CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION Background Statement of Problem
II. LEGALISSUES Authorities Summary
III. RESEARCH ISSUES
Research Questions Scope
TRACK I ‑ Inmate Study
TRACK III ‑ Chaplain Study
TRACK III – Management Study
TRACK IV – Comparative Models
TRACK V ‑ Other Issues
IV. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Summary
V. INMATE STUDY
Subjects Instrumentation Pre-Test Methodology Limitations
RESULTS
Summary
VI. CHAPLAIN STUDY
Subjects Instrumentation Methodology Limitations
RESULTS
Summary
VII. MANAGEMENT STUDY
Subjects Instrumentation Methodology Limitations
RESULTS
Summary
VIII. COMPARATIVE STUDY
Subjects Instrumentation Methodology Limitations
RESULTS
Summary
IX. OTHER ISSUES
Barriers to Service View of the Chaplaincy
Status of the Chaplaincy During the Eighties
X. CONCLUSIONS
XI. RECOMMENDATIONS
XII. REFERENCES
XIII. LIST OF INTERVIEWS
XIV. APPENDIX
I. INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The California Department of Corrections (CDC) offers religious services for approximately 95,000[1] incarcerated men and women throughout California. Chaplain staff, hired by each institution and consisting of 66 individuals,[2] furnish the majority of services. They deliver religious direction for their own faith group and facilitate services for other groups such as Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints (Mormon), Jehovah's Witnesses, and Native Americans. Volunteers and CDC contracted personnel supplement the program, enhancing some faith group services and providing for faiths not represented in the Chaplaincy.
The Chaplaincy was created in 1931 by the State Personnel Board (SPB) to provide religious services at many of the youth and adult correctional and veteran's institutions. The initial program called for Protestant, Catholic and Jewish Chaplain civil service classifications. Fifty years later the Muslim Chaplain classification was added. Then, in 1990, the CDC successfully obtained authorization to create a Native American Spiritual Leader Chaplain class.
Over the years, many changes occurred in the chaplain civil service process, including the addition of Permanent Intermittent positions; the consolidation of the individual faith group chaplain classes into a single chaplain class; the revision of the class back to individual faith group types; and the addition of new faith types. The SPB, has also wrestled, as recently as 1988, with minimum standards for the Chaplaincy.
The CDC Office of Community Resource Development (OCRD)
provides functional oversight for the Chaplaincy program. In 1990, as part of a management goal, OCRD
studied the Department's religious program.
Their report, called Review of
Religious Program,[3]
examined the level of staffing for chaplains within the Department and
concluded:
"There appears to be a need for more staff chaplains, particularly at the multi-facility institutions with interfaith chapels, for the Muslim faith group, and the Native American faith group. However, the number cannot be determined because no staffing standards exist."
OCRD recommended that the Department:
"Conduct a study to determine chaplain staff needs to meet the requirements of Section 5009 of the Penal Code."[4]
Completion of this study (...) will help to resolve present and anticipated litigation by religious faith groups who feel that inmates of their persuasion are not being provided reasonable opportunities to practice their religion because of the lack of full time chaplains."
The OCRD report identified two major issues:
1. No workload
standards exist for the Department to estimate the number of chaplains required
in each of the institutions.
2. No workload
standards exist for the Department to estimate the mix of chaplains required at
each institution by faith group.
As indicated in the OCRD report, litigation has instigated
changes in the Chaplaincy. Lawsuits
addressing “reasonable opportunity to practice religion” resulted in the
addition of Muslim and Native American chaplains. Even so, legal questions remain unresolved. In Jackson v. Rowland,[5]
the Department (through Director Rowland) was asked during interrogatories a
number of questions regarding standards by which staffing of chaplains was
determined. The Department conceded it
had no method to establish chaplain ratios and resolved the matter through
stipulated judgment in 1989.
In a second case, Sample v. Borg,[6]
Native American inmates filed federal suit in 1985, alleging that they were
being denied First Amendment rights to practice their religion at Folsom State
Prison. The complaint was later
certified as a class action suit and raised issues involving lack of CDC staff
to provide services, lack of facilities for services, and security related
restrictions on use of religious artifacts.
To resolve the matter, CDC agreed to a stipulated judgment
in 1987 that recognized the American Indian "religion" and initiated
action to obtain funding for Native American programming in parity with other
recognized religions. Correction
officials also agreed to hire Native American Chaplains. Even so, in attempting to comply with that
judgment, CDC determined that no statewide staffing standard existed for
chaplains. Additionally, the actual
number of inmates professing to identify with a particular faith was unknown.
As a result, CDC was unable to determine faith group parity.
In response to the recommendations of OCRD and in recognition of the need for court compliance, CDC directed the Management Analysis and Evaluation Branch (MAEB), in conjunction with OCRD, to conduct a study that would establish a chaplain staffing standard based on workload and inmate religious preference. In addition, a Technical Advisory Group (TAG), consisting of chaplains representing each faith type and staff from Human Resources, Parole and Community Services Division, Labor Relations, and Research Branch was appointed to provide technical guidance in development and management of the study. The project commenced in January 1991.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
CDC requires an assessment of inmate faith preference to
establish parity among faith groups for chaplain staffing and to determine
appropriate staffing levels based on workload.
II. LEGAL ISSUES
AUTHORITIES
Periodically a question arises about the State hiring staff to provide religious services for those in custody or care of the State. Questioned are constitutional standards for separation of church and state. Authority to provide religious services within CDC institutions comes from case law involving federal civil rights litigation and California Penal Code (PC) § 5009, which notes:
"It is the intention of the Legislature that all prisoners shall be afforded reasonable opportunity to exercise religious freedom."
Implementation of the state code requires a definition of religion. In Jacques v Hilton,[7] the courts found that, although a religion may profess reverence for an all pervasive, nonhuman force and advocate a simple code of conduct, for (penal) institutional recognition it must also contain the three characteristics of an accepted religion against which a belief system may be measured. The religion:
1. must address fundamental and ultimate questions of deep and imponderable matters;
2. must be comprehensive in nature and consist of a belief system as opposed to an isolated teaching;
3. must be recognizable by certain formal and external signs.
While litigation occasionally results in shaping penal policy on religious practice, the courts traditionally avoid control of practices, except where prisoners maintain rights and privileges. Prison authorities may not punish prisoners for religious beliefs, nor discriminate against forms of religion. Conversely, prison security and other operational issues serve as a defense of the state in not providing religious services.
The operative concept in discussion of PC §5009 is "reasonable opportunity" to practice religion. Under First Amendment constitutional principles, an inmate must be provided reasonable opportunity to practice religion; however, regulations related to the legitimate governmental interest in prison operations, including the impact of the asserted right on other prisoners, prison personnel, and the allocation of prison resources generally, is cause for a restriction of that right.[8] What constitutes a reasonable opportunity or reasonable equal access to facilities and services may vary depending on the size of the prison population and the extent of the demand. Efforts to provide a reasonable opportunity for an inmate to pursue his faith must be evaluated in light of the state's legitimate interest in prison security. Appropriate restrictions on chapel use, including the requirement of the presence of an outside sponsor for chapel meetings, are reasonable to maintain order and security.[9]
Prisoners are also not entitled to special considerations
due to religious affiliations. Thus,
special escorts for high security inmates, mixing of populations to provide
services, and inmate time off from work duties is not required. The courts have also found that federal
prison officials may provide services only on request where a small number of
same faith inmates reside in certain security level facilities. This practice does not deny an inmate
reasonable opportunity to practice his religion.[10]
The State's obligation to provide chaplains to meet inmate
religious needs has never been litigated.
For that reason it is unclear if employment of chaplains is
required. Conversely, in cases where
separation of church and state have been raised regarding employment of
military chaplains, the U.S. Supreme
Court has ruled that a "compelling public interest" is served by
hiring chaplains to serve the religious needs of the members of the armed
forces.
