nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02826 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1999 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02826 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 1998 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice 1999-11-10 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1999 ICPSR 2826 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program measures levels of and trends in drug use among persons arrested and booked in the United States. The ADAM Program is a redesigned version of the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program (DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 [ICPSR 9477]), upgraded methodologically and expanded to include 35 cities. The data address the following topics: (1) types of drugs used by arrestees (based on self-reports and urinalysis), (2) self-reported dependency on drugs, (3) self-reported need for alcohol/drug treatment, (4) the relationship between drug use and certain types of offenses, and (5) the relationship between self-reported indicators of drug use and indicators of drug use based on urinalysis. Participation in the project is voluntary, and all information collected from the arrestees is anonymous and confidential. The data include the arrestee's age, race, gender, educational attainment, marital status, and the charge at the time of booking. The recently modified ADAM/DUF interview instrument (used for part of the 1995 DUF data and all of the DUF 1996, DUF 1997, and ADAM 1998 data) also collected information about the arrestee's self-reported use of 15 drugs. For each drug type, arrestees were asked whether they had ever used the drug, the age at which they first used the drug, whether they had used the drug within the past three days, how many days they had used the drug within the past month, whether they had ever needed or felt dependent on the drug, and whether they were dependent on the drug at the time of the interview. Data from the new interview instrument also included information about whether arrestees had ever injected drugs and whether they were influenced by drugs when they allegedly committed the crimes for which they were arrested. The data also include information about whether the arrestee had been to an emergency room for drug-related incidents and whether he or she had prior arrests in the last 12 months. Data that continue to be collected with the new version of the ADAM/DUF interview provide information about arrestees' histories of drug/alcohol treatment, including whether they ever received drug/alcohol treatment and whether they needed drug/alcohol treatment. As part of the ADAM program, arrestees were asked to provide a urine specimen, which was screened for the presence of the following ten drug types: marijuana, opiates, cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone, propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02826.v1 drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2826 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02826.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02994 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2000 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02994 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 1999 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2000 ICPSR 2994 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program, the successor to the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program (DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 [ICPSR 9477]), measures levels of and trends in drug use among persons arrested and booked in 35 sites across the United States. The data address the following topics: (1) types of drugs used by arrestees (based on self-reports and urinalysis), (2) self-reported dependency on drugs, (3) self-reported need for alcohol/drug treatment, (4) the relationship between drug use and certain types of offenses, and (5) the relationship between self-reported indicators of drug use and indicators of drug use based on urinalysis. Participation in the project is voluntary, and all information collected from the arrestees is anonymous and confidential. The data include the arrestee's age, race, gender, educational attainment, marital status, and the charge at the time of booking. The modified ADAM/DUF interview instrument (used for part of the 1995 data and all of the 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999 data) also collected information about the arrestee's use of 15 drugs, including recent and past use (e.g., 3-day and 30-day drug use), age at first use, and whether the arrestee had ever been dependent on drugs. As part of the ADAM program, arrestees were asked to provide a urine specimen, which was screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates, cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone, propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02994.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2994 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02994.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03688 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2003 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03688 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2001 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2003 ICPSR 3688 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2001 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 33 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in juvenile detention facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile instrument from previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE FORECASTING series (ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2001 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) weights. The juvenile file contains demographic variables and arrestee's self-reported past and continued use of 15 drugs, as well as other drug-related behaviors. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3688 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03815 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2004 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03815 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2002 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2004 ICPSR 3815 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2002 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 36 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in juvenile detention facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile instrument from previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE FORECASTING series (ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2002 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence, (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) weights. The juvenile file contains demographic variables and arrestee's self-reported past and continued use of 15 drugs, as well as other drug-related behaviors. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3815 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04020 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2004 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR04020 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2003 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2004 ICPSR 4020 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2003 up to four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 39 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. The ADAM program in 2003 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult male and female files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence, (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) for males, weights. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1 demographic characteristics icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr drug dependence icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 4020 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR28141 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR28141 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Project in Rural Nebraska, 1998 [electronic resource] Denise C. Herz 2011-01-28 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 28141 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. A pilot outreach project of the National Intstitute of Justice's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, the rural Nebraska ADAM program examined the prevalence and type of arrestee drug use in four rural Nebraska counties and compared the results to those found in Omaha, Nebraska, an established ADAM site. The data were collected in Madison (n=78), Dawson (n=50), Hall (n=53), and Scotts Bluff (n=149) counties, and Omaha, Nebraska, (n=202) in October and November of 1998. The catchment area for Omaha was the central city. The ADAM interview provided demographic and descriptive data, including race, age, marital status, source of income, screens of substance abuse and dependency, treatment history, arrest and incarceration experiences, and participation in local drug markets. At the conclusion of the interview, respondents were asked to provide a urine specimen. The current study included a supplemental questionnaire about methamphetamine use. The methamphetamine addendum included variables on why the respondent began and continued the use of methamphetamines, how often and how much methamphetamine was used, if and why the respondent had ever sought and completed treatment, source of the methamphetamine, and if the respondent had ever made or sold methamphetamine. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28141.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr methamphetamine icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Herz, Denise C. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 28141 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28141.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR25821 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2009 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR25821 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2007 [electronic resource] Dana Hunt 2010-01-28 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2009 ICPSR 25821 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) II program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, the ONDCP and Abt Associates have initiated a new data collection that replicates the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. A total of 8,296 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2007. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25821.v2 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr methamphetamine icpsr urinalysis icpsr addiction icpsr alcoholism icpsr cocaine icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug use icpsr heroin icpsr marijuana icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Hunt, Dana Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 25821 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25821.v2 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR27221 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2010 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR27221 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2008 [electronic resource] Dana Hunt , William Rhodes 2010-03-31 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2010 ICPSR 27221 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc. have initiated a new data collection that replicates the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implements two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collects data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. Data collection has been conducted across two back-to-back quarters in each of 10 counties from a county-based representative sample of 250 male arrestees per quarter for a total of 500 arrestees annually per site or a total of 5,000 arrestees across sites annually. A total of 7,717 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2008. Collection occurs in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2007 and ending March 31, 2008. Additional data collection periods were optioned by ONDCP, and subsequent cycles of back-to-back data collection (not yet available) began April 1, 2008. Participation is voluntary and confidential, and the procedures include a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27221.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr methamphetamine icpsr urinalysis icpsr addiction icpsr alcoholism icpsr cocaine icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug use icpsr heroin icpsr marijuana icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Hunt, Dana Rhodes, William Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 27221 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27221.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR30061 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR30061 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2009 [electronic resource] Dana Hunt , William Rhodes 2011-02-24 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 30061 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc., initiated a new data collection that replicated the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. A total of 7,794 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2009. Collection occurred in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2009, and ending September 30, 2009. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30061.v1 trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr susbstance abuse icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Hunt, Dana Rhodes, William Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 30061 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30061.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR32321 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR32321 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2010 [electronic resource] Dana Hunt , William Rhodes 2011-11-04 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 32321 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc., initiated a new data collection that replicated the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. A total of 8,332 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2010. Collection occurred in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2010, and ending September 30, 2010. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32321.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr susbstance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Hunt, Dana Rhodes, William Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 32321 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32321.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR20625 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2008 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR20625 MiAaI MiAaI Assessing the Validity of Voice Stress Analysis (VSA) Tools in a Jail Setting in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 2006 [electronic resource] Kelly R. Damphousse , Laura Pointon , Deidra Upchurch , Rebecca K. Moore 2008-06-23 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2008 ICPSR 20625 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of the project was to assess the validity of two Voice Stress Analysis (VSA) tools currently on the market: the Layered Voice Analysis (LVA) and the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA). The methodology and sampling protocols for this study were derived from the pre-existing methodology and sampling techniques employed in the National Institute of Justice-funded Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program that operated in Oklahoma County from 1998 to 2004. The researchers interviewed arrestees in the Oklahoma County jail about their recent illicit drug use during the months of February and March 2006. The VSA data collected using each of the software systems in this study were sent to certified examiners from CVSA and LVA for their analysis. After the completion of the interview, the subjects were asked to complete the data collection process by supplying urine specimens. Answers from the 319 respondents were compared to the results of a urinalysis test to determine the extent to which they were being deceptive. Then, their "actual deceptiveness" was compared to the extent to which deception was indicated by the VSA programs. The dataset contains (1) demographic information obtained from the official booking records, (2) responses to survey questions about recent drug use, (3) the results of a urinalysis test on five drugs, (4) variables recording "deception" or "no deception" on each of the drugs, and (5) decisions by novice and expert analysts regarding the indication of deception. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20625.