Community reentry following [rison: A [rocess evaluation of the accelerated community entry program

Federal Probation

Volumn 72, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 54-60

  Knollenberg, Laura ^a   Martin, Valerie A ^b  

^a Primary Clinician

^b Western District of Michigan ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 62149115962     PISSN: 00149128     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Attorney General's Opinion 96029. (1996). http;//ago,nol.org/local/ opinion/index.html?topic=details&id=1811
2. Dehar, M., Casswell, S., & Duignan, P. (1993). Formative and Process Evaluation of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Programs. Evaluation Review, 17, 204-220.
3. Eaglin, J.B., Gilbert, S., Hooper, L., & Lombard, P. (1997). RPI Profiles: Descriptive Information About Offenders Grouped by Their RPI Scores. Federal Judicial Center, 1-24.
4. Gendreau, P. & Andrews, D.A. (1990). Tertiary prevention: What the Meta-Analysis of the Offender Treatment Literature Tells us About "What Works." Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 173-184.
5. Huddleston, C.W., Freeman-Wilson, K., & Marlowe, D.B. (2005). Painting the Current Picture; A National Report Card on Drug Courts and Other Problem Solving Court Programs in the United States. National Drug Court Institute, 1(2).
6. Kelly, P. & Stemen, D. (2005). Probation Reform: Is Zero Tolerance a Viable Option? Research and Practice Forum, 1-8.
7. Johnson, J.L. (2007). Does Employment Help Reduce Recidivism for Federal Offenders. News & Views, 32(3), 1-8.
8. Lindquist, C, Harrison, L, & Lattimore, P.K. (2003). Reentry Courts Process Evaluation Phase 1. RTI International Health, Social, and Economics Research, Research Triangle Park, NC.
9. Marlowe, D.B., DeMatteo, D.S., & Festinger, D.S. (2003). A Sober Assessment of Drug Courts. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 16(1), 113-128.
10. Marlowe, D.B., Festinger, D.S., & Lee, P.A. (2004). The Judge is a Key Component of Drug Court. Drug Court Review, IV (2), 1-34.
11. Marlowe, D.B., Heck, C, Huddleston, C.W., Casebolt. R. (2006). A National Research Agenda for Drug Courts: Plotting the Course for Second-Generation Scientific Inquiry. Drug Court Review, V(2), 1-27.
12. National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (1997). Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components. Washington, DC: Drug Courts Program Office, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
13. National Drug Court Institute. (2006). Local Drug Court Research: Navigating Performance Measures and Process Evaluations. Alexandria, VA: Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
14. Office of Probation and Pretrial Services: Administrative Office of the United States Courts. (2005). The Supervision of Federal Offenders, Monograph 109.
15. Petersilia, J. (2004). What Works in Prisoner Reentry? Reviewing and Questioning the Evidence. Federal Probation, 68(2), 4-8.
16. Prochaska. J.O. & DiClemente. (1986). Toward a Comprehensive Model of Change. In W.R. Miller & N. Heather (Eds.), Treating Addictive Behaviors: Processes of Change. New York: Plenum Press.
17. Stufflebeam, D.L. & Shinkfield, A.J. (1985). Systematic Evaluation: A Self-Instructional Guide to Theory and Practice. Boston: Kluwer-Niihjoff.
18. Taxman, F. S. (2002). Supervision-Exploring the Dimensions of Effectiveness. Federal Probation, 66(2), 14-26.
19. Travis, J. (2003). In Thinking About "What Works," What Works Best? The Margaret Mead Address at the National Conference of the International Community Corrections Association. Speech.
20. United States Department of Justice. (2006). Report to Congress on the Feasibility of Federal Drug Courts.