An implementation analysis conducted as part of a 2-year experimental study of residential and nonresidential treatment programs for the dually diagnosed homeless found significant differences in client engagement and retention, as well as unexpected variations in the treatment conditions. Fully 40 percent of subjects assigned to either treatment failed to become engaged for even one day, although a significantly higher percentage of those assigned to the residential program than the nonresidential program graduated from the first 3-month phase of treatment. The analysis revealed significant differences in the type and amount of services provided by the two treatment programs, as well as potentially important difficulties in program management. Such process data are valuable tools for understanding client outcomes and interpreting experimental results.
Originally published in: Evaluation Review, v. 18, no. 6, pp. 689-717.
This report is part of the RAND reprint series. The Reprint was a product of RAND from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.