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr voice stress analysis icpsr drug testing icpsr drugs icpsr evaluation icpsr jail inmates icpsr jails icpsr stress icpsr urinalysis icpsr voice communications icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Damphousse, Kelly R. Pointon, Laura Upchurch, Deidra Moore, Rebecca K. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 20625 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20625.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR20352 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2009 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR20352 MiAaI MiAaI Characteristics of Arrestees at Risk for Co-Existing Substance Abuse and Mental Disorder in Cleveland, Ohio, 2003 [electronic resource] Sonia A. Alemagno , Elizabeth Shaffer-King , Peggy Tonkin , Rachel Hammel 2009-02-25 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2009 ICPSR 20352 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The current study was conducted as a supplemental study to the Cleveland/Cuyahoga County Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program in the second quarter of 2003 (April-June). A risk screening instrument was implemented to classify Cleveland/Cuyahoga County adult arrestees into four groups: arrestees at no risk for substance abuse or dependence or mental disorder; arrestees at risk for substance abuse or dependence with no risk for mental disorder; arrestees at risk for mental disorder with no risk for substance abuse or dependence; and arrestees at risk for both mental disorder and substance abuse or dependence. A total of 311 adult arrestees were interviewed and provided a urine sample submitted for testing. The dual risk screening instrument includes six mental disorder risk questions and six substance abuse risk questions. The mental disorder risk questions include questions on having feelings or emotions that make it difficult to complete normal day to day activities, feeling hopeless or depressed, having thoughts of hurting oneself or committing suicide, and hearing or seeing things that others cannot hear or see. The substance abuse risk questions include questions on problems caused by drinking or drug use, arrests due to alcohol or drug use, time spent on thinking about or trying to get alcohol or drugs, and feelings of guilt about drinking or drug use. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20352.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr addiction icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr mental disorders icpsr mental health services icpsr substance abuse icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD VI. Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Alemagno, Sonia A. Shaffer-King, Elizabeth Tonkin, Peggy Hammel, Rachel Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 20352 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20352.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02564 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2000 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02564 MiAaI MiAaI Crack, Powder Cocaine, and Heroin [electronic resource] Drug Purchase and Use Patterns in Six Cities in the United States, 1995-1996 K. Jack Riley 2012-08-22 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2000 ICPSR 2564 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study was designed to address the practical and policy implications of various drug market participation patterns. In 1995, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) collaborated on a project called the Procurement Study. This study was executed as an addendum to NIJ's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program (DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 [ICPSR 9477]) with the goal of extending previous research in which heroin users were interviewed on various aspects of drug market activity. The present study sought to explore additional features of drug market participation and use, both within and across drug types and cities, and included two additional drugs -- powder cocaine and crack cocaine. Data were collected from recently arrested users of powder cocaine, crack cocaine, and heroin in six DUF cities (Chicago, New York, Portland, San Diego, San Antonio, and Washington, DC). Each of the three files in this collection, Crack Data (Part 1), Heroin Data (Part 2), and Powder Cocaine Data (Part 3), is comprised of data from a procurement interview, urine test variables, and a DUF interview. During the procurement interview, information was collected on purchase and use patterns for specific drugs. Variables from the procurement interview include the respondent's method of using the drug, the term used to refer to the drug, whether the respondent bought the drug in the neighborhood, the number of different dealers the respondent bought the drug from, how the respondent made the connection with the dealer (i.e., street, house, phone, beeper, business/store, or friends), their main drug source, whether the respondent went to someone else if the source was not available, how the respondent coped with not being able to find drugs to buy, whether the respondent got the drug for free, the means by which the respondent obtained money, the quantity and packaging of the drug, and the number of minutes spent searching for, traveling to, and waiting for their last purchase. Urine tests screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates, cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone, propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Data from the DUF interview provide detailed information about each arrestee's self-reported use of 15 drugs. For each drug type, arrestees were asked whether they had ever used the drug, the age at which they first used the drug, whether they had used the drug within the past three days, how many days they had used the drug within the past month, whether they had ever needed or felt dependent on the drug, and whether they were dependent on the drug at the time of the interview. Data from the DUF interview instrument also included alcohol/drug treatment history, information about whether arrestees had ever injected drugs, and whether they were influenced by drugs when the crime that they were charged with was committed. The data also include information about whether the arrestee had been to an emergency room for drug-related incidents and whether he or she had had prior arrests in the past 12 months. Demographic data include the age, race, sex, educational attainment, marital status, employment status, and living circumstances of each respondent. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02564.v1 crack cocaine icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug traffic icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr heroin icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr arrests icpsr cocaine icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Riley, K. Jack Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2564 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02564.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06122 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1994 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06122 MiAaI MiAaI Criminal Histories and Criminal Justice Processing of Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Sample Members in Washington, DC, 1989-1991 [electronic resource] Jay Carver , Eric Wish , Douglas A. Smith , Christina Polsenberg 2006-01-12 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1994 ICPSR 6122 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. These data provide information on the relationship between arrestee drug tests and future criminality once other risk factors, such as prior criminal history, are accounted for. Also explored is whether the association between drug test results and future offending varies depending upon the attributes of individual offenders. The dataset contains information drawn from the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) in Washington, DC, and the National Institute of Justice's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program. Data are available from each source for 1989 and 1990 with subsequent arrest data provided by PSA through August 1991. The 1989-1990 data supplied by PSA contain information on criminal history and drug test results taken at the time of arrest. Data provided from the DUF program include drug test results from a sample of persons arrested as well as information obtained from arrestee interviews on items such as family and work status. The combined data contain the arrestees' demographic characteristics, arrest and charge information, prior criminal history, and subsequent offending. Drugs tested for include cocaine, opiates, methadone, PCP, amphetamines, barbiturates, marijuana, methaqualone, Darvon, and Valium. In addition, self-reported information regarding an individual's use of and dependency on these drugs is supplied. Demographic information includes age, sex, income, and employment status. Due to changes in the DUF measurement instrument from 1989 to 1990, the variables contained in the two data files are not completely identical. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06122.v1 substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr criminal histories icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr gun use icpsr handguns icpsr recidivism prediction icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Carver, Jay Wish, Eric Smith, Douglas A. Polsenberg, Christina Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6122 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06122.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02706 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2000 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02706 MiAaI MiAaI Differences in the Validity of Self-Reported Drug Use Across Five Factors in Indianapolis, Fort Lauderdale, Phoenix, and Dallas, 1994 [electronic resource] Andre B. Rosay , University of Maryland at College Park , Denise C. Herz 2000-09-11 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2000 ICPSR 2706 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study investigated the accuracy of self-reported drug use in three ways. First, the researchers examined differences in the accuracy of self-reported drug use across five factors: gender, race, age, type of drug, and offense seriousness. Second, an attempt was made to determine the specific sources of inaccurate self-reports in terms of differences in underreporting and overreporting. Third, the researchers sought to explain differences in underreporting and overreporting in terms of true differences or differences in opportunity to underreport or overreport. This study used data collected in 1994 as part of the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program [DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 (ICPSR 9477)]. The DUF drug testing and measurement methodology allows the accuracy of self-reported drug use to be checked with a biological criterion, namely urine tests. The sample for this study consisted of 4,752 white and Black adults from Indianapolis, Ft. Lauderdale, Phoenix, and Dallas. The five exogenous measures included in this study were type of drug (marijuana vs. crack/cocaine), age (18 through 30 vs. 31 or over), offense seriousness (misdemeanor vs. felony), race (Black vs. white), and gender (male vs. female). The endogenous measures were accuracy (self-report and drug test both positive or both negative vs. otherwise), underreporting (self-report negative but drug test positive vs. otherwise), and overreporting (self-report positive but drug test negative vs. otherwise). Variables include result of marijuana urine test, result of cocaine/crack urine test, marijuana self-report, cocaine/crack self-report, age group, sex, race, offense category, and ethnic/gender group. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02706.v1 African Americans icpsr age icpsr crack cocaine icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offender profiles icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr gender icpsr marijuana icpsr race icpsr urinalysis icpsr White Americans icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program RCMD I. Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Rosay, Andre B. University of Maryland at College Park Herz, Denise C. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2706 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02706.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03585 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2003 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03585 MiAaI MiAaI Domestic Violence and Substance Abuse Among the Arrestee Population in Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1999-2001 [electronic resource] Paul Guerin 2003-06-25 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2003 ICPSR 3585 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The focus of this study was to examine levels of aggressive behavior during incidents of domestic violence in relation to self-reported drug and alcohol use among an arrestee population from Bernalillo County in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The research questions motivating this project were: (1) Are acts of domestic violence committed while the offender is taking illicit psychoactive substances, as ascertained by self-reports? (2) For those individuals with domestic violence charges, do urinalyses conducted within 48 hours of an individual's arrest indicate the recent use of a psychoactive substance? (3) Which substances are most prevalently associated with incidents of domestic violence? (4) Is there a difference in levels of aggressive behavior that is dependent on the individual? (5) Does the severity of domestic violence increase with the presence of psychoactive substances? (6) What differences (if any) exists between batterers who take psychoactive substances and batterers who do not? The data for this research were collected in conjunction with the National Institute of Justice's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) programs. The domestic violence survey addendum was administered to all arrestees from Bernalillo County in Albuquerque, New Mexico, who had completed the ADAM interview and provided a urine specimen and were willing to answer additional questions concerning domestic violence. Variables from the ADAM instruments were comprised of demographic data on each arrestee, calendar of admissions to drug treatment-related programs, data on dependence and abuse, drug market and use data, and urine test results. Variables from the domestic violence addendum include demographics on the intimate partner, whether specific physical events occurred, whether specific injuries had been sustained by both arrestee and partner, and the specific circumstances surrounding the physical abuse event. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03585.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr aggression icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr domestic violence icpsr drug use icpsr offenders icpsr substance abuse icpsr urinalysis icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XIII. Violence Against Women NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Guerin, Paul Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3585 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03585.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09979 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1993 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09979 MiAaI MiAaI Drug Abuse as a Predictor of Rearrest or Failure to Appear in Court in New York City, 1984 [electronic resource] Eric D. Wish 2000-04-18 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1993 ICPSR 9979 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This data collection was undertaken to estimate the prevalence of drug use/drug use trends among booked arrestees in New York City and to analyze the relationship between drug use and crime. The data, which were collected over a six-month period, were generated from volunteer interviews with male arrestees, the analyses of their urine specimens, police and court records of prior criminal behavior and experience with the criminal justice system, and records of each arrestee's current case, including court warrants, rearrests, failures to appear, and court dispositions. Demographic variables include age, education, vocational training, marital status, residence, and employment. Items relating to prior and current drug use and drug dependency are provided, along with results from urinalysis tests for opiates, cocaine, PCP, and methadone. The collection also contains arrest data for index crimes and subsequent court records pertaining to those arrests (number of court warrants issued, number of pretrial rearrests, types of rearrests, failure to appear in court, and court dispositions), and prior criminal records (number of times arrested and convicted for certain offenses). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09979.v1 drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr police records icpsr recidivism prediction icpsr urinalysis icpsr arrest records icpsr court cases icpsr criminal histories icpsr disposition (legal) icpsr drug abuse icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Wish, Eric D. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9979 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09979.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09686 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1992 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09686 MiAaI MiAaI Drug Testing of Juvenile Detainees to Identify High-Risk Youth in Florida, 1986-1987 [electronic resource] Richard Dembo 2002-06-07 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1992 ICPSR 9686 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This data collection examines the interrelationships among drug/alcohol use, childhood sexual or physical abuse, and encounters with the juvenile justice system. To identify high-risk individuals, youths in a Tampa juvenile detention center were given urine tests and were asked a series of questions about past sexual and/or physical abuse. Official record searches were also conducted 6, 12, and 18 months afterward to measure later encounters with the juvenile or criminal justice systems. The investigators used the youths' urine test results as the primary measure of drug use. On the basis of their review of Florida's statutes, the investigators developed outcome measures for the following offense categories: violent felonies (murder/manslaughter, robbery, sex offenses, aggravated assault), property felonies (arson, burglary, auto theft, larceny/theft, stolen property offenses, damaging property offenses), drug felonies (drug offenses), violent misdemeanors (sex offenses, nonaggravated assault), property misdemeanors (larceny/theft, stolen property offenses, damaging property offenses), drug misdemeanors (drug offenses), and public disorder misdemeanors (public disorder offenses, trespassing offenses). Other variables measured physical and sexual abuse, emotional and psychological functioning, and prior drug use. Demographic variables on sex, race, age, and education are also contained in the data. The individual is the unit of analysis. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09686.v1 aggravated assault icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug testing icpsr felony offenses icpsr juvenile justice icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr property crimes icpsr psychological evaluation icpsr sex offenses icpsr substance abuse icpsr urinalysis icpsr youths at risk icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Dembo, Richard Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9686 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09686.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09477 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1991 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09477 MiAaI MiAaI Drug Use Forecasting in 24 Cities in the United States, 1987-1997 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice 1998-07-15 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1991 ICPSR 9477 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program measures levels of and trends in drug use among persons arrested and booked in the United States. The data address the following topics: (1) types of drugs used by arrestees (based on self-reports and urinalysis), (2) self-reported dependency on drugs, (3) self-reported need for alcohol/drug treatment, (4) the relationship between drug use and certain types of offenses, and (5) the relationship between self-reported indicators of drug use and indicators of drug use based on urinalysis. Participation in the project is voluntary, and all information collected from the arrestees is anonymous and confidential. The data include the arrestee's age, race, gender, educational attainment, marital status, and the charge at the time of booking. The recently modified DUF interview instrument (used for part of the 1995 data and all of the 1996 and 1997 data) also collected information about the arrestee's use of 15 drugs, including recent and past use (e.g., 3-day and 30-day drug use) of each of these drugs, age at first use, and whether the arrestee had ever been dependent on drugs. In the original DUF interview instrument (used for the 1987 to 1994 data and part of the 1995 data), the information collected was the same as above except that the use of 22 drugs was queried, and the age at which the arrestee first became dependent on the drug was included. Arrestees also were questioned in the original instrument about their history of intravenous drug use, whether the consideration of AIDS influenced whether they shared needles, history of drug and alcohol treatment, their past and current drug treatment needs, and how many persons they had sex with during the past 12 months. Finally, arrestees were asked to provide a urine specimen, which was screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates, cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone, propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). The Gun Addendum Data (Parts 27, 35, and 37) contain variables on topics such as arrestees' encounters with guns, whether they agreed or disagreed with statements about guns, gun possession, how they obtained handgun(s), whether they were armed with a gun at their arrest or during crimes, and if they had ever used a gun against another person. The Heroin Addendum Data, 1995 (Part 29) contains information that was formerly covered in the main annual file in 1992-1994, but in 1995 was revised and prepared as a separate dataset. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09477.v2 drug related crimes icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr gun use icpsr handguns icpsr recidivism prediction icpsr substance abuse icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr criminal histories icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offenders icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9477 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09477.v2 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06567 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1997 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06567 MiAaI MiAaI Estimating the Elasticities of Demand for Cocaine and Heroin with Data from 21 Cities from the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program, 1987-1991 [electronic resource] Jonathan P. Caulkins 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1997 ICPSR 6567 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The objective of this research was to estimate the elasticity of the demand for cocaine and heroin with respect to the price. Price elasticity is the percentage of change in the dependent quantity corresponding to a one-percent change in price. The project involved the development of an econometric model to determine price elasticity, given that national- and city-level data on the consumption of cocaine and heroin are insufficient or nonexistent. The researchers circumvented this lack of data by partitioning the desired elasticity into the product of two elasticities, involving a measurable intermediate quantity whose relationship to the quantity of consumption could be modeled and estimated by measurable techniques. The intermediate quantity used for this project was the fraction of arrestees testing positive for cocaine or heroin as measured by the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) System. From the Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA's) System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) data, expected purity was computed by regressing on log quantity and dummy variables for location and quarter. Price series were produced by finding the median standardized price per expected pure gram for each location and quarter. Variables for Part 1, National Data, include year, quarter, standardized prices for a gram of cocaine and a gram of heroin, and expected purity of cocaine and heroin. The Cities Data, Part 2, cover city, year, quarter, number of observations used to compute the median price of cocaine and heroin, standardized prices, and expected purity. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06567.