Treatment during transition from prison to community and subsequent illicit drug use
|
|
- Marlene Dawson
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) Treatment during transition from prison to community and subsequent illicit drug use Clifford A. Butzin, (Ph.D.)T, Steven S. Martin, (M.A.), James A. Inciardi, (Ph.D.) Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA Received 15 May 2004; received in revised form 21 February 2005; accepted 25 February 2005 Abstract This study examined the effects of postrelease transitional therapeutic community treatment on the drug use and employment rates of drug involved prisoners in the Delaware corrections system followed for up to 5 years after release. A comparison group received standard postrelease supervision. Abstinence rates were 32.2% in the treatment group and 9.9% in the no-treatment group, and the treatment group had a higher overall proportion of time free of drug use. Time to relapse was a mean of 28.8 months in the treatment group versus 13.2 months in the no-treatment group. Relapse was defined as any use of any drug and was confirmed by urinalysis. Positive effects were seen even for those who did not complete treatment. The treatment group had a significantly higher rate of employment after leaving work release (54.6%) than did the no-treatment group (45.4%). Treatment during the transitional period between prison and community showed substantial and persistent benefits even for a cohort marked with extensive criminal history, low rates of marital bonds, and substantial unemployment. D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Treatment in corrections; Substance use; Treatment outcomes; Employment; Relapse 1. Introduction A major emphasis in both federal and state correctional systems has been to establish treatment programs for inmates with histories of drug use. Although a variety of approaches have been implemented, the one that has been most used and that has received the most attention from researchers is the therapeutic community (TC) modified for the prison environment (Inciardi, Martin, & Surratt, 2001). Evaluations of therapeutic communities within correctional systems have generally found positive outcomes in terms of recidivism at 1 3 years following release (Hiller, Knight, & Simpson, 1999; Inciardi, Martin, Butzin, Hooper, & Harrison, 1997; Knight, Simpson, & Hiller, 1999; Martin, Butzin, Saum, & Inciardi, 1999; Pelissier et al., 2000; Wexler, Melnick, Lowe, & Peters, 1999). These studies have variously defined outcomes from the criminal justice T Corresponding author. Tel.: ; fax: address: butzin@udel.edu (C.A. Butzin). perspective as return to custody or new arrests, with both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Two studies have extended these positive findings 5 years after release in examinations of data from California (Prendergast, Hall, Wexler, Melnick, & Cao, 2004) and Delaware (Inciardi, Martin, & Butzin, 2004). Although it is a plausible assumption that the recidivism benefits are an indication of lessened drug use, illicit drug use has been less often examined as an outcome, most likely because those variables are not amenable to use of official records as outcome measures. Those studies that have examined drug use outcomes (Martin et al., 1999; Inciardi et al., 2004; Prendergast et al., 2004) have done so in crosssectional analyses with drug use as a dichotomous outcome and found somewhat different results. The first 2 studies found a significantly higher proportion of those with TC treatment experience remained drug free both 3 and 5 years after release. Prendergast et al. (2004) found no significant differences in the proportion of those reporting heavy drug use in the fifth year after release. The studies differed in the /05/$ see front matter D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi: /j.jsat
2 352 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) mix of treatment experience, as well as the drug use outcome measure. Treatment experiences examined in the various studies of correctional TC s have varied between treatment within prisons, treatment during work-release transition from prison, and treatment in the community after prison release. Most of the studies, including Prendergast et al., have had at least a preponderance of participants from treatment programs within prison. In contrast, in the Delaware sample, all treatment respondents participated in work-release treatment, with a sizeable minority also participating in treatment within prison. Thus, although there are a range of reports consistently supporting the benefits of correctional TC treatment with respect to recidivism, the data with respect to drug use is less extensive and consistent. The inconsistency is plausibly because differences in the outcome measures and the treatment mix. Participation in treatment during the period of transition from prison back to the community, as opposed to treatment inside prison, has been shown to be particularly effective (Butzin, Martin, & Inciardi, 2002; Wexler et al., 1999), but other explanations remain. The effects of treatment upon drug use have not been the subject of longitudinal analyses, nor have there been any quantitative measures of drug use. Thus, the main goal of this study is an extension of the analyses of the Delaware data, particularly a longitudinal examination of the impact of work-release treatment upon subsequent use of illicit drugs, measured both qualitatively and quantitatively. A second goal of the study is to place the impact of treatment in the context of other variables associated with recidivism and relapse for those in correctional treatment (Gendreau, Little, & Coggin, 1996), including age and criminal and drug-use histories. Additional contextual variables of interest are suggested by theories of criminal desistance (Laub & Sampson, 2001; Warr, 1998) that stress the importance of social bonds such as employment and marriage. The relationship between unemployment and negative outcomes, specifically crime and drug use, is both theoretically and empirically supported (Laub & Sampson, 2001; O Connell, 2003; Petersilia, 2003; Platt, 1995; Uggen, 2000). Most treatment programs place at least some emphasis upon vocational issues, and often employment status is seen as a plausible outcome in evaluating treatment programs (Fiorentine, 1998). An additional interest is in the subsequent treatment experiences of the participants. Within substance abuse research, the importance of understanding recovery patterns has been advanced by the study of addiction and treatment careers (Hser, Anglin, Grella, Longshore, & Prendergast, 1997). Work on btreatment careersq by Anglin, Hser, and Grella (1997) suggests that an understanding of treatment outcomes also requires an understanding of the treatment history of clients. It is an extension of the common finding of an association between more extensive time in treatment with more favorable outcomes (Hubbard et al., 1989). In particular, the favorable consequences of increased time in treatment can come from not only retention in one program but also from time spent in multiple programs over time. Finally, the study also examines differences in outcomes associated with differential treatment experiences of those who participated in work-release treatment. Because, as noted earlier, some of the Delaware sample also participated in treatment within prison, that participation provides a contextual variable for the evaluation. Also of interest is the impact of a partial treatment course represented by those who failed to complete the work-release program. Finally, a comparison is provided between those who participated in an aftercare program after graduation and those who graduated before such a program was in place. The latter comparison is particularly relevant to the more general question of the value of posttreatment continuing care (McKay, 2001) Delaware work-release treatment program The treatment program during the state s period of standard work release for the last 6 months of prisoners sentences has been the centerpiece of the treatment efforts within the Delaware correctional system (details of the program have been presented by Hooper, Lockwood, & Inciardi, 1993; Inciardi, Lockwood, & Martin, 1994; Lockwood, Inciardi, & Surratt, 1997) and is the central focus of the present study. Work release is a form of partial incarceration whereby inmates who are approaching their release dates are permitted to work for pay in the free community, but must spend their nonworking hours either in the institution or, more commonly, in a community-based work-release facility. The Delaware work-release TC examined here is physically adjacent to the regular workrelease center, and correctional officers provide security for both buildings. Both the regular work release and the workrelease TC are 6-month programs. The transitional workrelease TC is similar to that of the traditional TC, with a bfamily setting,q removed from as many of the external negative influences of the street and inmate cultures as is possible. The clinical regimen is modified to address security concerns and the correctional mandate of work release to prepare clients for employment in the community (De Leon, 1997). During the first 3 months, the TC participants are not employed in the outside community, but for the final 3 months, follow the same regimen as regular work-release participants and are allowed access to the community for employment opportunities. To put the transitional work-release program in context, treatment within the Delaware criminal justice system occurs at three levels: TC treatment within prison, TC treatment during work release, and a subsequent aftercare program. Within prison, TC treatment occurs in a separate pod of the facility for a 12-month period. Many of the participants had previously participated in treatment within the prison, but for most the work-release treatment was their primary treatment within the correctional system. The
