitudes toward those individuals who .. .. r» ,. 53¢? ofLfihded. A “ Q g“,- P. a- ., ‘- “‘.‘ . ' . (n 333.33: 3 *1 fizznt cunt3131L13t to norcscL anal 3L1L1*rtz*e 1“ “ V f to thm prficazs of rcPcrral hfis been 3333 L" LL. ’“co1 (:h"13t, 3133333133 CLLQV'LR treatucnt in a policm Letii.3.2 £3 3 ints out the adventsges 0! L33 autharitative Letting, and £3318 that the authority can b3 u33d t3 refer far treat.ent to anather agnncy, to .r- “we" or pr!‘ awaional arwnr t3 maintain in treqtmeqt by an outnida HQLLcy or other prflfGLSiohal pLPBOn, and to kaap thn offentler 1n c1333 cantht with the aqency. He £3313 that the focus of 3r m3133 331313 b3 Lh3 essanament of the client's needs, the exten to UM :h t 3y are ha 13 t, and the manner in whi 031 his um WI 11.-Ld nmads, if these lend to maladiust- ment, can b3 mat. Wafecral Lh1ulfi not be cou.id 3r3d an 11bid., p.23. zdwcob Chwnst, "C3sew3rk TrLatment in a Police Setting," *""‘V,. rcht 1331 V31.LVIII, 33. h, (Decem- ber, l))~)p F09). Gd v’,’ (J .- .v~p . - “ ‘5 \‘L- ~-.-.‘.‘,\ 1 .I' ‘olqu ...- '..- 5' "‘ ‘ ‘ .5" ‘ ' ‘ "ha - ‘. lLLlJI14993'3u-blul..° rzx)\a&1u‘$e L519 ‘1 £2r0v389 W «M ‘luclj ~ '~ entail cous ldm 33l3 ,1333LL3ion of bath the client and EH3 aggrOpriute agency. An efLuctive referral can t- 33 - ha of therag3utic value to the client, and also in man} c3333 demands thé sane positive orien Ption as- 53 nti- .l in good casewcrk or sychochcrapy. Perhaps 033 of the must cogent articles in cor- rectional liturature as it relates to social work and the process of referral is by chon. he discusses the tale of the family 65 zncy and the jufiicial proceas and LADCqu”b many aspects of which the Corr est; anal marker shauld be aware. He believes that 93ci3l wczk and corrections are now in a p; sition where we should start lacking to imprUV3ment of service. Historically the two ware clcse together and have cannon raots. In the growth of the two, they were in competitlon as albllngs and did not speak to each other for quite a period of time. He believes strongly that we must have COOPGrfltion between corrections agency and the fymily service agency. He must (1) reaffirm our commonuese of purpose, (2) make mutual effOrts in the solutions of problems, (3) rid our- aelres of the many resiiual remnaLts, such as "Can C‘sework be d: ne in an authoritarian settin5?", and (A) utilize the 11b1d.. p.37. 25. Kogon, ”The Family Agency in the Judicial Process," fedor l Irobabion, ("epte mbe er, 1;U 55), p.31. .21- procoss of referrals.1 Corrections, he boliovos does not have all of the services neodod for the client. A referral, however, in a two-way process and he believes that no have to define the role of the community agency in relation to corrections and referral. He states, "...hhilo family service agonciao have every right to limit their intake, they must face their responsibility as community agencies in taking cognizance of the needs of clients who show their maladjustment by delinquent behavior and who are permitted to remain in the comnun- ity.”2 Kogon discusses the use of corrections agencies by the community resources. In dincuasing his own Lon Angolan County probation office, he states that out of the 9,000 referrals to the Juvenile intake section only four came from private agencies. This strongly suggests that as correction: has boon reluctant to use community agencies, likewise the cormunity has not exploited to the fullest the corrections agency. Perhaps we can View this no a reflection of the gap between social work and cor- rections, and no can see that the client and the community suffer from this mutuol lack of understanding. Essentially, than, there has boon a gradual involve- ment of social work in the corrections field. lbs literature 11b1d., p.31. 