UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Programs for Women Laurie Bright, National Institute.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Amity In-Prison Therapeutic Community: Preliminary Five-Year Outcomes
Advertisements

XR-NTX Implementation in Los Angeles County Desirée A. Crèvecoeur-MacPhail, PhD UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs Santa Monica Blvd., Suite.
Oklahoma Department of Corrections DUI Offender Profile
Treatment of Substance Involved Offenders in Criminal Justice Settings – Challenges & Outcomes Igor Koutsenok, MD, MS Assistant Professor of Psychiatry,
Abstract People who enter substance abuse treatment under various degrees of legal pressure do at least as well at the end of treatment or at follow-up.
Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver.
The Catalyst Group, LLC Adolescent Residential Treatment Initiative I Mua Mau Ohana Project Preliminary Findings Richard Kim, Ph.D. 03/03/2005 Funded by.
" The Impact of Criminal Justice Policies and Practices on Minorities" 2009.
Conducting Research in Challenging Times: California Parolee Reentry Court Evaluation Association of Criminal Justice Research, California March
Preliminary Findings: Recovery Center Outcome Study
Foster Youth and the Transition to Adulthood: Findings from the Midwest Study Mark Courtney, Principal Investigator Amy Dworsky, Project Director.
Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative (DOSA): Treatment and Supervision
IN NUMBERS: INCARCERATION-RECIDIVISM-EDUCATION THE NEED FOR BETTER COMMUNICATION BEHIND BAR COMMUNICATION BEHIND BARS TDCJ REHABILITATION PROGRAMS DIVISION.
1 The Importance of Successful Reentry to Jail Population Growth Presented by: Allen J. Beck, Chief Corrections Statistics Program Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Re-Entry and Recidivism
2013 Alaska Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Adverse Childhood Experiences of Alaskan Adults.
ENROLLING JUSTICE INVOLVED POPULATIONS: POLICY IMPLICATIONS LINDSAY NELSON KENTUCKY PRIMARY CARE ASSOCIATION.
Alternatives to Incarceration and Care Coordination May 12, 2015.
Denise Biron Julie Chavez Dara Robichaux.  Who are we? Denise Biron, Psy.D., Norfolk Department of Human Services, Julie Chavez, PO Senior at Norfolk.
Drug treatment in prisons: recent evidence Jessica Harris, RDS NOMS, Home Office Malcolm Ramsay, DSPD Programme, Home Office.
Second Chances: Housing and Services for Re-entering Prisoners National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference Nikki Delgado Program Manager Corporation.
In the Community. Community Corrections Continues after incarceration And it deals with split sentences.
A Case Study of the Intersection Between the Child Welfare and Criminal Justice Systems Charlene Wear Simmons, Ph.D. Parental Incarceration, Termination.
Evaluating Prison-Based Therapeutic Community Substance Abuse Programs: The California Initiative William M. Burdon, Ph.D. David Farabee, Ph.D. Michael.
URBAN MEN IN POVERTY: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS Michael Massoglia Professor of Sociology & Director of Center for Law, Society and Justice University of Wisconsin-Madison.
UCLA Drug Abuse Research CenterForever Free Evaluation Forever Free Substance Abuse Treatment Program Outcomes Study Michael Prendergast, Ph.D., Principal.
Lost Opportunities: The Reality of Latinos in the U.S. Criminal Justice System Nancy E. Walker J. Michael Senger Francisco A. Villarruel Angela M. Arboleda.
QUEENS (NY) TREATMENT COURT JACOB GINESTRO Drug use on any level can lead to further addictive behavior and crime. This program attempts to lower recidivism.
Chapter 40 Rehabilitation. Objectives Identify the major factors that affect criminal behavior Explain the role of correctional treatment programs in.
The Rhode Island Experience Ellen Evans Alexander Assistant Director RI Department of Corrections.
Presentation Outline Why we need a prisoner reentry program What is happening with MPRI statewide What is happening locally How you can help Questions.
Ohio Justice Alliance for Community Corrections October 13, 2011.
Criminal Justice Reform in California Challenges and Opportunities Mia Bird Northern California Grantmakers Annual Conference – From Ideas to Action May.
Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief.
Housing: A Significant Reentry Barrier Nicole E. Sullivan NC Department of Correction Office of Research and Planning.
PowerPoint Template ©2009 Texas Christian University, Center for Instructional Services. For Educational Use Only. Content is the property of the presenter.
Incarcerated Mothers: Their Histories of Victimization and the Consequences for Their Children Toni Johnson, Associate Professor
METHODS Sample n=245 Women, 24% White, 72% Average age, 36.5 Never married, 51% Referral Sources (%) 12-Month DSM-IV Substance Dependence Prior to Entering.
UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs Gender-Responsive Drug Treatment Services for Women Offenders Elizabeth Hall, Ph.D. Criminal Justice Research.
Evaluations of CDCR Substance Abuse Programs: Lessons Learned Michael L. Prendergast, Ph.D. Criminal Justice Research Group UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse.
2013 Alaska Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Adverse Childhood Experiences of Alaskan Adults.
Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Association for Criminal Justice Research (California) 76th Semi-Annual.
Are Incentives Effective in Improving Participation and Outcomes in Treatment for Substance-Abusing Offenders? Michael L. Prendergast, Ph.D. Elizabeth.
Behavioral Health DATA BOOK A quarterly reference to community mental health and substance abuse services Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 2 March 30, 2010.
Introduction Overview of the ASUS-R  The Adult Substance Use Survey - Revised (ASUS-R; Wanberg, 2004) is a self-report screening tool intended to:  identify.
Salient Factor Score CTSFS99. What it is How to use it.
Method Introduction Results Discussion Psychological Disorder Diagnoses Across Ethnicities ??? ? ??? University of Nebraska-Lincoln Many people during.
The Health Consequences of Incarceration Michael Massoglia Penn State University.
Psychosocial Changes Among Special Populations in a Prison-based Therapeutic Community David Farabee, Michael Prendergast, & Jerome Cartier University.
UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs Amity In-Prison Therapeutic Community: Five-Year Outcomes Association of Criminal Justice Research (CA) Sacramento,
Research on Permanent Supportive Housing for Families NAEH National Conference on Ending Family Homelessness Jacquelyn Anderson Senior Program Manager,
Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ Project Transitional Jobs for Ex-Prisoners: Early Impacts from a Random Assignment Evaluation of the Center for.
Public Safety and Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007 (AB 900) Implementation and Impact on County Mental Health Robin Dezember Chief Deputy Secretary.
Nora Wikoff August 19, Former prisoners face hurdles to gainful employment Recidivism rates are high among former prisoners Prison- and community-based.
Midwest Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at Age 19 Chapin Hall Center for Children University of Chicago.
Introduction Results Treatment Needs and Treatment Completion as Predictors of Return-to-Prison Following Community Treatment for Substance-Abusing Female.
Substance Use among Older Adults (Age 50+): Current Prevalence and Future Expectations Presented by Joe Gfroerer U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.
Ready (or not) to graduate: Mental and physical health characteristics associated with completing public housing-based, substance abuse treatment in Key.
The impact of community-based drug and alcohol treatment on reoffending in Indigenous communities Anthony Morgan, Tracy Cussen, Alex Gannoni & Jason Payne.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Research 1.
Behavioral Health DATA BOOK A quarterly reference to community mental health and substance abuse services Fiscal Year 2015 Quarter 1 March 10, 2015
Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver.
Research Issues on Treating Substance-Abusing Offenders Michael L. Prendergast, Ph.D. William M. Burdon, Ph.D. UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
Association for Women in Psychology Conference “A Model of Integrated Treatment for Women with Co-Occurring Disorders who are at High Risk for HIV” Presented.
The Minnesota Youthbuild Program Costs and Benefits to the State of Minnesota Nancy Waisanen, Youthbuild Coordinator February 5, 2011.
Recidivism Rates for DCJ Offenders Exiting Residential Treatment June 2007 Kim Pascual Research & Evaluation.
PURPOSE BACKGROUND RESULTS STUDY DESIGN & METHODS HIV Risk Behaviors Among Male Prisoners Participating in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Methadone Maintenance.
US Census Data Ortman, Jennifer M., Victoria A. Velkoff, and Howard Hogan. An Aging Nation: The Older Population in the United States, Current Population.
Summit County Probation Services
Arely M. Hurtado1,2, Phillip D. Akutsu2, & Deanna L. Stammer1
Presentation transcript:

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Programs for Women Laurie Bright, National Institute of Justice David Chavez, California Department of Corrections David Conn, Mental Health Systems Elizabeth A. Hall, UCLA Richard Jeske, STAR Program Willard Peterson, California Department of Corrections Michael Prendergast, UCLA American Correctional Association August 6, 2002

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Synopsis  Quick overview of Forever Free (Jeske)  Forever Free’s success (Prendergast, Hall)  How Forever Free began (Jeske, Conn, Chavez)  How the integrity of the program was maintained (Chavez, Conn, Jeske, Peterson)

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Background: Forever Free Substance Abuse Treatment Program Started in 1991 Designed specifically for women Cognitive-behavioral model (Gorski) Participants housed separately, but mix with other inmates during meals and work assignments Intensive six-month program provided to volunteering women inmates during the end of their imprisonment Upon release, women may also volunteer for an additional six months of residential treatment in the community

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Documenting Forever Free’s Success: Aims of Outcome Evaluation Compare the 12-month outcomes of Forever Free participants with similar inmates from the general prison population on:  parole performance  drug use  employment  psychological functioning Determine what in-treatment variables predict outcome for Forever Free participants

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Outcome Study Participants Female 215 inmates  119 enrolled in Forever Free  96 in comparison group enrolled in drug education Housed at California Institution for Women near Chino Low educational attainment 66% have children under 18 Offenses were primarily drug or drug-related During the 30 days before incarceration, the treatment group reported spending an average of $125 on alcohol and $1,976 on illegal drugs

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Age and Ethnicity Treatment Comparison (N=119) (N=95) Age 1 Age in years (mean)3534 Ethnicity (percent) 2 White3631 African American3138 Latina2419 Other912 1 Independent sample t-test, differences were non-significant at p =.05 level. 2 Fishers Exact Test (2-Tail), differences were non-significant at p =.05 level.

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Drug Use History Treatment Comparison Primary Drug of Abuse (percent) 1 Cocaine/crack3654 Amphetamine/methamphetamine2816 Heroin and other opiates2521 Alcohol 6 6 Other drugs 4 3 Ever injected in lifetime (% yes)64*50 Received drug education or treatment during past incarcerations (% yes)25*39 1 Fishers Exact Test (2-Tail), differences were non-significant at p =.05 level. * Fishers Exact Test (2-Tail), p <.05.

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Arrest and Incarceration History Treatment Comparison Lifetime arrests (mean) Age first arrested (mean) Lifetime incarcerations (mean) Age first incarcerated (mean) 21N.A. Controlling case (percent) 2 Drug offenses6264 Robbery, burglary, forgery2726 Assault 44 Other 76 1 Independent sample t-test, differences were non-significant at p =.05 level. 2 Fisher’s Exact Test (2-tail), differences were non-significant at p =.05 level.

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Methods In-prison assessment:  Twice for the treatment group  Once for the comparison group (abbreviated form) One-year post-release interviews:  Telephone and face-to-face  Urine samples

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Criminal Justice Measures Forever Free participants perform better ** 1 ** p<.01 1 p=.09

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Percent Reincarcerated Prison treatment + parole treatment = best outcome p =.006, chi square

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Forever Free significantly delays reincarceration * * logrank p<.05

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Lower levels of drug use among Forever Free participants *** *** p<.001

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Higher level of employment among Forever Free participants * * p<.05

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Additional Findings Forever Free women who attended residential treatment during parole were 15 times more likely to be employed Income of those employed was barely above minimum wage Nearly 80% of women in both groups smoked, of these approximately 80% wanted treatment for smoking Forever Free participants scored significantly better on psychological functioning at follow up Women in both groups had a high need for services during parole; the greatest unmet need was for vocational services Of women with minor children, a higher percentage of Forever Free participants had their children living with them and a higher percentage of Forever Free participants rated themselves as doing “Well” in their parenting

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation Recommendations Strongly encourage or mandate community aftercare Require a service needs assessment prior to parole Link Forever Free parolees to community services Provide vocational training to improve income status of women and their children Undertake additional research on:  cognitive-behavioral treatment in prison settings  the impact of post-release services, especially vocational training, on long-term outcome  improving parenting outcomes

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation How the Forever Free program began California Department of Corrections in Sacramento Warden buy-in Custody staff buy-in Training for custody staff Bumps along the way

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse ProgramsForever Free Evaluation How the integrity of the program was maintained Long-term involvement of both CDC and Mental Health Systems staff Continuing evaluation Counselor training Custody staff training Staff pay