Therapeutic communities (TCs) are a primary approach for treating substance abusers in the criminal justice system. The transformation from residential treatment to a TC marked a significant change in the service delivery and organizational culture for one in-prison substance abuse treatment program. This longitudinal case study examines how clients perceived their treatment as a result of treatment and organizational changes. This is important because the scientific literature shows that client perceptions of their treatment impacts treatment retention and the benefit they gain from treatment. Data that were collected over 5 years are presented. Implications, including how the program’s interim therapeutic milieu eased the transition to a therapeutic community, are discussed.
Broome, K. M., Knight, K., Hiller, M. L., & Simpson, D. D. (1996). Drug treatment process indicators for probationers and prediction of recidivism. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 13, 487-491.
2.
Burdon, W. M., Farabee, D., Prendergast, M. L., Messina, N. P., & Cartier, J. (2002). Prison- based therapeutic community substance abuse programs—Implementation and operational issues. Federal Probation, 66(3), 3-8.
3.
Butzin, C. A., Martin, S. S., & Inciardi, J. A. (2002). Evaluating component effects of a prison-based treatment continuum. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 63-69.
4.
Condelli, W. S. (1986). Client evaluations of therapeutic communities and retention. In G. De Leon & J. T. Ziegenfuss (Eds.), Therapeutic communities for addictions: Readings in theory, research, and practice (pp. 131-139). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
5.
De Leon, G. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model, and method. New York: Springer.
6.
Garrity, J. F. (1999). Process evaluation for the substance abuse program at Kentucky State Reformatory in LaGrange, Kentucky: Follow-up evaluation for year II. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
7.
Gilchrist, A. (2000). The well-connected community: Networking to the “edge of chaos.”Community Development Journal, 35, 264-275.
8.
Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12, 436-445.
9.
Goodrum, S., Staton, M., Leukefeld, C. G., Webster, J. M., & Purvis, R. T. (2003). Staff members’ and clients’ perceptions of a prison-based substance abuse treatment program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 37, 27-46.
10.
Inciardi, J. A., Martin, S. S., Butzin, C. A., Hooper, R. M., & Harrison, L. D. (1997). An assessment of prison-based drug treatment for drug-involved offenders. Journal of Drug Issues, 27, 261-278.
11.
Lemieux, C. (1998). Determinants of expectations of treatment efficacy among incarcerated offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 42, 233-245.
12.
Leukefeld, C. G., & Tims, F. M. (1992). Directions for practice and research. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (pp. 279-293). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
13.
Nielsen, A. L., & Scarpitti, F. R. (1997). Changing the behavior of substance abusers: Factors influencing the effectiveness of therapeutic communities. Journal of Drug Issues, 27, 71-139.
14.
Pearson, F. S., & Lipton, D. S. (1999). A meta-analytic review of the effectiveness of corrections-based treatment for drug abuse. The Prison Journal, 79, 384-410.
15.
Smiley-McDonald, H. M., Staton, M., & Leukefeld, C. G. (2002). Process evaluation for the substance abuse program at Kentucky State Reformatory in Lagrange, Kentucky: Follow-up evaluation for year 5. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
16.
Staton, M., Leukefeld, C. G., Logan, T. K., & Purvis, R. (2000). Process evaluation for a prison-based substance abuse program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 32, 105-127.
17.
Wexler, H. K. (1995). The success of therapeutic communities for substance abusers in American prisons. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 27, 57-66.
18.
Wexler, H. K., Melnick, G., Lowe, L., & Peters, J. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for Amity in-prison therapeutic community and aftercare in California. The Prison Journal, 79, 321-336.