2;hi§., p.32. -22- on one aspect, that is, referrelc, is sparse and has been mainly prepared by social workers due to the fact that it originally'wEI a social work process. There are many modi- fications that must arise when this process is applied in the correctional setting and only by modification can it be effective. Gordon Hamilton, in discussing the rolc of referrals in eocial work, has stressed that this is pri~ marily a function of intake in the agency.1 By and lorge, correctional agencies do not have intake sections, and this is particularly applicable in the probation and parole getting that deals with the adult rather than Juvenile offender. Although the literature in this area is sparse, social work has defined and exploited the process of referral until at this point it is a well-standardized process. Although social work has accepted this on a given proyosition, corrections has not been involved due to the gap that existed between the correctional agency and the community agency. This is a two-way process, as we have seen, and the gap is slowly being narrowed. The corrections agency has a reeponeihility to both the client and the community to make adequate use of the process of referral in a somewhat modified form. Underpinning this whole discussion is the premise that referrals can be effectively mode and should be made in the corrections setting. Due to its nature and structure it is an 1Hamilton, op. cit., p. 179. ‘3 applicable in the corrections setting as it is in the family service agency. There are various methods of utilizing the pro- cess of referral, and syecifically, to determine when referral is indicated. In defining this study, it became increasingly evident that indications for referral seemed to be varied and partially undefined. Unlike the family service and other community agencies, the corrections agency has no intake section when referral most frequently occurs in the community agency. is means in effect that referrals are somewhat different inasmuch as they are tempered by the setting. The need for referral sometimes becomes apparent shortly after release from the institu- tions, and sometimes does not occur for a considerable period of time. Another factor is that, unlike the intake section of a community agency, corrections agencies must by law continue to be involved inasmuch as they are charged with the supervision and welfare of the paroles. As defined by law, problems involving asocial or acting out behavior which bring the paroles into contact with the law cannot be handled by an agency other than the parole agency. This means that there are problems that are seen by the parole officer and his client that usually fall outside the scepe of most agencies. For this rea- son they are referrci to the agency having end/er of- fering services around a given type of problem. It is (‘ -2)“. felt that Helen Perlman discusses fully certain factors to be consificred in both treating and referring clients.1 It is essential that the client has sufficient e59 strengths to be involved in a relationchip if ha is to receive any service. In referring a parolee to a community agency for service or treatment of any type, motivatiun for this treatment must be evidanccfi. This means that the paroles must hava a ccnscicus desire and need for treataant as a condition of referral. As has been prcvlausly noted, a referral that is Eorcad upon the client who becauae of defenaivenesa or any other reason does not desire help, 13 act inflicated. Secandly, the client must have a capac- ity ta use a givan service. This means that in terms of intellectual endowment and personality structure, be will be ablc to uaa a service offered. Agencies frequently define their services and TQCOfiniza that they are ill- equlpped to daal.w1th certain types of clients. As an illustration, it is known that peeple usually do not have the capacity to use intensive casework services, or psycho- therapy, if their intelligence is limited. Theae are twa of the primary indices that must be used in determining whether or act a referral is inflicated and if it is feasible. Some difference exists in terms of the pacple who would be lnvclved in a given