NCJ Number
93537
Date Published
1983
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This case study of the implementation of the Positive Indirect Recreation Approach (PIRA) in a particular jail setting portrays the adverse consequences when such an implementation is done too rapidly and without proper preparation; lessons are drawn for the most effective way to introduce PIRA in a jail setting.
Abstract
In the Sacramento County Main Jail (California), the jail administration hired civilians to design, implement, and operate the jail's inmate recreation program as stipulated in the Federal Court Consent Decree. In 1982, the PIRA method was instituted. Under PIRA, recreational equipment quality and purchases improved, new competitive sports and recreational programs both in and out of the cell were implemented, and an individualized physical fitness/exercise program was designed to meet each inmate's needs. An additional 39 more recreational activities were implemented based on 2 inmate recreational preference surveys given to inmates over 3 months. Video games were introduced into the jail, along with the formulation of an inmate newsletter and other new activities. Through the program there was increased inmate recreation participation, improved inmate physical fitness, and an overall decrease in inmate stress. Although the program functioned smoothly for a few months, conflict then began to develop with both the formal and informal structures in the jail. Among the reasons for the problems were the failure of PIRA staff to become thoroughly familiar with the personnel and operations of the jail, failure to include jail officers in program planning, and failure to take into account the functions of the informal jail operations. As a result of these and other factors, jail officers became increasing intolerant of PIRA programs and more disruptive of their continuation, creating confrontations between jail staff and the PIRA staff and inmates. Based upon this experience it is recommended that the implementation of a PIRA program include (1) communications between officers, staff, inmates, and the jail administration about the program; (2) continual feedback, followup, and program evaluation from officers in general, officers involved in the program, inmates, staff, community groups, and jail administration; (3) an openness by the jail administration for change within the system and a commitment to seeing PIRA used as a systems intervention tool; and (4) preparation by civilian staff for resistance from some officers.