- Critique a colleague’s choice based upon whether the program
selected appears to meet the criteria for evidence-based programming.
- Offer an additional element of effective programming for your colleague to consider. Please reply to Sophia King as if you
are having a conversation with her. A few sentences and a question.
Here, I reviewed an effective evidence based offender treatment or
reentry program in Washington State. The program incorporates
individualized treatment of the offender (criminogenic needs), provide
education, job training that will allow the offender to have marketable
skills upon release, therapy, mental health treatment if needed,
substance abuse treatment if needed, maintain family connection,
assisting offenders in obtaining government identification (so they can
get a job), and easement back into the community with resources to
assist them such as halfway homes. One such as this is a evidence based
treatment drug program for adults in the state of Washington. This
evidence based program had definable outcomes, measurable, and defined
expectations according to practical realities. What is the outcome?
Washington State policymakers sent drug users to Drug Court. Here, the
state is using evidence based program to facilitate a different outcome
by providing treatment and help rather than punishment.
According to Aos, Miller, and Drake (2006), the program is
successful because it offers in prison “therapeutic communities” with
and without after care. This includes cognitive treatment as well as
drug treatment in prison and in the community. These inmates live
separately in their own units in order to keep it drug free. After care
only boosted to 6.9% from 5.3% (Aos, Miller, and Drake , 2006), thus
the bulk of intervention and change occurred while the offender was in
prison in the therapeutic community. Adults who receive education, GED,
or vocational education while in prison also has a positive impact on
them not going back to prison. The program also offered intensive
supervision that focused on treatment and not punishment. In my opinion
the intensive supervision is the most important. This holds the offender
accountable but at the same time allows them to receive treatment and
get better. That in conjunction with the therapy and education will
allow the offender to be and feel as a productive citizen upon release.
Many programs such as this is effective in aiding an offender in
reentry and reduces recidivism (Seiter & Kadela, 2003).
Aos, S.,Miller, M., and Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and
What Does Not. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy
(PDF) Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237270608_Evidence-Based_Adult_Corrections_Programs_What_Works_and_What_Does_Not [accessed Dec 17 2018].
Seiter, R. P., & Kadela, K. R. (2003). Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is
Promising. Crime & Delinquency, 49(3), 360 388.