aarvice. In a case involving diffi- culty in relationship between a huaband and apouaa, referrAI newnrkL_A Problem y of Luicaso Areas, 1Helen M. Perlman, gpcial Ca (flhicago: Uulvcruit of tee wire ie someLiues iugiceyed ii bad he» Les deéiie and cepecicy to use Lee services of an agency. Ixe focus of this study is be decermine primarily situations the pe'eon under supervision of the Richigen Department of Correctione is involved in, because this agency defines -vs 53a as being pxiuarily cancereed with the client and concern with the faeiiy and others invalve d 1e importent yet eeecedery. ihe inuiCLtion ior referral in this agency is also tenpered by the community rescurCBa in;clved. some 1:101 lens ale eyiu.erccd that the C"LmL.nity ’1. (a E {.0 ble to aeel i.’ith, the: is, existing services are net -“ icien L to cover all prcbl~ts eviuenccd by the clienL. Ehie weens that both Lee client and the perele oificer have a reepensibi liL Ly in determining wizat age: cy may fit the need and it may well to that no agency in the cezauniLy cculd meet the needs ef 8.5ivcn client.eferra1 U o d (7' 5 fl' '1) S is not and cannot be e 3 with their ysrolncs. T393 OSTica was one of thrLe if a district cater: ng savzrtl countiLs in the {arena of Pardons and Paroles. The dis”rict sup?“ isor hadw 3”,; Crntact with -‘.'40 ~I‘. ’ \ "p". van . . ‘ ‘3 -. P‘s 1 - o J- . - LHQ zerLL 5.”;cuic and L¢b .anti .n w b Lo Luicrvise i_,,-_‘ 0' —‘ -.- J ‘ ---"- '1“ ’ ‘ ‘1- 't‘-‘, 'fi 1‘“ " t.1=;.».1" db: i... ii ‘35 fall!“ .l—L-‘l.d Ligatf. “1189 to his?! 1‘3” 2 Ole Ofd 3.06 r6 3 1 . i, . .—~ w _. L a , .. 1. in this; 5.1" s “81... «1 vi)”. $4.1 Err-1:3” t~}\ir I’W.‘O¢K.‘~‘JSO Falrt‘itb'r. tile 5 'i’ - '7' . .1.-.’ r —. 9w ,- ‘ —-.-‘ ‘r- ‘- FQI‘C13 C Li .LC‘JI" isru ra€;\i-I‘L-d t.‘ (Lt ::Il~.-. iii-dbl V4433 tu 3111‘ ‘ “ --* --—- .3 ‘ ~ -.. 1"}. L A In. 35 {TECCi-Ln?) SL'JIhJQIeM ty {Hi-3 IL‘fili‘) 11 LGELI‘LQ. ant {,n; gyro Q—h rec.ions on an inf 1+ uurt 1L3iu. 'fhc func tion cf the p'rclco ficer, than, Wt: uoll definad and understood by the three officers involved. The basic subscription to social work goals, values and tech- niqucs by tag parse r.ncl of this office made apprOprlata a research project of this type. CH‘FTZ IV FRQCEDUfiES In structuring ‘his stuff, it nggcared best to limit P8 much as 03311313 t.:13 VL'arie c‘les that fire yrcsent in a study of this kind. Time 13 an important factmr in any study and it was the writer's Opinion that the time factor in this studyr 3.3uld be 11- mited to a one year period. In this 33.nner it W93 ho: edt hat trenis in refer- ral and changes of parse: n31 3'3311 b3 eq mlizw '3 the point whare they would 1033 their sixflificance as a factor. It was therefore decided that £313 stadf'would encompass the one year periad of Octaoer 1,1,f36, to 33 Mo er 1, 1957. A list was campiled ff all persons under super- vision of the Lansing Persia blLlce of $43 Bureau of Pardons and Paroles, Licnigan Department of Corrections fbr this one yaar period. It was found that there were 267 persons, p”n‘ahluan+lf male, unis. the supervision ,fi A. T 7 *4. of thrae parole officers in this ”uring the twelve O C (D ‘3 month period. u-Lli1 th is * otal CL 267 twelve who hLd completed most of their 333013 and were discharged during the months of 00 “bar and Sovcmbor of 1937. Lhasa were not excluded as it is felt that it would be significant to determine if the request or indication for referral -31.. appeared during the months under study. Also included in the 267 were those diecharged during the year and those who had abeconded from supervision and had been declared parole violetore and either apprehended or re- turned to prieon during the one year span. although this in itself is e limitation to the study it also offered aide in the study due to the fact that it was not 0 static, but a dynamic andcheuging caseload. Alec included in the 267 were those who transferred.