Abstract
Dog programs in correctional facilities have been criticized for relying too much on anecdotal evidence of success. To address this limitation, a team of social scientists in Philadelphia conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of a prison-based canine program of rescue, training, and inmate learning. The program was a 10 week “live-in” design, in which four dogs rescued from imminent euthanasia were placed with eight inmates of the Philadelphia city jail’s Alternative Sentencing and Detention Unit. The participating inmates were taught general animal care and specific training techniques. At the conclusion of the 10-week program, each dog passed the Canine Good Citizenship test and every inmate received a certificate of completion of the animal training curriculum. The project proposed an eight step evaluation strategy proposed by Furst (2011) that others can adapt to suit their specific programs. The phases included: (1) qualitative interviews with all participants, (2) post-only Qualities of Life study, no control group, (3) pre-post Qualities of Life study, no control group, (4) pre-post Qualities of Life study with control group, (5) incident reports analysis with a pre-post with comparison group, (6) post-release follow up for recidivism analysis with comparison group, (7) cost outcome analysis (projecting costs with and without lowered recidivism) and (8) cohort tracking (to add to the knowledge/data base/numbers). Due to funding limitations, only the first two phases were completed; they form the basis for this chapter. The authors draw upon this experience as support for the contention that dog programs in corrections will continue to be privately funded, sporadic interventions that are subject to discontinuation unless the cost-benefit can be demonstrated to decision makers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arkow, P. (1998). Pet therapy: A study and resource guide for the use of companion animals in selected therapies (8th ed.). Stratford, NJ: Author.
Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values and public interest: Counter-balancing economic individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Bozeman, B., & Sarewitz, D. (2011). Public value mapping and science policy evaluation. Minerva, 49, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7.
Chianese, N. M. (2009). Girls, jails, and puppy dog tails: An evaluation of the New Leash on Life program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). California State University, Fullerton.
Cooke, B. J. (2014). Bad to the bone? The effects of dog training programs on factors related to desistance (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Cambridge, UK.
Cooke, B. J., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). The effectiveness of dog-training programs in prison: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. The Prison Journal, 96, 854–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885516671919.
Cullen, F. T. (2013). Rehabilitation: Beyond nothing works. Crime and Justice, 42, 299–376. https://doi.org/10.1086/670395.
Cushing, J. L., Williams, J. D., & Kronick, R. F. (1995). The wild mustang program: A case study in facilitated inmate therapy. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 22, 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1300/J076v22n03_08.
Day, A., & Ward, T. (2010). Offender rehabilitation as a value-laden process. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54, 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X09338284.
Domínguez, P., & Raphael, S. (2015). The role of the cost-of-crime literature in bridging the gap between social science research and policy making: Potentials and limitations. Criminology & Public Policy, 14, 589–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12148.
Egalite, A. J., Kisida, B., & Winters, M. A. (2015). Representation in the classroom: The effect of own-race teachers on student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 45, 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.01.007.
Fitzmaurice, G. M., Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (2011). Applied longitudinal analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley & Sons.
Furst, G. (2006). Prison-based animal programs: A national survey. The Prison Journal, 86, 407–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885506293242.
Furst, G. (2011). Animal programs in prison. Boulder, CO: First Forum Press.
Gardner, F., Hutchings, J., Bywater, T., & Whitaker, C. (2010). Who benefits and how does it work? Moderators and mediators of outcome in an effectiveness trial of a parenting intervention. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39(4), 568–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.486315.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Graham, B. (2000). Creature comfort: Animals that heal. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Griner, D., & Smith, T. B. (2006). Culturally adapted mental health intervention: A meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 43, 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.43.4.531.
Harbolt, T., & Ward, T. (1991). Teaming incarcerated youth with shelter dogs for a second chance. Society & Animals, 9, 177–182. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853001753639279.
Harkrader, T. E., Burke, T. W., & Owen, S. S. (2004). Pound puppies: The rehabilitative uses of dogs in correctional facilities. Corrections Today, 66, 74–79.
Haynes, M. (1991). Pet therapy: Program lifts spirits, reduces violence in institution’s mental health unit. Corrections Today, 53, 120–122.
