Profile Updated:
Summary: This is a post-custody, community-based intervention to reduce the rates of recidivism for individuals with co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders. The program is rated Effective for reducing the number of days in a psychiatric hospital, and Ineffective for reducing the number of reconvictions, felony reconvictions, arrests, and time to rearrest. (Review the full program description).
| Title | Rating | Details | Outcome Category | Study(ies) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rearrests | There was no statistically significant difference on the total number of rearrests during the first 20 months after the initial release from jail between individuals in the treatment group and individuals in the control group. |
Crime and Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism; Arrest/rearrest | Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425. See evaluation methods. |
|
| Reconvictions | Overall, there were no statistically significant differences on the rate of reconvictions between individuals in the treatment group and individuals in the control group based on multiple measures from the study. |
Crime and Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism; Conviction/reconviction | Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425. See evaluation methods. |
|
| Felony reconvictions | There was no statistically significant difference on the number of felony reconvictions between individuals in the treatment group and individuals in the control group. |
Crime and Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism; Felonies | Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425. See evaluation methods. |
|
| Time to re-arrest | There was no statistically significant difference on the time from initial release from jail until first re-arrest between individuals in the treatment group and individuals in the control group. |
Crime and Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism; Time to failure/risk of failure | Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425. See evaluation methods. |
|
| Days in a psychiatric hospital | Individuals in the treatment group had fewer days in a psychiatric hospital compared with individuals in the control group. This difference was statistically significant. |
Justice Systems or Processes; Use of services or referrals by target population | Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425. See evaluation methods. |
Program Goals/Target Population
The Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program in Alameda County (California) was a post-custody, community-based intervention for individuals with co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders. The goal of the program was to reduce participants’ recidivism and jail days following release from jail.
The program targeted individuals with both serious mental illness and substance use disorders who had at least two jail stays in the two years prior to the index admission, or who had spent at least 90 days in jail within the past two years.
Program Components
The Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program offered participants stage-wise interventions, meaning that the program progressed consistently with the participant’s readiness to change. Unlimited access to supportive services was provided for up to two and a half years. These services included outreach, motivational intervention, substance-use counseling, dual-disorders group treatment, family education on dual disorders, self-help groups, pharmacological treatment, health interventions, and secondary interventions for those who did not respond to treatment.
Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program participants also had access to the usual pre- and post-release services. Pre-release services included intensive assessment, medications, discharge planning, individual counseling, and crisis intervention. Post-release services consisted of case-management referral, medication services, grant-funded case management, and housing assistance for up to 60 days.
Study Title: Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists With Co-occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders (which is associated with outcomes Rearrests, Reconvictions, Felony reconvictions , Time to re-arrest, and Days in a psychiatric hospital)
Research Design/Sample
Chandler and Spicer (2006) conducted a randomized controlled trial in Alameda County, California, to assess the effects of the Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program on participants’ rearrest, reconviction, and days in a psychiatric hospital.
Participants were eligible if they had both a current serious mental illness and a current substance use disorder; were not sentenced to prison and were not on parole; were not a resident of another county; were not currently enrolled in another Alameda County treatment program; had a Global Assessment of Functioning score of 50 or less; were fluent in English or Spanish; and had at least two jail episodes in the two years prior to the index admission (or had spent at least 90 days in jail in the prior two years). Potentially eligible individuals were interviewed and randomly assigned by research staff resulting in 79 participants in the control group and 103 in the treatment group. Both groups received in-custody services. The treatment group received the Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program as described in the Program Description, while the control group received treatment-as-usual post-custody, which included referral to a county-operated service team for case management and medications. Control group members also had access to 60 days of case management and housing assistance.
There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment group’s characteristics and those of the control group at baseline. Over half of the Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program group (51.5 percent) was between 36 and 50 years old. Male participants made up 71.8 percent of treatment group participants. The treatment group was 66 percent Black, 23.3 percent white, 7.8 percent Latino, and 2.9 percent another race/ethnicity. The most frequently reported primary diagnosis of the Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program group participants was major depressive disorder (28.2 percent), followed by schizophrenia (25.2 percent) and psychotic disorder (23.3 percent). A little over 60 percent of the control group was between 36 and 50 years old, and the majority were male (71.8 percent). The control group was 67.1 percent Black, 19.0 percent white, 10.1 percent Latino, and 3.8 percent another race/ethnicity. The most frequently reported primary diagnosis of control group members was psychotic disorder (34.2 percent), followed by major depressive disorder (22.8 percent) and schizophrenia (17.7 percent).
Data Collection/Outcome Measures
The outcomes included the number of rearrests and time to rearrest, total reconvictions (which included the number of reconvictions and the percent who were reconvicted), felony reconvictions, and days spent in psychiatric hospital. Arrests and convictions data were obtained from the Alameda County Information Services Department. Arrests included only “original” arrests and not subsequent arrests related to the original, which was primarily due to failure to appear in court. Information on acute hospitalization days was provided by Alameda County Behavioral Health Care Services.
Statistical Analysis
Binomial and logistical regression models were used to examine the effect of participation in the Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment program on the outcomes. No subgroup analysis was conducted.
Citation:
Chandler, Daniel Williams, and Gary Spicer. 2006. “Integrated Treatment for Jail Recidivists with Co-Occurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders.” Community Mental Health Journal 42(4):405–425.
This study is a high-quality randomized controlled trial.
The outcome "reincarceration" was considered in the scored study, but CrimeSolutions Study Reviewers determined the evidence was insufficient for a rating to be assigned.
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:
This practice involves correctional programs that focus on the transition of individuals from prison into the community. Reentry programs involve treatment or services that have been initiated while the individual is in custody and a follow-up component after the individual is released. The practice is rated Promising for reducing recidivism.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types |
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this program:
This is an enhanced day reporting center designed to reduce the risk of recidivism in people on probation with mental illnesses. It provides services such as substance abuse treatment and crisis intervention. The program is rated Promising. Treatment group individuals had a statistically significantly lower risk of conviction for any offense, compared with control group participants on standard probation. However, there was no statistically significant effect on the risk of conviction for a felo
This program was originally rated Ineffective. It has been re-reviewed based on the change in the program rating instrument. Under the new instrument, CrimeSolutions ow now rates individual program outcomes and no longer assigns an overall rating.
Rating Process
Program Status
This program is Not Active.