Breadcrumb

  1. Multimodal Community-Based Prisoner Reentry Program

Multimodal Community-Based Prisoner Reentry Program

Program Goals
The Multimodal Community-Based Prisoner Reentry Program is a community-based prisoner reentry program that provides substance abuse treatment to offenders who have been placed on 24-month community correctional supervision. The program targets medium- to high-risk offenders and seeks to maximize participants’ learning and motivation, while catering to their strengths. Overall the Multimodal Community-Based Prisoner Reentry Program seeks to reduce the relapse, rearrest, and reincarceration rates of program participants.

Program Theory
The Multimodal Community-Based Reentry Program used the cognitive–behavioral therapeutic (CBT) framework as its foundation, believing such an approach would increase the likelihood of behavior change. The cognitive–behavior framework is grounded in the belief that substance dependency is a learned behavior and through CBT strategies this behavior can be replaced (Grommon, Davidson, and Bynum 2013).

Program Components
The program was broken into two graduating phases, which took place during the first year of release. Phase 1 took place in a secured transitional facility during the first 30–45 days following release. During this phase, the program focused on important transition components, such as housing, employment, and ensuring participants enrolled in outpatient substance abuse services and various life skills trainings. Program participants participated in 10 hours of services each week. These services were broken into one individual counseling session (1 hour long); three group sessions (4½ hours total); one family therapy session (1½ hours); and three Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous meetings (3 hours total). Randomized drug testing occurred during each day of the week. The randomization schedule ensured that 40 percent of participants were tested at least twice a week.

Following completion of Phase 1, program participants transitioned into Phase 2, which consisted of similar direct services, yet fewer hours than those offered in Phase 1. For example, Phase 2 consisted of two group sessions (3 hours total), one family group session (1½ hours), and three Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous meetings (3 hours total) each week. Participants also had two individual counseling sessions each month. As in Phase 1, randomized drug testing occurred during Phase 2, with a schedule ensuring that at least 40 percent of participants were tested at least once a week. Failing a drug test during Phase 2 resulted in a 3-day stay in the secure residential facility.

Individualized treatment protocols were developed for each program participant. An individualized approach allowed the team to develop both treatment and prevention plans for the individual and refer him to various organizations in the community that could provide further aid. The caseworker, the therapist, and the case coordinator helped the participants identify goals and monitor progress. In addition to receiving the core curriculum, program participants also received workbooks associated with the curriculum.

Key Personnel
Program participants were managed by a primary caseworker, a treatment therapist, and a case coordinator during the program. These individuals worked together to understand the participant’s need and his substance abuse history, which was then used to develop his individualized treatment protocol. Program therapists were certified counselors, trained in CBT, with years of experience understanding behavior relapse so that such behaviors could be identified and, when possible, prevented.

Intervention ID
356
Ages

No Data.

Rating
No Effects
Outcomes

Study 1
The preponderance of evidence from the Grommon, Davidson, and Bynum (2013) study suggests that the Multimodal Community-Based Prisoner Reentry Program had no significant effect on program participants on all three measures (rearrest, reincarceration, and relapse).

Rearrest
At the 2-year follow-up analysis, 30 percent of the treatment group, versus 27 percent of the comparison group, were rearrested. Although it appeared that treatment group participants were slightly more likely than comparison group participants to be rearrested, these differences were not statistically significant.

Reincarceration
At the 2-year follow-up analysis, 36 percent of the treatment group, versus 31 percent of the comparison group, were reincarcerated. Although this indicates that treatment group participants were slightly more likely than control group participants to return to prison, these differences were also not statistically significant.

Relapse
During the course of the study, 75 percent of the treatment group relapsed, whereas 71 percent of the comparison group relapsed; however, these differences were not significant. These results indicate that a majority of both the treatment and control group relapsed (i.e., had at least one positive drug test) during the study period.

Topics - Placeholder

1 2 4 11 26 28 31 35 36 53 56 57 58 59 106 152 164 166 168 177 188 189 190 191 192 195 196 198 256 272