< PreviousWHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH: Engaging in Resilience Training to Promote Staff Effectiveness and Well-Being By Caterina Spinaris and Daria Mayotte Desert Waters Correctional Outreach21 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH: ENGAGING IN RESILIENCE TRAINING TO PROMOTE STAFF EFFECTIVENESS AND WELL-BEING T om,1 a parole officer, had a very hard year. Tom had always excelled at his work and was deeply caring towards and engaged with his clients. Ethical conduct was a priority for him, “walking his talk,” as he would describe it. However, a client he had sanctioned for a significant policy violation, with a recommendation that her parole be revoked, accused him of assaulting her sexually in his office a few months prior. The accusation horrified him. It was blatantly false and retaliatory, yet his future career and possibly even his freedom depended on the outcome of the case, and all he had was his word against that of the parolee. While under investigation, Tom felt all alone, unsupported by his supervisor and colleagues, and viewed as guilty before the verdict was pronounced. Additionally, in that same time period his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. Tom became panicked and overwhelmed, and he experienced great difficulty focusing and sleeping. Unable to cope with the stress on his own, he finally sought the help of a psychotherapist, who taught him resilience-promoting skills based on cognitive-behavioral and positive psychology approaches. These skills that helped him pull through the crisis--and to even identify its positives--included, among others, breathing and other mindfulness skills, cognitive restructuring, skills for tolerating inescapable distress, expressive writing, and an understanding of ways to pursue post-traumatic growth. After his department cleared him, he became an advocate of teaching resilience skills to all staff, openly sharing with his agency administrators that the resilience skills he’d learned and had personally begun incorporating had felt like life and career savers. Correctional employees in all facets of correctional work– in probation, parole, jail, or prison settings–have always dealt with occupational challenges. However, since the COVID-19 pandemic, some employees are being stretched to unprecedented degrees, often with higher loads of high- risk clients, making the teaching of resilience skills more indispensable than ever before. Psychological resilience has been defined as the ability to experience an adaptive stress response, rapid stress recovery, and low susceptibility to stress-related psychopathology (Wu et al., 2013). Consequently, psychological resilience is a critical component of functioning for those serving in high-stress work environments, such as corrections. A study during the COVID-19 pandemic found that teaching healthcare workers resilience-promoting skills improved levels of resilience, stress, anxiety, and burnout-exhaustion (Yi- Frazier et al., 2022). Yet another study reported that online group coaching of women physician trainees decreased burnout and increased well-being measures (Mann et al., 2023). Similarly, simulation-based resilience-promoting training of police officers was reported to improve levels of the officers’ physiological stress response (Andersen et al., 2015). These findings support the expectation that resilience skills are helpful, teachable, and can result in improved well-being even under highly stressful conditions, such as the extreme stress that Tom experienced. While his exact circumstances may not be the norm, dire challenges of one sort or another are too often encountered in correctional settings. Resilience training is therefore imperative, not only for seasoned staff but also for new staff, to prepare them to some degree for what they may encounter and experience during their careers. Like any complex construct, resilience has several layers and facets, and it is best taught incrementally, with more advanced skills, such as skills that promote post-traumatic growth, building on more foundational elements, such as Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy skills (Beck, 2019), and self-regulation through breathing exercises, meditation, and other mindfulness skills (Linehan, 2014). Additionally, repetition, through reviews, reminders, and opportunities to practice, is known to strengthen skills acquisition (Kluge et al., 2010). THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS FOURFOLD: • Give a brief overview of what resilience is understood to be. • Present reasons why resilience needs to be promoted in correctional work. • Discuss skills and conditions that promote resilience. • Discuss best practices for teaching skill-based resilience-promoting behaviors to correctional staff to increase the likelihood that staff will incorporate these behaviors in their personal and professional lives. • We are professional counselors and educators working on equipping correctional professionals so that they can improve their well-being and correctional agencies by implementing wellness-promoting work conditions. We recognize that we are addressing complex issues here in a limited space, and we welcome our readers’ comments and feedback, so we can continue learning from those in the field. WHAT IS RESILIENCE? We have a friend whose hobby is growing bonsai trees. If you’re unfamiliar with this, bonsai is a Japanese art form in which a tree is grown and “trained” within the confines of a small container (Relf, 2020). It is a decades-long process that aims to create what looks like a full-sized tree in miniature form. The bonsai needs regular care, shaping with wires, and extensive and thoughtful pruning. Because there’s little space in the container for reserves, the bonsai also needs regular, even daily, water