3 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) aftercare program consists of weekly outpatient group meetings and one day each month at the facility for the first 6 months of subsequent probation. Note that although in the correctional treatment literature, the term aftercare is often used to refer to any treatment after that in prison, here it specifically refers to a continuing care program that is an extension of the work-release program. 2. Methods In the Delaware correctional system, those reaching the final 6 months of their sentence may be classified as approved for work release with a recommendation for drug treatment, based upon criminal history and correctional counselor interviews. The present sample is drawn from those so classified between 1991 and Because the number of prisoners in that category exceeded the capacity of the treatment programs during that period, those eligible were assigned to either treatment or to regular work release, a bno-treatmentq group. Priority for entering the program was given to graduates of treatment programs within the prison and to those with judicial sentencing orders that required treatment participation as a condition for release. The research complied fully with the special protections for prisoners as research subjects. The research protocol included baseline and multiple follow-up interviews, as well as urine testing at each interview. The baseline interview was administered at the point of an inmate s transfer to work release from prison. The first follow-up occurred at 6 months, corresponding with completion of work release. Subsequent interviews were conducted 18, 42, and 60 months after baseline. Interviews at baseline and each subsequent follow-up were lengthy, with participation in the research project compensated with up to $50 at each of the testing intervals $25 for completing the questionnaire and $25 for giving a urine sample. Most relevant for the present analyses are three measures of illegal drug use at each interview. Each of the three types of measures was examined to identify the first use of illicit drugs after release from prison. First, respondents were directly asked whether they had used any illegal drugs since the last interview, and if so, when that use had first occurred, and the frequency of use (scaled from 0, no use, to6,used more than once a day). Secondly, each interview asked respondents to recall where they were living when they were last interviewed, and asked to report on the frequency (again scaled from 0, no use, to6,used more than once a day) of their use of illegal drugs while they were living there. The process was then repeated for the next residence until the complete period was described. Thirdly, at each interview urine samples were requested and tested for the presence of opiates, marijuana, cocaine, barbiturates, phencyclidine, and amphetamines. If there was indication of drug use, the time of initial relapse to drug use was determined by the first occurring indicator of drug use in the 3 measures. When the first report of use was during a residential period, the initial date of that period was used as the relapse date. If each of the measures indicated no use, the respondent was classified as abstinent through the last available interview date. The analyses reported below each initially compared those participants who had any participation in transitional treatment versus those who did not. This represented the main question of the study the longitudinal effects of workrelease treatment. Given significant effects of treatment, subsequent analyses then explore differences among the treated group in terms of completion of the treatment program and participation in aftercare. Additional comparisons of treatment graduates with and without aftercare were possible because the aftercare component was not operational until 1996, whereas the other stages of treatment had been implemented several years earlier. Of the original cohort of 1319 interviewed at their prison release, 1247 (94%) were subsequently interviewed. The primary mode of analysis was survival analyses, which allowed the inclusion of cases that did not relapse to drug use, bcensoredq cases, and the full cohort of 1247 with any follow-up. Statistical analyses of data describing time to relapse used Kaplan Meier methods for the initial test and description of treatment effects, with subsequent multivariate tests using Cox multivariate regression methods. The Cox proportional hazards regression models included, in addition to treatment status, variables representing demographics (sex, race, age, and marital status), employment after release, and criminal, drug use, and drug treatment histories. They were selected to include those often found to be associated with treatment failure and recidivism (Gendreau et al., 1996; Wexler et al., 1999). The indicator for criminal history was number of incarcerations. Previous drug use was measured as the report at baseline of frequency of drug use in the 3 months before incarceration on the 6-point scale described above. Previous participation in drug treatment was measured as a direct question at baseline of whether they had ever been in a drug treatment program before this incarceration. Employment was the report of working at least 30 hours per week after leaving work release. Table 1 Demographics and history for treatment and no-treatment groups Characteristics No work-release treatment Work-release treatment n Male sex (%) African American (%) Age (mean) Ever married (%) Prior arrests (mean) Any treatment before incarceration (%) Any treatment during incarceration (%) Prior drug use frequency a (mean) a Response categories 4 and 5 are bseveral times a weekq and bonce a day,q respectively.
4 354 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) Group means and percentages on the baseline covariates are shown in Table 1. The btreatmentq and bno-treatmentq groups differ significantly on the frequency of drug use prior to incarceration, with the treatment group reporting more frequent drug use, as well as a higher rate of participation in treatment within prison. Less than 5% of the cohort reported themselves as Asian, Hispanic, or botherq and were excluded from the sample. 3. Results 3.1. Time to relapse The time from release from prison to the first reported or tested instance of illicit substance use, or the last contact in the case of no substance use, was compared between those respondents with and without work-release treatment using Kaplan Meier survival analyses. Relapse rates were 32.2% in the treatment groups and 9.9% in the no-treatment group. Time to relapse to drug use was significantly longer for those respondents who participated in transitional treatment than those not in treatment (means of 28.8 vs months, respectively, p b.001, log rank test). Thus, those who participated in work-release treatment were over three times more likely to remain drug free, and the time until relapse was about twice as long among the treatment participants. The survival curves from this Kaplan Meier analysis are shown in Fig. 1. Each of the curves shows a precipitous decline in the first 2 years after release from prison, then a much more modest decline through the rest of the 5-year period. There is a clear and consistent separation between the survival curves for those with and without treatment, with the treatment group establishing a substantial higher probability of abstinence after the first year and maintaining that difference through the remainder of the follow-up period. The impact of urinalyses at the interview points is seen in the dips in the curves at 18 and 42 months. Relapse for this analysis was defined as any use of any illegal drug and was measured objectively through urinalysis. As such, it is a very stringent definition, including what may be only an occasionally lapse as a full-blown relapse. Further analysis was conducted with a definition of relapse as heavy drug use, rather than a definition of the event as any positive report or test, defined as a report of at least weekly use. The pattern of significance was the same for this analysis, although, of course, the levels of abstinence were much higher, 50.5% for the treatment group and 28.5% for the no-treatment group. Because that definition precluded the use of urinalysis results, however, all analyses reported use the stringent definition of relapse as any test or report of use of illicit drugs. The effect of treatment participation was also statistically significant in the context of the other covariates in a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. There were 1122 respondents with complete data included in this analysis. As shown in Table 2, treatment participation was the largest predictor, with age, frequency of prior drug use, and employment after work release as additional significant predictors. Rate of employment was also Treatment Any Treatment Probability of no drug use.6.4 No Treatment Months after release Fig. 1. Survival function for drug use as a function of work-release treatment.
