Restorative Justice For Victims, Offenders and Community Mark Umbreit, Ph.D., Sheryl Wilson, B.A. Annie Roberts M.Sc. Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking University of Minnesota School of Social Work January 2006

Key Questions: Retributive Justice What laws were broken? Who did it? What punishment do they deserve? Dr. Howard Zehr Eastern Mennonite University

Key Questions: Restorative Justice Who has been hurt by this event? What are their needs? Whose obligations are they? Dr. Howard Zehr Eastern Mennonite University

Key Characteristics: Restorative Justice Victim-centered Offender-focused Community-driven Government as safeguard Dr. Marlene Young National Organization for Victim Assistance

University of Minnesota Restorative Justice “Restorative justice provides opportunities for those most directly affected by a crime (victim,offender, families, and other community members) to be actively involved in the process of addressing harms, needs and obligations. RJ is about offender accountability, victim healing, and community safety, through mediation and dialogue whenever possible.” Dr. Mark S. Umbreit University of Minnesota

Current Justice System: HOLDING OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE ACCOUNTABILITY MEANS TAKING YOUR PUNISHMENT Victim and Offender in passive roles Focus on deficits Debt is abstract Little, if any, victim restitution

Restorative Justice System: HOLDING OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE ACCOUNTABILITY MEANS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY AND TAKING ACTION TO REPAIR THE HARM TO VICTIM(S) Victim and offender in active roles Focus on strengths Debt is concrete Victim restitution/restoration is norm

Key Elements of Restorative Justice (Howard Zehr 12/98) Harm-focused Victim-centered responses Offender accountably addresses the harm

Key Elements of Restorative Justice (Howard Zehr 12/98) Engagement Stakeholders involved in the process: victims, community, offender Dialogue, exchange of information, mutual agreement encouraged

RJ Dialogue Processes - Prototypes Victim Offender Mediation (VOM) Victim and offender Multi-party Restorative Group Conferencing (RGC) Family Group Conferencing (FGC) Community Conferencing (CC) Circles Peacemaking circles Talking circles

R J Dialogue Processes Restorative Dialogue Models COMMUNITY POLICING R J Dialogue Processes Restorative Dialogue Models RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PRACTICES AT A GLANCE PRISONER RE-ENTRY Adapted from: Mark Seidler, Clearestory Communcations markus@csd.net

Engaging & Involving Crime Victims “A Balanced & Restorative Justice System” Victim Members on Advisory Committees Victim Members on Special Task Forces Victim Awareness Staff Training Victim Awareness Training for Offenders Victim Panels/Dialogue with Offenders Victim Offender Dialogue Groups (in facility and/or in community)

(Dr. Mark Umbreit, BARJ Project) Engaging & Involving Crime Victims “A Balanced & Restorative Justice System” Victim Offender Mediation & Conferencing Family Group Conferencing Peacemaking and Sentencing Circles Victims as Mentors for Offenders Victims as Supervisors of Community Service (Dr. Mark Umbreit, BARJ Project)

Where RJ Dialogue fits in CJS DIVERSION PREVENTION PRE-TRIAL OR PRE- ADJUDICATION Dialogue Opportunity PAROLE & REENTRY PROBATION PRISON OR COMMITMENT

Evidence-based Best Practices Restorative Justice Dialogue A Meta-Analysis conducted by the Canadian Department of Justice, 2001 Examined 27 victim offender mediation program evaluations Examined 8 family group conferencing program evaluations 26 youth studies, 9 adult studies

Outcome Measures Examined Victim Satisfaction Offender Satisfaction Restitution Compliance Recidivism

Victim Satisfaction Higher victim satisfaction ratings when compared to a comparison group Total of 13 studies, 9 VOM, 4 FGC

Offender Satisfaction Moderate to weak positive impact on offender satisfaction in all but one of the 13 studies when compared to non-restorative approaches Total of 13 studies, 7 VOM, 6 FGC

Restitution Compliance Substantially higher compliance rates than offenders exposed to other arrangements Total of 8 studies

Recidivism Restorative justice dialogue or conferencing, on average, yield reductions in recidivism when compared to non-restorative approaches Total of 32 studies, 24 VOM, 8 FGC

32% REDUCTION IN RECIDIVISM Nugent, Umbreit, Wiinamaki, Paddock Recidivism Study – Meta Analysis 2001 Successful replication of 4 studies Sample of 1,298 juvenile offenders VOM = 619, Comparison Group = 679 32% REDUCTION IN RECIDIVISM

Participation in Victim Offender Mediation and the Prevalence and Severity of Subsequent Delinquent Behavior: A Meta-Analysis William Nugent, Mona Williams, Mark Umbreit University of Tennessee and University of Minnesota Utah Law Review, December 2003 Total sample of 9,307 juvenile offenders Sample came from 19 program sites (15 prior studies) The meta-analysis suggests a 26% reduction in recidivism For those who recidivated, their future delinquent behavior decreased in severity (statistically significant) The effect size is 2-3 times greater than 2 prior meta-analyses of juvenile recidivism in non-restorative programs

Selected Books The Little Book of RJ (series) – Zehr Critical Issues in RJ – Zehr and Toews Peacemaking Circles – Pranis, Stuart & Wedge The Handbook of VOM – Umbreit Facing Violence – Umbreit, Vos, Coates, Brown Changing Lenses – Zehr

Videos and Web-site Restorative Justice Videos -- $20 each 1 of 6 in series – total price for all $100 Center for RJ & Peacemaking, U of MN, School of Social Work, 1-612-624-4923 Web-site, Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking, University of Minnesota Current: ssw.che.umn.edu/rjp Soon to be changed to: rjp.umn.edu

RJ Dialogue – other “systems” CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM (CJS) FAITH COMMUNITIES PUBLIC HEALTH - SOCIAL SERVICES RJ Opportunity COMMUNITY/ NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS WORKPLACE