and fertilizer. Growing bonsai trees skillfully can have very impressive results. A bonsai is technically put through trauma as it grows. To survive, it must become resilient. And while it doesn’t end up looking like other trees of its family, its adaptation to constraints helps shape it into something that commands admiration. “A smooth sea never made a skilled sailor.” -Franklin D. Roosevelt22 PERSPECTIVESVOLUME 48, NUMBER 1 INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY The term “resilience” derives from the Latin verb resilire, which means to rebound or to recoil. In early usage in the 180’s it described the capacity of materials, like wood or metal, to endure severe conditions (Alexander, 2013). The term has since been used to describe properties of living organisms, such as ecosystems, individuals, and organizations (Alexander, 2013; Stanley et al., 2018). Psychological resilience can be defined as the ability of persons to adapt successfully to disruptions that threaten functioning (Masten, 2014); recovering relatively rapidly following adversity or even positive change (Luthans, 2002), experiencing low current psychological distress in the context ofhigh degree of exposure to high-stress events and conditions (Pietzrack & Cook, 2013), and being relatively resistant to the effects of stressors on health and functioning (Wu et al., 2013). Characteristics of resilience that have been identified are determination, endurance, adaptability, and recuperability during or following a disruptive exposure to a sudden or extreme stressor or after sustaining damage, injury, or psychological trauma (Taormina, 2015). Consider the bonsai tree here; consider Tom himself as a metaphorical bonsai–someone who “trained” through extreme stressors, adapted to constraining conditions, and “grew” with an amazing outcome. Psychological resilience is not viewed as an all-or-nothing characteristic of an individual–being either present or absent. Rather, it is defined in relative terms, as degree of resistance to the erosion of well-being and/or impaired functioning, despite exposure to events that tend to affect well-being and functioning (Wu et al, 2013). To use an immune system analogy, more resilient staff may still suffer from infection, and their immune system may be taxed, but it will be taxed significantly less than the immune system of staff who are less resilient, and a faster and more complete recovery will result. When addressing correctional staff, a distinction must be made between true resilience and false resilience. False resilience can be characterized as looking good on the outside but falling apart on the inside. This façade of toughness may eventually collapse as unprocessed psychological pressures mount (Friedman & Higson-Smith, 2003). False resilience can be based on staff’s denial, to themselves and others, that they are distressed or malfunctioning in some areas as a result of how they were affected by work-related stressors. Practically, you may hear false resilience playing out in statements like, “No, this did not bother me; I’m fine,” or “We’re tough! We can handle anything!” On the other hand, true resilience entails facing challenges with self-awareness coupled with self-honesty regarding their impact and what it will take to overcome the difficulties encountered. Admiral James Stockdale’s statement regarding his resilient mindset as a prisoner of war comes to mind as an illustration of true resilience. As he stated in what has become known as the Stockdale Paradox, “You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be” (as cited in Groysberg & Abrahams, 2020, para. 9). The difference between true and false resilience is significant. In workforce cultures where false resilience is celebrated and even expected, the consequences on staff’s mental health can be highly detrimental and even deadly. That happens when staff falsely believe suicide is their only honorable option when they are struggling with mental health issues, rather than reaching out for assistance. Therefore, the quest for true and enduring resilience is of primary importance, as lives may depend on it (Friedman & Higson-Smith, 2003). Studies have repeatedly reported that the rate and risk of suicide among correctional officers is disturbingly elevated compared to those in most other professions, even police officers (New Jersey Police Suicide Task Force Report, 2009; Stack & Tsoudis, 1997; Violanti et al., 2013). The suicide rate for Massachusetts Department of Correction Correctional Officers was found to be over four times higher than the nation’s highest risk demographic for men aged 25-64 (Frost, 2020). Elevated rates of suicidal thoughts have been reported in samples of correctional officers (Lerman, 2017; Denhof & Spinaris, 2016; Spinaris & Brocato, 2019). We’d like to pause at this point and say that if you, our reader, are experiencing suicidal thoughts or urges at this time, please dial 988 to contact the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 24/7 and/or contact your agency’s Employee Assistance Program and/or Peer Support Team to begin to receive the help you need at this time. We want you well! One more key construct related to resilience is that of Post- Traumatic Growth (PTG), which refers to personal growth due to how one responds to stressors in the aftermath of traumatic experiences (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996). This PTG may result in increased appreciation of relationships, discovering previously unidentified personal strengths, involvement in new pursuits, increased spiritual growth and involvement, and increased appreciation of life (Alper et al., 2022). In addition to helping traumatized people bounce back, PTG can also operate as a protective factor, rendering people more able to withstand and overcome future stressors. WHY