Training Toolkit for Volunteers in Criminal Justice System Pilot Evaluation Report

8/18/2019 Training Toolkit for Volunteers in Criminal Justice System Pilot Evaluation Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/training-toolkit-for-volunteers-in-criminal-justice-system-pilot-evaluation 1/41

Training Toolkit for Volunteers in

Criminal Justice System

Pilot Evaluation Report



Training Toolkit for Volunteers in CJS – Pilot Evaluation Report

2 [ Justice Involving Volunteers in Europe ]

Published March 2016 by Aproximar.

All rights reserved.

Programme

JIVE – Justice Involving Volunteers in Europe

Partners

Aproximar

BAGázs

BRIK Institute

Clinks

Cooperativa Sociale Cellarius

Foundation 180

GRADO

Penal Justice Reform (RPJ)

University of Bremen

Authors

Joana Portugal

Rita Lourenço

Tiago Leitão (Coordination)

APROXIMAR, Cooperativa de Solidariedade Social, Crl.

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the JIVE project country partners who delivered a pilot action on Training Programme for

Volunteers in CJS. A special thank you to all volunteers who attended the pilot actions and contribute to

improvement of the training toolkit and to all the organizations and networks involved in the process.

Publication Date

2016

This publication has been produced with the financial support of the Criminal Justice Programme of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility

of the project partners, above, and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission.





Index

I NTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................4

VOLUNTEER TRAINING TOOLKIT ....................................................................................................................5

1. Volunteer Profile Development .............................................................................................................5

2. Training Programme Development .......................................................................................................7

FRAMEWORK OF PILOT ACTION ......................................................................................................................9

COUNTRY PILOTS .........................................................................................................................................11

Hungary ...................................................................................................................................................11

Italy ..........................................................................................................................................................13

Portugal ....................................................................................................................................................15

Romania ...................................................................................................................................................17

R ESULTS AND EVALUATION..........................................................................................................................19

Hungary ...................................................................................................................................................20

Italy ..........................................................................................................................................................23

Portugal ....................................................................................................................................................27

Romania ...................................................................................................................................................32

CONTENTS’ QUALITY ASSESSMENT ..............................................................................................................34

CONSTRAINTS ...............................................................................................................................................38

Annexe 1 - Questionnaire for Contents’ Quality Assessment .....................................................................40





I NTRODUCTION

This report describes the process and results of 6 pilot actions undertaken to test and validate the TrainingProgramme for Volunteers in Criminal Justice System1 developed as part of JIVE project under W/S2 - volunteer

recruitment, training and support. The project establishes a partnership of eight European NGOs working in the

CJS in order to promote the exchange of ideas and share good practices. There are two main areas of work that this

project concentrate on:

1) the use and value of volunteers working with offenders, their families and victims and

2) working effectively in partnership with statutory and private organisations.

The JIVE project builds upon the recommendations of the Policy Agenda for Volunteering in Europe (PAVE) and

the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (SOC/431- EU Policies and Volunteering) and

intends to deliver:

1] A report on the current contribution and value of volunteers in the criminal justice systems in Europe for

dissemination to relevant statutory and non-statutory organisations and European bodies, based on creation

and design of an electronic survey (led by BRIK Institute)

2] A best practice guide on volunteer recruitment, training and support, and volunteer training programme

(led by Aproximar)

3] An evaluation of current practices in cross sector partnerships to inform a report with recommendations

for effective co-operation (led by Foundation 180)

4] Cross sector seminars to explore ideas and promote the use of volunteers in CJS and regular newsletters

highlighting European practice and project developments (led by Penal Justice Reform Foundation)

5] A final conference in Bucharest, Romania to promote and demonstrate the value of volunteers within the

CJS and celebrate the successes of the project (led by GRADO).

The pilots were undertaken by 4 country partners of JIVE: Hungary, Italy, Portugal and Romania.

1 For more detailed information about the training programme, please check “Training Toolkit for Volunteers in Criminal

Justice System”.





VOLUNTEER TRAINING TOOLKIT

There is a variety of models of volunteering across Europe and the Policy Agenda for Volunteering in Europe(PAVE), produced at the end of the 2011 European Year of Volunteering, offers excellent recommendations on

various aspects of recruitment, training, supporting and managing volunteers in several policy areas. However,

there is little reference to volunteers working in the criminal justice sector, except in terms of support for victims.

JIVE project included the conception of a volunteer training toolkit directed toward organizations that promote

volunteering in the CJS and volunteers working in the CJS, which comprises of a volunteer profile and a training

programme. The construction of the volunteer training toolkit was based on:

● The results of three reports developed within JIVE project, highlighting the level and nature of

volunteering in the criminal justice systems across Europe (“The role and value of volunteers in the

Criminal Justice System: A European study”, Clinks, 2015), reviewing current practices in recruitment,

training and supporting these volunteers (“Design and Delivery of volunteering in the Criminal Justice

System”, Aproximar, 2015) and including recommendations for effective co-operation doing an evaluation

of current practices in cross sector partnerships (Building successful partnerships involving volunteers in

the criminal justice system - A good practice guide, Stichting 180, 2016);

● The pilots delivered under W/S2 - volunteer recruitment, training and support (led by Aproximar) and all

the work developed under this Workstream (volunteer profile development; self assessment tool; training

modules; etc.).

1. Volunteer Profile Development

The objective of the development of a volunteer profile was to identify the set of core competences for volunteers

working in the criminal justice system.