5 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) Table 2 Cox proportional hazard regression results for time to lapse Independent variables B SE (B) Significance Exp. (B) Age b Female sex African American Married Prior incarcerations Prior drug use frequency b Any treatment prior to current incarceration Treatment in prison Work-release treatment b Employed after release b examined separately with respect to treatment. The treatment group had a significantly higher rate of employment after leaving work release (54.6%) than did the no-treatment group (45.4%). The results from the Cox regression analysis showed that, even when controlling for the other predictors, participating in the transitional treatment program essentially halved the odds of relapsing. Older participants and those employed were significantly less likely to relapse. None of the other predictors, including participation in treatment programs within prison, and participation in treatment programs before the incarceration were significant. Each second-order interaction between participation in work-release treatment and the other variables was also tested. None was statistically significant. Given the significant effect of work-release treatment, additional analyses were conducted with the respondents divided into four groups: those with no work-release treatment (n = 303), those who failed to complete the treatment program (n = 275), those who completed but did not participate in aftercare (n = 234), and work-release treatment graduates with aftercare participation (n = 310). Cox proportional hazards analysis were conducted with these four levels of the treatment predictor and the same set of other variables, with one exception, as in the analysis of Table 2. The exception was the inclusion of the year of release from prison as a predictor. Because the graduate with aftercare subgroup entered the study later than did the other groups, its effects could have been confounded with changes in the program or cohort over time. The additional predictor of year of study entry was not statistically significant ( p =.08). The same pattern of significance for the other predictors was found with the four-group analysis as with the above two-group analysis. The plot of survival probability from the regression analysis is shown in Fig. 2. The curves are the linear estimates at the mean values of each of the other predictors. The most striking aspect is that all three of the treatment groups curves lie significantly ( p b.01, log rank tests) above that for the no-treatment group. Thus, even the group that participated bunsuccessfullyq in workrelease treatment was less likely to relapse than those who did not participate in treatment. The curve for graduates that participated in aftercare was consistently above that 1.0 Treatment subgroups Probability of no drug use Complete & aftercare Complete, no aftercare No complete No treatment Months after release Fig. 2. Survival function for drug use as a function of work-release treatment subgroups.
6 356 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) for those without aftercare, although the difference was not statistically significant Amount of time abstinent Each reported residential period for the last three interviews was examined and categorized with respect to whether drug use was reported during that period. The period during work release was excluded because the treatment group would have been at less risk of substance use. Periods of incarceration were also excluded, because opportunity for drug use should have, at least, been greatly reduced during incarceration. The sample was, thus, restricted to those with at least the second follow-up and whose follow-up period has some period in which they were not incarcerated, resulting in 855 cases. The treatment group again showed significantly less drug use. Over the complete follow-up period, the treatment group had a significantly higher proportion of their time abstinent from drug use (53%) than did the no-treatment group (38%, p b.0001, by F test). Fig. 3 shows that proportion of abstinent time over each of the three latter interview periods, for the no-treatment group and the three treatment subgroups. In both the first two periods after work release, the differences between the four groups were statistically significant ( p b.001, by F tests). For the third interview period, beginning 3 years after work release, the four groups were not significantly different from each other ( p =.08), although the treated group as a whole was significantly different than the no-treatment groups (43% vs. 35%, respectively, p b.03 by F test). Table 3 Ordinary least squares regression results predicting amount of time abstinent from use of illegal drugs Independent variables B SE (B) h t Significance Age Female sex African American Prior incarcerations Prior drug use b.001 frequency Any treatment prior to current incarceration Treatment in prison Work-release treatment b.001 Employed after release b.001 This effect of treatment on the time abstinent was also tested in a multivariate context using ordinary least squares regression with the same set of control variables as the previous survival analyses. As can be seen in Table 3, treatment participation remained significantly related to total time abstinent, even in the context of the other predictor variables. In this analysis, age was no longer a significant predictor. Number of previous incarcerations was associated with less time abstinent and participating in treatment within prison was significantly associated with more time abstinent Subsequent treatment We also examined postaftercare treatment in these samples. The no-treatment, graduate, and graduate with No Treatment Complete no aftercare No complete Complete & aftercare Proportions Year 1 Years 2-3 Years 4-5 Years after work release Fig. 3. Proportion of months not using drugs.
7 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) aftercare groups did not differ significantly in subsequent treatment participation (37%, 35%, and 32%, respectively). However, significantly more of the dropout group was in later treatment (49%). Those who had any subsequent treatment experience were significantly less likely to have remained abstinent (13.8%) than those with no subsequent treatment (31.6%, p b.001) and to have less time abstinent (45.7% vs. 50.8%, p =.04). Moreover, a substantial amount of all subsequent treatment occurred as part of an arrest or probation violation. Among this sample, only 34% of those who had any subsequent treatment received that treatment exclusively outside the correctional system. For 53% of those who had subsequent treatment, that treatment was entirely from programs within prison systems. 4. Discussion Participation in a work-release TC during the transitional period between prison and the community had a substantial impact on the timing, incidence, and duration of subsequent drug use. The proportion of those treated who remained abstinent was approximately three times that for those without treatment. For those with treatment, the time to relapse was approximately twice as long as for those without treatment. Finally, cumulative time abstinent for those with treatment was about a third more than for those without treatment. Those who did not complete treatment showed reduced but similar outcomes as those who completed treatment. Treatment participants were free to leave the facility after the first 3 months of the program, which was the most common time for treatment dropouts. As a result, the dropout group had a mean stay of about 3 months, rather than the 6 months required for treatment graduation. Thus, the majority of the dropout group was still exposed to a substantial amount of treatment. In addition, that group was also exposed to more subsequent treatment, largely via brecyclingq through the correctional treatment system. The effect of cumulative treatment experience is intricately confounded by the pairing of treatment with the criminal justice system. Thus, the present data do not provide a rich enough history of treatment experiences before this incarceration to allow a truly relevant test of the cumulative treatment hypothesis. As with several previous studies, treatment within prison, as opposed to during the transition from prison, had a much smaller impact on outcomes. Treatment while in prison had significant effects only upon the overall time of subsequent drug use; but not on the rate of abstinence or the time to relapse. One could speculate that the superior impact of treatment in the transitional period is two-fold: The contextual milieu of that treatment is much more similar to the community context in which the participants must maintain their sobriety and/or the timing of the treatment provides support when risks of returning to previous behaviors are much stronger. Treatment also was related to increased likelihood of subsequent employment, and in turn, employment was also associated with decreased drug use. Practically, this effect is sensible in the context of the realistic employment expectations for this cohort. The group as a whole had a very high rate of preincarceration unemployment (58%). The life-course perspective in criminology has depicted desistance from illegal behavior largely as a product of social ties, most clearly demonstrated by job stability and marital attachment (Laub & Sampson, 2001; Warr, 1998). The extensive criminal history of this cohort is supportive of that notion, given there is only a small minority that have ever been married and who had full-time employment of any sort. The evidence of the effectiveness of a transitional TC is thus particularly impressive, although also consonant with the perspective of De Leon (1997, 2000). That perspective is that the focus of treatment is needed to be upon the whole person, rather than the specifics of drug abuse; that bhabilitationq rather than brehabilitationq is the goal, given the individual s history of negative patterns of behavior. Acknowledgments This research was supported by grants DA06124 and DA06948 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The authors thank Gregory Postle for his assistance in preparation of the data and the manuscript. References Anglin, M. D., Hser, Y., & Grella, C. E. (1997). Drug addiction and treatment careers among clients in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 11, Butzin, C. A., Martin, S. S., & Inciardi, J. A. (2002). Evaluation component effects of a prison-based treatment continuum. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, De Leon, G. (1997). Therapeutic communities for special populations and special settings. Westport, CT7 Greenwood. De Leon, G. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model, and method. New York7 Springer. Fiorentine, R. (1998). Effective drug treatment: Testing the distal needs hypothesis. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 15, Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works. Criminology, 34, Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., & Simpson, D. D. (1999). Prison-based substance abuse treatment, residential aftercare and recidivism. Addiction, 94, Hooper, R. M., Lockwood, D., & Inciardi, J. A. (1993). Treatment techniques in corrections-based therapeutic communities. Prison Journal, 73, Hser, Y., Anglin, M. D., Grella, C., Longshore, D., & Prendergast, M. L. (1997). Drug treatment careers: A conceptual framework and existing research findings. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 14, Hubbard, R. L., Marsden, M. E., Rachal, J. V., Harwood, H. J., Cavanaugh, E. R., & Ginzburg, H. M. (1989). Drug abuse treatment: A national study of effectiveness. Chapel Hill, NC7 University of North Carolina Press.
8 358 C.A. Butzin et al. / Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28 (2005) Inciardi, J. A., Lockwood, D., & Martin, S. S. (1994). Therapeutic communities in prison and work release: Some clinical and policy implications. In F. M. Tims, G. De Leon, & N. Jainchill (Eds.), Therapeutic community. Advances in Research and Application: Research Monograph No. 144 (pp ). Rockville, MD7 National Institute on Drug Abuse. Inciardi, J. A., Martin, S. S., & Butzin, C. A. (2004). Five-year outcomes of therapeutic community treatment of drug-involved offenders after release from prison. Crime & Delinquency, 50, Inciardi, J. A., Martin, S. S., Butzin, C. A., Hooper, R. M., & Harrison, L. D. (1997). An effective model of prison-based treatment for drug-involved offenders. Journal of Drug Issues, 27, Inciardi, J. A., Martin, S. S., & Surratt, H. S. (2001). Therapeutic communities in prisons and work release: Effective modalities for drug-involved offenders. In B. Rawlings, & R. Yates (Eds.), Therapeutic communities for the treatment of drug users (pp ). London7 Jessica Kingsley. Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., & Hiller, M. L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. Prison Journal, 79, Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice (pp. 1 69). Chicago7 University of Chicago Press. Lockwood, D., Inciardi, J. A., & Surratt, H. L. (1997). CREST outreach center: A model for blending treatment and corrections. In F. M. Tims, J. A. Inciardi, B. W. Fletcher, & A. M. Horton (Eds.), The effectiveness of innovative approaches in the treatment of drug abuse (pp ). Westport, CT7 Greenwood. Martin, S. S., Butzin, C. A., Saum, C., & Inciardi, J. A. (1999). Three-year outcomes of therapeutic community treatment for drug-involved offenders in Delaware: From prison to work release to aftercare. Prison Journal, 79, McKay, J. R. (2001). Effectiveness of continuing care interventions for substance abusers. Addiction, 96, O Connell, D. J. (2003). Investigating latent trait and life course theories as predictors of recidivism among an offender sample. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, Pelissier, B., Rhodes, W., Saylor, W., Gaes, G., Camp, S., Vanyur, S., et al. (2000). TRIAD Drug Treatment Evaluation Project final report of three-year outcomes: Part 1. Washington, DC7 Office of Research and Evaluation, Federal Bureau of Prisons. Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York7 Oxford University Press. Platt, J. L. (1995). Vocational rehabilitation of drug abusers. Psychological Review, 117, Prendergast, M. L., Hall, E. A., Wexler, H. K., Melnick, G., & Cao, Y. (2004). Amity prison-based therapeutic community: Five-year outcomes. Prison Journal, 84, Uggen, C. (2000). Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of age, employment and recidivism. American Sociological Review, 67, Warr, M. (1998). Life-course transitions and desistance from crime. Criminology, 36, Wexler, H. K., Melnick, G., Lowe, L., & Peters, J. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for Amity in-prison therapeutic community and aftercare in California. Prison Journal, 79,
Effect of drug treatment during work release on new arrests and incarcerations
Journal of Criminal Justice 34 (2006) 557 565 Effect of drug treatment during work release on new arrests and incarcerations Clifford A. Butzin, Daniel J. O'Connell, Steven S. Martin, James A. Inciardi
More informationAttachment EE - Grant Application RSAT Aftercare
Attachment EE - Grant Application RSAT Aftercare Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Program CFDA #16.593 Statement of the Problem The Maryland Department of Public Safety
More information3-Year Reincarceration Outcomes for Amity In-Prison. Therapeutic Community and Aftercare in California
3-Year Reincarceration Outcomes for Amity In-Prison Therapeutic Community and Aftercare in California Harry K. Wexler Gerald Melnick Lois Lowe Jean Peters Center for Therapeutic Community Research at the
More informationCONTINUITY OF OFFENDER TREATMENT: INSTITUTION TO THE COMMUNITY
CONTINUITY OF OFFENDER TREATMENT: INSTITUTION TO THE COMMUNITY Prepared at the Request of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Prepared By Gary Field, Ph.D. Administrator, Counseling and Treatment
More informationPost-Release Substance Abuse Treatment for Criminal Offenders: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Post-Release Substance Abuse Treatment for Criminal Offenders: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Kathryn E. McCollister, Ph.D. Michael T. French, Ph.D. Jim A. Inciardi, Ph.D. Clifford A. Butzin, Ph.D. Steve
More informationSubstance Abuse Treatment Outcomes: A Multi-Site Study of Male and Female Prison Programs
Substance Abuse Treatment Outcomes: A Multi-Site Study of Male and Female Prison Programs Bernadette Pelissier Research Department Federal Correctional Institution PO Box 1000 Butner, NC 27509-1000 919-575-4541,
More informationCriminal Justice Professionals Attitudes Towards Offenders: Assessing the Link between Global Orientations and Specific Attributions
Criminal Justice Professionals Attitudes Towards s: Assessing the Link between Global Orientations and Specific Attributions Prepared by: Dale Willits, M.A. Lisa Broidy, Ph.D. Christopher Lyons, Ph.D.
More informationFederal Prison Residential Drug Treatment Reduces Substance Use and Arrests After Release
Federal Prison Residential Drug Treatment Reduces Substance Use and Arrests After Release Bernadette Pelissier, Ph.D. Susan Wallace, M.A. Joyce Ann O Neil, M.A. Gerald G. Gaes, Ph.D. Scott Camp, Ph.D.
More informationBrief Report Series:
Brief Report Series: Findings from the National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices Survey (NCJTPS) RATIONALE OF THE STUDY Substance abuse treatment for offenders has been part of the national drug control
More informationRe-Entry Modified TC in Community Corrections for Offenders with COD: Crime Outcomes at 12-Months Post-Prison Release
Re-Entry Modified TC in Community Corrections for Offenders with COD: Crime Outcomes at 12-Months Post-Prison Release Stanley Sacks, PhD Center for the Integration of Research & Practice (CIRP) National
More informationRE-INCARCERATION OF PRISONERS IN ARIZONA: A FOCUS ON DRUG OFFENDERS
RE-INCARCERATION OF PRISONERS IN ARIZONA: A FOCUS ON DRUG OFFENDERS The re-incarceration of prisoners in Arizona: a Focus on Drug Offenders Submitted to Arizona Criminal Justice Commission By: Dr. Nancy
More informationCriminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (CJKTOS) FY 2009 Follow-up Report 10.30.09 .09
Criminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (CJKTOS) FY 2009 Follow-up Report 10.30.09.09 2 Criminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (CJKTOS) FY 2009 Follow-up Report (n=345) October 30,
More informationForever Free has been implemented at the California Institution for Women, a female-only State prison in Riverside County, California, since 1991.
Forever Free Forever Free is a drug treatment program for women who abuse drugs and are incarcerated. The intervention aims to reduce drug use and improve behaviors of women during incarceration and while
More informationThe Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Program: Evaluation and Recommendations
The Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Program: Evaluation and Recommendations Criminal Justice Policy Council Prepared for the 77 th Texas Legislature, 2001 Tony Fabelo, Ph.D. Executive Director The Substance
More information# Surveyed Courts 76 132 208 % Responding Courts 72% 65% 68% % with Responding Treatment Providers
The National Drug Court Survey Lead Research Center Faye Taxman, Doug Young, Anne Rhodes, Matthew Perdoni, Stephen Belenko, Matthew Hiller Collaborating Research Centers National Institute on Drug Abuse
More informationDrug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 32 (2007) 239 254 Special article Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state Faye S. Taxman, (Ph.D.) a, 4, Matthew L. Perdoni, (M.S.) a, Lana
More informationGeorge De Leon Center for Therapeutic Community Research @ NDRI Clinical Professor of Psychiatry; NYU School of Medicine Jan, 2010
Is the Therapeutic Community Evidence Based? What the Evidence Says George De Leon Center for Therapeutic Community Research @ NDRI Clinical Professor of Psychiatry; NYU School of Medicine Jan, 2010 1
More informationMONTANA STATE PRISON
MONTANA STATE PRISON ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF TREATMENT PROGRAMS ON INMATE MISCONDUCT AND RECIDIVISM CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT & SEX OFFENDER PROGRAMMING The University of Montana-Missoula Montana
More informationCon-Quest Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program Outcome Evaluation. February 2004
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program Outcome Evaluation February 2004 Introduction The link between drugs and crime in the United States is widely accepted. Drug users frequently commit crime
More informationFactors predicting attrition from prison-based intensive psychosocial drug treatment
Factors predicting attrition from prison-based intensive psychosocial drug treatment Eli Grant, Sean Grant, Paul Montgomery To start a Campbell review, a title must be registered and approved by the appropriate
More informationThe role of alcohol and drug rehabilitation in custodial settings. Amanda Street Sector Capacity Building Project Officer
The role of alcohol and drug rehabilitation in custodial settings Amanda Street Sector Capacity Building Project Officer Overview Background Tasmanian Prison Service The Policy Context My Research Key
More informationONDCP. Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse FACT SHEET John P. Walters, Director www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov 1-800-666-3332
UNUM Executive Office of the President Office of National Drug Control Policy E PLURIBUS OFFICE OF NATIONAL POLICY D RUG CONTROL ONDCP March 2001 Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse FACT SHEET John P.
More informationCriminal Arrest Patterns of Clients Entering and Exiting Community Substance Abuse Treatment in Lucas County Ohio, USA
Criminal Arrest Patterns of Clients Entering and Exiting Community Substance Abuse Treatment in Lucas County Ohio, USA LOIS A. VENTURA AND ERIC G. LAMBERT 1 ABSTRACT Research on drugs and crime typically
More informationPOWDER COCAINE: HOW THE TREATMENT SYSTEM IS RESPONDING TO A GROWING PROBLEM
Effective treatment is available for people who have a powder-cocaine problem seven in ten of those who come into treatment either stop using or reduce their use substantially within six months POWDER
More informationORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES
ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES INTER-AMERICAN DRUG ABUSE CONTROL COMMISSION FIRST INTER-REGIONAL FORUM OF EU-LAC CITIES: PUBLIC POLICIES IN DRUG TREATMENT April 2 5, 2008 Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
More informationThree Year Recidivism Tracking of Offenders Participating in Substance Abuse Treatment Programs
Three Year Recidivism Tracking of Offenders Participating in Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Prepared for the 76 th Texas Legislature, 1999 Criminal Justice Policy Council Tony Fabelo, Ph.D. Executive
More informationTHE EFFECT OF DRUG TREATMENT ON INMATE MISCONDUCT IN FEDERAL PRISONS. Neal P. Langan. Bernadette M. M. Pelissier
THE EFFECT OF DRUG TREATMENT ON INMATE MISCONDUCT IN FEDERAL PRISONS Neal P. Langan Bernadette M. M. Pelissier Drug Treatment and Misconduct Page 2 of 18 ABSTRACT This paper employs a large sample to empirically
More informationThe Hamilton County Drug Court: Outcome Evaluation Findings
The Hamilton County Drug Court: Outcome Evaluation Findings Final Report Submitted by: Shelley Johnson, M.S. Project Director and Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D. Principal Investigator University of Cincinnati
More informationA Multi-Site Evaluation of Prison-Based Drug Treatment: A Research Partnership Between
A Multi-Site Evaluation of Prison-Based Drug Treatment: A Research Partnership Between The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and Temple University Final Report to the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime
More informationRESEARCH FINDINGS ON ADULT CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS: A REVIEW
RESEARCH FINDINGS ON ADULT CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS: A REVIEW Polly Phipps Kim Korinek Steve Aos Roxanne Lieb January 1999 Washington State Institute for Public Policy RESEARCH FINDINGS ON ADULT CORRECTIONS
More informationEvaluation of the Colorado Short Term Intensive Residential Remediation Treatment (STIRRT) Programs
Evaluation of the Colorado Short Term Intensive Residential Remediation Treatment (STIRRT) Programs Christine M. Shea Adams, Ph.D. Linda Harrison, M.S. Kim English, M.A. Colorado Division of Criminal Justice
More informationUNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Curriculum Vitae
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Curriculum Vitae DATE: June 8, 2004 PERSONAL Name: Kathryn Estelle McCollister Home Phone: (305) 673-2449 Office Phone: (305) 243-3479 Home Address: 725 14 Place, Apt. 8, Miami Beach,
More informationResidential Substance Abuse Treatment Programs for Women
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Programs for Women Laurie Bright, National Institute of Justice David Chavez, California Department of Corrections David Conn, Mental Health Systems Elizabeth A. Hall,
More information2009 Florida Prison Recidivism Study Releases From 2001 to 2008
2009 Florida Prison Recidivism Study Releases From 2001 to 2008 May 2010 Florida Department of Corrections Walter A. McNeil, Secretary Bureau of Research and Data Analysis dcresearch@mail.dc.state.fl.us
More informationMetropolitan Detention Center (MDC) DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Outcome Study for DWI Offenders
Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Outcome Study for DWI Offenders Prepared for: The DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Metropolitan Detention Center Prepared
More informationCorrelates of Drug Treatment Outcomes for African American and White Male Federal Prisoners: Results from the TRIAD Study
Correlates of Drug Treatment Outcomes for African American and White Male Federal Prisoners: Results from the TRIAD Study Jennifer L. Rounds-Bryant, PhD* Division of Alcoholism and Chemical Dependency
More informationPRISON-BASED CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT IN MINNESOTA: AN OUTCOME EVALUATION
PRISON-BASED CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT IN MINNESOTA: AN OUTCOME EVALUATION 1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200 St. Paul, Minnesota 55108-5219 651/361-7200 TTY 800/627-3529 www.doc.state.mn.us March 2010
More informationGENDER DIFFERENCES AMONG PRISONERS IN DRUG TREATMENT. Neal P. Langan, M.A. Bernadette M. M. Pelissier, Ph.D. Federal Bureau of Prisons
GENDER DIFFERENCES AMONG PRISONERS IN DRUG TREATMENT Neal P. Langan, M.A. Bernadette M. M. Pelissier, Ph.D. Federal Bureau of Prisons ABSTRACT Purpose: Nearly all prison-based substance abuse treatment
More informationPetrus UW-L Journal of Undergraduate Research X (2007)
Fighting the Addiction: The Effectiveness of the La Crosse County Drug Court Program Erin R. Petrus Faculty Sponsor: William G. Zollweg, Department of Sociology/Archeology ABSTRACT The purpose of the research
More informationPredictors of Drug Treatment Completion Among Parole Violators^
Predictors of Drug Treatment Completion Among Parole Violators^ David A. Zanis, Ph.D.*; Donna. M. Coviello, Ph.D.**; Jacqueline J. Lloyd, Ph.D.*** & Barry L. Nazar, Ph.D. **** Abstract This study examined
More informationDrug Treatment Services in Jails
University of South Florida Scholar Commons Mental Health Law & Policy Faculty Publications Mental Health Law & Policy 1992 Drug Treatment Services in Jails Roger H. Peters Robert May II Follow this and
More informationMost states juvenile justice systems have
BRIEF I Setting the Stage: Juvenile Justice History, Statistics, and Practices in the United States and North Carolina Ann Brewster Most states juvenile justice systems have two main goals: increased public
More informationHow To Calculate The Cost Of A Jail Based Substance Abuse Treatment Program
Jail-Based Substance Abuse Treatment Program Cost Analysis Study Prepared By: Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-5000 With Funds Provided
More informationA Preliminary Assessment of Risk and Recidivism of Illinois Prison Releasees
A Preliminary Assessment of Risk and Recidivism of Illinois Prison Releasees David E. Olson & Gipsy Escobar Department of Criminal Justice Loyola University Chicago Presented at the Justice Research and
More informationHARRY WEXLER National Development and Research Institutes, Inc.
BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTING EFFECTIVE CORRECTIONAL DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMS DAVID FARABEE MICHAEL PRENDERGAST JEROME CARTIER University of California, Los Angeles HARRY WEXLER National Development and Research
More informationHow To Know If You Will Get Out Of Jail
Drug Abuse, Treatment, and Probationer Recidivism Beth M. Huebner, Ph.D. University of Missouri-St. Louis Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice 533 Lucas Hall 8001 Natural Bridge Road St. Louis,
More informationDrug Use, Testing, and Treatment in Jails By Doris James Wilson BJS Statistician
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Revised 9/29/00 Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report May 2000, NCJ 179999 Drug Use, Testing, and Treatment in Jails By Doris James Wilson BJS
More informationRecovery Services Evaluation Report: An Assessment of Program Completion Rates, and the Relationship Between Program Completion Status and Recidivism
Recovery Services Evaluation Page 1 Recovery Services Evaluation Report: An Assessment of Program Completion Rates, and the Relationship Between Program Completion Status and Recidivism 2009 2012 Period
More informationFrequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Drug Abuse Treatment for Criminal Justice Populations
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Drug Abuse Treatment for Criminal Justice Populations From The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) 2. Why should drug abuse treatment be provided to offenders?
More informationCriminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (CJKTOS)
Criminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (CJKTOS) 2005-2006 Internal Report 7/31/2006 Report prepared for: John D. Rees, Commissioner Kentucky Department of Corrections Kevin Pangburn, Director
More informationAbstinence and drug abuse treatment: Results from the Drug Outcome Research in Scotland study
Drugs: education, prevention and policy, December 2006; 13(6): 537 550 Abstinence and drug abuse treatment: Results from the Drug Outcome Research in Scotland study NEIL MCKEGANEY 1, MICHAEL BLOOR 1, MICHELE
More informationCorrections Rehabilitative Programs Effective, But Serve Only a Portion of the Eligible Population
February 2007 Report No. 07-14 Corrections Rehabilitative Programs Effective, But Serve Only a Portion of the Eligible Population at a glance The department s rehabilitative programs serve only a small
More informationResearch Report. Women Offender Substance Abuse Programming & Community Reintegration
Research Report Women Offender Substance Abuse Programming & Community Reintegration Ce rapport est également disponible en français. This report is also available in French. Pour obtenir des exemplaires
More informationFact Sheet: Drug-Related Crime
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics DEPARTMENT OFJUSTICE OFFICEOF JUSTICE PROGRAMS BJA NIJ OJJDP OVC BJS Drugs & Crime Data Fact Sheet: Drug-Related Crime
More informationDRAFT Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Outcome Study Final Report UPDATED
DRAFT Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Outcome Study Final Report UPDATED Prepared for: The DWI Addiction Treatment Programs (ATP) Metropolitan Detention Center
More informationOFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
MATTHEW L. CATE, INSPECTOR GENERAL SPECIAL REVIEW INTO IN-PRISON SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAMS MANAGED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION FEBRUARY 2007 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationCowlitz County Drug Court Evaluation
Cowlitz County Drug Court Evaluation Prepared by: Principal Investigator Mark Krause, Ph.D. Laurie Drapela, Ph.D. Consultants Research Assistants: Kate Wilson, Jillian Schrupp, Jen Haner Department of
More informationTITLE. Brent Canode TERMINAL PROJECT
TITLE Therapeutic Communities in Prison: An evidence-based tool for treating drug involved offenders in prison. A review and discussion of the literature on prison-based therapeutic communities in the
More informationA longitudinal evaluation of treatment engagement and recovery stages
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 27 (2004) 89 97 Regular article A longitudinal evaluation of treatment engagement and recovery stages D. Dwayne Simpson, (Ph.D.)*, George W. Joe, (Ed.D.) Institute
More informationUtah Cost of Crime. Therapeutic Communities in Secure Settings for Substanceabusing Offenders (Adults): Technical Report.
Utah Cost of Crime Therapeutic Communities in Secure Settings for Substanceabusing Offenders (Adults): Technical Report December 2012 Utah Cost of Crime Therapeutic Communities in Secure Settings for
More informationHow To Treat A Drug Addict
Texas Department of Criminal Justice Rehabilitation Programs Division June 2010 SAFPF (Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facility) Community treatment alone is not always enough Some individuals must be
More informationRetaining Offenders in Mandatory Drug Treatment Programs: The Role of Perceived Legal Pressure
Retaining Offenders in Mandatory Drug Treatment Programs: The Role of Perceived Legal Pressure Introduction Massive increases in arrests as well as jail and prison commitments over the past decade have
More informationOpioid Agonist Treatment in Correctional Settings
Opioid Agonist Treatment in Correctional Settings Robert P. Schwartz, M.D. Friends Research Institute Open Society Institute - Baltimore Treating Heroin-Addicted Prisoners Opioid agonist treatment is widely
More informationPAROLE/PROBATION OFFICER
JOB DESCRIPTION MICHIGAN CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JOB SPECIFICATION PAROLE/PROBATION OFFICER Employees in this job function as professional representatives of the Department of Corrections in the parole,
More informationThe author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report:
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Author(s): Outcome Evaluation of the Crossroads to Freedom
More informationIowa Department of Corrections. Report to the Board of Corrections
THOMAS J. VILSACK, GOVERNOR SALLY J. PEDERSON, LT. GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS GARY D. MAYNARD, DIRECTOR Iowa Department of Corrections Report to the Board of Corrections Substance Abuse First in
More informationDrug Treatment and Education Fund. Legislative Report
Drug Treatment and Education Fund Legislative Report Fiscal Year 1997-1998 Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Office of the Courts Adult Services Division March 1999 Drug Treatment and Education Fund
More informationThe Erie County Drug Court: Outcome Evaluation Findings
The Erie County Drug Court: Outcome Evaluation Findings February 2001 By: Shelley Johnson Listwan, M.S. Co-Project Director Deborah Koetzle Shaffer, M.A. Co-Project Director and Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D.
More informationWashington State Institute for Public Policy CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT FOR OFFENDERS: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE AND BENEFIT-COST FINDINGS
Washington State Institute for Public Policy 110 Fifth Avenue Southeast, Suite 214 PO Box 40999 Olympia, WA 98504-0999 (360) 586-2677 www.wsipp.wa.gov CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT FOR OFFENDERS: A REVIEW
More informationDrug Court as Diversion for Youthful Offenders
Drug Court as Diversion for Youthful Offenders Juvenile Drug Courts in Hawaii: A Policy Brief Introduction The problem of drug abuse among the general population in the United States began to escalate
More informationOverall, 67.8% of the 404,638 state
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report April 2014 ncj 244205 Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010
More informationSpecial Report Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report Substance Abuse and Treatment, and Prisoners, 1997 January 1999, NCJ 172871 By Christopher J. Mumola BJS
More informationSENTENCING REFORM FOR NONVIOLENT OFFENSES: BENEFITS AND ESTIMATED SAVINGS FOR ILLINOIS
SENTENCING REFORM FOR NONVIOLENT OFFENSES: BENEFITS AND ESTIMATED SAVINGS FOR ILLINOIS LISE MCKEAN, PH.D. SUSAN K. SHAPIRO CENTER FOR IMPACT RESEARCH OCTOBER 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PROJECT FUNDER Chicago
More informationIn many jurisdictions, state and local government
September 2012 States Report Reductions in Recidivism In many jurisdictions, state and local government officials have intensified their efforts to reduce recidivism. As policymakers are under tremendous
More informationThe Facts on Drugs and Crime in America
The Facts on Drugs and Crime in America Our nation s prison population has exploded beyond capacity. 1 1 in 100 U.S. citizens is now confined in jail or prison. The U.S. incarcerates more people per capita
More informationDepartment of Community and Human Services Mental Health, Chemical Abuse and Dependency Services Division
Criminal Justice Initiative Community Center for Alternative Programs Intensive Outpatient Chemical Dependency Treatment Program Two Year Outcomes Subsequent to Program Changes Department of Community
More informationReturning Home Illinois Policy Brief. Treatment Matching. By Laura Winterfield and Jennifer Castro
Returning Home Illinois Policy Brief URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center 2100 M Street NW Washington, DC 20037 http://justice.urban.org By Laura Winterfield and Jennifer Castro Prepared for the Illinois
More informationWelcome. This presentation is designed for people working in criminal justice and drug abuse treatment settings. It provides an overview of drug
Welcome. This presentation is designed for people working in criminal justice and drug abuse treatment settings. It provides an overview of drug abuse treatment principles for individuals involved in the
More informationEOPS Grantee Tools. Implementing a Reentry Program According to Best Practices
EOPS Grantee Tools Implementing a Reentry Program According to Best Practices Report prepared by: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety Research and Policy Analysis Division March 2007 This document
More informationA New Data on the Incidence of Felony Arrests
DSHS Research and Data Analysis Division Fact Sheet 4.42 Substance Abuse Treatment and Arrests: Analyses from Washington State Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Research and Data
More informationWomen and Substance Abuse: Gender Transparency
Women and Substance Abuse: Gender Transparency Sally J. Stevens, PhD Harry K. Wexler, PhD Editors Women and Substance Abuse: Gender Transparency has been co-published simultaneously as Drugs & Society,
More informationFeature WATCh: Montana s In-Prison DUI Treatment Program By Marilyn C. Moses Goals. Montana s WATCh Program 34 July/August 2014 Corrections Today
Feature WATCh: Montana s In-Prison DUI Treatment Program By Marilyn C. Moses Alcohol is the most prevalent substance abused by those in the criminal justice system exceeding illicit drugs. In fact, alcohol
More informationJail Based Substance Abuse Treatment Literature Review
Jail Based Substance Abuse Treatment Literature Review June 2011 Institute for Social Research University of New Mexico Prepared for: Department of Substance Abuse Programs, Bernalillo County INSTITUTE
More informationResidential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners
MAY 03 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Research for Practice Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners WEB-ONLY DOCUMENT Breaking the
More informationATLANTIC JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DRUG COURT
ATLANTIC JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DRUG COURT History The Atlantic Judicial Circuit began exploring the possibility of a Drug Court in 2008 under the leadership of Superior Court Judge D. Jay Stewart. A planning
More informationStatistics on Women in the Justice System. January, 2014
Statistics on Women in the Justice System January, 2014 All material is available though the web site of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): http://www.bjs.gov/ unless otherwise cited. Note that correctional
More informationEvaluation of the Performance of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Rehabilitation Tier Programs
Evaluation of the Performance of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Rehabilitation Tier Programs Criminal Justice Policy Council Prepared for the 77 th Texas Legislature, 2001 Tony Fabelo, Ph.D.
More informationPrisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising
10.1177/0011128703253761 CRIME Seiter, Kadela & DELINQUENCY / PRISONER REENTRY / JULY 2003 Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising Richard P. Seiter Karen R. Kadela During the
More informationThe New York State Adult Drug Court Evaluation
520 Eighth Avenue, 18 th Floor New York, New York 10018 212.397.3050 fax 212.397.0985 www.courtinnovation.org Executive Summary: The New York State Adult Drug Court Evaluation Policies, Participants and
More informationYOUNG ADULTS IN DUAL DIAGNOSIS TREATMENT: COMPARISON TO OLDER ADULTS AT INTAKE AND POST-TREATMENT
YOUNG ADULTS IN DUAL DIAGNOSIS TREATMENT: COMPARISON TO OLDER ADULTS AT INTAKE AND POST-TREATMENT Siobhan A. Morse, MHSA, CRC, CAI, MAC Director of Fidelity and Research Foundations Recovery Network YOUNG
More informationSubstance Abuse Treatment for Criminal Offenders: A Review of the Literature
Stein (1999) 1 Substance Abuse Treatment for Criminal Offenders: A Review of the Literature David M. Stein, Ph.D. 1 Introduction The association between substance abuse, crime and recidivism following
More informationONDCP. Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse FACT SHEET John P. Walters, Director www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov 1-800-666-3332. Drug-Related Crime
Executive Office of the President Office of National Drug Control Policy ONDCP March 2000 Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse FACT SHEET John P. Walters, Director www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov 1-800-666-3332
More informationReentry & Aftercare. Reentry & Aftercare. Juvenile Justice Guide Book for Legislators
Reentry & Aftercare Reentry & Aftercare Juvenile Justice Guide Book for Legislators Reentry & Aftercare Introduction Every year, approximately 100,000 juveniles are released from juvenile detention facilities
More informationGeorgia Accountability Court Adult Felony Drug Court. Policy and Procedure Manual
Georgia Accountability Court Adult Felony Drug Court Policy and Procedure Manual Contents Policy and Procedure Manual: Adult Felony Drug Court Overall purpose...3 Mission Statement...4 Adult Drug Court
More informationCUMULATIVE SECOND YEAR COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PIMA COUNTY S DRUG TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE TO PRISON PROGRAM REPORT
CUMULATIVE SECOND YEAR COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PIMA COUNTY S DRUG TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE TO PRISON PROGRAM REPORT Submitted to: Barbara LaWall Pima County Attorney and Melissa Rueschhoff, Esq. Program
More informationStopping the Revolving Door for Mentally Ill Offenders in the Criminal Justice System via Diversion and Re-entry Programs
GEORGIA GEORGIA GEORGIA GEORGIA GEORGIA Department of Corrections ON THE MOVE Stopping the Revolving Door for Mentally Ill Offenders in the Criminal Justice System via Diversion and Re-entry Programs Academic
More informationDivision of Alcoholism and Chemical Dependency Programs
Division of Alcoholism and Chemical Dependency Programs Virginia N. Price Assistant Secretary Wrenn Rivenbark Clinical Director Current Prison Population Prison Inmates 39,463 Male Inmates 36,608 Female
More informationSubstance Abuse Treatment and Public Safety January 2008
January 2008 The Justice Policy Institute is a Washington, D.C.- based think tank dedicated to ending society s reliance on incarceration and promoting effective and just solutions to social problems.
More informationScreening and Referral for Substance Abuse Treatment in the Criminal Justice System
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. /, r l " " j7 Screening and Referral for Substance Abuse Treatment in the Criminal Justice System Kevin Knight D. Dwayne Simpson
More informationTreatment Approaches for Drug Addiction
Treatment Approaches for Drug Addiction NOTE: This is a fact sheet covering research findings on effective treatment approaches for drug abuse and addiction. If you are seeking treatment, please call 1-800-662-HELP(4357)
More information