DO CORRECTIONAL STAFF NEED RESILIENCE? Recently, there has been an increase in the attention paid to correctional staff’s wellness needs, and particularly their need for resilience, given inherent occupational stressors (Smith, 2023). Correctional staff in all job roles and ranks are continually and relentlessly bombarded by multitudes of occupational stressors, which can be viewed as falling in three broad categories: (a) operational stressors (technical aspect of the job, such as, staffing, equipment, and certain policies); (b) organizational stressors (the “people” aspect of the job, such as leadership styles, an “us against them” mindset, and personality conflicts); and (c) traumatic stressors (incidents of violence, injury and death, such as the suicide or murder of justice-involved persons, to which staff are exposed either directly, in real time, or indirectly, at a later time, electronically or otherwise). Elements of these three broad categories of occupational stressors may co-occur and interact with one another, making each other worse. For example, short staffing may increase the likelihood of an assault in which staff are injured, resulting in some staff going on medical leave. Conflict may ensue between frontline staff and administrators and between staff 23 \AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY and justice-involved persons, with some staff quitting and others calling in sick, worsening the short-staffing difficulties. Moreover, exacerbation of the “us against them” mindset increases the probability of future conflict and assaults. In this conversation on promoting resilience, it is important to point out that corrections work has a high probability of repeated traumatic exposure, both directly and indirectly, and staff’s own safety is also at risk (Ferdik & Smith, 2017; Spinaris & Brocato, 2019). The term “burnout” (Maslach et al., 1996; Schaufeli et al., 2009) does not adequately describe negative consequences of correctional occupational stressors, because burnout only addresses the consequences of operational and organizational stressors; it does not include the consequences of traumatic stressors. Similarly, the terms Vicarious Traumatization (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995; Saakvitne & Pearlman, 1996) and Compassion Fatigue or Secondary Traumatic Stress (Figley, 1995) do not capture the consequences of occupational stressors of correctional staff, as these terms only address indirect traumatic exposure in situations where the safety of those exposed (typically mental health providers while at their offices) is not at high risk. They do not address direct traumatic exposure, being at risk oneself, the impact of operational or occupational stressors, and the interactions of all these factors. The term Corrections Fatigue was coined to address these nuances and better address wellness needs of correctional staff (Spinaris, 2000). This umbrella term attempts to capture the consequences of all types of correctional occupational stressors. It refers to cumulative negative changes in staff’s personality, health, and functioning and cumulative negative changes of the workforce culture as a result of combinations of these stressors (Spinaris, 2020; Spinaris & Brocato, 2019). Causes of Corrections Fatigue are cumulative exposures to occupational stressors in the context of insufficient or unhealthy coping strategies or resources at the individual, team, and/or administrative levels. Although not a clinical diagnosis, but rather a descriptive term similar to burnout (Finney et al., 2013), at the severe end of the continuum Corrections Fatigue may involve diagnosable health conditions such as depression, post-traumatic stress, or high blood pressure (Spinaris, 2020; Spinaris & Brocato, 2019). WHAT ARE KEY INGREDIENTS OF RESILIENCE? For correctional work environments to be healthy, three areas need to be targeted to pursue enhanced staff resilience: (a) initiatives involving individual staff (bottom- up), (b) initiatives involving peers/teams (horizontal), and (c) initiatives involving administrators and supervisors (top- down). All three are essential for successful outcomes. By bottom-up initiatives we mean self-care and other health- promoting behaviors that individual staff can practice on their own, independent of anyone else, on and/or off the job. These include self-care practices that employees can do themselves and that no one else can do for them. They and only they can make these behaviors happen, and often only they know whether they have disciplined themselves enough to follow through with these activities. By horizontal initiatives we mean training and role-modeling regarding values as well as interpersonal and self-regulation skills that help coworkers interact with one another in constructive, supportive ways. Coworker/peer horizontal activities include the ways staff treat one another, especially staff of the same rank/level, and the workforce culture that emerges as a result (“the way we do things around here”), with formal or informal leaders setting the pace. By top-down initiatives we mean programs, resources, and system-wide policies instituted and implemented by administrators in order to promote employee wellness. Organizational, top-down activities are those most directly accomplished by agency leadership through a broad variety of system-wide approaches. Examples of these are implementation of strategic well-being initiatives, increase in staffing levels, messaging about and recognition of Corrections Fatigue issues, provision of specifically-targeted training courses, intentional role modeling, new policies that address Corrections Fatigue risk issues (such as mandatory overtime, excessive caseload size, and the ever-present exposure of staff to traumatic stressors), management performance