UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:___________________ I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: in: It is entitled: This work and its defense approved by: Chair: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ A COMMUNITY OF PEERS – PROMOTING BEHAVIOR CHANGE: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY FOR JUVENILE MALE OFFENDERS IN REDUCING RECIDIVISM A Dissertation Submitted to the: Division of Research and Advance Studies Of the University of Cincinnati In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctorate of Philosophy (Ph.D.) In the Division of Criminal Justice Of the College of Education April 2004 by Jennifer A. Pealer, M.A. B.A., East Tennessee State University, 1997 M.A., East Tennessee State University, 1999 Dissertation Committee: Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D. (Chair) Francis T. Cullen, Ph.D. John Paul Wright, Ph.D. Melissa M. Moon, Ph.D. A COMMUNITY OF PEERS – PROMOTING BEHAVIOR CHANGE: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY FOR JUVENILE MALE OFFENDERS IN REDUCING RECIDIVISM One avenue that has received considerable attention for the substance abusing adult population is a therapeutic community; however, research examining the effectiveness of this popular treatment modality for juveniles is scarce. While some studies have found a reduction in criminal behavior and substance abuse, others have found null results concerning the effectiveness of therapeutic communities. Furthermore, the literature on therapeutic communities has been criticized on the following points: 1) studies fail to incorporate multiple outcome criteria to measure program success; 2) follow-up time frames have been inadequate; 3) comparison groups often fail to account for important differences between groups that are likely to impact program outcome; and 4) insufficient attention that is given to the measure of program quality. Moreover, research on the effectiveness of therapeutic communities for juvenile offenders is limited. Accordingly, this research attempts to overcome the common shortcomings by: 1) including multiple outcome criterion; 2) following the juveniles for a period up to 3 years after program completion; 3) using a comparison group drawn from a sample of youth that did not receive treatment but who are matched on risk and needs; and 4) using a standardized instrument to measure program quality.1 The current study used a quasi-experimental design to estimate the impact of the juvenile therapeutic community on recidivism (e.g., return to incarceration; both juvenile and adult). The treatment group was a sample of 447 male youth who were sentenced to a 1 This dissertation is an expansion of the work of Pealer, Latessa, and Winesburg (2002a), which examined a therapeutic community for juveniles. Specifically, this dissertation will follow the juveniles for a period of three years whereas the previous study only followed the juveniles for a period of 18 months. ii residential treatment facility that operated as a therapeutic community from January 2000 to August 2001. The comparison group was derived from a sample of adjudicated youth who were released from the Department of Youth Services in 1999. The comparison group was matched based on risk and need levels (e.g., Youthful Level of Service/Case Management Inventory). Due to the fact that there were different times to failure, a Cox regression model was computed to determine if participation in a therapeutic community significantly reduced the probability of a new incarceration. Results indicated that while the treatment group was less likely to be incarcerated during this time period, the difference between the groups was nonsignificant. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There have been many people who have assisted me throughout my educational career. I first need to thank my committee. Dr. Edward Latessa, you have given me many opportunities to see different institutions, programs, and even the countryside. I have learned much working with you throughout the years. Your guidance has helped to make the me person I am today. I look forward to many years of collaboration. Dr. Francis Cullen, you really do practice what you preach. You have given me much social support throughout my years at UC. You were always willing to give advice and counsel me as to my best options. You are a true role model and I appreciate all you have done for me. Dr. John Wright, again, you amaze me with your knowledge of the field and your ability to convey the knowledge in a way that anyone can understand. Thank you for always taking the time to answer any question. Dr. Melissa Moon, what can I say? You were the mechanism that started this whole thing – my mentor at ETSU. If it were not for your foresight I would never have dreamed of getting this degree. You saw something that I did not. I really appreciate you urging me to go for it and helping me along the way. You are a great friend. I also need to thank individuals at the Department of Youth Services. Candy Peters and Andy Popel were instrumental in obtaining some initial data for the project. Also, Bruce Sowards contributed greatly by obtaining the latest outcome data on his own time. I really appreciate your contribution to this project. Special thanks and acknowledgements go to case managers at Mohican Youth Center, and to Jeanette Britton for coordinating the data collection process, and to Elaine Surber for her leadership and ongoing support throughout this project. I also need to thank John Schwartz, Chris Lowenkamp, Shelley Johnson-Listwan, and Debi Shaffer. John, you helped me navigate the red tape at UC and showed me how to get things done. I appreciate you being so helpful. The Center could not operate without you. Chris, you were always willing to answer any questions from a stat problem to raising kids. Thanks for the advice. Shelley, you helped to show me the ropes for working with Dr. Latessa. Debi, my travel buddy. We have had some really good times traveling all of Ohio, Indiana, Oklahoma, and other parts of the country. I will miss playing “good cop/bad cop” with you. We made an unlikely pair – you from Michigan and me from Tennessee – but man did we have fun. A truly special thanks for one of my closest friends – Kristie Blevins. We started UC together, took proficiencies together, took comps together (well most of them), defended on the same day, and will graduate together. Having someone from East Tennessee here in Cincinnati made the North more tolerable. You have helped me tremendously. Many of the stories I tell my children about UC will begin with: “onetime Kristie and I …..” iv Last but certainly not least, I need to thank my family for their love and support. My dad and mom, Jerry L. and Ruth Ann Sartain, you instilled the value of education from the start. I just took the concept to the extreme. Thanks for giving me financial support and emotional support. I knew I could not fail because I did not want dad coming up here. My brother, Jerry, we were always in competition to out do the other. Even though you are an architect I still have more degrees – so I win. My husband, Jamie, I could not have done this without you. Five years ago you just picked up your life and moved away from family and friends just so I could go to school. I appreciate the faith you have in me. You were always willing to provide encouragement and advice when I needed it. Thanks for being there. Finally, thanks go to my new son, Jake, for sleeping so much in the beginning so Mommy could finish writing her dissertation. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Statement of the Problem 1 Prevalence of Substance Abuse Among Juvenile 1 Offenders Development of Residential Substance Abuse Treatment 3 Criticisms of Drug Treatment Programs 4 Overcoming the Criticisms 6 Research Questions 8 Summary 8 Chapter 2: Literature Review 11 Introduction 11 The Mission of the Juvenile Justice System 11 The Development of the Juvenile Justice System 12 Criticisms of the Juvenile Justice System 14 Attacking Rehabilitation and the Juvenile Justice System 15 Social Context, Rehabilitation, and Treating Juvenile Offenders 15 Liberal Ideology 15 Conservative Ideology 18 Juvenile Justice: From Treatment to Punishment 20 Public Support for Juvenile Treatment 21 Support for General Rehabilitation 22 Support for Juvenile Rehabilitation 24 Therapeutic Communities as a Treatment Modality for Offenders 26 History of Therapeutic Communities 27 Developments in the United Kingdom 27 Development in the United States 29 Characteristics of Therapeutic Communities 32 View of Substance Abuse and the Individual 32 Treatment Modality of the Therapeutic Community 32 Structure of the Therapeutic Community 33 The Use of Work in the Therapeutic Community 35 The Use of Behavioral Reinforcements in the Therapeutic Community 38 The Types of Meetings and Groups in a Therapeutic Community 40 Therapeutic Communities and the Principles of Effective Interventions 42 Intensive and Behavioral Services 43 Targeting Criminogenic Needs of High-Risk Offenders 45 Reinforcement of Contingencies 47 Staff Characteristics 48 Relapse Prevention Strategies 48 Effectiveness of Therapeutic Communities 49 Reducing Recidivism 50 Treatment Versus Non-Treatment 50 Follow-Up Time Period 59 Completers Versus Non-Completers 60 vi Transitional Therapeutic Communities 61 Meta-Analysis and Reviews of the Literature 62 Predictors