Annette Parker
SWI 499
July 15, 2018
H&H is a company that specializes in giving treatment in form of outpatient services for sex offenders and substance abuse through intensive techniques. The main purpose of this paper is to explain the policy that relates to the specifics of the treatment given at H&H by looking at the historical analysis and the outcome of the policy to the various stakeholders involved. The policy is designed to help the clients gain life skills which will help them build better relationships in the society and improve on their behavior. The policy provides that the officers, therapists, and the offenders/clients must work closely so that the maximum positive yields are cultivated at the end of the program (Farkas & Miller 2008). The program is run through sessions of individual or group therapy where the therapist has to take notes which can be used to give a full summary of the treatment progress of the offender and substance abuse upon completion.

Policy description
The economy is significantly affected by people who are sex offenders and those with substance abuse disorder. They rely on a different system and services to assist them to overcome their disorder and depict positive impetuses. The Federal and state system issues policies that govern these actions that will produce effective outcomes. Therefore, the policy that is applied at H&H Treatment Programs focuses on the treatment of the sexual offenders and illegal substance abuse pre or post-incarceration, so that they can gain skills that will help them adapt better in the society once they are released.
Sexual offenses are found in Title 18 of the United States Code, The Sex Offender Registration and Notification ACT (SORNA) which stated that all sex offenders are required to be registered as sex offenders across all states and have a public notification. As in the federal code, the code requirements remain the same in the state of Arizona. Failure to register, offenders attract a fine up to 10 years in prison (The United States Department of Justice, (n.d.). Therefore, H&H treatment programs policy work in partnership with the federal policy who housed the probation officer, which is designed to help the offenders live up to their expectations, become better members of the society and get over their past.
Substance abuse falls under US Code Title 42, section 290aa, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administrations (SAMHSA). They are a federal agency who collaborates with states and local government to assist in the prevention and reduction for individuals suffering from substance abuse disorders and mental health. SAMHSA works within the communities using different policies and rules to help manage effective treatment services that are delivered to the beneficiaries.
SAMHSA deliver these services to the states through different entities. For example, they use a Substance abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Program (SABG) which:
Grantees use the block grant programs for prevention, treatment, recovery support, and other services to supplement Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance services. Specifically, block grant recipients use the awards for the following purposes: Fund priority treatment and support services for individuals without insurance or for whom coverage is terminated for short periods of time. Fund those priority treatment and support services that demonstrate success in improving outcomes and/or supporting the recovery that is not covered by Medicaid, Medicare, or private insurance. Fund primary prevention by providing universal, selective, and indicated prevention activities and services for persons not identified as needing treatment. Collect performance and outcome data to determine the ongoing effectiveness of behavioral health promotion, treatment, and recovery support services (SABG, SAMHSA, 2017).
These imports are used within the communities H&H Treatment Program policy reflects some of the significances.
H&H treatment program policy specifically provides that the therapists and the probation officers are to work together in collective ways to ensure the defendant/offenders’ needs are being met as the treatment program rolls. The officers and the therapists need to be in constant collaboration so that they can communicate what is needed regarding the treatment progress of the offenders. The defenders are required to be enrolled into the program for at 120-150days. The Substance Abuse Intake Assessment Report of 2011 provides that the vendor must within the first 10 days of interaction with the offender provide a typed report to the USPO after the initial contact. The reporting of the first contact helps the billing information to be recorded so that an offender’s progress is measured at every given stage of their progress into the program. Section 5 of the policy provides that the offenders must be aligned to treatment plans which are to contain goals and objectives that are attainable at targeted completion dates.
The goals and objectives set out must be SMART in that they must be Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-conscious on part of the offenders, the officers and the therapists working with the offenders on a daily basis. The details of the treatment plan must include the offender’s input throughout the program and where they are at the end of the said program. The review in the treatment plan must also highlight the community support programs that will assist the offenders at the end of the program once they rejoin the community. The therapists and the officers must ensure that the offenders that have completed the program are in safe hands once they go back to their society. the offenders are expected to check into programs that help them stay in appositive place in their lives and avoid the possibility of a relapse. Upon the successful completion of the treatment program, the therapists are required to provide UPSO with a discharge sheet that summarizes the progress of the offender as well as the status of their well-being by the time the program is completed.
The federal policy relates to the H;H treatment program as an agency in the helping of the offenders by assisting them to steer their life into the right path of life without succumbing to the sexual and substance abuse desires they may exhibit after the treatment. The formation of H;H as a treatment facility was designed to help the offenders rebuild their lives after serving the prescribed sentence that was handed to them by the relevant bodies. The intended recipients qualify for delivery of and/or access to rights, services, benefits, or funding from the policy by showing that they have served a sentence that pertains to their sexual behavior in the past, and by attending all the classes of the different phases of their treatment process. To go to the next phase of their treatment the offenders must satisfactorily complete the level they are in by the therapists making proper recommendations and making positive notes on the progress of the defendant.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Historical analysis
In understanding how a company policy works it is important to establish the background of the agency that has adopted the policy. The H;H treatment program is owned and run by Mr. Christopher A. Heindel and Mr. Mathew T. Heindel. The two individuals have a combined experience stemming to over 30 years providing sex-offender specific treatment and services and are responsible for supervising the treatment products that are offered by qualified professional subcontracted service providers. As per the ATSA, the two individuals are Licensed Marriage and Family therapists, Clinical Members of ATSA, and Clinical Members of the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (AAMFT). Mr. Christopher A. Heindel has over 20 years of experience providing services in many capacities, including adult/adolescent sex offender programs, residential programs, and startup of programs. Mr. Mathew T. Heindel has 10 years’ experience in collaborating and helping individuals who have been living in the guilt of sexual offenses and treating defendants with sexual offending issues.
He has provided sex-offender definite treatment in outpatient, residential and group home environments. He is currently serving as the President-Elect for the local Idaho chapter of ATSA. The policy was adopted in 2013 as a way to help make offenders improve their lives by leading more fulfilling lives once they are done with the sentences passed upon them by the state agencies, and make sure that the offenders do not commit future criminal offenses which may see them incarcerated. Because the probation/parole policy at H&H is a federal policy, the services that are offered are funded by federal pass through and the money collected by the organization when admitting the different offenders to the program. The therapists, the probation officers, and the members of the public supported the passing of the policy because the long-term benefits would be evident on how sexually related crimes and illicit use of drugs in any given society would diminish by reducing in large percentages. The probation officers saw it as the most effective way to follow up on the activities of an offender who has served time for these crimes because they would only need to be checking into the treatment centers and see the notes that therapists have taken when helping the different people enrolled into the program.
Much opposition to the implementation of the policy was by the victims and the victims’ families who had been on the receiving end of the sexual acts. The people opposing saw the policy as a way of assisting the people who had done them wrong and hurt them so much in the past. The people who advocated for the policy saw it as a way to reform the sexual offenders so that they could be better citizens of the world, and not subject them to a forever kind of punishment due to their past mistakes. The policy has adapted over time through the state of Arizona because the many people who have been enrolled into the treatment program have turned out quite well, and most are advocates against the committing of sexual offenders and substance abuse to the younger generation. Former offenders are now peer counselors who help guide the way for young boys and girls who may be headed to the path of committing offenses against other people.
Significantly in Arizona, the rates of sexually related crimes and the use of illegal substance have gone down since the introduction of the H;H treatment program. The motives and goals of the policy when it began was to help minimize the rates of sexual crimes, illicit substance use, and help the offenders lead a more fulfilling life and making better decisions in their near future. The policy can be said to have made a positive impact on the community as a whole because the offensive activities have gone down.

Policy outcomes
The policy has led to the decrease in crimes that are related to sexual exploitations and illegal drug use. The people who are enrolled in the program come in as very disturbed individuals, but they leave the program as well-rounded people who are ready to make a positive impact on the society. The therapists help the clients/offenders open up a bit more by creating an honest relationship. The first step to becoming a better person in any given community is, to be honest about one’s mistakes and admitting that they were wrong in the first place. The policy is working quickly in providing solutions to the community at large because many offenders are being admitted day in day out into the program and going out reformed. The officers write positive reports about most of the offenders who complete the program which in turn could help the offenders get good jobs to better their lives and no longer engage in offenses that could land them back in jail (Farkas & Miller, 2008). Financing of the policy has been quite difficult because convincing the potential donors of the importance of the program is difficult. Most people tend to shun away sexual offenders because they see them as bad people who can never change their ways no matter what is done to them. Making them understand that the program helps the offenders become better members of the society is tiring and demoralizing.
The money that the clients pay to be enrolled into the program is not enough because the therapists have to be paid as the work they do to turn around the minds of the offenders is not easy (Farkas & Miller, 2008). Some offenders need the program like yesterday, but they do not have the money to pay. The program will not turn their backs on them because the program’s mission is to help the offenders turn around their lives and lead a more fulfilling life. The criterion to benefit from the policy is to follow the phases carefully as recommended by the therapists so that one can move onto the next phase until the completion of the program successfully. The measure is accessible because it is reasonable to most individuals who have been sexual offenders and substance abusers in the past.

Implications for practice
The policy adheres to the rules as provided in the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) code of ethics of 2017. The ethical principle provides that the primary goal of social workers is to help people in need and to address the social problems. The policy is designed to help the offenders who are in need of turning their lives around and become better citizens of a given society. It is upon the social workers to help the individuals in whatever way they can without discriminating on the grounds of gender, race or even the crimes committed (Bamford, 2015).

Implications for the agency
The H ; H treatment program center in Arizona views its probation/parole policy as a bridge to help the sexual offenders and people with substance abuse find a way to navigate through their new lives once they are free. The agency was created for the sole purpose of assisting the offenders/defendants turn their lives around and the policy helps in that by using the collective efforts of the officers as well as the therapists to assist the wrongdoers. Sexual and illegal substance crimes have been quite rampant in Arizona but the treatment program through the policy has been very effective in helping many of those who had committed the crime in turning over a new leaf. The funding that the agency receives is used in paying the various stakeholders involved such as the therapists and running the programs that help the offenders such as the group therapy which may involve playing of various games. The agency has to purchase items that may be needed to help the clients improve and recover from their vices. Therapists do quite the workload in assisting the clients because it is through them that the offenders get to accept that what they did was wrong, and vow not to repeat the same in the near future.

Implications for the future
Social workers in the agency collaborate with other groups and clients to improve on what they are currently doing and see if they can better the results that are recorded. Clients have different needs when they are enrolled in the program so the social workers do not generalize all the matters brought in but rather deal with each case on its own. The social workers attend organized workshops where they get to learn how other agencies are dealing with their clients, and if there are services that they could improve on at their own treatment centers. A lot could be improved on regarding the dimensions that the policy covers. For instance, the clients should not be subjected to the same amount of hours to see the therapist because the veracity of each offense is different thus different techniques should be adopted (Becker, 1994). Specific future steps that a student could take to inform, improve, or implement the policy in later social work practice would be to one, emphasize to the agency the effectiveness of the Monthly Treatment Reports (MRTs), and two, increase the number of days that the treatment program should run for so that the clients leave the agency with full potential with no need of the one year follow up on their individual progress.

Bamford, T. (2015). Social work’s ambivalence about professionalism. In a contemporary
history of social work: Learning from the past (pp. 21-38). Bristol: Policy Press at the University of Bristol. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1t89bbq.6 on July 9, 2018
Becker, J. (1994). Offenders: Characteristics and Treatment. The Future of Children, 4(2),
176-197. doi:10.2307/1602530 on July 10, 2018
Farkas, M., & Miller, G. (2008). Sex Offender Treatment: Reconciling Criminal Justice
Priorities and Therapeutic Goals. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 21(2), 78-82. doi:10.1525/fsr.2008.21.2.78 on July 10, 2018
SABG, SAMHSA. September 15, 2017). Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration. Retrieved July 7, 2018 from: https://www.samhsa.gov/grants/block-grants/sabg.
The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics 2017
The United States Department of Justice. (n.d.). Citizen Guide to U.S. Federal Laws on
sex offender’s registration. Retrieved from https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-sex-offender-registration July 10, 2018.