Since 1990, the correctional drug treatment system in California has become one of the largest in the nation. As part of the development of the initiative, California Department of Corrections has funded or supported several evaluations of these programs. As background to the articles in this special issue reporting on results from some of these evaluations, this article examines the decline and revival of rehabilitation within corrections in general and then traces the development of in-prison treatment programs in California. The article concludes with comments on improving correctional programs for offenders in the following four areas: treatment process, continuity of care, system integration, and the role of evaluation in policy and program development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, L. C., MacKenzie, D. L., & Hickman, L. (2001). The effectiveness of cognitive behavioral treatment for adult offenders: A methodological, quality-based review. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(4), 498-514.
2.
Anglin, M. D. (Ed.). (1988). Social policy analysis of compulsory treatment for opiate dependence (Special issue). Journal of Drug Issues, 18(4), 503-703.
3.
Anglin, M. D., & Maugh, T. H. (1992). Ensuring success in interventions with drug-abusing offenders. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 521, 66-90.
4.
Anglin, M. D., & Perrochet, B. (1998). Drug use and crime: A historical review of research conducted by the UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center. Substance Use and Misuse, 33(9), 1871-1914.
5.
Anglin, M. D., Prendergast, M., & Farabee, D. (1997). First annual report on the substance abuse program at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility (SATF) and state prison at Corcoran: A report to the California state legislature. Project Report, California Department of Corrections Contract C97.243. Los Angeles: UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center.
6.
Bell, D. C. (1994). Connection in therapeutic communities. International Journal of the Addictions, 29, 525-543.
7.
Blue Ribbon Commission on Inmate Population Management. (1990). Final Report. Sacramento, CA: Blue Ribbon Commission on Inmate Population Management.
8.
Brown, B. S., (1979). Community integration of the former drug user. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1999). Substance abuse and treatment, state and federal prisoners, 1997 (NCJ 172871). Washington, DC: Author.
10.
California Department of Corrections. (1996). Parolee Partnership Program: A parole outcome evaluation. Sacramento: California Department of Corrections.
11.
California Department of Corrections. (1997). Los Angeles Prison Parole Network: An evaluation report. Sacramento: California Department of Corrections.
California Department of Corrections. (2002b). Office of substance abuse programs: Weekly in custody population report-September 13, 2002. Sacramento: Office of Substance Abuse Programs, California Department of Corrections.
15.
Camp, G. M., & Camp, C. G. (1989). Building on prior experience: Therapeutic communities in prison. South Salem, NY: Criminal Justice Institute.
16.
Catalano, R. F., Wells, E. A., Jenson, J. M., & Hawkins, J. D. (1989). Aftercare services for drug-using institutionalized delinquents. Social Service Reviews, 63 (4), 553-557.
17.
Chaiken, M. (1989). In-prison programs for drug-involved offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
18.
Clear, T. R., & Braga, A. (1995). Community corrections. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime (pp. 421-445). San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
19.
Cullen, F., Cullen, J., & Wozniak, J. (1988). Is rehabilitation dead? The myth of the punitive public. Journal of Criminal Justice, 16(4), 303-317.
De Leon, G. (1995). Therapeutic communities for addictions: A theoretical framework. International Journal of the Addictions, 30, 1603-1645.
22.
De Leon, G. (1996). Therapeutic communities: AIDS/HIV risk and harm reduction. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 13(5), 411-420.
23.
De Leon, G. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model and method. New York: Springer.
24.
De Leon, G., & Rosenthal, M. S. (1989). Treatment in residential communities. In T. B. Karasu (Ed.), Treatment of psychiatric disorders (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
25.
De Leon, G., & Ziegenfuss, L. J. (Eds.). (1986). Therapeutic communities for addictions: Readings in theory, research, and practice. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
26.
Fagan, J. (1990). Intoxication and aggression. In M. Tonry & J. Q. Wilson (Eds.), Drugs and crime: Crime and Justice, a review of Research (Vol. 13, pp. 241-320). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27.
Federal Bureau of Prisons. (2001). About the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Washington, DC: Author
28.
Field, G. (1985). The cornerstone program: A client outcome study. Federal Probation, 49, 50-55.
29.
Field, G. (1989). The effects of intensive treatment on reducing the criminal recidivism of addicted offenders. Federal Probation, 53, 51-56.
30.
Fletcher, B. W. (2003). The national criminal justice drug abuse treatment studies (CJ-DATS). Offender Substance Abuse Report, 3(5), 65-66, 72-75.
31.
Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. A. (1996). Correctional program assessment inventory (CPAI) (6th ed.). Saint John, New Brunswick: University of New Brunswick.
