Drug Treatment in the Criminal Justice System: The Current State of Knowledge

Enhancing prisoner reentry through access to prison-based and post-incarceration aftercare treatment: experiences from the Illinois Sheridan Correctional Center therapeutic community

“…The combination of quantitative with the qualitative information gleaned from these observations and interviews provided the basis of information upon which the analyses were made and interpreted. Also, consistent with the intent of action-oriented evaluation designs, and suggested as being critical to the development of prison-based treatment and aftercare programs (Mears et al 2003), it is evident that there has been extensive support, involvement, and feedback from the evaluation team since the beginning of the program.…”

“…Further, Mitchell et al (2006: 30-31) also concluded that corrections-based TCs that served large proportions of non-white offenders (where 70% or more of the sample was non-white), programs serving exclusively male offenders, and those institution-based TCs that did not required post-release aftercare, all had smaller reductions in recidivism than did their counterparts. However, despite the apparent benefits of prison-based treatment and aftercare, a number of barriers to the effective implementation of these strategies has been identified (Mears et al 2003), including restrictions on the criminal backgrounds of program participants (Farabee et al 1999), staff retention (Inciardi et al 1992), prison crowding and limited bed-space (Office of National Drug Control Policy 1999), and conflicting goals between the criminal justice and treatment personnel (Farabee et al 1999;Morrissey et al 1983;Inciardi et al 1992).…”

“…During the first 5 years of operation (January 2004 through December 2008), 5,353 inmates had been admitted to the Sheridan Correctional Center, and more than 3,200 have completed the prison-phase of the program and been released to the postrelease aftercare and supervision phase. Unlike many prison-based treatment programs, which exclude offenders with current charges or past criminal histories involving crimes of violence (Mears et al 2003;Farabee et al 1999), the Sheridan Correctional Center's eligibility criteria are quite broad and inclusive. The only restrictions to participation are that the inmate must be in need of treatment based on a substance abuse assessment [Texas Christian University (TCU) Drug Screen II plus the addiction severity index (ASI)], be male, be appropriate for placement in a medium security prison, have 9-24 months of time left to serve on their sentence, 1 not suffer from severe mental illness, have no current or prior murder or sex offenses, and volunteer for the program.…”

“…As a result, there has also been an unprecedented number of inmates released from prison annually, with more than 725,000 released during 2007 alone (West and Sabol 2008). However, despite the high need for substance abuse treatment, and increased resources for treatment through the federal Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program, relatively few prison inmates receive drug treatment while incarcerated (Mumola and Karberg 2006), and the proportion of inmates receiving prison-based substance abuse treatment services decreased during the 1990s (Mumola 1999;Mears et al 2003). Despite the evidence that prison-based treatment, followed by aftercare, can reduce recidivism and save money in the long run [i.e., the California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA) study by Gerstein et al 1994], the significant political, organizational, and resource barriers to implementing these types of programs have hindered their development and reduced their effectiveness (Mears et al 2003).…”

“…However, despite the high need for substance abuse treatment, and increased resources for treatment through the federal Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program, relatively few prison inmates receive drug treatment while incarcerated (Mumola and Karberg 2006), and the proportion of inmates receiving prison-based substance abuse treatment services decreased during the 1990s (Mumola 1999;Mears et al 2003). Despite the evidence that prison-based treatment, followed by aftercare, can reduce recidivism and save money in the long run [i.e., the California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA) study by Gerstein et al 1994], the significant political, organizational, and resource barriers to implementing these types of programs have hindered their development and reduced their effectiveness (Mears et al 2003). As a result of this limited rehabilitative programming, the high rate of recidivism has produced what many have described as the 'revolving door' of corrections: almost 40% of adults exiting parole were returned to prison (Glaze and Bonzcar 2006), and, within 3 years, two-thirds of prison releasees in the USA were rearrested and more than one-half of all releasees had been returned to prison (Langan and Levin 2002).…”