Article

Collaborative behavioral management: integration and intensification of parole and outpatient addiction treatment services in the Step'n Out study.

Center on Systems, Outcomes & Quality in Chronic Disease & Disability, Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Journal of Experimental Criminology (Impact Factor: 1.17). 09/2009; 5(3):227-243. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-009-9079-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Integration of community parole and addiction treatment holds promise for optimizing the participation of drug-involved parolees in re-entry services, but intensification of services might yield greater rates of technical violations. Collaborative behavioral management (CBM) integrates the roles of parole officers and treatment counselors to provide role induction counseling, contract for pro-social behavior, and to deliver contingent reinforcement of behaviors consistent with contracted objectives. Attendance at both parole and addiction treatment are specifically reinforced. The Step'n Out study of the Criminal Justice-Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS) randomly allocated 486 drug-involved parolees to either collaborative behavioral management or traditional parole with 3-month and 9-month follow-up. Bivariate and multivariate regression models found that, in the first 3 months, the CBM group had more parole sessions, face-to-face parole sessions, days on which parole and treatment occurred on the same day, treatment utilization and individual counseling, without an increase in parole violations. We conclude that CBM integrated parole and treatment as planned, and intensified parolees' utilization of these services, without increasing violations.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
85 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective This study describes and provides relapse and recidivism outcome findings related to an experimental trial evaluating the viability of frequent, random drug testing with consequences for use. Methods The sample consisted of 529 offenders released on parole. An experimental design with random assignment to one of three groups was employed. The Experimental Group received frequent, random drug testing with instant results, immediate sanctions, and referral for substance abuse treatment. Control Group I received frequent, random drug testing and treatment referral, but did not receive immediate test results or immediate sanctions. Control Group II followed standard parole practice. Members of this group were not tested on a random basis and did not receive immediate sanctions. Repeated measures ANOVA and survival analysis techniques were used to explore group differences. Results Frequent monitoring of drug use with randomized testing protocols, immediate feedback, and certain consequences is effective in lowering rates of relapse and recidivism. The effectiveness is particularly salient in the short term during the period of exposure to testing conditions. Conclusions The findings lend support to the use of randomized testing with swift and certain sanctions with parolees. Additional quality evidence is necessary to generalize and refine findings from this study and others that focus on sanction certainty. Future replications must consider the immediacy of test result and sanction execution as well as the length of exposure to randomized testing periods.
    Journal of Experimental Criminology 06/2012; 9(2). · 1.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper describes a new method of adaptive array processing for the unknown frequency characteristics. In the practical situations, it is easy to obtain the estimation of the power spectrum in the observed direction instead of the frequency characteristics. Then the maximum entropy spectral analysis can be incorperated with the adaptive array processing. The predicted coefficients of MESA can be obtained. The predicted coefficients can be used as the constrained conditions of the algorithm for the adaptive array processing. In this paper the above method is further expanded and the adaptive array processor is presented for the more general cases, in which the signal characteristics in the observed direction are completely unknown. A series of computer simulation experiments have been conducted.
    01/1982;
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine whether collaborative behavioral management (CBM) reduces substance use, crime and re-arrest among drug-involved parolees. Step'n Out was a randomized behavioral trial of CBM versus standard parole (SP) during 2004-08. CBM adapted evidence-based role induction, behavioral contracting and contingent reinforcement to provide parole officer/treatment counselor dyads with positive tools in addition to sanctions to manage parolees' behavior over 12 weeks. Six parole offices in five states in the USA. Parolee volunteers with a mandate for addiction treatment and a minimum of 3 months of parole (n = 476). Follow-up was 94% at 3 months and 86% at 9 months. Drug use and crime in a given month from calendar interviews 3 and 9 months after parole initiation, and re-arrests from criminal justice administrative data. The CBM group had fewer months in which they used their primary drug [adjusted risk ratio (ARR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05, 0.78, P = 0.02] and alcohol (ARR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.66, P = 0.006) over follow-up. CBM had its greatest effects among parolees who reported marijuana or another 'non-hard' drug as their primary drug; parolees who preferred stimulants or opiates did not benefit. No differences were seen in total crime, re-arrests or parole revocations. Collaborative behavioral management may reduce substance use among primary marijuana or other 'non-hard' drug-using parolees without increasing revocations. Because the majority of drug violation arrests in the United States are for marijuana, these findings have important implications for the management of a substantial proportion of the US community correctional population.
    Addiction 12/2011; 107(6):1099-108. · 4.60 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
3 Downloads
Available from
Jan 14, 2015