THE MODEL

Our Team

A multi-disciplinary team of professionals with a shared commitment to delivering effective translational research services and products. To meet them, click “Our Team.”

Our Goals

Build effective public-private partnerships involving a wide range of stake-holders, from federal and state programs to nonprofits and universities.

Institute field-tested, proven SUD intervention programs including Technical Assistance facilities.

Focus SUD intervention programs on low-income, high-risk individuals including those involved with the criminal justice system.

Document year-to-year outcomes in concert with high-quality academic institutions.

Expand the model to as many states as possible.

Uniquely Personal

When it comes to effective treatment, a “Cookie-Cutter Approach” simply doesn’t work. In everything we do, we want to first find out:

What does the individual want?

What has the individual tried in the past?

What was the individual’s response to past interventions?

Only when those questions are fully and truthfully answered is it safe to proceed with a treatment program suited to each individual client.

Evidence-Based Documentation

Project management is driven by detailed program evaluations based on data collected and analyzed on site and at the administrative level using a state-of-the-art technology platform. In fact, we’re a federal model for Evidence-Based Best Practices according to SAMHSA’s 2019 “Evidence-Based Resource Guide.” An in-depth analysis of those practices cited by SAMHSA can be read by clicking here.

Blended Start-Up Funding

Facility construction and start-up are funded with a variety of blended funding streams, including support from:

Local Government Programs

State and Federal Agencies including HUD

The Local Department of Corrections

The State Housing Corporation

Community Development Block Grants

Tax Credits

Food Stamp Vouchers

Section 8 Housing Vouchers

Blended Operations Funding

Operation costs are funded through a range of collaborative partnerships including those with:

Local Government Agencies

The Local Department of Corrections

The Local Housing Authority

Section 8

Community Development Block Grant Programs (including per diem funds paid for clients that are referred to the Recovery Center by the Local Department of Corrections)

Braided Treatment Support

Treatment services are conducted in concert with numerous pre-existing programs and institutions such as:

Health and Social Services (HUD)

Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) Services

The State Governor’s Office

The Local Department of Corrections

State and Local Courts

State and Local Social Services

State and Local Health Services

Faith-Based Organizations

For-Profit and Not-For-Profit Entities

Planning and Zoning Authorities

Private Construction Firms

Contracting Services

12-Step Programs (both Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous)

Harm Reduction Programs

Collaborative Recovery Programs

Social Enterprise Programs including Employment Training Programs and Placement Services

Helpful Links

Here’s more information that will help you understand the Fletcher Group model in greater detail:

Best Practices. What the ideal recovery center might look like.

Recovery Kentucky. An example of a Fletcher Group “Recovery Ecosystem” at work.

“A Model That Works.”

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services regarding “The Healing Place of Louisville,” a Recovery Kentucky Center.

“A Bright Spot In Treating Prescription-Drug Abuse.”

The Louisville Courier-Journal regarding Recovery Kentucky Centers following a two-year investigation of the state’s prescription drug abuse epidemic.

“The Only State Providing Services At This Level . . . A Model For Other States.”

Mike Townsend, Kentucky Housing Corporation’s Recovery Kentucky Program Director

“A Program of Excellence.”

The 2018 National Council of State Housing Agencies (NCSHA) annual conference in Texas regarding the Kentucky Housing Corporation/Recovery Kentucky program

“Effective Harm Reduction Services.”

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) in regard to House First Programs

Partnering With Criminal Justice

The Fletcher Group model provides an alternative, non-punitive approach to the expensive, ad hoc manner in which the Criminal Justice System traditionally deals with those experiencing homelessness and addiction. The benefits are numerous and substantial:

• Recovery Centers provide housing for up to 24 months during which clients receive the kind of SUD, OUD, and AUD treatment that can turn their lives around.
• Referrals from drug courts, jails and prisons coordinated with probation and parole personnel can help end the cycle of repeated arrests, thereby lowering the burden on taxpayers incurred by never-ending arrests, prosecutions, and incarcerations.
• Recovery Center per diem operating costs can be substantially lower than those when people are housed in jails or prisons.
• Housing, social recovery and peer support directly address the physical and mental health conditions that contributed to the individual’s arrest in the first place.

Partnering With State Housing

The Fletcher Group’s innovative model for recovery housing leverages State Housing Agencies in a number of ways:

• To facilitate planning and prioritization of scoring models applied to fund recovery housing
• Assistance in addressing the major social issues involved in treating homeless individuals and families and the substance use disorders that may qualify as a disability
• Tax Credits
• Section 8 Housing Vouchers
• Other “Soft Funding” including HOME Funds and CDBG
• Aligning priorities and scoring criteria

Partnering With Medicaid

Recovery housing is an essential building block of overall health and, as such, is being looked at more and more by the Federal Medicaid program. It’s clear that SUDs, OUDs, and AUDs are particularly significant when it comes to child welfare in general and foster care placement in particular. Partnerships between Recovery Centers and Medicaid can promote the following:

• Community-based programs that facilitate family reunification
• Treatment programs that are more cost-effective compared to inpatient and other residential treatment programs
• More effective intervention programs made possible by addressing housing needs and SUD/OUD/AUD treatment, particularly in rural communities