The profile does not intend to be a fixed volunteer profile for selection processes. Instead, this profile allows the

compilation of various relevant skills for volunteer work, and it’s flexible for different agencies and settings of the

CJS. Thus, it is possible to select different competences to different recruitment processes, depending on the

activities and tasks to be undertaken by the volunteer, or to use it as a tool for self-assessment of volunteers, so they

can self-improve and become more committed with the Organization and with the role that it’s expected from him.

For a training needs assessment, it supports the identification of competences that need further development, by a

regular and generic training or by specialized modules. After training, it can be applied to certify which

competences actually improved with training delivery.





The Volunteer Competences Framework 2 represents a common and generic profile of a volunteer in the criminal

justice system, regardless the agency or setting he/she is working in. The competences are organized within three

categories: generic, specific and supportive:

● Self-Assessment Tool

The Self-Assessment Tool is a mechanism to ease up the evaluation of competences by volunteers themselves. It’s

an online tool (although it can be printed) that has the enough flexibility for volunteering managers to create

surveys, according to what they wish to assess or the purposes of the assessment.

The Self-Assessment tool is part of the training programme toolkit as it can be used to identify training needs, this

means competences which need improvement. In the Self-Assessment, volunteers just pick the level (from 1 -

Basic to 4 - Authoritative) they feel they have about each indicator.

At the end, volunteer’s managers get an overview about the strong and weak points of each volunteer or a profile of

a group of volunteers. This snapshot enables volunteer’s managers to support volunteers more effectively through

training, motivation or matching appropriate target groups to whom they volunteer for.

2 For more detailed information about the volunteer profile and the self-assessment tool, please check “Training Toolkit for

Volunteers in Criminal Justice System”.

Generic

Communication and team work

CJS legislation and regulations

Understanding CJS specificenvironments

Representation and inter-institutional collaboration

Motivating CJS clients andagents

Clients’ needs assessment

Groups management in CJSsettings

Specific

Managing CJS special needsclients (e.g. inmates, victims,

youngsters)

Reintegration process facilitator

Specific literature regardingreintegration and corrective

theories

Identify and efficiently useexisting resources and tools

Time management skills

Supportive

IT skills for volunteer actionsand administrative purposes

Basic knowledge of a foreignlanguage

Autonomous lifelong learner





2. Training Programme Development

The definition of the course curriculum was set up in work collaboration between all JIVE partners, through a four-stage development process:

At the Convergence, partners established a common perspective about what the curricula should be and collected

training practices, existing training materials, and development of learning contents.

Ownership stage involved the co-development of training and learning materials and methodologies. Aproximar

led this co-work, defining a list of training materials and assigning each one to different partners, according to their

scope and experience. This phase was the hardest and most time consuming due to the complexity of tasks, namely

producing the materials in English.

Finally, Testing and Evaluation are associated to the pilot actions, which this report refers to, and they intended to

put into practice whatever materials defined and to collect feedback from users about the added value of the

training.

● Course Curriculum Definition

The first task in conception was the agreement on course curriculum, namely the modules, hours, training delivery

and evaluation methods. The final version of training programme3 comprises of 12 modules in a B-learning format,

lasting for 73 hours:

0. Welcome meeting

1. Introduction to CJS (country specific)

2. Attitudes and values to crime and justice

3 For more detailed information about the training programme, please check “Training Toolkit for Volunteers in Criminal

Justice System”.





3. Introduction to volunteer profile and self-assessment tool

4. Roles and responsibilities

5. Communication skills in managing relationships

6. Motivational interviewing/pro-social modelling

7. Risks, boundaries and self-regulation

8. Handling difficult situations

9. Client needs’ analysis

10. Working with external agencies

11. Observation period

12. Evaluation

Each module lasts for 3 hours, including online and workshop sessions. All modules are planned within a session

plan, which envisage the contents, outcomes, activities and resources for each module (online and workshop). The

observation period was set up as a key factor for new volunteers to validate their performance and personal

characteristics.





FRAMEWORK OF PILOT ACTION

JIVE partners agreed to perform pilot actions for the Training Programme for Volunteers in CJS. A pilot action is a phase of technical experimentation, validation of the training programme and re-evaluation of the toolkit potential

value that intends to:

▪ Identify improve actions in the training toolkit;

▪ Verify users’ (volunteers, trainers) acceptance level;

▪ Identify and correct any deficiencies and problems;

▪ Evaluate added value;

▪ Improve training offer before dissemination to other organizations.

The configuration of the pilot actions should follow as far as possible the structure of the training programme in

terms of contents (modules defined), duration and target groups.

This means that each partner country could:

1. Select a group of volunteers in the CJS;

2. Apply a pre-self-assessment of competences to each volunteer (according to the Volunteer Profile);

3. Organize a tailor-made training by identifying the modules which addresses best the training needs;

4. Deliver the training in B-learning format (mix of class and online sessions) or class format;

5. Arrange an observation period for selected volunteers;

6. Evaluate learners and trainers’ satisfaction;

7. Apply a post-self-assessment of competences to each volunteer to determine the improvement in

knowledge, skills and/or attitudes.

Regarding the training in B-learning format, Aproximar made available a LMS4 for those who wanted to perform a

B-learning training, only for the period of JIVE project.