Head, B. W. (2010). Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges. Policy and Society, 2, 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2010.03.001.
Hennessy, M. B., Morris, A., & Linden, F. (2006). Evaluation of the effects of a socialization program in a prison on behavior and pituitary-adrenal hormone levels of shelter dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 99, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.09.011.
Hershman, C. L. (2008). Inaugural marine prison dog program assists wounded veterans. Corrections Today, 70, 46–48.
Hines, L. M. (1983). Pets in prison: A new partnership. California Veterinarian, 5, 7–11.
Huynh, K. H., Hall, B., Hurst, M. A., & Bikos, L. H. (2015). Evaluation of the positive re-entry in corrections program: A positive psychology intervention with prison inmates. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59, 1006–1023. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X14523385.
Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council. (2018). Illinois results first: The high cost of recidivism. Retrieved from http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/Illinois_Result_First-The_High_Cost_of_Recidivism_2018.pdf.
Kazdin, A. E. (2007). Mediators and mechanisms of change in psychotherapy research. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091432.
Katcher, A., Beck, A. M., & Levine, D. (1989). Evaluation of a pet program in prison: The PAL Project at Lorton. Anthrozoös, 2, 175–180.
Koda, N., Watanabe, G., Miyaji, Y., Kuniyoshi, M., Miyaji, C., & Hirata, T. (2016). Effects of a dog-assisted intervention assessed by salivary cortisol concentrations in inmates of a Japanese prison. Asian Journal of Criminology, 11, 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-016-9232-7
Lai, J. (1998, April). Pet facilitated therapy in correctional institutions. Paper prepared for Correctional Services of Canada by Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Women. Available at http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca.
Laurenceau, J. P., Hayes, A. M., & Feldman, G. C. (2007). Some methodological and statistical issues in the study of change processes in psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 682–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.01.007.
MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). An introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McCall, R. B. (2009). Evidence-based programming in the context of practice and policy and commentaries. Social Policy Report, 23, 1–20.
Merriam, S. (2001). Discovering Project POOCH: A special program for violent incarcerated male juveniles. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pepperdine University, Malibu, California.
Moneymaker, J., & Strimple, E. (1991). Animals and inmates: A sharing companionship behind bars. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 16, 133–152.
Mulcahy, C., & McLaughlin, D. (2013). Is the tail wagging the dog? A review of the evidence for prison animal programs. Australian Psychologist, 48, 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12021.
Newcomer, K. E., Hatry, K. E., & Wholey, H. P. (2010). Planning and designing useful interventions. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 5–29). New York: Wiley.
New Leash on Life. Retrieved from http://newleashonlife-usa.org/about-us/.
Ormerod, E. (2008). Companion animals and offender rehabilitation: Experiences from a prison therapeutic community in Scotland. Therapeutic Communities, 29, 285–296.
Rodriguez, K. E., Bryce, C. I., Granger, D. A., & O’Haire, M. E. (2018). The effect of a service dog on salivary cortisol awakening response in a military population with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Psychoneuroendocrinology, 98, 202–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2018.04.026.
Smith, M. D. (2011). From pound to prison … then paradise: The journey of a service animal. All Hands, 1131, 26–33.
Smith, T. B., & Griner, D. (2006). Culturally adapted mental health interventions: A meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice & Training, 43, 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.43.4.531.
Strimple, E. O. (2003). A history of prison inmate-animal interaction programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764203255212.
Turner, W. G. (2007). The experiences of offenders in a canine prison program. Federal Probation, 71, 38–43.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families. (2003). The program manager’s guide to evaluation. Washington, DC: Author.
Weisburd, D., Farrington, D. P., & Gill, C. (2017). What works in crime prevention and rehabilitation: An assessment of systematic reviews. Criminology & Public Policy, 16, 415–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12298.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Conroy, J.W., Coppola, E.C., Ferris, C.S., Conroy, N.L., Devlin, S.J., Boc, J.A. (2019). Evaluating Outcomes in a Prison-Based Canine Program: A Mixed-Method Analysis of New Leash on Life. In: Jalongo, M. (eds) Prison Dog Programs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25617-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25618-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)