SUMMARY
Although a requirement for chaplains at penal institutions
has never been litigated, the authority of the state to provide religious
services has. CDC has, pursuant to
Penal Code and case law, some obligation to provide religious services within
limitations imposed by security and availability of resources. Additionally, the courts have found a
"compelling public interest" in the employment of chaplains by the
government. The extent of state
religious obligation remains unclear and to this point is defined only in the
context of PC § 5009, existing practice and litigated prisoner rights.
RESEARCH ISSUES
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The study sought to provide the Department with workload
information which can be used to estimate the number of chaplains required by
faith group, in accordance with need and common practice.
The study developed on five tracks:
I. INMATE
STUDY
Research to develop information on inmate religious preference.
II. CHAPLAIN
STUDY
Research to develop information on chaplain workload and related work
issues.
III. MANAGEMENT
STUDY
Research of CDC management and policies that define provision of religious
services at institutions.
IV. COMPARATIVE
STUDY
Research of comparative program models and comparison of CDC religious
services to other correctional organizations.
V. OTHER
ISSUES
Research on other issues related to providing chaplain services.
Subsequent chapters discuss each of the tracks separately. The following discusses issues common to all of the study tracks.
SCOPE
This study focused upon chaplains serving the following
faith groups:
‑ Catholic ‑
Native American
‑ Jewish ‑ Protestant
‑ Muslims
The study was fixed in time, only examining the existing provision of chaplain services and existing inmate populations. The study did not evaluate the Department's ability to provide inmates reasonable opportunities to practice their religion or provision of services through volunteers.
Because the study evolved in five distinct tracks,
discussion of research issues focus on each of the tracks separately. Methodology, limitations and results of the
various studies are also presented in separate chapters.
TRACK I ‑ INMATE STUDY
Research on inmates sought to identify prisoner religious
preference and participation. Study
questions asked:
1. What is the religious preference of inmates at time of incarceration with CDC?
2. Do inmate religious preference patterns vary from institution to institution?
3. Does inmate religious preference change during incarceration?
4. Does inmate religious preference translate proportionately to religious participation?
The inmate study provides valuable information on the religious preferences and practices of the CDC inmate population. This knowledge creates a base on which to analyze subsequent study tracks that examine chaplain workload. Chapter V discusses the inmate study in detail.
TRACK II ‑ CHAPLAIN STUDY
Research on chaplain activities sought to develop
information on services provided, work tasks, organizational relationships,
chaplain profiles, working conditions, and potential variance between faith
group practitioners. Study questions
asked:
5. What are general characteristics (demographics) of chaplains?
6. What services are being provided?
7. What time is required to provide services?
8. What is the relative importance of each work task?
9. Are there differences among faith group chaplains?
10. What is the chaplain to inmate ratio in the various institutions?
11. How do chaplains perceive their role in the institution?
The chaplain study track provides important information on workload and direct delivery of religious services by chaplain staff. It also highlights organizational issues that contribute to increased or diminished program effectiveness. Chapter VI discusses the chaplain study in detail.
TRACK III ‑ MANAGEMENT STUDY
Research on management of the chaplain program sought to
establish a context for delivery of chaplaincy services. It also examined the role of such
programming in an institutional setting.
Study questions asked:
12. What is the role of chaplain programming in the institution?
13. What factors should be considered in determining chaplain staffing?
14. What are roles of non-chaplains (volunteers and inmates) in providing religious services?
15. What are program limitations?
16. What is the best feature of the program?
17. How is chaplain effectiveness measured?
18. What is the role of a chaplain as institutional staff.?
19. What are the duties of the chaplain and what is the relative importance of them?
The management study provides important perspective on the existing management view of chaplain work load and the systems that enhance or impede religious program delivery. Chapter VII discusses the management study in detail.
TRACK IV ‑ COMPARATIVE STUDY
The comparative study sought to review chaplain programs of
other correctional agencies and compare them with the CDC program. Study questions asked:
20. What is the staffing to inmate ratio of chaplains in other correctional agencies?
21. What is the basis of chaplain staffing in other correctional agencies?
This study track establishes comparative data by which to examine chaplain workload. Chapter VIII discusses the comparative study in detail.
TRACK V ‑ OTHER ISSUES
Track V summarized other issues that effect chaplain
staffing. Study questions asked:
22. What barriers exist in providing chaplain services?
23. What have staffing patterns been in the past?
24. What is the general view of the chaplaincy by the organization?
Research on other issues assists in understanding problems in service delivery that are not exclusive to inmate, chaplain, or management issues. Chapter IX discusses other issues in detail.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
In developing and validating the various study tracks, MAEB
staff reviewed the following, previously conducted research.
RESEARCH ON RELIGION IN A PRISON SETTING
A study by the Institute for Religious Research at
Loyola College in Maryland, called the Final Report on Year One Prison
Fellowship Research Project,[11]
contained an extensive literature review.
The study team for that report concluded that:
1. Religious commitment variables are infrequently studied in criminal justice research.
2. Even when religious variables are studied, they are studied in a peripheral way and not as the central focus of the research.
3. No studies of prison ministry were found; indeed, the only study which centrally focused on religion in prison was a study of Transcendental Meditation.
General religious research contained only a small amount of additional information. Systematic analysis of quantitative research in psychiatry conducted in 1986 noted that only 3.5 percent of studies reported a religious variable.[12] In most cases the variable was denomination. Only three of 2,348 studies reviewed actually made religion a focus of study. Studies containing measures of religious commitment were found to be methodologically inferior.
RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE
Study Track I considers religious preference of
inmates. In considering institutional
faith preference, it is useful to look at preference of the general
population. The Graduate School of the
City University of New York recently commissioned the ICR Survey Research Group
of Media, Pennsylvania, to conduct a nationwide survey of religious
affiliation. In that survey 113,000
adults were interviewed about faith preference during the period of April 1989
through April 1990. Nationwide patterns
of religion (for a variety of reasons) vary from those in California; however,
results of that study (contained in Table 1) are of interest.
Table 1
GENERAL PUBLIC NATIONWIDE FAITH PREFERENCES
City University of New York, 1990
PROTESTANT ......... 60.0% NONE[13] ............................ 7.5%
CATHOLIC ............. 26.0% BUDDHIST ........................ .3%
MUSLIM .................. 0.5% HINDU .............................. .1+%
JEWSH ..................... 1.8% DECLINE TO STATE ........ 2.0%
(The margin for sampling error for
the nationwide statistics is less than one percentage point in either
direction.)
Review of other government programs also garnered
information. Some Aspects of Freedom
of Religion in Canada's Correctional System[14] discussed chaplain staffing and inmate faith
preference. Inmates in Canada must
declare a religious affiliation upon admittance to a penitentiary. Canadian officials recognize that "such
affiliations may, of course, vary from being purely nominal and of no
meaningful consequence to the inmate, through to the complete and genuine
practice of religious customs and rites.
At another level, certain affiliations might be professed in the
expectation that certain advantages or privileges may result. (...) It is noteworthy that 88 percent of
the total (Canadian inmate population) profess either Christian[15]
or Jewish religious affiliation."
Also identified were four unpublished CDC surveys of inmate
religious preference. In December 1982
and January 1983, then again in January and February 1988, Chaplain Patrick
Leslie reviewed 1,568 and 1,344 inmate identification worksheets constituting
100 percent of all individuals processed through the CDC Northern Reception
Center (NRC) in those months. At that
time, NRC received all new commitments from 47 Northern California
Counties. In April 1988, Chaplain
Leslie and Correctional Case Records Supervisor Marion Daniels reviewed an
additional 459 files. Table 2, above,
illustrates results of the NRC surveys.