4 Aproximar’s LMS can be visited on Aproximar Capacita (click to access).

http://aproximarcapacita.pt/learning/index.php








The LMS presented a course for each partner country. In the course folder, each partner could upload materials and

organize the training as it suits best. For this, Aproximar sent a User’s Guide to each country partner who requested

a course in LMS. Unfortunately, Aproximar couldn’t deliver this to Hungary because of a momentary failure of the

LMS platform, which could only be solved after the beginning of Hungarian pilot action. As Aproximar is the

system administrator of LMS, Aproximar managed the registration of all learners in the LMS, after partner

countries sent a list with names and emails.

Aproximar recommended that each partner country established a piloting plan to determine whether they would

follow the approved structure or whatever alternatives they would include. Thereby, next pages will be dedicated to

present how each country developed their own pilot action.





COUNTRY PILOTS

Hungary

The Hungarian partner BAGázs5set out a very particular training for volunteers, adjusting what JIVE aimed to their

own context. BAGázs combined JIVE training framework with their experience in mentoring and organized a

group of mixed peer and non-peer mentors.

The process for delivering the training pilot was:

BAGázs course for non-peer was also delivered in a B-learning format, unfortunately not with Aproximar ’s

platform but with another open source platform. In this platform, Hungarians uploaded contents such as documents

and Prezi presentations.

The training pilot plan for Hungary stands as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Pilot action configuration in Hungary

Contents

Introduction to Values of BAGázs; Segregation, RomaSegregation and Poverty Reproduction; Criminal JusticeSystem; Mentoring; Communication; MotivationalInterviewing; Mentalisation; National and Local

Nr. of training groups 1

Nr. of learners and target 17 peer and non-peer mentors

Duration of the training 68 hours

Format B-learning

5 http://www.bagazs.org/

Organizingtraining pilot

•Set out 1 pilotaction

•Combinationof JIVE andmentoring

•Selection oflocal

•Selection oftrainersaccording toexperience

and expertise

Seekingtrainees

•Posting onFacebook forrecruitingnon-peer anda selectionprocess byCV andapplication

• Invitation forpeer mentorsto peopleBAGázs isworking with

Collect datafrom learners

• Applicationfor pilotaction

• Assessmentof motivationsand goals

Definition ofmodules

• Adaptation tospecificcontext





Teaching methods On-line lecture of theoretical contents, in-class: games,role-plays, small group discussion

Evaluation methods

Improvement in competences through a self-assessment(pre and post)

Oral feedback on: “What do you throw away?”; “What doyou take away from this training?”, e “What is yourmessage to the trainers?”





Italy

The Italian partner Cooperativa Sociale Cellarius6 performed a pilot action towards volunteers operating in prison

setting. The pilot started in October, 2015 and the sessions were configured as far as possible having into account

the structure of the training programme in terms of contents (modules defined), duration and target groups.

The process for delivering the training pilot was:

Italian online course was delivered through Aproximar LMS platform on which Cellarius uploaded contents such

as documents, presentations and worksheets. Cellarius also introduced in the LMS the learners’ satisfaction

questionnaire.

6 http://www.coopcellarius.it/

Organizingtraining pilot


•Test allmodules ofthe trainingprogramme


•Selection oftrainersaccording toexperienceandknowledge

Seekingtrainees

•Sent aninvitation to 4

organisationswho operatewithin CJS


•Registration inpilot action

• Applied adiagnosticquestionnaireforexpectations


• Adjustmentsin modules'

order • Adaptation tospecificcontext





The training pilot plan for Italy stands as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Pilot action configuration in Italy

Contents All modules of the training programme


Nr. of learners (Identify target group)

17 Volunteers working in prisons


Format B-learning

Teaching methods Online lecture of theoretical contents, in-class review oftheoretical contents (viewed online), debates,assignments, role-plays, exercises, study visits

Evaluation methods Satisfaction of learners





Portugal

Aproximar 7

, Portuguese partner, developed a collaboration work with Direção Geral de Reinserção e ServiçosPrisionais (DGRSP)(General Direction of Portuguese Prison and Probation Services) as part of JIVE project. This

collaboration, besides to increase the knowledge about volunteering in prisons, allowed getting access to the

national network of promoter organisations of prison volunteering and volunteers, volunteering managers and

central management. This means that pilot action was organized between both entities. Furthermore, it’s important

to notice that the programme in Portugal suffered some changes to keep it appropriate to what DGRSP already

worked in this field and also to focus on prison environment: the module “Handling difficult situations”

disappeared and module “Risks, boundaries and self -regulation” was designed to prison environment specificities

and entitled “Risks, boundaries and problems in prison setting”. All contents were developed in a multimedia

format to enhance the learning experience.

The co-work with DGRSP constitutes the first validation step towards the recognition of the training toolkit. All

features and contents were presented to experts of central management who analysed it and gave feedback on

corrections and adjustments.

Due to time constraints, Aproximar and DGRSP set out 3 pilot actions (Lisbon, Leiria and Oporto), for 1 day of

class session, and decided to test only two modules of the training programme, to be selected from four options:

Introduction to the Portuguese CJS; Roles and Responsibilities; Motivational Interviewing; and Risks, boundaries

and problems in prison settings. The modules delivered were picked up according to training needs of participating

volunteers, after the analysis of the pre-self-assessment of competences. DGRSP also appointed experienced staff

from Portuguese prison services to co-conduct pilot actions with trainers: a prison assistant director, a volunteering

manager, and a prison guard.

7 http://www.aproximar.pt/





The process for delivering the training pilot is explained below:

Table 3 presents key figures of pilot action in Portugal.

