Restorative Justice Hamilton
Year 1

Pilot an innovative, new and creative restorative justice program targeted to youth who are at-risk for being expelled from school

RJ trainers 35 in year one participate in 3 day workshop program. Trainers then offer training to 45 trainees in year one

98 trainers in year one, 163 trainees in year one

Evaluate the impact of training and results on target group of those trained, involved in justice circles
a) number of expulsions decreases;
b) pre and post surveys undertaken.
c) Evaluation tools applied by E-BEST Coordinator

a) expulsion data to be reported in year two
b) Survey data attached
c) Tools developed attached

Pilot evaluated to determine efficacy of training and train the trainer model

1 presentation to other agencies that may benefit from this training and the application of the Restorative Justice Model

Hamilton Restorative Justice Evaluation Project

Year 1 Report
March 26, 2009

Background

“Restorative justice is a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused or revealed by criminal behaviour. It is best accomplished through cooperative processes that include all stakeholders.” (http://www.restorativejustice.org/intro/) Restorative Justice is response to harm and Restorative Practices are preventative, building a sense of community, a climate of listening and understanding.

The Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB), the John Howard Society of Hamilton & Burlington (JHS) and the Hamilton Police Services (HPS) formed a partnership funded by a grant from the Ontario Trillium Foundation to implement Restorative Justice for youth in the Hamilton community.

Although planning began in advance, implementation began in the fall of 2008. The first year of the grant completed March 31, 2009.

Evaluation Overview

The Hamilton Restorative Justice project includes an evaluation component. The objective of the evaluation is to understand the implementation of Restorative Justice amongst the partner organizations in Hamilton and to assess the impact of using Restorative Practices. Specifically the constructs being examined are Uptake, Climate, Behaviour, Attitude and Knowledge and Community Collaboration. Information from the evaluation provides a continuous feedback loop for implementation of the training. The evaluation plan includes multiple baselines within the schools and employs observations, surveys, interviews, focus groups, reflective reporting exercises, examination of disciplinary action in the school board and youth crime rates in the community. In addition to observation and training assessment, measures will be repeated annually or semi-annually in order to assess changes.  Summary comments regarding training are based on purposeful observation conducted by the research team.

Summary of Restorative Justice Implementation and Related Findings

a) Training Status:

The training program has evolved over the first year of implementation. The current design involves 4 levels of training.

• Level 1 is a brief (e.g. less than 1 hour) high level introduction to the Restorative Justice project in Hamilton, targeted for Senior Staff, board members, parents and the like. The objectives are to define the concept of Restorative Justice, identify the partners, and explain the implementation plan in Hamilton.
• Level 2 is a brief (e.g. 1 hour) awareness training to help people understand the concepts of Restorative Justice and its value and to know how to access support if necessary. This training is targeted as initial training for all school staff, for all staff at JHS who do not receive higher level training and the beat officers of the HPS.
• Level 3 is a 1 day session that may be divided over several part days. The objectives are to define RJ and its value over a punitive approach, to introduce the different types of RJ circles and to train on the skills related to active listening, respecting others perspectives, building a sense of sense of community and problem solving by having group discussions to repair harm. Participants will have an understanding of the various types of circles and be prepared, with support, to run classroom circles.  This is targeted at school staff, Youth and Adult workers at the JHS and the Youth and School Officers in the HPS. 
• Level 4 is a 3 day ‘train the trainer’ program. This program provides in-depth information about the concepts of Restorative Justice, having participants consider this approach compared to a punitive approach. Participants will understand the value in respecting others perspective, building a sense of sense of community and problem solving by having group discussions to repair harm. They will practice skills of active listening, running formal RJ circles.  This is targeted at school administration and selected staff, social workers, officers in the crime managers’ office, and managers and selected staff from the JHS. This group is intended to be the trainers and disseminate the program in their own school.

Two 3-day ‘train the trainer’ training sessions were held in October, two sessions in March and one session is scheduled in April. The sessions included teachers, school administration, social workers from HWDSB, and representatives from HPS and the JHS. Each training session included school staff from one secondary school.

Train the Trainer – 3 day sessions

The Fall training sessions focussed on the concepts of Restorative Practices and the issues with a punitive approach to discipline particularly in schools as well as the process for implementing a Restorative Justice circle in response of an incident causing harm. Most participants in the Fall training sessions agreed with the concepts and reported intention to implement Restorative Practices in their own classrooms or job function. New training practices have been included beginning with the March 2009 sessions. These training sessions are a combination of Lynn Zammit’s work, Fraser Region Community Justice Initiatives and locally developed programs. In closing comments, the Fall training participants appreciated an alternative to traditional justice and felt a sense of hope although many commented on the daunting task ahead, some still had unanswered questions and needed support to proceed. It is too early to assess the success of implementation in the recently trained schools.     

In contrast to the school staff, JHS trainers provided Level 3 training sessions for Youth Workers and the Youth Justice Committee. The concepts of alternative justice measures are not new to this group and the training was very well received. In closing comments the participants appreciated a structured alternative to traditional justice and were relieved to hear that traditional justice would not be abandoned but instead used in parallel.

HPS has provided Level 2 awareness training to Youth and School Officers and is planning to implement Level 3 training for this group in the next few months. Logistics and scheduling appear to be the most significant barrier to rolling out the training. Level 2 training for all other officers will occur over the next annual training cycle.

b) Training – Impact on Staff Attitudes

Each of five training sessions (3 school clusters Level 4 and 2 JHS groups Level 3) included pre measurements and 4 of the 5 sessions included post measurements of attitudes.  The evaluation showed that the training was successful in shifting attitudes away from the use of punishment and improved attitudes with regard to ability to manage youth aggression and victims’ needs. As a result of the training, schools, the JHS and the HPS are beginning to adopt Restorative Practices.

