Michael S. Caudy

Examining Racial Disparities in Drug Arrests

The War on Drugs popularized a set of policies and practices that dramatically increased the number of drug arrests, particularly for low-level drug offenses. The War’s tactics have affected Americans of every race; however, minorities have been most dramatically affected. There are several explanations for the observed racial disparity in drug arrests, but relatively little research directly tests these explanations. In this study, we test three common explanations of racial disparities in drug arrest rates. We find that racial disparities in drug arrests cannot be explained by differences in drug offending, nondrug offending, or residing in the kinds of neighborhoods likely to have heavy police emphasis on drug offending. Our findings are most consistent with explanations focusing on racial bias in drug sanctions.

The Plight of Providing Appropriate Substance Abuse Treatment Services to Offenders: Modeling the Gaps in Service Delivery

Abstract Using data from the National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices (NCJTP) Survey, estimates of offenders participating in drug treatment services were generated. Existing drug treatment programs have a capacity to serve around 10% of offenders. The majority of available services are alcohol and drug education and group counseling, which are suited for people with low-threshold substance use disorders. Yet a third of the offenders are reported to have a severe disorder (dependency) requiring more intensive structured services. Offenders in prison and jail are more likely to have access to treatment services compared to offenders in the community. Regardless of the correctional setting, only a small portion of the offender population receives the appropriate level of treatment. The current delivery system is inadequate to reduce the risk of recidivism. Using the risk, need, and responsivity framework to address the adequacy of dealing with drug-involved offenders, the current service delivery does not embrace this model. An effective correctional system should not only expand treatment capacity but also provide appropriate services given the needs of offenders. The composition of the current system demands attention to providing more intensive services to effectively use resources and to focus on risk reduction strategies.

Justice Reinvestment in the United States: An Empirical Assessment of the Potential Impact of Increased Correctional Programming on Recidivism

Abstract Recent efforts in justice reinvestment in the United States have echoed the importance of using evidence-based practices. Legislative initiatives support the expansion of these practices and related programming to a broader array of correctional populations and settings. But the efforts to date are likely to have limited success altering the outcomes from the use of incarceration unless more attention is paid to the principles of effective interventions and access to efficacious treatment services. The most comprehensive survey of services, conducted in 2005–2006, found that less than 10% of offenders can participate in treatment services on a given day. Two simulation models are reported in this paper that demonstrate different impacts from increasing the number and type of programs offered within correctional and community correctional settings: expanding access and participation rates in programs can yield reductions in recidivism, adding treatment matching will accelerate the recidivism reduction, and by offering risk-need-responsivity (RNR) programming the reincarceration rate can be reduced by 3–6%. This paper offers four measures that can be used to gauge performance of systems undergoing justice reinvestment initiatives. Expanding correctional programming is an important, if not essential, component of undoing the impact of mass incarceration policies.

Co‐Occurring Disorders in Treatment‐Based Courts: Results of a National Survey

Drug courts and mental health courts have expanded rapidly in the past several decades to provide more efficient coordination of treatment and supervision of offenders with behavioral health problems. A significant number of offenders in these court-based programs have co-occurring mental and substance use disorders, which predict early termination, relapse, rearrest, and other negative outcomes. A web-based national survey examined programmatic adaptations for co-occurring disorders (CODs) among 54 drug courts, mental health courts, and freestanding COD dockets. COD dockets were smaller and of longer duration, and provided more intensive services than programs situated in drug courts or in mental health courts. However, more similarities than differences were noted across the different types of court-based program. Key adaptations for CODs included extended program duration, highly intensive and integrated treatment, smaller, less formal, and more frequent hearings, and use of specialized supervision teams and dually credentialed staff.

Short-term trajectories of substance use in a sample of drug-involved probationers☆

The current study estimates trajectories of illegal substance use in a sample of 251 drug-involved probationers to identify risk profiles that predict group membership and explores the impact of treatment participation across these trajectories. Trajectory analyses reveal five patterns of drug use during probation supervision. Age and the use of hard drugs are identified as the strongest predictors of involvement in illicit drug use while on probation. The effect of participation in substance use treatment varies across treatment settings and trajectory groups. Prior research has tended to treat drug abusers as a homogeneous population, but the current study findings suggest considerable heterogeneity amongst drug users involved in the criminal justice system. Identifying trajectories of drug use during supervision can help identify individuals who may be more likely to persist in drug use, can inform practice by identifying individuals in need of more intensive treatment services, and can assist in developing new drug treatment strategies.

Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR): Leading Towards Another Generation of the Model

The risk-need-responsivity (RNR) framework has great utility to the field of corrections and public policy about how best to punish and treat those involved in the justice system. The basic premise is that the decision should be grounded in responsivity—the response that will generate the most desired positive outcomes, particularly if one is interested in reducing recidivism. We have explored the RNR framework and have presented an updated RNR framework with empirically and clinically based principles. In this final chapter, we highlight six key conclusions: (1) there is an expansive body of literature supporting an RNR framework of treatment and program delivery; (2) offender risk and need assessment instruments can, with some adjustments, be used to identify primary offender risks and needs; (3) a significant treatment gap in services currently exists to address offender’s primary needs, and this gap contributes to the current high rates of negative outcomes; (4) meta-analyses of correctional treatment programs can be used to identify programs that result in significant reductions in recidivism; (5) simulation models that test RNR implementation scenarios on a large scale illustrate substantial reductions in recidivism; and (6) RNR programming can be integrated into a system of treatment delivery designed for particular jurisdictions. Future research is needed in the area of substance use disorders, measurement of criminogenic needs, identifying dosage levels, testing treatment matching strategies, and understanding how offender-level demographics should be integrated into the RNR model. Together, these will advance the next generation on the RNR framework.

Reducing Recidivism Through Correctional Programming: Using Meta-Analysis to Inform the RNR Simulation Tool

A reoccurring debate in the evidence-based corrections literature concerns how much impact adherence to evidence-based practices can have on the desired outcome: reduced recidivism. Translating knowledge is perhaps the most pressing challenge currently facing the evidence-based corrections movement. Using population impact measures, this chapter examines the potential impact of scaling up the use of effective correctional interventions. The chapter begins with a review of existing meta-analyses examining the effectiveness of correctional interventions and includes a discussion of how meta-analytic findings have been used to inform a simulation model that estimates the impact of adherence to the principles of effective intervention on recidivism. Study findings suggest that scaling up can have a large systematic impact on aggregate recidivism rates; recidivism can be reduced by 20 % by adhering to the principles of effective intervention and increasing the proportion of offenders in appropriate treatment. Number needed to treat (NNT) analyses suggest that treating eight offenders with rehabilitative interventions will prevent one future recidivism event; this is a marked improvement over the NNT of criminal sanctioning programs where punishing 33 offenders prevents one recidivism event. When correctional interventions adhere to the principles of effective intervention and match treatments to offender risk and need profiles, the recidivism reduction potential is increased to 40 % and the NNT to prevent one recidivism event is four. The implications of these findings for improving recidivism outcomes at a system level and the potential public health impacts of scaling up the use of effective interventions are discussed.

The Empirical Basis for the RNR Model with an Updated RNR Conceptual Framework

The risk-need-responsivity framework is based on a review of the empirical literature on offender factors that affect recidivism. The emphasis is on responsivity or the alignment of the risk and need profile with programs that are suitable to reduce recidivism. The empirical basis for the three-part framework is reviewed in this chapter with attention to integrating intervention science into a definition of responsivity. A review of the research literature since the original design of RNR (in the late 1980s) reveals that not all of the eight static and dynamic (criminogenic needs) risk components have a direct relationship with recidivism and that there are clinically relevant factors that need to be included when considering the effectiveness of an intervention, program, service, or control strategy. This chapter provides a different “sorting” of the risk and need factors besides the inclusion of gender and developmental (age) factors and clinically relevant factors (i.e., mental health status and substance abuse) that affect recidivism. The purpose is to lay the foundation for further chapters that describe the parameter and inputs into the RNR simulation model. This chapter illustrates the robustness of the original conceptual framework while demonstrating the elasticity to reframe the model based on new and emerging literature on factors that affect recidivism. Focusing attention on recidivism, and recent efforts to identify programmatic factors for different risk-need profiles, provides an opportunity to further refine the RNR model to be compatible with current research.

Case Studies From Three States: Breaking Down Silos Between Health Care And Criminal Justice

The jail-involved population-people with a history of arrest in the previous year-has high rates of illness, which leads to high costs for society. A significant percentage of jail-involved people are estimated to become newly eligible for coverage through the Affordable Care Acts expansion of Medicaid, including coverage of substance abuse treatment and mental health care. In this article we explore the need to break down the current policy silos between health care and criminal justice, to benefit both sectors and reduce unnecessary costs resulting from lack of coordination. To draw attention to the hidden costs of the current system, we review three case studies, from Washington State, Los Angeles County in California, and New York City. Each case study addresses different aspects of care needed by or provided to the jail-involved population, including mental health and substance abuse, emergency care, and coordination of care transitions. Ultimately, bending the cost curve for health care and criminal justice will require greater integration of the two systems.

The Psychometric Properties of the Simple Screening Instrument for Substance Abuse

The Simple Screening Instrument for Substance Abuse (SSI-SA) is gaining widespread use as a self-report measure of substance abuse; yet, little information exists regarding the instrument’s psychometric properties. This study examined the SSI’s psychometric properties within a population of 6,664 adult Medicaid enrollees in Florida, who responded to a survey conducted as part of a statewide evaluation of Medicaid services. The SSI-SA had excellent internal consistency (.85). Evidence of the SSI’s validity was strong; SSI-SA scores distinguished among individuals with and without substance abuse needs and were significantly correlated with a measure of functioning in daily living. Using the recommended SSI-SA cutoff score of 4 or higher to indicate the presence of a substance abuse problem, the SSI-SA had respectable sensitivity (.82) and specificity (.90).