{"id":{"repo_id":"duquesne","oai_identifier":"oai:dsc.duq.edu:etd-2418"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/duquesne/oai:dsc.duq.edu:etd-2418","repository":{"repo_id":"duquesne","name":"Duquesne","base_url":"https://dsc.duq.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"\"They Just Want Someone They Can Talk To:\" Administrative Perceptions of Prison Grievance Resolution Programs","abstract":"This study compares prison grievance resolution programs currently being utilized in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The effectiveness of each program is examined through administrators' perceptions of how well the programs are working. The Chief Grievance Processor and a Facility Grievance Coordinator in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and the Head Corrections Ombudsman in the state of New Jersey were interviewed. Effectiveness is determined through a comparison of what administrators report and the stated objectives of each program. It is hypothesized that administrators from both states will believe the processes are currently working effectively because of bureaucratic pressure. Results show that administrators in Pennsylvania support this hypothesis, while the administrator interviewed in New Jersey made suggestions for change. The results also show while neither program operates more effectively in terms of their stated goals, the New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsman functions with a larger scope of potential change.","abstract_html":"This study compares prison grievance resolution programs currently being utilized in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The effectiveness of each program is examined through administrators' perceptions of how well the programs are working. The Chief Grievance Processor and a Facility Grievance Coordinator in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and the Head Corrections Ombudsman in the state of New Jersey were interviewed. Effectiveness is determined through a comparison of what administrators report and the stated objectives of each program. It is hypothesized that administrators from both states will believe the processes are currently working effectively because of bureaucratic pressure. Results show that administrators in Pennsylvania support this hypothesis, while the administrator interviewed in New Jersey made suggestions for change. The results also show while neither program operates more effectively in terms of their stated goals, the New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsman functions with a larger scope of potential change.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Zaveloff, Erica Paige"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"MA","degree_level":"Immediate Access","degree_discipline":"Graduate Center for Social and Public Policy","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Norman Conti","Charles F. Hanna"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2008,"date_issued":"2008-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2008-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:10:43Z","subjects":["corrections ombudsman","grievance resolution","prisons","total institutions"],"languages":["English"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1402","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Norman Conti","Charles F. Hanna"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Zaveloff, Erica Paige"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2018-08-03T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Graduate Center for Social and Public Policy"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Immediate Access"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["MA"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["corrections ombudsman","grievance resolution","prisons","total institutions"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1402"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study compares prison grievance resolution programs currently being utilized in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The effectiveness of each program is examined through administrators' perceptions of how well the programs are working. The Chief Grievance Processor and a Facility Grievance Coordinator in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and the Head Corrections Ombudsman in the state of New Jersey were interviewed. Effectiveness is determined through a comparison of what administrators report and the stated objectives of each program. It is hypothesized that administrators from both states will believe the processes are currently working effectively because of bureaucratic pressure. Results show that administrators in Pennsylvania support this hypothesis, while the administrator interviewed in New Jersey made suggestions for change. The results also show while neither program operates more effectively in terms of their stated goals, the New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsman functions with a larger scope of potential change."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["\"They Just Want Someone They Can Talk To:\" Administrative Perceptions of Prison Grievance Resolution Programs"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Norman Conti","Charles F. Hanna"],"dc:creator":["Zaveloff, Erica Paige"],"dc:date.available":["2018-08-03T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study compares prison grievance resolution programs currently being utilized in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The effectiveness of each program is examined through administrators' perceptions of how well the programs are working. The Chief Grievance Processor and a Facility Grievance Coordinator in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and the Head Corrections Ombudsman in the state of New Jersey were interviewed. Effectiveness is determined through a comparison of what administrators report and the stated objectives of each program. It is hypothesized that administrators from both states will believe the processes are currently working effectively because of bureaucratic pressure. Results show that administrators in Pennsylvania support this hypothesis, while the administrator interviewed in New Jersey made suggestions for change. The results also show while neither program operates more effectively in terms of their stated goals, the New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsman functions with a larger scope of potential change."],"dc:identifier":["https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1402"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:subject":["corrections ombudsman","grievance resolution","prisons","total institutions"],"dc:title":["\"They Just Want Someone They Can Talk To:\" Administrative Perceptions of Prison Grievance Resolution Programs"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Graduate Center for Social and Public Policy"],"thesis:degree_level":["Immediate Access"],"thesis:degree_name":["MA"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:10:43Z"}