Table 3. Pilot action configuration in Portugal

Contents

Introduction to CJS;

Motivational Interviewing;

Risks, boundaries and problems in prison setting


Nr. of learners and target group Expected 36 Volunteers working in prisons

Duration of the training 9 hours for each action pilot (6h class and 3h online)

Format B-learning

Teaching methods Online lecture of theoretical contents, in-class review oftheoretical contents (viewed online), debates,

assignments, role-plays, exercises

Evaluation methods

Improvement in knowledge, skills and attitudes through aself-assessment (pre and post)

Satisfaction of learners

Satisfaction of trainers

Due to the fact that we were piloting the training programme, Aproximar have only opened a limited number of

vacancies. The expectations were exceeded and Aproximar received 68 requests, but could only accept 45 learners.

Organisingtraining pilot

•Set out 3 pilotactions

•Test only twomodules ofthe trainingprogramme


•Selection of

trainers andinvitation toexperts

Seekingtrainees

•Sent aninvitation to allpromoterorganisationsof prisonvolunteering(by email)

• Introduction tothe project, theobjectives of

the JIVE pilot,the modules intest and thelink to theregistrationform


•Registrationin pilot action

•Fulfil the self-assessmenttool


• Analysisfocused onthosecompetencesthat ratedbasic (1) orcapable (2)

•Selection oftwo modulesaccording to

the matchingofcompetencesand modules





Romania

Grado8

, the Romanian partner, was responsible for delivery of training pilot in Romania. Grado selected themodules to be delivered considering the experience of the trainees and the activities in which they can involve in

the prison field. They also had in mind the objectives of volunteering in these two systems: probation and prison, as

in Romania there is not a volunteering for very specialised volunteers. The process for delivery the pilots is

represented below:

Grado delivered a B-learning training using Aproximar’s LMS. In their folder, Grado uploaded all documents for

training, namely power-point presentations, worksheets and other documents.

8 http://grado.org.ro/

Organizing

training pilot


•Test allmodules ofthe trainingprogramme


•Selection oftrainers

Seeking

trainees

• Announcement in Facultyof Sociologyand SocialWork fromthe Universityof Bucharest

•Contact withsecretariatand teachers

Collect data

from learners

•Registrationin pilot action

•Evaluation ofmotivationandexperience inCJS

Definition of

modules

• Adjustmentsto teachingmethods

• Inclusion oftopicsaddressinglearners'expectations

•Reducedtime fortheory





The key features of training pilot in Romania are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 Pilot action configuration in Romania

Contents All modules of the JIVE training programme, exceptMotivational Interviewing and Client Needs’ Analysis


Nr. of learners and target group 17 Students of Social Work, Deviance and Criminality

Master and the Probation Master


Format B-learning

Teaching methods Online lecture of theoretical contents, in-class review oftheoretical contents, case studies, debates, assignments,

role-plays, exercises

Evaluation methods Satisfaction of trainees





R ESULTS AND EVALUATION

The results and evaluation of the training pilot actions show that for all country pilots, volunteers were satisfied

with training contents and delivery methods. All country partners used a B-learning format to training volunteers

for the first time and it was possible to check that volunteers were at ease with this tool. Not all countries deliver

a pre and post self-assessment of competences, but those who did can rely on their training as it has produced

improvements. The differences from partners are justified by their context and experiences and the way each

one developed the training or what they wanted to accomplish.

Although we cannot compare accurately the results of each country, there is evidence that the training

programme is fully appreciated by volunteers and that it is appropriate to those who are willing to become

volunteers in Criminal Justice System. In addition, we can tell that volunteers value continuous training and

want more regular sessions.

Further investment must be made to define an European framework for training volunteers in CJS, namely to

establish a certified package.





Hungary

As mentioned before, BAGázs delivered a 68 hours training course mixing JIVE framework and some modules for

mentoring training. The pilot action took place in the settlement and in Budapest and began in October, 2015. Each

class session lasts for 3 hours. For non-peer, online materials were available before the class session.

Table 5. Training delivery in Hungary

Session number/ date Modules

1st ● Introduction to Values of BAGázs

2nd● Introduction to Values of BAGázs; Segregation, Roma

Segregation and Poverty Reproduction

3rd ● Criminal Justice System

4th ● Mentoring

5th ● Study visit to the settlement

6th ● Mentoring

7th ● Communication and Motivational Interviewing

8th ● Awareness

9th, 10th and 11th ● Excursion

Learners’ Satisfaction

Learners’ satisfaction was evaluated with an oral feedback through answering to:

What do you throw away?;

What do you take away from this training?; and

What is your message to the trainers?

With this activity, BAGázs collected a few testimonies about their training:

"I made friends. I gained self-confidence. And I go home in a happy mood."

"Thank you for the huge amount of energy and attention that I got from you during the training! I think the themes

were put together in an excellent way; I learnt lots of new and interesting things!"





"For me the most important thing this weekend was the importance of consciousness and the instruments of closing

down the mentoring. I will definitely take home these!"

"Thanks for the existence of BAGázs! It helped me collect many great experiences. It also made me more conscious

of the importance of turning to those who need it."