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr cocaine icpsr consumption icpsr criminal histories icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug traffic icpsr drug use icpsr gun use icpsr handguns icpsr heroin icpsr price fluctuations icpsr recidivism prediction icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Caulkins, Jonathan P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6567 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06567.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09947 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1993 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09947 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of Adult Urine Testing/Drug Use Surveillance Project in Washington, DC, 1984-1986 [electronic resource] Mary Toborg , Anthony Yezer , John Bellassai 1993-05-13 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1993 ICPSR 9947 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. These data were gathered to assess whether drug users are greater risks than nonusers for rearrest or failure to appear for scheduled court appearances while on pretrial release. The data also evaluate the relative effectiveness of periodic surveillance through urinalysis, traditional narcotic treatment, or neither in reducing rearrest and failure to appear during the pretrial period. The collection provides information on arrestees who both tested positive for drugs and were released on recognizance as well as those arrestees who tested negative but were not released on recognizance. Drugs tested for include heroin, cocaine, PCP, methadone, and amphetamines. Arrestees who were released were randomly assigned to one of three groups: weekly urine testing, referral to drug treatment, or a control condition. The data offer information on the offender's background, family and employment status, probation and parole status, pending charges, and prior convictions. Other variables include date of arrest, charge, initial release, decision, date of disposition, type of final disposition, number of subsequent arrests before trial, and number of bench warrants issued. Results of urine tests at arrest are available for about 65 percent of the total sample. For those in the experimental surveillance group, summary urine test results from the periodic testing program are available. There is no measure of treatment for the drug treatment or control groups. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09947.v1 drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr pretrial procedures icpsr recidivism icpsr substance abuse icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Toborg, Mary Yezer, Anthony Bellassai, John Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9947 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09947.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09807 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1992 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09807 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of Arizona Pretrial Services Drug Testing Programs, 1987-1989 [electronic resource] Chester L. III Britt , Michael R. Gottfredson , John Goldkamp 2006-01-12 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1992 ICPSR 9807 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of this data collection was to examine the relationship between drug use and pretrial misconduct in Pima and Maricopa counties in Arizona. Data assess the effectiveness of Arizona pretrial services, which were designed to monitor those defendants who tested positive for selected drugs. The collection includes variables for drugs such as marijuana and cocaine, previous criminal history, results of urinalysis testing, pretrial misconduct, and drug monitoring. Demographic information includes defendant's sex, ethnicity, age, marital status, employment, and last grade completed. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09807.v1 defendants icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug testing icpsr pretrial procedures icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Britt, Chester L. III Gottfredson, Michael R. Goldkamp, John Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9807 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09807.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06214 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1999 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06214 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of the Focused Offender Disposition Program in Birmingham, Phoenix, and Chicago, 1988-1992 [electronic resource] John R. Hepburn 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1999 ICPSR 6214 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Drug Testing Technology/Focused Offender Disposition (FOD) program was designed to examine two issues regarding drug users in the criminal justice system: (1) the utility of need assessment instruments in appropriately determining the level of treatment and/or supervision needed by criminal offenders with a history of drug use, and (2) the use of urinalysis monitoring as a deterrent to subsequent drug use. This data collection consists of four datasets from three sites. The FOD program was first established in Birmingham, Alabama, and Phoenix, Arizona, in December 1988 and ran through August 1990. The Chicago, Illinois, program began in October 1990 and ended in March 1992. These first three programs studied probationers with a history of recent drug use who were not incarcerated while awaiting sentencing. The subjects were assessed with one of two different treatment instruments. Half of all clients were assessed with the objective Offender Profile Index (OPI) created by the National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD). The other half were assessed with the local instrument administered in each site by Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC), Inc. Regardless of which assessment procedure was used, offenders were then randomly assigned to one of two groups. Half of all offenders assessed by the OPI and half of the offenders assessed by the local instrument were assigned to a control group that received only random urinalysis monitoring regardless of the drug treatment intervention strategy prescribed by the assessment instrument. The other half of offenders in each assessment group were assigned to a treatment group that received appropriate drug intervention treatment. The Phoenix pilot study (Part 4), which ran from March 1991 to May 1992, was designed like the first Phoenix study, except that the sample for the pilot study was drawn from convicted felons who were jailed prior to sentencing and who were expected to be sentenced to probation. These data contain administrative information, such as current offense, number of arrests, number of convictions, and prior charges. The need assessment instruments were used to gather data on clients' living arrangements, educational and vocational backgrounds, friendships, history of mental problems, drug use history, and scores measuring stakes in conformity. In addition, the study specifically collected information on the monitoring of the clients while in the FOD program, including the number of urinalyses administered and their results, as well as the placement of clients in treatment programs. The files also contain demographic information, such as age, race, sex, and education. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06214.v1 criminal justice system icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr needs assessment icpsr probationers icpsr program evaluation icpsr treatment programs icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD III. Corrections Hepburn, John R. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6214 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06214.