from the Introduction "This paper is a follow-on to preliminary research on the Quakers conducted in the fall of 2000. That inquiry looked at other-regarding principles in the Quaker religion and how they are applied in practice. Underlying Quakerism is a deep regard for all people. The Quakers believe that “God is in everyone.” They are strongly anti-violent, very receptive of people of other faiths, and generally very tolerant in their approach to life. Because of these principles, Quakers are frequently sought out as mediators, counselors, and leaders of organizations committed to non-violence. The strength of their beliefs about the goodness of all other people led me to the notion that this principle might be transferable and useful as a means of fostering cooperation. It seemed logical that the degree to which one person regards another would have a bearing on his or her willingness to cooperate. If other-regarding/other-valuing (I will use these terms together frequently throughout this paper) can be instilled and reinforced in people and their willingness to cooperate subsequently shown to increase, then we should be able to draw the conclusion that modifying these values produces a positive effect on cooperation. My theory is that it does, and I will present an analysis that supports this conclusion herein. A second, and more difficult question, is whether or not the other-regarding behavior can be generalized across a broader segment of the population (beyond the immediate group). That question is not specifically addressed in this project, but it is a logical extension of the research."

from the Background "This project arose as a continuation of earlier research on Quaker other-regarding behavior (see Sloane, 2001). That line of inquiry led to an ethnographic study of inmates in the Delaware Correction Center who were participating in Alternatives-to-Violence Program (AVP) workshops. These workshops were originally developed by the Quakers in response to requests from inmates at Attica prison for some way to address violence at the prison. The workshops are facilitated by outside volunteers (non-prison employees) and focus on developing social skills. The intent is to help the inmates cope with potentially violent situations, by recognizing when they are likely to occur, improve interpersonal communications in order to mitigate the situation, and develop a sense of other-valuing to reduce the likelihood of resorting to violence. The workshops are managed by inmate trainers, but with the support and involvement of outside volunteer co-trainers. AVP workshops are typically two or three days in length, depending on the specific module. Both inmates, as well as outside trainers are volunteers, their qualifications being completion of all AVP modules in addition to the “train-the-trainer” workshop. Participants start with the basic workshop, progress to the advanced, and from there to the adjunct modules which include Bias Awareness and Manly Awareness. The ethnographic study, completed in May of 2001 (Sloane 2001), suggested that AVP participants’ behaviors were modified by their involvement in these workshops." [2-pg flyer version]

from the Abstract "Recidivism statistics were developed for a random sample of Alternatives to Violence Program (AVP) participants from 1993 to 2001 at the Delaware Correctional Center, the state's largest correctional institution, which houses male inmates with the most serious offenses. Three hundred men were randomly chosen for the sample; 175 had been released at least one year prior to data collection, 162 had been released two years prior, and 148 three years prior. One, two, and three year cumulative statistics are provided for them. At the end of three years following release, only 11.5 percent of the AVP participants had new felony convictions and only half of these were for violent offenses. ¶-"The AVP sample was compared to a group of 34 men randomly selected to be the control group for an evaluation of the Life Skills Program at DCC. The AVP sample consistently performed better each year for three years both in recidivism and in the rate of return to prison for any reason. These striking results suggest that AVP is effective in reducing the likelihood of recidivism."

from References "AVP Manual Basic Course. 2002 Revision. The Education Committee, Alternatives to Violence Project USA. Bischoff, M. (2003). How restorative is AVP?: Evaluating the Alternatives to Violence Project according to a Restorative Justice yardstick. St. Paul, MN: AVP/USA. Bitel, M. (1999). The Alternatives to Violence Project: A path to restoration. Prison Service Journal. (123) 9-12. Garver, N. & Reitan, E. (l995). Nonviolence and community: Reflections on the Alternatives to Violence Project. Wallingford, PA: Pendle Hill Publications. Niyongabo, A. & Yeomans, P. (2003) An evaluation of the Alternatives to Violence Project in Rwanda. African Great Lakes Initiative. Phillips, B. (2002) An evaluation of AVP Workshops in Aotearoa/New Zealand. AVPA Inc (AVPAotearoa/New Zealand). Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rosenberg, M. (2003). Non-violent communication.(2nd Edition). Encinitas, CA: Puddle Dancer Press. Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80, 8-16. Scheier, M.D., & Carver, C.S. (l985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and Implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247. Shuford, J.A. (1993). Alternatives to Violence Project: Background packet. St. Paul, MN: AVP/USA, Inc. Sloane, S. (2003). A study of the effectiveness of Alternatives to Violence workshops in a prison system. St. Paul, MN: AVP/USA, Inc. Spielberger, C.D., Johnson, E.H., & Jacobs, C.A. (l982). Anger expression scale manual. Tampa: University of South Florida, Human Resources Institute. Walrath, C. (2002). Evaluation of an inmate-run Alternatives to Violence Project: The impact of inmate-to-inmate intervention. St. Paul, MN: AVP/USA, Inc.

