Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: August 17, 2024 Sat
Time: 2:44 am
Time: 2:44 am
Results for aftercare
9 results foundAuthor: Olson, David E. Title: A Process and Impact Evaluation of the Sheridan Correctional Center Therapeutic Community Program During Fiscal Years 2004 through 2010 Summary: In response to increases in Illinois’ prison population, low rates of access to substance abuse treatment services while in prison, and high rates of recidivism, on January 2, 2004, the Illinois Department of Corrections opened the Sheridan Correctional Center as a fully-dedicated, modified therapeutic community for incarcerated adult male inmates. Since the program began, a process and impact evaluation has been conducted by researchers from Loyola University Chicago, the Illinois Department of Corrections, the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities (TASC), the Safer Foundation, and WestCare. After 6 ½ years of operation, covering the period from January 2, 2004 through the end of State Fiscal Year 2010 (June 30, 2010), the evaluation has found the following: The pre-operational target population identified for the program is being served, with those admitted to Sheridan having extensive criminal and substance abuse histories, and a substantial unmet need for treatment, vocational and educational programming; As a result of strong support from IDOC executive staff, the Sheridan program has been allowed to evolve and be implemented in a manner that has ensured the clinical integrity of the program and the availability of sufficient resources for needed services; As a result of Sheridan, IDOC has developed and implemented a process by which all adult inmates admitted to prison undergo a screening to identify substance abuse treatment need, the integration of this information into their automated Offender Tracking System, and the development of a treatment waiting list for inmates; During the past 6 ½ years, the following significant accomplishments and improvements to the operation of the Sheridan Correctional Center have been achieved: o A consistently low rate of inmates being referred to Sheridan who are subsequently determined to not meet the eligibility criteria, and quicker identification and removal of these inmates from Sheridan. Overall, less than 5 percent of all inmates admitted to Sheridan were determined to not meet the eligibility criteria during the 6 ½ years of operation. o A consistently low rate of inmates being removed from Sheridan due to disciplinary reasons, despite the serious criminal histories of the population. The ratio of inmates who successfully complete the prison-phase of the program to those removed for disciplinary reasons was 4 to 1; o An increasing proportion of inmates being admitted to Sheridan via the treatment wait list from other institutions. During the first year of operation, less than 4% of admissions came from other prisons, but by 2007, nearly 25% of all Sheridan admissions came from other facilities via the treatment wait list; o During the course of program participation, inmates at the Sheridan Correctional Center improved their levels of psychological and social functioning, and reduced their criminal thinking patterns; o During the time period examined in this report, 32 percent of Sheridan graduates completed at least one vocational certificate program, and this reached a peak of 50 percent of inmates released during SFY 2008; and, o The implementation of enhanced pre-release planning for Sheridan releasees, including the involvement of a multidisciplinary case staffing team representing the institutional staff, parole and aftercare staff and the inmate. In addition to these enhancements at the Sheridan Correctional Center, significant accomplishments, enhancements and improvements to the post-release phase of the program have also been evident during the 6 ½ years of program operation, including: o A pattern of aftercare referrals consistent with the pre-operational expectations, with all Sheridan releasees receiving referrals to either outpatient or residential treatment services; o An increased rate of successful treatment admission among Sheridan releasees, fewer releasees failing to show up for aftercare referrals, and a decreased length of time between an inmate’s release and aftercare placement; and, o An increased rate of successful aftercare treatment completion among the Sheridan releasees. Among the SFY 2005 releasees from Sheridan only about one-half successfully completed post-release aftercare, but among the SFY 2009 and 2010 releasees, aftercare completion rates exceeded 70 percent. As a result of the successful implementation of the prison-phase of the Sheridan Correctional Center, coupled with the post-release aftercare component, the Sheridan program has produced the following outcomes: o The earned good conduct credits many of the inmates received at Sheridan for their participation in treatment during the first six full state fiscal years of operation (SFY 2005-2010) translates into a savings of 714 years of incarceration, which equates to $16.7 million, or $2.78 million per year, in reduced incarceration costs; o Sheridan participants who earned a vocational certificate were almost twice as likely to have job starts than those released from Sheridan who did not earn a vocational certificate; o As a result of the treatment services and aftercare received, those inmates released from Sheridan had a 16 percent lower likelihood of being returned to prison after three years in the community than a statistically similar comparison group of inmates released from Illinois’ other prisons during the same time period, and a 25 percent lower recidivism rate than those removed from Sheridan due to disciplinary reasons; and, o The largest reductions in recidivism —both in terms of rearrest and return to prison -- were evident among those Sheridan releasees who successfully completed aftercare treatment. Those Sheridan graduates who also completed aftercare had a 44 percent lower likelihood of being returned to prison after three years in the community than a statistically similar comparison group. Given that rates of aftercare treatment completion have improved substantially over the past year, it is likely that in the future the overall reductions in recidivism associated with Sheridan will be even larger. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2011. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 21, 2011 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Sheridan_6_year_eval_report_01_2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Sheridan_6_year_eval_report_01_2011.pdf Shelf Number: 121085 Keywords: AftercareCorrectional ProgramsOffender Treatment (Illinois)RecidivismRehabilitationSubstance Abuse TreatmentVocational Training |
Author: Reichert, Jessica Title: Community Re-entry After Prison Drug Treatment: Learning from Sheridan Therapeutic Community Program Participants Summary: The Sheridan Correctional Center National Model Drug Prison and Reentry Program is a drug treatment program providing in-prison substance abuse treatment as well as substance abuse treatment upon release. Prior research has shown reductions in recidivism among Sheridan participants compared to other prisoners. This study examined a group of 50 re-incarcerated men who successfully completed the in-prison phase of the Sheridan program and what led to their re-incarceration. Among this sample, positive findings about the Sheridan program and its participants include: • Sixty-two percent stated they were Very engaged in the Sheridan program. • Slightly more than half (60 percent) felt Sheridan prepared them for success after release. • Over three-fourths (76 percent) indicated they had a job at some point after graduating Sheridan and before their re-incarceration. • A majority (84 percent) reported having little difficulty in finding housing. • Most (86 percent) said Sheridan helped them more than a traditional prison. Other notable findings include: • On average, Sheridan graduates in this study spent 738 days (about two years) in the community before returning to IDOC. The range was 40 to 2,096 days (over five-and-a-half years). • A majority of the men in our sample (90 percent) relapsed into drug or alcohol use after their release from Sheridan. • Slightly more than half (56 percent) of the sample reported they had illegal sources of income. • Sixty-eight 68 percent stated drug dealing was common in the neighborhood they lived in after release. This study found many factors associated with length of time to relapse to drug or alcohol use and recidivism (self-reported criminal activity or re-incarceration) including: • Younger participants engaged in criminal activity and relapsed sooner than older participants. Younger participants also reported being less engaged in the Sheridan program than older participants. • After prison, those who returned to their original neighborhood relapsed sooner than those who did not return to their original neighborhood. • Unemployed participants engaged in criminal activity sooner than employed participants. • Those living in neighborhoods that were perceived as unsafe and/or where drug dealing was common relapsed sooner than those living in safer, lower-risk neighborhoods. • Those who reported spending time with persons who engage in risky activities—substance use and/or criminal activity—relapsed sooner than those who did not spend time with persons engaging in risky activities. • Those with gang involvement engaged in criminal activity and relapsed sooner. • Those who did not complete aftercare engaged in criminal activity and relapsed sooner than those who did complete aftercare. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 19, 2012 at: http://www.icjia.org/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Reentry_Sheridan_Report_012012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.org/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Reentry_Sheridan_Report_012012.pdf Shelf Number: 123667 Keywords: AftercareCorrectional ProgramsDrug OffendersDrug TreatmentPrisoner Reentry (Illinois)RecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Prendergast, Michael L. Title: Evaluation of the 2,000-Bed Expansion of Therapeutic Community Programs for Prisoners - Final Report Summary: The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of the UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs' (ISAP) evaluation of the California Department of Corrections (CDC) 2,000-bed therapeutic community (TC) substance abuse programs (SAPs) for prisoners (Contract Number C98,346). The report includes: the 12-month return-to-custody rates for all the 2,000-bed programs; the 6-month and 12-month return-to-custody rates for the SAP participants at four outcome study sites and the no-treatment comparison groups; the 6-month return-to-custody rates for the SAP-only participants at the four outcome study sites compared with those who went on to participate in aftercare treatment. Details: Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Program, 2004. 26p. Source: Library Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at Don M. Gottfredson Library of Criminal Justice, Rutgers Newark Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 126766 Keywords: AftercareResidential Treatment CentersSubstance AbuseSubstance Abuse TreatmentTherapeutic Communities (TC) |
Author: Bouffard, Jeffrey Title: Reentry Services Project. Process and Outcome Evaluation - Final 2 Year Report Summary: Background on RSP: In July 2003, the Clay County Joint Powers Collaborative (CCJPC) was awarded funding by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Drug Policy and Violence Prevention to develop and implement a Reentry Services Project (RSP). The CCJPC also provided matching funds to begin the RSP program. Two Transitional Coordinators began providing Reentry Services in July of 2003, and evaluation of the program by the North Dakota State University evaluation team began in September of 2003. RSP Goals: In general, the RSP prepares juvenile offenders for successful reentry to the Clay County community after returning from various out-of-home placements. The program aims to achieve its goal by assisting youthful offenders in becoming productive, responsible, and law abiding citizens through strategic and comprehensive reentry plans. These plans address the following Reentry components: 1. Obtaining and retaining long term employment, if appropriate; 2. Maintaining a stable residence by providing intensive services to high risk juvenile offenders leaving out-of-home placements, with an emphasis on seamless and comprehensive treatment, intensive case management, and the involvement of local communities; 3. Successfully addressing substance abuse issues; 4. Successfully addressing physical and mental health issues; and 5. Establishing a meaningful and supportive role in the community. Details: Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University, Department of Criminal Justice and Political Science, 2005. 119p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2014 at: http://www.claycountycollaborative.org/meetings/files/RSP2003-2005FinalReport.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.claycountycollaborative.org/meetings/files/RSP2003-2005FinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 147750 Keywords: AftercarePrisoner ReentryTreatment ProgramsYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Pessin, Sandi R. Title: An Examination of the Effects of Race on the Assignment of Aftercare Services and the Effects of Aftercare Services on Recidivism for Juvenile Offenders Summary: About 100,000 youth return to their communities from correctional facilities each year. Among these youth, it is estimated that two-thirds have drug dependency and abuse problems. In recent years advocates have called for intensive aftercare services to better facilitate transitions back into the community and reduce the probability of the youth reoffending. Barriers to the implementation of aftercare services include the untested nature of most current programs, as well as small sample sizes available to conduct studies. In addition, the racial disproportionality within the juvenile justice system is well documented. This study attempts to examine the effects the provisions of aftercare services had on recidivism in a particular substance abuse facility in Virginia, and the effect race played in the assignment of aftercare services. This study found that the assignment rates of Black youth and White youth to aftercare varies with Black youth receiving aftercare less frequently than Whites. However, after controlling for a number of characteristics of the youths, the difference in the assignment to aftercare does not differ significantly by race. This study also found that Black youth were more likely to be declared "severely delinquent" which appears to have systematically disqualified them from receiving aftercare services. Unfortunately, results regarding the effects of aftercare services on recidivism are inconclusive, mostly due to the small sample size. Details: Washington, DC: Georgetown University, Public Policy Institute 2008. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Master's Essay: Accessed June 19, 2014 at: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555950/30_etd_srp27.pdf?sequence=3 Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555950/30_etd_srp27.pdf?sequence=3 Shelf Number: 132531 Keywords: AftercareJuvenile Drug OffendersJuvenile OffendersJuvenile ReentryRacial DisparitiesRecidivism |
Author: Malloch, Margaret Title: The Elements of Effective Through-Care. Part 1: International Review Summary: This report forms Part 1 of a two-part review of the elements of effective through-care. It examines the international evidence in order to identify practice that appears to be effective, alongside areas that may hinder effective interventions. Part 2 examines this evidence alongside a review of practice in Scotland. The available evidence, consisting of international research and practice evaluations, clearly highlights the practical issues that prisoners experience at the point of release and transition into the community. These issues often appear more entrenched for short-term prisoners for whom rates of reconviction are highest. The review confirms that already existing difficulties in areas such as accommodation, income, employment, drug and alcohol problems can actually deteriorate after release from custody, and imprisonment may serve to further marginalise particular groups (for example women, young and elderly prisoners, and minority ethnic groups). While programmes in prison may help prepare prisoners for release, according to international research and evaluations these programmes will have greater impact if stable accommodation and employment opportunities are available in the community. Reductions in reoffending appear to be directly related to the availability of support following release, with international evidence suggesting that after-care may be as important as the provision of interventions during the period of custody. Through-care is intended to ensure processes are in place to support prisoners as they move back into their local communities and, to some extent, mitigate the worst effects of detrimental social and economic factors which affect the lives of many people processed by the criminal justice system. There is significant variation regarding the legislative context of through-care provision which can consist of both policy and statutory bases; varying across countries but also across regions and local states within a national framework. The provision of support at this transitional stage can reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Internationally, challenges to the provision of through-care arise from fragmentation of services, under-funding and a limited evidence base for service development. While this review drew on an extensive range of international literature, there are a number of limitations in the evidence available and very little evidence of outcomes obtained as a direct result of through-care services. Differences are evident between academic or independent reviews of through-care provision and project evaluations or policy analysis. Different methodological approaches can also hamper attempts to consider evidence comparatively and an over-reliance on reconviction data often obscures many of the 'softer' measures which are present in the process of (re)-integration. However, despite these caveats, there is sufficient evidence from which a number of conclusions may be drawn with regard to through-care provision. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Centre for Crime & Justice Research, 2013. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 03/2013: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/International_Through-care_Review.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/International_Through-care_Review.pdf Shelf Number: 132806 Keywords: AftercareEx-Offender EmploymentEx-Offenders, HousingPrisoner ReentryPrisoner Reintegration |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Joint thematic inspection of resettlement services to children by Youth Offending Teams and partner agencies Summary: Context The inspection took place as the Government had just launched Transforming Youth Custody which includes plans for the improvement of resettlement work with children. The Youth Justice Board and the National Offender Management Service are tasked with taking these plans forward. The inspection This inspection was led by HMI Probation, in collaboration with partner inspectorates, in response to the findings from our mainstream inspection programme of youth offending work which suggested that services to children in custody and on release were not being delivered consistently well enough. The inspection focused on the journey and experience of the child. Their cases were tracked through the custodial period, their release and the initial phase out into the community. We talked to them and their parents/carers where possible and appropriate, about the things that made it easier for them to settle back into their community successfully and about what got in the way. We also talked to staff and managers within the Young Offender Institutions, the Secure Training Centres and Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) as well as chairs of the YOT management boards and senior managers from the organisations with oversight of this work throughout England. Overall findings The offending outcomes for many of the children whose cases we inspected were poor. Too many had been rearrested, charged or convicted of new offences within months, or even weeks, of being released. Other outcomes: accommodation, education, training or employment, substance misuse and/or physical or mental health was also poor for too many. Very often, the support to help these children to successfully stop offending and start new, law-abiding lives had not been good enough. Many of the children in our inspection were vulnerable to harm, either through their offending or from others. They led complicated and chaotic lives, often in very difficult circumstances. Much hard work was carried out in the custodial institutions but it was not linked to giving children the best chance to stop offending and make a new life. It did not meet the individual, and often complex, needs of the child frequently enough; it was restricted to what was routinely available within the institution, the provision of education and behaviour management. Key staff did not fully understand each other's roles, did not always value each other's input and did not always work together. Information sharing was inconsistent both within and between organisations. Sentence planning was not integrated across all internal services, did not always take account of previous assessments or individual need and was not genuinely linked to the community. Plans were not useful tools to drive progress; they were generic, wordy and unfocused. Planning meetings were ineffective and failed to properly engage children and their parents/carers. Over one-third of children were held over 50 miles from home. This impacted on the ability of parents/carers to visit and be involved in planning, as well as the processes for gaining accommodation and accessing constructive activities. At the custodial stage, work in the community was not proactive and in too many cases was largely about attending meetings in the institution rather than preparing for release. Sometimes, having meetings and putting plans on a database had become ends in themselves; children recognised that and had become frustrated and disengaged. The worst examples of this were the lack of suitable accommodation being considered early enough and the failure to organise appropriate, realistic education, training and employment provision or constructive activities at the point of release. These were the two main complaints from those to whom we spoke. Children did not understand why things were not in place when they had been in custody for months. Too often, children and their parents/carers were not involved or engaged to any meaningful extent in the plans for release. They were at best, merely aware of the plans and, at worst, kept in the dark. There was little preparation to help them cope with the impact of the child's release. While there are some promising local resettlement projects, resettlement work in the community often started too late. Resources and services were not in place soon enough before release, leaving the child insufficiently supported at the most crucial point. Too often, it did not take into account what had taken place in custody. Contingency planning for the period following release was almost non-existent and Release on Temporary Licence was not used to promote successful resettlement. We found that some children were released without any form of statutory supervision following recall. At every stage, we found that children were held to account for their behaviour. We did not see a corresponding rigour towards the agencies tasked with providing services to them, either inside or outside custody. Conversely, we saw some excellent work both in custody and in the community, and for a small number of children, this hard work had contributed to successful resettlement back into the community. Those children had not reoffended. They had been helped to find and maintain suitable accommodation, they were engaged in education, training or employment and they told us about how they had changed the way they thought about themselves and their future. They were determined to make a new start and to stop offending. As outlined in the foreword, there are a number of agencies and departments responsible for resettlement policy and strategy. Across England and Wales, no one individual or organisation is ultimately accountable for the improvement of resettlement outcomes, in particular the reduction in the high level of reoffending of children leaving custody. The Youth Justice Board and the National Offender Management Service are again planning to improve resettlement practice under the auspices of the Government's Transforming Youth Custody. Previous initiatives have failed to embed improvements in services to those leaving custody or substantially reduce their reoffending. Locally, we found that YOT management boards did not identify or analyse the specific needs of children leaving custody or look at the reasons for their failure to settle back into the community successfully. Nor were children's social care services and housing providers sufficiently engaged, or held to account, in relation to the resettlement needs of children. Details: Manchester, UK: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation, 2015. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 3, 2015 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/03/Youth-Resettlement_report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/03/Youth-Resettlement_report.pdf Shelf Number: 135863 Keywords: AftercareJuvenile OffendersJuvenile ProbationJuvenile ReentryJuvenile Resettlement |
Author: MacDonald, Morag Title: Literature Review: United Kingdom. Throughcare: Working in Partnership Summary: The following literature review for the Throughcare services for prisoners with problematic drug use will address the criminal justice systems of England and Wales in order to provide the context for the research that will take place both in Scotland and England. The key areas that will be addressed by the literature review are: 1. the current national drug situation 2. the structure of the prison systems to include drug use in prison settings and prison health systems 3. Organisation of existing throughcare 4. key debates and issues in current research on prisons and throughcare For the purpose of this literature review, it is proposed to use the definition of throughcare used by Fox and Khan (2005:49) as it encompasses the criminal justice system and the community: The term "Throughcare" refers to arrangements for managing the continuity of care which started in the community[added] or at an offender's first point of contact with the criminal justice system through custody, court, sentence, and beyond into resettlement. "Aftercare" is the package of support that needs to be in place after a drug-misusing offender reaches the end of a prison-based treatment programme, completes a community sentence or leaves treatment. It is not one simple, discrete process involving only treatment but includes access to additional support for issues which may include mental health, housing, managing finance, family problems, learning new skills and employment. Details: Birmingham, UK: Centre for Research into Quality, Birmingham City University, 2011. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 24, 2016 at: http://throughcare.eu/reports/throughcare_uk_lit_review.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://throughcare.eu/reports/throughcare_uk_lit_review.pdf Shelf Number: 138409 Keywords: AftercareCommunity PartnershipsDrug Offender TreatmentDrug OffendersThroughcareTreatment Programs |
Author: Griffiths, Andrew Title: Evaluation of ACT Extended Throughcare Pilot Program Final Report Summary: This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the Extended Throughcare program (the Program) provided by ACT Corrective Services. Extended Throughcare is a voluntary program that provides support to detainees returning to the community at the end of their custodial sentence at the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC; the ACT's only adult correctional facility). ACT Corrective Services clients can be characterised as experiencing multiple disadvantages, including mental health issues, substance abuse issues, low levels of literacy and numeracy, interrupted education and sporadic employment history, as well as high level of homelessness. The findings of this report highlight clients' experiences with the Program, the impact of the Program in key areas, the strengths of the Program, and areas for improvement. It also details the perspectives of stakeholders with regard to the aims and impact of the Program and the effectiveness of the Program's governance. Objectives of Extended Throughcare The Program aims to reduce reoffending, improve community integration post-release, and improve the social and health outcomes of clients. Ultimately, the Program is designed to reduce recidivism and its associated costs. The Program, which commenced in June 2013, is tailored to each individual, commences pre-release, and continues for a period of 12 months post-release with the support of community organisations. The Program provides coordinated and continuous support, and aims to reduce duplication and gaps in services, to help detainees reintegrate into the community and to reduce the risk of homelessness, poor physical and mental health, drug and alcohol abuse, and premature death. The Program is similar to other Throughcare programs in Australia in that it provides person-centred case management and support in five core areas: accommodation, health, basic needs, income and community connections. Extended Throughcare is a voluntary program and is not mandated as part of any supervision order. Initially, the Program was limited to supporting prisoners prior to their release. The extension of the model to supporting the client into the community after their release was first funded in the ACT 2012-2013 budget. While this post-release care model is not unique to the ACT, the Extended Throughcare model is unique in offering support for 12 months and in offering this service to ex-detainees without ongoing supervision orders. Details: Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW Australia, 2017. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: (SPRC Report 02/17).Accessed April 8, 2017 at: https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/media/SPRCFile/Evaluation_of_ACT_Extended_Throughcare_Pilot_Program.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/media/SPRCFile/Evaluation_of_ACT_Extended_Throughcare_Pilot_Program.pdf Shelf Number: 144750 Keywords: AftercarePrisoner ReentryRecidivismThroughcare |