Evidence Rating for Outcomes
Crime & Delinquency | Multiple crime/offense types |
Date:
This practice uses a comprehensive, residential drug treatment program model for treating substance-abusing and addicted inmates to foster changes in attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors related to substance use. The practice is rated Promising in reducing recidivism rates after release for participants in therapeutic communities.
Practice Goals/Target Population
Incarceration-based therapeutic communities (TCs) are separate residential drug treatment programs in prisons or jails for treating substance-abusing and addicted individuals. The defining feature of TCs is the emphasis on participation by all members of the program in the overall goal of reducing substance use and recidivism.
Practice Theory
The TC theory proposes that recovery from substance abuse involves rehabilitation to learn healthy behaviors and habilitation to integrate those healthy behaviors into a routine (NIDA 2015). TCs differ from other models of treatment by their focus on recovery, overall lifestyle changes, and the use of the “community” as the key instrument for that change (De Leon and Wexler 2009; NIDA 2015; Welsh 2007; Vanderplasschen et al. 2012). The community includes inmate peers and facility staff. TCs use a stepping-stone model in which participants progress through several levels of treatment. As they progress through each treatment level, their level of responsibility also increases. TCs are implemented in a residential setting to help inmates adjust to the idea of a community working together toward a common goal (Welsh 2007). Treatment includes aftercare and reentry services as a means of providing continued support and relapse prevention after leaving the community (NIDA 2015).
Practice Components
Residents of TCs progress through treatment in three stages 1) induction and early treatment, 2) primary treatment, and 3) reentry. The first stage provides the resident with an introduction to the TC rules and procedures, staff, and community members. During this stage, residents begin TC model treatment and are integrated into the community. The second stage is the main treatment phase, which focuses on changing attitudes and behavior related to substance use as well as addressing other needs. Common treatment approaches include cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing. Other treatment services provide assistance with social, familial, medical, and mental health needs. The third stage prepares the residents for their transition from the program and includes aftercare services. During this final stage, resident discharge planning provides referrals for reentry services available in the community once the participants are released (NIDA 2002; 2015).
Specific treatment interventions vary by facility, but there are several common components of TCs. Residents of TCs are housed separately from other inmates in order to establish and maintain a drug-free, rehabilitative, prosocial environment. Residents must follow strict community rules and norms, reinforced with set rewards or punishments, as a way to facilitate self-control and responsibility. Routines are established to teach goal planning and accountability. Residents must participate in TC-related roles, as assigned, based on a hierarchy of increasing responsibilities and privileges. Residents must also participate in TC-related activities such as community meetings, individual and group counseling, games, and role playing (NIDA 2002; 2015). These roles include chores and jobs for maintaining the community and its daily operations. All activities, aside from individual counseling, occur in group formats (CSAT 1999). In addition to their assigned community-related work, residents typically participate in 4 to 5 hours of treatment a week (NIDA 2015).
|
Crime & Delinquency | Multiple crime/offense types
Mitchell, Wilson, and MacKenzie (2012) synthesized results from 30 studies that examined the effectiveness of incarceration-based therapeutic communities for adults on recidivism post-release. The results indicated that treatment group participants were significantly less likely to recidivate than comparison group offenders after release (odds ratio = 1.38 for the treatment group). This means that if the comparison group has an assumed recidivism rate of 35 percent, treatment group offenders have a 28 percent recidivism rate. Drake (2012) analyzed 18 effect sizes on the effectiveness of incarceration-based therapeutic communities for adults on recidivism. The results indicated that treatment group offenders were significantly less likely to recidivate than comparison group offenders (effect size =.12). |
Literature Coverage Dates | Number of Studies | Number of Study Participants | |
---|---|---|---|
Meta Analysis 1 | 1980-2011 | 30 | 0 |
Meta Analysis 2 | 1980-2011 | 18 | 0 |
Mitchell, Wilson, and MacKenzie (2012) synthesized results from 74 independent effect sizes on the effectiveness of incarceration-based drug treatment programs on recidivism and drug use post-release. For inclusion in the analysis, studies had to have been conducted between 1980 and 2011, assessed the effectiveness of prison- or jail-based drug treatment programs, specifically targeted substance users, used a random or quasi-experimental design with a no-treatment or minimal-treatment comparison group, and measured recidivism or drug use post-release.
The majority of the studies included in the overall analysis were published after 1999 (60 percent) and were conducted in the United States (88 percent). Thirty studies reported on the effects of incarceration-based therapeutic communities for adults on recidivism post-release. Of the included studies, 6 percent used an experimental design, 31 percent used a rigorous quasi-experimental design, 43 percent used a standard quasi-experiment design, and 20 percent used a weak quasi-experimental design. Participants in the treatment group were residents of therapeutic communities while incarcerated; those in the comparison group received no treatment or treatment-as-usual while incarcerated.