objectives and evaluation criteria, budget and resource allocations, and creation of new positions with support personnel such as wellness coordinators, staff psychologists, or staff chaplains. Meta-analyses of studies among physicians that compared the efficacy of bottom-up and top-down interventions regarding reduction of burnout reported that both bottom- up and top-down interventions can reduce burnout levels, but top-down interventions tend to have a bigger impact (Panagioti et al.,2016; West et al., 2016). This suggests that reducing or eliminating the negative impact of a stressor through a top-down intervention, such as a policy, tends to be more beneficial regarding promoting resilience than providing coping strategies, such as training physicians to apply mindfulness techniques, to deal with the effects of that stressor. That is important to keep in mind as agencies design programs to boost employee resilience in the workplace. Regarding the influence of horizontal interactions, a study of correctional professionals concluded that coworker relationships significantly impacted staff’s well-being (Spinaris & Brocato, 2019). Researchers have identified protective influences that increase resilience. Some examples are positive coping, positive thinking, positive emotions, realism, behavioral control, family support, positive command climate in work settings, and belongingness (Meredith, et al., 2011; Coulombe et al., 2020; Vanhove et al., 2015). Effective approaches for fostering resilience involve the promotion of such influences through strategies that target both prevention and intervention at all three levels—bottom-up, horizontal, and top-down. WHAT IS INVOLVED IN PREVENTION? At both the bottom-up (individual) and horizontal (work- team) levels, prevention methods are inoculation-type, long-term approaches, in which strategies are taught and skills are trained before high-stress workplace events happen. Prevention includes embracing health-promoting practices as habitual behaviors that foster health and wellness and practicing values that promote a positive culture, with the goal being to neutralize the negative consequences of stressors. At the bottom-up (individual) level, prevention strategies include teaching staff ways INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY 24 PERSPECTIVESVOLUME 48, NUMBER 1 of thinking that counter negativity and boost optimism and ways to tend to one’s physical, psychological, and spiritual health and overall well-being. For example, staff may be taught to correct thinking distortions (Burns, 1980) that lead to emotional distress, or engage in meditation or gratitude practices to promote self-regulation. At the horizontal (work-team) level, prevention strategies include teaching staff positive values and interpersonal skills (such as communication and conflict management) and educating staff on the impact of social support on health and well-being. Such values include the Big 7 values promoted in “From Corrections Fatigue to Fulfillment™,” a course offered by the Desert Waters Correctional Outreach nonprofit agency. At the top-down (organizational, administrator) level, prevention includes training administrators and supervisors to adopt positive leadership styles and supportive management practices (Cameron, 2012), wellness-promoting policies and their implementation, provision of appropriate resources, such as education and healthy nutrition, and advocacy for staff wellness at legislative levels. WHAT IS INVOLVED IN INTERVENTION? Intervention methods, on the other hand, involve strategies to counter the negative consequences of high-stress events and promote wellness following exposure to them—that is, after a high-stress incident (Everly & Mitchell, 1997). Such strategies may be rather brief and may be implemented in the short term, but they work best when based on wrap- around efforts to offer staff support, and they promote positive workforce cultures that protect staff’s psychological safety (Everly & Mitchell, 1997). Interventions are easier to engage in if the groundwork has already been laid to some degree through long-term and habitual resilience-promoting behaviors. Staff members who are well versed in practicing positive behaviors before a high-stress incident will likely be at an advantage compared to staff members who are not. Intervention methods also include the use of appropriate resources, such as corrections-specific, affordable, adequate, sufficient, and easily accessible treatment options. Prevention and intervention strategies can be likened to two mechanisms one might use for withstanding a torrential rainstorm. Raincoats, hats, and umbrellas are intended to keep one dry (prevention). Yet, if the storm is significant enough, one will get wet anyway, despite the protective gear. As a result, towels, hair dryers, and dry clothes will be necessary afterward (intervention). Both prevention and intervention have necessary functions and will be needed independently or simultaneously at various points in time, depending on the circumstances. Corrections staff will benefit from the ongoing incorporation of both prevention strategies as well as intervention strategies in the effort to boost resilience. WHAT ARE SOME FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS TO CONSIDER WHEN TEACHING RESILIENCE? As described earlier when addressing false resilience in law enforcement and military workforce cultures (Friedman & Higson-Smith, 2003; Spinaris, 2020, 2022), individuals in such cultures are trained implicitly and/or by example to “play through the pain” and to deny, minimize, or ignore their own feelings, needs, or reactions. Psychological resilience is a fairly new (in corrections, at least) and a specialized training topic. During the last two decades or so, there has been increased interest in the