1. SRCC poster template provided by Instructional Resources and Office of Undergraduate Research Comparison of Transition Processes from Secure to Non-secure Youth Detention Centers Naima Yancey, MPA Project Proposal Project Advisor: Dr. L. Buonanno This project seeks to fit into an emerging body of research by comparing nonprofit and public sector employees’ value systems, and how they affect the transition process for youth in detention centers. The question of primary concern in this study is: the significance of Public Service Motivation (PSM) and compassion satisfaction on values and their effects on the transition process of youth being transferred from a Secure to a Non-secure detention center (Liou & Bazemore, 1994). It is important to compare if the values differ for nonprofit employees and their counterparts – public sector employees – who work at youth detention centers, because value disparity may affect service delivery. The purpose of this project is to examine if the contracted Non-Secure Detention Service workers of the nonprofit agency – New Directions/Gateway – Longview, Erie County, NY, have similar or different values toward their work, than their counterparts, Erie County employees, who work at the Youth Services Center (Secure Detention) houses. A battery of questions designed to test both PSM and compassion satisfaction will be administered to a sample of employees within the Non-Secure Detention Service and Youth Services Center (Secure Detention) houses. PSM is a theoretical construct that scholars from multiple disciplines have applied to understand motivation in public settings (Clerkin, Paynter, & Taylor, 2009, p. 675-676). This construct will be used here to understand the PSM of nonprofit Non- Secure Detention Service workers and Erie County employees working with youth in the detention centers. While most studies have been concerned with the explanation of correctional officers professional orientation, (attitude toward inmates of adult correctional officers), few researchers have directly addressed the significance of PSM on values of nonprofit and public sector employees who work at youth detention centers, and its effects on the transition process of youth being transferred from a Secure to a Non-secure detention center (Liou & Bazemore, 1994). Because it is sometimes perceived that nonprofit employees are more “caring” and “compassionate” than public employees, these concepts must be measured as well. Therefore, this study will also include measures of compassion using an instrument such as the PROQoL (compassion satisfaction subscale). INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE Armstrong, S. (2002). Punishing not-for-profit: Implications of nonprofit privatization in juvenile punishment. Punishment & Society, 4(3), 345-368. Clerkin, R. M., Paynter, S. R., & Taylor, J. K. (2009). Public service motivation in undergraduate giving: Volunteering decisions. American Review of Public Administration, 39(6), 678. Liou, K., & Bazemore, G. (1994). Professional orientation and job involvement among detention case workers. Public Administration Quarterly, 18(2), 223. PROQoL - http://www.proqol.org/ProQol_Test.html Taylor, J. (2010Public Service Motivation, Civic Attitudes and Actions of Public, Nonprofit and Private Sector Employees. Public Administration, 88(4), 1083-1098. Van Slyke, D. M. (2003). The Mythology of Privatization in Contracting for Social Services. Public Administration Review, 63(3), 296-315. Van Slyke, D. M. (2007). Agents or Stewards: Using Theory to Understand the Government-Nonprofit Social Service Contracting Relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J- PART, 17(2), 157-187. REFERENCES METHODOLOGY & DESIGN This study will use a Quantitative Design (surveys testing PSM and compassion satisfaction. If permission is received to interview youth, the design will be Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods in which the results of the employee surveys (quantitative) will be compared with the youth interviews or focus groups (qualitative) in order to triangulate the results. We can be more confident of the results if we collect data from both vantage points. The probability sampling used in this study is a stratified sample. The sample selection will consist of members from the Secure (public service workers) and Non-Secure (nonprofit workers) Youth Detention Centers that have volunteered to participate in the survey. If permission can be obtained from Erie County, Gateway, and Buffalo State’s IRB, the researcher will also interview or focus group youth who have experienced both secure and non-secure detention to gauge their views as to whether they perceived a difference in the level of compassion towards them demonstrated by Erie County and nonprofit employees. SAMPLE SELECTION Over the past few decades, the federal government, states, and localities have turned the production and distribution of goods and services over to nonprofit organizations. “Contracting is the most widely used form of social services privatization and has been on the rise for more than four decades” (Van Slyke, 2003, p. 296). Governments may have some expertise in social service, but it is complex and often requires additional expertise. Therefore, governments either hire or contract in order to treat and serve clients. “Social services are prime candidates to be privatized in part because alternatives to government provision do exist, through the use of nonprofits for service provision. There is also generally strong support among policy makers to remove government from providing services that nongovernmental organizations already or can potentially provide” (Van Slyke, 2007). The perception that nonprofit services tend to be rehabilitative rather than punitive derives from the logic of understanding the community as treatment. When people begin to conceptualize the community in this way, it seems to reject the possibility that what happens in a community program might also be understood as punishment in a formal social control sense (Armstrong, 2002). This idea can also be understood as a proxy for “compassion” towards the clients with whom nonprofit employees work. LITERATURE REVIEW