Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014;53(7):543-561.
doi: 10.1080/10509674.2014.944739. Epub 2014 Sep 16.

Economic Costs of a Postrelease Intervention for Incarcerated Female Substance Abusers: Recovery Management Checkups for Women Offenders (RMC-WO)

Kathryn E McCollister  1 , Christy K Scott  2 , Michael L Dennis  2 , Derek M Freitas  3 , Michael T French  1 , Rodney R Funk  2
Affiliations

Economic Costs of a Postrelease Intervention for Incarcerated Female Substance Abusers: Recovery Management Checkups for Women Offenders (RMC-WO)

Kathryn E McCollister et al. J Offender Rehabil. 2014.

Abstract

This study estimates the economic costs of Recovery Management Checkups for Women Offenders (RMC-WO), highlighting the unique mix of services and differential costs between two distinct phases of the intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to quarterly outcome monitoring (OM) only (n=242) or OM plus Recovery Management Checkups (OM-plus-RMC) (n=238). The OM-only condition has a total annual economic cost of $76,010, which equates to $81 quarterly per person. The average cost per OM interview completed is $86. OM-plus-RMC generates a total annual economic cost of $126,717, or $137 quarterly per person. The cost per interview completed is $147 and the cost per intervention session completed is $161. RMC-WO has a relatively modest additional cost compared with the average costs of post-release supervision, which can range from $3.42 ($1,250) per day (year) for probationers to $7.47 ($2,750) per day (year) for parolees. The clinical, economic, and policy implications of incorporating RMC-WO into existing corrections and/or community-based treatment settings are discussed.

Keywords: cost analysis; economic analysis; outcome monitoring; recovery management; women offenders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Individual Variation in RMC Costs Per Session by Intervention Phase
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adams SM, Peden AR, Hall LA, Rayens MK, Staten RR, Leukefeld CG. Predictors of retention of women offenders in a community-based residential substance abuse treatment program. Journal of Addictions Nursing. 2011;22(3):103–116.
    1. Andrews DA, Zinger I, Hoge RD, Bonta J, Gendreau P, Cullen FT. Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology. 1990;28(3):369–404.
    1. Aos S, Lee S, Drake E, Pennucci A, Klima T, Miller M, Anderson L, Mayfield J, Burley M. Return on investment: Evidence-based options to improve statewide outcomes – update. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy; 2011.
    1. Aos S, Phipps P, Barnoski R, Lieb R. The comparative costs and benefits of programs to reduce crime. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy; 2001.
    1. Beck EJ, Harling G, Gerbase S, DeLay P. The cost of treatment and care for people living with HIV infection: Implications of published studies, 1999–2008. Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS. 2010;5:215–224. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources