An Assessment of Prison-Based Drug Treatment

Abstract

In response to increasing problems associated with drugabusing offenders, the 1991 Texas Legislature provided a statutory foundation for the development of a comprehensive drug treatment program within the state's criminal justice system. In an effort to assess the impact of the prison-based treatment component of this legislative mandate, the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse funded the Institute of Behavioral Research at Texas Christian University to conduct a comprehensive prison-based treatment assessment (PTA) including studies of the In-prison Therapeutic Community (ITC) treatment process and posttreabnent outcomes. This article provides an overview of the research project and findings from the 6-month follow-up study. Preprison and during-treaiment information was collected from 293 ITC program pahcipants. Six-month follow-up interviews were completed with 222 ITC program graduates and compared with a comparison Downloaded by [Ecole Hautes Etudes Commer-Montreal] at 06:18 17 August 2015 76 JOURNAL OF OFFENDER REHABILITATION sample of 75 parolees who were eligible but not sent to ITC treatment.Results showed that 80% of the inmates referred to the ITC during this study graduated, and that program graduates demonstrated marked reductions in their criminal and drug use activity from the 6 months before entering prison to the 6 months after leaving prison. Finally, ITC graduatespahcularly those who completed the fmt phase of their aftercare progmmhd lower relapse and recidivism rates in the 6 months after prison than did the parolees in comparison sample. They also reported highly favorable opinions about both the program and the counselors. Implications of these fmdings are discussed, and longer term follow-up evaluations are in progress. [Article copies awilable for a /ee fmm The H m r i h Document Delivety Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail dm: g e t i~i r i h s o m ]

A systematic review of evaluations of prison‐based alcohol and other drug use behavioural treatment for men

“…Year of publication: Twelve evaluations were published between 1995 and 2005 25–36 and 13 between 2006 and 2015 37–49 …”

“…Country of origin: Over half the evaluations were of programs in the United States ( n =15), 25–28,31–34,36,38,39,41,43,45,48 there were two each from Canada 37,46 and Taiwan, 29,47 and one each from Australia, 35 Croatia, 30 Japan, 40 Poland, 49 the United Kingdom (Wales), 44 and South Korea 42 …”

“…Format of treatment provided: Four treatment format modes were described: i) residential ( n =6); 25,26,28,29,37,38 ii) therapeutic prison ( n =3); 30,39,40 iii) therapeutic community ( n =8); 31–34,41–43,48 and iv) group treatment ( n =7) 35,36,44–47,49 …”

“…Treatment approach: Seven different treatment approaches were described: i) CBT, or a derivative such as cognitive social therapy ( n =8); 25,26,33,37,40,44,46,47 ii) self‐help, most commonly the Alcoholics Anonymous 12‐step program (n=7); 27–30,33,38,49 iii) psychoeducational approaches (n=6); 29,30,35,37,38,41 iv) a MATRIX model (n=2); 40,41 v) meditational approach (n=2); 39,47 vi) a computerised educational program (n=1); 45 and vii) a Native American therapeutic healing program (n=1) 36 . Several studies only described the treatment approach as being a TC with limited other detail given, even though a TC is not necessarily a treatment approach in the same way as the other treatments (n=7) 31–34,42,43,48 . In terms of post‐prison follow‐up treatment, three TCs and one residential program included post‐prison care, 28,31,32,34 and a therapeutic prison had 12‐step program attendance as a condition for release (although post‐prison attendance was not monitored) 30…”

“…Ongoing or evaluation project only: Twenty‐one studies evaluated ongoing treatment programs 25–33,35,37,38,40–43,45,46,48–50 and four were evaluations of a specific type of AoD treatment 36,39,44,47 …”