Odds-ratio effect sizes were calculated and analyzed using the random-effects inverse-variance weight method.
Meta Analysis 2Drake (2012) analyzed 55 studies on the effectiveness of chemical dependency treatment on reducing crime and substance use in juvenile and criminal justice systems. For inclusion in the analysis, studies had to assess the effectiveness of a therapeutic community, intensive outpatient, or outpatient chemical dependency treatment program in either the adult criminal or juvenile justice system, use a random or rigorous quasi-experimental design with a control or comparison group, provide sufficient information to calculate an effect size, and report on measures of recidivism. Studies were excluded if their treatment groups consisted of program completers only.
The analysis included 45 studies with adults and 10 studies with juveniles. Eighteen effect sizes were synthesized on the effectiveness of incarceration-based therapeutic communities for adults in the criminal justice system. The average age of program participants was 30. No information was reported on the gender and race/ethnicity of program participants. Participants in the treatment group were residents of therapeutic communities while incarcerated or under community supervision; those in the comparison group received no treatment or treatment-as-usual.
The analysis reported results using mean-difference effect sizes. The mean-difference effect sizes of studies with small samples were adjusted using the Hedges’ g correction factor. A random-effects model was used to calculate the weighted average effect size.
Mitchell, Wilson, and MacKenzie (2012) conducted a moderator analysis of treatment characteristics of the therapeutic communities. Treatment characteristics included mandatory aftercare, location of intervention (jail or prison), length of treatment program maturity, nature of participation (voluntary or at least partially mandatory), and average number of participants. The results showed that programs with voluntary participation in therapeutic communities had significantly larger effect sizes than programs in which participation was partially mandatory. No significant effects were detected for the other treatment characteristics.
These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:
Mitchell, Ojmarrh, David B. Wilson, and Doris L. MacKenzie. 2012. "The Effectiveness of Incarceration-Based Drug Treatment on Criminal Behavior: A Systematic Review." Campbell Systematic Reviews 18.
https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/better-evidence/effectiveness-of-incarceration-based-drug-treatment.htmlDrake, Elizabeth. 2012. Chemical Dependency Treatment for Offenders: A Review of the Evidence and Benefit-Cost Findings. Olympia, Wash.: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1112/Wsipp_Chemical-Dependency-Treatment-for-Offenders-A-Review-of-the-Evidence-and-Benefit-Cost-Findings_Full-Report.pdfThese sources were used in the development of the practice profile:
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT). 1999. "Therapeutic Communities." Treatment of Adolescents with Substance Use Disorders: Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series No. 32. Rockville, Md.: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
De Leon, George, and Harry K. Wexler. 2009. "The Therapeutic Community for Addictions: An Evolving Knowledge Base." Journal of Drug Issues 39:167–78.
Holloway, Katy R., Trevor H. Bennett, and David P. Farrington. 2006. "The Effectiveness of Drug Treatment Programs in Reducing Criminal Behavior: A Meta-Analysis." Psicothema 18(3):620–29.
Mitchell, Ojmarrh, David B. Wilson, and Doris L. MacKenzie. 2006. "The Effectiveness of Incarceration-Based Drug Treatment on Criminal Behavior." Campbell Systematic Reviews 11.
Vanderplasschen, Wouter, Kathy Colpaert, Mieke Autrique, Richard Charles Rapp, Steve Pearce, Eric Broekaert, and Stijn Vandevelde. 2013. "Therapeutic Communities for Addictions: A Review of Their Effectiveness From a Recovery-Oriented Perspective." The Scientific World Journal. doi:10.1155/2013/427817
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). 2002. Therapeutic Community. Research Report Series. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). 2015. Therapeutic Community. Research Report Series. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/therapeutic-communities/what-are-therapeutic-communitiesWelsh, Wayne N. 2007. "A Multisite Evaluation of Prison-Based Therapeutic Community Drug Treatment." Criminal Justice and Behavior 34(11):1481–98.
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:
Age: 18+
Gender: Male, Female
Targeted Population: Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) Offenders, Prisoners
Setting (Delivery): Correctional
Practice Type: Alcohol and Drug Therapy/Treatment, Alcohol and Drug Prevention, Aftercare/Reentry, Cognitive Behavioral Treatment, Group Therapy, Individual Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, Residential Treatment Center, Therapeutic Communities
Unit of Analysis: Persons