£ron different parole die- tricte throughout the etete to e home and residence in the area eerviced by the Lansing Parole Office. Contact with the client. or paroleee and their respective parole officers varied from monthly to daily interviewe. depend- ing upon the needs of the individual case. next, the 267 cease were surveyed by means of reading files, correspondence, field notes, and interviews with individual parole officer: to determine how many were referred to community agencies for help with probleme. A Survey of this total revealed that twenty-six paroleee were referred to community cheat egonciee in a manner that fell within the definition of a "referral." in previously noted, if a man in released from prieon and the parole officer is forced to contact a community agency for lodg- ing for the night without consulting the paroles, it was not considered a preper referral. It should be noted hat this was extremely rare. After detorrining the number of referrele from this office to community service agencies, the cases referred were then more closely scru- tinized to determine the outcome of the referral. Cases were surveyed to determine if the parolee end perole officer followed through with the referral and whet the diepoeition of the case might be. It should be noted that some of the records were incomplete and therefore disposition of the case was not determined by the writer. After compiling the date on the referral: preper. ten percent of the remaining caseload of the one year period was surveyed to see if referral was indicated. It appeared that this would be the best method to determine what percent of the total ceeee in need of referral were actually being referred in a professional eense to com- munity agencies. Ten percent of the remainder of the cases not referred, or 2L1 cases remeinded. i ten percent sample of the 2L1 would be 2k.l. The ten percent remainder, or 2k cases, were surveyed to determine if referral was indicated or eperpriete. The method of study remained the some in the survey of the remainder no it was in the survey of the cases referred, thet in, Department of Cor- rections files, progress notes, correspondence, and inter- views with individual perole officers were the primary tools by which this information was gained. Following the survey of the remainder of the cases, the date were analyzed in terms of the underlying hypothesis -33- of the study, namely that inadequate use is made of the process of referral in a parole netting, PRE SR‘NTATION AND DIDW WION OF DATA '5 I“ ,‘,~. ‘ 1" ”140113 Hut -.1.‘:3 0.: the . f ‘- ,- l- .‘ c Q if a n 'v'h - Iicaif n uegdltwent o; togrect L.) + , t. . ., kw as ‘.+‘_~ ' 0‘ 4 5-. . ‘1 m. communiu P;enc-es for “01: H1.“ 3 fmr43ty 0* ch.+egs. ’) V 1 fl I ‘- W '. .q . ’ T)" 0 ”I used. gaven persano Hate referral to tie gsrenu o; dwcial ('3 i O pl ‘hfi 3.) «.4 H :5, Rf: .J g... :5 Aid for casework services for pronlans whi the definitiun of this sgancy. Six clients ware referred \ +r p 1 “ d '3flvzi1' -93? {EV-3;. 1:131 Cal ‘ O Q o Catuolic Social “3:7129 and two eac1 were Dd ‘..r..2.,'-.~.~. o""' C 1 rtturra to ta; “Jnstp: drunca 0* the “-calcan A- J3sn '2 r ‘R w R... -«-. .« —-‘ 1 ~‘ A-d uOC$9tf, tJa Cutatlre "-Ffigfiop, and the v,ti~ty A m: A ‘1. r v! R I R 1 :0,- ‘1‘! thttr hearing. ;405u referreu t3 .;ca*g1n Cgltuze- Ld Originally this stud w¢3 structured in a manner whereby only community chest agencies that received re- ferrals f1‘om the parole office would be included. After (a } c + $ '1. 'J (.4. .. 1 1.1. (4? par J "J -9 1 ‘D 1 J. 7.1 t) 1 9 5 "9 L4. .3 t L.) 4 in .1 ’3 .13 .1 "D :1 c? f" If '1) c" fur the neoRg cf the ccrrec tinns client, the ccrmunity c31cst aQaucies are nmt sufficient nor do my» can p953 1 the parolée may have Cfinflict. It in for this reccan hat the revvn re?errflls to the Fureau 0f Social 35d fire inclnied. ATthnufh thfiy fire members of ths Cermunitv Services Council, the hurbuus d0 not receive 1‘ , .. , fl ‘ . .9 ._ ' . ‘ . +1, 1.1... ”Vt. , i ‘1; 3 wmncthl mid Cram uflC 195,“. Ldfira is n nat.cenhle ‘ - 1 “ . 7‘ . . ‘Ifi‘ o... 1' ”R I w ' '.~.- ' A“. ,-..~ - ‘ l"'h ‘ ... Gr: UL 3‘93; .3 I. ' ,-.. .‘3 as) '--a R J .r.’ 7‘ a": :3 "3f , ".C... ’3”, 3‘7!“ ink (37‘ t ”098 fivm y u”,; gne f"0‘lfinfi of childran. “RRRTP‘ v” iii? VI 17 h1 f“? BA" Rebutg and the Qirl 333355. Tdis griflg*177 19 due t3 thé fist tkn the caerCLiunr clieggcla i3 sumawu t s,vucturzd in tvfins of r - “V 4.1.4,: ... 1. ,- . 1d“0L9 44LLnr tdiS czlefidar buys vocat;3nul 5223 l at ;2nszn;, ulCilgfin, are ”vallfible t ‘ (7‘ 1' 9“ ~3 :31 '3 x‘ '\" (31' t T}, 3 to I‘ll-fie Sill-0 Elf—Jed Hill OJ. Holt, a ~M \lul vii . J- “4'9 ~ - r“I-. a - . n. Jc‘ n " -.-.- . ~.~ ‘v‘ ' .‘w, - -"‘v‘ want of Cuszectlota Que; .ct Layer? at tJo;e on pq.ole ‘ v.0 :‘v n ’ .1 A. u- 11. I .4" -‘ ‘ R - -' ‘55-: I v - .. - irou Luhll¢tieu bqu as these An-tner llmttinm *tctar -‘ " ‘ 3‘ " ’ V ‘\ r.- ‘. '\. R' "'.~ ’\ r‘ ' ,‘ I 1r ‘ “ ' ‘ . ‘3 is that tflcbe Ibldlruis tag. are mated CL ntc. plihufllj I‘ ‘ r ‘ 9 - ‘ .fl‘f .. ‘. ‘ . ,- .- _-£ .- ‘r' ‘, v ‘ . . a _ around LabUWUln SlelCCw “Ad “‘1 p with -ntr41a ilc problems to note “ t] '4. :J fl (1;, "5 \‘J (D. (f ya. :3 U i rather than with tgnq;ib13 aid. It i- that referral resulted after discuscsion witt¢ the parole -35- officer of inability to handle financos and particularly grants in aid that were received in eight cases. or the seven cases referred to the Bureau of Social Aid, six continued contact for casework services until the volationship‘waa terminated by mutual agreement of the Bureau and the client. The records in the remaining case are not sufficiently clear to determine disposition. Cf the two clients rafarrod to fiichigan Children: Aid Society, one continued contact and this agency handled the adaption of the paroleo's child when it was born. The remaining client did not continue contact with this agency. or tho four clients referred to the Family Service Agency two continued their relationship with tno agancy until they felt that they had reccivcd sufficient aid with their marital difficulty, one did not follow through with the referral, and one was not accepted by this agency. Of the six clients referred to the Lansing mental Health Center, none had a continuing relationship with this clinic although each wanted and needed help. This agency consistently did not follow through with referrals of paroloos and consequently all six were referred to the Psychological Tooting Center at Michigan Stato University. Of the six, two were evaluated and service did not appear to be indicated; The remaining four had contact: varying from three to ten interviews with this center until such time as service was no longer deemed advisable. -37.. Tha prablwmn 0f the two referred to the Curativo wcrkshOp centered around physical inpairment with amo- tional involvamenta which precluded satisfactory adjust- ment. One who received limited aid and a prosthetic device. felt that he had received coma service from this agancy. One did not follow through with the referral. Thrfle persona Were referred to Catholic Social Service sud each received casework sarvices far varying lengths of time. Two were refarred t0 the Society for Better Heariiw due be the fact that they had emotional involve- ments with a hearing impairment that gava them difficulty in their gocial relationahipo. The Society for Better Saaring rejected both of these referrals and they wore traated at the 3peech and Hearing Clinic of Michigan Stats University. One received needed service and ono abacondad from supervision. There were twelve referral. of children of tha primary client, the paroleo. In this sense youth serving agencies are being used, and yet hese referrals do n9: fall within the focus of thia study and are not inclufled. Thaaa data have many ramificgtiona. It in appar- ent that same of the raferrala resulted in a re-refarral ta another community resource. Thasa resources war. primarily'university centers that define their function as being concerned with persons in ths community. It 10 interasiing t0 note that in each of the referrals that was not accayttd for service, workers had seamed willing and able in pra-raferral conferences between parole ofb ficera uni tha agency to accept the referre . However, they contacted the parnla officer at a latar date to infarm him in each casm that the agincy could not give aervice due to the long waiting list and high caseloads. Rowaver, a large number of the total refarred did receive aid with different types cf problems that they pr$sented. Each of theta referrals, upon close scrutiny, reflectad the fact tnat these clients Hera amenable ta casswark services, id bwnefit by thaw, and underlying each of thase rarerzals is the cammunity's cancern and involve- ment with those who have difficulty with their peraanal lira. One of the wait limiting factgra in tnia study is the fact that sevaral referrais for tangible aid and ser- vices from agancies such as the Voluntaers of America, Salvation Army, anfi othar Agencies offering tangible aid but nut cafiework services, are nat included in this atudy. In terms of relative ratios, there was a preponderance of referrals for tangibla aid, varying from food orders to ladging. Taere were also several referrals to the Inghan County Fnabate Caurt, which is not a community chest agancy but is a cummunity rescurce, and these, by definition of this study, must be omitted. It is felt that the final figure of those referred fell within the definition of a -3?- *3 (“a l 1 '1 c \ 9—! M I!) (“01>"333331 re to the propriety or maths: in the referrsl p‘ ’3 O C ) {L EU) 33 o figrvexflof 333 10% Remaindar :0 Tan percent 3- the r33zind3-r of the cases nct refer. ed, 31' 21+ cases, were :3 WWW]! *0 newt-.1113 if refarral was imdicated. Z3333Lielly, aha survvy of the ramainiar of tha 03233 can be summ3d up in the stfite- want that within the fraacwark use far a pro? 31siunul rafarral, no case in the 3339;:pf 2&_disnlav3d 332 Sign in t r33 of est31513ed cricw a tzat rfcgéal 355 iwdiéfitog. T33 ten percant renfiinficr #33 obtained by ma’ns of a ramuom numLcr (3) being 53 ¢cted. ?he writer Lizam 33332113311 1.331 c: 39 in the rmuumum whose pawn numbe? ended in a "3." This group had only 2; c.:1933 on p3rola and in C3nt33t with this agency during the calendar yaar of October 1, 1956, to October 1, 1957. Cases were v awed frum diffs ant as pects regarding referr 31 and pzri33rily within P3r133u'3 frame of reference.1 The file, fiald mates, and case historias were all daamed ad e;uate 33d cantaincl ennu;h info maLion so that L13 n2ai for r3- farral, if indicated, couli ha ascertainad frmm the material availabl3. fiat 033 of Lhe 2h cas as mafia a r:23uu3 t for an casework service nor tangible service nor did the parole officer 333 any need fbr referral. Th3 field records that 13?. Cit. these officars kept era exrxincd to see if there were 31y hinfa ;ro$ L-:m5 ti m; crapped up dLring inLarvleaa, and the nctes and QLLa 313:105ed no indication L there had bean either an active or tacit recognition of u . finy pm Jalzm ra;JL i.g rgjaxxal. rarticular aLLenLion wag glvan L0 thuaa casca in nfliCh Lita paroles eiLher abaconded or was r%Lurncd to an imagination as a parole viola'LBr‘ or Ni :h a new falcny cmuunibmwai. In sur'wying Lassa racards it'was agparenL LhaL the parole offiicer knew of the involvements 0f the parolae and yen little if anything could be June for Lhasa clianLa due to the fact that they did not hLV$ aufficieuu ago strengths nar de‘ira to rccc;be any help with chair problemg. C"’”“”W VI Approximately ton parcvnt 0? ti. acbivc casaload u} during the cnlzndar year of October 1, l?5u, to Octobgr 1, 1957, in the ansin: {arnlé 973169 mgve refgrred to com- munity ”fencifis far di”?icu1fy in their 292301 1 livas and 9n? CQQOerk Rarvicna w~ich both tlrv uni Lhc ya ole citic'av' felt LVN-"r; 1.r\r‘.‘m‘r“r-ar.’.. 