Survey responses (n=208):

In comparing the attitudes of participants before the training sessions it was found that the attitudes of those participating in the different training sessions were similar at baseline. Participants at the two sessions conducted at JHS with the Youth and Adult Workers and the Youth Justice Committee tended to be slightly above or below the school groups in their answers due to understanding of the justice system and work with “at-risk” youth.

There were several areas that showed movement as a result of the training session. Specifically, in all cases there was considerable movement toward feeling harsher penalties are ineffective in reducing youth crime or aggression. There was also some improvement in the confidence level in all groups with regard to their ability and resources to manage youth aggression and victims’ needs. With two exceptions, attitudes towards bullies and bullying did not change significantly, however the majority started with attitudes consistent with Restorative Principles. The two groups that had the highest agreement with ‘punishment for those students that are teasing’ showed movement away from this agreement.

c) Implementation Status

Information gathered in structured interviews made it clear that the schools, JHS and HPS are in varied positions on the continuum of adoption. A model is being developed that will describe the stages along this continuum.

Early Adopters:
In several schools only the “Early Adopters”, particularly those that attended the 3 day training sessions, are using and modelling RJ practices. 

Awareness:
A few other schools and the HPS have made awareness presentations to their staff and other stakeholders. These schools report that the concepts were well received, with few objections. The HPS have been using extra-judicial measures in cooperation with the JHS for quite some time. These measures allow officers to divert youth away from being charged when appropriate to do so. The principles of RJ are not unlike the diversion tactics that have proven successful (Hamilton Police Services Youth Crime Annual Report, 2008).

Skills and knowledge:
At least one secondary and one elementary school have taken further action to provide skills training to the staff. In this and the preceding group of schools some staff, in addition to the Early Adopters, are beginning to use RJ principles such as classroom circles or circles to address issues and even a few formal Restorative Circles. 

Adopted and finally part of the Culture:
The JHS has been using circles, active listening, and capacity building for some time. Adopting Restorative Practices was primarily related to adding structure and common language. There are plans to modify written policies to coincide with RJ and to introduce the concept to the Crown Attorneys. Similarly, one school that had already implemented a program called Tribes, which employs concepts and practices analogous to RJ, continues to see the value in building a sense of community and addressing issues through the use of community circles. Although the language is slightly different, in this school the RJ concepts have become part of the culture. The students look for their daily community circle and it is standard practice to problem solve by sitting down in a group and “talking it out”.

A consistent finding that emerged from the structured interviews was that those schools who felt the Restorative Justice was a time consuming ‘add-on’ were less likely to have moved along the continuum of adoption.  As a part of the evaluation we strive to understand the indicators and determinants of each of stages of adoption.

d) Use of Restorative Justice Circles

Because Restorative Justice Circles take many forms and can be initiated by anyone in the partner organizations, it is difficult to track the number of circles that have occurred. However, anecdotal data was collected during structured interviews of school administration and members of the JHS and HPS.  Most schools reported the use of some form of Restorative Circle. Several schools reported that a portion of their staff was using regular classroom circles. One school was using daily community circles as part of the Tribes standards.  Most schools made use of informal restorative circles in the office in response to student issues.  Five of the schools the nine schools in the early training reported using one or more formal Restorative Justice Circle involving parents, and other community members, including police officers. Additionally trained police officers reported conducting several formal circles. These circles were to repair harm related to bigger issues such as graffiti, bullying, and violence.

e) Wider Staff Attitudes

Baseline surveys to measure attitudes toward punishment and restorative principles were conducted with JHS and HPS staff as well as staff at selected schools scheduled to receive training. Follow up surveys in the same population will be repeated in May to evaluate change in attitudes.

f) Student Attitudes

A sample of grade 6 to 12 students in the study schools were surveyed about their attitudes using an instrument that was developed for this evaluation that was based existing Restorative Justice tools in the literature. The survey measured sense of belonging, hope, attitudes towards bullying, punishment and restorative practices. The first survey was conducted in January / February and will be repeated near the end of the school year. Analysis will be done at that time to evaluate any change in attitudes.

g)  Safe Schools Survey

The HWDSB conducts an annual Safe Schools Survey in elementary and secondary schools throughout the district.  This survey includes items related to bullying, victimization, attitudes towards bullying, and school violence.  Safe Schools Survey data for those in the Restorative Justice evaluation will be aggregated and compared with board norms.

h) Student Behaviour

Feedback from people that had conducted Restorative Circles reported behaviour changes in the students participating in circle. A recurring theme was that circles were held in response to an issue between two or more students. The students were repeatedly having conflicts. After the circle, the conflicts stopped and in some cases a friendship has developed or been re-established.  Those that have been conducting regular classroom or maintenance circles report a greater sense of community and an improved ability to address issues within the classroom or group.

The impact on behaviour will be further examined through surveys, and data related to office referrals, suspensions, expulsions and youth crime statistics at a later point in the evaluation.

i) School Climate

Tell Them From Me is a survey that is routinely completed within HWDSB secondary schools.  Students who choose to participate are given the opportunity to describe their views of the school climate, their aspirations for the future, and their general well-being.  TTFM data from schools in the Restorative Justice evaluation will be aggregated and compared with board and national norms.