An Effective Model of Prison-Based Treatment for Drug-Involved Offenders

Abstract

A multistage therapeutic community treatment system has been instituted in the Delaware correctional system, and its effectiveness has captured the attention of the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Justice, members ofCongress, and the White House. Treatment occurs in a three-stage system, with each phase corresponding to the client's changing correctional status-incarceration, work release, and parole. In this paper, 18 month follow-up data are analyzed for those who receivedtreatment in: (/) a prison-based therapeutic community only, (2) a work release therapeutic communityfollowed by aftercare, and (3) the prison-based therapeutic community followed by the work release therapeutic community and aftercare. These groups are compared with a no-treatment group. Those receiving treatment in the two-stage (work release and aftercare) and three-stage (prison, work release, and aftercare) models had significantly lower rates of drug relapse and criminal recidivism, even when adjustedfor other risk factors. The results support the effectivenessofa multistage therapeutic community model for drug-involved offenders, and the importance of a work release transitional therapeutic community as a component ofthis model. is an AssociateScientist at the Center for Drug and AlcoholStudies and coprincipal investigatoron the "Ongoing Studies" project. He has authored or co-authored more than 40 articleson the epidemiology, etiology,prevention, and treatment ofsubQance abuse. COtTord A. Butzin, Ph.D., is also an Associate Scientist at the Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies. He was previousiyChiefof the ResearchConsulting Divisionat WMordHall MedicalCenter in San Antonio, and before that he was on the faculty at Duke University. Robert M. Hooper, Ph.D., Executive Directorof Substance Abuse Treatment, CorrectionalMedicalSystems,has been involved in justice programming nationallyfor the paQ 2.5 years, Over the laQ 8 )'\larshe has developedintensive abuse tJeatment programs withthe Delaware model receivingnational attention.

Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state

“…Knowledge about how the CJS provides drug treatment programs and/or services for offenders is limited and often program specific (e.g., studies on drug treatment courts Taxman & Bouffard, 2000, 2003a, prison-based drug treatment programs Harrison & Martin 2001, 2003Inciardi, Martin, Butzin, Hooper, & Harrison, 1997;Simpson, Wexler, & Inciardi, 1999a, 1999b, diversion from prison Belenko, 2000 as well as probation Farabee, Hser, Anglin, & Huang, 2004, intensive supervision Petersilia & Turner, 1993Taxman, 2002, and boot camps Coweles, Castalleno, & Gransky, 1995). However, more data about the nature of treatment services provided to offenders in the public health treatment system are available because of the large-scale surveys of drug treatment programs.…”

Evidence-based treatment practices for drug-involved adults in the criminal justice system

“…The seamless system (Taxman, 1998) includes 12 programmatic processes to facilitate offender change, such as: treatment goals that are compatible with public safety goals; assessment tools to identify appropriate offenders for treatment services; risk responsivity in matching of offenders to programs and services; incentives and sanctions to shape behavior and to work on compliance issues; drug testing to monitor progress; a continuum of care or program phases that allow the offender to move through the criminal justice system while obtaining treatment services to reinforce recovery; team strategies to adopt policies and procedures to reinforce the importance of individual programmatic components; and emphasis on quality in programming over the number of offenders served. The research on therapeutic communities in prisons reinforces many of these principles (Inciardi et al 1997;Taxman et al, 2000). Simpson and colleagues (2002) advocate a treatment process that includes similar key components.…”

Process Evaluation of Summit House: A Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program of the New Hampshire Department of Corrections

“…Also, Campbell (1997) Over the last decade a number of research studies and reviews have been published that specifically assess and demonstrate the effectiveness of prison-based therapeutic communities in reducing drug use and/or recidivism (e.g., Pearson and Lipton, 1999;Siegel, Wang, Carlson, Falck, Rahman, and Fine, 1999;Wexler, DeLeon, Thomas, Kressel and Peters, 1999;Inciardi, Martin, Butzin, Hooper and Harrison, 1997;Hartmann, Wolk, Johnston and Colyer, 1997;Knight, Simpson, Chatham and Camacho, 1997;Inciardi, 1995;Wexler, Lipton, Fallun and Rosenblum, 1995;Tims, DeLeon and been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) Jainchill, 1994;Lipton, Falkin and Wexler, 1992;Wexler, Falkin and Lipton, 1990).…”

“…With the infusion of the RSAT funds and the creation of Phase I, Summit House evolved into a three-phase program comprising components identified in the literature as effective for substance abuse treatment in corrections (Inciardi, et al, 1997;Pan, et al, 1993;DeLeon, 1991). The clinical personnel hired to staff all three of the Summit House phases included a mixture of recovering addicts and substance abuse professionals.…”

“…Some of these critical aftercare services include supervised work release that establishes ties with existing relevant community resources such as 12-step programs, outpatient follow-up services and/or even a post-prison therapeutic community (e.g., Van Stelle and Moberg, 2000;Simpson, Wexler and Inciardi, 1999;Wexler, Melnick, Lowe and Peters, 1999;Lipton, 1998;Inciardi et al, 1997;Inciardi, 1996;Wolk and Hartman, 1996;Inciardi and Pottieger, 1996;Lipton, 1995;Lipton, 1994;Pan, 1993;Wexler and Lipton, 1993;Chavaria, 1992;DeLeon, 1991;and Field, 1989).…”