Ten pilot sites participated in the evaluation of the pilot of National Drug Rehabilitation Framework. Six were based in Dublin and four were based outside Dublin. Of the six Dublin sites, two were inner city (site A and B) the other four represented suburban districts, two in west Dublin sites (C&D), one in South County Dublin (site E) and the other in North County Dublin (site F). Of the four sites outside of Dublin, one was a small rural town in the North- east of the Country (site G), one was in the South East of the Country (site H), another was in the mid West of the Country (site I) and the final site was in the South of the country (site J). Site A was a North Inner city Dublin site representing a large (15-20) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 20 years. Pilot site A could be best described as an early stage implementer site. The coordinator of site A was part-time and also held another addiction training/education full-time position. Site A had a functioning T & R group.
Site B was a South Inner city Dublin site representing a medium (5-10) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 20 years. Pilot site B could be best described as a pre-implementation site. The coordinator of site B was part-time and also held another full-time addiction specific position as a frontline service provider. The T&R group in site B was quite fragmented and often convened with three members.
Site C was a Dublin west suburban site representing a large (15-20) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 15 years. Pilot site C could be best described as a pre-implementation stage site. The coordinator of site C was part-time and also held another addiction training/education full-time position. Site C had a functioning T & R group equivalent.
Site D was a Dublin west suburban site representing a large (15-20) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 20 years. Pilot site D could be best described as an early stage-implementation stage site. The coordinator of site D was a part-time designated paid coordinator that held with no other post. Site D had a functioning T & R group.
Site E was a South Couth Dublin suburban site representing a medium (10-15) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The services in this site were long established providing addictions
services in excess of 15 years. Pilot site E could be best described as a pre-implementation stage site. The coordinator of site E was part-time and also held another addiction
122 | P a g e
Site F was a North county Dublin suburban site representing a medium (10-15) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 15 years. Pilot site F could be best described as an early stage implementation site. The coordinator of site F was part-time and also held another addiction training/education full-time position. Site F had a functioning T & R group.
Site G was in a small rural town in the North-east of the country. Site G represented the smallest (two agency) site in the pilot providing primary addiction services and secondary training, education and family support services between both agencies. The services in this site were recently established providing addictions services less than 5 years. Pilot site G could be best described as an advanced stage implementation site. The coordinator of site G was part-time and also held another addiction specific CEO full-time position. Site G had a functioning implementation committee made up of both services, but no T&R group. Site H was in the South East of the country. Site H represented a large (15-20) consortium of services ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. The addiction specific services in this site were established less than 2 years. The secondary services were long established some in excess of 20 years. Pilot site H could be described as an early stage implementation site. The coordinator of site H was a full-time designated paid coordinator that held with no other post. Site H had a functioning T&R group.
Site I was in the mid West of the country and was made up of a medium (10-15) consortium of services countywide ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. Services had quite a geographical spread. The
services in this site were quite established providing addictions services in excess of 10 years. Pilot site I could be best described as a pre-implementation stage site. The coordinator of site I was part-time and also held another addiction training/education full-time position. Site I had a functioning T&R group.
Site J was in the South of the country representing a medium (10-15) consortium of services countywide ranging from primary addiction services to secondary training, education and family support services. Services had quite a geographical spread. The services in this site were long established providing addictions services in excess of 15 years. Pilot site J could be best described as an early stage implementation site. The coordinator of site J was designated part-time but also held another rehabilitation position. Site J had a functioning T & R group.
123 | P a g e