Table 2
INMATE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AT INTAKE
NORTHERN RECEPTION CENTER
RELIGION DEC/JAN 92‑83 JAN/FEB 88 APRIL
88
Catholic 29.3% 34.0% 31.0%
Al Islam 2.0% 1.6% 1.9%
Jewish 0.45% 0.4% 0.4%
Native American 0.5% 0.0 0.4%
Protestant 43.2% 43.0% 43.0%
Buddhist * * 0.7%
None/Unknown/Misc. 25.2% 21.0% 22.5%
TOTAL FILES 1,568 1,344 459
*not
recorded
Chaplain Eric Lemmon completed the fourth review, A Survey of Religious Programming in the Conservation Camps Supervised by Sierra Conservation Center as of August 1, 1990. In this study each camp lieutenant reported inmate religious affiliation based on in person declaration. Approximately 3,750 inmates were surveyed and reported faith preferences as noted in Table 3 on the following page.
A comparison of the various CDC inmate surveys indicates fairly consistent distribution of faith preference among inmates. Except for Jan/Feb'88 tally in the Catholic category and the Dec'81/Jan'82 tally for None, faith preference varied only by ± 1 percent.
WORKLOAD AND ROLE DEFINITION
Study Tracks II and III consider organizational issues
involving management of chaplains.
During the course of the study, it became apparent that some chaplain
work issues were not clearly defined. A
review of literature on (work) role definition provided background information
used to create survey instruments that tested potential role definition
problems. It also provided information
on impacts of problems. Additional
discussion of the reviewed literature is contained in Chapter VI Chaplain Study
methodology and analysis of the survey results.
Table 3
AUGUST 1990 SURVEY OF RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AT
CAMPS SUPERVISED BY SIERRA CONSERVATION CENTER
Protestant .... 42% Muslim ............. 3% Jewish ... 1%
Catholic ...... 30% No Preference ...... 21% Other .... 2%
....................... Native
American .... 1%
SUMMARY
Religious preference of inmates and studies on
prison chaplain staffing are rarely reported.
CDC has examined inmate religious preference on a small scale and
findings suggest consistency in inmate religious preference; however, due to
study limitations, conclusions regarding total CDC population were not
drawn. Studies on nationwide religious
preference serve as an interesting reference but cannot be directly translated
to prison populations.
Other empirical studies assist in reviewing general
organizational issues associated with management of the chaplain staff. Discussion of those studies is found in
chaplain study sections on methodology and results.
INMATE STUDY
The Inmate Study assessed
religious preference of inmates at time of entry into CDC.
SUBJECTS
Staff examined religious preference of approximately 4,800
CDC inmates housed in 20 statewide institutions. This sample constituted over five percent of the total CDC institution
population.
INSTRUMENTATION
The study used the following:
1. The Social Factors Sheet[16]
contained in Central Files 17[17]
(C‑files). Each
inmate completes this form during processing into the CDC system. The Sheet includes information on family
members, social security number, driver's license, religion and a variety of
other issues.
2. A definitions sheet for Categories of Faith Preference.[18]
3. Cap Sheets[19] for recording information by C-File and institution.
4. A proportioned, computer generated, randomly selected listing of inmate file numbers in each institution.
5. Quarterly Religious Activity Reports.[20]
6. Sublists of inmates selected from initial C-file lists for follow‑up interviews.
PRETEST SURVEY
MAEB, OCRD and institution chaplain staff conducted
a pretest of the C‑file survey at the California State Prison at Folsom
on February 26, and at the California Medical Facility (Vacaville) on February
27. In this test the survey team
reviewed 339 C‑files to determine the availability of the files, inclusion
of Social Factor Sheets in the files, and general quality of information
contained on the Social Factor Sheets.
Staff determined that C‑files, Social Factor Sheets, and the
required information were generally available.
The pretest also verified previously identified religious category
definitions.[21]
METHODOLOGY
1. Faith Categories
Prior to conducting the pretest,
the Technical Advisory Group (TAG)[22]
in conjunction with MAEB and OCRD staff developed a listing of faith types that
encompassed religions most likely to be found among CDC inmates. These faith types were then compressed into
Protestant, Catholic, Buddhist, Jehovah's Witnesses, Native American, Al-Islam,
Jewish, Mormon, Other, None, and Unknown[23]
categories. The listing considered
faith codes utilized by the federal government and a listing found in an
American religion text book.[24] New codes were added during the survey as
faith groups were identified. Appendix
C contains the final listing of codes.
The listing contains minor flaws,
biased against the two major faith types.
For example, during the study, some survey team members recorded
Unitarian, nondenominational, and interdenominational faith types as
"Other" and different teams recorded them as "Protestant."
Some Catholic faith practitioners, particularly those from Mexico, may have
listed their faith as "Christian." For the purpose of the coding,
“Christian” was categorized as Protestant as the TAG considered the majority of
respondents to be referring to a Protestant form of worship. In all cases, the number of inmates claiming
these faith preferences was small (< 1 percent) and because the bias
involved only the Protestant and Catholic faith types, introduced error did not
have a significant impact on overall study results.
2. Random Sample List of Inmate Files for Review
Based on results of the pretest,
Research Branch staff determined that a listing of more than five percent of
the files should be generated to compensate for missing or incomplete files.
The CDC Offender Information
Services Branch (OIS) developed a survey sample of inmate files based on the
institutionalized CDC population of March 3, 1991. A computer generated random sample method identified a
proportionate number of inmates in each institution equaling 6.8 percent of all
inmates files.[25] OIS routinely prepares random sample lists
for other statistical studies.
3. C-File Review
Survey teams,[26]
including members of OCRD, MAEB, and the TAG visited each institution to record
Social Factor Sheet religious information in each pre-identified, randomly
selected C‑File. Chaplains at
each of the sites also assisted with the review.
Files previously identified by
OIS were pulled by institution staff and reviewed by team members working in
pairs. All survey teams included at
least one experienced member that had participated in the pretest or in another
institution survey. Additionally,
survey instructions[27]
established consistent procedures for each file review.
When pre‑identified files
were not available for the survey, such as an inmate being out to court or the
file containing highly confidential information, institutional Records staff
randomly pulled a number of files equivalent to those not available. Survey teams also asked for additional
randomly pulled files to compensate for files not containing the required
information.
4. Analysis of Results
CDC Research Branch staff
analyzed survey results utilizing standard mathematical practices and
determined that the overall confidence interval for the survey was ± 1.5 percent. The same method (called a Chi-Square test)
was used to determine if differences existed among the institutions. That analysis is contained in Study Question
2, page 20.
STUDY LIMITATIONS
· Obtaining information on inmate religious preference was problematic. Assessment of religious preference for the large CDC inmate population required use of a sampling method. Sampling methods are established as highly reliable for predicting characteristics, such as religious preference, found in large proportions of the population; however, as the characteristic becomes less common, sampling is more likely to proportionately under or over represent the reviewed trait.[28] This factor is discussed latter in the results and appropriate adjustments for purposes of interpretation of the sampling statistics were made.
· In order to maintain a large sample size it was necessary to randomly draw additional files at some institutions. This involved simple random selection rather than computer generated selection.
· Information on inmate religious participation is inconsistent. Anecdotal and other evidence permits tentative conclusions to be drawn; however, verification of the anecdotal evidence did not occur in the inmate study.
· Anecdotal evidence indicates that religious preference may change after incarceration; however, verification of that phenomenon did not occur in the study.
· Some faith practitioners, particularly Native American and Jewish, may hold bifurcated religious views reflecting both cultural and spiritual values. For example many Native Americans may view themselves as Native American faith practitioners and Catholics or Protestants. This is discussed in Study Question 3, page 20; however, only one faith preference was recognized in the study survey.
RESULTS
Study Question 1
What is the religious
preference of inmates at time of incarceration with CDC?
Tables 4 and 5 on the following page illustrate religious
preference, by institution, of randomly selected inmates. Because chaplaincy services are not provided
for Jehovah's Witnesses, Buddhist, and Mormon faiths, inmates claiming those
faith preferences were included in the "Other" category. The category called "Unknown"
reflects reviewed files that did not contain the required information, or files
that indicated that an inmate declined to state a faith preference.
The figures under each faith illustrated in Tables 4 and 5
represent the number of inmates in the sample that claimed the noted
religion. Table 6 provides a key to
institution abbreviations.
Table 4
INMATE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE SURVEY
Intake Data, March 1991
MEN'S INSTITUTIONS
Al Nat. Total
Location Prot. Cath. Jew Islam Amer. Other None Unkn. Total
Avenal 143 134 1 2 0 7 25 22 334
CCC 85 72 1 3 0 9 19 11 200
CCI 131 112 2 5 1 17 37 21 326
CWSP 60 57 1 1 0 3 23 12 157
CIM 75 51 0 1 0 0 5 10 142
CMC 197 106 2 8 0 13 39 53 418
CMF 93 82 0 2 1 7 21 16 222
CRC 126 78 2 4 0 9 28 46 293
CSP-COR 144 106 0 10 1 9 33 32 335
CTF 142 114 1 2 0 16 29 41 345
DVI 92 65 1 7 2 18 31 23 239
FOL 49 31 0 1 0 2 16 8 107
Mule Crk 53 47 1 3 0 8 19 25 156
Pelican B 118 88 0 6 1 2 44 62 321
RJD 81 78 1 8 0 6 38 26 238
SCC 130 85 1 3 1 6 41 30 297
SQ 121 87 2 4 0 15 28 29 286
Total 1,840 1,393 16 70 7 147 476 467 4,416
Percent 41.7% 31.5% 0.4% 1.6% 0.2% 3.3% 10.8% 10.6% 100%
Table 5
INMATE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE SURVEY
Intake Data, March 1991
WOMEN'S INSTITUTIONS
Al Nat. Total
Location Prot. Cath. Jew Islam Amer. Other None Unkn. Total
CCWF 94 43 0 1 1 9 8 17 173
CIW 55 22 0 1 0 2 11 23 114
NCWF 46 29 1 0 0 8 6 5 95
Total 195 94 1 2 1 19 25 45 382
Percent 51.0% 24.6% 0.3% 0.5% 0.3% 5.0% 6.5% 11.8% 100%
Table 6
KEY TO INSTITUTION ABBRET,7ATIONS
AVE AVENAL CTF CA Training Facility
CCC CA Correctional Center DVI Deuel
Vocational Institution
CCI CA Correctional Institution FOL Folsom
State Prison (New/Old)
CCWF Central CA Women's Facility MCSP Mule
Creek State Prison
CVSP Chuckawalla valley state Prism NCWF Northern
CA Women's Facility
CIM CA Institution for Men PBSP Pelican
Bay State Prism
OW CA Institution for Women RJD R.J.
Donovan Correctional Facility
CMC CA Men's Colony SCC Sierra
Conservation Center
CMF CA Medical Facility SQ San
Quentin State Prism
CRC CA Rehabilitation Center WAS Wasco
State Prism
COR Corcoran State Prison
Caution must be used in interpreting the data from the
survey. As mentioned earlier in Study
Limitations, due to the small size of some faith groups, adjustments must be
made to account for sampling difficulties and other issues as noted in Study
Question 3, page 20. For that reason,
Native American, Muslim and Jewish faith groups were permitted to self identify
membership, within reasonable limits established by the survey,[29]
and validate membership through use of attendance and other records.
Native Americans
Representatives of the Native
American faith group indicate that 800‑1100 inmates or approximately 1
percent of the total CDC population subscribe to Native American spiritual
values. CDC OIS statistics for inmate
racial characteristics indicate that on December 31, 1990 inmates claiming
Native American heritage numbered 578.
An informal survey of Associate Wardens conducted by OCRD in 1990
estimated that 700+ Native Americans were incarcerated. The earlier studies by Chaplain Leslie
(1982, 8288) showed Native American affiliations at up to .5 percent and the
survey by Chaplain Lemmon showed the ratio at 1 percent. All of the reported Native American numbers
are within :5 1 percent of the survey results.
Muslims
Representatives of the Muslim faith
group indicate that 7 percent of the inmate population practice Al-Islam. The attendance records and intake survey
validate that up to 3 percent of inmate population may hold such religious
views. In recognition of anecdotal
evidence that indicates inmate conversions to the Muslim faith occur after
incarceration, the survey analysis utilizes the 7 percent ratio. Suggested procedural Pr changes that permit
updating of C-Files would allow that percentage to be adjusted appropriately.
Jewish
Rabbis indicate that figures for
Jewish populations are difficult to report given the reluctance of faith
group members to identify themselves.
Worship attendance figures indicate that up to 1 percent of inmates
participate in such services.
Study Recommendation I
As a result of the inmate study, religious preference
information will now be collected annually by the OIS Branch, along with other
offender statistical information. T'he
data from this study will be used as baseline information. Annual collection will prevent a need for
future surveys of this type and will identify new faith trends as California's
demographics change.
It is recommended that OCRD review the faith statistics
annually with appropriate CDC management to determine if chaplain staffing
changes are required.
Study Question 2
Do inmate religious
preference patterns vary from institution to institution?
Women's institutions had statistically significant different
faith preferences[30]
from men's institutions. A larger
percentage of women identified with the Protestant faith and smaller percentage
identified with the Catholic faith.
Results from women's institutions are recorded in Table 5.
Among men's facilities, excepting CIM, only minor variation[31]
occurs. It appears that a small sample
size may have created an over representation of the Protestant category at
CIM. If necessary, CIM should be
resurveyed to determine if religious patterns are different from those of other
institutions.
Study Question 3
Does inmate religious preference change during
incarceration?
Some anecdotal evidence indicates that a percentage of
inmates change faith preference during incarceration. For example, inmate attendance at Muslim, Native American or
Jewish services exceeds numbers that might be expected given the survey
results. Several factors may contribute
to this. Some inmates of the Jewish
faith indicate to their chaplains that they purposefully did not identify their
religion at time of intake for fear of harassment. Native Americans may hold both Christian and tribal spiritual
values yet list only one in faith preference.
Additionally, non‑Native Americans may also participate in Native
American services. Chaplains of all
faiths indicate that some inmates join religious affiliations for cultural and
social reasons.
Even if changes in religious preference could be verified,
it would not be statistically significant given the large CDC inmate
population. While an increase of 50 new
members to a regular church would be impressive, the addition of 50 new members
to a chaplain's workload would not alter overall faith proportions.
Regardless, in an attempt to measure faith
movement, a follow-up test at four institutions was conducted. In this test, 25 percent of the inmates
identified for the C-File survey were personally interviewed by on-site chaplain
staff and asked their faith preference at time of intake and their current
faith preference. The test survey was
inconclusive. One Muslim reported
converting from Protestantism. One
Native American was identified, as was one Jew and one Buddhist. The overall results of the test found faith
preferences distributed in a pattern similar to the original C-File survey.
Given that the self-identification of faith group members is
reasonably accurate within the context of the study, continuing with in‑person
surveys to determine faith changes did not provide sufficient benefit to
warrant the cost of continuing the activity.
Study Recommendation 2
Because anecdotal evidence indicates that some inmates
change faith preference during incarceration, an institutional procedure should
be established that permits inmates to amend their C‑File religious
information. Statistics on faith
movements should then be reported to OCRD as part of the Quarterly Religious
Report. This, in conjunction with the
annually compiled offender statistical information, will permit OCRD to analyze
trends[32]
and recommend program adjustments.
Study Question 4
Does inmate religious
preference translate proportionately to religious participation?
Attendance at religious services indicates at least some
interest in religious programming.
Previous studies by CDC Planning and Construction staff[33]
and the State of Maryland[34]
suggest that 10 to 20 percent of inmates may be involved with religious
activities. New prison facilities are
designed with chapels suitable for 10 percent capacity attendance.
Quarterly Religious
Activity Reports prepared by institutions for OCRD were analyzed to establish
faith and participation trends. Due to
variance in reporting methods, no comparisons between institutions or faith
types could be drawn. However,
attendance records did verify active chaplain programming and inmate
participation equal to or greater than Planning and Construction Division
projections, and exceeding projections at women's institutions. Based on program attendance figures at
women's institutions, up to 30 percent of inmates may be involved in religious
activities.
