annual report of the CORRECTIONS BRANCH MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL for calendar year 1978 PRINTED BY AUTHORITY OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Colonel the Honourable Henry Pybus Bell-Irving, O.B.E., D.S.O., E.D., Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of British Columbia May it please your Honour: The Annual Report of the Corrections Branch for the calendar year ended December 31, 1978, is herewith respectfully submitted. Garde B. Gardom Attorney-General Office of Attorney-General April 1979 Ministry of Attorney-General Corrections Branch Victoria, B.C. April 1979 The Honourable Garde B. Gardom, Q.C. Attorney-General Parliament Buildings Victoria, B.C. Sir: I have the honour to submit the Annual Report of the Corrections Branch for the 12 months ended December 31, 1978. Within the Report a Branch Overview is provided for complete quick reference to the major developments of the year; it is presented in descriptive and statistical form. Respectfully submitted Bernard G. Robinson Commissioner Contents PREFACE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART BRANCH OVERVIEW Introduction Operations Major Issues Reorganization of the Branch Statistics THE REPORT IN DETAIL ..." Youth Services Prevention Diversion Programs Community Supervision Community Service Orders Attendance Programs Youth Custody Citizen Participation Comment Adult Services Pre-court Services Pre-trial Services Probation Services Community Service Orders Impaired Drivers' Courses Custody Services and Programs Psychological Services Medical Services Facilities and Capacities (Summary Sheet) Provincial Classification Re-entry Programs Religious Programs Citizen Participation Comment Preface This Annual Report was prepared in two major parts. A general overview of Branch operations, some of the major issues, future program priorities, and detailed statistics for 1978 are presented as the first part, for quick reference. The second part, "The Report in Detail," is a comprehensive description of major programs, activities, policies and practices of the Corrections Branch for 1978 both with respect to provincial and regional operations. This Annual Report was prepared by Information Services on behalf of the Office of the Commissioner. V ORGANIZATIONAL CHART CORRECTIONS BRANCH MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL 1979 Commissioner Assistant to Commissioner Regional Director of Corrections, Vancouver Regional Director of Corrections, Vancouver Island Regional Director of Dorrections North Fraser Deputy Commissioner Regional Director of Corrections South Fraser Regional Director of Corrections Interior Regional Director of Corrections Northern Inspection & Standards Information Services Provincial Classification Resource Analysis Staff Development Program Analysis Medical Services Program Evaluation and Data Systems Psychological Services Religious Programs Corrections Branch The Honourable Garde B. Gardom, Attorney-General Bernard G. Robinson, Commissioner SENIOR BRANCH A.K.B. Sheridan Deputy Commissioner J. Konrad Regional Director of Corrections South Fraser Region A.E. Neufeld Regional Director of Corrections North Fraser Region G. Chappie Regional Director of Corrections Interior Region MANAGEMENT B.A. Sadler Assistant to the Commissioner E.W. Harrison Regional Director of Corrections Vancouver Region W. Jack Regional Director of Corrections Vancouver Island Region J. B. Graham Regional Director of Corrections Northern Region COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE Section Directors J. E. Laverock Staff Development D. M. Hartman Program Evaluation and Data Systems O. E. Hollands Program Analysis Rev. E. Hulford Religious Programs Dr. H. Stevens Psychological Services T. A. Stiles Information Services E. Schmidt Provincial Classification W. F. Foster Inspection and Standards H. Miller Resource Analysis Dr. R. Bulmer Medical Services Branch Overview Introduction Many forms of resolving social conflict exist in society. The family, church and school are well known institutions which, among other functions, attempt to mediate and deal with the various types of social conflict. Government interventions (such as social welfare) and privately operated programs also are aimed at the resolution of various forms of social conflict. The justice system, on both the civil and criminal side, is used to deal with more serious forms of social conflict. The justice system attempts to mediate, resolve, or otherwise respond to those forms of social conflict which have been defined, by legislative process, as unacceptable — conflicts stemming from behaviour which violates the rights of others and cannot be tolerated without some form of formalized, state intervention. Within that framework, the justice system in Canada has been developed to protect social institutions and individuals in society, including the offender himself, by preventing crime and delinquency, by reducing the negative effects of crime and delinquency, and by fairly and humanely dealing with social conflict that comes within the context of the law. Corrections is an integral and essential part of that process and should be viewed as part of that context. Jurisdiction overcorrections in Canada is divided between the Federal and Provincial Governments. The British Columbia Corrections Branch of the Ministry of Attorney-General has the responsibility for providing services, programs and facilities on behalf of the Province. These services and programs include services to courts, such as pre-court enquiries, presentence reports and bail supervision; supervision of probationers, parolees, and those on temporary absence; the development of special community programs, such as community service and impaired drivers' courses; youth programs, such as detention, attendance and containment centres; a full range of adult custody institutions; and family court services for those approaching the court to find a legal resolution to marriage problems. This involvement is detailed in a later portion of this Report. During 1978, increasing pressure on all of these services has been felt, to the extent that virtually every aspect of corrections potentially emerges as an issue in terms of the quality of services provided. Some of these issues are detailed in a following section of this Report. But the Corrections Branch is only one of many government agencies which require tax dollars for operational funds. The operation of the various programs therefore tend to reflect the compromise government must make in budgeting for its diverse needs. Ultimately, however, the price of these programs can only be measured in terms of human resources and potential, human dignity and respect, and the opportunity of offenders to life fulfilling lives while being held accountable for their behaviour. This compromise presents a dilemma for society itself; and in particular for the Corrections Branch as the agency that must deal directly with offenders. The Corrections Branch, with its programs, attempts to balance this dilemma between the need to protect society, which is a prime responsibility, and a need to provide adequate opportunity for offenders to grow in responsibility to their communities. Corrections policy with respect to its programs and the people involved, reflect this twin responsibility. Programs Since 1974, the Corrections Branch has committed itself to the following principles. — A commitment to the dissolution of large, ineffective, and outdated correctional centres. — A commitment to the development and utilization of a wide range of community based programs as alternatives to incarceration. — A commitment to the use of smaller and more fully secure facilities for dangerous offenders. — An increased involvement of the Branch in the areas of prevention and diversion with both juveniles and adults. — A commitment to a program of Corrections which stresses the responsibility of offenders to their communities; a program that allows, where possible, expression of that responsibility in direct relation to the victims of their offences. — A commitment to remain responsive and in tune with needs of the community, and of the justice system as a whole. People The Corrections Branch has guidelines covering its behaviour towards offenders: — Offenders must be accountable for their actions — Offenders are members of society and are to be treated with the same respect and dignity accorded all society's members — Within the limitation of court orders and considering the risk to the community, the offender has the right to exercise self- determination and personal decision making — Offenders should not receive greater opportunities or rights than those generally available to other members of society Operations The following is a brief overview of the places in the justice system where the Corrections Branch now has operational responsibilities: (services provided in the Family Relations area are not included, but are described in detail in a following section entitled "Family and Children's Services." These are centred around civil process, not criminal offence — an important difference). Pre-court Services Alternative programs (diversion) for offenders who do not require full formal court and corrections experience; counselling and (or) referral provided. Reports on juveniles' (and some adults') social circumstances, including those around alleged offences, provided for Crown Counsel with respect to the decision whether to proceed with charges into Court. Pre-trial Services Supervision for those persons requiring some degree of control in order to ensure attendance at court, precluding for some the necessity of full custody remand. Personal assistance to alleged offenders and (or) the families of those held in custody pending the outcome of their charge. Provision of secure facilities for youth at risk, pending disposition and placement. Court Services Information report for the court on offender's background and future plans to assist the court in sentencing. The availiability in court of a Probation Officer to assist where on-the-spot information is needed and referrals must be made. Community Services The supervision in the community of offenders placed on probation. Educational courses on the topic of drinking and driving provided for offenders convicted on drinking and driving offences; attended as part of a probation order. Facilities and programs which provide special educational, training, recreational, community service and wilderness experiences for juveniles and young adults on probation. The supervision of court-ordered reparative activities undertaken by the offender with respect to the victim of the offence, or to the community. Institutional Services Youth Facilities A range of post-dispositional residential programs and facilities for youth at risk, where other community-based resources are deemed inappropriate, or ineffective. Adult Facilities Maximum and medium security custody facilities for persons sentenced to less than two years, and all custodial remand for the Province. Open-setting programs providing forest or farm work; special young adult or alcohol abuse programs; and community correctional centres in local communities where inmates on temporary absence may reside for work or educational purposes. Community Re-entry Services Permitted (temporary) absence from a correctional centre in selected cases for employment, training, education, medical treatment, maintenance of family ties, involvement in community service. Programs, and pre-parole/release planning. Supervision in the community of offenders paroled during the latter portion of their sentence of imprisonment, in order to assist them back to full and useful participation in the community. Community assessment reports to provide information to the administrative bodies making temporary absence or parole decisions. In April of 1974 on the advice of the Corrections Branch, the Attorney-General of British Columbia announced a detailed planning statement of overall policy and programs throughout Corrections. The principles of that policy are referenced previously; the application of the policy has been as follows: - The phase-out of Haney Correctional Centre - The phase-out of the sentenced population of Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre with that unit being utilized as a remand- classification centre - Re-opening of Chilliwack Security Unit - Opening of Jordan River Forest Camp on Vancouver Island - Expansion on the use of temporary absence, particularly for work and education releases - The opening of nine community correctional centres throughout the Province, and the contracted use of approximately one dozen community-based residential centres - The development of Bail Supervision in Vancouver, Victoria, Surrey and Prince George, with continuing expansion to other areas - The expansion of Impaired Drivers' Courses to a total of approximately 30 throughout the Province - The transfer of juveniles under detention prior to disposition in Vancouver to renovated Willingdon facilities in Burnaby, and the razing to the ground of the antiquated building on Yale Street - The development of facilities and programs for youth requiring post disposition containment, including the development of private remand homes throughout the Province - Extensive planning and decision making with respect to replacement for the remand and sentenced facilities at Okalla Correctional Centre, in addition to renovations and new buildings for Prince George Regional Correctional Centre and Kamloops Regional Correctional Centre -The assumption of responsibility forpre-trail services - The assumption of responsibility for all family and childrens' services throughout the Province 7 Highlights 1978 Diversion of offenders from the justice system continues to be an important focus of much dicsussion in the justice system, and in particular in the Corrections Branch. It is an area fraught with exciting possibilities and very real concerns about civil liberties, due process of law, and so on. The Corrections Branch has been involved in diversionary procedures for years, in its service capacity to Crown Counsel in the form of pre-trial reports on juveniles, to the Bench with respect to sentencing options, and in its own service delivery programs such as the use of volunteers from the community. Citizen participation in Corrections has been viewed by the Branch as a major activity by which the intention of seeking local involvement in the solution to justice problems can be realized. Offenders come from the community and return to the community, and it is the view of the Branch that justice and corrections are best handled by requiring appropriate offenders to continue to participate in and be responsible to their communities. In the last several years, this intention has seen expression by the Branch in the use of volunteer sponsors for those on probation and parole, in correctional centres to increase community and individual contact as well as increasing programming potential, the development of citizen advisory groups, citizen involvement on institutional disciplinary panels, the development of attendance programs for adults and juveniles under the auspices of private specialized societies, the community service order program, and so on. In 1978, special impetus to increasing the range and forms of citizen participation in Corrections programs has been given in one Corrections region on a project basis. This move has been to give increased responsibility and scope to local offices to develop innovative ways in which the community can become involved in resolving its own justice problems. A specific and interesting example of community involvement was a move in 1978 by one community to deal with some juvenile offenders through a mechanism known as an accountability panel. With the assistance of Corrections staff and other justice personnel, a pilot project was started in an area of the City of Vancouver. The basic concept of juvenile accountability is that young people who have come into contact with the police as a result of an alleged offence, and who meet certain criteria, will be referred to a panel of community members in order that an appropriate means of restitution is worked out. This type of response to juvenile offenders is also being developed in other centres in the Province. Also with respect to the provision of youth services, Corrections personnel have taken an active role in the Inter-Ministerial Children in Crisis Program which commenced in 1978. This program has arisen out of the involvement of senior level personnel in the Ministries of Health, Education, Human Resources and Attorney-General in an attempt to ensure that those governmental and non governmental agencies providing services to children are providing a complementary set of resources, and to provide a specific mechanism by which instances of children presenting severe behaviourial problems, are dealt with appropriately. The program has been implemented through local, regional and provincial co-ordinating committees comprised of representatives from the various Ministries involved, and Corrections personnel have been involved at all levels. As one component of government response to the provision of a wide range of resources for juveniles, in late 1977 containment centres for hard-core youths who required control and who had exhausted every other community resource, were opened by the Corrections Branch. A B.C. Supreme Court decision in April of 1978, which found the enabling legislation 8 to be ultra vires provincial jursidiction, effectively terminated entry to the programs as containment centres. With modified program, these centres operated as attendance programs, with youths attending as a condition of probation or, in the case of secure custody, under remand. In January of 1979, the B.C. Court of Appeal overturned that decision with one qualification, and these centres were designated industrial schools under the Juvenile Delinquents Act. The resolution to this question has now again provided to government an effective program of control at the far end of the range of resouces which are required to deal with the variety of children who come into conflict with the law. In the area of adult services, 1978 has seen a number of major activities. During the past ten year period, the Branch has reduced the average correctional centre population by 30%, from 2404 in 1967/68 to 1753 in 1977/78. During the same period there has been a substantial shift in the pattern of utilization of costly secure beds to the use of less costly forest camp and community correctional centre type programs. In 1967/68, 71% of the population was in secure bed space and 29% in open bed space. In 1977/78, by comparison, 55% of the population was in secure bed space, and 45% in open bed space. In late 1978, this trend had culminated in a pilot project in two regions known as "alternate entry." Alternate Entry is an attempt to drastically alter the pattern of entry to Corrections facilities from secure reception centres to open settings for certain categories of offenders. If this is successful, and the findings will not be known until late 1979, it is likely to further enhance the trend to the use of community correctional centres where inmates can take further education, and work in order that they may pay room and board, support their families, make restitution, and so on. A major significant event in 1978 was the approval by government of a pre-trial service centre to be located in Vancouver. This centre, to cost approximately $18,000,000 and open in 1981, is the first tangible effort to phase-out Oakalla Correctional Centre, which has been an intention for well over twenty years. Final working drawings of the Pre-Trial Services Centre will be completed by late 1979. The Centre's design is the result of an examination of other jurisdictions, and thinking with respect to physical plant and the provision of a full range of pre-trial services, all located in one spot. The most cost effective use of resources in Corrections is axiomatic in the Branch's provision of services. There was a significant development in the area of management information systems which has increased the Branch's capability to make management judgements about cost effectiveness, allocation of staff and resources. During late 1978, a series of staff briefings were held to familiarize personnel with a computerized method for shift scheduling for institutional programs. This work was the outcome of work commenced by Corrections approximately two years ago, when the Branch identified posts in institutions in order to get a better idea of personnel required to staff institutions. Utilizing a computer program developed for Corrections, it is possible to program information such as the number of posts in an institution, annual leave of employees, projected sick-leave, and compassionate leave, shift type and a number of other variables in order to arrive at a staffing configuration which is cost effective, and drastically reduces the number of manhours required to draw-up such schedules. In addition, a shift schedule can be printed out for each employee for the year. There is no question that the Corrections Branch is in the forefront of Corrections in Canada with this development. It ensures that institutions are staffed appropriately, and that employees receive the full benefits of their contract agreements. In addition to moving towards the streamlining of the Branch's own correctional resources, bi-lateral talks with the Federal Government were initiated in 1975 in order to attempt to reduce the duplication, overlapping, and lack of rational basis characterizing the two separate systems of Corrections in this province. A Federal/Provincial Task Force on Corrections in British Columbia was established in 1975 to examine alternative models for sharing Federal/Provincial responsibility in the delivery of correctional services. This movement has taken new impetus in 1978 through being placed within the ongoing Federal Provincial constitutional review context. A considerable amount of energy has been spent, and 1979 may see a major announcement by both levels of government with respect to a closer alignment or integration of services. One aspect of rationalization of correctional services in 1978 was the revision to the Parole Act made by the Federal Government which would allow provinces to set up provincial parole boards for the purpose of handling all parolees in provincial correctional facilities. With the exception of the definite indeterminate sentences in British Columbia, which have been handled by the B.C. Board of Parole, the Federal Government has been responsible for all other paroling from provincial centres. During 1978, both Ontario and Quebec have set up Provincial Parole Boards pursuant to the change in legislation, and the Corrections Branch has recommended to government that this province do likewise. The matter is currently being examined on the basis of cost sharing arrangements and will likely see some resolution in 1979." For the past three years, the principles of case management, as an alternative to pure case work, have been enunciated and adopted throughout the facilities of the Branch, which has given an institutional application to such principles adopted with respect to probation services in 1975. These principles lend emphasis to the Branch's view that 1) where possible, community services should be utilized to lend support to individual offenders, and those who come into contact with the system; 2) the Branch and individual persons must be accountable for seeing that offenders in the correctional system are provided with opportunities for self development and (or) constructive use of time within each corrections program or facility; and 3) a clearly defined internal accountability and responsibility system must be in place to achieve these ends. During 1978, these principles have been given further content with a major review of community reentry policies and programs. In view of the fact that 80% of admissions to correctional facilities are for six months or less, and the average Iegth of stay is less than one month, case management procedures at initial program planning for each inmate must emphasize re-entry needs. While a primary concern of the Corrections Branch is to protect society from those offenders who have demonstrated that they are a danger to it, a major responsibility is to seek to provide experiences and programs which will facilitate the successful re-entry of offenders who are only in our system for a relatively short time. Related to the developments in case management, and the decentralization of the Branch which has taken place over the past two years, it is incumbent upon the Branch to set provincial minimum standards with respect to every aspect of the range of correctional services, in order that offenders receive equality of treatment regardless of geographical location. In October of 1976, the Corrections Branch put into motion a process by which such standards could be developed, while realizing that the completion of the exercise would take several years. A Provincial Standards Committee was struck in 1978 to examine all aspects of Corrections operations in relation to standards. The Committee is chaired by the Director of Inspection and Standards Division and is comprised of representatives from each administrative region of the Branch. One line manager has been seconded since early 1978 on a full time basis for a maximum of two years to co-ordinate the activities of the Committee. This activity is seen as one of the most important the Branch has undertaken for some years. In the specific area of adult correctional centres the Standards Project will support the intentions 10 detailed in the revised Correctional Centre Rules and Regulations which came into force in August of 1978. The new Correctional Centre Rules and Regulations were the result of approximately five years of work and