from the introductory page "The Alternatives to Violence Project (AVP), a nonviolence training program run for inmates by inmates, represents an attempt to combat institutional violence. This program provides alternatives to violent behavior; it decreases the rate of violence within and among the prison population and may translate back to the community on release. An impact evaluation of an AVP was conducted in a medium-security corrections facility in Maryland. Despite limitations, the results from this evaluation demonstrate a positive impact on anger and self-reported confrontation for inmates who completed a basic level conflict resolution workshop as compared to those who did not. The power of the institutional environment, the need for continued intervention with offenders, and future directions for correctional setting-based evaluations are discussed. ¶-"Violence and crime are among the most pressing concerns in our society today. Violence in the community, home, school, andworkplace are recurrent themes in both popular and scientific forums. Not surprisingly, violence and its obvious consequences extend to, and some may argue stem from, the behaviors and activities that take place within the confines of our correctional facilities. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1,585,401 inmates were held in the custody of state or federal prisons or local jails in 1995 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1996). This represented an incarceration rate of 600 per 100,000 U.S. residents in 1995. About 44% of the prisoners sentenced to a state or federal correctional facility in 1995 had committed a violent offense (e.g., homicide, assault, robbery or kidnapping, rape, other sexual assaults) as their most serious offense (U.S. Department of Justice, 1997b). In a 1991 survey of state and federal prisoners, 32.8% of those admitted for the first time in the 12 months preceding the survey had committed a violent offense (U.S. Department of Justice, 1993)."

from the introductory page "In this paper, I will look at where the strands of Restorative Justice and the Alternatives to Violence Project meet. How well does AVP fit with the restorative principles and values expressed in the RJ framework? What could AVP learn from the questions RJ poses? AVP aims to contribute to the restoration of offenders and communities. How would AVP look different if it took seriously the questions and vision of RJ?"

Report on work in Rwanda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Burundi, Uganda, South Africa

AVP -- the Alternatives to Violence Project, is one of several peacemaking methods that I have used. This is a follow-up to earlier reports that AVP was about to be used in Congo for the first time. I met a Rwandan AVP facilitator recently who is helping to plan for Truth & Reconciliation Commissions dealing with the genocide there.
-- John Wilmerding
Alternatives to Violence Program - Bukavu, Congo, Workshop Narratives, July 2005, Comments by AVP facilitators as Recorded by Mary Kay Jou

from Context & Organizations "Nine years after Rwanda exploded onto the world stage with the 1994 genocide when the Hutu Power government slaughtered 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu in about one hundred days, the nation is once again at a crossroads. In an innovative and controversial effort to bring justice and reconciliation to both the victims and suspected perpetrators of the genocide, the Rwandan government has elected to utilize a modern day version of a traditional form of arbitration known as Gacaca to settle many of the lower-level cases. ¶-"The Alternatives to Violence Project-Rwanda (AVP-Rwanda) was established as a joint project of Rwanda Yearly Meeting of Friends (RYM) (Eglise Evangelique des Amis au Rwanda) and the Friends Peace Teams’ African Great Lakes Initiative. Though both Rwanda Yearly Meeting and AGLI remain involved in AVP-Rwanda, the organization has evolved into a largely independent entity."