"It was very good and motivating for me that you could always pay attention to the principles of BAGázs and to the

right way of communication in practice. Thank you for this! :)"

Improvement of Competences

As mentioned before, BAGázs rearrange the training framework to focus on participants to gain competences to

become mentors in the settlement. As so, the competencies framework is also different9:

BAGázs delivered the self-assessment questionnaire on the first days of in-class-training of pilot action and applied

the same questionnaire again after the end if training. The questionnaire focused on their profile framework, on a

scale from 1 (is not at all true of me) to 10 (is always true to me in all situations). It´s possible to understand which

competencies improved and attest if BAGázs training programme is effective.

9 As an improvement action for JIVE Volunteer Profile Framework, Aproximar included in the final version some of the

competencies created by BAGázs.

Self-knowledge

Mentalization,

Empathy

Self-reflexion,Developed self-

recognition,Mature personality

Dealing withfailure

Communication

Assertiveness)

Feedback

Collaboration

Proactivity

Teamwork

Trustiness andoutcome focused

approach

Socialmeetings

Dealing with

prejudice

Resourcemanagement

System andprocess oriented

approach

JIVE mentortraining specificcompetencies

Independent work

Orientation inHungarian socialwelfare system

Orientation inHungarian criminal

justice system

Mentoring as tool,knowledge and

practice





For the competencies chosen, the initial assessment showed that the lowest score was about the specific

competencies for JIVE Mentor Training (5,6). Graphic 1 presents the results of comparison between initial and

final assessment. Hungarian training pilot action produced an improvement of all competences worked.

Graphic 1. Results for Improvement of Competences in Hungary

The major increase stands for “JIVE Mentor Training Specific Competencies” which rose 1,7 points and the lowest

was for “Communication”. This results can probably notice the competencies that learners already had and those

that BAGázs had to invest.

7,58,0

7,27,7

5,6

7,88,2

7,8 8,07,3

0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

7,0

8,0

9,0

10,0

Self-knowledge Communication Collaboration Social meetings JIVE Mentor Training SpecficCompetencies

Initial Final





Italy

In what concerns the pilot action, Cooperativa Sociale Cellarius delivered 5 training session (in a B-learningformat), each one composed by 2 modules.

The “Welcome Meeting” session were included in the first session with the presentation of the training programme,

it aims and outcomes, contents, methods and evaluation system.

Table 6. Training delivery in Italy

Session number/ date Modules Place

1

st

October 16th, 2015

● “Welcome Meeting”

Offices of Cellarius

2nd

November 6th, 2015

● Introduction to the Italian Criminal Justice System

● Attitudes and Values to crime and justice

3rd

November 13th, 2015

● Role and responsibilities

● Risks, boundaries and self-regulation

4th

November 23th, 2015

● Working with external agencies

● Communication / Motivational Interviewing

5th

November 27th, 2015

● Communication skills in managing relationships

● Client needs' analysis

6th

December 10th, 2015

● Handling difficult situations

● Introduction to volunteer profile and self-assessmenttool

7th

January 15th, 2016

● Evaluation meeting with volunteers

(after 1 month by the end of the course)

The learners were invited to fill in of the "Diagnostic Questionnaire" in the first session and were informed that the

following questionnaires were only available through the online platform (this allowed to monitor the activities of

learners in real time through the filling in of the questionnaires).

Because the training pilot was delivered in different sessions (5), the number of attendance of participants was

different in each session (see Graphic 2). In total, the training pilots were delivered to 21 learners, more than it was

expected. The mean of attendance in sessions was 13 learners.





Graphic 2. Number of trainees per session

Regarding the evaluation of the pilot sessions, the results are expressed as means of those actions instead of

individual results. This is useful to collect the overall picture and to produce effective conclusions about how it was

developed.


Learners’ satisfaction was evaluated through a questionnaire that focused 3 main dimensions: organization and

logistics; contents and didactics. A total of 5 questionnaires were applied, one for each session. From a total

number of 65 participants in all sessions, 42 completed the questionnaires online, with a response rate of 65%. The

results are expresses in a scale from 1 (Bad) to 6 (Excellent).

Graphic 3. Learners’ Satisfaction per dimension

As seen in Graphic 3, learners expressed satisfaction with the different dimensions, being the “Didactics” the most

appreciated (learning methods and materials)., followed by “Organization and logistics”. “Contents” (meeting

15

17

8

13

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th

4,84,5

5,7

0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

Organization andlogistics

Contents Didactics





expectations, duration) scored a mean of 4,5 which represents a good-to-very good rate. It has been highlighted that

the duration of the modules was not enough.

Learners were also invited to give suggestions for improving the training course. Learners said that it should be

organized different training groups according to their experience in the field, because «those who have already

experience in the field have an interest in different subjects».

During the last meeting with volunteers, for evaluation, learners also testify that:

«I loved the lesson, especially the classroom mode which involved participants in the course. »

«It’s always very useful to confront and hear the personal experiences which are those that make the difference to

a course with "only theory", considering that it is the practice that enables to gain the right experience to address

certain critical situations. »


In the first meeting (welcome meeting), Italians have administered the self-assessment of competencies, but the

number of questionnaires was very short and the received data was not very significant. Thereby, there is no

reliable data that prove improvement of competencies.

However, during the selection process, volunteering associations have sent some characteristics of volunteers.

Almost all volunteers have a degree, mainly in social, humanistic, linguistic and legal fields. About their

experience in the volunteering sector, the group isn't homogeneous as some of them work in this sector since 5 or

more years, and some have just started (less than 2 years’ experience). The volunteers work both inside the prison

(with inmates) and outside (with crime victims and other target groups). The main activities carried out by the

volunteers who took part in the training course are: counselling office, library services, clothes and food

distribution inside the prison, literacy and foreign languages courses, supporting crime victims (outside the prison).