consultations and resulted in the elimination of inappropriate and unnecessary regulations, updating of others, the clarification of relative rights and responsibilities of staff and inmates, and made major changes in the area of discipline within institutions. The revised Correctional Centre Rules and Regulations and the standards process has resulted in providing impetus and clarity to the Branch's response to issues raised by the Royal Commission on the Incarceration of the Female Offender in British Columbia (1978). In 1976, a major study of Corrections Branch goals and objectives was undertaken and completed. This extensive document enunciated and re-confirmed in detail principles in the original 1974 plan, which are noted throughout this Report. The recent study included a range of activities by which the Corrections Branch can work towards specific goals and objectives. In 1977, these policies were widely discussed and applied throughout the Branch and provided the basis for the extensive field consultation which is being undertaken by the Standards Project. In 1978, one region of the Corrections Branch initiated a specific pilot project to examine the degree to which broad statements of intent were consistent with staff understanding of their roles and responsibilities. It is a fundamental premise that Branch goals and objectives can only be given meaning through clear understanding and implementation by staff at all levels of the Corrections Branch. A major on-going commitment to staff training and development is fundamental to Corrections Branch program planning. Related to the question of standards was another major development in 1978, the Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Workload which was undertaken in the Vancouver Region. This established a process and model by which a more objective judgement can be made with respect to staff allocation on the basis of workload. This also is a vanguard undertaking in Canada. It has been built into the overall management information system which will in 1979 provide information to management which allows an identification of complete cost benefits, allocation of resources, and other analyses. As well as providing the capacity for instantaneous tracking of offenders in the system, the total M.I.S. provides a wide range of operations information. This system works in conjunction with the financial information system and the personnel management system of the Ministry. In 1978, the Justice Institute came into being, housing the training sections of the major components of the provincial justice system. The Justice Institute is the first in North America and is a joint undertaking of the Ministry of Attorney-General and the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. It is intended to provide cost effective broadly based and inter-related training for personnel in all aspects of the justice process, in order to further the long stated need for an increased level of information sharing, communication, co-operation and understanding of the relative roles and responsibilities within all aspects of the justice process. There have been two major events which have and will continue to have impact on the delivery of service in the Family Relations area. In the Interior and Island Regions of the Corrections Branch automatic enforcement of maintenance orders got underway as pilot projects commencing in July of 1978. The background behind this initiative emerges from the work of the committee consisting of representatives from Corrections, Court Services and the Ministry of Human Resources, in order to develop a cost effective system whereby payments due on court orders for spousal and/or child maintenance would be monitored by the Court Services Division of the Ministry. Rather than having the onus placed upon the applicant spouse, should a payment become delinquent, collection/enforcement 11 action would be undertaken by Court Services automatically, on behalf of the recipient spouse and/or child. It is intended that this both reinforce the spouse's responsibility to live up to separation agreements, and to assist dependent family members in order that they do not have to continually find themselves in an economically insecure and unviable situation. It is anticipated that automatic enforcement may require re-negotiation of separation agreements, and therefore cause increased pressure on family court counsellors. The other major event in the Family Relations area has been preparation for the proclamation of Bill 22 early in 1979. While not known at this time, there are implications on work load from the increased reporting requirements and scope of responsibility given to family court counsellors. However, the Bill is seen as a progressive move which will lend support to families who have undertaken to seek legal remedies to family problems. Major Issues Present Facilities The upgrading or replacement of facilities for those remanded in custody awaiting trial or disposition is a major priority of the Corrections Branch. Each of the major Regional Correctional Centres provides this capacity and all the present facilities are deemed inadequate for the task. As well as aged facilities, the lack of program recreational space for those on remand is compounded when the same space must be utilized for sentenced populations. Replacement and upgrading of facilities for sentenced inmates is a second priority. Much of the focus of energy has been with respect to Lower Mainland facilities, and in particular the intention to phase out Lower Mainland Regional Correctional Centre, now known as Oakalla District. The capacity of Oakalla District is approximately 600, half of which is for remand. A number of initiatives have been taken to phase out that centre which has been a long standing recommendation to government. The first major tangible evidence that this centre can be phased down was the announcement in Novemberof 1978 that the 150 bed, $18,000,000 12 pre-trial services centre located adjacent to Vancouver Courts at 275 Cordova will go ahead. A second step is the provision of an additional 150 beds for pre-trial services in the Fraser Valley ^ This would entirely phase out the remand capacity of Oakalla. Originally plans called for two 75 bed facilities. While this will provide optimum correctional programming, the Ministry feels that it is not economically viable and is currently exploring the option of locating one 150 bed unit in the Fraser Valley. This unit will be similar in function and design to the pre-trial services centre in Vancouver. Detailed analysis and planning is currently underway to determine the most appropriate solution to the need for the 300 secure beds for sentenced males at Oakalla. This requires the careful balancing of correctional programming that reflects standards adopted by the Ministry, economic realities and the availability of suitable construction sites. Determining the appropriate location is a key factor. No one community should be expected to house all the correctional problems for the province. It is therefore desirable both from the point of view of correctional programming and community planning to consider breaking these 300 beds down into two 150 bed units. The question of size of facility poses a serious dilemma for the Branch. The Corrections Branch has taken the position in consultation with others that we do not wish to warehouse offenders. For effective control and programming, institutions must be kept to as small a size as possible in order that people can know each other. Since the turn over in provincial facilities is quite rapid (much more so than the federal system) the size question in order to meet these goals becomes very important. More latterly, the Corrections Service of Canada has revised upward their standards for the size of institutions against the recommendations of the Parliamentry Sub- Committee, the Canadian Association for the Prevention of Crime, and a number of other private agencies. The matter of size is not easily resolved, and an additional question with regard to placement of these facilities rests with the final disposition of the use of the present Oakalla lands. There is similar concern with respect to facilities for women in the Lower Mainland in particular. Oakalla Women's Correctional Centre is the major security centre for women in the province, and suffers from some of the same deficiencies as the men's unit. With the closure of the women's unit at Prince George Regional Correctional Centre, pursuant to the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Incarceration of the Female Offender (Proudfoot Commission), all women requiring security are transferred to the Lower Mainland. Indeed, with the scarcity of facilities for women outside of the Lower Mainland, virtually all women who are given sentences of imprisonment in the province are transported to this area. The question of facilities for women, including the two open settings operated by the Branch — Twin Maples Correctional Centre and Lynda Williams Community Correctional Centre — is further clouded by potential initiatives of the Federal Government with respect to the closure of the Kingston Prison for Women. The Solicitor General of Canada announced early in 1979 that he intended to close down that facility, and to develop a women's centre at the Mission Correctional Centre for those females from the western part of the country. As a result of the scarcity of facilities for women generally, women always have had to be transported some distance from their communities. However, to establish a female offenders unit at Mission would be contrary to the intention of the recommendation of the Proudfoot Commission that no further co-correctional centres should be established in the province. In addition, with the Branch's intention of finding an alternate, or renovating the Oakalla Women's Correctional Centre, it is important that we work with the Solicitor General's Ministry to ensure that facilities for women are not being duplicated. This kind of planning takes a considerable length of time, to the frustration of those inmates and staff who have to continue to work under very difficult circumstances. Overcrowding and inadequate facilities remain a problem at Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre and the Kamloops Regional Correctional Centre. The remand situation in Kamloops is particularly urgent, as the cell space capacity is severely limited. Sentenced offenders in K.R.C.C. are housed in dormitory setting, which is not appropriate for those on remand. With respect to the Vancouver Island situation, the original feasibility studies for the use of the Island Youth Centre for a mid Island correctional facility did not bear fruit with that centre being utilized in the Heroin Treatment Program. However, statistics have shown that upper Island communities are growing at twice the rate of southern communities, and there is a need to consider the full question of adult facilities for sentenced persons on the Island. There is no centre at all at this moment for the female offender. All sentenced offenders requiring some security must be transferred to the Lower Mainland. Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre has been used for over two years essentially as a remand centre, and it requires extensive renovations or replacement. Planning with respect to the requirements at both Kamloops Regional Correctional Centre and Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre are nearing completion, and will have to be presented to Treasury Board with a request to proceed to feasibility stages. The Corrections Branch operates nine forest camps and a number of open settings. The camps are wooden structures with limited life time and all facilities currently operated by the Branch are in need of upgrading or replacement due to normal wear and tear. Early in 1978, Treasury Board approved one and a half million dollars forthe re-location of Clearwater 13 Camp near Kamloops to the Bear Creek site with new facilities, and the renovation/replacement of camp facilities at Rayleigh, also near Kamloops. One of the difficulties with older camp buildings is that they are harder to protect from fires. In April 1978 part of Jordan River Camp was burned. In November of 1978 Ford Mountain Camp was almost entirely destroyed and only quick thinking of staff at Pine Ridge Camp in December of 1978 prevented a fire there. Renovation or replacement of camps will emphasize the need for adequate fire protection. Finally, the question of adequate housing for those given intermittent sentences must be addressed. On some weekends, Oakalla District receives over 100 persons serving intermittent sentences on weekends. Furthermore, in locations where there are no correctional facilities, local lock-ups have been utilized in order that the Court may have the option throughout the province of sentencing a person to an intermittent period of incarceration. This has placed an incredible strain on some local lock-ups, and curtailed the use of this type of sentence in other places. While it is too expensive to operate a correctional facility for two days a week only, the Corrections Branch has been addressing the question of transportable correctional facilities which would be located near areas where community service or other useful work could be undertaken. This is a matter which will have to see resolution in the next year. Youth Custody The Corrections Branch assumed responsibility for youth detention centres in Burnaby and Victoria on April 1, 1974. These are the only detention centres available in the province of British Columbia for juveniles considered "at risk" pending disposition and placement. These centres were previously operated by the municipalities, with very little remand services being operated elsewhere. As in past years, during 1978, the Willingdon facility was chronically over-capacity. The Victoria Youth Detention Centre experienced overcrowding at certain times, necessitating the use of other facilities on an interim basis. The Corrections Branch is in the process of implementing and developing the concept of private remand homes throughout the province, and it is clear that this has lessened some pressure on existing detention facilities. However, that has not seemed to impact on the over crowding problem at Willingdon in particular. In 1975, several issues with respect to the "hard core juvenile delinquent" problem became particularly urgent. In October of 1976, the Branch made recommendations for a three tiered containment program to the Attorney-General and some aspects of this program became available to the Courts in December of 1977. In April of 1978, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled that the legislation was ultra vires the provincial jurisdiction, and the existing facilities and programs were utilized as attendance programs until the Court of Appeal could rule on the matter. On January 3, 1979 the Supreme Court finding was reversed but with qualification and so these centres were designated Industrial Schools pursuant to the Juvenile Delinquents Act. Irrespective of the ruling in favour of containment, the Corrections Branch has taken the position that it must continue to ensure that these facilities do not become "mere juvenile jails." They are to be utilized only when all other community based resources are inappropriate, and it is a last step before transfer to adult court. The enabling provincial legislation called the Corrections Amendment Act, which authorizes development of containment centres, also called for the development of a wide range of community based programs for juveniles, as alternatives to containment. The Inter-Ministerial Children's Committee (Health, Education, Human Resources and Attorney-General) supports this intention to ensure that the containment program option contains the widest possible community based services. The Inter-Ministerial Children's Committee also is providing a focus for the development of resources for children, in addition to any of those developments which might arise through the continuing meeting of the Children in Crisis Committees throughout the province. Federal Provincial Constitutional Review The Branch for several years has been concerned about the overlap and duplication of services provided 14 by the Federal and Provincial governments in Corrections. The Federal and Provincial Correctional systems work relatively independently; there is no way of resolving the overlap and duplication question without looking at the split jurisdiction question. In 1975 the Branch had commenced a process with the Federal Government with respect to bi-latteral discussions, in order to focus on the possible ways in which these matters could be resolved. As part of the larger Federal Provincial constitutional review throughout Canada, the Attorney-General's Ministry and the Ministry of the Solicitor General have been focussing increasing amounts of energy in this area in 1978. It has become clear that within the justice framework corrections issues are being seen as being the clearest ones for resolve, and potentially could be dealt with first. It is considered possible that one of the proposals put forward by the Federal Ministry would be that Provinces assume full responsibility for Corrections. This move has already been made with respect to some areas of responsibilities for parole. Federal Bill C 51 allows forthe Province of British Columbia to establish provincial parole boards to release prisoners from provincial institutions; or delegates to the present B.C. Parole Board authority for releasing all provincial prisoners. Currently, all parolees from provincial institutions are handled by the National Parole Board. To date, Ontario and Quebec have established provincial Parole Boards to assume these responsibilities, and the Ministry of Attorney- General in British Columbia is moving towards this development. The Corrections Branch has recommended to the Ministry that it can provide parole supervision, and the Ministry is currently engaging in talks with the Federal Government with respect to cost sharing with respect to the provinces assuming a former federal responsibility. It is expected that this matter will be resolved and a provincial parole board will be in place during 1979. Re-organization of the Branch The processes leading to a major re-organization of the management structures of the Corrections Branch were undertaken in 1976, and was effective April 1, 1977. 1978 has seen the first year of implementation of this new structure. The reorganization was undertaken so that administrative structures reflected the intention of the Corrections Branch to develop a full range of services required by the justice system in a manner which is consistent with local and regional needs. In line with that intention the re-organization of the Branch decentralized authority and decision making to the lowest appropriate level. It also focuses on an integration of services provided by what have been categorized as institutional and probation streams. This integration has been necessitated by the development of new programs over the years. The traditional scope of institution and probation services had expanded so that institutions were running more community based facilities requiring ongoing liaison, and information flow, while probation services were expanding to include more residential types of programs. In some instances both probationers and parolees have resided in community correctional centres. During 1978, considerable management training was undertaken to assist directors with their new responsibilities within the new organization. On the premise that it takes approximately two to three years for an organization to consolidate after a change, 1979 should see the conclusion of a number of questions which manages and line staff at all levels have had to resolve in relation to roles, responsibilities and service to clients. Statistics In 1978, statistics on Corrections Branch case load, as in the last reporting year, reflect the actual resource impacts of various selected groups on the total Correctional system. Tables I through IV document both the number of reports and the total case months of supervision for adult and juvenile sub groups forthe probation and family services of the Branch. Tables V throuuh XII outline the average bed 15 space utilization per day on sentenced and remand populations forthe institutional component. The change from previous years in the mode of presentation is a reflection of an intention to provide figures which are more appropriate for management decision making. The traditional mode of analyzing populations in terms of number of admissions can lead to some mis-leading impressions. For example, an individual who enters the Branch system with a one day sentence of imprisonment would carry the same weight as an individual who enters with a one year sentence. Further, frequent admissions by the same individual could lead to a mis-perception of the actual population being incarcerated in provincial correctional facilities. Explanation of Tables Table II illustrates that there was a net increase in the number of reports prepared by probation and family service personnel from 1977 to 1978. Also pre-sentence reports, pre-court enquiries, and parole reports decreased; the number of verbal, temporary absence, ability to pay, and miscellaneous reports increased. As documented in Table III, the number of case months of supervision for probation and family services in 1978 was 140,513; this was 6,974 more than in the preceeding year. This represents a total increase of 5.2% from 1977 to 1978. It is interesting to note that in virtually every supervision type save parole, the number of case months of supervision have increased. Table IV indicates the relative usage of probation supervision by region. The Table indicates that there is a wide difference between regions in regard to the proportion of total case months supervision they deliver. The three regions highest in adult case months supervised (Vancouver, Island, and the Interior) all show lesser proportions delivered to juveniles. The opposite finding is evident in the three regions showing the lowest proportion of adult case months supervised (Northern, South Fraser, and North Fraser) where within these regions juvenile percentages are higher than the adult. Finally, Table IV illustrates that juveniles represent approximately one quarter of the total case months supervised under probation orders. Table V illustrates that females represent 13.6% of total probation case months supervised as compared to 86.4% for males. This discrepency is greater when looking just at juvenile probationers, with females representing 8.8% of the total. Table VI shows that an average of 1,635 adult institutional beds per day were delivered in the B.C. Correctional system in 1978. Approximately three quarters of those beds were filled by sentenced persons; the remaining one quarter by those on remand. Table VII describes the offence type for which sentenced and unsentenced institutional offenders are held. While the largest category for sentenced offenders is theft, for remand offenders it is for serious crimes, as would be expected. 73.3% of the total average bed space days are delivered to offenders between the ages of 18 and 34 as indicated in Table VIII. Although there are proportionately more beds devoted to individuals on remand under 18 as opposed to sentenced, there are also proportionately more remand offenders over the age of 30. Proportionately more females are on remand than sentenced as shown in Table IX. 93.3% of the total average bed space utilization in 1978 was devoted to male offenders with 6.7% being utilized by females. The percentage of Native Indians occupying beds in provincial facilities was 14.9% in 1978. This represents a slight increase from the preceding year. Table XI indicates that the average count in provincial institutions is dropping over the three year period recorded in the Table. At the same time, it can be seen that the total capacity figure is increasing within the provincial system. While a proportion of secure beds to the total average beds utilization has remained more or less constant over the three years, open facilities are seen to have dropped while community correctional centres have increased. Table XII shows that 23.4% of average institutional bed space days is utilized by individuals with sentences less than 90 days (three months). Previous analysis has shown however, that in terms of the number of admissions into institutions that this 90 16 day and under group accounts for approximately 50% of institutional entries. In fact, in excess of 80% of all admissions to provincial correctional centres are for six months and less. It can clearly be seen then, that although in numbers offenders with relatively long term sentences are fewer than those with short term sentences, the long term offenders utilize a much greater proportion of the total average bed space days. Table XIII is self explanatory. Jail Admissions o o o o o ° 0 12 3 4 5 6 Sentence length in months FIGURE I Utilization of bed space by sentence length 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2- 17 FIGURE II TOTAL EARNED $1,149,677 PERCENT RESTITUTION AND FINES: 2/,558 2.40 ROOM AND BOARD: 60,977 5.30 FAMILY MAINTENANCE: 257,400 22.39 DEBTS: 111,226 9.68 INCOME TAX: 214,819 18.68 INMATE SAVINGS: 477,697 41.55 Temporary Absence work release program statistics showing use of earnings, 1978. 