- 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). Reference 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