Breadcrumb

  1. Probation Case Management (San Francisco, Calif.)

Probation Case Management (San Francisco, Calif.)

Program Goals/Target Population

Probation Case Management (PCM) was a case management intervention that provided customized services for drug-involved women offenders. The PCM model incorporated elements of substance abuse treatment, intensive supervision probation (ISP), and case management. The goal of PCM was to improve services for drug-involved female offenders by providing treatment and related services as a means to reduce drug use, criminal recidivism, and incarceration of probationers.


 

Key Personnel

The PCM model was part of the San Francisco (Calif.) Network Project, which operated from 1995 to 2001. This project was designed to address the health and social needs of drug-involved women offenders by providing case management services to them and creating a relationship between the Probation Department and community services. The PCM model required recruitment and training of probation officers at the San Francisco Adult Probation Department to serve as case managers for substance abusing female clients. Probation officers still retained the responsibility of probation supervision of clients while they provided additional case management services. Case managers were also clinically supervised by an outside consultant. In the first 2 years of the project, case managers were supervised weekly, then biweekly in the 3rd year, and monthly in the 4th year.


 

Program Components

PCM case managers performed therapeutic and advocacy activities as well as case management activities for their clients. Therapeutic and advocacy activities included providing clients with gender-specific education about addiction, offering additional counseling for clients, and being more accessible to clients by phone and in person. Case management activities included attending treatment planning meetings at the client’s treatment program, going to court or to the housing authority with clients, making home visits, and attending medical appointments with clients.


 

PCM differs from standard probation in a number of ways. First, the caseload of case managers was restricted to no more than 50 clients at any time. Decreasing the caseload was designed to increase the frequency and length of client visits. Case managers maintained contact with their clients at least twice a month through field visits, through office appointments, or by phone. Second, case managers used a uniform client screening and assessment procedure. This ensured that the drug-involved clients were matched to their appropriate need for substance abuse treatment.


 

Finally, clients were provided with referrals to needed services. Case managers used referral resources, such as health and mental health services, child care and child reunification services, educational and employment counseling, and assistance with housing needs. The extent to which a case manager used the referral resources was dependent upon their individual approach with each client.

Intervention ID
147
Ages

18 to 100

Rating
No Effects
Outcomes

Study 1

Substance Abuse and Psychiatric Symptoms

When examining the outcome measures of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), and the Social Support Evaluation List, the analyses by Chan and colleagues (2005) found that there were no statistically significant differences between the Probation Case Management (PCM) treatment group and the comparison group. When averaged across all time points, the outcome measures did not significantly differ by group, and there were also no significant group by time interactions.


 


Incarceration, Child Custody, and Service Use

In addition, the proportion of women incarcerated at the 6-month and 12-month follow-up did not differ significantly by group. There were also no significant differences between the treatment and comparison groups in the proportion of women living with children under 18 years of age and the proportion of women enrolled in substance abuse treatment at both follow-up periods. Finally, the proportion of women who had participated in parenting classes, were seen by any medical professional, or had received dental care or psychological counseling did not differ between the treatment group receiving PCM services and the comparison group receiving standard probation services at any follow-up point. When looking at differences between groups, the only significant difference found was that comparison group members were less likely than PCM participants to report having visited an emergency room in the past 6 months (18 percent compared to 49 percent, respectively).

Topics - Placeholder

1 2 4 11 28 35 53 59 167 188