Screening and Assessment: An Evidence-Based Process for the Management and Care of Adult Drug-Involved Offenders (original) (raw)
Related papers
Demographic, criminal history, instant case, treatment modality, program failure, and re-arrest data were collected from 400 New York City drug court participants. Actuarial risk scores were created for program failure and re-arrest by performing stepwise logistic regressions based on criminal history, present case, and demographic predictors of these outcomes. Placement in a residential (vs. outpatient) setting increased the likelihood of program failure and re-arrest after controlling for actuarial risk scores. Residential placement was particularly counter-productive with low-risk program participants, whose re-arrest rate was more than double that of low-risk participants placed in an outpatient setting. Conversely, placement of low-risk participants in the least restrictive treatment modality—a non-intensive outpatient setting—lowered the likelihood of re-arrest relative to placement either in a residential setting or an intensive outpatient program. Results are discussed in terms of the Risk-need-responsivity model of offender intervention, which recommends avoiding overly restrictive treatment of low-risk offenders. The relationship between drug addiction and criminal behavior is an enduring problem for the American justice system (e.g., Mumola & Karberg, 2006). Dating back to the late 1980s, a wide range of pretrial diversion and post-adjudication alternatives to incarceration have emerged in an effort to treat the underlying problems of drug-addicted offenders. Specialized drug courts, three of which constitute sites for the present study, have arguably become the most popular and widely researched alternative model in existence today. As of 2014, there were nearly 3,000 active drug courts in the United States (National Drug Court Institute, 2015). Key elements that distinguish drug courts from traditional responses include court-ordered drug treatment, frequent status hearings before a specially trained judge to review progress, collaboration between otherwise adver-sarial court players (defense attorneys and prosecution), and the use of legal coercion (i.e., threat of adverse legal consequences) to incentivize improved compliance.
The disconnect between assessment and intervention in the risk management of criminal offenders
Open Access Journal, 2010
Although research suggests that risk/needs assessment and intervention models may be effective in reducing recidivism, there is emerging evidence that risk management interventions commonly used with various groups of offenders are not based on a proper assessment of offenders' criminogenic needs. In this paper, we examine the apparent disconnect between assessment and treatment among various groups of offenders, including sex, juvenile, mentally ill, drug-involved, and female. As will be discussed, research in these areas suggests that interventions commonly used with these specific groups of offenders may not be targeting appropriate criminogenic needs, which may be attenuating the effectiveness of the provided interventions.
2016
Research has shown that the prison population and recidivism rate of criminal offenders have continued to rise over the last thirty years (Coll, Stewart, Juhnke, Thobro, & Haas, 2009). In response, professionals are implementing techniques, such as risk-need assessments, to assist in lowering recidivism. These assessments are empirical tools that professionals use when interviewing offenders to identify their risk of recidivism (Barber-Roja & Rotter, 2015). Previous research has been focused on assessment’s predictive accuracy, but there is less data on professionals’ perceptions regarding which measures are most effective (Labrecque, Smith, Lovins, & Latessa, 2014). Studies have shown that corrections professionals and treatment providers have interpreted assessment results differently (Marlowe, 2012). In the current study, a quantitative survey with some qualitative elements was used to examine the following questions: 1) What aspects of risk-need assessments do different criminal...
Screening, Assessment, and Referral Practices in Adult Correctional Settings: A National Perspective
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2007
The use of screening and assessment tools to gauge substance abuse disorders and the risk for recidivism are two widely recommended practices. A national survey of adult prisons, jails, and community correctional agencies was conducted to examine the practices used to place offenders in appropriate treatment services. Study findings indicate that 58.2% of the surveyed respondents report the use of a standardized substance abuse-screening tool, and that 34.2% use an actuarial risk tool. The provision of higher intensity treatment programs, the use of standardized risk tools, and the provision of more community referral services were all independently associated with the use of a standardized substance abuse-screening tool. Because practices vary considerably, agencies desiring to improve correctional programming should consider different dissemination, implementation, and technology transfer strategies.
Treating the drug-abusing offender
The Journal of Mental Health Administration, 1992
The association between drug abuse treatment and criminal justice control is examined in this article. A framework is presented for mental health administrators and policy-makers to examine and appreciate the use of authority derived from the criminal justice system for drug abusers involved in community treatment. In addition, an overview of relevant literature is provided to encapsulate the literature related to the drug-abusing criminal offender which is most useful for mental health administrators and policy-makers.
2008
Background and Motivation Tereshchenko, Aaron Sundquist, Jay Reid and Will Jurist provided exceptional assistance preparing the data sets for analysis. Adele Harrell and Terrence Dun worth contributed to the conceptual development of the core hypotheses tested in this study. Shelli Rossman kindly allowed us to coordinate cost data collec tion with the MADCE. Nancy La Vigne provided excellent comments on the final narrative. We also wish to thank three anonymous reviewers for their comments on the technical matters. We would like to thank
Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2013
Objectives-The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to answer the question: Can the Andrews principles of risk, needs, and responsivity, originally developed for programs that treat offenders, be extended to programs that treat drug abusers? Methods-Drawing from a dataset that included 243 independent comparisons, we conducted random-effects meta-regression and ANOVA-analog meta-analyses to test the Andrews principles by averaging crime and drug use outcomes over a diverse set of programs for drug abuse problems. Results-For crime outcomes, in the meta-regressions the point estimates for each of the principles were substantial, consistent with previous studies of the Andrews principles. There was also a substantial point estimate for programs exhibiting a greater number of the principles. However, almost all of the 95% confidence intervals included the zero point. For drug use outcomes, in the meta-regressions the point estimates for each of the principles was approximately zero; however, the point estimate for programs exhibiting a greater number of the principles was somewhat positive. All of the estimates for the drug use principles had confidence intervals that included the zero point. Conclusions-This study supports previous findings from primary research studies targeting the Andrews principles that those principles are effective in reducing crime outcomes, here in metaanalytic research focused on drug treatment programs. By contrast, programs that follow the principles appear to have very little effect on drug use outcomes. Primary research studies that experimentally test the Andrews principles in drug treatment programs are recommended.
Treating Substance Use Disorders in the Criminal Justice System
Current Psychiatry Reports, 2013
The large number of individuals with substance use disorders involved in the nation's criminal justice system (CJS) represents a unique opportunity, as well as challenges, in addressing the dual concerns of public safety and public health. Unfortunately, a low proportion of those who could benefit from treatment actually receive it while involved in the CJS. This article presents a review of recent research on the effectiveness of major substance abuse treatment interventions used at different possible linkage points during criminal justice case processing, including diversion, jail, prison, and community supervision. This is followed by a discussion of key research and practice issues, including low rates of treatment access and under-utilization of medication-assisted treatment. Concluding comments discuss principles of effective treatment for offenders and identify key gaps in research and practice that need to be addressed to improve and expand provision of effective treatment for offenders.