Many references to community supervision are made throughout this TIP. The following list of general definitions may help a reader who is not familiar with the criminal justice system. However, the definitions may vary slightly from place to place because jurisdictions organize their supervision systems in different ways.
Probation is typically court-ordered supervision imposed in lieu of jail or prison.
Parole is supervision imposed at the end of a jail or prison sentence, perhaps shortening the period of incarceration. As with probation, parole may be revoked, resulting in the individual being incarcerated.
Postprison supervision is used to describe supervision following a completed period of incarceration. Some States have replaced their parole systems with postprison supervision.
Community supervision is the general category that includes all the terms listed above. There are other forms of community supervision as well, such as courts that have their own supervision systems. In this TIP, community supervision is the most commonly used term. A community supervision agent, then, could be a parole officer.
Figure 1-2
Characteristics of Both Outreach and Reach-in Models
Early prerelease planning
Development of an effective community reentry and relapse prevention plan
Establishment of linkages among service systems as designated by the plan
Incorporation of continued community treatment plans as a condition of parole or probation where possible
Monitoring the offender to ensure that linkages have been made, that transition services are appropriate, and that new issues that have arisen are being addressed
Establishment of a standard protocol for this function within the system's infrastructure
Contracted third-party services can fit with either model
A comprehensive review of the research on AA reveals several important findings:
Research shows a strong association between AA participation that occurs during or following professional treatment and both reduced drinking and abstinence.
Research suggests a strong association between increased frequency in attending AA meetings and improvements in drinking behavior measures, such as abstinence and decreases in alcohol consumption.
Research suggests a modest association between increased participation in and affiliation with AA (such as obtaining or becoming a sponsor) and improvements in drinking behavior measures, such as abstinence, decreased drinking, and decreased relapse.
Research suggests modest associations between AA participation and improvements in several areas of psychosocial functioning.
An agency has received legislative authority and funding to create a transitional services program for substance-using boot camp graduates who are returning to the community. Through a series of planning and development meetings with key administrators and program officials representing four other participating agencies, agreements were reached to address
>Common goals and objectives for the transitional phase
Agency responsibilities for offender risk and needs assessment
Case management plan development
The timing of components of transitional services, some of which begin while offenders are still in boot camp
The collection and transmittal of offender-specific data relating to institutional adjustment, treatment involvement and performance, key offender demographic data, and location data (such as home phone numbers)
Logistics issues, such as community agency access to the offender population for assessment and case management, the involvement of institutional and community agencies in care planning, what agency pays for what services, and issues related to offender release (such as custody and transportation)
These collaborative meetings were recorded by the lead agency and its clerical staff developed and circulated detailed meeting minutes. The agencies successfully negotiated all program criteria and letters of agreement were signed by all participating agencies.
In California, case management programs are funded through the Department of Corrections. The case managers, who are based in the prisons, keep track of the progress of the client, work with the parole officer, and follow the offender through all aspects of the treatment process.
In many States, parole and probation officers have specialized caseloads that include only offenders with substance use disorders. These officers receive specialized training in substance use disorders. It is significant that when Texas implemented its program in 1992, these specialized officers were in addition to, not in replacement of, existing officers.
Figure 4-3
State Legislatures and the Delivery of Transitional Services
The State can
Define who is in charge of the transition process (department of corrections; each prison; parole/probation system; or other third party, including TASC)
Pass laws that dictate eligibility criteria for prisons, jails, boot camps, and youth detention facilities (for example, structured sentencing laws)
Determine the funding levels and requirements for funding substance use disorder treatment for offenders and specify annual appropriation needs
Create policies dictating the process by which transitional issues are addressed (e.g., policy can mandate that State-run boot camp programs include a transitional phase designed in collaboration with community treatment agencies)
Specify treatment resources such as residential and substance use disorder programs dedicated to offenders leaving institutional care
Earmark funding for research to demonstrate the effectiveness of transition efforts
Figure 6-1
A Review of Treatment Programs for Offenders With Coexisting Disorders
A recent review of treatment programs for prison inmates with coexisting disorders (Edens et al., 1997) brings attention to efforts currently under way to meet the needs of those with coexisting disorders in prisons. The authors identified seven programs that provide specialized services for this population. Most of these initiatives evolved from the recognition that this population does not respond well to traditional intervention methods.
Transitional or aftercare services in these programs generally begin with placement in a halfway house or other transitional setting, such as work release. Transportation to the aftercare facilities is usually coordinated by the programs. The Turning Point program (see box) contracts with several aftercare programs and provides funds for 2 months of treatment after release. The Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facilities (TDCJ Estelle II and Hackberry Units) in Texas provide coordination and funding of transitional services through State agencies.
Several programs employ transitional coordinators, who work with case managers to provide linkages to community resources prior to release. In some programs, these coordinators also develop a plan for services and arrange meetings between the offender and the assigned case manager. All programs described in the review provide parole/supervision officers with an aftercare plan for those inmates who are released to community supervision programs.
The common goals of these prison programs, consistent with treatment approaches for those with coexisting disorders in community settings, are
The use of staff with training in mental health issues as well as substance use disorders
Consideration of both disorders as primary
Individualized assessments of skill deficits and symptom severity
Use of medication (when necessary)
A long-term treatment focus with an emphasis on phases of treatment
Appreciation of the integral role of self-help treatment
Recognition that treatment must extend beyond the institution and into the community
The authors found significant gaps in service during the transition period because of the expected difficulties in providing a comprehensive range of services for this population. These included a lack of transitional housing options for those in rural settings, a lack of availability or access to mental health services, resistance by community agencies to providing services to offenders, a lack of mental health services and medication monitoring in community programs, lack of cross-training in mental health issues for community supervision officers, and offender resistance to treatment after release.
Site Map
Help
Account
Cart
Home