Chaplain and management staff indicate that inmate work and
other institution schedules prevent religious program attendance by some
prisoners. Chaplains still minister to
these individuals through pastoral visiting at work sites, in housing units,
etc. For these reasons, attendance at
programs and faith interest should not be directly correlated.
Study Recommendation 3
Study staff alerted OCRD to variations in institution
reporting methods for Quarterly Religious Activity Reports. They plan to clarify report instructions or
provide additional training. This will
result in more meaningful participation statistics.
Study Recommendation 4
It appears that religious programming needs may be different
and greater in women's institutions.
Based on attendance figures and on‑site inspections by study
staff, the current new prison design accommodating ten percent attendance is
inadequate in women’s facilities.
Overcrowding in religious facilities also exists in men's facilities;
however, this is, in part, a function of inmate population exceeding design
capacity.
Study Recommendation 5
Staffing patterns for women's institutions should be
separately considered given statistically different faith preferences and
apparent greater religious program interest.
SUMMARY
The Inmate Study outlined religious preference of CDC
inmates at the time of incarceration.
The majority (over 70 percent) of inmates indicated a preference for the
Protestant and Catholic faiths and a smaller number professed to identify with
other major faith types or no faith at all.
While the distribution of faith preference appeared
generally even among the institutions differences existed between men's and
women's facilities, with a larger number of women claiming a Protestant faith
preference.
Some evidence indicates that inmate faith preference may
change during incarceration; however, the study did not validate the phenomenon.
CHAPLAIN STUDY
The chaplain study contained several components including
assessment of services provided, work tasks, organizational relationships,
chaplain staff profiles, working conditions and variance among faith group
practitioners. Each of the sub‑studies
will be discussed separately in terms of the methodology and study questions.
SUBJECTS
Studied were 66 chaplains working in 20 major institutions.
INSTRUMENTATION
The study incorporated use of the following:
1. A Workload Survey[35]
2. A Role Definitions Survey & Working Conditions Survey[36]
3. Official CDC Personnel Records
4. Non‑patterned, Topic Specific, Personal Interviews
5. Expert consultation with TAG Members
6. On‑site Observations by the Project Manager
7. CDC Operations Manual (DOM)
8. A listing of chaplain positions by institution and chaplain vacancies[37]
METHODOLOGY
1. Workload Issues
The TAG
evaluated departmental job descriptions and copies of relevant sections from
the DOM to determine if the
materials accurately reflected chaplain work scope.
A Workload Survey[38]
provided a second review. The TAG
examined a standardized workload survey, called the Resource Management System Employee Questionnaire,[39]
and made minor modifications to allow for job relevancy.
A sample Workload Survey was
distributed to ten chaplains representing the major faith groups. They were told that a pretest was being
conducted and asked to respond to the survey and provide comments on the survey
format, clarity and relevance of questions.
Based on the results, additional modifications to the standardized
workload survey instrument were made to reflect unique chaplain job
traits. The revised survey consisted of
18, open-ended questions requiring narrative responses.
Table 7
CHAPLAIN SURVEY, April 1990
Chaplain Response Rate
Total Responding Percent
of Faith Group
Protestant 23 85%
Catholic 16 84%
Muslim 8 66%
Jewish 6 75%
MAEB staff mailed the final
survey instrument to all chaplains at their institution on April 8, 1991. Survey participants were guaranteed confidentiality
and provided with self-addressed, return envelopes. Fifty-three chaplains responded to the survey constituting an 80
percent response rate. Table 7 shows
response by faith type.
2. Role Definition Issues
Based on the Workload Survey, a
separate survey of managers (see Chapter VII), and on-site observations by the
researcher, it was determined that testing of chaplain organizational
relationships, commonly called "roles," should be conducted. Staff reviewed role testing studies[40]
and extrapolated relevant survey questions.
In response to a pretest by the TAG, the survey was modified to only
test role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload. The final role definition survey consisted
of 23, five-point Likert scale questions.
The Likert scale items required responses ranging from "not
true" to "very true."
The final survey[41]
instrument was mailed to all chaplains at their institution on May 8,
1991. Participants were guaranteed
confidentiality and provided with stamped, self‑addressed, return
envelopes. Fifty-four chaplains
responded to the survey, constituting an 82 percent response rate.
3. Demographics Issues
CDC Human Resources staff
gathered information on demographic characteristics of chaplains. In some cases institution personnel staff
provided the information and in others personnel record systems were
utilized. Results were reported to MAEB
staff in a manner that protected employee confidentiality.
STUDY LIMITATIONS
· MAEB staff and the TAG (which included chaplains) developed research instruments. Bias may have occurred in the selection of survey instruments or development of survey questions.
· Time constraints and the small number of previous studies from which information could be drawn limited the research.
· The role definition survey only examined major issues previously identified in other segments of the study. It was not designed for, nor intended to serve as, a definitive test on role issues.
· Chaplains estimated the time required to provide services. Some bias to favored or important tasks may occur in this type of reporting.
· Contract Native American Spiritual Leaders currently provide limited services. This does not reflect what might be expected of employee leaders that will be hired during fiscal year 1991/92.
· Survey questions with narrative answers required interpretation by the researcher. Interpretation may have introduced bias.
· Some demographic reporting was clustered to protect employee confidentiality. Such reporting prevents in‑depth analysis or data confirmation.
RESULTS
Study Question 5
What are general characteristics (demographics) of
chaplains?
To obtain information for the profile contained in Table 8 on the following page, Human Resources staff utilized the Management Information Retrieval System to obtain the ages of current chaplain personnel. Based on this information, nearly one fourth of the chaplain staff is of retirement age and 35.5 percent are over age 55. This proportion of older chaplains could have significant impact on the religious program as the more mature workers leave the work force.
This could also have significant impact on recruitment and vacancies. According to a 1988 report by the SPB, due to the small number of qualified candidates available, most chaplain applicants are hired and some positions consistently remain vacant.
While staffing has been a problem for some faith groups, there has been no difficulty in recruiting Protestant Chaplains. An ample number of qualified candidates have been available when testing occurs and not all applicants are hired.
Appendix A outlines the number of chaplain positions, the location of the positions and if the positions are filled. Workload Survey question #1 asked how long chaplains had been in their CDC jobs. Answers ranged from less than one year to 25 years. Table 9, on the following page illustrates the average number of years on the job.
Table 8
CHAPLAIN AGE PROFILE
Personnel Record, May 1991
Age 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49
Percent 1.0% 11.5% 15.0% 19.0%
Age 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-74
Percent 17.0% 11.5% 15.0% 9.0%
Study Recommendation 6
Religious program managers should be prepared for future
recruitment challenges should work with the various faith groups to develop
qualified applicants for existing and upcoming vacancies.
Table 9
AVERAGE NUMBER OF YEARS ON THE JOB
Chaplains, May 1991
Protestants 7.0 years Catholics 7.5 years
Muslims 7.5 years Jewish 10.5 years
Study Question 6
What services are being provided?
Workload Survey questions #5 and #6 asked about chaplain
duties, the amount of time spent doing the duties, and the relative importance
of the tasks. Table 10, on the
following page, illustrates services provided by chaplains as reported in the
Workload Survey. Table 11, page 29,
illustrates the services that chaplains are authorized to perform under CDC DOM
policies. The highlighted sections of
Table 10 indicate chaplain reported duties not recognized in the DOM.
Study Recommendation 7
As referenced in Tables 10 and 11, chaplains report
performing more than the full range of duties anticipated by the
Department. It is recommended that
management review the text of DOM and reconcile chaplain duties with stated
authorizations.
Study Question 7
What time is required to provide each of various services?
Workload Survey question #5 asked about the time spent doing
required duties. The survey question
was scored by averaging the reported time for each task among chaplains of the
same faith type. Averages were only
developed for those reporting time spent in each task. For that reason, the sum of the average
percents does not equal 100 percent.
Mean, median, mode, and range scores were also developed to assess
consistency of the scores. Except for
time spent on marriages and funerals,
Table 10
CHAPLAIN SERVICES PROVIDED
As reported in the April 1991 Workload Study
Inmate Counseling Meetings Staff Counseling
Conduct Worship Services Program Development Serve as Model, Leader
Religious Rites, Prayer Planning (Religious
Presence)
Teaching, Study Groups Funerals, Marriages Facility Maintenance
Administrative Duties Community Relations Travel Between Units
(Includes scheduling)
Pastoral Visiting Emergencies Family Counseling
Supervise, Recruit, Facilitate Other Spanish Translation
Escort Volunteers Faith Groups Services
Supervise Inmates Security Work with Camps
Study, Sermon Preparation, Staff Coordination, Chaplains Coordinating
Training, Continuing Relationships Committee Duties
Education (Goodwill)
individual reported average times generally reflected the average times of others in the same faith group. In the case of marriages, only a small number of chaplains spend reportable time conducting them; however, the time spent by those who do is significant.
Chaplains of various faith groups reported differences in
the amount of time spent doing critical tasks.
For example, Protestant chaplains spend more time on administrative
duties, Catholic chaplains spend more time in inmate counseling, Muslim
chaplains reported the most time spent teaching, and Jewish chaplains split
time between counseling and conducting worship services. Graph 1, page 31, illustrates the average
percent time spent by each faith group in major tasks. Graphs 2 through 5, pages 32 and 33, show
average percent time spent per chaplain by faith type.
Table 11
CHAPLAIN DUTIES PER CDC OPERATIONS MANUAL (DOM)
Chaplain Duties Administrative Religious Program
DOM Chapter 53050.4 Functions Activities
DOM Chapter 53050.4.8 DOM Chapter 53050.5
CONDUCTING WORSHIP BUDGET Religious
Programs
Regular
daily and/or Submit requests in shall include activities
Weekly
worship services, writing through that encourage inmate
Special
services & supervisors participation. Activities
National
holidays, may
include the following:
Interfaith
services, INSTITUTION -Regular & special
religious
Memorial
services, and EMERGENCIES worship services
Funeral
services. Assist as required
in -Special religious
Institutional emergencies
as -Religious
Education
ADMINISTERING Dignity & conscience permit -National commemorative
SACRAMENTS services
Baptism,
Confession COMMITTEE WORK -Interfaith Services
Communion,
Confirmation, May include institution -Mediation Services
Sacrament
of the Sick, & classification
committee, -Religious
Literature
Marriage. Staff meetings, & Distribution
Departmental
committees or -Outside Religious Group
PASTORAL VISITING task forces
Participation
Hospital,
Work Programs, -Self-study
Religious Courses
Visiting
Areas, Housing HOURS & TRAINING -Speech Forums
Units,
Camps, Group Attend religious
retreats & -Service Projects
Activities,
& Families of conferences to
maintain -Religious Interest
Groups
Inmates ordination &
certification -Religious
Societies and
For clergy,
theological Organizations
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION Students, & religious -Community betterment
Scripture
Studies, Liturgy, volunteers where such
Programs
History,
Comparative such programs provide
a
Religion,
Religious Values, helpful service to the
Contemporary
Issues, & religious activities
of
Sacred
Music the institution
COUNSELING
Individual,
Family, Marital,
Prerelease
Planning, & Other
All chaplains reported volunteering time in support of their ministry. The majority of this time was spent in preparation of sermons, attending training, faith group and professional meetings, and working with volunteers. Table 12 illustrates the average times donated by the chaplains each week.
Table 12
AVERAGE NUMBER OF HOURS SPENT OUTSIDE OF WORK WEEK
Performing Chaplain Duties, April 1991
Protestants ...... 10 hours Catholics ....... 8 hours
Muslims ........... 8 hours Jewish .......... 11.5 hours
Study Question 8
What is the relative importance of each work task?
In Workload Survey question #6,
chaplains were asked to list each of their duties and rank them in order of
importance. Graph 6, page 34, illustrates
the chaplain's replies. The rankings
were generally consistent among the faith types with two exceptions. Protestant chaplains consistently viewed
administrative and volunteer management duties as more important than other
faith groups.
Study Question 9
Are there differences among
faith group chaplains?
Differences exist among faith
group chaplains in both time spent delivering various services and in the
relative importance of tasks. In
ranking tasks, Protestant chaplains appear to respond differently based on
actual time spent doing such tasks. As
noted above, Protestant chaplains spend significantly more time with volunteer
and administrative tasks than the other chaplains.
Workload Survey question #3
verifies this phenomenon. When asked
how many volunteers report to the chaplain.
Protestants recorded an average of 113 volunteers, Catholics an average
of 35, Muslims an average of 12, and Jewish an average of 3.
Graph 1
AVERAGE PERCENT TIME SPENT
FOR CHAPLAIN DUTIES
Graph 2
PROTESTANT CHAPLAINS
Average Percent Time Spent on Duties
Graph 3
CATHOLIC CHAPLAINS
Average Percent Time Spent on Duties
Graph 4
MUSLIM CHAPLAINS
Average Percent Time Spent on Duties
Graph 5
JEWISH CHAPLAINS
Average Percent Time Spent on Duties
Graph 6
CHAPLAINS SURVEY – TOP TEN DUTIES
Most Important Roles Ranked by Chaplains
The requirements of the faith groups also create differences. For example Muslim chaplains report that teaching language and customs is a critical part of their religious tradition. Jewish chaplains share similar requirements. Native American Spiritual 1,eaders conduct day-long services and can only minister to 40 individuals at a time. In contrast, Protestant and Catholic chaplains, if provided with adequate facilities, can minister to hundreds at one time. Catholic chaplains also have special demands due to a number of inmates requiring services in Spanish.
There appear to be differences between part-time and full-time staff. Part-time staff spend the majority of time giving direct delivery of services. Program development, institutional assignments, and administrative duties generally fall to full-time staff. The availability of full-time Protestant chaplains at each institution may help explain the predominance of administrative duties among that classification.
An additional factor is the number and type of inmates requiring service. Because many Muslim inmates are new to their faith, regular participation and professional instruction is a critical factor. In contrast, competent volunteers are able to provide bible study and other classes for Protestant and Catholic imnates. The general workload, as illustrated by Table 13 in study question 10, may also impact work factors.
Study Question 10
What is the chaplain to inmate ratio?
Utilizing data from Appendix A, and comparing it with data collected in the inmate religious preference survey, chaplain to inmate ratios can be established. For the purpose of this review, 1.8 chaplain positions (equivalent full-time personnel years) planned for Native American Spiritual Leaders are included. Staffing to inmate ratios for the entire Chaplaincy averages 1 to 1300. Protestant chaplains tend to have higher ratios (1 to 1700), Catholic chaplains the average, and the smaller faith groups better than average ratios (1 to 500 or less). Table 13, on the following page, illustrates the chaplain to inmate staffing ratio by faith type.
Table 13
INMATE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE
CHAPLAIN TO INMATE RATIO
*Authorized Staffing – Inmate Population, July
1, 1991
Given the expansive (both in size and location) CDC system,
some minimum staffing levels are required for the smaller faith groups. To that end, at least partial staffing for
Muslim, Jewish and Native American chaplains exists at most institutions.
Study Recommendation 8
Utilizing existing staff to inmate ratios, chaplain staffing
parity can be established. Staffing
based on inmate religious preference, service requirements, and basic minimum
staffing to provide for services in the major institutions is recommended. Re-alignment of Jewish chaplain positions
will be required to establish parity; however, such alignment should occur
through a normal attrition process and reallocation of vacancies.[42] Because Jewish chaplains assist with other
faith group needs, any disruption of current Jewish chaplain assignments would
be counter productive and disruptive.
Augmentation of chaplain staff is recommended later in the study. Augmentation of other faith type chaplains
through increased staffing or through addition of staff to new institutions
will achieve chaplain staffing parity.