In the last training session, in the module “Introduction to volunteer profile and self -assessment tool”, 14

volunteers completed the questionnaire “Volunteer profile: volunteer competences framework”. The results aredescriptive:

Regarding “generic skills”, volunteers said they felt competent in communication, team work and

customer’s needs analysis;

For “specific skills”, volunteers said they felt competent in handling special/critical situations and in the

assessment of priorities;

Finally, regarding the area of “supportive skills”, volunteers said they have increased critical thinking.





Furthermore, volunteers pointed out that training led to a rise in their ability of thinking about their role as

volunteers.





Portugal

Aproximar and DGRSP performed 3 pilot actions in February 2016, for a period of 6 hours in class each pilotaction (plus 3 hours that learners spent online). The pilot actions took place in prison setting (2) or prison

administration institutions (1).

Table 7. Training delivery in Portugal

Action number/ date Modules Place

1st

February 5th, 2016

● Introduction to the Portuguese Criminal JusticeSystem

● Risks, boundaries and problems in prison setting

Prison administration

institution - Lisbon

2nd

February 10th, 2016


● Motivational interviewing

Prison setting - Leiria

3rd

February 12th, 2016


● Risks, boundaries and problems in prison setting

Prison setting - Oporto

Aproximar gathered a very high number of participants, and as it was not possible to accept everyone, Aproximar

kept a list of volunteers willing to develop the training after the pilots. The final list of participants registered a total

of 68 individuals, but Aproximar could only accept 45 learners. As a matter of fact, due to absences or dropouts,

the sum total of learners was 37, divided by:

Graphic 4. Number of Learners per Pilot Action





All learners completed successfully the training, although some participants in Leiria didn’t access the multimedia

contents because of lack of IT competences.

Regarding the evaluation of the pilot actions, as Aproximar delivered 3 actions, the results are expressed as means

of those actions instead of individual results. This is useful to collect the overall picture and to produce effective

conclusions about how it was developed.

Trainers’ Satisfaction

As Aproximar delivered the training with own trainers, involved in JIVE project, namely in developing contents

and organizing the pilot actions, it was decided to have experts from Portuguese Prison and Probation Services

(DGRSP) to give feedback on how the pilot action was delivered. They gave their feedback on a questionnaire

which addressed factors such as logistics, contents, and learners’ profile, course nature and recommendation to

attend course, in a scale from 1 (very poor) to 6 (excellent).

According to our experts in volunteering in prisons, the training course is balanced (theoretical and practical) and

they all would recommend volunteers to attend this training. As for the contents (appropriateness to learners ’

needs, objectives and outcomes, practical application), experts rated a very high score (between 5 and 6), even

stating that there should be more modules for training, all volunteers in prisons should attend this training and that

this training toolkit should be available for all Portuguese Prison and Probation Services’ staff.


As a standard procedure for any delivery of training, learners were asked to give their feedback about the pilot

actions. This feedback was collected through a questionnaire that focused on 3 main dimensions: logistics, contents

and trainers, in a scale from 1 (Bad) to 6 (Excellent). The response rate was 100% for all pilot actions, as learners

didn’t leave room without delivering this questionnaire.

As seen in Graphic 5, learners were satisfied with pilot actions, especially with trainers and experts (theirknowledge about the theme). The training contents collected a fair-to-good rate, noticing that the lowest rate is for

Leiria, where participants were very experienced volunteers willing to learn specialized topics about Criminal

Justice System and how to deal with inmates and institutions. Logistics also were punctuated fair-to-good, mainly

due to duration and schedule of training, as most volunteers wanted more learning hours and also because the

majority are full-time workers and had to request a day-off to their employers.





Graphic 5. Learners Satisfaction per Dimension (mean per local of pilot)

Volunteers noted that the training course is:

Balanced between theory and practice. This is an important result as we stand for a model in which

volunteers are able to go deep in theoretical contents and become more confident about their perspectives and

thoughts, but combined with practical exercises to strengthen knowledge acquired;

Recommendable, as all volunteers who participated in pilot action recommended other volunteers to attend

this training course.

Volunteers were free to give suggestions and comments about the training programme, especially regarding that it

would benefit other volunteers and that it was piloting training. Thereby, volunteers outlined as positive features

that:

«This training could be mandatory for volunteers willing to work in prisons»

«The exercises and group activities bring added value to reinforce knowledge acquired»

«We learnt some strategies on how to react»

«This training is very valuable for people who want to become volunteers in prisons»

As suggestions for improvement, volunteers stated that Aproximar should:

Add role plays and more exercises;

Make online contents available for a longer period; and

Increase session duration.





Comparing all 3 pilot actions for learners’ satisfaction, Lisbon received the highest score (5,25) and Leiria the

lowest (4,54). Although Aproximar tried to keep some standards in delivering the training in each pilot action,

some factors could justify the differences: room and equipment’s (in Leiria room temperature was not very

comfortable); contents explored (they were the same for Lisbon and Oporto, but different for Leiria); group of

volunteers and their background (in Leiria there were very experienced volunteers, as we already mention); and

experts (different backgrounds, experience and personality).

Graphic 6. Learners Satisfaction (mean per local of pilot)


The self-assessment tool, as part of the training toolkit, can be applied as a method for evaluation of improvement

of competences worked in workshop sessions. In pilot actions, Aproximar also used this tool to prove the efficacy

of the training, as it is a key factor for validation of the training programme conceived.

