U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Evaluation of Indian River County Anti-Drug Abuse Act Grant Funded Programs

NCJ Number
165139
Author(s)
C A McNeece; C M Daly
Date Published
1993
Length
21 pages
Annotation
Two Indian River County (Florida) Anti-drug Abuse Act program evaluations are presented in this report: the First Start Program and the Substance Abuse Intervention/Aftercare Program.
Abstract
The First Start Program is part of a statewide early intervention effort designed to assist at-risk infants and toddlers and their families. The underlying goal of the program is to maximize the health, social functioning, and educational potential of at-risk infants and families. The Substance Abuse Intervention/Aftercare Program is designed to provide follow-up counseling to county jail inmates who are leaving the in-jail substance abuse counseling program. For the First Start Program, information on program design covers program philosophy, the target population, program operation, and program changes. Information on program management focuses on program monitoring/supervision, program objectives, and program efficiency. Also discussed are service area coverage accountability, service delivery accountability, program outcomes, and issues and recommendations. Similar topics are considered for the Intervention/Aftercare Program. The evaluation concludes that both the aftercare and in-jail treatment programs are well regarded by community experts, and it is likely that they did help many clients; however, the extent of their success with clients is impossible to assess due to the failure to note completion status and closed cases in a timely fashion. For the First Start Program, program staff and community key informants reported that program participants tend to follow through on well-baby clinic appointments at a much higher rate than nonparticipants and that, to their knowledge, none of the participant families have been involved with child protective services since entering the program. 7 figures