possibility of teaching resilience in workplaces to improve the well-being and functioning of employees, especially those working in predictably high-stress or high-trauma environments (Vanhove et al., 2015). Resilience-promoting curriculum is best when based on the latest valid scientific evidence and understanding of correctional workforce cultures. Resilience training aims to help staff build a greater capacity to withstand stressors, bounce back relatively unharmed, and even grow positively as a result of the experience, further increasing their capacity for resilience. WHAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN PREPARING A RESILIENCE TRAINING CURRICULUM? Since this is a specialized and ever-evolving area of learning, the curriculum and ways to teach it should be compiled by Subject Matter Experts (SME) in the areas of psychological trauma, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and positive psychology who also have an understanding of the correctional workforce cultures that the training addresses. Such a curriculum could be put together from scratch, or an existing program could be used or expanded, as long as it meets the criteria of being skills based, corrections specific, trauma responsive, and based on current research findings. Agencies might be best situated to offer two distinct curricula on resilience, one addressing the subject from the perspective and needs of seasoned staff and the other addressing the subject from the perspective and needs of new staff. Theoretical information is important to include in the training to start, explaining the concept of resilience and its nuances and its necessity if correctional staff are to remain healthy and functional. In the case where resilience training is mandatory, rather than just being given to staff members who elect to take the training, there is always the possibility that some staff who are mandated to attend do not have a “felt need” for such a training. These participants may be of the opinion that they are already resilient and that they are coping well both in their professional and their personal lives. If such participants express a negative opinion about the course—for example, indicating that they regard the class to be a waste of their time—they should be treated with respect and commended for doing well in their lives. The instructors may ask for them to share some of their coping strategies in class and may suggest to such reluctant attendees that they themselves may not need this material at this time but might be able to share it with a coworker in need and/or might find it useful for themselves in the future. The resilience curriculum is best when it is skills based, presenting a variety of resilience-promoting behaviors step by step, like recipes in cookbooks. This allows the learners to understand how to put the skills into real-world practice. Several such skills are necessary, as not all suggestions resonate with or fit all learners well. To make resilience training, including skill-building, more suitable for the audience, it would be advisable to include, with permission, pertinent brief examples or quotes by staff working in similar roles as the learners.25 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY When compiling the curriculum, the SME is strongly advised to point out that resilience is not only an individually based attainment. It is also very much a team-based and agency- based goal to be pursued. It is imperative to highlight that resilience must be pursued throughout the agency by staff at every level, exercising their authority to boost resilience in the ways that they are able and authorized to do. Helping staff during the training to identify their spheres of influence (i.e., who or what THEY can impact) is critical, as it empowers them to BE the change they want to see in their corner of their work world. For example, individual probation officers have control over how they treat their clients/ probationers and coworkers, but they do not have control over budgets voted on by the legislature. Ideally, resilience training should be divided into weekly or every other week sessions, including scenarios to discuss and exercises to practice assigned skills that can be worked on between sessions. Outcomes and experiences can be reported in the following session. Classes should be fairly small, comprised of approximately 12 to 15 learners, to allow appropriate time for reporting out and discussion. TO WHAT EXTENT IS RESILIENCE TRAINING EFFECTIVE? A meta-analytic review of resilience-building training studies in organizational workplace environments (Vanhove et al., 2015) examined the effects of resilience-building training on measures of well-being (e.g., life satisfaction, job satisfaction, optimism), prevention of deficits in psychosocial functioning (e.g., negative thinking, anxiety, depression), and work performance (e.g., supervisor-rated performance, successful task completion). Individual coaching was found to be the most effective method of resilience-building training, followed by classroom-based training. It was also found that organizational resilience-building training resulted in enhanced training effects that increased over time for workforce populations at greater risk for exposure to highly stressful and/or traumatic work conditions and who had had no prior such training, contrary to workforces not exposed to such conditions. (In fact, training benefits in the latter group diminished over time.) Correctional work environments certainly fall in the category of highly stressful and/or traumatic work environments. Indirectly, these findings also point to the importance of review of the material and reminders of principles through “refresher” training, and the encouragement and role modeling by supervisors of personal application of resilience-building