18 TABLE I ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE, 1978/79 CORRECTIONS Description Provides for: (a) administration and direction of all correctional programs, planning and development, research and information regarding staff; inspection and standards, the physical inspection of all institutional centres and development of standardized procedures in security of these institutions; (b) institutional services, the operation of institutional facilities for custody of convicted persons; (c) community services, an alternative to incarceration in large institutions by operation of small community-based units with adult and juvenile programs, including Family and Children's Court services. Estimated 1977/78 Staff $ (57) (1,130) (630) (1,817) (1,817) 2,149,991 25,347.121 13,477,201 40,974,313 Activity Administration Institutional services Community Services Total Vote Staff Estimates, 1978/79 $ $ (226) 8,061,271 (1,246) 30,173,440 (592) 15,706,724 (2.064) Classification by Standard Objects of Expenditure 29,784,332 (01) Salaries-established: 2,987,843 (04) Salaries — temporary 1,000,000 (10) Travel expense 1,966,000 (20) Professional and special services 300,000 (30) Office expense 71,880 (35) Office Furniture and Equipment 5,000 (40) Advertising and publications 3,000,000 (50) Materials and supplies 400,000 (55) Motor-vehicles 57,000 (60) Rentals —outside suppliers 50,000 (70) Acquisition —land and Buildings 290,258 (75) Acquisition — machinery and equipment 1,000,000 (80) Grants, contributions and subsidies 62,000 (90) Other expenditure 40,974,313 (2,064) 53,941,435 40,586,983 1,449,181 1,264,556 2,852,992 372,947 222,731 14,244 3,383,889 555,430 193,403 54,131 461,536 2,521,037 8,375 53,941,435 19 TABLE II CORRECTIONS BRANCH TYPES OF REPORTS1 PROBATION AND FAMILY SERVICES 1978 VS 1977 1978 1977 Increase/Decrease (±) Report Type Pre-Sentence Pre-Court Verbal Parole Temporary Absence . . . Ability to Pay Other Totals Applications to Raise . . Adult Juvenile Total Adult Juvenile Total Adult Juvenile Total 3,950 546 4,496 4,112 406 4,518 -162 + 140 - 22 — 12,524 12,524 — 12,944 12,944 — -420 -420 1,003 7,336 8,339 1,093 6,907 8,000 - 90 +429 + 339 434 — 434 546 — 546 -112 — -112 1,652 — 1,652 1,625 — 1,625 + 27 — + 27 942 — 942 801 — 801 + 141 — + 141 1,581 773 2,354 1,049 614 1,663 +532 + 159 +691 9,562 21,179 30,741 9,226 20,871 30,097 +336 + 308 +644 Number Number Number Raised Raised Raised — 70 10 — 108 18 — - 38 -8 'Applications to raise juveniles to adult courts are included in this table for convenience. TABLE III CORRECTIONS BRANCH CASE-MONTHS SUPERVISION1, PROBATION AND FAMILY SERVICES 1978 vs 1977 1978 Supervision Type Adult Juvenile Diversionary Counselling 2,055 9,265 Probation 91,097 30,140 Parole 1,259 Temporary Absence 1,729 — Other 2,860 2,108 Totals 99,000 41,513 Community Service Order 4,808 4,438 Impaired Drivers' Course 9,808 — 1 This does not represent the number of cases supervised. 1977 Increase/Decrease (±) Total Adult Juvenile Total Adult Juvenile Total 11,320 121,237 1,259 1,729 4,968 1,491 58,237 1,558 1,145 1,661 8,926 29,140 1,381 10,417 117,377 1,558 1,145 3,042 + 564 +2,860 - 299 + 584 + 1,199 339 ,000 + 903 +3,860 - 299 + 584 727 +1,926 140,513 94,092 39,447 133,539 +4,908 +2.066 +6,974 9,246 9,808 4,344 8,759 3,821 8,165 8,759 + 464 +1,049 + 617 +1,081 + 1,049 20 TABLE IV CORRECTIONS BRANCH CASE-MONTHS SUPERVISION, PROBATION BY REGION Adult Juvenile Total Region Case Months % of Total Case Months % of Total Case Months % of Total Vancouver Island 18,652 20.5 4,568 15.2 23,220 19.2 Vancouver 17,533 19.2 5,353 17.8 22,886 18.9 North Fraser 9,822 10.8 3,832 12.7 13,654 11.3 South Fraser 10,743 11.8 4,346 14.4 15,089 12.4 Interior 23,526 25.8 6,633 22.0 30,159 24.8 Northern 10,821 11.9 5.408 17.9 16,229 13.4 Provincial (Totals) 91,097 100.0 30,140 100.0 121,237 100.0 TABLE V CORRECTIONS BRANCH CASE-MONTHS SUPERVISION, PROBATION, BY SEX Adult Juvenile Total Sex Case Months % of Total Case Months % of Total Case Months % of Total Male Female 77,250 13.847 84.8 15.2 27,486 2,654 91.2 8.8 104,736 16,501 86.4 13.6 Total 91,097 100.0 30,140 100.0 121,237 100.0 TABLE VI CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY REGION Sentenced Remand Total Average Beds Average Beds Average Beds Region Per Day % of Total per Day % of Total per Day % of Total Vancouver Island 135 10.9 54 13.4 189 11.6 Vancouver 374 30.3 286 71.1 660 40.3 North Fraser 312 25.3 7 1.8 319 19.5 South Fraser 117 9.5 — — 117 7.2 Interior 148 12.1 22 5.5 170 10.4 Northern 147 11.9 33 8.2 180 11.0 Provincial (Totals) 1,233 100.0 402 100.0 1,635 100.0 Note: This table reflects the utilization of Correctional resources within regions. It reflects the average daily bed utilization actually provided by the various facilities within the region independently of the court of origin. 21 TABLE VII CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY OFFENCE CATEGORY Sentenced Remand Total Average Beds Average Beds Average Beds Offence per Day % of Total per Day % of Total per Day % of Total Serious 316 25.6 150 37.4 466 26.5 Sexual and Morals 6 .5 6 1.5 12 .7 Community Order 21 1.7 10 2.6 31 1.9 Drink Driving 88 7.1 3 .7 91 5.6 Other Motor-Vehicle 16 1.3 2 .4 18 1.1 Theft 354 28.8 86 21.4 440 26.9 Other Property 74 6.0 19 4.8 93 5.7 Possessing Drugs 42 3.4 15 3.7 57 3.5 Traffic/Intent Drugs 184 14.9 59 14.5 243 14.8 Breach/FTA 44 3.6 6 1.6 50 3.1 Common Assault/Government Liquor Act 47 3.8 13 3.3 60 3.7 Other Person/Community Order 37 3.0 33 8.1 70 4.3 Unknown 4 .3 — — 4 .2 TOTALS 1,233 100.0 402 100.0 1,635 100.0 Note: The following are examples of the types of offences includes in each category: Serious: Pointing a firearm, perjury, rape & attempt, negligence causing death, murder(s), kidnapping, etc. Sexual & Moral: Incest, indecent exposure, procuring, bigamy, contributing to juvenile delinquency, etc. Community order: Causing & disturbance, vagrancy, mischief, etc. Drink/Drive: Impaired driving, above 0.08, etc. Other Motor-Vehicle: Failing to stop at an accident, driving while disqualified, etc. Theft: Theft over/under $200, breaking and entering, possessing of stolen property, etc. Other property: False pretenses, fraud (public), forgery, and uttering, etc. Other persons/Community Order: Unlawful assembly, riot, bribery of officers, harassing & threatening, habitual criminal. 22 TABLE VIII CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY AGE Sentenced Remand Total Average Beds Average Beds Average Beds Age Groups (Years) per Day % of Total per Day % of Total per Day % of Total Unknown 1 .1 2 .6 3 .2 16 4 .3 4 1.0 8 .5 17 41 3.3 18 4.6 59 3.6 18-19 128 10.4 41 10.1 169 10.3 20-21 179 14.5 40 10.0 219 13.4 22-24 232 18.8 64 15.8 296 18.1 25-29 248 20.1 90 22.3 338 20.7 30-34 127 10.3 49 12.2 176 10.8 35-39 96 7.8 33 8.2 129 7.9 40-49 112 9.1 37 9.3 149 9.1 50 and over 65 5.3 24 5.9 89 5.4 TOTALS 1,233 100.0 402 100.0 1.635 100.0 TABLE IX CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY SEX Sentenced Remand Total Sex Average Beds per Day % of Total Average Beds per Day % of Total Average Beds per Day % of Total Male Female 1,158 75 93.9 6.1 368 34 91.6 8.4 1.526 109 93.3 6.7 TOTALS 1,233 100.0 402 100.0 1,635 100.0 TABLE X CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY RACE Sentenced Remand Total Racial Origin Average Beds per Day % of Total Average Beds per Day % of Total Average Beds per Day % of Total Native Indian Other Unknown 181 1,031 21 14.7 83.6 1.7 62 332 8 15.5 82.6 1.9 243 1,363 29 14.9 83.3 1.8 TOTAL 1,233 100.0 402 100.0 1,635 100.0 23 TABLE XI AVERAGE INSTITUTIONAL COUNTS AND CAPACITIES BY TYPE OF SETTING 1978 1977 1976 Average Beds Average Beds Average Beds Setting per Day % of Total per Day % of Total per Day % of Total Secure — Remand 395 24.2 384 23.2 393 22.9 Sentenced 559 34.2 587 35.3 625 36.4 Totals 954 58.4 974 58.6 1,018 59.3 Capacity 955 49.9 980 53.7 970 53.7 Open — Count 553 33.8 533 35.4 607 35.4 Capacity 787 41.2 784 42.9 780 43.2 ccc — Count 128 7.8 100 6.0 92 5.4 Capacity 170 8.9 125 6.8 118 6.5 Totals — Count 1,635 100.0 1,662 100.0 1,717 100.0 Capacity 1,912 100.0 1,889 100.0 1,868 100.0 24 TABLE XII CORRECTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM UTILIZATION BY LENGTH OF SENTENCE FOR SENTENCED OFFENDERS Sentenced Length (Days) Average Beds Per Day % of Total 1 - 10 9 .7 11-20 16 1.3 21 - 30 124 10.1 31 - 60 65 5.3 61 - 90 74 6.0 91 - 120 59 4.8 121 - 180 167 13.5 181 - 270 115 9.3 271 - 360 160 13.0 361 -719 313 25.4 720 + 131 10.6 TOTAL 1,233 100.0 TABLE XIII INSTITUTIONAL AVERAGE BED UTILIZATION PER DAY BY STATUS ON ADMISSION Disposition Average Beds Per Day % of Total Fine in default 70 4.3 Indeterminate (Section 64A) 4 .2 All other sentenced 1,159 70.9 Remand 392 24.0 Immigration Hold 10 .6 TOTALS 1.635 100.0 25 The Report in Detail Youth Services Helping offenders to become aware of their responsibility to themselves and to their community is the major goal of the corrections experience. All Branch policy leads towards that end. The sooner (and the younger) offenders acquire the sense of responsibility, the less likely they are to break the law again. Prevention The Corrections Branch feels that is has a responsibility to encourage the community and other government ministries to develop programs which will reduce the probability of children coming into conflict with the law in the first place. This requires ongoing involvement with schools, particularly at the junior high level, and a contribution to the planning of appropriate programs to keep children involved in school and community activities. The activities include the development of alternative schools and "grad awareness" alcohol education programs. For those who come to the attention of the probation officer, formally or informally, the emphasis is always on referral to private or community agencies. The Branch has a number of formal and informal contacts with many private and public agencies, which include contacts with the provincial Ministries of Human Resources, Education, and Health and links with the federal departments of the Solicitor General, Manpower and Health and Welfare. This sharing of resources and knowledge is an important element to the overall effectiveness of the British Columbia Corrections Branch. It is the context out of which the Interministerial Children's Committee (comprised of representatives of the Ministries of Attorney-General, Education, Health and Human Resources), has grown (see also Youth Custody Programs). Diversion Programs Wherever possible, it is the policy of the Branch to resolve social conflict outside the justice system all together. This is particularly important when dealing with youth offenders. That is why under the authority of Section 7 of the Corrections Act, youth in conflict with the law are referred to a probation officer by the Crown for a pre-court enquiry. An investigation is done on the young person, and his/her behaviour in the home, at school, and in the community is assessed. Based on the findings, a recommendation for no further action (if the matter has resolved itself), diversion, or court action is made. On the strength of that recommendation, the Crown may end its involvement, or refer the matter to Court. During 1978 a total of 12,524 such enquiries were carried out by probation staff throughout the Province. As many as 50% of all juveniles brought to the attention of the probation officers (through the pre- court enquiries) are redirected (diverted) away from proceeding to court, when diversion is a more effective way to deal with the problem than the full formal court process. Courts must be reserved to be effective in dealing with those very serious or sensitive offences which are a concern to the country. However, when a youth is diverted as a result of a pre-court enquiry, he or she may receive short term counselling by a probation officer, perhaps with his or her parents, and there is an attempt by the probation officer to make the fullest use of community resources and agencies on a referral basis. The probation officer is often a catalyst or consultant in the development and operation of both private and government sponsored programs for juvenile offenders which may be used as a diversion program, as well as for youths under a court order of supervision. 26 There are many good examples of diversion programs, but a unique juvenile accountability program was set up in 1978 by a community with the assistance of a probation officer in one area of Vancouver. Here, youths who have broken the law appear before a panel of community representatives in an attempt to work out a restitution of reparative arrangement with the victim. This model is a striking example of a community accepting responsibility for its own justice problems. Although a child can be brought into Family Court and charged from the age of seven on, it is the general practise in this province, if possible, to deal with children under the age of fourteen on an out of court basis. Corrections planning related to juveniles involves attempts to formalize this process administratively. Our ability to do that is often related to the degree to which local communities will be concerned about the provision of a wide range of services to children in general. Court Services In 1978, a total of 21,179 reports (pre-court enquiries, pre-sentence reports, verbal reports, and others) were prepared by probation officers throughout the Province with respect to juveniles. In this regard the further refinement of the court resource officer's role in both juvenile and adult probation contexts in 1978, found itself an acceptecUind important operation practise. The availability of a probation officer in court to facilitate information flow and do referrals, short reports, and so on, is central to the court support role of probation officers. Community Supervision Where, as a result of a pre-court enquiry, it is felt that an element of supervision is necessary on more than an informal basis, or there is no admission of guilt relating to the charge, the matter is referred to court. If the child admits to the delinquency, or is found delinquent by the court, he or she may be placed under formal probation supervision. In addition, a number of specific conditions of supervision may be applied to the juvenile, and a probation officer will attempt to use all necessary community resources to assist the juvenile in meeting these court order responsibilities. Community Service Orders The requirement that youth offenders perform work for the benefit of the community or the victim goes back many years in this Province. It was usually arranged informally under the initiative of individual probation officers (often during the pre-court process) or judges (at the time of making a disposition). It was not until the 1970's that community service was first proposed on an organized basis for both juveniles and adults. Since that time, Community Service Orders have become a major program priority of the Corrections Branch and is one of the clearest responses to crime and delinquency we have. This program allows a humane and effective consequence for offences; consequences which are economical to operate, which avoid the unnecessary use of more drastic sentences, and is available to the many offenders who are unable to pay a fine. For the last two years Community Service Officers, specialists hired to develop activity banks of information and to supervise those given probation orders including Community Service, have been operating in every major location in the Province. The Court and the community has been in support of the program as shown by the increasing number of total hours of community service completed by offenders. During 1977, it was approximately 100,000 total, with slightly less than half of that being undertaken by juveniles. In 1978, juveniles did approximately 60,000 hours of community service of a total of 170,000 hours. Community Service is a program in which the Corrections Branch is in the very vanguard in the implementation throughout Canada and the whole of North America. 27 Attendance Programs For those cases where the community and other agencies are unable to supply support services, or the available services are not suitable or available at the local level, the Corrections Branch has developed programs which fall under the general rubric of "attendance centres." Juveniles may be committed to such programs by the court as a condition of probation. There are three categories of Attendance Programs; a) Daily attendance, i.e. during the day, after school or work; a program where there are specific activities to be undertaken. b) Weekend attendance, i.e., where the probationer must attend and reside at the program from Friday night to Sunday afternoon, until successful graduation. c) Full residential attendance. These programs offer the court the option of ordering supervision in a structured setting for a specific kind of program for those persons who require a more specific form of supervision than that generally available within the community. The actual program varies from educational training, recreation and community service activities to involvement in wilderness "outwardbound" types of experiences. The Corrections Branch operates, staffs and (or) funds these programs in close relationship with schools, child welfare services, mental health programs, and other community agencies. DARE (Vancouver), Metchosin (Victoria), New Directions Program (Victoria), Victoria Attendance Program, Lakeview Youth Camp (Campbell River), Porteau Camp {Vancouver), and DASH (Chilliwack) are the major such programs operated by the Corrections Branch. The New Directions Program in Victoria had an average monthly enrollment of 18 during the course of 1977, with a total enrollment up to 34 in October. In October, a very significant change in program focus and concept was instituted and the program was given its present name "New Directions Program." This change was the result of an attempt to better meet the needs of probation field staff in the greater Victoria area. The new Directions Program during 1978 has carried a main focus on academic upgrading and life skills training during twelve weeks of a probationer's involvement. The program accepts male or female probation referrals between the ages of 13 and 17. The goal of the program is to present students with a structure wherein they can discover and embark upon new directions — directions which will lead them to a more successful life vocationally, educationally and socially. 80 hours of academic upgrading is provided together worth 50 hours of life skills, 30 hours of recreation, after 70 hours of work experience. During the three months of operation in 1977, the new program experienced overwhelming support and a great deal of positive feed-back from the field. Over 30 students attended the program with 15 on the waiting list during that period. During 1978, the program had a total enrollment of 48 which represents 25% increase over the previous year. During 1978, workers in the Detention and Recreation Extension program (DARE) provided continued intensive supervision for selected juveniles on probation who live in the urban area of the Vancouver Region of Corrections. A total staff of 17, consisting of six women and 11 men, supervised an average number of 77 probationers during each month. During the year 75 juveniles were terminated and 72 probationers were assigned to the program. This program is unique in that it provides a very close level of supervision and a low staff client ratio which allows normally "high risk" juveniles to remain in the community and be directed towards constructive activities. 28 Porteau Camp provides weekend experiences in the wilderness which stress group co-operation, the development of positive work attitudes and improving self image. In 1978, Porteau Cove saw 138 juvenile males, aged 13 to 17 graduate from the weekend program. Youths must attend at the camp from Friday evening till Sunday evening. Porteau also offers a month long summer full residential program called Search and Leadership Training (SALT). 30 youths graduated from that program during 1978. Also operating under the auspices of Porteau, is a new mid week program entitled "Learn How to Work" which was started in October. This program handles up to 50 boys and is designed to teach them the techniques to find a job, and then how to work to keep it. The Metchosin Camp Program offers a weekend residential wilderness program to male and female probationers from the ages of 13 to 22. Referrals are accepted from Duncan south on Vancouver Island. During 1978, 51 juvenile probationers and 14 adult probationers attended the program. 1978 marked the successful implementation of a vigorous marine oriented experience for probationers aboard the 55 foot motor vessel Freedom Found. A specialized weekend program was also run specifically for probationers from Salt Spring Island with the assistance of the Sidney Probation Office. DASH (Developing Attitudes Skills and Habits) is a much more intensive nine week, three staged probation attendance program for youths aged 14 to 19. It also uses the unique opportunity offered by wilderness experience to challenge both mentally and physically, to an extent far beyond every day living. Young people must work together in small peer groups to overcome unusual challenges for a sense of personal achievement. The DASH program is often a last stop resource before youth containment or transfer to adult court. During the course of the year a total of 117 young men and women attended the course, 86 boys and 31 girls. Lakeview Youth Camp opened its doors officially on the 26th of April 1978, and was originally to have been a youth containment camp. However, just prior to opening, the Youth Containment Legislation was declared ultra vires and the camp became designated an attendance centre to receive those on probation. Since its opening, Lakeview has provided a wilderness program and a specialized residential program set up to offer a four to six month program for hard core youngsters, for whom all other resources had been exhausted and/or unsuccessful. The latter program became extremely popular with the field and soon a lengthy waiting list for referrals had accumulated. In October 1978, it was decided to combine the wilderness program aspect with the specialized program. In the eight months in which this program was operating in 1978, 37 referrals from all over the province were accepted and with the exception of one youngster, who had to be transferred out, all had successfully completed the program with an average length of stay being four months. With the Appeal Court ruling on containment in January 1979, other containment centres were designated industrial schools, but Lakeview as a result of its success, has continued to remain an attendance centre unless pressure on capacities at the other programs require its designation also as an industrial school and containment centre. Another major residential attendance program utilized extensively by the Branch is the House of Concord at Langley. This is funded entirely by the Corrections Branch ($740,290 in 1978/79) but is operated by the Salvation Army. House of Concord provides educational, vocational, life skills and employment experiences for juveniles and young adults who attend as a condition of a probation order by the Court. The Branch also provides major funding for a variety of other attendance programs throughout the province, often developed from the efforts of local staff. These are often funded under the auspices of a local society of service group for the purposes of funding and direction. Some of them are daily attendance, and others are short term weekend 29 attendance programs; some are short lived to provide a particular experience which is helpful in a smaller community. There are over a dozen of these programs formed throughout the province, to a total of $1,350,000 in 1978/79. The Branch views the expenditure of these monies as supporting the most efficient development or continuation of a wide range of programs throughout the province, so that youths may be dealt with as much as possible within their own community, where the solution to the problems of youth in conflict with the law resides and must be solved. Youth Custody In 1974 the administration of Justice Act gave the Province, and in particular the Corrections Branch of the Ministry of the Attorney-General, responsibility for the detention of youth (male and female) awaiting trail, disposition or placement. This included the only two detention facilities in operation — in Vancouver and Victoria. These responsibilities had previously been apportioned to municipalities under the Family and Children's Act (1969). However, with the exception of these two facilities there had been little other development and the two centres had been providing the major detention capacities throughout the Province, with the attendant problems for youth of dislocation from communities or places where plans are worked out, travel, and so on. The alternative for short stays had been police cells in local communities. With the assumption of responsibility for these services, the Branch commenced to phase out the antiquated facility in Vancouver and move to Willingdon in Burnaby, upgrade the newer Victoria facility and set policy with respect to remand throughout the Province. The facilities at Willingdon originally were for remand purposes, but with the development of containment an additional capacity was added to handle those requiring short term secure custody. The Willingdon Centre has had a perennial overcrowding problem; and during 1978 had a daily average population of 40.28 boys and 8.88 girls, making a combined daily average of 49.16 residents. This is approximately a seven person increase over 1977. The containment section of the, centre, forthe six month period ending June 30 in which it was in operation (prior to the Court ruling that the legislation was ultra vires — see below) averaged on a daily basis 14.65 residents. Thus, for the six months period ending June 30, 1978 the Detention Centre housed a total daily population average of 63.81 residents and a total daily population average of 49.16 forthe remaining six months. The total number of detention days for the centre were up significantly over 1977: 17,897 in remand, plus 2,666 for containment for a total of 20,563. A comparable latter figure for 1977 was 14,871. During 1978 the average length of stay at Willingdon was 26.19 