As mentioned before, the competences assessed are displayed in the Volunteers Profile. In the pre-assessment,

volunteers have gone through all competences to be tested in order to define weaker and stronger points of their

volunteer role and set up the tailor-made training. In the post-assessment, as training just worked those

competences that were weaker, volunteers just had to level those ones. Thus, it´s possible to make a linkage

between their knowledge, abilities and attitudes before and after training, and attest if the training programme

works towards effective development of competences.

For the competences chosen, the initial assessment results showed that the lowest score was about the competence

“CJS legislation and regulations” followed by “Motivating CJS clients and agencies”. Nevertheless, as this





represents means scores for the three pilots, both in Lisbon and Oporto, the competence “Managing CJS special

needs clients” rated lower .

As seen in Graphic 7 , the training pilot action produced an improvement of all competences worked, being the

greatest increase for “CJS legislation and regulations” and “Understanding CJS specific environments”.

Graphic 7. Results for Improvement of Competences in Portugal

These results are satisfied for JIVE partners as it indicates that the developed training programme effectively

produces outcomes. Further evaluation might be on-job, directly with volunteers who participated in pilot action, to

verify if behaviours are different and performance is better.

2,46

3,17

2,77

3,133,28

3,68

3,23 3,29

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

CJS legislationand regulations

UnderstandingCJS specific

environments

Motivating CJSclients andagencies

Managing CJSspecial needs

clients

Initial

Final





Romania

Grado carried out a training pilot with students in February 2016 at Grado’s headquarters. The requests fromstudents were very high but Grado could only accept 17 participants. Due to absences or dropouts, the sum total of

learners was 9.

Graphic 8. Data from requests, registration and attendance in Romanian pilot


Grado asked learners to give their feedback about the pilot actions a questionnaire that was shared in the

curriculum development stage (it’s the same version of that used in Aproximar’s pilot). The response rate was

100%.

Romanian learners were very satisfied with training pilot (see Graphic 9):

Training logistics rated 4,8 (from 1 to 6);

Training contents collected a good-to-excellent rate; and

Trainers got the highest score with 5,6.

The lowest score for logistics might be due to the length of training, as most participants said that it was too short.

44

17

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Requests Registrations Attendances





Graphic 9. Learners’ Satisfaction Results per dimension

Volunteers thought that the training course is:

Very practical (7 answers). This is relevant as it shows a different perspective from other partners (namely

Portugal) and as JIVE partners aimed for a model which combined theory and practice, it must be analysed what

were the main differences and how trainers developed the workshop sessions;

Recommendable, as all volunteers who participated in pilot action recommended other volunteers to attend

this training course.

Grado, like Cellarius, didn’t apply a self-assessment of competences previous to training pilot. Grado will only

apply it after an internship they are organizing with learners in a prison setting.

4,85,4

5,6

0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

Training logistics Training contents Trainers





CONTENTS’ QUALITY ASSESSMENT

As a part of the evaluation of the pilot action, namely for the evaluation of the contents and the overall training

programme, Aproximar conducted an assessment. The assessment comprises a questionnaire which focus on 8

dimensions that are relevant for a training programme:

▪ Innovation (intensity of new and distinctive features in training contents; what differentiates this from

other training contents with similar characteristics and purposes; the content’s added value compared to

conventional responses and the development of new skills)

▪ Suitability (how far the contents respects the culture, the social experience and the previous knowledge

and training of target-audience and the organizations they were developed for and responds to their needs

and problems regarding volunteering)

▪ Usefulness (benefits and added value perceived by volunteers, evidenced in terms of skills recognition,

social value and / or personal autonomy)

▪ Accessibility (User-friendly) (proximity and familiarity of the target-audience and the organizations with

the contents, particularly in terms of literacy and technology, clarity and transparency in language)

▪ Accuracy (contents refer to real situations occurring in prison context; contents are relevant for volunteers’

role)

▪ Feasibility (adaptability to prison context and to different learning domains and contexts)

▪ Acceptability (volunteers’ level of acceptance and adoption willingness)

▪ Expected Impact (volunteers might improve their activities and their role as volunteers and produce

greater outcomes inside the prison context)

This questionnaire was delivered to all learners (except Italy because when assessment structure was finished, their

pilot action had already ended and no participant answered). Participants had to score from 1 (low or insufficient)

to 4 (very high or very good) each dimension and justify their answer and also to point out the strengths and

weaknesses of contents and to give improvement suggestions and recommendations.





Comparing the three country pilots, it shows that the contents’ proved to be perceived as quality by all participants,

even though we cannot compare it accurately. Even so, the contents’ quality scored up to 3 in all dimensions (see

Graphic 10). The most relevant result is for suitability and expected impact which have the major points among

three pilots, alongside with usefulness, accessibility and acceptability. Training contents showed to address

volunteer’s needs for knowledge and to produce effective results; also volunteers feel that JIVE training benefits

their role as volunteers being more capable to carry out volunteering activities autonomously. This results are

consistent with the results of training pilots delivery, namely with learners’ satisfaction and testimonies and with

the improvement of competencies, enhancing the added value of JIVE training for volunteers in Criminal Justice

System.

