Screening, Assessment, and Referral Practices in Adult Correctional Settings A National Perspective

George Mason University.
Criminal Justice and Behavior (Impact Factor: 1.71). 10/2007; 34(9):1216-1234. DOI: 10.1177/0093854807304431
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.

Download full-text


Available from: Douglas Young, Jul 28, 2015
  • Source
    • "Findings further showed differences between settings in the use of these types of assessments and of those facilities reporting use, the proportion of offenders assessed also varied widely. For example, the use of standardized substance abuse assessment instruments were shown to be least common in community corrections and most often used by substance abuse treatment prisons (Taxman et al., 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many discretionary decisions made by practitioners working in the criminal justice system are partly influenced by progress reports submitted by treatment providers. Surprisingly, though, little research has examined how clinician ratings of treatment progress relate to subsequent success in the community. This study explored whether clinician ratings of treatment progress were associated with re-incarceration of offenders post-treatment. Ratings were completed by clinicians on a large sample of probationers (N = 419) enrolled in a Therapeutic Community treatment setting. This study examined the measurement characteristics and the factor structure of the assessment tool and whether the factors derived were predictive of re-incarceration at three years post-treatment. Results showed a clear four factor solution with no significant relationship between the factors and re-incarceration. Results have implications for both policy and practice related to offender assessment.
    Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 05/2014; 53:253-272. DOI:10.1080/10509674.2014.902007
  • Source
    • "(Glaze 2011) It has been estimated that at least 15% of these individuals are opioiddependent , and alcohol dependence is ubiquitous. (Polcin & Greenfield 2003) While the vast majority of criminal justice referrals to publicly-funded drug abuse treatment programs in the U.S. are through community corrections (Taxman et al. 2007), referrals to addiction pharmacotherapy are rare in most jurisdictions. Substantial evidence supports the effectiveness of medication assisted treatment (MAT) in reducing opioid and alcohol use (Amato et al. 2005; Johnson 2008; Saxon & Miotto 2011; Tompkins & Strain 2011), criminal behavior and arrest (Ball & Ross 1991; Schwartz et al. 2009), and HIV risk behavior and infection (Gowing et al. 2011; Metzger et al. 1993). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Substance use disorders are highly prevalent in community correctional populations, yet these settings frequently are ill-equipped to identify and refer offenders to community-based treatment services. In particular, community corrections staff are often opposed to the use of medication in addiction treatment because of inadequate knowledge, resources, and organizational structures to facilitate client linkages to evidence-based services. Methods/design Each of the NIDA-funded Research Centers recruited 2 criminal justice agencies to participate in the study. Eligibility rules required study sites that were focused on community corrections (i.e., probation or parole), had few or no formal relationships with treatment providers for referring clients to medication-assisted treatment, and had no state or local policies prohibiting such relationships. Sites under the oversight of the same parent agency were eligible only if they were in geographically distinct catchment areas, and could be assigned to different study arms without cross-contamination at any level. The 18 clusters consisted of community corrections officers and their offender caseloads nested within agencies, each of which was partnered with at least one community-based substance abuse treatment program. Randomization was blocked by Research Center, within which one cluster was randomly assigned to a training-only condition (comparison) and the other to training followed by a strategic organizational linkage process (intervention). Line staff received a scientifically-grounded, systematically-delivered training session that addresses gaps in existing knowledge, perceptions, and information about medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and local availability of MAT services. Key decision-makers subsequently were asked to collaborate in a strategic planning process to enhance formal and informal linkages between criminal justice agencies and local MAT providers. It was hypothesized that the two implementation intervention components together would be more likely than staff training alone to improve the process of referring opioid- and alcohol-dependent adults under community supervision to appropriate addiction pharmacotherapy. Outcomes were measured at the client (referrals), line staff (attitudes), and organizational (linkage) levels. Discussion Through closer collaboration among criminal justice agencies and treatment providers, improved linkages to effective substance abuse treatment should yield significant clinical, public health and public safety benefits.
    12/2013; 1(6). DOI:10.1186/2194-7899-1-6
  • Source
    • "Static risks include factors that do not change over time or with interventions (e.g., age at first arrest). Dynamic risks refer to traits that may be changed over time or with programming and/or interventions, such as substance abuse (Hannah-Moffat, 2013; Taxman et al., 2007; Van Voorhis, Salisbury, Wright, & Bauman, 2008). This is referred to as the risk/need/responsivity principle or RNR (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2006, 2011; Clements, 1996; Lovins, Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Smith, 2007; Salisbury et al., 2008; Smith, Cullen, & Latessa, 2009; Van Voorhis et al., 2008; Vitopoulos, Peterson-Badali, & Skilling, 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This review examines female offender reentry within the context of the Transition from Prison to Community Initiative (TPCI). Specifically, we consider each stage of the TPCI, noting the extent to which current reentry policies and practices can be informed by gender responsiveness. To illustrate further, we compare reentry approaches and correctional outcomes in two states. Directions for further research on female offender reentry and TPCI evaluations are discussed.
    Criminal Justice and Behavior 10/2013; DOI:10.1177/0093854813504406 · 1.71 Impact Factor
Show more