days. We may see from this data that while the total number of individuals coming in to the centre over the year has not increased substantially (containment not withstanding) over 1977, the number of detention days and thus the average length of stay has. In short, about the same number of people are coming into custody as in 1977 but they are staying about one week longer than they did in 1977. Finally, it is note worthy that approximately 10% of the total number of the people coming into the Centre for "social misconduct," that is they are being sent by courts on other than criminal matters. The Victoria Youth Detention Centre also has been designated as a secure custody centre for purposes of short term containment, in addition to its remand capacity. During 1978, a number of events prevented the necessary renovations to the centre, but these are underway in early 1979. This Centre does not have the same overcrowding problem that Willingdon does however, during 1978 the average daily count went up from 11.5 to 15.2. The capacity is 20. The 30 total number of admissions also were up from 917 in 1977 to 1,037 in 1978. The average length of stay of residents during 1978 was 8.8 days for those from out of town, and 4.2 days for those who were from the Victoria area. The Victoria centre handles both boys and girls. The program possibilities at Victoria centre are much more limited than those at Willingdon, and therefore the use of volunteers, while emphasized at both centres has become integral to the operations of the Victoria Youth Detention Centre. In August of 1976, the Corrections Branch authorized a set of comprehensive guidelines and policies for the development and funding of private remand homes throughout the Province, in an attempt to facilitate the development of local resources as more appropriate alternatives than local police cells, or transfer to the Willingdon or Victoria facilities. Remand homes are homes of private citizens who for a per diem rate provide room and board and supervision to youths "at risk" pending disposition of the court. The general per diem rate is as negotiated by each Corrections Branch region. The use of private remand homes, while still in its early stages of development, increased substantially in 1978, and is considered an important program initiative of the Corrections Branch. Private Remand homes are being developed in conjunction with third level containment community resources, described below. The very idea that youthful offenders should be "locked up" at all, is on the surface very upsetting. Yet for those who have exhausted every other program offered by the Corrections Branch, or other government ministries, some kind of special secure programs are felt to be necessary. In October of 1976, the Cabinet of Government decided that the Corrections Branch should proceed with the development of a three levelled containment program for youths in the above category. During 1977, the facilities and program were brought on line, with staff hired and fully trained. The enabling provincial legislation, known as the Corrections Amendment Act, which in addition to providing authority to the Corrections Branch for the operation of containment centres, emphasized the need for a wide range of community based programs, was proclaimed on December 15, 1977. The three leveled program consists of secure custody for those juvenile offenders whose behaviour is deemed to be dangerous to others or themselves. As noted previously the present two youth detention centres in Victoria and Willingdon have provided the additional capacity to hold juveniles at the post disposition stage in strict custody. The Willingdon facility added a capacity of 20, and the capacity of the Victoria facility was set as flexible within its total capacity of 20. The program and security facility focusses on work or school and supervised recreation activities. Use of the full range of community resources is encouraged to include the involvement of volunteer services wherever possible. The second level of the containment package is camps, which provide the option of a more definitive and active program for juveniles, and which are centred on education and the wilderness program concept. Centre Creek Camp at Chilliwack and originally Lakeview Camp at Campbell River were identified to each have a capacity of 30. Centre Creek Camp was available at the time of the proclamation of the Act, but Lakeview Camp opened as referenced above in mid 1979. By that time, the Supreme Court of British Columbia had ruled the Youth Program Section Part IV of the Corrections Act, in reference to containment, ultra vires. The third level of the containment package, secure group homes, which were to provide residential placement with close staff supervision, had not seen much development, and was held up pending a resolution to the legislation question. At the time of the Supreme Court judgement, the renovations for the Victoria Youth Detention Centre had not got underway and so the centre was not 31 holding any youth in containment. All youths on containment at the Willingdon Youth Detention Centre and Centre Creek Camp were returned to court and either placed on probation with a condition to attend an attendance program, or continued under remand status. Youths at Lakeview Camp, also were returned to court. Lakeview and Centre Creek Camps were designated attendance centres pending the outcome of the Appeal Court Decision. That decision did not come until January 3, 1979 at which time the containment program was back on line, with the exception that Lakeview continued as an attendance program. It is the position of the Corrections Branch that containment does not supply long term answers to juvenile problems. Containment is only one of a number of options and the Inter-Ministerial Youth Committee "Children in Crisis Program" is continuing to look at the whole issue of services to youth. This committee is composed of the Deputy Ministers of Human Resources, Health, Education and Attorney-General, with a working group of representatives from each of those ministries. Provincial, regional and local Children in Crisis Committees have been formed in many locations throughout the Province to ensure that youths do not "fall between stools" when it comes to finding the appropriate programs for special needs. Citizen Participation Corrections has taken the position that justice solutions lie at least in part in the community itself, as it is the community by its legislation that sets the limits on acceptables modes of social behaviour. Not only does the solution lie in the community, but some of the most effective resources are provided by members of the community and their involvement in seeking solutions to the problems. The use of one to one volunteer sponsors for youths in conflict with the law has been used in communities throughout the Province for many years, but in 1970 the use of volunteer sponsors for both adult and juvenile probationers became more focussed with the appointment of volunteer co-ordinators. This subsequently has led to expansion in the types of activity of volunteers, into such areas as Youth Detention Centres. Citizen participation and volunteer sponsor activities in the adult area are dealt with below in the section entitled Adult Services. Volunteers can provide young people with effective one to one relationships, with group involvement, with entertainment and recreational opportunities and with wider general life experiences. Citizen volunteers give youths the kind of time that is not possible for Branch staff as a result of budget and manpower restraints, but particularly as a result of the nature of the justice system process. As a result of the work of volunteer sponsors, and volunteer co-ordinators, the view of the role of citizen participation in Corrections has expanded considerably within the last few years. During the latter part of 1978 there was a move to de-emphasize the staff role of the volunteer co-ordinator, and to place increasing responsibility on local directors of offices and institutions to incorporate citizen involvement in a wide variety of program operations, with the support and assistance of the volunteer coordinators. The use of citizens in the justice process through Citizen Advisory Boards, volunteer sponsorship and so on, has been one of the most difficult, intangible and problematic aspects of providing effective services to offenders. However, the successful and efficient use of citizens in a variety of aspects in Corrections both at the policy and line service level, will continue to require energy and openness on the part of Corrections staff at all levels of the organization. Statistics do not adequately convey the extent and energy of citizens who give their time to Corrections. Thousands of hours of volunteer time alone have been available to youths in the Victoria Youth Detention Centre, and the kind of assistance this gives cannot be overstated. In economic terms, if the average hourly rate of volunteers at approximately $6.66 is utilized, in Victoria alone during 1978 some $140,260 worth of time was provided to offenders by this form of citizen involvement. The gross figure for the Province therefore, including areas where there are volunteer co-ordinators and other areas where Branch Staff are co-ordinating these progrms in addition to other responsibilities is substantial. Comment In conclusion, the juvenile justice system is a complex business focussing around dealing with a certain kind of social conflict — that relating to contravention of the law — and the marshalling of the wide variety of resources and programs available to remedy the problem. A major requirement of the justice system is to tie together the various aspects of services available throughout the government and the private sector in a way which will be helpful to each individual youth, and where multiple services are required, where they will be appropriately provided. The humanity and effectiveness with which this can be carried out with respect to young people sets a standard for society, and can have a significant impact on the quality of life in communities throughout the Province. Adult Services For a number of complex reasons, beyond the scope of this Annual Report, the community has become much more concerned about criminal behaviour, and in particular about the treatment of offenders. This concern has tended to become focussed around the issue of incarceration, and is related to a number of critical incidents within institutions, both federal and provincial, and the high public profile these have achieved. But the concern goes much deeper than that. On the one hand, the Corrections Branch has come under public criticism for giving out temporary absences too easily, or to the "wrong" people, for coddling offenders and providing them with job training in full competition with the rest of society or perhaps assisting in job searches, for attempting to provide decent living circumstances for offenders, and for generally going too soft on society's "outsiders". On the other hand, the increased sophistication of offenders relative to civil rights, and the activities of a number of community action groups, have given strongly worded alternate messages in relation to the perception of harsh treatment that the Branch appears to meet out, particularly in maximum security settings. Somewhere in between these two extreme attitudes is the attitude of the Branch itself, an attitude expressed in the number of programs that try to help most offenders help themselves get back into society, and assume the full rights and responsibilities of such participation. It is from within the context of attempting to balance these dilemmas that the following programs and initiatives are described. Pre-Court Services As with juveniles, it is sometimes preferable to resolve a community conflict involving adults before it starts its way through the justice system. Generally speaking the Corrections Branch is not involved with the alleged offender prior to a court appearance because of the different nature of the justice process for juveniles and adults. However, probation officers' involvement in diversion initiatives with adults as with juveniles, is sanctioned and encouraged, and there has been extensive involvement with local police, lawyers, courts, and private community agencies in an attempt to make the court process only one of a number of effective alternatives for adults. To that extent, some jurisdictions have been testing the use of the pre-court enquiry model for certain adult offenders in an attempt to divert persons who clearly do not require the full, formal court process. North Vancouver has been experimenting successfully with it since November 1974. During the calendar year 1978, Crown Counsel requested 77 Diversion Reports, 33 up by 19 from 1977. The program has been well accepted by the police, Crown Counsel, clients and the community in North Vancouver. Kamloops and area is another jurisdiction which has been utilizing the diversion process for adults for several years, and in 1978 handled approximately 40 cases. In both areas, most of those diverted are referred to another agency for assistance, or undertake some community service activity. A major project was underway during 1978 in the City of Vancouver. By the end of the year, the staff on the project had increased to two and 191 adults were involved in the program during the year. This project is an important one because it represents the first real experimentation in this province in a large urban area. The matter of diversion for adults is still one which requires some clarity of definition, and this project has been very specific about its target group and standards, and therefore will provide useful information for the start up of similar projects in other parts of the province. At this time, there are a number of other areas which are experimenting in a limited way with adult diversion. Pre-Trial Services Increased involvement by probation officers as available resources to the court, to provide information to the court at the pre-trial stage, as well as at the sentencing stage, has continued to be an important part of the justice process in 1978. The court resource officer role is a relatively new one, but has been well received. Most of the activities of the Corrections Branch in the pre-trial services area is with respect to the operation of bail supervision in Vancouver, Surrey, and Victoria with areas such as North and West Vancouver being serviced from the Vancouver office. Originally all managed from the Vancouver area, this service was regionalized effective April 1, 1977, with all of the other Corrections Branch programs. In 1978, Prince George and Coquitlam were added to the list of those locations with Bail Supervision operations. The following is a brief background to those developments. Prior to the Bail Reform Act in 1972, it was customary for a person who had been charged with an offence to be released on either a promise to reappear by posting bail or to be remanded in custody, usually in maximum security remand facilities operated by the Corrections Branch. Indications were that a large number of those remanded into custody probably did not need to be incarcerated. However, after the implementation of the Bail Reform Act, which allowed increased discretion to the police and courts in remand arrangements, there were a large number of abuses by persons who entered into an agreement to appear in court but who did not appear, or who committed further offences during the time when they were released on bail. This indicated that, for some offenders, a more organized method of pre-trial supervision was required. To that end in September of 1974 the Bail Supervision Pilot Project was implemented in the Provincial Courts of Vancouver. By the end of 1975, Bail Supervisors numbered eight in Vancouver, and expanded to supply services to Victoria and Surrey. During 1976, the staff in those areas each had an average case load of 50. During 1977, Vancouver and Surrey supervisors carried approximate average case loads of 80 and this increased in 1978 to 100. In Victoria, with only two supervisors, that figure had reached 110 each in December of 1977. In 1978, these figures have remained high. It is clear that the courts view bail supervision as a worthwhile service both to the courts, in ensuring that an alleged offender will meet commitments and appear for trial, and in terms of providing personal support to alleged offenders. In April of 1976 the wider area of pre-trial volunteer program responsibilities was assumed by the Corrections Branch. This service involved volunteers and one staff person (located at Oakalla District) who provided a direct service to remandees at the centre. The pre-trial services officer attempts to interview each person remanded into custody in order to assist them by providing information, by providing them and making bail applications or in obtaining a lawyer, by contacting friends, and by dealing with any other personal loose ends which might have arisen as a result of a person's arrest, and subsequent remand into custody. The facilities and services which will be provided by the new Vancouver Pre-Trial Services Centre announced in December 1978 (described under Custody Services) to be completed in 1981 will set a high standard in the provision of a range of services required by those in custody while before the courts. The extent of the resources of the Branch available to become more comprehensively involved in pre-trial services is limited at the time of writing. It is a clear situation where citizen participation in conjunction with staff efforts can provide some very necessary human services to people who are undergoing the first shock of incarceration while awaiting trial. Probation Services The services provided by probation officers to the courts emphasize court information to assist in the sentencing process and in community supervision. During 1978, probation officers completed 3,950 presentence reports on adults, 1003 verbal reports, 942 reports to the court with respect to an offender's ability to pay a fine and 1,581 other kinds of reports. As one aspect to the community role of the probation officer, 2,086 parole and temporary absence reports were prepared during 1978. The total report workload was up in 1978 from 9,226 to 9,562. Community supervision for adults has placed emphasis in the formal responsibilities of offenders, and virtually all such persons supervised by a probation officer have come to him/her via the court, with specific conditions to be met. A wide range of community resources always have been utilized, but the major element of this supervision has been the formal reporting responsibility. The development of effective programs for adults under probation supervision, or under voluntary diversionary supervision, is still in its infancy. For instance, with the exception of a few programs, for young adults, there are no attendance programs available for adults as there are for juveniles. (See under Youth Services). Community Correctional Centre programs have been used in some instances for those who require residence in addition to regular community supervision and for whom there are no appropriate community resources. There are two corrections programs which have been developed and expanded over the past six years to fill the gap between supervision in the community and total incarceration for adults. These are the Community Service Order Program and Impaired Drivers' Courses. Community Service Orders The Community Service Order program has been described at some length above under Youth Services. More so than for juveniles, however, this program represents a true alternative to incarceration for many offenders, and for those who are unable to pay a fine where a fine would be considered. The tasks which might be performed are similar to those that juveniles might perform, but with a greater degree of responsibility. On a number of occasions, particularly in the case of young adults, the experience of assisting the elderly, the handicapped, or providing work for community service organizations has been beneficial and has resulted in continued involvement past the time of the end of the probation. During 1978, almost 110,000 hours of community service were undertaken by adult offenders across the province. As in past years, on the average adults appeared to receive approximately twice the number of hours as do juveniles, but the number of orders given out to juveniles and adults 35 across the province is approximately 50/50. The rate of success for completion is estimated at over 95%. This program in particular has expanded each year, with 1977 registering approximately 100,000 hours of work in total for juveniles and adults, with slightly more than that amount being undertaken by adults alone in 1978. There is no question that the community is in full support of this program, where it does not infringe upon the rights of persons to be employed. This has generally not been a problem. It should be noted that the operation of community service was part of the larger concern around fine option, which is the focus of a Ministerial and Branch initiative which has seen the development of two pilot projects on Vancouver Island which will be implemented commencing early in 1979. This project has emerged from statistics which indicate that approximately 20% of admissions to provincial correctional facilities are for fine in default. Fine option programs in Saskatchewan and Alberta have shown the ability to impact on those kinds of figures, and the pilot project which is underway at the time of writing is to be evaluated with the view towards possible expansion throughout the province. The pilot project incorporates the option of community service which is applied to the amount of the fine at a minimum wage of $3.00 per hour. The findings of this project will be known in the next reporting period. Impaired Drivers' Courses Impaired Driver's Courses are designed as an informative and educational program for convicted impaired drivers, and its operation represents an important area of operations for the Corrections Branch. The. program had its beginnings in 1973 and since that time has expanded to over 30 locations throughout the province. Originally a joint effort of the Corrections Branch, The Alcohol and Drug Commission, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, and the Motor Vehicle Branch, the Corrections Branch is now responsible for funding and co-ordinating this program which is attended by offenders as a condition of probation. The program consists of a four evening, two and a half hour per evening format which involves presentations by a number of persons in the community who are likely to be involved in the problem of drinking and driving, i.e. doctors, judges, crown counsel, coroners, ambulance drivers, alcoholism counsellors, Motor Vehicle Branch and Insurance Corporation of British Columbia representatives, and probation officers. A course moderator is hired for a small honourarium by the Corrections Branch. Impaired Drivers Courses are unique in the justice system as they have sprung from, and only continue as a result of, wide ranging community participation in a formalized sentencing option for the court. The Branch has been concerned, however, that I.D.C. is not a final solution to stem the tide of injury, death, property damage, and human grief which arises from this particular form of alcohol and driving abuse. In 1977 and 1978 the Attorney-General has spearheaded a comprehensive attack on the problems created by drinking drivers in British Columbia which is known as "Counterattack". Impaired Drivers' Courses are only one of a number of important initiatives taken to combat drinking and driving in British Columbia. The extent of this problem cannot be underestimated, with approximately 30% of all probation cases comprised of drinking and driving offences and 13% of locked admissions to Branch institutions. This is not counting the number of those incarcerated as a result of failing to pay some of the larger fines which are now imposed for this offence. (Over 40% of all admissions to institutions for failure to pay a fine, are for defaulting on a fine imposed as a result of drinking and driving offences.) L 36 The questions of possible sanctions and responses to drinking and driving has been one of a number of priority items for discussion by the Motor Vehicles Task Force which was established in 1978, and which will be submitting its report on a number of aspects of the operation and licensing of motor vehicles in 1979. Custody Services and Programs Under the separation of federal/provincial jurisdiction relating to the imprisonment of convicted (adult) offenders specified in the British North America Act, the Corrections Branch in British Columbia is given the responsibility for providing appropriate facilities for five categories of individuals. 1. All persons remanded into custody pending a resolution of their charges before the courts. 2. All offenders being held in custody pending the appeal of their conviction and/or sentence, (up to 30 days only where the sentence of imprisonment is for two years or more). 3. Those offenders who have received sentences of two years or over and are awaiting transfer to a federal penitentiary. 4. Those offenders who have received a sentence of imprisonment of less than two years. 