Study Question 11
What is the
organizational relationship between chaplains and their institution?
The Workload Survey asked
chaplains to describe the purpose of their job. The majority of chaplains described their work as specific to
their faith type and complex in purpose.
The responses show that chaplains consider not only institutional needs
but denominational needs in providing services. Chaplains also reported problems in delivery of services due to
lack of chaplain and support staff and resources, management policies, and
cooperation of other institutional staff.
The Role Definitions Survey, called Workload Survey 2, attempted to define and explain the chaplain's
organizational 'relationships as described in the Workload Survey. Chaplains also shared their views about
working conditions.[43] Where the Workload Survey asked questions
about what chaplains did, the Role Definitions Survey asked for
chaplains' perceptions about their work. Table 14, on the following page, illustrates the chaplains' responses
on role ambiguity (the clarity of the job), role conflict (conflicts between
the chaplain’s role and role of others in the institution), and role overload.[44] These factors are especially important in
the context of this study, as previous empirical studies of other professions
indicate that job/role problems correlate with stress, conflict, and Workers
Compensation Claims.[45]
ROLE AMBIGUITY
The survey asked nine questions about the clarity of work goals and the expectations held by chaplains and others about the job. The questions tested role ambiguity. According to the survey, 77 percent of chaplains found their work goals moderately‑to‑well defined. The test on ambiguity questions did, however, identify two important work factors. Sixty percent of chaplains reported that chaplain work was not the same for all chaplains. The finding about work similarities is consistent with the results of the previous workload survey.[46]
Significant differences existed between responses about knowledge of the Warden's expectations and the clarity of work goals. While most chaplains believed they knew Warden expectations, 37 percent did not find they had clear work goals. This could be attributed to the fact the chaplains report to someone other than the Warden.
ROLE CONFLICT
Seven survey questions asked about chaplain conflict with other staff, work tasks, and personal life. Survey responses indicate that 57 percent of chaplains do not experience role conflict in these areas. Two exceptions to this finding were identified. Sixty‑seven percent of chaplains did report conflicts with Correctional Officers and 71 percent reported having to juggle work tasks. Chaplains did not view conflict factors related to personal life, other professionals, and supervision as significant.
Conflict with Correctional Officers point to some potential management problems. Schedule and work conflicts relate to competing demands for the chaplains' limited time. Both of these issues will be discussed later in Chapter X (Conclusions). In combination with other factors, these findings lead to recommendations for staff augmentation in the program.
Table 14
WORK ROLES SURVEY
May 1991
Not
True Not Really Maybe Somewhat Very True
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
AMBIGUITY (I know …)
1.
Warden
Expectations 3 4 8 13 21
2.
Chaplain
Expectations 3 2 13 14 14
3.
Chaplain
Work is Similar 14 14 9 6 4
4.
Clear
Goals 7 11 5 11 15
5.
Inmate
Expectations 5 9 9 15 12
6.
Job
Defined 6 5 3 15 19
7.
Where
to go with Problems 1 7 4 14 23
8.
Work
is Organized 0 2 17 18 13
9.
Supervisor
Can Help 2 4 7 15 19
Total 41 58 75 121 140
A high score indicates 23% 60%
Low Ambiguity -
clarity + clarity
CONFLICT ( I have with)
10.
Juggle
Conflicts 5 9 8 14 13
11.
Job
v. Personal Life 24 9 5 8 3
12.
Correctional
Officers 7 9 10 12 10
13.
Security
Issues 28 15 3 2 0
14.
Attend
Faith/Family Functions 14 13 8 7 6
15.
Other
Professionals 17 13 8 6 3
16.
Supervisor
Doesn’t Facilitate 18 9 8 9 3
Total 113 77 50 58 38
A high score indicates 57% 29%
Role Conflict -
conflict + conflict
OVERLOAD (There is)
17.
Inadequate
Staffing 6 9 2 3 30
18.
I
am Overworked 5 10 8 10 16
19.
Hurried
& Rushed to Finish 6 14 6 11 10
20.
Chaplains
Overworked 18 9 9 9 2
21.
Uneven
amount of Work 1 4 6 7 30
22.
Other
Chaplains Help 10 6 8 13 11
Total 46 52 39 53 99
A high score indicates 57% 29%
Role Overload - overload + overload
Role Overload
The survey asked six role overload questions about over
work, distribution of work, and staffing.
Moderate to significant role overload is experienced by 66 percent of
chaplains. Approximately one third of
the chaplains did not report this problem.
Based on narrative provided by respondents, some of the chaplains have
"given up." They do not believe they can accomplish all the work
required of them and simply do what they can.
Because these chaplains do not attempt to over work they are not
"overloaded."
Responses to survey questions on whether or not all
chaplains are overworked (57 percent said no) should be contrasted with answers
regarding whether the chaplain believed he[47]
was overworked (69 percent said maybe or yes).
This explains, in part, why 90 percent of chaplains said that work was
not evenly distributed. This finding
points to potential program management problems and may relate to the uneven
chaplain to inmate ratios identified in Table 13. This finding is discussed in greater detail in Chapter X
(Conclusions).
The survey responses on overload indicate too much
work or too many role demands. As noted
earlier, these factors, in combination with others noted above, have been
proven to contribute to stress, job conflicts, and on-the-job injury. Overwork causes accidents by reducing worker
attentiveness and in some cases reducing safety when workers "speed
up" tasks. Based on the responses
in the Workload Survey and Role Definition survey questions on job conflict,
stress inducing conflict is likely to exist.
Due to the time constraints of the study, it was not possible to test
f6r stress; however, a test of on-the-job injury was conducted.
Table 15
Chaplain Worker Compensation Claims
Period 1986‑1991
INJURY .................................... #
Back Injury ................................ 7
Stress ........................................ 3
Injured Finger/Hand .................... 3
Heart Attack .............................. 2
Injured Knee .............................. 1
TOTAL .................................... 16
Human Resources staff contacted institution personnel staff
and asked for the previous 3-5 year[48]
chaplain Worker Compensation Claim statistics.
Eleven claims were filed during the last 3-5 years. As noted earlier one chaplain retired on a
stress disability during the study.
Institution staff indicated that some additional claims may be
pending. Table 15, on the previous
page, illustrates injuries by type.
None of the claims involved injuries suffered due to inmate
assault. Because the chaplain job would
normally be considered as low risk for physical injury, the number of claims
involving stress and back-related injuries may indicate training needs. Training is available to help individuals
reduce back injury and stress.
Study Recommendation 9
Due to the number of work-related injuries resulting in back
problems and related to stress, it is recommended that OCRD or individual
institutions provide training on methods to reduce the risk of these
injuries. The annual chaplain
conference, sponsored by OCRD, might be an appropriate forum for such training.
BOUNDARY SPANNING
One additional factor contributes to role overload. While competing role demands create
job-related problems, "boundary spanning" may also have impacts
(Miles, 1976). Previous empirical
research indicates that individuals forced to interact outside the work group
to accomplish work tasks may suffer from role demands. To determine if this was a factor in‑the
chaplaincy, chaplain TAG members were asked to complete a listing of work
groups, other than their own, that they interact with to accomplish work
goals. The lists were then reviewed by
the TAG. The chaplains identified 55
organizational entities that they must interact with to do their job.
Where most employees only interact with their chain
of command to accomplish work goals, chaplains must negotiate basic aspects of
their work with many individuals and groups.
Chaplains, as managers of trust and volunteer funds, organizers of
special meals, planners of special events, and coordinators of volunteer
programs, etc., "span" various chains of command. They must negotiate their work before
performing it. Institutional staff may
not react to these requests as being from a single program but instead as
multiple demands from each individual chaplain. These multifaceted interactions may lead to the frustrating
experiences that chaplains report having with institutional staff. Conclusions regarding this are discussed
later in Chapter X.
WORKING CONDITIONS
A working conditions survey was distributed to chaplains as
an addition to the Role Definition Survey.