32.
Gendreau, P., & Ross, R. (1979). Effective correctional treatment: Bibliotherapy for cynics. Crime and Delinquency, 25, 463-489.
33.
Gendreau, P., & Ross, R. (1987). Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s. Justice Quarterly, 4(3), 349-407.
34.
Glaser, D., & Erez, E. (1988). Evaluation research and decision guidance: For correctional, addiction-treatment, mental health, and other people-changing agencies. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
35.
Glaze, L. E. (2002). Probation and parole in the United States, 2001 (NCJ-195669). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U. S. Department of Justice.
36.
Graham, W. F., & Wexler, H. K. (1997) The Amity Therapeutic Community Programat Donovan Prison: Program description and approach. In G. De Leon (Ed.), Community as method: Therapeutic communities for special populations and settings. New York: Praeger.
37.
Harrison, P. M., & Karberg, J. C. (2003). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2002 (NCJ-198877). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U. S. Department of Justice.
38.
Hawkins, J. D., & Catalano, R. F. (1979). Reintegrating street drug abusers: Community roles in continuing care. In B. S. Brown (Ed.), Addicts and aftercare (pp. 25-79). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
39.
Hawkins, J. D. (1985). Aftercare in drug abuse treatment. International Journal of the Addictions, 20(6-7), 917-945.
40.
Inciardi, J. A. (1996). The therapeutic community: An effective model for corrections-based drug abuse treatment. Drug treatment behind bars: Prison-based strategies for change (pp. 65-74). Westport, CT: Praeger.
41.
Inciardi, J. A., Martin, S. S., Butzin, C. A., Hooper, R. M., & Harrison, L. D. (1997). An effective model of prison-based treatment for drug-involved offenders. Journal of Drug Issues, 27(2), 261-278.
42.
Inciardi, J. A., Surratt, H., Martin, S. S., & Hooper, R. M. (2002). The importance of aftercare in a corrections-based treatment continuum. In C. G. Leukefeld, F. Tims, & D. Farabee (Eds.), Treatment of drug offenders: Policies and issues (pp. 204-216). New York: Springer.
43.
Jarman, E. (1993). An evaluation of program effectiveness for the Forever Free Substance Abuse Program at the California Institution for Women, Frontera, California. Sacramento: Office of Substance Abuse Programs, California Department of Corrections.
44.
Knight, K., & Simpson, D. (2001). The TCU model of treatment process and outcomes in correctional settings. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 1(4), 51-53, 58.
45.
Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., Chatham, L. R., & Camacho, L. M. (1997). An assessment of prison-based drug treatment: Texas’in-prison therapeutic community program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 24(3/4), 75-100.
46.
Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., & Hiller, M. L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. Prison Journal, 79(3), 337-351.
47.
Kooyman, M. A. (1993). The therapeutic community for addicts: Intimacy, parent involvement and treatment outcome. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
48.
Kressel, D., Zompa, D., & De Leon, G. (2002). A statewide integrated quality assurance model for correctional-based therapeutic community programs. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 2(4), 49-50, 60-64.
49.
Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
50.
Latessa, E. J., & Pealer, J. A. (2002). Measuring program quality over time—Examples from three RSAT programs. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 2(5), 65-66, 76-78.
51.
Leukefeld, C. G., & Tims, F. M. (Eds.). (1992). Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (NIDA Research Monograph 118). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
52.
Lipton, D. S. (1998). Therapeutic community treatment programming in corrections. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 4, 213-263.
53.
Lipton, D. S., Martinson, R., & Wilks, J. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment. New York: Praeger.
54.
Lipton, D. S., & Wexler, H. K. (1988). The drug-crime connection: Rehabilitation shows promise. Corrections Today, 50(5), 144-147.
55.
Little Hoover Commission. (1998). Beyond bars: Correctional reforms to lower prison costs and reduce crime. Sacramento, CA: Little Hoover Commission.
56.
Lockwood, D., & Inciardi, J. A. (1993). CREST Outreach Center: A work release iteration of the TC model. In J. A. Inciardi, F. M. Tims, & B. W. Fletcher (Eds.), Innovative approaches in the treatment of drug abuse: Program models and strategies (pp. 61-69). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
57.
Lowe, L. (1995). A profile of the young adult offender in California prisons as of December 31, 1989 1994 (Prepared for the Substance Abuse Research Consortium, Spring 1995). Sacramento: Office of Substance Abuse Programs, California Department of Corrections.
58.
MacKenzie, D. L. (2002). Reducing the criminal activities of known offenders and delinquents: Crime prevention in the courts and corrections. In L. W. Sherman, D. P. Farrington, B. C. Welsh, & D. L. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence based crime prevention (pp. 330-404). London: Routledge.
