Implementing Evidence-Based Practices in Community Corrections and Addiction Treatment

333 Pages·2012·4.07 MB·English

by  Faye S. Taxman

Springer Series on Evidence-Based Crime Policy
Series Editors:
Lawrence W. Sherman
Heather Strang
Crime prevention and criminal justice policies are domains of great and growing
importance around the world. Despite the rigorous research done in this fi eld, policy
decisions are often based more on ideology or speculation than on science. One
reason for this may be a lack of comprehensive presentations of the key research
affecting policy deliberations. While scientifi c studies of crime prevention and
criminal policy have become more numerous in recent years, they remain widely
scattered across a wide range of journals and countries The Springer Series on
Evidence-Based Crime Policy aims to pull this evidence together while presenting
new research results. This combination in each book should provide, between two
covers (or in electronic searches), the best evidence on each topic of crime policy.
The series will publish primary research on crime policies and criminal justice
practices, raising critical questions or providing guidance to policy change. The
series will try to make it easier for research fi ndings to become key components in
decisions about crime and justice policy. The editors welcome proposals for both
monographs and edited volumes. There will be a special emphasis on studies using
rigorous methods (especially fi eld experiments) to assess crime prevention interven-
tions in areas such as policing, corrections, juvenile justice, and crime prevention.
Published in Cooperation with the Campbell Crime and Justice Group
For further volumes:
http//www.springer.com/series/8396
wwwwwwwwww
Faye S. Taxman Steven Belenko
●
Implementing
Evidence-Based Practices
in Community Corrections
and Addiction Treatment
Faye S. Taxman Steven Belenko
Criminology, Law and Society Department of Criminal Justice
George Mason University Temple University
Fairfax, VA, USA Philadelphia, PA, USA
[email protected] [email protected]
ISBN 978-1-4614-0411-8 e-ISBN 978-1-4614-0412-5
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-0412-5
Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011939835
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written
permission of the publisher (Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 233 Spring Street, New York,
NY 10013, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in
connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden.
The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are
not identifi ed as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject
to proprietary rights.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
Preface
For most of our careers, we have devoted our work to generating knowledge about
“what works,” mostly aimed at improving criminal justice outcomes for offenders.
Both of us have advanced new ideas and concepts in judicial and corrections pro-
grams to address the criminogenic needs of offenders, primarily substance abusers
and high risk offenders. Steven Belenko conducted extensive research on treatment
needs and substance abuse treatment interventions for drug-involved offenders
including prosecutorial diversion programs, drug courts, and prison treatment. Faye
Taxman has devoted extensive work toward developing, testing, and refi ning mod-
els of continuum of care and seamless system in probation, prison, and jail settings.
And, she has worked on testing new models for facilitating the advancement of
researcher–practitioner partnerships as well as interventions to promote organiza-
tional change. We both have worked extensively in collaboration with practitioners
and policy makers to demonstrate that the criminal justice system can deliver effec-
tive interventions that improve the quality of life for offenders, their families, and
communities. The implications of our work, along with other colleagues, are that it
is important to offer services within the corrections and criminal justice settings as
a tool to improve both public safety and public health. We strongly believe that the
corrections system should be part of the service delivery system in the USA, includ-
ing integrated behavioral and health services that promote boundaryless systems.
The high concentration of offenders with substance use disorders, mental health
problems, and infectious diseases demands a new paradigm.
Along the way, we both realized that the issues were increasingly less about the
research on “what works” (or identifying services that improve behaviors) and more
about: (1) the degree to which the community corrections and other criminal justice
organizations and society at large believe that research fi ndings are useful for crime
prevention efforts; (2) the techniques that community and institutional corrections
agencies can use to reduce widespread barriers and resistance to organizational
change; (3) the willingness of corrections and other justice agencies to consider
effective ideas and strategies from other disciplines that seek to change behavior;
and (4) the willingness of addiction treatment, mental health, and other behavioral
services agencies to provide care for offenders.
v
vi Preface
The “aha” moment evolved slowly as both of us pursued our own work during an
era of increasingly punitive sentencing policies and enormous increases in incar-
ceration and community control. This era coincided with a growing recognition that
the general punishment tools of the corrections system did little to promote a drug-
or crime-free lifestyle; in fact, in many ways it contributed to the growing cynicism
about the intentions and effectiveness of the justice system. We noted that many of
the offenders affected by these punitive policies had underlying drug abuse disor-
ders. Our own work evolved as a result of being exposed to a health services frame-
work and becoming practicing “health services criminologists.” The growing
research on behavioral health interventions transformed our own contributions to
criminology and criminal justice as we learned more about the stages of behavioral
change and how different types of interventions or techniques can facilitate such
change. Through this lens, we began to understand that the lessons from health
services research and intervention science were applicable to the problems of inter-
ventions in targeted settings like the corrections and judicial systems. The growth of
new research and tools to advance organizational change, and the emergence of a
new science of implementation, also caught our attention.
At the same time, the addiction treatment fi eld was undergoing its own metamor-
phosis. This specialty fi eld of care was the subject of several important and critical
reports by the Institute of Medicine. The IOM “Bridging the Gap” report in 1996
emphasized the need to improve the type and quality of care offered to those that
suffered from an addiction disorder. This report triggered many new studies devoted
to the quality of addiction treatment, the infrastructure needs of the fi eld, and the
barriers to advancing clinical practice. The focus of the IOM report on improving
the adoption of evidence-based practices in the addiction treatment system coin-
cided with the needs and demands of the corrections and larger justice systems – the
unmet needs of service delivery agencies given the unserved client-level needs.
In our view, the similarities between the needs for change in addiction treatment and
criminal justice/community correction agencies were glaring. More importantly,
while a number of research-based and effective interventions to reduce recidivism
and drug use had been identifi ed over the years, it was clear that these evidence-
based practices were not being disseminated widely, or being sustained over time
once they were implemented. As the evidence-based practices and treatment meth-
ods gained momentum, it was apparent that renewed attention to implementation
and methods to advance organizational change processes were sorely needed.
This book actually started as part of an idea that Steven Belenko had to establish
the Center on Evidence-based Interventions for Crime and Addiction (CEICA)
(during his tenure at the Treatment Research Institute, and codirected by Drs.
Belenko and Harry K. Wexler). They organized a CEICA conference in December
2006 that brought together researchers, practitioners, and policy makers to discuss
the challenges of implementing effective addiction treatment programs for offend-
ers. Shortly thereafter, the National Institute of Corrections provided a grant
(PI, Dr. Belenko, Drs. Taxman and Wexler co-PIs, Cooperative Agreement
06PEI06GJN8) to produce a white paper on this topic that served as an impetus for
this book and our ongoing work on implementation.
Preface vii
At the same time, Faye Taxman was working with the Maryland Division of
Probation and Parole on an implementation project revamping probation supervi-
sion, to include offi cers using adapted motivational interviewing and cognitive
restructuring techniques as well as using risk and need assessments to inform super-
vision plans. This project is part of a 20 year agreement that Dr. Taxman has with
this agency to implement innovations (EBP) and to engage in technology transfer
efforts, and has brought to light many of the challenges confronting community cor-
rections agencies trying to move from an enforcement model to EBP.
Both of us have ongoing research that propelled further work in this area. Steven
Belenko (Temple University) and Faye Taxman (George Mason University) each
direct centers engaged in implementation research to test various implementation,
organizational change and process improvement strategies to increase the use of
evidence-based practice in corrections agencies; these are part of the Criminal
Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJDATS) cooperative agreement, funded by
the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Taxman also directed the national surveys
of the criminal justice agencies that revealed many of the issues addressed in this
book regarding the low uptake of EBP, and the organizational dynamics that affect
the inability for science to penetrate traditional practice.
Our careers are turning now as we embark on new studies that build on this
framework of intervention science and implementation science. This budding fi eld
builds upon our own training, and a research framework incorporating Patton’s
(1987) utilization focused evaluation methods, action research, and policy focus.
But our new research agendas allow for more attention to the methods and tech-
niques to support organizational and systems change.
This book is the culmination of many years of funding and research that we both
share. Some of our funders have been the National Institute on Drug Abuse, National
Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment,
National Institute of Justice, National Institute of Corrections, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, State Justice Institute, Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, and Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation. Steven Belenko acknowledges the following people
who have infl uenced his research and thinking about how to improve criminal
justice practices and policies and reduce the harms caused by drug abuse: Tom
McLellan, Richard Dembo, Jeremy Travis, Dean Fixsen, Ken Schoen, the late Jack
Novik, Nancy Wolff, Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Anne Swern, his CJDATS colleagues,
and the many drug court judges with whom he has had the pleasure to work. Faye
Taxman acknowledges the following people that have shaped her own views
including Judith Sachwald, Ernest Eley, Jasper Ormond, Tom Williams, Peter
Luongo, Justin Jones, and others that each day try to import EBP into the justice and
addiction treatment settings. Dr. Taxman’s mentors and collaborators in the fi eld
include Edward Latessa, Todd Clear, Tom McLellan, Doug Anglin, the late Doug
Longshore, James Byrne, Dwayne Simpson, and the late Don Gottfredson.
Navigating the pathway to study the issues related to adopting EBP has been Peter
Friedmann, Doug Young, Craig Henderson, Jeff Bouffard, Susan Turner, David
Weisburd, Danielle Rudes, Shannon Portillo, Karen Cropsey, and CJDATS collabo-
rators, to name a few. We both acknowledge Redonna Chandler for her insights and
viii Preface
contributions to our work. Both authors shared equally in the conceptualization,
background research, and writing of this book.
This book would have not been possible without the assistance of Judith Sachwald,
who was an invaluable editor. Doctoral students Jennifer Lerch and Jill Viglione at
George Mason University’s Criminology, Law and Society department and George
Mason University law student, Carolyn Watson, assisted us in preparing fi gures,
exhibits, references, and other parts of this book, and we thank them immensely.
It is not surprising that implementation studies are receiving increasing atten-
tion. This book is dedicated to the practitioners, policy makers, and scholars that
seek to improve the quality of addiction treatment and other behavioral health
programming to reduce recidivism and relapse to drug use among the enormous
numbers of offenders in need of services. Theirs is a noble venture, and one that
demands our full attention and support. We are committed to advancing knowledge
in this fi eld and hope that this book stimulates new research, new synergies to
implement EBP, and new organizational efforts to deliver the most effective services
possible to the greatest number of people. The realization that the corrections system
should be a service delivery system would fulfi ll our aspirations for an effective
crime control policy that recognizes the value of community corrections and addic-
tion treatment services.
Fairfax, VA Faye S. Taxman
Philadelphia, PA Steven Belenko
Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
1.1 The Promise of Science in Public Policy ......................................... 4
1.2 Why Community Corrections and Addiction Treatment? ............... 5
1.3 Building Knowledge in Community Corrections ............................ 7
1.4 The Focus on Technology Transfer .................................................. 8
1.5 Community Corrections Presents Unique Challenges
for Addiction Treatment Interventions............................................. 10
1.6 Multistage Conceptual Model for Identifying
and Selecting EBPs .......................................................................... 11
1.7 Evidence-Based Interagency Implementation Model (EB-IIM) ...... 12
1.8 Conclusions and Outline of the Book .............................................. 14
References ................................................................................................. 15
2 Identifying the Evidence Base for “What Works”
in Community Corrections and Addiction Treatment ........................ 19
2.1 Introduction and Overview .............................................................. 19
2.2 Basic Defi nitions and Concepts ....................................................... 22
2.2.1 Hierarchy of Levels of Evidence .......................................... 22
2.3 Effi cacy vs. Effectiveness ................................................................ 24
2.4 Frameworks for Determining the Evidence Base ............................ 26
2.4.1 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Model .............. 26
2.4.2 Applying the FDA Model to Behavioral
Interventions ......................................................................... 27
2.4.3 Synthesizing Across Research Designs ............................... 27
2.4.4 Consensus Processes ............................................................ 28
2.4.5 Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ............................. 29
2.5 Evidence-Based Repositories ........................................................... 32
2.5.1 Cochrane Collaboration/Cochrane Reviews ........................ 32
2.5.2 Campbell Collaboration–Crime and Justice Group ............. 33
2.5.3 National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs
and Practices ........................................................................ 34
ix