Graphic 10. Contents’ Quality Results per Country Pilot

3,3

3,7

3,7

3,8

3,8

3,8

3,7

3,8

3,6

4,0

4,0

3,4

3,4

3,8

3,9

4,0

3,8

3,9

4,0

3,9

4,0

4,0

Innovation

Suitability

Usefulness

Accessibility (User-friendly)

Accuracy

Feasibility

Acceptability

Expected Impact

Portugal Hungary Romania





In addition to questionnaire, volunteers were asked to identify strengths and weaknesses of training contents, as

summarized below:

Strengths Weaknesses

Simple and interesting

Enlightening

Sharing of experiences

Meaningfulness

Accessing online contents first

Proper themes and well developed

giving a wide perspective about

volunteering in prisons The content is referring to real

situation we can face in ourvolunteering activity

Lots of new information

Very good documentation

Include some media files, such as

videos

Add some role plays for personal

attitudes

Review of theoretical contents

Review of online exercises

IT problems in platform

As contents are too extensive, itneeds more learning hours

Concerning individual/country results for contents’ quality assessment, the major findings demonstrates that

volunteers appreciated the knowledge acquired and the methodologies applied.

The results of Hungarian contents’ assessment reveals to be very satisfied, although they are not similar to what

JIVE training programme stands for. Nevertheless, it is an important outcome of JIVE project as it shows a

different standard for training specialized volunteers, introducing specific contents such as mentoring. The highest

scores for contents are for its suitability and usefulness, achieving the top score of 4, justified by:

«(...) the training was greatly adapted [to participants’] backgrounds and culture»

«(...) trainers successfully showed and taught us how to communicate properly, and they gave us a lot of new

knowledge about the penalty execution»

The lower scores for Hungary are for feasibility and accuracy, both scoring 3,4:

«Concerning reference to real situations, we also read parts of actual criminal court records, and one of the

inside-community learners shared his experiences about his late drug-addiction and spending years in prison

before getting involved in the programmes of BAGázs»

«We could meet an ex-convict, who really convincingly transmitted his thoughts on prison life»





For Portugal, the results are positive and show that contents are of high value for volunteers. The highest scores

stand for accessibility, accuracy, feasibility and expected impact, although suitability, usefulness and acceptability

are just 1 point down. Participants stated that:

«contents were very relevant»

«Accessing online contents makes it easier to internalise the information»

Innovation got the lowest score in Portugal assessment, even though it was rated high/good:

«There are few training programmes in this field so just its existence is already an innovation»

«It adds contents to other known training (such as DGRSP manual)»

In Romania, the results got the highest scores among the three pilots. Only feasibility and accessibility rated lower

than the top score (3,9). This can be due to Romanian context in which volunteer’s training is not very common

and so this pilot action was an outstanding event:

«Information accuracy»

«Very good group communication»

«Attractive»

«Good and interactive presentation»

In conclusion, JIVE partners are very satisfied with these results as they contribute to enhance the JIVE reports’

recommendations and the added value of training for volunteers. JIVE partners acknowledge that further

investment on training framework is needed and they will develop all their efforts to disseminate these findings and

to send this information abroad.





CONSTRAINTS

Regardless of the positive results of training pilot actions developed, the four partner countries handled some

constraints when delivering JIVE training for the first time. The challenges partners faced are presented to help

other organizations to overcome this less positive situation and/or to prevent them for happening.

The constraints can be grouped into four categories:

Assessment of competencies

Completion of self-assessment. Volunteers weren’t aware of this procedure or didn’t recognize its value

before training. Volunteers didn’t understand the competencies or the level they were really in. Only after

training volunteers were fully aware of what each competencies mean: in some cases, they scored lower in

final assessment for this reason and not because the competences decrease. Some countries didn’t apply the

initial self-assessment.

Improvement of competencies. As the completion of self-assessment was not a regular procedure,

sometimes it was not possible to observe the improvement of competencies with reliable data.

Assessment ofcompetencies

B-learningformat

Groupcharacteristics

Comparisonbetween

training pilots





B-learning format

Using an online platform. For almost all countries, it was the first time they train volunteers in a B-learning

format. They had to learn how to develop this type of training and how to use a platform.

Multimedia files ready for use. Only Aproximar created multimedia files for the platform (based on

training presentations). The amount of contents and the timeline put out some pressure in concluding all

modules on time.

Accessing internet for online contents. In some occasions, learners dealt with difficulties when accessing

the online platform. Most times, this is due to internet connection but a few learners might have lack of IT

competencies.

Group characteristics

Experienced and new volunteers. In most training groups, there was a mix of experienced volunteers,

working a long time ago in CJS, with new volunteers/ people who want to become volunteers. Needs of

both groups are distinct and trainers had to manage the depth of contents approached and the type of

activities to perform.

Gap between motivation and knowledge. Many participants were highly motivated but had little knowledge

initially about volunteering in CJS. Trainers had to manage their motivation and expectations, and give

them very basic concepts about volunteering in CJS.

Confronting beliefs. Despite debates and sharing points of view is part of JIVE training, this kind of

activities might become polemic and unpleasant as participants have to deal with their own preconceived

ideas.

Comparison between training pilots

Couldn’t have a proper comparison between pilots. As this were the first training actions for JIVE training, partners let each country free to decide how to deliver training. This way, just a few factors were similar,

like training programme, session plans and structure of contents. There was no definition of common

indicators for the evaluation.





Annexe 1 - Questionnaire for Contents’ Quality Assessment



Documents

Training Toolkit for Volunteers in Criminal Justice System Pilot Evaluation Report