principles and strategies (Kluge et al., 2010). WHAT IS INVOLVED IN OVERCOMING ROADBLOCKS TO RESILIENCE TRAINING IN CORRECTIONAL WORKFORCE CULTURES? For many understandable reasons, correctional workforce cultures have admired and sought after the appearance of invulnerability and toughness among the staff, especially uniformed staff. As a result, staff who admit to struggling emotionally may be ostracized. This mindset must be tactfully overcome if learners are to be open to receiving resilience-promoting material and acknowledging that we are all fragile human beings who need constructive strategies for dealing with stressors. STRATEGIES THAT HELP REDUCE APPREHENSION ABOUT THIS TYPE OF TRAINING INCLUDE: Explaining to staff that, yes, they need to keep their emotions at bay while responding to high-stress or traumatic events, but there will come a time later on when they need to process that material for the sake of their well-being. If they do not, negative consequences of exposure to such events will continue to accumulate, eventually reaching a critical mass that is hard to overcome. Affirming that it is much more courageous and admirable to face one’s struggles than to deny them by keeping a “stiff upper lip.” In our experience, staff are more receptive to such self-help material when the need for it is explained to them in this manner. Pointing out to staff the positive aspect of keeping an open mind as they go through the course, because they may not need this material at this time but their colleagues might, or the material may become relevant to them personally later on. Including stories of staff overcoming adversity and regaining their well-being through the application of resilience- promoting behaviors. Training instructors to briefly share personal stories of experiencing and working through adversity through the application of resilience-promoting behaviors. Training instructors to remain respectful when challenging comments are expressed by learners in class or outside of class. Compassionately validating the emotions behind staff concerns about the material without agreeing with the content of the comments is an art form that can be taught. When applied, it can win naysayers over. Training instructors to protect learners’ psychological safety by respectfully yet firmly intercepting critical or ridiculing statements made when a learner shares about having struggled with work-related stressors. Instructors must be trained to affirm that correctional work poses unique challenges, which is why such material is taught to staff. When such steps are taken and done well, the classroom experience becomes one of “bonding” and forming a community. This is augmented when learners are given ample opportunity to ask questions, discuss the material both as a large group and in small groups, and provide input and solutions to work-related and home-life challenges. Even though resilience training tends to be positive and empowering, the subject of trauma may be touched upon periodically. Consequently, there is always a possibility that learners may feel “triggered” by a memory and experience emotional distress. Instructors must be trained to respond to learner “meltdowns” in class and at a later time and have a number of resources and referrals available. WHAT ARE SOME BASIC MEANS OF ENGAGING THE LEARNERS? Since this is a primarily skills-based training (a cookbook with several recipes) it is important to apply these skills 26 PERSPECTIVESVOLUME 48, NUMBER 1 INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY at even a rudimentary level in class through the use of scenarios and role playing. In addition, for long-term benefit the training team of the agency should provide reminders of resilience-promoting behaviors. That can be done through group emails, newsletters, bulletin boards, or posters or by disseminating the information to supervisors to discuss with their team. WHAT TOPICS ARE COVERED IN RESILIENCE TRAINING? Important topics in resilience training include: How well-being can be gradually eroded by work stressors– the nature and process of Corrections Fatigue, How resilience-promoting behaviors can reduce Corrections Fatigue and even reverse it, The fact that resilience-promoting skills can be learned, and The process of brain “rewiring” through repetition (based on current knowledge about nervous system changes when we learn). ADDITIONALLY, IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO PRESENT SKILLS RELATED TO: • Positive social interactions and social support • Self-regulation (emotions, thoughts, behaviors) • Cognitive reframing • Positive meaning making • Logical problem-solving • Managing inescapable distress in healthy ways • Self-care • Mastery/Overlearning • Correcting cognitive errors • Optimism • Gratitude • Post-Traumatic Growth This article is merely an overview with broad brush strokes that presents the big picture for teaching resilience skills. Like the proverbial layers of the onion, after instructors at an agency start to offer this type of training, they may seek and discover ways to proceed deeper into the subject by progressively building on existing blocks of learning, while also keeping the big picture in mind. CONCLUSION Let’s return for a moment to our bonsai analogy. What correctional agencies have in their (metaphorical) hands is staff who, like the bonsai, are being repeatedly subjected to uniquely taxing environments. As a result, they are continually shaped by occupational stressors. Opportunities available through resilience training are comparable to expert pruning, watering, and fertilizing. Skillfully managed, exposure to highly stressful circumstances can become a springboard for growth. What is the potential outcome of the intentionality of resilience training throughout this transformation process? As with the bonsai, it can be simply amazing. REFERENCES Alexander, D. E. (2013). Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological journey. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13, 2707–2716. www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci. net/13/2707/2013/ doi:10.5194/nhess-13-2707-2013 Alper, H. E., Feliciano, L., Millien, L., Pollari, C., & Locke, S. (2022). Post-traumatic growth and quality of life among World Trade Center Health Registry enrollees 16 years after 9/11. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph1915973 Andersen, J. P., Papazoglou, K., Koskelainen, M., Nyman, M., Gustafsberg, H., & Arnetz, B. B. (2015). Applying resilience promotion training among special forces police officers. SAGE Open, 5, 1-8. Beck, A. T. (2019).A 60-year evolution of cognitive theory and therapy.Perspectives on Psychological Science,14(1), 16–20. htpps://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618804187 Burns, D. (1980). Feeling good: The new mood therapy. William Morrow and Company Cameron, K. S. (2012). Positive leadership: Strategies for extraordinary performance. Berret-Koehler Publishers Coulombe, S., Pacheco, T., Cox, E., Khalil, C., Doucerain, M. M., Auger, E., & Meunier, S. (2020). Risk and resilience factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A snapshot of the experiences of Canadian workers early on in the crisis. Frontiers in Psychology, Sec. Personality and Social Psychology, 11. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.580702 Denhof, M. D., & Spinaris, C. G. (2016). Prevalence of trauma-related health conditions in corrections officers: A profile of Michigan Corrections Organization members. https:// desertwaters.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/MCO-Paper_ FINAL.pdf Everly, Jr., G. S., & Mitchell, J. T. (1997). The scientific evidence for critical incident stress management. Journal of Emergency Medical Services, 22, 86-93. Ferdik, F. V., & Smith, H. P. (2017). Correctional officer safety and wellness literature synthesis. National Institute of Justice. https:// www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/250484.pdf Figley, C. R. (1995). Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. Bruner/Mazel: New York. Finney, C., Stergiopoulos, E., Hensel, J., Bonato, S. & Dewa, S. S. (2013). Organizational stressors associated with job stress and burnout in correctional officers: a systematic review. BMC Public Health, 13, 82. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471- 2458/13/82 Friedman, M., & Higson-Smith, C. (2003). Building psychological resilience: Learning from the South African Police Service. In Paton, D., Violanti, J.M. & Smith, L.M., (Eds.), Promoting capabilities to manage posttraumatic stress: Perspectives on resilience. Charles C. Thomas. Frost, N. (2020). Understanding the impact of corrections officer suicide. National Institute of Justice. https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/ articles/understanding-impacts-corrections-officer-suicide Groysberg, B., & Abrahams, R. (2020). What the Stockdale paradox tells us about crisis leadership. Harvard Business School, Working Knowledge. Retrieved from: https://hbswk. hbs.edu/item/what-the-stockdale-paradox-tells-us-about-crisis- leadership27 AMERICAN PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY Kluge, A., Sauer, J., Burkolter, D., & Ritzmann, S. (2010). Designing training for temporal and adaptive transfer: A comparative evaluation of three training methods for process control tasks. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43, 327–353. doi:10.2190/EC.43.3.d Lerman, A. E. (2017). Office health and wellness: Results from the California Correctional Officer Survey. https://gspp.berkeley.edu/ assets/uploads/research/pdf/executive_summary_08142018.pdf Linehan, M. M. (2014). DBT Skills Training Manual (2nd Ed). The Guilford Press. Luthans F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695–706. Mann,A.,Shah,A. N.,Thibodeau,P. S., Dyrbye, L.;Syed,A.,Woodward, M. A., Thurmon, K., Jones,C. D.,Dunbar,K. S., & Fainstad,T. (2023). Online well-being group coaching program for women physician trainees: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open.2023;6(10):e2335541. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.35541 Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). MBI: The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Manual. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA. Masten, A. S. (2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development 85, 6–20. Meredith, L. S., Sherbourne, C. D., Gaillot, S., Hansell, L., Hans, V., Ritschard, H.V., Parker, A.M., & Wren, G. (2011). Promoting psychological resilience in the U.S. Military. RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research. New Jersey Police Suicide Task Force Report. (2009). http://www. state.nj.us/lps/library/NJPoliceSuicideTaskForceReport-January- 30-2009-Final(r2.3.09).pdf Panagioti,M.,Panagopoulou,E., Bower,P., Lewith,G.,Kontopantelis,E.,Chew-Graham,C.,Dawson,S.,van Marwijk, H., Geraghty,K., & Esmail,A. (2016). Controlled interventions to reduce burnout inphysicians: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine. doi:10.1001/ jamainternmed.2016.7674 Pearlman, L. A., & Saakvitne, K.W. (1995). Trauma and the therapist: Countertransference and vicarious traumatization in psychotherapy with incest survivors. New York: W.W. Norton. Pietzrack, R. H., & Cook, J. M. (2013). Psychological resilience in older U.S. veterans: results from the national health and resilience in veterans study. Depression and Anxiety, 30, 432-443. Relf, D. (2020). The Art of Bonsai. VCE Publications. https://www. pubs.ext.vt.edu/426/426-601/426-601.html Saakvitne, K. W. & Pearlman, L. A. (1996). Transforming the pain: A workbook on vicarious traumatization. New York: W. W. Norton. Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2009). Burnout: 35 years of research and practice. Career Development International, 14, 204-220. Smith, H. P. (Ed.). (2023). Promoting Wellness and Resiliency in Correctional Officers. New York: Routledge. Spinaris, C. G. (2000). “Corrections Fatigue”: The cost of working behind bars. Oasis Insights, 3, 2-3. Spinaris, C. G. (2020, May/June). Mission critical: Correctional employee health and wellness. American Jails, 8-14. Spinaris, C. G. (2022, January/February). Breaking the “I’m good!” code of silence. American Jails, 8-13. Spinaris, C. G., & Brocato, N. (2019). Descriptive study of Michigan Department of Corrections staff well-being: Contributing factors, outcomes, and actionable solutions. https://www. michigan.gov/documents/corrections/MDOC_Staff_Well-being_ Report_660565_7.pdf Spinaris, C. G., Denhof, M. D., & Kellaway, J. A. (2012). Posttraumatic stress disorder in United States corrections professionals: Prevalence and impact on health and functioning. https://desertwaters.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PTSD_ Prev_in_Corrections_09-03-131-1.pdf Stack, S. J, & Tsoudis, O. (1997). Suicide risk among correctional officers: A logistic regression analysis. Archives of Suicide Research, 3, 183-186. Stanley, S., Sethuramalingam, V., & Pandian, S. (2018). Resilience: Its nature and significance (a theoretical overview). Indian Journal of Social Work, 79 (1), 5-30. Taormina, R. J. (2015). Adult personal resilience: A new theory, new measure, and practical implications. Psychological Thought, 8, 35–46. doi:10.5964/psyct.v8i1.126 Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (1996). The posttraumatic growth inventory: Measuring the positive legacy of trauma.Journal of Traumatic Stress,9(3), 455-471. doi: 10.1007/BF02103658 Vanhove, A. J., Herian, M., Perez, A. L. U., Harms, P. D., & Lester, P. B. (2015). Can resilience be taught at work? A meta-analytic review of resilience-building programme effectiveness. P.D. harms Publications, 11. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/pdharms/11 Violanti, J. M., Robinson, C. F, & Shen, R. (2013). Law enforcement suicide: A national analysis. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health and Human Resilience, 15, 289-298. West, C. P.,Dyrbye, L. N. Erwin, P. J., & Shanafelt, T.D. (2016). Interventions to prevent and reduce physician burnout: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet, 388(10057), 2272-2281. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31279-X Wu, G., Feder, A., Cohen, H., Kim, J. J., Calderon, S., Charney, D. S., & Mathe, A. A. (2013). Understanding resilience. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(10), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fnbeh.2013.00010. Yi-Frazier, J. P., O’Donnell, M. B., Adhikari, E. A., Zhou, C., probation settings.Journal of Offender Rehabilitation,56(1), 38- 60. Wodahl, E. J., Garland, B., Culhane, S. E., & McCarty, W. P. (2011). Utilizing behavioral interventions to improve supervision outcomes in community-based corrections.Criminal Justice and Behavior,38(4), 386-405. Caterina Spinaris, PhD, LPC, is the founding director of Desert 28 PERSPECTIVESVOLUME 48, NUMBER 1 INNOVATIONS IN COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS TRAINING PRACTICES, CONTENT, AND DELIVERY Waters Correctional Outreach and a Licensed Professional Counselor. Her professional experience includes writing wellness curriculum for correctional staff and their families, training thousands of staff, and conducting wellness research. Her course, From Corrections Fatigue to Fulfillment™ (CF2F), received the 2016 Commercial Product Award of Excellence from the International Association of Corrections Training Personnel. She designed the Corrections Fatigue Assessment™ and has authored and co-authored four books on correctional staff wellness. Caterina is currently developing SafetyNet Accreditation™, Desert Waters’ Correctional Staff Wellness Accreditation Program. She can be reached at caterina@desertwaters.com. Daria Mayotte, MA, is Deputy Director and Director of Training at Desert Waters Correctional Outreach. With degrees in both education and counseling, her passions are teaching, training, and writing. After spending 11 years working with correctional staff in South Africa and teaching wellness curriculum such as From Corrections Fatigue to Fulfillment™ (CF2F), she has appreciated the opportunity to incorporate her understanding of overseas correctional staff into her current roles. Daria recently co-authored the book, Building Bridges with Corrections Staff: Spiritually, Practically, Relationally, with Caterina Spinaris, for correctional chaplains. She can be reached at daria@desertwaters.com.scramsystems.com Empowering Clients on the Road to Sobriety SCRAM Continuous Alcohol Monitoring® (SCRAM CAM®) has played a pivotal role in transforming the lives of clients that have been court-ordered to abstain from alcohol or have voluntarily chosen the path to sobriety. Some key features that set SCRAM CAM apart include: • Anti-Tamper Technology. Industry- leading technology that encourages client compliance and accountability. • Recidivism Reduction. SCRAM CAM provides crucial support for long-term sobriety. • Proven Research. Validated by multiple independent research studies and peer-reviewed publications. • Single-Source Admissibility. Single- source admissible results upheld by the Frye-Daubert standards of admissibility. SCRAM Systems offers a full spectrum of monitoring solutions that give probation departments the tools they need to efficiently supervise and manage diverse caseloads. 1 MILLION ‘‘ The SCRAM program really helped me out with everything in life and made me a better father, son, and husband.’’ —SCRAM CAM ParticipantNext >