from Acknowledgements & Introduction "We would also like to acknowledge the work of Adrien Niyongabo and Peter Yeomans who authored an evaluation of AVP-Rwanda in 2003, entitled “I Still Believe There is Good in All People.” That evaluation served as an important guide for us as we began our interviews, and we have borrowed directly from that report to provide background information about Rwanda, Gacaca, and the Alternatives to Violence Project. ¶-"In an innovative and controversial effort to bring justice and reconciliation to both the victims and suspected perpetrators of the genocide, the Rwandan government has elected to utilize a modern day version of a traditional form of arbitration known as Gacaca2 to settle many of the lower-level cases3. With funding from the United States Institute for Peace and support from the Africa Great Lakes Initiative, the Rwanda Friends Peace House has offered seventy 3-day workshops in Alternatives to Violence to Gacaca judges throughout Rwanda, with the hope of preparing them for the difficult work of balancing truth with justice, and successfully reintegrating genocide perpetrators back into their communities. To evaluate the success of these efforts, we interviewed 37 judges, government leaders, Alternatives to Violence Project (AVP) facilitators and community members. The response everywhere was the same: a clarion call for AVP to continue, to reach into every corner of the country, into every heart. Every person needs AVP, interviewees said again and again. Blanket our communities, reach every Gacaca judge, every leader, every genocide survivor. Go into the prisons and work with those who have been accused of genocide. Work with those who still subscribe to genocide ideology. “Every person who has taken [AVP] is changed,” claimed Mukarwihura Anne Marie, president of her local Gacaca court, “it can bring peace to our whole country.” ¶-"Another Gacaca judge, Nyirabagande Laurence, said, “If AVP had come before 1994, I believe that the genocide wouldn’t have come to Rwanda."

from Purpose of the study "Within my work as a volunteer for the ‘United Network of Young Peacebuilders’ (UNOY), a global network of youth organisations active in the field of peace-building, and particularly as a member of the ‘PEACE IT TOGETHER CAMPAIGN’ team4, a campaign that aims to promote the ideal of a global culture of peace, I have been dealing with peace education in different ways. The more I learned about it, the more interested I became in the ideas and visions behind it; but I also became more critical. ¶-"Does peace education really have the potential to change mindsets and actions, and thus to contribute to the creation of sustainable peace? If so, what are the necessary conditions? Isn’t it far beyond the capacity of any educational programme to address the reasons and root causes of a complex conflict setting and hence to contribute to the overcoming of long-term violence in countries plagued by conflict for decades? Or, to put it more bluntly, what do people do with the knowledge and skills achieved in the classroom? Does participation in a peace education programme make any difference for personal perceptions on conflict and the ways to deal with it, perception of the ‘other’, and the structural causes of violence? Many questions still remain to be answered. ¶-"During my four-month research period in Uganda, I tried to gain insights to the opinions and perceptions of participants in one specific informal peace education programme for the conduct of this study. The so-called ‘Alternatives to Violence Programme’ (AVP) consists of peace education workshops of threedays in length for participants from all over Uganda, both from conflict and nonconflict regions. They are facilitated by the ‘Civil Peace Service Project’, which is supporting the M.A. Programme in Peace and Conflict Studies at Makerere University, Kampala. The project hosted me during the period of my research and will benefit from my work by using my findings for the currently ongoing revision of the training manuals. ¶-"Who if not those considered as the beneficiaries of such programmes should be asked about its effects on them, its potential, but also its limitations? By using different qualitative research methods, namely semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and participatory observation I tried to not only elaborate on the participants’ perceptions on AVP, but to also link them to the Ugandan context and conflict setting and to analyse the potential, limitations and requirements of peace education in Uganda in general. Based on this multi-dimensional analysis and the voices of my informants I finally wanted to develop recommendations for AVP in Uganda and for the implementation of peace education programmes in this challenging context in general."

from introductory page "In Sincelejo and Monteria in the northern part of Colombia, and in Bogotá, our team of four Colombian and two US facilitators, conducted three Advanced and three Training for Facilitators (T4F) workshops." / (¶-"Friends Peace Teams is also supporting AVP training in Colombia, where Colombian facilitators are now fully qualified to run their own program." note from annual report of Baltimore Yearly Meeting)

from The origins of the report & Objectives of the current evaluation "The approach suggested by Maxwell & Roberson (2001) most closely fits what Greene (1994) describes as pragmatic. As such, it draws upon an eclectic, or mixed, design of both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Such evaluation designs are typically aimed at answering questions about: • What needs improvement? • How well does the programme achieve the organisation’s goals? • And, how well does it meet the needs of those who use the programme? ¶-"The evaluation undertaken for this report has, as its stated objective, to “undertake an appraisal of the effectiveness of the work done by AVP workshops” (Maxwell & Roberson, 2001, p. 1). To achieve this, the first step taken has been to: • Establish the aims of AVP, how AVP goes about achieving those aims? and, • What does AVP base this approach upon?"