59.
Martin, S. S., Butzin, C. A., Saum, C. A., & Inciardi, J. A. (1999). Three-year outcomes of therapeutic community treatment for drug-involved offenders in Delaware: From prison to work release to aftercare. Prison Journal, 79(3), 294-320.
60.
Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Public Interest, 35, 22-54.
61.
Martinson, R. (1979). New findings, new views: A note of caution regarding sentencing reform. Hofstra Law Review, 7(2), 243-258.
62.
McBride, D. C., & McCoy, C. B. (1993). The drugs-crime relationship: An analytic framework. Prison Journal, 73(3-4), 257-278.
63.
McCarthy, B. R., & McCarthy, B. J. (1997). Community-based corrections (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
64.
McGlothlin, W. H., Anglin, M. D., & Wilson, B. D. (1977). An evaluation of the California civil addicts program (NIDA Services Research Monograph Series, Department of Health and Human Services Publication No. ADM 78-558). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
65.
Melnick, G., & De Leon, G. (1999). Clarifying the nature of therapeutic community treatment: First validity study of the Survey of Essential Elements Questionnaire (SEEQ). Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 16(4), 307-313.
66.
Melnick, G., De Leon, G., Hiller, M., & Knight, K. (2000). Therapeutic communities: Diversity in treatment elements. Substance Use and Misuse, 35(12-14), 12-14.
67.
Melnick, G., & Wexler, H. K. (in press). Multimodality Quality Assurance instrument for prison-and community-based substance abuse treatment programs. Offender Substance Abuse Report.
68.
Mullen, R., Ratelle, J., Abraham, E., & Boyle, J. (1996). California program reduces recidivism and saves tax dollars. Corrections Today, 58(5), 118-123.
69.
Mullen, R., Rowland, J., Arbiter, Y., Yablonsky, L., & Fleishman, B. (2001). California’s first prison therapeutic community: A 10-Year report. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 1(2), 17-18, 26-30.
70.
Mumola, C. J. (1999). Substance abuse and treatment, state and federal prisoners. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
71.
Murray, D. W. (1996). Drug abuse treatment in the federal bureau of prisons: A historical review and assessment of contemporary initiatives. Drug Treatment Behind Bars: Prison-Based Strategies for Change (pp. 89-100). Westport, CT: Praeger.
72.
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (1981). Drug abuse treatment in prisons (Treatment research report series). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
73.
Newcomb, M. D., Galaif, E. R., & Carmona, J. (2001). The drug-crime nexus in a community sample of adults. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15(3), 185-193.
74.
Office of National Drug Control Policy. (1989). National drug control strategy. Washington, DC: The White House.
75.
Ossmann, J. (1999). Evolution of continuing care in California. Sacramento: Office of Sub-stance Abuse, California Department of Corrections.
76.
Palmer, T. (1975). Martinson revisited. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 12, 133-152.
77.
Palmer, T., & Petrosino, A. (2003). The “experimenting agency”: The California youth authority research division. Evaluation Review, 27(3), 228-266.
78.
Parker, R., & Auerhahn, K. (1998). Alcohol, drugs, and violence. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 291-311.
79.
Parnas, R. I., & Salerno, M. B. (1978). The influence behind, substance and impact of the new determinate sentencing law in California. UC Davis Law Review, 11, 29-41.
80.
Pearson, F. S., Lipton, D. S., Cleland, C. M., & Yee, D. S. (2002). The effects of behavioral/cognitive-behavioral programs on recidivism. Crime & Delinquency, 48(3), 476-496.
81.
Pelissier, B., Camp, S. D., & Motivans, M. (2003). Staying in treatment: How much difference is there from prison to prison. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17(2), 134-141.
82.
Pelissier, B., Gaes, G. G., Camp, S. C., Wallace, S. B., O’Neil, J. A., & Saylor, W. G. (1998). TRIAD drug treatment evaluation project: Six-month interim report. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Prisons.
83.
Pelissier, B., Rhodes, W., Saylor, W., Gaes, G., Camp, S. D., Vanyur, S. D., et al. (2000). TRIAD drug treatment evaluation project: Final report of three-year outcomes: Part I. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Evaluation, Federal Bureau of Prisons.
84.
Prendergast, M., & Burdon, W. (2002). Integrated system of care for substance-abusing offenders. In C. Leukefeld, F. Tims, & D. Farabee (Eds.), Clinical and policy responses to drug offenders (pp. 111-127). New York: Springer.
85.
Prendergast, M., Hall, E., & Wellisch, J. (2002). An outcome evaluation of the Forever free sub-stance abuse treatment program: One-year post-release outcomes. Final Report, National Institute of Justice Grant 99-RT-VX-K003. Los Angeles: UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center.
86.
Prendergast, M. L.Hall, E. A.Wexler, H. K.Melnick, G. & Cao Y. (2004). Amity Prison-based therapeutic community 5-year outcomes. The Prison Journal, 84 (1), 36-60.
87.
Prendergast, M. L., Wellisch, J., & Wong, M. (1996). Residential treatment for women parolees following prison-based drug treatment experiences, needs and services outcomes. Prison Journal, 76(3), 253-274.
88.
Rupp, L. G., & Beck, A. R. (1989). Invited review: California Department of Corrections sub-stance abuse treatment programming. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.
89.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2000). Substance abuse treatment in adult and juvenile correctional facilities: Findings from the Uniform Facility Data Set 1997 Survey of Correctional Facilities (Drug and Alcohol Services Information System Series: S-9). Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.
90.
Sugarman, B. (1986). Structure, variations, and context: A sociological view of the therapeutic community. In G. De Leon & J. T. Ziengenfuss (Eds.), Therapeutic communities for addictions: Readings in theory, research, and practice (pp. 65-83). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
91.
Taxman, F. S., Reedy, D. C., Klem, T., & Silverman, R. S. (2002). Breaking the cycle: Year 3 implementation. Report prepared for the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services. Retrieved from August 15, 2003, http://www.bgr.umd.edu/pdf/FinalWrittenreportMarch02.pdf
92.
Wellisch, J., Prendergast, M., & Anglin, M. D. (1993). Criminal justice and drug treatment systems linkage: Federal promotion of interagency collaboration in the 1970s. Contemporary Drug Problems, 20(4), 611-650.
93.
Welsh, W. N., & Zajac, G. (2001). Assessing prison-based drug and alcohol treatment: Pennsylvania’s ongoing reviewhas improved programming. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 1(6),83-84, 90-93.
94.
Wexler, H. K. (1986). Therapeutic communities within prisons. In G. De Leon & J. T. Ziegenfuss (Eds.), Therapeutic communities for addictions: Readings in theory, research and practice (pp. 227-237). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
95.
Wexler, H. K. (1994). Progress in prison substance abuse treatment: A five-year report. Journal of Drug Issues, 24(2), 361-372.
96.
Wexler, H. K. (1997). Therapeutic communities in American prisons. In E. Cullen, L. Jones, & R. Woodard (Eds.), Therapeutic communities in prisons. New York: John Wiley.
97.
Wexler, H. K., Blackmore, J., & Lipton, D. S. (1991). Project REFORM: Developing a drug abuse treatment strategy for corrections. Journal of Drug Issues, 21(2), 473-495.
98.
Wexler, H. K., DeLeon, G., Thomas, G., Kressler, D., & Peters, J. (1999). The Amity prison TC evaluation: Reincarceration outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26(2), 147-167.
99.
Wexler, H. K., Falkin, G. P., & Lipton, D. S. (1990). Outcome evaluation of a prison therapeutic community for substance abuse treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), 71-92.
100.
Wexler, H. K., Falkin, G. P., Lipton, D. S., & Rosenblum, A. B. (1992). Outcome evaluation of a prison therapeutic community for substance abuse treatment. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (NIDA Research Monograph 118, pp. 156-175). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
101.
Wexler, H. K., Graham, W. F., Koronkowski, R., & Lowe, L. (1995). Amity Therapeutic Community Substance Abuse Program preliminary return to custody data: May 1995. Report to the Office of Substance Abuse Programs. Sacramento: Office of Substance Abuse Programs, California Department of Corrections.
102.
Wexler, H. K., & Lipton, D. S. (1993). From REFORM to RECOVERY: Advances in prison drug treatment. In J. Inciardi (Ed.), Drug treatment and criminal justice. Newbury Park: Sage.
103.
Wexler, H. K., Melnick, G., Lowe, L., & Peters, J. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for Amity in-prison therapeutic community and aftercare in California. Prison Journal, 79(3), 312-336.
104.
White, H. R., & Gorman, D. M. (2000). Dynamics of the drug-crime relationship. In E. Jefferis & J. Munsterman (Eds.), Crime and Justice 2000, Vol. 1: The nature of crime: Continuity and change (pp. 151-218). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U. S. Department of Justice.
105.
Winett, D. L., Mullen, R., Lowe, L. L., & Missakian, E. A. (1992). Amity Righturn: A demonstration drug abuse treatment program for inmates and parolees. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prison and jails (NIDA Research Monograph Series 118, pp. 84-98). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
