The development and implementation of transitional programming for offenders requires an effective partnership among diverse criminal justice, substance use disorder treatment, and social services agencies. The designated transitional program administrator must be thoroughly knowledgeable of the obstacles inherent in launching such a collaborative effort. As each agency brings its own culture, agenda, and operational differences to the planning process, administrators from each of the participating agencies must work together to establish compatible goals, policies, and procedures. At the outset of the planning process, the need for individual and organizational flexibility and genuine cooperative effort should be emphasized to all participants.
The role of the administrator of a transitional services program is critical. This individual shoulders the responsibility for managing complex interactions among all agencies and institutions involved in criminal justice accountability and service provision. Therefore, the administrator must be thoroughly familiar with the environments in which participating agencies operate and lead the effort to unify policies so that communications with other organizations and with offenders served are consistent. Knowledge of each agency's administrative environment and procedures improves the likelihood of an effective collaboration.
At the beginning of the planning process, the transitional program administrator and the participating agency representatives should focus attention on several issues that, if left unaddressed, will have a serious impact on the success of offender transitions and the transition program itself. Key issues for consideration are discussed below.
Ideally, each agency's representative should be a senior staff member who has authority to speak for the agency, make commitments on behalf of the agency, and sign agreements or other official documents. Final sign-off authority is extremely important. The transitional services program administrator should resist any attempts to assign staff members who do not have such authority. However, since partial authority is better than none, accepting representatives who can approve some elements of the transitional program may be necessary if that is the only alternative.
Including other stakeholders (e.g., judges, legislators, advocates) may prove beneficial to the success of the program. For example, if legislators become part of the planning process, they may become advocates for funding. Support at this level can be essential to program implementation and long-term funding.
Each participating agency should have a working knowledge of every other participating agency's policies, internal dynamics, service capacities, legal responsibilities, and authority in relation to the client. This knowledge is essential for the development of mutual respect among the partners. Additionally, familiarity with the organizational history of each agency, including success in collaborative or partnership efforts is important to the planning process. Agencies that have had difficulty sharing authority or yielding control may need to be treated with special sensitivity and attention.
Each agency representative should take responsibility for determining how collaboration on transitional services may affect the internal operations of his agency. Coupled with this analysis is the need to make adjustments to ease service planning and program implementation. For example, an agency headed by a board of directors that must approve changes in operations or policy will need extra time to obtain approval.
The nature of transitional service programs is complex in that several service providers must function as one. Therefore, the organizational goals and culture of each agency must be blended with the others. Differences will exist in professional jargon, organizational structure (including chain of command and identity of the official invested with authority for various programming issues), and the amount of time each agency will need to obtain approval. To mediate these and other differences, the transitional services program administrator can remind the participating agencies that the goals and objectives for each agency and for the partnership are the same.
An educational effort may be required to align the partner agencies in an understanding of client characteristics and the diverse agency planning, processes, and programming that may be at play. Agencies that have not worked with offenders will need training on the kinds of issues these clients bring to service providers and on the community concerns that may surface. They will also need to develop an understanding of criminal justice processes and the operating principles that govern community-based organizations and other groups in the partnership, as well as the political forces that shape each agency's agenda. For example, jails and prisons have been under enormous pressures to reduce their populations through the targeting of specific offender populations for diversion. Identification of these target populations will generally include determinations regarding substance use disorder histories. For planners of transition services, this is an important opportunity, as it provides the political motivation to move offenders from jails and prisons into community programs under a carefully designed transition process.
A delicate balance must be reached in order to reconcile differences in policy and procedures among the partnership agencies. Differences left unaddressed at the organizational level can prevent effective service delivery and undermine the program. Figure 4-1 presents a brief developmental scenario of a successful transitional services program.
During the planning phase of a transitional service program, it is critical to agree on goals that are acceptable to each participating agency. For example, a treatment provider may see a decrease in substance use as a measure of success. The criminal justice agency, however, may believe that abstinence is the only acceptable outcome. Such issues highlight the underlying philosophies of different systems and must be identified and discussed prior to program implementation. Failure to do so may foster interagency mistrust, inmate manipulation, and dishonesty, and can result in program failure. Partnership goals and objectives must also be compatible with any legal conditions placed on an offender by the releasing or supervisory authority.
Treatment Improvement Protocols (TIPs) 17, Planning for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment for Adults in the Criminal Justice System (CSAT, 1995c), and 12, Combining Substance Abuse Treatment With Intermediate Sanctions for Adults in the Criminal Justice System (CSAT, 1994c), describe basic differences in the criminal justice and substance use disorder treatment systems, and the use of sanctions in coordination with substance use disorder treatment.
When possible, the results of negotiating the key components of a transitional services program should be documented in an interagency agreement. All policy and procedural decisions reached during planning meetings should be included in this agreement. Such decisions include
The development of a shared "vision statement"
Goals and objectives of transition programming
Each agency's specific roles, expectations, and responsibilities
Site Map
Help
Account
Cart
Home
