Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Screening and Assessment: An Evidence-Based Process for the Management and Care of Adult Drug-Involved Offenders

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Evidence-Based Substance Abuse Treatment in Criminal Justice Settings

Part of the book series: Issues in Children's and Families' Lives ((IICL,volume 11))

Abstract

Valid and reliable assessment of risk and needs is a cornerstone of evidence-based practices with offenders who use and abuse drugs. They provide the needed clinical information upon which the case planning and services referral and delivery processes observed in criminal justice settings are based. However, recent surveys of nationally representative samples shows critical gaps remain, with many criminal justice programs either forgoing assessment of risks and needs or using instruments that have not be externally validated. To encourage more widespread use of risk and substance abuse instruments that have been shown to be reliable and valid, the current chapter reviews a number instruments within the context of the Risk-Need-Responsivity (R-N-R) model for assessment and services planning. Descriptions of these instruments as well as their reliability and validity when used with offender samples are presented. Discussion focuses on the need to adhere to evidence-based practices and processes when assessing and managing offenders with drug abuse problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alterman, A. I., Bovasso, G. B., Cacciola, J. S., & McDermott, P. A. (1994). A comparison of the predictive validity of four sets of baseline ASI summary indices. Psychology of Addictive Behavior, 15, 159–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alterman, A. I., Mulvaney, F. D., Cacciola, J. S., Cnaan, A., McDermott, P. A., & Brown, L. S. (2001). The validity of the interviewer severity ratings in groups of ASI interviewers with varying training. Addiction, 96, 1297–1305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4Th Ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The LSI-R: The level of service inventory-revised. Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Newark, NJ: Lexis Nexis/Matthew Bender.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. J. (2004). The level of service/Case management inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. J. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Dowden, C. (2007). The risk-need-responsivity model of assessment and human service in prevention and corrections: Crime-prevention jurisprudence. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49(4), 439–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Kiessling, J. J., Mickus, S., & Robinson, D. (1986). The construct validity of interview based risk assessment in corrections. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18, 460–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, C. (2009). A question of evidence: A critique of risk assessment models used in the justice system. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, C., Heinz, R., & Bemus, B. (1979). The Wisconsin case classification/staff deployment project. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Division of Corrections.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, C., Heinz, R., & Bemus, B. (1981). The Wisconsin case classification staff deployment project: Two year follow-up report. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Division of Corrections.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belenko, S. (2006). Assessing released inmates for substance-abuse related service needs. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 94–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J. (2002). Offender risk assessment: Guidelines for selection and use. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 355–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J., & Andrews, D. A. (2007). Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation. Ottawa, ON: Public Safety Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1987). The diversion of incarcerated offenders to correctional halfway houses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24, 302–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1990). Classification to correctional halfway houses: A quasi-experimental evaluation. Criminology, 28, 497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, T., Dieterich, W., & Ehret, B. (2009). Evaluating the predictive validity of the COMPAS risk and needs assessment system. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome, K. M., Flynn, P. M., Knight, D. K., & Simpson, D. D. (2007). Program structure, staff perceptions, and client engagement in treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 33, 149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome, K. M., Knight, D. K., Knight, K., Hiller, M. L., & Simpson, D. D. (1997). Peer, family, and motivational influences on drug treatment process and recidivism for probationers. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53, 387–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clawson, E., Bogue, B., & Joplin, L. (2005). Implementing evidence-based practices in corrections. Washington, DC: National Institute on Corrections.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T. R., & Gallagher, K. W. (1983). Screening devices in probation and parole: Management problems. Evaluation Review, 7, 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, G., Ilacqua, G., Nutbrown, V., Giulekas, D., & Cudjoe, F. (1996). Predictive validity of the LSI for incarcerated female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 427–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Leon, G. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model & method. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (2000). Effective correctional treatment and violent re-offending: A meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 42, 449–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (2004). The importance of staff practices in delivering effective correctional treatment: A meta-analysis of core correctional practices. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 203–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, A., Sacks, S., Melnick, G., Cleland, C. M., Pearson, F. S., & Coen, C. (2008). Performance of the CJDATS Co-Occurring Disorders Screening Instruments (CODSIs) among minority offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 351–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, M., Bryl, J., & Fabelo, T. (2009). Validation of the Wisconsin department of corrections risk assessment instrument. New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farabee, D., Knight, K., Garner, B. R., & Calhoun, S. (2007). The inmate prerelease assessment for reentry planning. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1188–1197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fass, T. L., Heilbrun, K., DeMatteo, D., & Fretz, R. (2008). The LSI-R and the COMPAS: Validation data on two risk-needs tools. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 1095–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldstein, S. W., & Miller, W. R. (2007). Does subtle screening for substance abuse work? A review of the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI). Addiction, 102, 41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, B. W. (2003). The national criminal justice drug abuse treatment studies (CJ-DATS). Offender Substance Abuse Report, 3, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, B. R., Knight, K., Flynn, P. M., Morey, J. T., & Simpson, D. D. (2007). Measuring offender attributes and engagement in treatment using the client evaluation of self and treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1113–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2002). Is the PCL-R really the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk? A lesson in knowledge cumulation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 397–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove, W. M., & Meehl, P. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 2, 293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanlon, T. E., O’Grady, K. E., & Bateman, R. W. (2000). Using the Addiction Severity Index to predict treatment outcome among substance abusing parolees. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 31, 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., Leukefeld, C., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Motivation as a predictor of treatment engagement in mandated residential substance abuse treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 56–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., Rao, S. R., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Assessing and evaluating mandated correctional substance abuse treatment. In C. G. Leukefeld, F. Tims, & D. Farabee (Eds.), Treatment of drug offenders: Policies and issues (pp. 41–56). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., Saum, C. A., & Simpson, D. D. (2006). Social functioning, treatment dropout, and recidivism of probationers mandated to a modified therapeutic community. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 738–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, M. L., & Narevic, E. (2005). Evaluating brief substance abuse screening instruments for drug-involved offenders. Offender Substance Abuse Report, 5(3), 35–37, 48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, P. B. (1983). Screening for risk: A revised salient factor score. Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 539–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, D. J., Travis, L. F., & Latessa, E. J. (2001). Case classification in community corrections: A national survey of the state of the art. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joe, G. W., Broome, K. M., Rowan-Szal, G. A., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Measuring patient attributes and engagement in treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 183–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, C. E., & Welsh, W. N. (2008). The predictive validity of the level of service inventory-revised for drug-involved offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 819–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K., Garner, B., Simpson, D. D., Morey, J. T., & Flynn, P. M. (2006). An assessment of criminal thinking. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 159–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., & Hiller, M. L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. Prison Journal, 79(3), 337–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., & Hiller, M. L. (2002). Screening and referral for substance-abuse treatment in the criminal justice system. In C. G. Leukefeld, F. Tims, & D. Farabee (Eds.), Treatment of drug offenders: Policies and issues (pp. 259–272, 373–376). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K., Simpson, D. D., & Morey, J. T. (2002). TCU-NIC cooperative agreement: Final report. Fort Worth, TX: Texas Christian University, Institute of Behavioral Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kressel, D., De Leon, G., Palij, M., & Rubin, G. (2000). Measuring client clinical progress in therapeutic community treatment: The therapeutic community client assessment inventory, client assessment summary, and staff assessment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 19, 267–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. (1998). The importance of evaluating correctional programs: Assessing outcome and quality. Corrections Management Quarterly, 2, 22–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latessa, E. J., & Lowenkamp, C. (2006). What works in reducing recidivism? University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 3, 521–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonhard, C., Mulvey, K., Gastfriend, D. R., & Shwartz, M. (2000). The Addiction Severity Index: A field study of internal consistency and reliability. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 18, 129–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenkamp, C., Hodsinger, S., & Latessa, E. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of child abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 543–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenkamp, C. T., & Latessa, E. J. (2002). Evaluation of Ohio’s community based correctional facilities and halfway house programs. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 575–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loza, W., & Simourd, D. J. (1994). Psychometric evaluation of the Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI) among male Canadian federal offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21, 468–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäkelä, K. (2004). Studies of the reliability and validity of the Addiction Severity Index. Addiction, 99, 398–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe, D. B. (2003, August). Integrating substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision. Science and practice perspectives. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLellan, A. T., Kushner, H., Metzger, D., Peters, R., Smith, I., Grissom, G., et al. (1992). The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 9, 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLellan, A. T., Luborsky, L., Cacciola, J., & Griffith, J. E. (1985). New data from the Addiction Severity Index: Reliability and validity in three centers. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 173, 412–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLellan, A. T., Luborsky, L., Woody, G. E., & O’Brien, C. P. (1980). An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patient, the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 168, 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. S., Woodson, J., Howell, R. T., & Shields, A. L. (2009). Assessing the reliability of scores produced by the substance abuse subtle screening inventory. Substance Use and Misuse, 44, 1090–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, F. G. (1985). The substance abuse subtle screening inventory manual. Bloomington, IN: Glenn A. Miller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, F. G., & Lazowski, L. E. (1999). The adult SASSI-3 manual. Springville, IN: SASSI Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2006). Principles of drug abuse treatment for criminal justice populations. Rockville, MD: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogloff, J. R. P., & Davis, M. R. (2004). Advances in offender assessment and rehabilitation: Contributions of the risk-needs-responsivity approach. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 10, 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. H., Bartoi, M. G., & Sherman, P. B. (2008). Screening and assessment of co-occurring disorders in the justice system. Delmar, NY: The National GAINS Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. H., Greenbaum, P. E., & Edens, J. F. (1998). Prevalence of DSM-IV substance abuse and dependence disorders among prison inmates. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 24, 573–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. H., Greenbaum, P. E., Steinberg, M. L., Carter, C. R., Ortiz, M. M., Fry, B., et al. (2000). Effectiveness of screening instruments in detecting substance abuse disorders among prisoners. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 18, 349–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. H., & Wexler, H. K. (Eds.). (2005). Substance abuse treatment for adults in the criminal justice system. Treatment improvement protocol (TIP) series 44. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rikoon, S. H., Cacciola, J. S., Carise, D., Alterman, A., & McLellan, A. T. (2006). Predicting DSM-IV dependence diagnoses with the Addiction Severity Index composite scores. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 31, 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, E. A., Contois, M. W., Willis, J. C., Worthington, M. R., & Knight, K. (2007). Assessing offender needs and performance for planning and monitoring criminal justice drug treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1179–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, J. Y., McKendrick, K., & Kressel, D. (2007). Measuring offender progress in treatment using the Client Assessment Inventory. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1131–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, S., Melnick, G., Coen, C., Banks, S., Friedmann, P. D., Grella, C., et al. (2007a). CJDATS Co-occurring disorders screening instrument for mental disorders (CODSI-MD): A pilot study. The Prison Journal, 87, 86–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, S., Melnick, G., Coen, C., Banks, S., Friedmann, P. D., Grella, C., et al. (2007b). CJDATS Co-occurring disorders screening instrument for mental disorders: A validation study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1198–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltstone, R., Halliwell, S., & Hayslip, M. A. (1994). A multivariate evaluation of the Michigan Alcohol Screening Test and the Drug Abuse Screening Test in a female offender population. Addictive Behaviors, 19, 455–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saum, C. A., O’Connell, D. J., Martin, S. S., Hiller, M. L., Bacon, G. A., & Simpson, D. D. (2007). Tempest in a TC: Changing treatment providers for in-prison therapeutic communities. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 1168–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selzer, M. L. (1971). The Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test: The quest for a new diagnostic instrument. American Journal of Psychiatry, 127, 1653–1658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selzer, M. L., Vinokur, A., & van Rooijen, L. (1975). A self-administered Short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (SMAST). Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 36, 117–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, A. L., Howell, R. T., Potter, J. S., & Weiss, R. D. (2007). The Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test and its shortened form: A meta-analytic inquiry into score reliability. Substance Use and Misuse, 42, 1783–1800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields, I. W., & Simourd, D. J. (1991). Predicting predatory behavior in a population of young offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 180–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simourd, D. (2004). Use of dynamic risk/need assessment instruments among long-term incarcerated offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 306–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simourd, D. (2006, May). Validation of risk/needs assessments in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Interim report. Collingswood, NJ: Volunteers of America-Delaware Valley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simourd, D. J., & Malcolm, P. B. (1998). Reliability and validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised among federally incarcerated offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, D. D., & Joe, G. W. (1993). Motivation as a predictor of early dropout from drug abuse treatment. Psychotherapy, 30, 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, D. D., Joe, G. W., & Broome, K. M. (2002). A national 5-year follow-up of treatment outcomes for cocaine dependence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 538–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, D. D., Joe, G. W., Rowan-Szal, G. A., & Greener, J. M. (1995). Client engagement and change during substance abuse treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 7, 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, D. D., & Knight, K. (2007). Offender needs and functioning assessments from a national cooperative research program. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1105–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, H. A. (1982). The Drug Abuse Screening Test. Addictive Behaviors, 7, 363–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staton-Tindall, M., Garner, B. R., Morey, J. T., Leukefeld, C., Krietemeyer, J., Saum, C. A., et al. (2007). Gender differences in treatment engagement among a sample of incarcerated substance abusers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1143–1156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storgaard, H., Nielsen, S. D., & Gluud, C. (1994). The validity of the Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (MAST). Alcohol and Alcoholism, 29, 493–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swartz, J. A. (1998). Adapting and using the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory-3 with criminal justice offenders: Preliminary results. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 344–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., Cropsey, K. L., Young, D. W., & Wexler, H. (2007). Screening, assessment, and referral practices in adult correctional settings: A national perspective. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1216–1234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., & Marlowe, D. B. (2006). Risk, needs, responsivity: In action or inaction? Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 3–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., Perdoni, M., Young, D., Belenko, S., & Hiller, M. (in press). Twenty years of drug treatment courts: The current state of drug courts. In D. K. Shaffer (Ed.). Drug Courts and the Criminal Justice System. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., Thanner, M., & Weisburd, D. (2006). Risk, need, and responsivity (RNR): It all depends. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 28–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F., Young, D., & Byrne, J. (2004). Transforming offender reentry into public safety: Lessons from OJP’s Reentry Partnership Initiative. Justice Policy and Research, 5, 101–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., Young, D., Wiersema, B., Rhodes, A., & Mitchell, S. (2007). The National criminal justice treatment practices survey: Methods and procedures. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32, 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teitelbaum, L., & Mullen, B. (2000). The validity of MAST in psychiatric settings: A Meta-analytic integration. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 61, 254–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanner, M., & Taxman, F. S. (2003). Responsivity: The value of providing intensive services to high-risk offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 24, 137–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, G. D. (1995). The psychological inventory of criminal thinking styles: Part I. Reliability and preliminary validity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 22, 307–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, W. N. (2006). Evaluation of drug treatment programs at the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at Chester: A partnership between the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Gaudenzia Inc., and Temple University. (Final Report to the National Institute of Justice 2002-RT-BX-1002). Retrieved October 9, 2009, from the PADOC Web site http://www.cor.state.pa.us/stats/lib/stats/ChesterReporttoNIJ-Final-November2006.pdf

