Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 4/2011

01-10-2011

High-Risk Offenders Participating in Court-Supervised Substance Abuse Treatment: Characteristics, Treatment Received, and Factors Associated with Recidivism

Authors: Elizabeth Evans, MA, David Huang, DrPH, Yih-Ing Hser, PhD

Published in: The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

High-risk offenders treated by California’s Proposition 36 court-supervised drug treatment initiative account for a disproportionate number of re-arrests (Hawken 2008) undermining the many successes of the program, yet little is known about their characteristics, treatment experiences, or factors that influence re-arrest. To better understand this group, self-reported and administrative data were analyzed on 78 high-risk (five or more convictions in the previous 5 years) and 1,009 low-risk offenders enrolled during 2004. At intake, high-risk offenders were younger, more were male, and more had prior contact with psychiatric and criminal justice systems. Treatment received and the proportion recidivated during the 30-months after treatment assessment were similar across groups, but high-risk offenders had a greater number of re-arrests. The number of re-arrests was increased by high-risk classification, but decreased by receipt of more treatment services and longer treatment length. Moreover, the number of re-arrests was highest among high-risk offenders with shorter treatment lengths, whereas it was similar to that among low-risk offenders if treatment length was longer. To reduce recidivism among high-risk offenders in court-supervised drug treatment, consideration of psychiatric problems and criminal history is needed, as is receipt of sufficient treatment.
Literature
5.
go back to reference Evans E, Li L, Hser YI. Client and program factors associated with dropout from court mandated drug treatment. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2009; 32: 204–212.PubMedCrossRef Evans E, Li L, Hser YI. Client and program factors associated with dropout from court mandated drug treatment. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2009; 32: 204–212.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Hser YI, Evans E, Teruya C, et al. Predictors of short-term treatment outcomes among California’s Proposition 36 participants. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2007; 30: 187–196.PubMedCrossRef Hser YI, Evans E, Teruya C, et al. Predictors of short-term treatment outcomes among California’s Proposition 36 participants. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2007; 30: 187–196.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Taxman FS, Thanner M, Weisburd D. Risk, need, and responsivity (RNR): It all depends. Crime & Delinquency, 2006; 52: 28–51.CrossRef Taxman FS, Thanner M, Weisburd D. Risk, need, and responsivity (RNR): It all depends. Crime & Delinquency, 2006; 52: 28–51.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Thanner MH, Taxman FS. Responsivity: The value of providing intensive services to high-risk offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2003; 24: 137–147.PubMedCrossRef Thanner MH, Taxman FS. Responsivity: The value of providing intensive services to high-risk offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2003; 24: 137–147.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Taxman FS, Bouffard J. Treatment inside the drug treatment court: The who, what, where, and how of treatment services. Substance Use & Misuse, 2002; 37: 1665–1688.CrossRef Taxman FS, Bouffard J. Treatment inside the drug treatment court: The who, what, where, and how of treatment services. Substance Use & Misuse, 2002; 37: 1665–1688.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Marlowe DB. Integrating substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision. Science and Practice Perspectives, 2003; 2: 4–14.PubMedCrossRef Marlowe DB. Integrating substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision. Science and Practice Perspectives, 2003; 2: 4–14.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Marlowe DB. Judicial supervision of drug-abusing offenders. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 2006; 29: 337–357. Marlowe DB. Judicial supervision of drug-abusing offenders. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 2006; 29: 337–357.
12.
go back to reference Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Dugosh KL, et al. Adapting judicial supervision to the risk level of drug offenders: Discharge and 6-month outcomes from a prospective matching study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2007; 88: 4–13.CrossRef Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Dugosh KL, et al. Adapting judicial supervision to the risk level of drug offenders: Discharge and 6-month outcomes from a prospective matching study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2007; 88: 4–13.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Lee PA, et al. Matching judicial supervision to clients’ risk status in drug court. Crime & Delinquency, 2006; 52: 52–76.CrossRef Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Lee PA, et al. Matching judicial supervision to clients’ risk status in drug court. Crime & Delinquency, 2006; 52: 52–76.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Chen S, Barnett PG, Sempel JM, et al. Outcomes and costs of matching the intensity of dual-diagnosis treatment to patients’ symptom severity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2006; 31: 95–105.PubMedCrossRef Chen S, Barnett PG, Sempel JM, et al. Outcomes and costs of matching the intensity of dual-diagnosis treatment to patients’ symptom severity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2006; 31: 95–105.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Thornton CC, Gottheil E, Weinstein SP, et al. Patient-treatment matching in substance abuse drug addiction severity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1998; 15: 505–511.PubMedCrossRef Thornton CC, Gottheil E, Weinstein SP, et al. Patient-treatment matching in substance abuse drug addiction severity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1998; 15: 505–511.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Tiet QQ, Ilgen MA, Byrnes HF, et al. Treatment setting and baseline substance use severity interact to predict patients’ outcomes. Addiction, 2007; 102: 432–440.PubMedCrossRef Tiet QQ, Ilgen MA, Byrnes HF, et al. Treatment setting and baseline substance use severity interact to predict patients’ outcomes. Addiction, 2007; 102: 432–440.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Timko C, Sempel JM. Short-term outcomes of matching dual diagnosis patients’ symptom severity to treatment intensity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2004; 26: 209–218.PubMedCrossRef Timko C, Sempel JM. Short-term outcomes of matching dual diagnosis patients’ symptom severity to treatment intensity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2004; 26: 209–218.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Babor TF. Treatment for persons with substance use disorders: Mediators, moderators, and the need for a new research approach. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 2008; 17: 45–49.CrossRef Babor TF. Treatment for persons with substance use disorders: Mediators, moderators, and the need for a new research approach. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 2008; 17: 45–49.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Karno MP, Longabaugh,R. Does matching matter? Examining matches and mismatches between patient attributes and therapy techniques in alcoholism treatment. Addiction, 2007; 102: 587–596.PubMedCrossRef Karno MP, Longabaugh,R. Does matching matter? Examining matches and mismatches between patient attributes and therapy techniques in alcoholism treatment. Addiction, 2007; 102: 587–596.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lowenkamp CT, Latessa EJ. Increasing the effectiveness of correctional programming through the risk principle: Identifying offenders for residential placement. Criminology & Public Policy, 2005; 4: 263–290.CrossRef Lowenkamp CT, Latessa EJ. Increasing the effectiveness of correctional programming through the risk principle: Identifying offenders for residential placement. Criminology & Public Policy, 2005; 4: 263–290.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Farabee D, Hser Y, Anglin D, et al. Recidivism among an early cohort of California’s Proposition 36 offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 2004; 3: 563–584.CrossRef Farabee D, Hser Y, Anglin D, et al. Recidivism among an early cohort of California’s Proposition 36 offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 2004; 3: 563–584.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Urada D, Evans E, Yang J, et al. Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act 2009 Report. 2009. Submitted to the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs. Urada D, Evans E, Yang J, et al. Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act 2009 Report. 2009. Submitted to the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
23.
go back to reference Hser YI, Teruya C, Brown AH, et al. Impact of California’s Proposition 36 on the drug treatment system: Treatment capacity and displacement. American Journal of Public Health, 2007; 97: 104–109.PubMedCrossRef Hser YI, Teruya C, Brown AH, et al. Impact of California’s Proposition 36 on the drug treatment system: Treatment capacity and displacement. American Journal of Public Health, 2007; 97: 104–109.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Grella CE, Greenwell L, Prendergast M, et al. Organizational characteristics of drug abuse treatment programs for offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 291–300.PubMedCrossRef Grella CE, Greenwell L, Prendergast M, et al. Organizational characteristics of drug abuse treatment programs for offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 291–300.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Hser YI, Teruya C, Evans E, et al. Treating drug-abusing offenders: Initial findings from a five-county study on the impact of California’s Proposition 36 on the treatment system and patient outcomes. Evaluation Review, 2003; 27: 479–505.PubMedCrossRef Hser YI, Teruya C, Evans E, et al. Treating drug-abusing offenders: Initial findings from a five-county study on the impact of California’s Proposition 36 on the treatment system and patient outcomes. Evaluation Review, 2003; 27: 479–505.PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Hser YI, Evans E. Cross-system data linkage for treatment outcome evaluation: Lessons learned from the California Treatment Outcome Project. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2008; 31: 125–135.PubMedCrossRef Hser YI, Evans E. Cross-system data linkage for treatment outcome evaluation: Lessons learned from the California Treatment Outcome Project. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2008; 31: 125–135.PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, et al. An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients: The Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1980; 168: 26–33.PubMedCrossRef McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, et al. An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients: The Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1980; 168: 26–33.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D, et al. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1992; 9: 199–213.PubMedCrossRef McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D, et al. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1992; 9: 199–213.PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Bovasso GB, Alterman AI, Cacciola JS, et al. Predictive validity of the Addiction Severity Index’s composite scores in the assessment of 2-year outcomes in a methadone maintenance population. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 2001; 15: 171–176.PubMedCrossRef Bovasso GB, Alterman AI, Cacciola JS, et al. Predictive validity of the Addiction Severity Index’s composite scores in the assessment of 2-year outcomes in a methadone maintenance population. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 2001; 15: 171–176.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Kosten TR, Rounsaville BJ, Kleber HD. Concurrent validity of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1983; 171: 606–610.PubMedCrossRef Kosten TR, Rounsaville BJ, Kleber HD. Concurrent validity of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1983; 171: 606–610.PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference McLellan AT, Cacciola JC, Alterman AI, Rikoon SH, Carise D. The Addiction Severity Index at 25: Origins, contributions and transitions. American Journal of Addictions, 2006; 15:113–24.CrossRef McLellan AT, Cacciola JC, Alterman AI, Rikoon SH, Carise D. The Addiction Severity Index at 25: Origins, contributions and transitions. American Journal of Addictions, 2006; 15:113–24.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Assessing drinkers’ motivation for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 1996; 10: 81–89.CrossRef Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Assessing drinkers’ motivation for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 1996; 10: 81–89.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference McLellan AT, Alterman AI, Cacciola J, et al. A new measure of substance abuse treatment: Initial studies of the treatment services review. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1992; 180: 101–110.PubMedCrossRef McLellan AT, Alterman AI, Cacciola J, et al. A new measure of substance abuse treatment: Initial studies of the treatment services review. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1992; 180: 101–110.PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference McCarty D, McGuire TG, Harwood HJ, Field T. Using state information systems for drug abuse services research. American Behavioral Scientist, 1998; 41: 1090–106.CrossRef McCarty D, McGuire TG, Harwood HJ, Field T. Using state information systems for drug abuse services research. American Behavioral Scientist, 1998; 41: 1090–106.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Saunders RC, Heflinger CA. Integrating data from multiple public sources: Opportunities and challenges for evaluators. Evaluation: International Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice, 2004; 10: 349–65. Saunders RC, Heflinger CA. Integrating data from multiple public sources: Opportunities and challenges for evaluators. Evaluation: International Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice, 2004; 10: 349–65.
38.
go back to reference Evans E, Grella C, Murphy D, Hser YI. Using administrative data for longitudinal substance abuse research. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 2010; 37: 252–271.CrossRef Evans E, Grella C, Murphy D, Hser YI. Using administrative data for longitudinal substance abuse research. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 2010; 37: 252–271.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Evans E, Anglin MD, Urada D, Yang J. Promising practices for delivery of court-supervised substance abuse treatment: Perspectives from six high-performing California counties operating Proposition 36. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2011; 34:124–134PubMedCrossRef Evans E, Anglin MD, Urada D, Yang J. Promising practices for delivery of court-supervised substance abuse treatment: Perspectives from six high-performing California counties operating Proposition 36. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2011; 34:124–134PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Evans E, Li L, Urada D, Anglin M.D. Comparative effectiveness of California’s Proposition 36 and drug court programs before and after propensity score matching. Crime & Delinquency, 2011 (in press). Evans E, Li L, Urada D, Anglin M.D. Comparative effectiveness of California’s Proposition 36 and drug court programs before and after propensity score matching. Crime & Delinquency, 2011 (in press).
41.
go back to reference Taxman FS, Perdoni ML, Harrison LD. Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 239–254.PubMedCrossRef Taxman FS, Perdoni ML, Harrison LD. Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 239–254.PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Holloway KR, Bennett TH, Farrington DP. The effectiveness of drug treatment programs in reducing criminal behavior: A meta-analysis. Psicothema, 2006; 18: 620–629.PubMed Holloway KR, Bennett TH, Farrington DP. The effectiveness of drug treatment programs in reducing criminal behavior: A meta-analysis. Psicothema, 2006; 18: 620–629.PubMed
43.
go back to reference Kelly JF, Finney JW, Moos R. Substance use disorder patients who are mandated to treatment: Characteristics, treatment process, and 1- and 5-year outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2005; 28: 213–223.PubMedCrossRef Kelly JF, Finney JW, Moos R. Substance use disorder patients who are mandated to treatment: Characteristics, treatment process, and 1- and 5-year outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2005; 28: 213–223.PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Ettner SL, Huang D, Evans E, Ash DR, Hardy M, Jourabchi M, Hser YI. Benefit-cost in the California Treatment Outcome Project: Does substance abuse treatment “pay for itself?” Health Services Research, 2006; 41: 192–213.PubMedCrossRef Ettner SL, Huang D, Evans E, Ash DR, Hardy M, Jourabchi M, Hser YI. Benefit-cost in the California Treatment Outcome Project: Does substance abuse treatment “pay for itself?” Health Services Research, 2006; 41: 192–213.PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Friedmann PD, Taxman FS, Henderson CE. Evidence-based treatment practices for drug-involved adults in the criminal justice system. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 267–277.PubMedCrossRef Friedmann PD, Taxman FS, Henderson CE. Evidence-based treatment practices for drug-involved adults in the criminal justice system. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2007; 32: 267–277.PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Substance Abuse Treatment for Adults in the Criminal Justice System. Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 44. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 05–4056. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2005. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Substance Abuse Treatment for Adults in the Criminal Justice System. Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 44. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 05–4056. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2005.
47.
go back to reference McKellar J, Kelly J, Harris A, et al. Pretreatment and during treatment risk factors for dropout among patients with substance use disorders. Addictive Behaviors, 2006; 31: 450–460.PubMedCrossRef McKellar J, Kelly J, Harris A, et al. Pretreatment and during treatment risk factors for dropout among patients with substance use disorders. Addictive Behaviors, 2006; 31: 450–460.PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Laudet AB. The road to recovery: Where are we going and how do we get there? Empirically driven conclusions and future directions for service development and research. Substance Use & Misuse, 2008; 43: 2001–2020.CrossRef Laudet AB. The road to recovery: Where are we going and how do we get there? Empirically driven conclusions and future directions for service development and research. Substance Use & Misuse, 2008; 43: 2001–2020.CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Laudet AB, White W. What are your priorities right now? Identifying service needs across recovery stages to inform service development. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2010; 38:51–59.PubMedCrossRef Laudet AB, White W. What are your priorities right now? Identifying service needs across recovery stages to inform service development. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2010; 38:51–59.PubMedCrossRef
50.
go back to reference McLellan AT. Have we evaluated addiction treatment correctly? Implications from a chronic care perspective. Addiction, 2002; 97: 249–252.PubMedCrossRef McLellan AT. Have we evaluated addiction treatment correctly? Implications from a chronic care perspective. Addiction, 2002; 97: 249–252.PubMedCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Sung HE, Belenko S, Feng L, et al. Predicting treatment noncompliance among criminal justice-mandated clients: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2004; 26: 315–328.PubMedCrossRef Sung HE, Belenko S, Feng L, et al. Predicting treatment noncompliance among criminal justice-mandated clients: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2004; 26: 315–328.PubMedCrossRef
52.
go back to reference Merkx MJ, Schippers GM, Koeter MJ, et al. Allocation of substance use disorder patients to appropriate levels of care: Feasibility of matching guidelines in routine practice in Dutch treatment centres. Addiction, 2007; 102: 466–474.PubMedCrossRef Merkx MJ, Schippers GM, Koeter MJ, et al. Allocation of substance use disorder patients to appropriate levels of care: Feasibility of matching guidelines in routine practice in Dutch treatment centres. Addiction, 2007; 102: 466–474.PubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference Hardy M, Teruya C, Longshore D, et al. Initial implementation of California’s Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act: Findings from focus groups in ten counties. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2005; 28: 221–232.CrossRef Hardy M, Teruya C, Longshore D, et al. Initial implementation of California’s Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act: Findings from focus groups in ten counties. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2005; 28: 221–232.CrossRef
54.
go back to reference Chandler RK, Peters RH, Field G, et al. Challenges in implementing evidence-based treatment practices for co-occurring disorders in the criminal justice system. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 2004; 22: 431–448.CrossRef Chandler RK, Peters RH, Field G, et al. Challenges in implementing evidence-based treatment practices for co-occurring disorders in the criminal justice system. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 2004; 22: 431–448.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
High-Risk Offenders Participating in Court-Supervised Substance Abuse Treatment: Characteristics, Treatment Received, and Factors Associated with Recidivism
Authors
Elizabeth Evans, MA
David Huang, DrPH
Yih-Ing Hser, PhD
Publication date
01-10-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 1094-3412
Electronic ISSN: 2168-6793
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-011-9241-3

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 4/2011 Go to the issue