Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of Organizational Characteristics on Success in Implementing Process Improvement Goals in Correctional Treatment Settings

  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Colditz GA. The promise and challenges of dissemination and implementation research. In: RC Brownson, GA Colditz, EK Proctor (Eds). Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health: Translating Science to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 3–22.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. McGovern MP, Saunders EC, Kim E. Substance abuse treatment implementation research. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2013; 44(1): 1–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Volkow ND. What Science Tells Us About Opioid Abuse and Addiction. Testimony to Congress, January 27, 2016. Available online at https://www.drugabuse.gov/about-nida/legislative-activities/testimony-to-congress/2016/what-science-tells-us-about-opioid-abuse-addiction. Accessed on May 22, 2016.

  4. Powell BJ, McMillen JC, Proctor EK, et al. A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health. Medical Care Research and Review. 2012; 69: 123–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Aarons GA, Hurlburt M, Horwitz SM. Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011; 38: 4–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Damschroder LJ, Hagedorn HJ. A guiding framework and approach for implementation research in substance use disorders treatment. Psychology of Addictive Behavior. 2011; 25: 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Feldstein AC, Glasgow RE. A practical, robust implementation and sustainability model (PRISM) for integrating findings into practice. Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety. 2008; 34: 228–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, et al. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Quarterly. 2004; 82: 581–629

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Proctor EK, Landsverk J, Aarons G, et al. Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2009; 46: 24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ducharme LJ, Chandler RK, Wiley TRA. Implementing drug abuse treatment services in criminal justice settings: Introduction to the CJDATS study protocol series. Health & Justice. 2013; 1: 5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Carson EA, Sabol WJ. Prisoners in 2011. U.S. Dept. of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, De. 2012, NCJ239808, Table 9, p. 9, and Table 11, 10. Washington, DC, 2011. Available online at: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  12. Karberg JC, James DJ. Substance Dependence, Abuse and Treatment of Jail Inmates, 2002. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, 2007. Table 7, p. 6. Available online at: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/sdatji02.pdf. Accessed on May 25, 2016.

  13. Glaze LE, Bonczar TP. Probation and Parole in the United States, 2010. Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 236019. Appendix Table 2, p. 30, and Appendix Table 5, p. 33. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. Available online at: www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ppus10.pdf.Accessed on May 25, 2016.

  14. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results from the 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings. NSDUH Series H-44 Publication No. SMA, 12–4713. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lowenkamp, CT, Latessa EJ, Holsinger AM. The risk principle in action: What have we learned from 13,676 offenders and 97 correctional programs? Crime & Delinquency. 2006; 52(1): 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Taxman FS, Thanner M. Risk, need, and responsivity (RNR): It all depends. Crime & Delinquency. 2006; 52(1): 28–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Welsh WN, Zajac G. A census of prison-based drug treatment programs: Implications for programming, policy, and evaluation. Crime & Delinquency. 2004; 50(1): 108–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Screening and Assessing Adolescents For Substance Use Disorders. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series #31, HHS Publication No. SMA, 12–4079. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  19. Andrews A, Bonta J. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct, Fifth Edition. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 2010.

  20. Andrews DA, Bonta J, Hoge RD. Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 1990; 17: 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gendreau P, Smith P, French S. The theory of effective correctional intervention: Empirical status and future directions. In FT Cullen, JP Wright, KR Blevins (Eds.). Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological Theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions Publishers, 2008, pp. 419–446.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Andrews, DA, Bonta J, Wormith JS. The risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model: Does adding the Good Lives Model contribute to effective crime prevention? Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2011; 38: 735–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Peters RH, Wexler HK. Substance abuse treatment for adults in the criminal justice system: Treatment Improvement Protocol TIP 44. Mental Health Law & Policy Faculty Publications Paper 267, 2005. Available online at: scholarcommons.usf.edu/mhlp_facpub/267. Accessed on May 25, 2016.

  24. Taxman FS, Cropsey KL, Young DW, et al. Screening, assessment, and referral practices in adult correctional settings: A national perspective. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2007; 34(9): 1216–1234.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Belenko S, Peugh J. Estimating drug treatment needs among state prison inmates. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2005; 77(3): 269–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Taxman FS, Young DW, Wiersema B, et al. The national criminal justice treatment practices survey: Multilevel survey methods and procedures. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 32(3): 225–238.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Grella C, Greenwell L, Prendergast M, et al. Organizational characteristics of community and correctional treatment providers. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 32(3): 291–300.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Pelissier B, Jones N, Cadigan T. Drug treatment aftercare in the criminal justice system: A systematic review. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 32(3): 311–320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lehman WEK, Greener JM, Simpson DD. Assessing organizational readiness for change. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2002; 22: 197–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, et al. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science. 2009; 4(1): 50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Ducharme LJ, Knudsen HK, Roman PM, et al. Innovation adoption in substance abuse treatment: Exposure, trialability, and the Clinical Trials Network. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 32(4): 321–329.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Brown BS. Staffing patterns and services for the war on drugs. In JA Egertson, DM Fox, AI Leshner (Eds). Treating Drug Abusers Effectively. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. 1997, pp. 99–124.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Burrington DD. Organization development in the Utah Department of Public Safety. Public Personnel Management. 1987; 16: 115–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Jones AP, James LR. Psychological climate: Dimensions and relationships of individual and aggregated work environment perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1979; 23; 201–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pond SB, Armenakis AA, Green SB. The importance of employee expectations in organizational diagnosis. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 1984; 20: 167–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Henderson CE, Young DW, Farrell J, et al. Associations among state and local organizational contexts: Use of evidence-based practices in the criminal justice system. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2009; 103(1): S23–S32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation. Evidence-Based Practices: An Implementation Guide for Community-Based Substance Abuse Treatment Agencies, 2013. Available online at: www.uiowa.edu/%7Eiowapic/files/EBP%20Guide%20-%20Revised%205-03.pdf. Accessed January 21, 2015.

  38. Crime Justice Institute. Implementing Evidence-Based Principles in Community Corrections: Leading Organizational Change and Development. CJI, Community Corrections Division, U. S. Department of Justice (#03C05GIW2), 2004.

  39. Crime Justice Institute. Implementing Evidence-Based Principles in Community Corrections: The Principles of Effective Intervention. CJI, Community Corrections Division, U. S. Department of Justice (#03C05GIW2), 2004.

  40. Proctor EK, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011; 38: 65–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Shafer MS, Prendergast M, Melnick G, et al. A cluster randomized trial of an organizational process improvement intervention for improving the assessment and case planning of offenders: A study protocol. Health & Justice. 2014; 2(1): 1–9.

  42. Duffee DE, Steinert R, Dvorin R. Breaking the barriers to change. In: DE Duffee (Ed). Correctional Management. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Klofas J, Kroovand-Hipple N, McGarrell E. (Eds). The New Criminal Justice: American Communities and the Changing World of Crime Control. New York: Routledge, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wexler HK, Zehner M, Melnick G. Improving drug court operations: NIATx organizational improvement model. Drug Court Review. 2012; 8(1): 80–95.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Loftus-Hills A, Harvey G. A Review of the Role of Facilitators in Changing Professional Practice. Oxford, UK: Royal Collage of Nursing Institute, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Stetler CB, Legro MW, Rycroft-Malone J, et al. Role of “external facilitation” in implementation of research findings: A qualitative evaluation of facilitation experiences in the Veterans Health Administration. Implementation Science. 2006; 1: 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ford JH II, Green CA, Hoffman KA, et al. Process improvement needs in substance abuse treatment: Admissions walk-through results. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 33: 379–89.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Pahl N, Richter A. SWOT analysis: Idea, methodology and a practical approach. GRIN Verlag, 2009.

  49. Glynn RJ, Brookhart MA, Stedman M, et al. Design of cluster-randomized trials of quality improvement interventions aimed at medical care providers. Medical Care. 2007; 45(10, 2): S38–S43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, Third Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013.

  51. Broome KM, Knight DK, Edwards JR, et al. Leadership, burnout, and job satisfaction in outpatient drug-free treatment programs. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2009; 37: 160–170.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Garner BR, Knight K, Simpson DD. Burnout among corrections-based drug treatment staff: Impact of individual and organizational factors. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2007; 51: 510–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lehman WEK, Greener JM, Rowan-Szal GA, et al. Organizational readiness for change in correctional and community substance abuse programs. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. 2012; 51: 96–114.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Bennink M, Croon MA, Keuning J, et al. Measuring student ability, classifying schools, and detecting item bias at school level, based on student-level dichotomous items. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2014; 39(3): 180–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bennink M, Croon MA, Vermunt JK. Micro–macro multilevel analysis for discrete data: A latent variable approach and an application on personal network data. Sociological Methods & Research. 2013; 42(4): 431–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Croon MA, van Veldhoven M. Predicting group-level outcome variables from variables measured at the individual level: A latent variable multilevel model. Psychological Methods. 2007; 12(1): 45–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. van Woerkom M, Croon M. The relationships between learning activities and team performance. Personnel Review. 2009; 38(5): 560–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide, Seventh Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2014.

  59. Chen FF, West SG, Sousa KH. A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2006; 41(2): 189–225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Wiesner M, Schanding GT. Exploratory structural equation modeling, bifactor models, and standard confirmatory factor analysis models: Application to the BASC-2 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Teacher Form. Journal of School Psychology. 2012; 51(6): 751–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Hofmann DA, Griffin MA, Gavin MB. The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In KJ Klein SJ Kozlowski (Eds). Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2000, pp. 467–511.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Satorra A, Muthen B. Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. Sociological Methodology. 1995; 25: 267–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Bartholomew NG, Joe GW, Rowan-Szal GA, et al. Counselor assessments of training and adoption barriers. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 33(2): 193–199.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Moos RH, Moos BS. The staff workplace and the quality and outcome of substance abuse treatment. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1998; 59(1): 43–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Greener JM, Joe GW, Simpson, DD, et al. Influence of organizational functioning on client engagement in treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 33(2): 139–147.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Simpson DD, Joe GW, Rowan-Szal GA. Linking elements of change: Program and client response to innovation. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 33(2): 201–209.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Innes C. Healing Corrections: The Future of Imprisonment. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Hülsheger, UR, Anderson N, Salgado JF. Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009; 94(5): 1128–1145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Mesmer-Magnus JR, DeChurch LA. Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009; 94(2): 535–546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Hoever IJ, van Knippenberg D, van Ginkel, et al. Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2012; 97(5): 982

  71. Spreitzer G. Giving peace a chance: Organizational leadership, empowerment, and peace. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2007; 28(8): 1077–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Burke CS, Stagl KC, Salas E, et al. Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2006; 91(6): 1189–1207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Melnick G, Wexler HK, Zehner M. Communication in drug courts: The consensus-building enhancement. Drug Court Review. 2014; 9(1): 99–116.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Jolink M, Dankbaar B. Creating a climate for inter-organizational networking through people management. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2010; 21(9): 1436–1453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Yang, T, Maxwell TA. Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational, and inter-organizational success factors. Government Information Quarterly. 2011; 28(2): 164–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Wichinsky L, Thomlison B, Pennell J. Exploring organizational culture and climate in community coalitions. Community Development. 2012; 43(2): 133–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Palinkas LA, Holloway IW, Rice E, et al. Influence network linkages across treatment conditions in randomized controlled trials. Implementation Science. 2013; 8(133): 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Palinkas, LA, Fuentes D, Finno M, et al. Inter-organizational collaboration in the implementation of evidence-based practices among public agencies serving abused and neglected youth. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2014; 41: 74–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Tsasis P. The social processes of interorganizational collaboration and conflict in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 2009; 20(1): 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Torrey WC, Bond GR, McHugo GJ, et al. Evidence-based practice implementation in community mental health settings: The relative importance of key domains of implementation activity. Administration and Policy in Mental Health. 2012; 39: 353–364 doi:10.1007/s10488-011-0357-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Welsh WN, Knudsen HK, Knight K, et al. Effects of an organizational linkage intervention on inter-organizational service coordination between probation/parole agencies and community treatment providers. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2016; 43(1): 105–121.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Friedmann PD, Taxman FS, Henderson CE. Evidence-based treatment practices for drug-involved adults in the criminal justice system. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007; 32(3): 267–277.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Raudenbush SW. Statistical analysis and optimal design for cluster randomized trials. Psychological Methods. 1997; 2: 173–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Spybrook J, Raudenbush SW. An examination of the precision and technical accuracy of the first wave of group-randomized trials funded by the Institute of Education Sciences. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2009; 31(3): 298–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Stevens, J. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, Fifth Edition. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2009.

  86. Fixsen DL, Naoom SF, Blase KA, et al. Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. University of South Florida, Tampa. No. Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Publication #231, 2005.

  87. Office of National Drug Control Policy. In-Custody Treatment and Offender Reentry. Available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/in-custody-treatment-and-reentry. Accessed May 22, 2016

  88. Welsh WN. The need for a comprehensive approach to program planning, development, and evaluation. Criminology and Public Policy. 2006; 5: 603–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Welsh WN, Harris PW. Criminal Justice Policy and Planning, Fifth Edition. New York: Routledge, 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded under a cooperative agreement from the US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIH/NIDA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaborative contributions by NIDA; the Coordinating Center, AMAR International, Inc.; and the Research Centers participating in CJDATS. The Research Centers include Arizona State University and Maricopa County Adult Probation (U01DA025307); University of Connecticut and Connecticut Department of Correction (U01DA016194); University of Delaware and New Jersey Department of Corrections (U01DA016230); University of Kentucky and Kentucky Department of Corrections (U01DA016205); National Development and Research Institutes, Inc., and Colorado Department of Corrections (U01DA016200); University of Rhode Island, Rhode Island Hospital, and Rhode Island Department of Corrections (U01DA016191); Texas Christian University and Illinois Department of Corrections and Virginia Department of Corrections (U01DA016190); Temple University and Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (U01DA025284); and University of California at Los Angeles and Washington State Department of Corrections (U01DA016211). The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Health and Human Services, NIDA, or other CJDATS parties. Thanks are due to Kris Langabeer and Kory van Unen for assistance in preparation of the final version of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Los Angeles, USA

    Michael Prendergast Ph D & Umme Warda M S

  2. Temple University, Philadelphia, USA

    Wayne N. Welsh Ph D

  3. University of Rhode Island, Kingston, USA

    Lynda Stein Ph D

  4. Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, USA

    Wayne Lehman Ph D

  5. National Development and Research Institutes, New York City, USA

    Gerald Melnick Ph D

  6. Arizona State University, Phoenix, USA

    Michael Shafer Ph D

  7. University of Connecticut, Hartford, USA

    Wendy Ulaszek Ph D & Eleni Rodis M S

  8. West Chester University, West Chester, USA

    Sami Abdel-Salam Ph D

  9. Defense Logistics Agency, Columbus, USA

    Jamieson Duvall Ph D

Authors
  1. Michael Prendergast Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wayne N. Welsh Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lynda Stein Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wayne Lehman Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gerald Melnick Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Umme Warda M S
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael Shafer Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wendy Ulaszek Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Eleni Rodis M S
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Sami Abdel-Salam Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Jamieson Duvall Ph D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Prendergast Ph D.

Ethics declarations

The research centers obtained approval for the study protocol from their Institutional Review Boards. Where necessary, approvals were also secured from participating correctional and/or treatment agency research committees or Institutional Review Boards. All participants provided informed consent.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prendergast, M., Welsh, W.N., Stein, L. et al. Influence of Organizational Characteristics on Success in Implementing Process Improvement Goals in Correctional Treatment Settings. J Behav Health Serv Res 44, 625–646 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-016-9531-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-016-9531-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation