Report of a Process Evaluation of the Ozark Correctional Center Drug Treatment Program: Final Report

• NCJ Number: 181648
• Author(s): Donald M. Linhorst Ph.D.
• Date Published: February 2000
• Length: 61 pages
• Grant Number(s): 97-RT-VXK013
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored

Annotation

A process evaluation of the therapeutic community drug treatment program established for inmates in the Ozark Correctional Center in Missouri focused on changes in the treatment program, participant characteristics, the use of aftercare, and participant ratings of the program and aftercare.

Abstract

The program serves offenders from an all male, 650-bed minimum-security prison. The program admitted 1,268 inmates between February 1, 1994 and September 30, 1996; 693 inmates successfully completed the program. The evaluation used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods and multiple data sources. Results revealed that the two main events that influenced the treatment process were a change in treatment providers contracted to operate the program and the initiation of a no-smoking policy, which began on May 1, 1997 and was rescinded on April 1, 1998. Both staff and participants indicated that the change in treatment providers had a negative impact on the program. The focus groups also believed that the no-smoking policy had a substantial detrimental effect. Alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine/crack were the drugs most used prior to program participants. Most participants had committed prior crimes and were serving moderately long sentences. Almost all participants took part in aftercare, which usually was required as a condition of parole. Findings indicated that participants were receiving a range of services and were satisfied with crucial program elements and that administrators had a strong commitment to the therapeutic community model. Findings suggested that the implementation of therapeutic communities requires training to enable staff to enact their new roles, that factors beyond the immediate control of the program can affect its quality, that staff continuity is important, and that ongoing administrative support is essential. Tables, appended tables, and 18 references