'sz the; stirvvey LL" the Lon. porcent of the rfinaindur of czsgs not rcfcrrud, not one instance was idnrtifieé in L3 ch referral was inuicmted or feasible. From this it is concluded thut kae ori5i- n91 Lypcthesin cf this stufiy hag Loan diaproved. Under- lying this study was tFe hygotheais that 1:1 JdeQLate use is mrde of cc mnunity TQS‘UTCQS in the g: 013 of ice. This study disprcves this. It has been found that & gcod vary cssna 9P9 referred in a parole o?fice, and that refer.31 was not findiCfited in anw of the ten percent of the rereinder of the cases. It was the writer's belief that the proof or disprcof of the hypothesis would be found in a sur‘ey cf the ten percent remainder. It was prefiimusly notei that hild.en's a5uncias are not used due to the fact that the clients of this agency are not Within the scope nor definition of these youth service -23... .fl‘ (.0 Emma L .5 .., Ev ¢~ .a-. {1:81 em. mum L130 3 i It is 13 coma in ' § :u client who h- I A ta give Lflrvica t3 3 are wt"; luri‘ 33'. 3' '19 writer is not M $& ith tha 18W. CG {1.251103 W cea offered 3 finition of the sarv 1a )lved 11? , ag;cia= in with the parsén who 3' .15! 'lfitwifin. r- L A. . <- “ ,Q '\ -'\ hagxusnudel 3 and t3 t cia ‘30. I- J - \fi 3 ‘r n thesa nxgr 4 11.8. C GTE? 3‘) 2133, I J. w 3 e v. in ccra I-d Mn 3". V. 0 ,5 01339 «A of r-~ yrn ‘w u. M t“. :4}. o “1" «u v.58 :- O L. w J a largar stud ’3‘ 1.5‘ .5 1110113 ‘blffifi'l &. .1" a» r's wite is thiS‘h ed 'f' d . a d COHCQ Quid b‘ LL 0 ._ 1‘ -t .0 _ JAr60LL983 $ n V to 3 8. In"; 3d at there 1 Q fl .6 fig; L . 1’. '39"). [P L. .1131- A l COR}? ’5 a gily t ‘4’ ~‘ d. nation of ” s, and m eval :'-:3r1c i a ’u n (1. ity aw '3: 14 Q J ‘ ‘ I ‘ urtmn‘C9s f - ceuld b3 rectified bv t met; :5: r 9 tin. :1. 1m 9" o ELI if 233$ ef‘ in 3 ‘- .- ' S L or to v 5i” ‘5‘ cwla offics p '- - -rt oi tha p: 1‘]' 1 th q 1 U a total a 1’)? d cranes P unity re .A a ...I \ 0 CL. t ":8 of Joy it 4" Lé-. & .- ‘- 5 nt up Y P01 :8” 7"- I H it anfl ‘. {wansian of the role 0 O J 3 05 correcticne, th5t of raferr5ia 15 5 parole 595537. 51thin the 11 51-3Li:»ns cf an exploratary atady, referral his been 5"cun to be needed and a £5155b in the cor- rwcticn5 setting. This 5255" izaii;atcs t;5t or a parnla f ,. {“98 .1 u r , r- C 5 . - b "‘ "J - .1. - - ‘0‘ "- #CLC = 1:5 “R‘d‘ix 3.501y art: N‘Jll‘g hi .un.‘5L¢l use 01 t...{a &.?0 .5 ~63- 51:5:1 pr 05555 of reierral consi5t 5nt with both the d strin5s of soci5l wazn and of corrections. In rafl~5c (' in; u; on tlze hygot5esi5 underlyia; th5 study, it 55] be t55t the erLur ya ceived Lha gap betwaun 805151 work sud curvactinna 55 b5i~* 15r55r L555 it is 5: the graaent “E; VFW-x ' ‘3'" ~H “.- ‘ ‘5‘ “-‘---.R9 ‘2“ 4 55.3.0. -..,e 55ve 365:“ L463 0318 CL [‘1 81.91.0215 «5,55.» l 4.13 k, ..'¢ ’ .. .. .. . -‘ , N 5...}. -._,1 9 MA,- ,. ,1. rem—[Lit ‘5' 15:07:14}; in.) 2:13:15] La»: ..1£mgad-J5£C 05 505.153]. N135“. in the area of 55:55:515. It is apparent th3t there is need far 5rt5xr e5510ratian in this area, so that we 55: cidtin555 y 555L55t5 war r515 as prs-aiiirners :nd iv: buttnr 55rvice to the client ‘5}! :4 03 {J ‘t. I!!! (9 ‘ 6 c t *h r: 0 € 0 Q I ‘. . - . l" “A ‘ Lu+fiji f. u STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS CERTIFICATE OF PAROLE _______ Inmate N 0, now confined Thereas ........................ . eligible for parole; Therefore, in consideration of the signed promises made by said inmate, We, the iichigan Parole Board, hereby order that the said inmate be paroled after ..... _. to the confines of ounty, under the supervision of Parole Officer____-__ Name Address Home Phone »r a period of ending roviding the conditions of this Parole are faithfuny carried out. We further order that said inmate will proceed to 3 City County or State here he will be employed by Name Address 1d will reside with Name Address SPECIAL CONDITIONS Given at Lansing under the seal of the Michigan Department of Corrections this yof MICHIGAN PAROLE BOARD test : By Chairman ----_- 918a """"""""""" ‘ """""""" ‘" " 11352331 _____ sewing :0 01113311318 - JO 33113934131 _. ‘1 3193910 310mg £111 10 901Ape 9111 £q pop1118 eq pus 11398 11151 I 88111.1 9501112 3111 £q pelaAoo :1011 manual [18: 'smm [moped pm: 91818 1112 p111: ‘s19p10 .10 93011111111110 £1un00 pus [12111011111111 [[9 1111A £1d11103 [11.51 '; 'pempm 812 910.113.