5. Those offenders in federal institutions who are transferred to the Province under the Federal Provincial Exchange of Services Agreement. Branch facilities are designated by the level of security they afford. A custody facility is described as maximum-medium security, and includes reception and remand centres. Reception and remand centres are areas within the major correctional centres which are separated from the sentenced inmate population for such purposes. Open (or minimum) security centres include forest camps, community correctional centres, and specialized facilities (for alcohol or drug dependency problems). After five years of work with regard to location, design and program, in November 1978 Treasury Board approved the construction of the pre-trial services centre to be located adjacent to the Vancouver Courts. The 150 bed facility will cost approximately $18,000,000 and will require a staff of 130 when it is opened sometime in 1981. It is intended to service the Vancouver Courts — Provincial, County and Supreme. It is the first step of a plan announced publicly in April to ultimately phase out the entire remand population of approximately 300 at Oakalla Correctional Centre. The design of the pre-trial services centre is indicative of an emphasis on programs and services, in addition to custody. The physical plant provides for containing all court services currently administering to the Vancouver Courts, such as Sheriff staff, bail supervisors, probation officers and ancilary personnel. In addition, pre-trial service workers will provide direct service to remandees, such as assistance on application for legal aid and providing support with regard to personal concerns of remandees. Space will be made available for the use of relevant private agencies for interviewing, visiting, and so on. This centre represents a major step forward for the Corrections Branch in its intent to provide humane and effective facilities and programs for those persons falling within its jurisdiction. The incarceration of offenders has always been closely identified with Corrections and suffers the most intense form of public criticism, myths, and stereotypes. Few people would argue with the notion that some types of institutions will always be needed to isolate dangerous and predatory elements from the community. But in the past, people who were never a threat to public safety were put into maximum (or medium) security institution because the courts had no alternatives. Even with the more liberal use of probation supervision for appropriate offenders, there is still a large percentage of our institutional population serving time for offences involving Motor Vehicle Act infractions, drunkeness, or the inability to pay a fine. 37 It is the position of the Corrections Branch that only persons requiring secure custody should be held in these settings. Based on extensive experience, and in consultation with the police, courts, a variety of community resource agencies and interested citizens, Corrections follows the policy that sentence management which is community oriented, and requires continued participation and a responsibility to the community is the most appropriate and effective for many offenders. In 1978, this intention was reflected in extensive planning decisions for a project in two lower mainland regions, entitled Alternate Entry. In October of 1978, Corrections Branch Management Committee had made the decision to proceed on a limited experimental basis with the concept of using open setting correctional locations to receive inmates. This approach has been adopted as a result of the proposal that the Branch shift its view of primary resource from custody centres to open settings. The aim is to admit inmates directly to open settings and classify upwards in security only if necessary, rather than the reverse. The initial concern has arisen out of attempts to decrease the population of Oakalla Correctional Centre and to take advantage of the under utilization of camp programs. In 1979, the two projects will be run, and evaluated with the view towards expansion in other areas. Alternate Entry represents one of the most significant developments in the use of corrections facilities to take place in the Branch for some years. It is a move consistent with the view that on average, admissions to correctional facilities are for less than one month, and that 80% of admissions are for six months or less. The concept of Alternate Entry has been utilized on a limited basis since July of 1977 at the Terrace Community Correctional Centre. The Centre has been receiving inmates directly from courts at Prince Rupert, Masset, Terrace, Kitimat, Burns Lake, Smithers and Hazleton. Originally, sentence length for direct admission was limited to under 90 days. The program worked so effectively that inmates with sentences up to approximately nine months are now being admitted. The criteria limiting direct admission includes the type of offence (to be consistent with the open setting nature of the centre, unless transfer has come through Prince George Regional Correctional Centre); transients are not eligible, unless on relatively short sentences. Since the intention of the centre is to put appropriate inmates into the community either doing community service work, forest projects or on employment temporary absences, there is emphasis on housing inmates at the centre whose residences are within approximately 100 miles of it. The Terrace Community Correctional Centre also has provided space for a few offenders given intermittent sentences (on weekends), and for selected remandees. During 1978, more than $40,000 was saved in transportation costs alone through this type of program. The centre really is a community correctional centre. (See also under Re-Entry Programs.) Also in line with the Branch intention that incarceration is utilized only as a last resort and that offenders should continue to participate in and be responsible to their communities, in late 1978 the Branch has been considering alternative ways of housing those offenders given intermittent sentences. The administration of intermittent sentences is problematic forthe Branch as reflected in the type of concern caused in correctional centres by a massive influx of persons for weekends only,.For instance, Oakalla Correctional Centre may receive over 100 persons on the weekend on intermittent sentences. The impact on police lock-ups throughout the province is even more drastic. The cost of specific facilities for intermittent sentences is not only exorbitant to build, but to staff on only a two day out of seven basis. The Government cannot afford to have facilities sit empty for most of the week. Since the Branch believes that this type of sentence is very effective for some offenders, a proposal is being considered for possible implementation in 1979 for mobile facilities located close to community service projects, and moveable to where the demand for facilities is. There are a number of problems with this type of approach, however, this may provide a solution to a very perplexing problem. The types of programs offered at the various correctional facilities throughout the province operated by the Corrections Branch are circumscribed by the security needs and correctional goals of each offender. Over the years, camps have focussed on bush work, slash and burning, road clearing, nursery work, land clearing, fire suppression, mill work, and so on, to provide inmates with a healthy and vigorous way to do their time, plus providing the opportunity to pick up some employable skills and work habits. In custody facilities the emphasis has been on shop work, carpentry, machining, tailoring, sewing, and soon, with farming available on a supervised gang basis. In all facilities there is kitchen work where skills in butchery and mass food production may be learned. The following are some selected examples of the results of these kinds of work in 1978 from across the province: - Clearwater Forest Camp (Kamloops) Lumber produced: Lumber shipped: — To Forestry — Highways — To Parks — To Corrections Droppers produced Fire wood produced for parks Fire suppression — Rayleigh Farm (Kamloops) Vegetables produced Beef slaughtered for local use Beef shipped to Chilliwack Camps Beef shipped to Alouette River Correctional Centre Hay harvested Silage harvested - Haney Forest Camps Stave Lake Cleanup Project Fire Wood to Parks Board Completed 416 hours of community projects shakes stakes - Twin Maples Correctional Centre Tailors shop Farm operation 273,453 B.F.M. 159,185 B.F.M. 13,498 B.F.M. 19,937 B.F.M. 28,028 B.F.M. 35,700 Pieces 78 Cords 848 Man Days 66,652 lbs. 62 head, value $33,612.00 8 head, value $2,260.00 40 head, value $14,760.00 500 tons 500 tons 148 stumps cleared 20 acres debris burned 211 acres of snags cut 1.349 cords (10,000 hours of manpower production) 205 squares 41,500 5,000 clothing items 316 cattle on the hoof 1.350 chickens housed 12,000 dozen egg production 11,000 bails of hay 50 tons of silage 39 The total amount of lumber and wood products is valued at approximately $200,000 with an additional approximately half million dollars in man hours worked on forestry projects during 1978. As noted above much of the work undertaken in custody facilities is of a maintenance nature, and inmates are assigned to provide them with reasonable activities during the day, while bearing in mind the needs for security. Except in special circumstances, as soon as it is appropriate, inmates are transferred to forest and other minimum security settings. The Branch has moved away from any focus on skills development in vocational training at centres, but interested inmates will pick up a number of work skills when working with qualified staff. Educational opportunities for interested inmates are provided through a number of avenues. Every attempt is made to make use of educational resources within the community, often through a placement of an inmate at a community correctional centre under the authority of the Temporary Absence Program (refer below to re-entry programs). For instance at Kamloops the Community Correctional Centre has the availability of a certain number of seats at the local community college. In the Lower Mainland area, a major education program for inmates is carried out on a contract basis with the British Columbia Institute of Technology. Funded in 1974, and focussing at that time on Oakalla District, the purpose of the program has been to assist interested inmates in readjusting to the community through academic and vocational training. In addition to a generally low level of formal education and lack of job skills, many inmates have alcohol (or) drug problems. The service provided attempts to deal with these in conjunction with the formulation of short and long term goals for education or on-the-job training. The latter is often achieved under the temporary absence program and also can be a significant factor in pre-release parole planning and application. From 1976 the service has expanded its operations to a wide number of correctional facilities in the greater lower mainland area. Another major educational program, which is conducted within an institution, is that at Prince George Regional Correctional Centre, where the Ministry of Education has sponsored a full time educational program in the institution. Inmates have been able to receive upgrading from qualified teaching staff and obtain entrance to the College of New Caledonia. One full time and one part time teacher were hired and the school opened in October, 1977. Since that time, during 1978 classes have averaged eight to twelve students. Other educational opportunities rely mainly on the availability of correspondence courses for any inmate who desires them and makes a request. Community Correctional Centres and Community-Based Residential Centres form an important aspect of programs and facilities utilized by the Corrections Branch. A typical community correctional centre is a large house or converted motel. It is the home base of the residents and he/she must return to it immediately after work or school. Dinner is usually communal, and each person has assigned chores. After hours there is time for studying, hobbies, and social events. Some residents spend their evenings and weekends on a community service project, worthwhile causes, and on volunteer work with local community organizations. Those earning an income are charged room and board at the centre. The rest of their money may go towards paying off debts, making restitution, supporting their family, or bank savings for the time when they are released. (For detailed statistics, refer to Figure III under Statistics, and see also under Re-Entry Programs.) Community-based Residential Centres offer essentially the same kind of service as community correctional centres but are not corrections staffed and are run by a myriad of private agencies offering a variety of different programs. Inmates attend community correctional centres or community-based residential centres through the authority of the temporary absence program, which is dealt with in more detail in both descriptive and statistical form below under Re-entry Programs. At the time of writing, there are nine community correctional centres operated by the Corrections Branch throughout the province, and contracted services with approximately one dozen community- based residential centres. In 1975, there had been an increase in the number of unlawful absences from correctional facilities. Although all unlawful absences directly from a centre are considered escapes, it is important to qualify the word by pointing out that the large number of these are in fact walkaways from open settings such as forest camps. With the increased use by the courts of probation supervision, and with the phase out of Haney Correctional Centre for young offenders, the camps are receiving a much more troublesome type of offender. Young offenders generally are more spontaneous, impulsive, have more energy, and require a more intense kind of programming than the older offender previously received by the camps. As a result of efforts directed at reducing escapes such as more screening and intensity of program, in 1976 escapes dropped 20%, and in 1977 a further 25% from 359 to 291. In 1978, the number of escapes increased by 11% over 1977. Escapes or walkaways are usually individual, spontaneous actions, and while they may be simply the expression of the desire to "getaway", many times escapes occur as the result of an individual need to deal with something on the outside, such as a family problem. Sensitive staff can often pick up on feelings of anxiety of an inmate and provide that person with the assistance required to overcome the problem without adding the problem of having escaped. Sometimes a referral for counselling or medical services is indicated. Psychological Services The Corrections Branch has one full time Senior Psychologist who is responsible forthe delivery of all psychological services throughout the Corrections Branch. These include direct service to adults and juveniles within the lower mainland area as well as seeing that psychological services are available to other Branch regions via local psychologists employed either in other government agencies or by the Branch on a fee-for-service or sessional basis. The major approach in providing psychological services to the Branch continues to be in developing community resources. However, the Branch recognizes the need to provide direct service such as in the case management of inmates with serious psychological/behavioural problems. Branch Psychological Services is responsible for the recruitment of practitioners to provide this support service. A focal point of this recruitment includes taking an active part in the professional training of psychologists at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University. In addition to this basic university training program the Branch supports a Psychology and the Law continuing education program which has proved to be a highly practical way of informing practising psychologists (and other practitioners) of the current issues and concerns involved in their working with people who may be on probation, parole, etc. A major activity of Branch Psychological Services continues to be in the area of clinical research. The Branch Clinical Research Committee is chaired by the Senior Psychologist and includes the Branch Senior Medical Officer and the Director of Branch Program Evaluation and Data Systems. The Committee is responsible for reviewing clinical and related research proposals that are initiated from within or outside the Branch. The aim of the Committee is to encourage community scientists to get involved in research related to Branch concerns, such as violent crime. 41 Medical Services Medical Services throughout the Branch are coordinated by the full time Senior Medical Officer. Each correctional complex has the availability of local doctors and dentists who visit the facilities at recular intervals. Where security is not an issue, and hospital services are required, inmates use community facilities. Where security is an issue, corrections has the availability of limited hospital capacities at Oakalla District, and Alouette River Correctional Centre. Oakalla District Hospital has a capacity of 40 and one full time and one half time doctor and trained staff. The Alouette River Correctional Centre Hospital has trained staff and is visited by a doctor. It has a capacity of approximately ten. For a number of years, the Corrections Branch has had the availability of a specially designated ward at the Vancouver General Hospital for serious medical problems where security is an issue. The ward has been under-utilized, but its closure in 1978 is considered a loss to the Branch. An analysis of the statistical information on medical services indicated that during 1977 there were fewer psychiatric examinations carried out at correctional institutions in the Lower Mainland. This is explained by an increase in court referrals to the Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission for examination, rather than to the Corrections Branch. This trend has continued through 1978, and continues to be welcomed. It has taken some of the strain off the facilities at the Oakalla District Hospital. A second annual meeting of the Correctional Physicians of British Columbia was held in November 1978 at which the major topic of discussion was the possible instituting of medical accreditation standards, taking as a guideline the set of standards developed by the American Medical Association. The Prison Care Committee of the Health Planning Council of the B.C. Medical Association is actively pursuing the adoption of these standards, and it is anticipated that this will take place in 1979, in conjunction with the overall look at standards which is being undertaken through the Standards Project of the Corrections Branch, which is described in this Report. 42 Summary Sheet Facilities and Capacities Custody Facilities 1. Lower Mainland Regional Correctional Centre 567 2. Oakalla Womens' Correctional Centre 103 3. Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre 60 4. Kamloops Regional Correctional Centre 86 5. Prince George Regional Correctional Centre 139 6. Chilliwack Security Unit 30 Forest and Farm Operations 1. Pine Ridge Camp (Haney) 60 2. Steve Lake Camp (Haney) 48 3. Cedar Lake Camp (Haney) (closed December 15, 1978) 4. Jordan River Camp (Vancouver Island) 48 5. Rayleigh Camp (Kamloops) 30 6. Clearwater Camp (Kamloops) 30 7. Hutda Lake Camp (Prince George) 60 8. Ford Mountain Camp (Chilliwack) 60 9. Mount Thurston Camp (Chilliwack) 60 Specialized Facilities 1. Boulder Bay Camp (Haney) 51 2. New Haven Correctional Centre (Burnaby) 40 3. Alouette River Correctional Centre (Haney) 151 4. Twin Maples Correctional Centre (Haney) 60 Community Correctional Centres 1. Marpole (Vancouver) 20 2. Burnaby 14 3. Southview (Burnaby) 8 4. Lynda Williams (Vancouver) 10 5. Victoria (#1) 25 6. Snowdon (Campbell River) 30 7. Chilliwack 18 8. Kamloops 20 9. Terrace 21 43 Provincial Classification Provincial Classification provides services to all Regional Correctional Centres (reception) for sentenced inmates. At admission, each inmate is seen by a classification officer for classification either to one of the satellite programs of the particular centre, or for transfer to another institutional complex in the province. All decisions regarding such transfer are made by a classification officer. The classification of an inmate is an important first step in an overall case management plan for the individual inmate, and is made out of an assessment of the information available (pre-sentence reports, previous institutional records, police reports, interviews) and with the participation of the inmate. The classification officer then places him/her in an available Branch facility best suited to assist in working through the plan. Where security and control are indicated, placement is made accordingly. Provincial Classification was integrally involved in the development of the case management system which has been referenced in previous sections of this report. Effective and ongoing case management in institutions is difficult, but a key activity which assists in the effectiveness of the plans is the "fleshing out" by the receiving facilities. During 1978 different methods of handling the task have been developed. Some utilized a commitment plan approach of which an example is the Chilliwack Forest Camps, where every commitment plan is referred, upon completion, to Provincial Classification for comments, prior to formal approval by the District Director. Cases are referred for re-classification either according to sentence plan or by reason of subsequent changes of sentence plan consequence upon fresh factors. Provincial Classification in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley area is conducted by a Provincial Classification team which works out of its Burnaby office. Provincial Classification responsibilities in the other three regions (Island, Interior and Northern) are handled by classification officers who, for their provincial classification functions are responsible to the Director of Provincial Classification, but who have in addition other regional responsibilities. The Burnaby office also undertakes administrative functions such as processing of transfer warrants, maintenance of inmate location card system, preparation of weekly provincial institutional count statistics, and so on. With the closure toward the end of 1978 of Cedar Lake Camp of the Haney Forest Camp complex, and the temporary closure of Ford Mountain Camp of the Chilliwack Forest Camps, due to fire, the Branch was left with only two male facilities in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley regions, of a non specialized nature. (A list of these facilities and their special uses is shown as Table I.) All the other facilities are utilized to a greater or lesser extent as resources to the whole province. The question of the intent for regions to have self contained the full range of correctional facilities is contingent upon the size of facilities question which has been discussed elsewhere in this report. For the first time in many years, the total number of classifications and re-classifications effected has shown a small decrease (see Table II), from 7,074 in 1977 to 6,682 in 1978. Provincial Classification continues to process all Corrections Branch applications under the Federal/Provincial Exchange of Services Agreement whereby inmates receiving sentences placing them under either jurisdiction may spend their sentence under the other jurisdiction. Table III shows comparative figures of applications, approvals, denials and returns for the last three years. These figures show a reduction in the traffic both ways. Provincial Classification also is mandated to process all applications for transfer in and out under the recent Canada/U.S. A. Treaty for Exchange of Offenders. There have so far been no applications for offenders under B.C. jurisdiction to transfer to the U.S., and only one application to transfer from the U.S. to the B.C. provincial jurisdiction. 44 TABLE II INITIAL & RECLASSIFICATIONS CALENDAR YEAR 1978 WITH COMPARATIVE TOTALS FOR 1977 TABLE I LOWER MAINLAND/FRASER VALLEY FACILITIES BY AREA OF SPECIALIZATION Long term security & medical/psychiatric problems, protective custody etc. — Oakalla District. Short term security & evaluation — Chilliwack Security Unit. Young offender programmes — New Haven, Boulder Bay. First incarceration facility — Stave Lake Camp. Alcoholic treatment & impaired drivers' course — Alouette River Correctional Centre. Female security — Oakalla Women's Correctional Centre. Female minimum security — Twin Maples. Temporary Absence Facilities — Marpole C.C.C., Burnaby C.C.C., Surrey C.T.R.C, Lynda Williams House (female), Chilliwack C.C.C., various C.B.R.C.s under contract. General purpose camps for males — Mount Thurston Camp, Pine Ridge Camp. 1978 1977 Institution Total % Total % V.I.R.C.C. 685 10.2 543 7.7 Jordan River Camp 278 4.2 350 4.9 Victoria C.C.C. 243 3.6 209 3.0 Snowdon C.C.C. 261 3.9 250 3.5 L.M.R.C.C—(Male) 1728 25.9 1894 26.8 O.W.C.C—(Female) 146 2.2 149 2.1 Marpole C.C.C. 215 3.2 517 7.3 Chilliwack Forest Camps 587 8.8 600 8.5 Security Unit 209 3.1 215 3.0 Chilliwack C.C.C. 24 0.4 21 0.3 A.R.U. 868 13.0 917 13.0 Twin Maples 170 2.5 154 2.2 H.C.C. — Boulder Bay Camp 122 1.8 159 2.2 — Cedar Lake Camp 194 2.9 181 2.6 — Pine Ridge Camp 599 9.0 585 8.3 — Stave Lake Camp New Haven 118 1.8 82 1.1 K.R.C.C. 95 1.4 121 1.7 P.G.R.C.C. (Male) 140 2.1 119 1.7 P.G.R.C.C. (Female) — — 8 0.1 TOTALS 6682 100.0 7074 100.0 TABLE III FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL EXCHANGE OF PRISONERS, CALENDAR YEAR 1978 Federal to Prov. 1978 1977 Prov. to Federal 1978 1977 Male Females Male Females 1976 APPROVED NOT APPROVED TOTAL PROCESSED RETURNED TO FEDERAL SYSTEM RETURNED TO PROVINCIAL SYSTEM 13 6 19 0 15 6 21 3 28 12 40 3 40 29 69 14 9 2 11 NIL NIL NIL 9 2 11 11 8 19 5 6 11 NOTE: A further 6 cases were in process at Year's End. 45 In addition to their classification responsibilities, classification officers are involved in a variety of duties including case management development, involvement in alternate entry considerations, staff development, studies of inmate populations, and so on. The major needs identified by Provincial Classification, as are indicated to them through their perception of the needs of individual inmates, are as follows, and should be seen in context with remarks made in the previous section of this report, and in the Major Issues Section in the beginning of this report. 