Study 1
Prendergast and colleagues (2011) conducted a multisite study in four States with male and female inmates (n = 812). Subjects were recruited from secure correctional facilities that offered substance abuse treatment services. To be eligible, inmates needed to be 18 or older, be enrolled in a drug treatment program, have a referral to a community-based substance abuse treatment program, be about 3 months away from release, and be scheduled for release to a metropolitan area where TCM managers were located. Inmates were excluded if they received a referral to community-based case management services, were registered sex offenders, had parole requirements that prevented their participation, or could not provide informed consent. Eligible inmates were assigned to a transitional case management (TCM) group (n = 412) or to a standard referral (SR) group (n = 400) using urn randomization. Participants did not differ significantly on any variables, except ethnicity (the TCM group had a larger percentage of whites than did the SR group: 50 percent versus 44 percent). Women were oversampled relative to their percentage in the prison population.
Both groups received in-prison substance abuse treatment, referrals to publicly funded treatment, and in-prison exposure to a video developed to encourage engagement in treatment post-release. The SR group received the usual planning and referral services available in prison and while on parole, including referrals to community-based treatment in the community to which the parolee was being released. Parolees in this group were supervised and received standard services through their parole officers. The TCM group received standard services as well as services specified in the TCM protocol. These activities included a strengths assessment; a conference call with family members, a treatment provider, and a parole officer; and community sessions with the case manager (see above). Attendance at TCM sessions was voluntary.
Data was collected through individual interviews at baseline, 3 months post-release (91 percent follow-up participation), and 9 months post-release (90 percent follow-up participation). Baseline data was collected from clients at time of consent or within a week following consent. Researchers used the CJ–DATS Core Intake to collect information on sociodemographic background, family and peer relations, health and psychological status, criminal history and criminal justice involvement, drug use history, and HIV/AIDS risk behaviors. The TCU Drug Screen was used to collect data on substance abuse or dependence. The Client Evaluation of Self at Intake was used to collect information on treatment motivation. The Services Needed and Received collected self-report data on services needed and received since release or last interview.
Twelve case managers were recruited for this project across the four sites. They received comprehensive standardized training, based on a detailed manual developed for the project, over 3.5 days. Managers received supervision during the project through biweekly calls early in the project, then monthly calls, as well as site-specific supervision. Managers participated in a 3-hour refresher course halfway through the study. At the beginning of the project, there were seven women case managers and five men; their average age was 39.6 years; six were African American and six white; seven had achieved a bachelor’s degree and five a master’s. Seven had previous experience as a case manager.
Researchers used chi-square tests and t-tests to assess substance abuse and other services received. Two-way interactions for each outcome variable were examined using a mixed-effects model. Fifty-three individuals were excluded from analysis. The study authors did not conduct subgroup analyses.
