Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundThis paper describes the means by which a United States National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded cooperative, Juvenile Justice-Translational Research on Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System (JJ-TRIALS), utilized an established implementation science framework in conducting a multi-site, multi-research center implementation intervention initiative. The initiative aimed to bolster the ability of juvenile justice agencies to address unmet client needs related to substance use while enhancing inter-organizational relationships between juvenile justice and local behavioral health partners.MethodsThe EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment) framework was selected and utilized as the guiding model from inception through project completion; including the mapping of implementation strategies to EPIS stages, articulation of research questions, and selection, content, and timing of measurement protocols. Among other key developments, the project led to a reconceptualization of its governing implementation science framework into cyclical form as the EPIS Wheel. The EPIS Wheel is more consistent with rapid-cycle testing principles and permits researchers to track both progressive and recursive movement through EPIS. Moreover, because this randomized controlled trial was predicated on a bundled strategy method, JJ-TRIALS was designed to rigorously test progress through the EPIS stages as promoted by facilitation of data-driven decision making principles. The project extended EPIS by (1) elucidating the role and nature of recursive activity in promoting change (yielding the circular EPIS Wheel), (2) by expanding the applicability of the EPIS framework beyond a single evidence-based practice (EBP) to address varying process improvement efforts (representing varying EBPs), and (3) by disentangling outcome measures of progression through EPIS stages from the a priori established study timeline.DiscussionThe utilization of EPIS in JJ-TRIALS provides a model for practical and applied use of implementation frameworks in real-world settings that span outer service system and inner organizational contexts in improving care for vulnerable populations.Trial registrationNCT02672150. Retrospectively registered on 22 January 2016.

Objectives Prison-based therapeutic community (TC) drug treatment followed by community aftercare is widely recognized as the most effective treatment paradigm for drug-dependent offenders. However, few randomized experiments have addressed this question and fewer studies have examined how interactions between treatment modality and individual characteristics may explain variations in outcomes. Methods Using a randomized experimental design, this study examined the effects of treatment modality [TC vs. Outpatient (OP) group counseling], individual psychosocial characteristics (e.g., risk, negative affect), and interactions on reincarceration over a 3-year follow-up period. Survival analysis using Cox regression with covariates was used to analyze data obtained from 604 subjects at a specialized drug treatment prison. Results The expected advantage of TC failed to emerge. Critical and heretofore unexamined interactions between treatment modality (TC vs. OP), inmate levels of risk, and negative effect help explain these unexpected findings. Conclusion The superiority of prison TC to less intensive OP counseling was not supported. The effects of TC appear to be conditioned by critical responsivity factors that have received little empirical attention.

Although research indicates that organizational characteristics substantially influence the adoption and use of evidence-based practices (EBPs), there has been little empirical research on organizational factors most likely to influence successful implementation of EBPs, particularly in criminal justice settings. This study examined organizational characteristics related to the success of change teams in achieving improvements in assessment and case-planning procedures for persons leaving correctional settings and receiving community services. In this evaluation of the Organizational Process Improvement Intervention (OPII), part of the National Institute on Drug Abuse’s (NIDA’s) Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJDATS) cooperative, 21 sites were randomized to an early-start or a delayed-start condition. For this analysis, data from both conditions were combined. Agencies with fewer program needs, good communication, adequate staffing levels, good supervision, positive attitude toward rehabilitation, and higher institutional capacity for change were better able to implement planned changes in assessment and case-planning procedures. Such agencies may be better candidates for implementation improvement strategies, whereas other agencies could benefit from pre-intervention efforts aimed at strengthening these characteristics before attempting to improve assessment procedures.

Although concern about school disorder has increased dramatically in recent years, little systematic attention has been given to its measurement or to separating its diverse causal influences. Measures used in research have included self-reported victimization, fear, delinquency, misconduct, and school-recorded incident rates. In this paper I explore the effects of several major dimensions of school climate and individual student characteristics on five different measures of school disorder. I examine survey responses from 4,640 middle school student, using MANCOVA. Schools vary significantly on all five measures of disorder: both student characteristics and school climate variables provide significant explanatory power for each. Patterns of results vary, however, for different measures of disorder. For example, between-school effects are much stronger for students' misconduct than for more serious offending. Implications for research and policy on school disorder are discussed.

Explanations of school disorder have suffered from at least two deficits: (1) institutional explanations of disorder (that is, school climate) have been largely ignored, and (2) insufficient attention to appropriate measures of disorder has guided research and policy. Like people, schools have their own characteristic personalities, or climates. Using survey responses from students in middle schools in Philadelphia, the author discusses the effects of school climate (such as clarity and fairness of rules) and individual student characteristics (such as age, sex, race, and dimensions of bonding) on different measures of school disorder, including victimization, avoidance, perceptions of safety, misconduct, and offending. The schools varied significantly on all measures of disorder, and school climate provided significant explanatory power for each. Results varied for different measures, though. For example, school climate predicted less serious misconduct more strongly than it predicted serious offending. School climate offers significant potential for enhancing both the understanding and the prevention of school violence.

Drawing upon control theory, school climate theory, and social disorganization theory, this study examined the relative influence of individual, institutional, and community factors on misconduct in Philadelphia middle schools. Using U.S. census data, school district data, police department data, and school climate survey data obtained from the administration of the Effective School Battery to 7, 583 students in 11 middle schools, we examined the following predictors of student misconduct: community poverty and residential stability; community crime; school size; student perceptions of school climate (school attachment); and individual student characteristics (e.g., age, race, sex, school involvement and effort, belief in rules, positive peer associations). “Community” was conceptualized in two ways: “local” (the census tract around the school), and “imported” (aggregated measures from the census tracts where students actually lived). We used hierarchical linear modeling techniques (HLM) to examine between‐ and within‐school factors. Individual‐level factors accounted for 16% of the explained variance; school and community‐level factors (both local and imported) added only small increments (an additional 4.1–4.5%). We conclude that simplistic assumptions that “bad” communities typically produce “bad” children or “bad” schools are unwarranted.

Although interorganizational relationships (IORs) are essential to the effective delivery of human services, very little research has examined relationships between juvenile justice agencies and behavioral health providers, and few studies have identified the most critical organizational and individual-level characteristics influencing IORs. Across 36 sites, juvenile probation officials (n = 458) and community behavioral health providers (n = 91) were surveyed about characteristics of their agencies, themselves, and IORs with each other. Generalized Linear Mixed Models were used to analyze the data. The strongest predictors included Perceived Organizational Support and individual Adaptability. Implications for research, theory and practice are discussed.

In a study of 118 drug treatment programs in a state correctional system (Welsh and Zajac, 2004a), certain program types (e.g., therapeutic community) were fairly consistent along dimensions like the primary treatment approach (cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic approaches were commonly used), program content (e.g., thinking errors, models of addiction, and problem-solving skills), and treatment duration. Before conducting an impact evaluation of a program, two main criteria (prerequisites) should be satisfied (Welsh and Harris, 2004): (1) Program or policy objectives must have been clearly specified, and those objectives must be measurable, and (2) the intervention should have been sufficiently well designed and sufficiently well implemented so that there is no question that its critical elements (activities) have been delivered to clients as planned.

Weak coordination between community correctional agencies and community-based treatment providers is a major barrier to diffusion of medication-assisted treatment (MAT)—the inclusion of medications (e.g., methadone and buprenorphine) in combination with traditional counseling and behavioral therapies to treat substance use disorders. In a multisite cluster randomized trial, experimental sites (j = 10) received a 3-h MAT training plus a 12-month linkage intervention; control sites (j = 10) received the 3-h training alone. Hierarchical linear models showed that the intervention resulted in significant improvements in perceptions of interagency coordination among treatment providers, but not probation/parole agents. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

Welsh et al respond to a commentary by Hoffman and Johnson on their research regarding a multiuse statistical model to examine whether school and community characteristics affect school misconduct at an individual level. It is argued that Hoffman and Johnson identify some potential issues to consider in multivariate studies but do little to support, clarify or address them.