1. Lack of security facilities for sentenced offenders in the following areas: Vancouver Island, Kamloops/Okanagan, and Kootenays. It should be noted that for at least half of the year, sentences of imprisonment from the Kootenays are admitted directly to Oakalla District. 2. Lack of minimum security institutions (non temporary absence) in the following areas: metro Vancouver area, Kootenays, central Vancouver Island (Nanaimo/Duncan vicinity). 3. Lack of community correctional centre facilities in the following areas: Kootenays, Okanagan, and central Vancouver Island. 4. Special program facilities in the province for drugs (particularly heroin) addicts, security programs for young offenders whose sole reason for security is their inability of unwillingness to stay put; programs for protective custody cases. 5. Re-creation of more meaningful activities for young offenders in high security areas, especially Oakalla District. There are two of these needs which bear emphasis. First is the lack of the range of facilities on Vancouver Island. The potential use of the Island Youth Centre referenced in the 1977 Annual Report, was not realized with that centre being utilized as the residential treatment component to the Heroin Treatment Program, Ministry of Health. A feasibility study has been underway to seek alternatives. The other area of major requirement is for an open setting/community correctional centre in the Kootenays and Okanagan area. Re-Entry Programs There are two major types of re-entry programs for an offender given an institutional sentence. These are temporary absence, and parole supervision. A period of incarceration plus probation is not considered in the same context, though often a period of parole is available to an inmate during the institutional portion of his sentence, and this supervision flows naturally into probation at the end of the institutional portion. All parole decisions are either made by the B.C. Parole Board of the Ministry of the Attorney-General, with respect to definite indeterminate sentences (which will be terminated with the proclamation of relevant parts of Federal Bill C-51 in 1979) or the National Parole Board with regard to all other definite sentences, whether the sentences are served in a federal institution or a provincial one. Probation officers of the Corrections Branch undertake parole supervision, where there are no federal officers available. In addition, probation officers often prepare community investigations on offenders who have applied for parole, so that this information can be available to the paroling authority in order to assist them in their decision-making process. During 1978, probation officers prepared 434 such investigations and other parole reports. The major re-entry program which comes under the jurisdiction of the Corrections Branch, through the Corrections Act, is the temporary absence program. Temporary absences are granted for three distinct purposes: 1. Short term — For leave from a correctional centre for a specific period of time up to a maximum of 15 days. These are granted for maintaining contact with the family, or the event of a death of a family member, for other socialization purposes, and for other defined reasons. 46 2. Employment/education — the authority by which an inmate resides in a community correctional centre or a community-based residential centre while taking work, education, or training. 3. Medical — absences granted for the purposes of obtaining medical attention in community hospitals when it is not available within correctional centres. The crucial factor in the temporary absence program is that the program activity which the applicant plans to pursue in the community must be as likely to benefit him/her and the community as would any program offered within the centre. The inmate must pose no threat to the community and be unlikely to go unlawfully at large. Apart from the community involvement made possible forthe inmate, the program avoids wasting the community's own resources and avoids costly duplications of resources in institutions. During 1978 there were 9,526 temporary absences granted for the three categories as outlined above, with a 97.9% success rate. The employment/education temporary absence, which is the backbone of the program, saw again an increase in absences granted from 1,518 in 1977 to 1,658 in 1978. With respect to revocations, the unlawfully at large category rose slightly in 1978 from 93 to 103. this was approximately the 1976 level. The positive trend with respect to further criminal offences which had decreased to 13 in 1977 rose to 26 in 1978, which was slightly under the 1976 figure. These statistics are a reflection that the screening process requires continuing caution. A major constructive aspect of the temporary absence program is the employment program. In 1978, an increase in the total amount earned by inmates residing at community correctional centres or community based residential centres and attending work on temporary absence passes reached approximately $1,150,000. Of that amount earned, $27,558 was paid in restitution and fines, $60,977 in room and board, $257,400 in family maintenance and $111,226 in debts were paid. In addition, $214,817 was paid in income tax which was returned to the community. Four year figures are now available on the work release temporary absence program, from 1975 to 1978. These figures show that the total amount earned was (figures rounded oft) $3,500,000 with the following payments being made: $84,000 (restitution and fines), $233,000 (room and board), $704,000 (family maintenance, $275,000 (debts), and $647,000 (income tax). This represents approximately 50% of the monies earned returned directly or indirectly to the community, with the balance being put aside to cushion the inmates total re-entry to the community when their sentences expire. As in the case of parole, probation officers and temporary absence officers are involved in the preparation of community investigations before any major temporary absence decision is taken. This decision is made by a screening panel, which may include representatives from police and community. The degree of communications which this interchange of information between a number of components working in the justice system represents, is an important aspect of the temporary absence program. On a final note, with the proclamation of Federal Bill C-51 some time in 1979, the B.C. Provincial Parole Board will be phased out when the legislation terminates the use of definite-indeterminate sentences. Proposals have gone before the Ministry from the Corrections Branch to suggest that a reconstituted Provincial Parole Board should be formed, to have jurisdiction over all parole decisions in relation to provincial institutions. Presently the National Parole Board has jurisdiction in these areas. Some thought had been given to placing all re-entry authority in the hands of the new Parole Board, including temporary absence, but Branch Management have recommended that the temporary absence program provides a degree of flexibility at the local level which is desirable. A resolution to the structure of re-entry programs should be complete in 1978. 47 Religious Programs In December of 1975 the Senior Chaplain of the Branch was named the Director of Religious Programs, and this function became a separate autonomous section of the Branch consisting of full and part-time Protestant and Catholic chaplains and the Director. The establishment of one senior position with overall responsibility for all chaplains in functions and programs, instead of the services being broken up as part of each correctional centre, has been beneficial in terms of consistency and comprehensiveness of policy, efficiency in administrative matters, more effective relationships inter and intragovernmental branches and ministries, and with the churches. It is a reinforcement of the spirit of ecumenical co-operation which is evident in the way in which the chaplains function within the various centres. As a result, when all other Corrections Branch programs regionalized effective April 1, 1977, the Director of Religious Programs continued to have on-going responsibilities. Religious Programs has played an ever increasing and wider role in the emphasis of the Corrections Branch in involving the community in the correctional process. Chaplains are taking individual clients and groups of clients into the community for religious and social functions at an ever increasing rate, and have engaged community church groups in the development of various volunteer sponsor programs. Chaplains also have assisted in job placement, locating accommodation, and contacting community resources for the inmate who is re-entering the community. Chaplains offer courses to inmates on such topics as marriage dynamics, communications, life skills and alcoholism and provide counselling for married inmates for the purpose of resolving family conflict. One chaplain has placed more emphasis on aftercare and has continued contact with inmates once they are released from an institution. The chaplains continue to emphasize taking a strong role in treatment program decisions, to give recognition to their extensive involvement with inmates. This is particularly important in matters pertaining to temporary absence or parole release decisions. The number of chaplains increased in 1977, in reflections of this extensive involvement, and now number 18. Five chaplains including the Director, are full time, with the others providing services on a part time basis. With the implementation of the containment program, even in spite of legal and constitutional issues explained elsewhere, there has been an increasing involvement of chaplains with young offenders. Chaplains working with these offenders have noted an increasing interest in spiritual matters. Counselling to staff on a number of personal matters in an institution continues to be an important role of the chaplain. Whenever morale of staff fluctuates, chaplains are available to be supportive, independent and a non biased listener for staff concerns. In addition, chaplains play a key role with staff in supporting their efforts towards providing programs and working in difficult situations with both juveniles and adults. During 1978, the chaplains from across the province met again with some of their federal counterparts around the overall theme of communications, both inside the organization and external to the organization. Discussions were held and papers were presented on such topics as Christians in the Criminal Justice System, Citizen Participation, Victim Restitution, Crime Prevention, Goals Strategies and Beliefs in Corrections, and the Correctional Centre Rules and Regulations. A series of resolutions pertaining to these topic areas were passed. It cannot be overstated that chaplains form an important contribution to effective corrections operations throughout the province, help persons within an institutional setting, and can offer constructive guidance to inmates who may not accept such direction from regular staff. As a result of their wide ranging involvement with both staff and offenders, chaplains continue to require of themselves a high level of energy and dedication. Citizen Participation The Corrections Branch has encouraged two types of citizen participation: development of a direct service role to offenders, and providing citizen input to administrative and policy decisions of the Corrections Branch. The range of one to one sponsorship and involvement of citizens within individual offenders or groups of adults is similar to that described previously under Youth Services. In summary, volunteers involved in a direct service role with adults during 1978 were active in Bail Supervision Projects, the operation of Pre-Trial Services (without whose services this program would be seriously constrained), with probationers and those on parole, for those on temporary absence, and were integral in two such Branch programs as Impaired Drivers' Courses and the Community Service Order Program. The Elizabeth Fry Society, John Howard Society, W2, M2 and other volunteer non profit agencies continue to play an important role in assisting inmates with a variety of individual needs. Implementation of a diverse range of direct service roles for volunteers from the community is problematic from a number of points of view. The Branch is convinced that this kind of support and participation of the community in solving its own justice problems and in supporting individuals who may need particular assistance, is not only appropriate but necessary. Citizen participation is a clear intention and goal of the Corrections Branch. That intention has been expressed originally through the appointment of volunteer co-ordinators to recruit and orient volunteers. In the past few years, the potential role of volunteers has expanded from the original sponsorship program and has required more involvement of a wider variety of staff. This broader basis of working with volunteers and involving citizens in other aspects of Corrections has been difficult for some staff, and the Branch is continuing to grapple with issues such as confidentiality, the role of the citizen within the confines of a maximum security institution, and so on. In order to assist this process, one region has made citizen participation an operational objective which applies for each local service delivery unit, placing responsibility on the director to implement a program appropriate to particular needs. This has changed the role of the volunteer co-ordinator to one of staff support and the project intends to operationalize citizen participation in a way which will focus staff on new and creative ways in which citizens can increase the level of service to clients. The results of this experiment will not be known until 1979. The other major form of citizen participation in adult Corrections is in the area of community advisory boards, and a major step forward was undertaken in late 1977 with the establishment of a pilot project in the Vancouver area. Over the last decade and a half, increased activity, involvement, and influence of public interest groups and citizen organizations have become one of the most distinctive features of North American government administrations, and in particular in the area of corrections. A general assumption has been that broadened participation is desirable because it increases the representativeness and responsiveness of our administrative and political institutions, and most importantly, it heightens citizens' sense of social problems and the inherent dilemmas of operating correctional services. Feedback on the Community Advisory Board indicates that both the Vancouver administration, particularly the Regional Director of Corrections, and the citizens and other representatives comprising the Board, have come to a greater understanding of each other's positions and problems, and have provided valuable input to policy decisions taken by the Regional Management. It is apparent that the Branch has some way to go with respect to realizing the full potential of both passive and active support of citizens throughout the province. There are a whole range of programs which 49 have been developed primarily in the last five years which cannot effectively meet minimum objectives without some level of general or individual support of citizens. Realizing this potential will continue to require considerable energy from Branch staff throughout the province over a number of years. Comment The administration of Corrections with respect to adults, particularly in the area of institutional services, reflects the greatest number of paradoxes and dilemmas forthe Branch. Corrections attempts to provide for inmates the greatest opportunity to enhance their likelihood for a successful return to the community without becoming a repeat offender. At the same time, the Branch is concerned about protecting society and sometimes inmates themselves, from some of the more dangerous and predatory offenders who are in the system, and from those other offenders whose behaviour tends to cause the community grave concern with respect to personal property. The solution to this problem requires an offender's continued participation and accountability to the community through such programs as temporary absence, community service, increased education, or employment in support of family while under a prison sentence. It requires the increased use of community- based programs and facilities such as community correctional centres.and community-based residential centres, and the fullest use of the more normal environment possible at a forest or farm camp. Corrections Branch policies and plans for expansion reflect an attempt at balancing this dilemma. This requires a broad understanding within the justice system and within the community of what is essentially a community problem. Family & Children's Services In December, 1973 a Royal Commission on Family and Children's Law was established to enquire into and make recommdnations with respect to all aspects of Family and Children's Law enforced in British Columbia, the administration of justice relative to such laws, and ancillary services to courts in Family Law matters. The Commission was not only given a mandate to recommend changes in the law relating to families and children, but also was authorized to undertake projects and to implement and test proposals for reform. As a result, the Commission established pilot projects to test the concept of a unified family court. In addition, the Commission produced 13 Reports which recommended both structural reform of the courts operating in the Family Law field and major changes in substantive Family and Children's Law. The Commission's fourth Report entitled "The Family, The Courts and the Community" dealt with the expansion of the unified family court concept throughout the Province, the delivery of family and juvenile court counselling services, and in particular the delivery of services to young people in conflict with the law — one specific focus of the Corrections Branch. In late June 1975 the provincial cabinet accepted the recommendations of the fourth Report in principle. On July 7, 1975, an implementation team was appointed to bring about phased implementation throughout the Province of the recommendations. During 1975 the Branch continued to maintain Family Relations Act services in most other areas of the Province. The end of 1975 saw the issuance of a jointly-prepared policy statement of respective responsibilities of the Corrections Branch and the implementation team. As a result of a further government decision in early 1976, it was decided that effective April 1, 1976 the Corrections Branch would assume full responsibility for the Unified Family Court Projects and for further development of services in the Family Court area throughout the Province, in 50 order to locate such services under one umbrella organization. The existing Unified Family Court projects were to be transferred to the Corrections Branch and phased into regular operations. The phasing in of these operations was completed in March 31, 1977. The services provided by the Branch in the area of Family Relations are as follows: — Short term marriage and family counselling — The screening of referrals to appropriate agencies for long-term marital counselling or other services — Assistance in negotiating the terms of separation agreements in matters of financial maintenance, child custody and child access — Individual counselling pertaining to the problems of separation — Administrative enforcement of court orders in the matters of maintenance payments, child custody and child access. Includes automatic enforcement project (1978) — Custody and Access Reports forthe court — The provision of general information on Family Court procedures It is the stated position of the Branch that unification of the courts where possible should continue to be undertaken. Priority given to Family Relations Act services has been raised in the Branch and the overall objective is the provision of full services throughout the Province sometime in the future. One aspect of the phasing in of the U.F.C. project has been to define and utilize the innovative procedures and practices implemented in the project, and to take advantage of these with respect to the rest of the Province. A major aspect of this was a Handbook on Family Relations Act Services for field staff which was distributed in early 1977. The major issues now, as noted previously in this Report, are with respect to expansion of the services at a time of general government fiscal restraint. At present, all new probation officers as part of their training are given training in Family Court Counselling techniques and related Family Law and procedures in order that eventually, through additional in-service training, officers throughout the Province are in a position to provide Family Court Counselling Services when designated. In the 1978/79 fiscal year, virtually all staff requests in the community services area were for Family Counsellor positions. Family Counsellors are probation officers who are given particular training in this area. By the end of 1978 these activities led to an increase over a one year period of almost 50% of the number of Family Court Counsellors, full or part time. This meant a 13% increase during that period in man hours of services delivered spread around the province. This increase capability to deliver the service will allow the Corrections Branch to further develop as appropriate the concept of conciliation courts. In 1979, it is anticipated that the proposed new Family Relations Act will impact on some of the activities of Family Court Counsellors. The Corrections Branch has had significant input to the Ministry Family Law Unit with respect to the proposed Act, and has been engaged in the necessary staff information sharing and development. Management and Operational Services With the administrative re-organization of the Corrections Branch which was effective April 1, 1977, a number of management and operational services were maintained as the Commissioner's Office and these are described below. Some of these Sections (Inspection and Standards, Staff Development, Provincial Classification, Medical Services, Psychological Services, Information Services, and Religious Programs) provide a clear operational function as well as providing policy input for issues which arise from 51 across the province. Provincial Classification, Medical Services, Psychological Services and Religious Programs are described previously under Adult Services, however, since their functions are intertwined inextricably with the operations of institutions, and are included in that context. The management services group (Program Evaluation and Data Systems, Program Analysis, Resource Analysis) provide support for field initiatives, provide a provincial perspective around specific or generalized programs and services, and provide important support for senior management with respect to issues arising from other jurisdictions. The intention is to provide a team approach to management issues. Inspections and Standards In the fall of 1973 the office of the Directors of Inspection and Standards was developed with two inspectors appointed in July of 1974 to work under his direction. On August 31, 1978 the role of the Division was expanded significantly with the promulgation by Order-in-Council of the new Correctional Centre Rules and Regulations. In addition to the responsibility legislated in the Corrections Amendment Act of 1977, the Division now assumes responsibility for dealing with appeals from awards of disciplinary panels. This additional responsibility resulted in the receipt often requests for review between September 1 and December 31, 1978. Of these, two were dismissed, two received alternate determination, and six were pending at the year's end. In sum, the legislated responsibilities therefore include: 1. To inspect all correctional centres, youth containment centres, remand facilities, and other facilities established under the Act; 2. To investigate any matter on the written request of the Minister or Commissioner, including escapes, suicides, and staff misconduct; 3. To investigate complaints received from inmates, youths in containment or remand, probationers oi parolees, youths on conditional release, and parents of youths under Corrections Branch supervision. Legislation provides the Director, Inspection and Standards, with the powers, privileges and protection of a Commissioner under Section VII, X, and XI of the Public Enquiries Act. During the calendar year 1978, grievances or complaints were received from or on behalf of 278 inmates, listing a total of 307 separate complaints. This represents an increase of 18% over grievances received during 1977. Pending from 1977 were 13 grievances, listing 16 complaints, making a total of 323 complaints received from 291 inmates which were handled by Inspection and Standards Division during 1978. Of the above grievances, three were in the form of petitions signed by more than one inmate but counted as one grievance. A total of 45 investigations were carried out by Inspection and Standards Division staff during 1978, an increase of 50% over 1977. These investigations involved escapes, incidents and disturbances, assaults, suicides, deaths, and misconduct. Consistent with the concern expressed by previous Directors of Inspection and Standards Division, the role of the Division conducting periodic inspection of correctional facilities continued diminishing to the extent that no routine inspections were conducted in the calendar year 1978. This issue I was addressed, however, by the adoption of an inspection team model which will see all correctional facilities, adult and juvenile, in the province receiving routine inspection during the calendar year 1979. The team concept will involve the utilization of other government agencies, i.e. Public Service Commission, Workers' Compensation Board, Ministry of Health, Provincial Fire Marshal and local fire departments, with additional resources from the Commissioner's office in conducting facilities inspections. Due to the diverse nature of the functions of the Division, a decision has now been made to organize in such a way that ongoing responsibilities for specific areas are designed to individual Inspector. These areas include Occupational Health and Safety, firearms inventory, sentence calculation, and issues that pertain to juvenile programs. This specialization will ensure that specific areas of responsibility are more efficiently focused on and followed up by the Division. Due to the increasing workload the establishment of the Division was increased in 1978 with the addition of two positions. An additional inspector was appointed in December 1978 to commence duties in March 1979. The successful candidate comes to the Division with a broad background in investigation, both with the R.C.M.P., and the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General and Consumer and Corporate Affairs in British Columbia. The other position was utilized to appoint an office assistant in May 1978. The responsibility for the development of service delivery standards for Corrections Branch was housed within the Division by Branch Management decision in March of 1978. The Standards Committee, which comprises six regional representatives, a full time Coordinator, the Director of Inspection and Standards Division, and other specialists as required, will conclude their work in March of 1980 with the finalization of a complete set of standards for the delivery of correctional services in British Columbia. To date this has been an extremely positive exercise with a significant amount of energy and enthusiasm being displayed not only by committee members, but by the Branch staff, generally, who have been responding to standards drafts. The Director continues as chairman of the Standards Committee for Wilderness Programs and High Risk Activities which has been established to evaluate such programs either operated or funded by the Ministries of Attorney-General or Human Resources. The Ministries of Provincial Secretary, Lands, Parks and Housing, and Forests are also represented on the committee. Members of the committee evaluate the programs upon request and provide recommendations and guidance to program operators and government officials. During 1978, the Division continued to monitor reports of staff and inmate accidents, safety and health committees, boards of enquiry, statements of punishment, and escapes. There was a slight increase (11%) in the number of escapes and walkaways recorded by this Division during 1978 over that recorded for 1977. A total of 216 staff accidents were reported to this Division during 1978, an increase of 96% over 1977. There were 496 accidents concerning inmates reported to this Division during 1978, a slight increase (11%) over the previous year. In the coming year it is anticipated that the Division will be of increased assistance to correctional management through the inspection team program. The utilization of safety, fire and health "experts" will add increased weight to the identification of those areas of weakness in our correctional facilities. The Division will continue to assist management in the identification and rectification of areas of weakness and efficiency in the delivery of Corrections Branch Staff Development Division The training, education and development of staff has continued to be a high priority in the Corrections Branch during 1978. A new set of policies and standards for Staff Development were formalized by the Corrections Branch effective April 1, 1978, which include the following standards: 1. All new employees must complete required training (Blocks I to III of Four-Phase training) before the end of their six month probation period. 2. All staff must complete basic training (Block I to IV of Four-Phase training) prior to promotion. 3. All staff who have completed basic training must participate in advanced or refresher training at least ten days every three years. 53 4. All new supervisory or management staff must complete basic management training either prior to promotion or within six months of promotion. 5. All experienced management staff must participate in advanced training of at least ten days every three years. 6. All staff transferring from one functional area of Corrections to another must complete required on-the-job training within 30 days of transfer. With the adoption of those policies, major efforts were made during the year to "fine-tune" the training system to ensure that training took place at the appropriate stage of an employee's career and that training took place at the appropriate stage of an employee's career and that the training directly reflected the identified needs of employees at all levels. Content of all basic training programs was analyzed and modified where appropriate to reflect field needs. On-the-job training journals were developed and/or refined for all work units during the year. The role of Regional Staff Development Officer was further refined and developed to ensure close coordination with the Central Staff Development Division. A system of monthly meetings between Central Staff Development Division staff, and Regional Staff Development Officers has assisted in ensuring clear communication and an appropriate division of responsibilities. Organizational changes within the Central Staff Development Division in April, 1978 resulted in the reallocation of staff and tasks into three functional areas. a) Community and Management Basic and Advanced Training (headed by an Assistant Director) b) Institutional Basic and Advanced Training (headed by an Assistant Director) c) Administration Support Services and Specialized Programs (headed by the Director of Staff Development). Each functional area includes a Senior Staff Development Officer and a number of Staff Development Officers. In April, 1978 under the Colleges and Provincial Institutes Act, an Order-in-Council of the Ministry of I Education established the Justice Institute of British Columbia. In September 1978, Corrections Staff Development moved its former operations from the Marpole Training Centre and the Burnaby Training Centre to the Justice Institute located at 4180 West 4th Avenue, Vancouver. The Institute will be the educational base of Courts, Corrections, Police, Sheriffs and Fire Services. In order to ensure that instructional staff have a current understanding of field operational issues and recent field experience to enhance their credibility, the Corrections Branch adopted a policy of seconding all new instructional staff for time-limited periods. This I system is intended to allow for a periodic rotation of instructional staff, thus allowing experienced field staff the opportunity to instruct other employees and allowing experienced staff Development Officers to contribute their knowledge and broadened experience to field operations. During the calendar year the Central Staff Development Division provided a full range of off- job-training programs involving 955 Branch employees in a total of 1,580 man weeks of training (7,904 student days). Courses carried out during the year include the following: • Probation Officer Block II Basic training — two courses, 32 participants. • Probation Officer Block IV Basic training — one course, 24 participants. • Probation Officer Advanced and Refresher training — fourteen courses, 204 participants. • Institutional Block II Basic training — six courses, 212 participants. • Institutional Block IV Basic training — four courses, 89 participants. • Youth Containment Basic Training — two courses, 35 participants. • Firearms training — three courses, 51 participants. I, • Institutional Advanced training programs — thirteen courses, 228 participants. • Basic Management training — two courses, 34 participants. • Advanced Management training — one course, 16 participants. • Seven additional training courses involving 116 participants included a three-day workshop on Corrections Centre Rules and Regulations, several two-day workshops for Record Staff, two Crisis Intervention Workshops, a Community Service Officer Workshop of three days duration, a Staff Development Officer Workshop, and a one-day workshop for introduction of new Family Relations Act legislation. The majority of Probation Officer Advanced training focused on Family Relations Act training for experienced probation officers. Institutional Advanced courses were developed on a modular style, with a variety of short workshops offered including "Power Writing", "Interviewing Techniques", "Crisis Intervention", and "Interpersonal Communications Skills". In addition to courses provided at a Central location, Staff Development personnel were involved in providing courses at various locations in the Province and acted as resources to field personnel in numerous short courses, workshops, and planning meetings. In addition to the training courses listed above, a further 235 Branch employees participated in a variety of training programs offered through universities, colleges, and private agencies, and tuition reimbursement was provided by the Public Service Commission in the amount of $21,965,00. A further 84 Branch employees participated in Community training programs, workshops and conferences with tuition subsidy provided by the Staff Development Division in the amount of $5,389,00. During the year, five Branch employees were approved for Education Leave with 75% pay to pursue graduate studies in various graduate programs. A new Education Leave Policy was adopted allowing Branch staff to apply for Education Leave for both graduate and undergraduate university programs. During the year the Branch was able to establish a full-time Librarian position within the Staff Development Division in order to provide a research and reference service to Branch employees and the community, and to develop and monitor the book collection to ensure a range of resource materials of direct interest to Corrections and the field of Criminology. With the move to the Justice Institute in September, 1978 the Corrections Branch Library was amalgamated with other Library holdings as part of the Justice Institute Educational Resource Centre. Although the year was filled with changes and challenges for Staff Development, the refinements made to the overall training system have assisted in the development of a high quality comprehensive training system which provides a wide variety of training programs and opportunities to Corrections employees. Program Evaluation and Data Systems During 1978 this Section was involved in the on-going development of the information system that supports both the operational and management decision-making processes of the Branch. All facets of the system received attention, including field capture of data, data entry/retrieval, analytic capability of the system, master file structure, and output report format. Some of the specific work projects undertaken by this Section in 1978 were: 1. The development of a policy simulation model capable of analyzing the effects of implementing proposed programs. 2. Preliminary design of a Management Information System for the Corrections Branch to outline inputs, outputs, efficiency, and effectiveness of Branch programs. 55 3. A start of the reworking of the caseload statistics system in an attempt to develop a better workload analysis system for all community and family services programs. 4. The development of a report structure that links average beds utilized with staff allocations, salary costs, and operational costs. 5. The publication of the fl.C. Corrections Branch Research Report outlining research and development undertaken within the criminal justice field. 6. Support of the facilities plan dealing with the future institutional requirements of the Branch. 7. Design and support of an alternate entry model whereby non-secure facilities are utilized as admission points into the B.C. Correctional system. 8. The publication of Incarcerated Women in British Columbia Provincial Institutions. 9. The production of information for on-demand requests from field personnel, Branch managers, and non-Branch users. 10. Major progress on the Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre project which will test the feasibility of automated record keeping and master file updating in a field situation. The year 1979 should see further streamlining and development of the total corrections information system, both management and operational. The development of a schedule forthe implementation of the Management Information System will be a high priority of this Section in the up-coming year. Overall, the direction of Program Evaluation and Data Systems will be the continuing improvement of all data systems and evaluation functions performed within the Branch. ' Resource Analysis This Section of the Commissioner's Office was created effective April I, 1977, with Branch reorganization, to bring together provincial expertise from each of the previously existing operations aroun issues of manpower and physical allocations. This includes capacities in relation to construction and maintenance, and specialized food service expertise. This Section is responsible for provincial compilation of quarterly fiscal reports, consultation and processes with regard to Treasury Board and Cabinet submissions for resources, liaising as a provincial group with the Government Employees Relation Bureau and Personnel Services over manpower issues, maintaining a provincial set of books on Corrections operations in liaison with regional resource/business managers, preparation of Branch submission for estimates 1978/79, and ongoing consultation and advice to senior management with regard to use of contracts for services. The Attorney-General's Ministry and the Ministry of Forests were the two pilot project ministries in government which developed their budget submissions for the 1978/79 fiscal year according to zero-based method. The Resource Analysis Section, in conjunction with Ministry personnel and Treasury Board Staff undertook a major responsibility with respect to information sharing and staff training and development around the implementation of this new approach. The result although at times appearing to be confused and difficult, was viewed in retrospect as an extremely worthwhile learning experience which was helpful to managers at all levels of the organization with respect to one of their key responsibilities. The Resource Analysis Section, and in addition to the Resource Analysis Team comprised of representatives from the I Commissioner's Office Group and Regional Business/Support Services Directors were mainly responsible for this positive outcome. This experience is being sought and utilized in other Ministries which will be implementing zero-based budgeting in the next fiscal year. 56 During 1978, effective manpower utilization was a key objective of the Resource Analysis Section. Extensive training for all levels of management in contemporary techniques for shift scheduling was completed during the year. In addition the Section was responsible for bringing on line a Computer Program which would assist in the production of schedules and analysis of manpower needs. The Section continues to be a primary point of contact between the Branch and central management information systems, (Financial and Personnel), in order that these systems may inform Branch Management's decision making. The importance of these kinds of activities cannot be overstated and in measure contribute to the Branch's relative effectiveness in achieving the appropriate resources to adequately run programs and facilities. The role is a difficult one requiring sensitivity to local management needs and authority within a decentralized organization, and the needs of central ministry agencies and central government agencies. 1979 will continue to see work being done in clarifying relative roles and responsibilities. Program Analysis As with Resource Analysis, this group was created effective April 1, 1977 as a result of the Corrections Branch re-organization, to include a variety of program and analyst expertise which existed in the previous operational organizations. The analysts in this Section undertake on demand from management a variety of analytical, data gathering and consultative functions. They act as resources to field managers on specific issues, and to Management as a whole with regard to general directions, issues, and so on which require policy decision. 1978 was the first full year of operations of this Section, though it was not at full strength until halfway through the year. The analysts play a vital and diverse role in providing facts and opinions for informed decision making at all levels of the Branch and within the Ministry. Additionally in designated areas, each analyst is accountable for drafting provincial policy, standards and procedures; contributing to the drafting of legislation and regulations; and co-ordinating inter- ministerial activities relative to the development and implementation of the various programs and services. Assignment Completed in 1978 Requested By Ministry 14 Branch (Commissioner's Office & Branch Management Committee) 38 Region 8 Section 1 Federal 3 Other 5 TOTAL 69 Some significantly large pieces of analysis and work activities were as follows: — Branch Response to Ministry Priorities — Administration of Impaired Drivers' Courses — Fine Option Pilot — Bill C-51 (1977) —Parole Act and Prisons and Reformatories Act. — Provincial Inter-Ministry Children's Committee — Branch Response to Heroin Treatment Act. Plans for 1979 include a seminar/workshop entitled "Program Planning, Analysis and Evaluation in Corrections". This training will better equip all Program Analysts as well as the other members of the Policy Planning Division in the skills, techniques and concepts of program analysis. Information Services In May of 1975 the Director of Information Services was permanently appointed within the Branch with the responsibility for the design and direct implementation of a progressive communications function for the Corrections Branch. To date this has been carried out in a two phased plan emphasizing both management of Information (policy, 57 development, communications systems examinations and development, consultation) and specific production responsibilities for Corrections Newsletter, Annual Report, newspaper clipping service, Staff Directory, Branch Management Committee Minutes Ministerial briefing material, printed, audio visual, and display materials update and development, news releases, and a host of other information providing activities. Phase I of the two phased plan has been to develop a comprehensive policy on information sharing (May 1977), a comprehensive briefing book on all facets of information about Corrections, the Ministry of the Attorney-General, communications, and so on, and finally a full range of publications and audio visual presentations on Corrections operations. These publications and presentations are available from Information Services to the general public directly or through Corrections Branch staff. Phase II of the information sharing strategy has been to facilitate regional development of specific communications goals and objectives, responsibilities and accountabilities with respect to both internal and external communications, consistent with the policy on information sharing. A major communications project was started in North Fraser Region in late 1978, and the report will be available in 1979. It is anticipated that this will provide a major blue print for other regions to develop and implement appropriate communications systems to meet their operational strategies objectives, programs and services. 1979 also saw the involvement of Information Services with respect to the establishment of a Ministerial policy on information sharing and the School's Legal Education Project. The latter subject is of particular significance. At the end of the year, a brief submitted to the Management Committee of the Ministry of Educatior Science and Technology which is currently looking at revision to the Social Studies Curriculum, was accepted and detailed goals and outcomes are being worked on in 1979. While final decisions have not been made, it would appear that the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology has made a commitment to the incorporation of a wide range of legal education studies as part of the social studies core curriculum in order that every person attending school in this province will be provided with basic legal education. This is a landmark move. Incorporating legal education into schools as part of the curriculum has been a major objective of Information Services for over two years, and the decision of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology to examine social studies provided an opportunity for Information Services to work with the Legal Services Commission in the development of thi brief. Corrections Branch Personnal Classification Project During the last several years, a significant effort was made to attempt to grapple with issues of anomalies and inconsistencies with respect to classifications of personnel within the Corrections Branch, and the lack of any real career planning structure within the Branch. As an organization, the Corrections Branch had originally been two virtually autonomous and non- relating correctional streams, i.e. probation services and institutional services. In 1973, these divisions were joined by a planning and development capacity, in order to attempt to focus the intent of the Branch to develop an acceptable continuum of correctional services in the Province, and has already been outline in the previous section of this Report entitled Branch I Re-organization. The results of these considerable developments had seen a blurring of traditional roles, and a number of new roles emerging, such as bail supervisors, temporary absence officers, community I service officers, and staff support roles. 58 -^fFT In September of 1976, a Correctional Manpower Development Committee was struck by the senior staff of the Branch. It was given the task of designing a career stream classification model for an integrated correctional system. The Committee was to start the task conceptually from a clean slate, but, was to develop a practical system which would effectively rationalize all existing roles into one classification series, into which new and developing roles could easily be accommodated. The new system should rationalize equitably the classification level for the role being performed, it should spell out criteria by which people could move up as well as laterally to change "streams". It should allow career planning and spell out staff training and development needs for individuals and for groups. The Committee was made up of representatives from the Corrections Branch, Personnel Services of the Attorney-General's Ministry, and the Public Service Commission. After a number of efforts to grapple with the complexity and size of the task at hand, the Committee recommended to senior management that the endeavour required full time co-ordination and staff, with the part time availability of central agency personnel, such as Public Service Commission, Government Employee Relations Bureau, and Personnel Services of the Attorney-General's Ministry. These appointments were made in May of 1977, and the first phase of a six month feasibility study was undertaken. During the first stage, the project team concurrently examined four possible options for the creation of an improved classification system for the Corrections Branch. The examination required an extensive field consultation and review of existing literature. The option which emerged as the most appropriate one was built on a theoretical model which received approval by Branch Management in December of 1977. The model has three basic elements and considerable detail associated with each one: 1. An integrated classification series. 2. based on factor/point analysis, 3. applied to functional areas of corrections work. Phase II, which was to be commenced in 1978, but has been delayed one year, will be directed towards refining and testing the model and producing a more thoroughly defined working framework. Common Concern The justice system is guided by and at the same time sets out, standards of acceptable behaviour in our modern, complex society. Every branch of the justice system — the police, the courts, legal services to the Corrections Branch — must share in the responsibility of finding effective responses to those people who do not meet society's standards — people involved in contravention of the laws of the land. But it has been shown throughout this Report, that the Corrections Branch is committed to emphasizing community based programs as constructive alternatives to imprisonment, as it is committed to increasing prevention programs in conjunction with police and court initiatives, because the real solutions to justice problems lie within the community where they arise. Resolving justice issues is a responsibility not only for the justice system, but for the community at large. 59 Appendix A: Goals, Strategies, and Beliefs, Corrections Branch, 1976 Part I — Introduction Many forms of resolving social conflict exist in society. The family, church, and school are well- known institutions which, among other functions, attempt to mediate and deal with various types of social conflict. Governmental interventions (such as social welfare) and privately operated programs are also aimed at the resolution of various forms of social conflict. The justice system, on both the civil and criminal side, has been used to deal with more serious forms of social conflict and to act as a "back-up" to those institutions and agencies previously mentioned. In essence then, the justice system has been used to mediate, resolve, or otherwise respond to those forms of social conflict which have been defined, by legislative process, as unacceptable; the conflict stemming from behaviour which violates the rights of others and cannot be tolerated without some form of formalized, state intervention. Although general and wide acceptance is lacking, the basic purpose of the justice system in Canada is to protect social institutions and individuals in society, including the offender himself, by preventing crime and delinquency, by reducing the negative effects of crime and delinquency, and by fairly and humanely dealing with social conflict which comes within the context of law. Thus, the purpose of the Corrections Branch is to provide a range of services which vary in level of supervision, control, and security, and which collectively contribute to the achievement of the justice system purpose. In working toward this purpose the Corrections Branch has established as principles: (i) a statement of goals and objectives (see Part II) which outlines what it is we want to attain; (ii) a statement of strategies and actiivities (see Part III) which indicates (he means employed in reaching those goals and objectives; and (iii) a statement of beliefs (see Part IV) which serves as guidelines in determining how we implement those strategies and guidelines. Corrections is an integral part of the justice system, initiating a number of programs which, it is hoped, will contribute to the over-all purpose of the justice system and thus serve society by playing a significant role in the protection of society and the mediation and resolution of social conflict. Corrections must then be seen as an integral and essential part of a co-ordinated and interdependent justice system. Thus, it has a relationship and interdependent justice system. Thus, it has a relationship and interdependence with police, courts, prosecution, and legal services as well as numerous community agencies contributing their services and advice in the justice area. Actions taken by police frequently result in required Corrections involvement. To a great extent, the courts dictate the level of Corrections involvement in custodial and community programs. And conversely, actions taken in the Corrections area have substantial impact on police, courts and, indeed, society itself. 60 In summary, Corrections is part of a justice system, has a purpose and goals compatible with the larger system, provides a continuum of services which collectively contribute to the achievement of the purpose of the justice system, and the results of correctional programs affect the basic protection of society. Part II — Statement of Goals and Objectives Goal A In co-operation with personnel in all components of the justice system, to participate actively in promoting reform throughout the justice system. Objectives: A1. Increased awareness and understanding of police, courts, legal and corrections personnel of the present state of correctional knowledge and the effectiveness (results) of existing correctional programs. A2. Increased public awareness and understanding of the state of correctional knowledge and the effectiveness of correctional programs. A3. Devise and implement specific strategies of reform within contemporary correctional theory, practice, and legislation. A4. Identify possible strategies of system-wide reform, e.g., decriminalization, depenalizaton, and diversion, and communicate these to appropriate decisionmakers. GoalB To assist the family in resolving those disputes in which direct court intervention is being considered. Objectives: B1. Provide counselling and referral services to the family in response to applications for assistance in resolving, without direct court intervention if possible, disputes involving family and child maintenance, custody, and access arising from marital separation. B2. Provide opportunities for out-of-court resolutions of family-related criminal matters, e.g., assault, threat, and nonsupport. B3. Provide information when requested by the Family Court to assist in making a finding on maintenance, custody of, and access to children. B4. Assist in the administration of orders made by the Family Court in the above disputes, as provided for by statute or court directive. GoalC To provide information which will assist the court in determining disposition. Objectives: C1. Advise the court on available and suitable dispositional alternatives and resources, both within and outside the Corrections Branch. C2. Supply the court with relevant information on the offender, as provided for by statute or court directive. GoalD To administer those dispositions and orders imposed by the court which fall within the jurisdiction of the Corrections Branch. 61 GoalF Objectives: D1. Identify, develop, and maintain a wide range of correctional programs and facilities which provide graduated levels of control, supervision, and security. D2. Provide to offenders program opportunities which are conducive to active, self-determined participation. D3. Provide opportunities for offenders to exercise responsible decision-making. D4. Assist the offender in understanding that the imposed sanction is a result of his infringement upon the rights of others. D5. Encourage the court to specify the purpose and intent of the sanction imposed. GoalE To increase community and individual awareness of joint responsibility in preventing crime, delinquency, victimization, and family breakdown. Objectives: El. Provide information on social conditions contributing to crime, delinquency, victimization, and family breakdown. E2. Encourage and participate in the development of programs which contribute to improvement in those social conditions. E3. Encourage the reduction of opportunities for criminal behaviour, e.g., Neighbourhood Watch. E4. Encourage the development of effective mechanisms for community mediation and resolution of social conflicts/disputes without necessitating referral to, or intervention of, the justice system. To encourage effective co-operation among justice system components. Objectives: Fl. Identify and recommend to police and (or) CrowJ counsel appropriate alternatives to court action. F2. Increased communication and information sharing justice system personnel at all levels. F3. Ensure that goals and objectives of each justice system component are mutually compatible and I complementary. F4. Participate in joint planning for more effective service delivery. Part III — Statement of Strategies and Activities Strategy 1 Investigation and reporting. Activities: 1 A. Provide information as required by the court. IB. Provide prosecutor and (or) police with information on persons referred for possible diversion or screening before court action. 1C. Provide information to institutions and parole boards on incarcerated offenders before their reentering the community. ID. Provide relevant information and (or) reports to other related agencies as appropriate and with due regard forthe confidentiality of the information. Stragety 2 Mediation and conciliation. Activities: 2A. Where appropriate and in co-operation with other agencies, attempt to mediate mutually acceptable resolutions of conflict as an alternative to court resolution. 2B. Identify situations and make referrals for intervention by social agencies other than those of the justice system. 2C. Collaborate with police, Crown counsel, and court administration to develop guidelines for determining which conflicts should be resolved through outside mediation. Strategy 3 Imprisonment. Activities: 3A. Provide a range of custodial facilities to; (1) separate dangerous and hard-core offenders from the community; (2) provide graduated levels of control for those serving sentences of denunciation and sentences resulting from wilful noncompliance with a previously imposed court order; (3) provide separate containment for juvenile offenders; and (4) provide graduated levels of control for those remanded in custody. 3B. Provide standards and procedures for gradual reentry and supervision of offenders released from custody. 3C. Provide a classification process to determine the level of control required for each offender sentenced to a period of incarcertaion. 3D. Provide programs and activities in which the inmate is encouraged to exercise personal decision-making skills in areas of work, recreation, spiritual development, education, and life skills. 3E. Ensure that rights and responsibilities of staff, inmates, and the community as a whole are upheld and that the respective responsibilities of each are identified and communicated. 3F. Ensure the availability of suitable medical, dental, and psychiatric services to those incarcerated. Strategy 4 Community supervision and control. Activities: 4A. Provide supervision, counselling, and (or) referral to other agencies, thus ensuring that the spirit and intent of the disposition is achieved. 4B. Provide a range of community-based residential and nonresidential attendance facilities and programs. 4C. Develop and maintain mechanisms for communication and information-sharing with justice and social agencies concerned with surveillance and control. Strategy 5 Alternatives to imprisonment. Activities: 5 A. For some offenders, where sentences or orders of imprisonment have traditionally been indicated, to recommend alternatives to imprisonment such as the following: (1) good conduct order; (2) reporting order; (3) residence order; (4) performance contract order; (5) community service order; (6) counselling order; (7) restitution and compensation order; (8) absolute discharge; (9) conditional discharge; (10) day fines; (11) bail and remand supervision. 63 5B. Co-operate with other agencies in the search for other alternatives to imprisonment by providing incentive and opportunity for innovative demonstration projects. Strategy 6 Legislative review. Activities: 6A. Review legislation and recommend appropriate revisions in order that laws remain consistent with, and responsive to, changing standards and values in society. 6B. Interpret existing legislation in view of the goals and objectives of the Branch. 6C. Develop and communicate rationale for existing legislation and for possible changes. 6D. Support system-wide research to study society's views on different crimes and to assess appropriateness of existing sanctions provided for in legislation. 6E. Assess social costs of criminal activity and trends to identify those offences that need not be processed through the justice system. 6F. Where appropriate, develop and communicate to the Minister Branch positions on selected controversial issues related to justice. 6G. Provide opportunities for joint criminal justice personnel training, development, and education concerning issues of legislative change. Strategy 7 Community involvement and public awareness. Activities: 7A. Communicate information on Corrections Branch activities generally, including those which are unrelated to criminal behaviour, such as services to families and individuals. 7B. Communicate information and statistics on type of offenders, offences, sentences, expenditures, expectations, and results achieved. 7C. Co-operate with and encourage public and social service agencies to assist offenders. 7D. Encourage and provide opportunities for voluntary participation of citizens and community groups in correctional programs. 7E. Provide resources to community and private agencies which assist in the achievement of Corrections Branch goals and objectives. 7F. Provide training opportunities for Corrections staff to equip them to work with community organizations. 7G. Use existing community organizations, e.g., Justice Councils and Family Division Committees, in promoting and facilitating public awareness and communication. Strategy 8 Staff management. Activities: 8A. Provide adequate compensation and benefits consistent with the level and complexity of responsibilities assigned. 8B. Ensure that staff are provided with adequate support services to effectively carry out their assigned duties. 8C. Maximize opportunities for personal and professional growth and development through education and training. 8D. Provide opportunities for job rotation, lateral and vertical career mobility, job enrichment, and improved working environment. 8E. Periodically review and clarify job roles and relationship to organizational goals. 8F. Provide consistent standards of performance and policy guidelines. 8G. Encourage staff participation in professional associations. 64 8H. Promote an atmosphere in which staff feel free to evaluate current correctional and personnel practices. 81. Consistent with good labour management practice, encourage co-operation between management and union components to more effectively achieve the common purpose. Strategy 9 Management of resources. Activities: 9A. Reduce the fragmentation and duplication represented by the current division of correctional responsibilities between the Federal and Provincial Governments. 9B. Provide an information system which will ensure monitoring and evaluation of correctional programs. 9C. Determine the need for resources, secure adequate resources, and establish a set of priorities (Provincial, regional, and local) to ensure the most effective use of those resources. 9D. Integrate resource management and delegate decision-making to the lowest appropriate level. 9E. Develop and maintain appropriate correctional standards and policies. Part IV — Statement of Values and Beliefs Society has an interest in upholding values and has developed many forums for the resolution of social disputes arising from a conflict of values. The justice system exists as a "back-up" to deal with the more serious forms of conflict which have not been or cannot be resolved in other forums. Correctional services exist as an essential part of a co-ordinated and interdependent justice system. Corrections Branch activities contribute to the realization of the goals of the justice system generally. Personnel of the Corrections Branch bring to the performance of their duties a set of values which predisposes them to carry out their mandate within a certain framework of beliefs. These beliefs, which include the following, serve as guidelines in determining how we, as correctional personnel, implement strategies and activities and work toward our goals: 1. Offenders must be held accountable for their acts. 2. All offenders, regardless of their offence, remain members of society, are to be treated with the basic respect and dignity accorded all members, and should not be subjected to cruel and unusual forms of treatment. 3. Within the limitation of the court-imposed sanction and considering the risks for the community, the offender has a right to exercise self determination and personal decision-making. 4. Although a minority reflect a consistent pattern of criminal behaviour, offenders are capable of responsible decision-making and of changing their behaviour. Therefore, some correctional programs ought to be designed to allow for, and indeed, encourage behavioural change. 5. The majority of offenders, with the exception of the commission of a specific act, function daily within acceptable societal norms, and therefore should be subject to only simple sanction and not to programs designed for behavioural change. 6. Every opportunity should be provided for offenders to "make amends" to society generally and (or) to the victim. 7. Offenders should not receive greater opportunities or rights than those generally available to other members of society. 65 12 13 The term "offender" is reserved for those persons who become identified through the lock-step process of being observed, reported, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced for committing an act which is defined as illegal. The term is not applied for those persons who commit a similar act and are not processed through the justice system; thus offenders within the justice system represent an unknown percentage of those persons engaged in any given illegal activity. Society must accept responsibility for those conditions which contribute to criminal activity and must work toward their improvement. Social institutions and individual members of the community have a right to protect from victimization by an offender. While the justice system is charged with the responsibility of upholding certain values through the imposition of sanction, we believe that law should generally reflect current values held by the community, though at times legislators in their role as "law makers" should lead in the formulation of community values. Sanctions imposed by the court should be influenced by the total circumstances leading to the commission of the offence. While the offender retains many of the rights of other citizens, he does forfeit certain rights as dictated by the explicit "limitation of freedom" imposed by the court and the implicit limitations dictated by the conditions and degree of custody, security, and supervision. 14. The Branch has a responsibility to hold in secure I custody those offenders so sanctioned until the expiration of sentence, or until such time as there are reasonable indicators that the risk they present to the community has been reduced to the degree that less secure, community-based programs can be made available to them. 15. Since the community is the natural environment and the environment to which offenders will eventually return, as many Correctional Branch programs as possible should operate in the community in order to increase the effectiveness of those programs. 16. We recognize that members of society are entitled to a basic level of subsistence (food, shelter, and care), and we recognize that we do not have the right to force people to work or participate in correctional programs, but we also believe that offenders must be helped to understand the consequences which resulted from their action, and how their behaviour resulted in the violation of the rights of others. 17. There must be a perceived balance of rights, responsibilities, and respect between the offender, the community, the victim, and the staff responsible for administering the sentence oil the court. 18. Some conflicts are best resolved through mediation and conciliation of the conflict with referral to the court only when other attempts at resolution fail. 19. In attempting to meet its objectives, the justice system should avoid excessive and unnecessary intervention in the lives of members of the public generally and specifically in the lives of offenders. 20. Within the justice system, due regard for confidentiality of information is essential. 66 Appendix B Regional Operations As explained elsewhere in this Annual Report (Re-organization of the Branch), each region is administratively responsible forthe full range of Correctional services within its geographical area as illustrated in Appendix C. The following is a breakdown of the operational units reporting relationships throughout the Province. Vancouver Region Vancouver East District North East Adult Office South East Adult Office South Juvenile/Family Office East Juvenile/Family Office North Juvenile/Family Office Burnaby Community Correctional Centre Vancouver Juvenile Services Intake Vancouver Family Services Intake DARE Vancouver West District South West Adult Office West End Adult Office Vancouver Court Team Adult Office Vancouver Bail Supervision Burrard Juvenile/Family Office West Juvenile/Family Office Marpole Community Correctional Centre Lynda Williams Community Correctional Centre North Shore District North Vancouver Adult Office West Vancouver Office Porteau Cove Camp Sechelt Office Squamish Office North Vancouver Juvenile/Family Office Powell River Office Oakalla District South Wing West Wing East Wing West Gate B Hospital Central Control Support Services Oakalla Women's Unit Youth Containment Youth Detention Centre South Fraser Region Chilliwack Forest Camps Thurston Ford Mountain Security Unit 67 District 2 Twin Maples Community Correctional Centre Farms Programs Maple Ridge Probation Office Coquitlam Juvenile & Family Services Port Coquitlam Adult Probation Office District 3 Haney Forest Camps Stave Lake Camp East District Boulder Bay Camp Cedar Lake Camp (Closed December, 1978) DASH (Pierce Creek) Pine Ridge Camp Chilliwack Community Correctional Centre Abbotsford Probation & Family Services District 4 Chilliwack Probation & Family Services Hope Probation & Family Services Alouette River Correctional Centre Mission Probation & Family Services West District Interior Region Delta Probation & Family Services House of Concord Langley Probation & Family Services Richmond Unified Family Court Richmond Adult Probation & Family Services Surrey Unified Family Court Surrey Adult Probation & Family Services Surrey Bail Supervision White Rock Probation & Family Services Kamloops District Ashcroft Probation Office Kamloops Adult Probation Office Kamloops Family Probation Office Lillooet Probation Office Merritt Probation Office 100 Mile House Probation Office Williams Lake Probation Office Surrey Community-Based Residential Centre Okanagan District Juvenile Containment Program Oliver (Grand Forks and Princeton) Centre Creek Camp Penticton Kelowna Support Services Vernon Salmon Arm Revelstoke North Fraser Region Kootenay District Castlegar District 1 Cranbrook Creston New Haven Correctional Centre Fernie Burnaby Central Probation Office Golden Burnaby North Probation Office Kimberley Burnaby South Juvenile & Family Services Nelson New Westminster Probation Office Trail | 68 1 Institutions Kamloops Regional Correctional Centre Rayleigh Camp Clearwater Forest Camp Kamloops Community Correctional Centre Northern Region West Coast District Terrace Community Correctional Centre Queen Charlotte Island Probation Office Prince Rupert Probation Office Terrace Probation Office Kitimat Probation Office Smithers Probation Office Institutions Prince George Regional Correctional Centre Hutda Lake Camp Activators Community-Based Residential Centre North Central District Dawson Creek Probation Office Fort St. John Probation Office Fort Nelson Probation Office McKenzie Probation Office Prince George Probation Office Adult Juvenile & Family Services Vanderhoof Probation Office Quesnel Probation Office Vancouver Island Region South District 1 Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre Community Correctional Centre No. 1 Victoria Adult Probation Office Court Services Unit Case Managment Unit (Administration) Attendance General (Administration) South Island 2 Jordan River Camp Youth Detention Centre Duncan Probation Office Court Services (Victoria) Metchosin Camp Family Court Probation Office (Victoria) New Directions Program Sidney Probation Office North Island District Snowdon Community Correctional Centre Lake View Youth Containment Camp (1978) Port Hardy Probation Office Campbell Probation Office Courtenay Probation Office Port Alberni Probation Office Port McNeill Probation Office Parksville Probation Office Nanaimo Probation Office 69 Appendix C: Regional Headquarters: Corrections Branch See Map below for Lower Mainland Regional Areas. 3. SOUTH FRASER REGION 1. Vancouver Island Regional Office 3. South Fraser Regional Office 5. Interior Regional Office 209-2951 Tillicum Road c/o Room 200-33384 South Fraser Way Room 18-546 St. Paul Stred] Victoria, B.C. Abbotsford, B.C. Kamloops, B.C. V9A2A6 V2S2B5 V2C5T1 North Fraser Regional Office 11965 Fraser Street Ste. 303 Maple Ridge, B.C. V2X 8H9 4. Vancouver Regional Office Ste. 400-805 West Broadway Vancouver, B.C. V5Z1K1 6. Northern Regional Office 3rd Floor 444 Victoria Street Prince George, B.C. V2L 2J7 70
- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- BC Sessional Papers /
- annual report of the CORRECTIONS BRANCH MINISTRY OF...
Open Collections
BC Sessional Papers
annual report of the CORRECTIONS BRANCH MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL for calendar year 1978 British Columbia. Legislative Assembly [1982]
jpg
Page Metadata
Item Metadata
Title | annual report of the CORRECTIONS BRANCH MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL for calendar year 1978 |
Creator |
British Columbia. Legislative Assembly |
Publisher | Victoria, BC : Government Printer |
Date Issued | [1982] |
Genre |
Legislative proceedings |
Type |
Text |
FileFormat | application/pdf |
Language | English |
Identifier | J110.L5 S7 1979_V01_07_001_070 |
Collection |
Sessional Papers of the Province of British Columbia |
Source | Original Format: Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. Library. Sessional Papers of the Province of British Columbia |
Date Available | 2019-04-08 |
Provider | Vancouver: University of British Columbia Library |
Rights | Images provided for research and reference use only. For permission to publish, copy or otherwise distribute these images please contact the Legislative Library of British Columbia |
CatalogueRecord | http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=1198198 |
DOI | 10.14288/1.0378786 |
AggregatedSourceRepository | CONTENTdm |
Download
- Media
- bcsessional-1.0378786.pdf
- Metadata
- JSON: bcsessional-1.0378786.json
- JSON-LD: bcsessional-1.0378786-ld.json
- RDF/XML (Pretty): bcsessional-1.0378786-rdf.xml
- RDF/JSON: bcsessional-1.0378786-rdf.json
- Turtle: bcsessional-1.0378786-turtle.txt
- N-Triples: bcsessional-1.0378786-rdf-ntriples.txt
- Original Record: bcsessional-1.0378786-source.json
- Full Text
- bcsessional-1.0378786-fulltext.txt
- Citation
- bcsessional-1.0378786.ris
Full Text
Cite
Citation Scheme:
Usage Statistics
Share
Embed
Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML
of your page to embed this item in your website.
<div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
<script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
src="{[{embed.src}]}"
data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
async >
</script>
</div>

https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/cdm.bcsessional.1-0378786/manifest