The vast majority of people coming out of US prisons and jails has a history of drug use and/or abuse prior to being incarcerated, and many will use drugs when they return to the pressures and temptations of life outside the prison walls. (See Policy Statement 12, Substance Abuse Treatment, Research Highlights, for more on the substance abuse trends among people who are incarcerated.) Indeed, even those who have been treated for their addictions during incarceration are likely to relapse at some point during their recovery process in the community. Community supervision officers should be educated as to how to address the issues they will inevitably encounter with individuals who use alcohol or drugs while under supervision. Individuals with substance abuse problems need careful supervision that is geared not only towards successful termination of their probation or parole term, but also towards their long-term sobriety and effective use of community resources.

Supervision officers should seek to understand the nature of the alcohol or drug issues of individuals on their caseloads in order to most effectively address them. Simply knowing a person's drug of choice and substance abuse history can help community corrections officers to adjust the individual's supervision strategy to best promote compliance. Much of the information about a person's drug history may be covered in the pre-sentence investigation memo and/or institutional file, at least some part of which should follow the person when he or she leaves prison or jail. Additionally, the probationer or parolee should be engaged in providing input into his or her own treatment plan; not only can the supervision relationship benefit from this information, but engagement in the process can promote the probationer's or parolee's sense of responsibility for the success of the supervision and treatment at the outset. ^[1]   (See Policy Statement 20, Planning Continuity of Care, and Policy Statement 25, Development of Supervision Strategy, for additional information on engaging individuals in planning for their transition to the community.) Community corrections administrators should also ensure that officers are trained to understand the implications of the types of substance abuse disorders that are prevalent among individuals that they supervise. As with training on mental health issues, cross-training between community corrections officers and substance abuse and other service providers can be especially effective. Recognizing the usefulness of such cross-training, the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) initiated the Substance Abuse and Infectious Disease Cross-Training Initiative in 1998 (see sidebar).

Example: ACCESS Program, Division of Parole and Office of Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services (NY)

Parole officers refer parolees to ACCESS counselors in their local jurisdiction. ACCESS provides on-site, face-to-face assessments, referrals, and placements in treatment programs licensed by the Office of Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services for parolees in need of substance abuse treatment. ACCESS refers parolees to programs under contract with the New York Division of Parole, and also noncontract programs as needed.

Working with community hospitals and substance abuse providers can also help corrections officials to develop and implement a realistic and meaningful range of treatment options, from detoxification to inpatient treatment. In most cases, community-based organizations will actually provide the programming as well.

Example: Oriana House, Inc. (OH)

The Oriana House treatment program is a residential treatment center (RTC) located in Akron, Ohio. The RTC is a six-month, modified therapeutic community providing residential treatment for men, primarily between the ages of 18 and 24. Its focus is to address addiction problems through the use of cognitive behavioral interventions. The Oriana House RTC assists residents in modifying their negative, self-destructive behaviors through chemical dependency treatment, cognitive skills development, and relapse prevention. The program is primarily directed towards individuals who have not had successful outcomes at other community treatment programs or who are in need of more long term care. Placement at Oriana House must be ordered by a court or parole authority.

Cooperation between community corrections agencies and service providers will ensure that any treatment ordered is promptly delivered, so that a person who has been testing positive for drugs need not wait several weeks before beginning at least outpatient treatment. Such cooperation can also lead to greater efficiencies in both systems. For instance, if a person takes drug tests through his or her assigned probation or parole office, he or she may not need to be tested again through his or her community-based treatment program. Similarly, providers who work for community organizations might be tapped to do counseling or special groups for individuals under community supervision. Providing contracts to organizations in the communities where probationers and parolees live also builds treatment service capacity in those areas.

While it is clear that drug treatment should be mandated for individuals returning to the community who have a history of substance abuse, it is less clear how to manage that treatment, particularly with regard to likely relapses. Community corrections administrators should seek to partner with programs that focus on each individual's critical issues, rather than imposing so many restrictions that failure becomes virtually inevitable. Supervision officers should monitor and promote the drug treatment of individuals on their caseloads by using a combination of sanctions and incentives, with a particular focus on incentives. For any such system of positive and negative reinforcements to be successful, the probationer or parolee must be focused on his or her own behavior and must be provided the following: (1) clear expectations about acceptable and unacceptable behaviors; (2) clear expectations about consequences for unacceptable behaviors; (3) clear expectations about incentives for acceptable behaviors. ^[2]  

When violations occur, the consequences should be rapid, measured sanctions of increasing severity. For instance, one positive test could result in a counseling session with the supervision officer or a substance abuse professional. Further positive tests might result in increased monitoring, mandatory attendance at a 12-step recovery program (such as Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous), outpatient treatment, or inpatient treatment. Although it may seem simpler or more appropriate to punish illegal drug use with revocation and a jail sentence, such a sanction fails to address the underlying drug habit or to have a lasting impact on public safety. If a person is revoked under these circumstances, he or she is likely to be released at the end of his or her sentence with the same addiction, but no supervision. In a program that includes sanctions for certain behaviors, it is essential that staff are trained and held responsible for imposing sanctions consistently.

Supervision officers should also use incentives to shape behavior. Incentives provide a formal response to positive behavior that mirrors the sanctions applied to negative behavior. Incentives, like sanctions, should be swift, certain, and progressive as a person makes progress towards goals or other benchmarks set at the outset of treatment. ^[3]  

Contingency management is a system that uses some form of reinforcement to modify behaviors of substance abusers in a positive and supportive manner. Examples of contingency management include offering certificates of achievement for individuals who attend a certain number of treatment meetings, or reducing compulsory meetings for drug users who maintain long periods of abstinence. Token economies are another such system of positive reinforcement. In a token economy system, program participants receive some form of marker (chips, check marks, etc.) for good behaviors. After acquiring a certain number of markers, the participant may exchange the markers for something of value to him or her: a reduction in supervision; a reduced fee for drug testing; or some other privilege. In an incentive-based model, supervision offers an opportunity for the officer to motivate a probationer or parolee to address the factors that contribute to criminal or other negative behaviors. ^[4]  

Example: Allen Superior Re-Entry Court Project (IN)

Many of the individuals supervised by the Allen County Re-Entry Court were incarcerated on drug charges and are required to participate in substance abuse programming as a condition of their release. The Re-Entry Court team, which includes representatives of parole, can assign different levels of treatment programming (education, therapy, aftercare, or relapse prevention) or recommend early release from supervision depending on each individual's demonstrated commitment to recovery and degree of compliance with release conditions.

Although drug treatment has been discussed above as a mandatory condition of supervision, community supervision officers should also serve as a resource to individuals on their caseloads who voluntarily seek out drug treatment. Promoting access and adherence to treatment programs for these individuals can help them to achieve recovery and to successfully comply with all conditions of their re-entry plans. As with compliance with mandated treatment, voluntary participation in treatment should be rewarded with positive reinforcements by the supervision officer.

Example: Snohomish County Human Services, Division of Alcohol and Other Drugs (WA)

In Snohomish County, the Division of Alcohol and Other Drugs reaches out to local community corrections officers to inform them about the outpatient drug and alcohol services that the division offers. Probation or parole officers can refer their clients for outpatient assessment and treatment at ten different treatment locations. Where necessary, the division can also refer probationers or parolees to inpatient treatment.