  • Welsh, W. N., & McGrain, P. N. (2008). Predictors of therapeutic engagement in prison-based drug treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96, 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yudko, E., Lozhkina, O., & Fouts, A. (2007). A comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the Drug Abuse Screening Test. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32, 189–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA

    Matthew L. Hiller, Steven Belenko & Wayne N. Welsh

  2. Justice Center for Research, College of the Liberal Arts and University Outreach, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    Gary Zajac

  3. Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute (FMHI), University of South Florida (USF), Tampa, FL, 33612, USA

    Roger H. Peters

Authors
  1. Matthew L. Hiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven Belenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wayne N. Welsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gary Zajac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Roger H. Peters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew L. Hiller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Behavioral Science, Center on Drug & Alcohol Research, University of Kentucky, 111 College of Medicine Office Bldg., Lexington, 40506, Kentucky, USA

    Carl Leukefeld

  2. Child and Family Agency of Southeastern, Hempstead Street 255, New London, 06320, Connecticut, USA

    Thomas P. Gullotta

  3. Eliots Oak Rd. 5262, Columbia, 21044, Maryland, USA

    John Gregrich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hiller, M.L., Belenko, S., Welsh, W.N., Zajac, G., Peters, R.H. (2011). Screening and Assessment: An Evidence-Based Process for the Management and Care of Adult Drug-Involved Offenders. In: Leukefeld, C., Gullotta, T., Gregrich, J. (eds) Handbook of Evidence-Based Substance Abuse Treatment in Criminal Justice Settings. Issues in Children's and Families' Lives, vol 11. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9470-7_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation