Throughcare and Aftercare: Approaches and Promising Practice in Service Delivery for Clients Released From Prison or Leaving Residential Rehabilitation

• NCJ Number: 208697
• Author(s): Anne Fox; Lorraine Khan; Daniel Briggs; Nicky Rees-Jones; Zoe Thompson; Jan Owens
• Date Published: 2005
• Length: 37 pages
• Sale Source: Great Britain Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate
• Publication Format: Document (Online)
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United Kingdom
• Note: Home Office Online Report 01/05; downloaded February 10, 2005.

Annotation

This report presents findings from an evaluation of existing approaches to throughcare and aftercare services for released inmates with drug problems.

Abstract

Six aftercare and four residential rehabilitation centers made up the case studies for the evaluation. The study relied on Rapid Assessment and Response (RAR) methodology that allows researchers to gather information rapidly and effectively through multiple methods. The population under study was adults with drug problems who were leaving residential treatment or returning to the community from corrections custody. Formal and informal interviews were conducted with approximately 200 prisoners, clients, and staff members of the 11 rehabilitation and aftercare agencies regarding their approaches to delivering services to released offenders. Additionally, 50 questionnaires were delivered to aftercare agencies across England and Wales and 60 questionnaires were distributed randomly to prisoners in 12 prisons. The main findings regarding the throughcare services indicated the need for timely assessments on offender needs and consistent collaboration in aftercare planning. Potential sources for aftercare service referrals were not well integrated with local service delivery; additional information about local agencies and their functions should be provided to all workers. The main findings regarding aftercare indicated that aftercare case management plans did not always take into account other agencies’ interventions. A persistent and non-judgemental approach by staff motivated greater engagement by clients. Other areas of aftercare improvement were identified as greater guidance and training for staff regarding the signs of high-risk situations and characteristics of clients that may indicate a relapse. Finally, there was little empirical evidence concerning the effectiveness of aftercare or throughcare interventions and approaches. A standardized outcome monitoring system that allows for a follow-up of clients should be developed and implemented. Greater in-depth study about case-management practices is warranted. Table, footnotes, endnotes