The accurate and reliable assessment of client psychological and cognitive change during correctional substance abuse treatment has gained increasing importance during the past decade as criminal justice systems seek to evaluate and understand those treatment elements associated with long-term change. The Client Assessment Inventory (CAI) is a self-report instrument for measuring client change during treatment across 14 cognitive and behavioral domains. The reliability and internal consistency of the CAI, as adapted for use in criminal justice settings, were examined with data gathered from 1,170 offenders. The research addressed the utility of the CAI for different subpopulations of offenders (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender) across a variety of correctional treatment settings. Overall, the data support the use of the CAI as a consistent, reliable, and easily administered instrument for measuring client performance and progress in treatment in both therapeutic community (TC) and non-TC correctional treatment settings.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
2.
Czuchry, M., & Dansereau, D.F. (2003). Cognitive skills training: Impact on drug abuse counseling and readiness for treatment. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 29, 1-18.
3.
De Leon, G. (1995). Therapeutic communities for addictions: A theoretical framework. International Journal on the Addictions, 30, 1603-1645.
4.
De Leon, G. (Ed.). (1997). Community as method: Therapeutic communities for special populations and special settings . Westport, CT: Greenwood.
5.
De Leon, G. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model & method. New York: Springer.
6.
Fletcher, B.W. (2003). The National Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS). Offender Substance Abuse Reports, 3(5), 1-5.
7.
Garner, B.R., Knight, K., Flynn, P.M., Morey, J.T., & Simpson, D.D. (2007). Measuring offender attributes and engagement in treatment using the Client Evaluation of Self and Treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1113-1130.
8.
Harrison, P.M., & Beck, A.J. (2006). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2005 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
9.
James, D.J. (2004). Profile of jail inmates, 2002 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
10.
Joe, G.W., Broome, K.M., Rowan-Szal, G.A., & Simpson, D.D. (2002). Measuring patient attributes and engagement in treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 183-196.
11.
Kim, J., & Mueller, C. (1978). Factor analysis: Statistical methods and practical issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage .
12.
Knight, K., Simpson, D.D., & Hiller, M.L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. The Prison Journal , 79, 337-351.
13.
Kressel, D., De Leon, G., Palij, M., & Rubin, G. (2000). Measuring client clinical progress in therapeutic community (TC) treatment: The TC Client Assessment Inventory (CAI), Client Assessment Summary, and Staff Assessment Summary (SAS). Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 19, 267-272.
14.
Kressel, D., Palij, M., De Leon, G., & Bunt, G. (2006). Therapeutic community client progress assessment scales: Psychometric properties. Manuscript submitted for publication.
15.
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. The Prison Journal, 79, 294-320.
16.
Melnick, G., De Leon, G., Thomas, G., Kressel, D., & Wexler, H.K. (2001). Treatment process in prison therapeutic communities: Motivation, participation and outcome. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 27, 633-650.
17.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). ( 2006). Principles of drug addiction treatment for criminal justice populations: A research-based guide (NIH Publication No. 06-5316). Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health.
18.
Pelissier, M.M., Gaes, G., Rhodes, W., Camp, S., O'Neil, J., Wallace, S., et al. (1998, January). TRIAD drug treatment evaluation project six-month interim report. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Prisons, Office of Research and Evaluation .
19.
Simpson, D.D. (2004). A conceptual framework for drug treatment process and outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 27, 99-121.
20.
Simpson, D.D., & Joe, G.W. (2004). A longitudinal evaluation of treatment engagement and recovery stages. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment , 27, 89-97.
21.
Simpson, D.D., Joe, G.W., & Broome, K.M. (2002). A national 5-year follow-up of treatment outcomes for cocaine dependence. Archives of General Psychiatry,59, 538-544.
22.
Simpson, D.D., Joe, G.W., & Brown, B.B. (1997). Treatment retention and follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 11, 294-307.
23.
Strauss, S.M., & Falkin, G.P. (2000). The relationship between quality of drug user treatment and program completion: Understanding the perceptions of women in a prison-based program. Substance Use and Misuse, 35(12-14), 2127-2159.
24.
Wexler, H.K., Melnick, G., Lowe, L., & Peters, J. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for amity in-prison and aftercare therapeutic community and aftercare in California . The Prison Journal, 79, 321-336.