} JO suo111p1100 111109113 qons 01 1111 01111 [11m 1 u‘,—1 - 1901110 910mg £u1 1110.1; isenbea .10 131131 £1113 01 30110 :18 £11131 {[1511 " l 13311111109 p118 81113111350111 . ‘smoqeeieqm £111 10 8311111 He is 139111501111 5301110 310.1124 £111 deal 01 £1111q1s110ds31 £111 81 :11 pmsaapnn 1 *1 ' 'aums 311151111 uosxed n 10 £1111du100 8111 111 eq .10 ‘e1191meqdemd 0110011111 .10 111.101 £111; 111 153an 012100.112111011u00 £111 .Iepun 951211 .10 ‘einq111s1p ‘Hes ‘esn ‘ssessod ‘uo 1011 111.111 rII ‘uogednooo .10 £11A1p‘e 11333111 10 seoeld £118 iuenbeu .1011 ssaoxa 03, seBBJeAeq 35119011101111 3811 1011 [11A 1 '; °£1111qe £111 10 aseq 311:1 01 £11me1 £111 .10; ep1501d 111.11 1 1- °.1n011 BIQBUOSBBJ e 111 1113111 110113 90113111591 DBAOJddB £111 111 sq isnm 1 1 'qo1' DBAOlddB 1m in £11peeis 11.1015 18111111 “1 'p.1009.1 eo110d .10 [eu11111io 10 ed£1 £1111 31115311 11081911 '3 113,151 31801111111111100 .10 9113100881: OJ. “(1 “nodeem .10 10;)qu 151101331181) 1; 3u1ssess0d (105.1311 ‘B 10 £uedu103 8113 111 eq .10 uodeem snosafiunp e se pasn ioefqo £111; .10 111112311; 13 ssassod .10 ‘eanomd ‘11510 01, '3 °sasuadxe 31111111 211.131.1110 emeuosnei p110£aq :1qu u1 paAIOAu1 emooeq 0], '1 a - (eouemsul KJIIIQBII 3113‘] 180m) (113111.151) 13101qu 1010111 £u12 10 eseqomd 911-1 .101 £euou1 ep1AOJd 01 J0 81011151 1010111 5“" an '10 851.11) O‘I‘ '3 (113111.151) £11851 0]; ‘111au1£01d1na go send £111 381112113 OJ, P '0 'eouep1sei 10 9011111 £111 331113113 OJ, 'q (119111.151) 'pBIOJBd um I 110111115 01 £111nog .10 31918 3111 951191 OJ, ’8 I :3111510110; 91121 10 £118 01) 0:1 1001110 910mg £111 1110.11 1101ss111113d 11181qo 18.111 [1115 “odes any {£11911}; mu met I pap1501d sumo; 110 111111 0:1 1.101191 113111.151 1n1111n11 '3 91113111 11115 I 1901110 910mg £111 £11 peiomism ss .10 1111mm 3 33110 I- °peionnsu1 so 1901110 910113 £111 101211100 £Ieie1peu1u11 [11m 1 nopeugsap £111 in 113511.111 110d; '1 :18111 93.1313 p111: as11110.1d £qeiaq op I 31301.} “385111 GEINIHJ EI'IOHVJ JO SNOIJJICINOO (IIVS EIHCL BNICINVLSHHCIND (DIV GIN 0J1 (IVGIH (II: DNIAVH no avail 9mm (INV ‘uos11d 0:1 peuimei 3111911 £111 111 1111831 £11111 910.19d 91111 10 8110111111111 911:1 10 [[13 01 dn 3511 0; 3.1111113; 112111 efipemoun 1111; 311151311 pus ‘elomd uodn 315119131 £111 10 uopmeppsuoo 111 .;,5. F3 -v 1“ 0 ?- --_ u -— Hanna-U nab-b..- D fiamilcon, voruon. -:g%$ry $fi $0.250 Raw Tor-(112011111111 Perlman HAlon d. A cinl LAAAA~ k Afro 13m 141 in? ' M ‘ WH'WOID? “‘04-! ‘- f‘lu -- 7"5 1 . f f I J4 vbbr‘ é. LL‘i; VH1 O-BU) 1." vsiuu' \. 3‘) I a. 01-553....“1 £57. (-0.; ‘. q I‘ ’ '1" r1, '1 v: 93‘ 1 " "1 ‘ . 0' - *. ‘ n¥9u¢¢“¢: idoYo ”“31&. El: JMSLfio MAN lurk: A'A5.All QAVQ Foundation, I 317. Taft, 1D??&14. 'Qgiwiaplqu. New York: ficfilllnn Company, $5200 t'xr'gi-C‘le § Chwast, Jacob. "Cuaework Treatment in a Police S‘etting,” “*H‘ il zrruuylon. Val. Affili, £0. 1 (L ecAAb:3r, 1-; 5k). hagAn. B. "'19 Ianily L:;Anoy in nae JuAiciAl EIUcAA A,” A1» *“1 PrG"t*0fi (“1..ember, 1955). Fray, KAnnath I. 1. "The Principles of Social Case Work as A~1slieA to 1robbmion A.1n }Arala," ipdvrfil {rabw tion . ¥ol. 1X, Eu. 2 (ipril-June, lghfl ' Stu11t, £1.110L. ”Casework in the CorrectionAl Field, ” 1,61? Profi.*inn Val. 11111.119. 3 (391m ambAr, 1Q5L). TflCafiP, H‘rlAi"H. ”TTA 5AA 0f 60*:munity A3:encies in Probat 1:1n Aork “ Pe4wr83 Irokutinn 1.1. 11 (fhctoter- Duvduud1. 13k710 £13k ini, Louis. "”3 mal work éflfl LhA Correuiimnal. Field,” 111;:1 Prflfifitign: Val. XIJ. fig. 1 (fiarch, 19 53). .1ij figpnrtg National Probation and Parcle AAsociation. Raver: to th; ”A;- [6‘ 'ng.“¢\3V" 3r£t_."1w Cop? if)”. ‘1‘ wt FAte l1: ‘ i 3.;11- 1." {'11:} 1933‘45JL0 PQAQ 1953. fiiChiflfin COL. 17h3, 33c. 791.231, Act 232, QUME. filo . . . “.132. fiat Zfifi,