The combined surveys were called Workload
Survey 2. The TAG recommended this
survey method to prevent unintentional bias in answers due to anticipation of
the questions. The conditions section
of the survey utilized a 5-point Likert scale that rated factors as very good
to very poor. Graph 7 illustrates
responses from this segment of the survey.
Graph 7
WORKING CONDITIONS SURVEY
Chaplain Responses, May 1991
Conditions Rated Good to Very Good
Conditions Rated Poor to Very Poor
More than 50 percent of chaplains reported inmate
cooperation, secure work environment, institution location, flexible work
schedule, volunteer programs, and management cooperation as good to very
good. Promotional opportunity and incentives
(perks) were found by most chaplains to be poor to very poor.
The answers were not surprising given responses in the first
Workload Survey. The range of answers
on chapel accommodations relate to differences in prison design and the lack of
space for smaller faith groups.
TAG members were confused by the 7 percent of chaplains
responding that their promotional opportunities are good. No chaplain promotion opportunities
exist. They determined that respondents
were probably referring to promotion within their own faith group (outside of
the institution) or promotion into non-chaplain jobs.
Overall, at least half of the chaplains find working
conditions adequate to good. Conditions
found to be poor or very poor centered on status and economics.
SUMMARY
The chaplain study provides an overview of the type,
relative importance, and time involved chaplain work. It also examined demographic characteristics of chaplains and
various issues they encounter in conducting their work.
The study found differences among services delivered by the
various faith group chaplains.
Protestant chaplains become more involved in administrative and
volunteer programming than other faith types.
Muslim, Jewish, and Native American chaplains emphasize direct delivery
of services, and Catholic chaplains focus more intently on pastoral visits.
Also found was potential "role overload"
associated with overwork and 'boundary spanning." Chaplains respond to
continuous demands on their time and must integrate with numerous segments of
the organization to accomplish their work goals. Such findings indicate a high potential for stress‑related
problems among chaplains which lead to organizational tension and potential
chaplain injuries.
MANAGEMENT STUDY
Research on management of the chaplain program sought to
establish a context for delivery of chaplaincy services and define the role of
chaplains and religious programming in an institutional setting. The study provides important perspective on
the existing management view of chaplain work.
SUBJECTS
Study staff surveyed twenty
Associate Wardens and Chief Deputy Wardens assigned to manage religious
programs at CDC institutions.[49] These individuals serve as managers within
their respective institutions and also directly supervise chaplains.
INSTRUMENTATION
The management study utilized a survey, called "Chaplain Study, Supervisor's
Questionnaire."
METHODOLOGY
MAEB staff developed a draft survey instrument to ask
questions about critical study components.
The TAG then reviewed the draft and, as with the workload study, made
job appropriate revisions. The final
survey,[50]
composed of nine, open‑ended, narrative response questions, was
distributed in April 1991. There was a
100 percent response rate.
LIMITATIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT STUDY
·
The survey instrument was developed by MAEB staff and the TAG which may have introduced some bias
in focus.
·
All managers responded to the survey; however, there is
some indication that chaplains completed the survey forms for their
manager. Although managers were
required to sip the survey, this contaminates survey results. In other cases it appears that Wardens
reviewed the survey before the Associate Warden mailed it back. This also contaminates results as the survey
was designed to reflect the opinion of managers supervising chaplains.
RESULTS
Answers to the study questions are summarized on the
following page.
Study Question 12
What is the role of chaplain programming in the institution?
Survey question #1 asked supervisors, "What is the main
purpose for having chaplains at your institution?" Appendix L lists the
answers of each supervisor. Seventeen
(85 percent) respondents indicated that direct delivery of religious services
was the main function. Three (15
percent) supervisors believed that chaplains maintained complex roles
facilitating behavioral changes in inmates.
One respondent indicated that chaplains reduced anxiety and tension in
the institution.
Study Question 13
What factors should be
considered in determining chaplain staffing?
Fourteen (70 percent) managers (supervisors) thought that
staffing should be based on percentage or number of inmates interested in a
particular faith group. Two respondents
believed special needs should be considered; for example, inmates with mental
problems should have greater access to the chaplaincy. One supervisor indicated there should be
inmate-to-staff ratios as is found in ' other states. Only one respondent said that chaplains be
"pluralistic," or serve more than one faith group.
Study Question 14
What are roles of
non-chaplains (volunteers and inmates) in providing religious services?
Seventeen (85 percent) supervisors believed that volunteers
should assist chaplains or supplement and enhance program. Only one respondent held the view that
volunteers should provide the majority of religious services.
Thirteen (65 percent) supervisors said that inmates should
only be participants in services while seven respondents believed inmates
should have an active program role.
Three supervisors specifically stated that inmates should not have
active program roles.
Study Question 15
What are program
limitations?
Graph 8, on the following page, illustrates the program
limitations described by supervisors.
Nine (45 percent) respondents said that funding and lack of staff were
limitations. Four (20 percent)
supervisors saw security needs limiting religious programming.
Graph 9
IMPORTANT CHAPLAIN ROLES
Views of Chaplains & Supervisors, April 1991
I = Counseling VII = Supervise Inmates
II = Worship Services VIII =
Study, Sermon Prep., Ed.
III = Teachings IX =
Meetings
IV = Administrative X = Program
Development
V = Visit Inmates XI =
Funerals, Marriages
VI = Manage Volunteers XII =
Emergencies
Study Question 16
What is the best
feature of the program?
Seven (35 percent) of the managers considered volunteer
programs the best feature. Four (20
percent) respondents believed that full, quality programs were the best
feature. Three (15 percent) supervisors
rated the chapel as the best feature.
Study Question 17
How is chaplain effectiveness measured?
Attendance at religious programs is a measure used by eight
(40 percent) of the managers. Seven (35
percent) said they considered factors such as a lack of problems and feedback
from staff and inmates. Five (25
percent) of the respondents valued degree of program as important.
Study Question 18
What is the role of a chaplain as institutional staff?
Nine (45 percent) of the managers responded that chaplains
should be advisors on religious and inmate issues while seven (35 percent) said
they should have no role at all.
Graph 8
CHAPLAIN PROGRAM LIMITATIONS
Supervisor’s Survey, April 1991
Study Question 19
What are the duties
of the chaplain and what is the relative importance of them?
Graph 8, above, illustrates the top ten duties
ranked by managers and compares them with the top ten duties ranked by
chaplains. Pastoral visits, volunteer
management, meetings, emergencies and program development were all areas where
some significant differences in perspective exists.
These answers, along with answers on measurements of
effectiveness and best features of the program, indicate a view of the
Chaplaincy by managers more in line with services being provided by Protestant
chaplains. The answers may also reflect
what the supervisors themselves are rated on.
To what extent these factors impact distribution of workload is unknown;
however, it may create some problems for faith groups not traditionally
involved in community-based programming.
Study Recommendation 10
Based on study findings of the work actually performed by
chaplains and the perceived value of that work by managers, measures for
determining effectiveness of religious programming should be examined. A study of effectiveness as it relates to
faith groups, should be considered.
Also recommended is additional training for chaplain
supervisors to provide a perspective on faith group traditions with which they are not familiar and how
these practices impact program effectiveness.
SUMMARY
The manager study revealed management perspective on CDC
chaplain programs. Most managers
believed the mission of the chaplaincy was relatively simple, and that program
effectiveness could be determined by observable indicators. While many managers believed volunteer
programs were one of the best features of the chaplaincy, most managers believe
that volunteers and inmates should only be used to augment religious programs,
not supplant them. The major
limitations of the chaplain program were economic (funding, staffing, and
space) issues and security based.
While a small number of managers believed chaplains should
be included as part of the management team, over a third believed they should
have no role at all. Forty-five percent
of managers believed that chaplains should advise on inmate and religious
issues. Most managers believed that
staffing for chaplains should be based on numbers of inmates requiring
religious services.
The study recommends additional training for supervisors/managers
in the area of religious practices and religious programming effectiveness.
