Residential Treatment for Women Parolees Following Prison-Based Drug Treatment: Treatment Experiences, Needs and Services, Outcomes

Abstract

This article reports on an evaluation of the community residential phase of a prison-based program for drug-using women, the Forever Free Substance Abuse Program at the California Institute for Women. Three groups were interviewed: graduates from Forever Free who entered residential treatment, graduates who did not enter residential treatment, and women who applied to Forever Free but were not able to enter. The study assessed treatment experiences, needs and services received, and drug use and parole outcomes 1 year after the women were released from prison. Briefly, findings indicate that the women's needs for relapse prevention training and drug treatment were not met, women often did not complete treatment, and women who participated in community residential treatment had lower self-reported drug use rates and higher levels of successful parole discharge than women in the other two groups. Multiple needs beyond drug treatment must be addressed to increase treatment entry and improve retention in programs.

Predicting the effect of substance abuse treatment on probationer recidivism

“…Much of this research has focused on the effectiveness of prison-based residential treatment programs, with several studies finding reduced recidivism among treatment participants Rhodes et al 2001), particularly when prison-based therapeutic communities are combined with community-based aftercare (Martin et al 1995;Wexler et al 1995;Prendergast et al 1996). Because the current analysis considers the effectiveness of community-based treatment among probationers, we have prioritized methodologically strong evaluations of treatment delivered to offenders under community supervision in the review that follows.…”

Drug treatment aftercare in the criminal justice system: A systematic review

“…The findings of these studies showed that persons who completed both in-prison treatment and transitional treatment programs after release had more favorable outcomes when compared with persons who completed in-prison treatment alone or with a comparison group of untreated offenders Inciardi et al, 1997;Prendergast et al, 1996;Wexler, Melnick, et al, 1999). Similar results were found when the in-prison and transitional treatment groups were compared with persons who dropped out of in-prison treatment (Wexler, Melnick, et al, 1999) or with a comparison group of persons who did not receive any treatment (Griffith et al, 1999).…”

“…Other than the treatment setting (community vs. prison) and the focus on work-release programming, the primary modality of treatment (the therapeutic community) and the intensity of treatment (residential) within the criminal justice systems appear to be similar to that which is provided within the in-prison treatment programs (Butzin, Martin, & Inciardi, 2002De Leon et al, 2000;Griffith, Hiller, Knight, & Simpson, 1999;Inciardi, Martin, & Butzin, 2004;Inciardi, Martin, Butzin, Hooper, & Harrison, 1997;Martin, Butzin, Saum, & Inciardi, 1999;Prendergast, Hall, Wexler, Melnick, & Cao, 2004;Prendergast, Wellisch, & Wong, 1996;Wexler, De Leon, Thomas, Kressel, & Peters, 1999). One study investigated postrelease residential services following intensive in-prison treatment, but the primary modality of the postrelease treatment was not a therapeutic community or work-release program (Prendergast et al, 1996). Knight, Simpson, and Hiller (1999) combined transitional residential care (3 months) with outpatient aftercare (up to 1 year of treatment without specified intensity) when studying the effects of aftercare.…”

“…Other studies did not report the length of time in transitional treatment (Inciardi et al, 1997;Martin et al, 1999;Prendergast et al, 2004) or reported that the length varied between 2 and 12 months with an expected length of stay of 6 months (Prendergast et al, 1996).…”

“…For example, one study mentioned that the transitional treatment provided services to family members (Wexler, De Leon, et al, 1999;Wexler, Melnick, et al, 1999). Another residential transitional program included vocational rehabilitation services and social programs, but it was noted that the services varied from one program to another (Prendergast et al, 1996). Even in states where aftercare is available to all in-prison treatment graduates (unlike the case in the federal system), knowledge about and understanding of aftercare are limited by variations in service received and by the lack of details about the interface between the criminal justice and treatment systems.…”