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR27921 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR27921 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) Community Supervision Strategy, 2007-2009 [electronic resource] Angela Hawken 2011-07-06 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 27921 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) community supervision strategy for substance-abusing probationers. The study involved the administration of key stakeholder surveys as part of a process evaluation of the HOPE program and the comparison of HOPE probationers with control-group probationers on two primary outcome measures: no-shows for probation appointments and positive urine tests for illicit-substance use. For Part 1 and Part 2, data were collected from administrative data sources. Missed Appointments Data (Part 1) were collected from 2007 to 2009 on a total of 1,174 probationers including 1,078 HOPE probationers, 78 comparison probationers, and 18 probationers for which study group information was not available. Specifically, for Part 1, the research team compiled data on the proportion of missed appointments in the three-month period before the study start date (baseline), in the three-month period following baseline, and in the six-month period following baseline. Drug Test Results Data (Part 2) were collected from 2007 to 2009 on the same 1,174 probationers. Specifically, for Part 2, the research team compiled data on the proportion of positive urine tests in the three-month period before the study start date (baseline), in the three-month period following baseline, and in the six-month period following baseline. Stakeholder survey data were collected from September 2008 through March 2009 on 50 Integrated Community Sanctions or "Specialized Unit" probationers (Part 3), 28 probationers in treatment (Part 4), 16 probationers in jail (Part 5), 20 probation officers in the Integrated Community Sanctions Unit (Part 6), 11 public defenders (Part 7), 12 prosecutors (Part 8), 7 judges (Part 9), and 11 court staff (Part 10). Part 1 contains a total of eight variables including group (high intensity or control), demographics, and mean missed appointments scores for three periods. Part 2 contains a total of eight variables including group (high intensity or control), demographics, and mean positive urine tests for illicit-substance use scores for three periods. The Integrated Community Sanctions Probationers Survey Data (Part 3), the Probationers in Treatment Survey Data (Part 4), and the Probationers in Jail Survey Data (Part 5) each include variables about the respondent's general perceptions and opinions of the HOPE program. Part 3 contains 24 variables, Part 4 contains 30 variables, and Part 5 contains 30 variables. The Probation Officers Survey Data (Part 6), Public Defenders Survey Data (Part 7), Prosecutors Survey Data (Part 8), Judges Survey Data (Part 9), and Court Staff Survey Data (Part 10) include variables about workload issues and the respondent's general perceptions and opinions of the HOPE program. Part 6 contains 65 variables, Part 7 contains 45 variables, Part 8 contains 55 variables, Part 9 contains 36 variables, and Part 10 contains 36 variables. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27921.v1 drug offenders icpsr drug testing icpsr evaluation icpsr judges icpsr outcome evaluation icpsr probation icpsr probation conditions icpsr probation officers icpsr probationers icpsr process evaluation icpsr prosecuting attorneys icpsr public defenders icpsr sanctions icpsr urinalysis icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD V. Courts ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Hawken, Angela Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 27921 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27921.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02589 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2000 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02589 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of the Impact of System-Wide Drug Testing in Multnomah County, Oregon, 1991-1992 [electronic resource] David P. Cavanagh 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2000 ICPSR 2589 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Multnomah County Drug Testing and Evaluation (DTE) program was established to help clients rid themselves of drug abusing behavior. To that end, the DTE program provided random, weekly drug tests to all clients in the program. These urinalysis tests allowed DTE to monitor each client's compliance with release conditions and progress in treatment programs, and to intervene appropriately when a client showed signs of a drug abuse problem. The DTE program supplemented drug testing with client drug evaluations and treatment recommendations, which were provided to the client's probation officer or case manager. This study was a program evaluation of two of DTE's divisions: the Pretrial Release Supervision Program (PRSP) and the probation and parole program. The pretrial division was chosen because it was the first opportunity for the criminal justice system to supervise and control the drug use of potential DTE clients. The probation and parole program was selected for three reasons: it was the largest component of the DTE program, it linked the pretrial and post-sentence DTE programs, and the experience of this program could be readily applied to the development of other such programs in other jurisdictions. The programs were evaluated using administrative data collected by corrections technicians, case managers, probation and parole officers, and the DTE central office. Part 1 (Pretrial Data) variables include dates of entry into and exit from the program, number of drug tests, number of positive tests for various drugs, type of offense and arrest date for each offense, and need assessment rating for medical, employment, legal, family, psychological, and drug addiction problems. Part 2 (Probation and Parole Data) variables include a probation or parole indicator, prior drug arrests, prior non-drug arrests, prior convictions, technical violations, drug use, and new drug crimes committed during the program. Demographic variables for both files include age, race, and gender. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02589.v1 probation conditions icpsr treatment compliance icpsr treatment outcomes icpsr treatment programs icpsr urinalysis icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug testing icpsr intervention icpsr pretrial intervention icpsr pretrial procedures icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Cavanagh, David P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2589 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02589.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02890 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2001 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02890 MiAaI MiAaI Experiment to Enhance the Reporting of Drug Use by Arrestees in Cleveland, Detroit, and Houston, 1997 [electronic resource] Eric D., Wish , Thomas Gray , Jonathan Sushinsky 2001-04-12 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2001 ICPSR 2890 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This project involved an experiment conducted in three Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) [DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 (ICPSR 9477)] program sites to determine whether using a more detailed informed consent procedure and/or altering the sequence of the interview and urine specimen collection could enhance the validity of arrestees' self-reports of drug use without adversely affecting study response rates. A 2x2 factorial design was used to assess the effects of the two manipulations. The first two experimental conditions involved administering either the standard DUF informed consent or an enhanced consent that told the arrestees more about the confidential nature of the research and the capabilities of urinalysis. The second two conditions involved collecting the urine specimen either before or after the interview was administered. The experiment included 2,015 adult arrestees from Cleveland, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Houston, Texas, who were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions. The experiment was designed so that the only variability across the interviews was the manipulation of informed consent and the sequencing of the urine specimen request. All other procedures of a standard DUF collection were followed. Data were collected in Cleveland between July 8 and August 22, 1997, in Detroit from August 4 to September 27, 1997, and in Houston from October 17 to November 1, 1997. Variables specific to this project include the experimental condition to which the respondent was assigned, follow-up questions asking whether the arrestee would have responded differently if assigned to the other conditions, and several dummy variables on length and type of drug use. Data from the DUF interview provided detailed information about each arrestee's self-reported use of 15 drugs. For each drug type, arrestees were asked whether they had ever used the drug, the age at which they first used the drug, whether they had used the drug within the past three days, how many days they had used the drug within the past month, whether they had ever needed or felt dependent on the drug, and whether they were dependent on the drug at the time of the interview. Data from the DUF interview instrument also included alcohol/drug treatment history, information about whether arrestees had ever injected drugs, and whether they were influenced by drugs when the crime that they were charged with was committed. The data also include information about whether the arrestee had been to an emergency room for drug-related incidents and whether he or she had had prior arrests in the past 12 months. Urine tests screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates, cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone, propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Demographic data include the age, race, sex, educational attainment, marital status, employment status, and living circumstances of each respondent. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02890.v1 drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr offenders icpsr treatment programs icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Wish, Eric D., Gray, Thomas Sushinsky, Jonathan Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2890 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02890.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06527 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s1997 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06527 MiAaI MiAaI Hair Assays for Drugs of Abuse in a Probation Population [electronic resource] Pilot Study in a Florida Correctional Field Setting, 1993 Tom Mieczkowski , Richard A. Newel , Gale Allison , Shirley Coletti 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1997 ICPSR 6527 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The major objectives of this research project were: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination of hair and urine assays in determining drug use among probationers, (2) to examine the concordance patterns of hair and urine specimens, (3) to explore the perceptions and attitudes of probation officers regarding the use of hair assays for drug testing, and (4) to assess the feasibility of implementing hair analysis in a probationary field setting. The 22 correctional officers who participated in this study were recruited from the Florida Department of Corrections Probation Field Services Divisions, and worked within Pinellas and Pasco counties. Each officer was requested to solicit from his or her caseload eight to ten probationers who would be eligible for the project because they would be undergoing at least monthly urinalysis or urine testing. Approximately 150 probationers participated in the project and were subject to hair assays for illicit drug use, along with standard urine testing. Specimens were collected and analyzed on 90 probationers over a six-month period and on 101 probationers for five consecutive months, as well as fewer numbers of samples for the other probationers. The drugs for which the hair and urine specimens were analyzed included cocaine, opiates, cannabinoids such as marijuana, PCP, and methadone. Survey questions asked of the probation officers (Part 1) covered personal information (gender, ethnicity, education level, years of experience in corrections, and satisfaction with job) and attitudes and opinions about their jobs and drug testing (estimated percentage of caseload using drugs, whether all clients should be tested, and whether knowing drug quantities is helpful). Data in Part 2 cover probationers' drug test results and self-reported drug use, personal information (gender, age, weight, ethnicity, and criminal charge), a variety of hair questions (color, texture, style, length, how often shampooed, and if dyed, tinted, bleached, relaxed, or jeried), and use of medications, along with the medication name and amount. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06527.v1 attitudes icpsr drug testing icpsr probation officers icpsr probationers icpsr process evaluation icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Mieczkowski, Tom Newel, Richard A. Allison, Gale Coletti, Shirley Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6527 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06527.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03213 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2001 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03213 MiAaI MiAaI Integrating the Ion Mobility Spectrometer Into Drug Monitoring at the New Orleans Pretrial Diversion Program, 1996 [electronic resource] Tom Mieczkowski , Rosemary Mumm , Harry Connick 2005-11-04 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2001 ICPSR 3213 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This project was designed to evaluate the use of a drug detection instrument, the ion mobility spectrometer (IMS), and to integrate its use into an ongoing pretrial diversion program for nonviolent, first-time, drug-abusing offenders. The Pretrial Diversion Program in Orleans Parish, Louisiana, targeted offenders with limited arrest histories of nonviolent felony or misdemeanor violations. The majority of eligible participants were violators of simple drug possession statutes, primarily crack/cocaine or marijuana. Persons charged with drug distribution offenses were not eligible. In order to qualify for diversion, persons had to admit guilt regarding the acts for which they were arrested. The program was entirely voluntary. One of the unique aspects of this program was its aggressive use of drug testing, including urinalysis and hair analysis. This project evaluated the ability of the IMS to provide complete drug profile information to supervising agencies and assessed its usefulness to field staff engaged in drug monitoring duties. The project was based on the premise that enhanced information on offenders diverted into this program could create or improve several key aspects of program operation, such as client assessment, monitoring of compliance and progress, dispositional decision-making, client motivation, and staff morale. The study was designed to integrate the IMS into the normal operation of the New Orleans Pretrial Diversion Program with as little modification of existing treatment and supervision protocols as possible. Each client in the diversion program underwent an intensive intake assessment including an intake radioimmunoassay (RIA) hair assay and an additional RIA hair assay every 60 days. Each client was urine-tested at intake and assigned to a random test pool. The modified protocol for the project added an IMS-based scan or a hair specimen, skin wipe, and ten-second vacuum scan of clothing, hands, and axillae at intake. At each subsequent visit each client had a repeat IMS scan utilizing a skin swab and a scan of clothing or body area. Variables include self-reported cocaine use, self-reported marijuana use, IMS date, urinalysis date, hair assay results, urinalysis results, IMS detection, nicotine use, maximum amplitude, delta, cumulative amplitude, number of detections, whether the IMS showed a positive result, and the age, sex, and race of the client. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03213.v1 criminal histories icpsr diversion programs icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug offender profiles icpsr drug testing icpsr felony offenses icpsr misdemeanor offenses icpsr offenders icpsr pretrial intervention icpsr pretrial procedures icpsr program evaluation icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Mieczkowski, Tom Mumm, Rosemary Connick, Harry Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3213 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03213.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03604 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2003 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03604 MiAaI MiAaI Modeling Impacts of Policing Initiatives on Drug and Criminal Careers of Arrestees in New York City, New York, 1999 [electronic resource] Bruce D. Johnson , Andrew Golub 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2003 ICPSR 3604 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study sought to understand the accuracy and validity of arrestee self-reports of drug use and the overall contact of arrestees with the criminal justice system, with a secondary focus on how arrestee self-reports of drug use correspond to urinalysis results. Moreover, this study investigated whether arrestees were aware of the New York City Police Department's Quality-of-Life (QOL) policing efforts and whether they had changed their criminal behavior as a result. A QOL Policing Supplement, designed to explore new means of evaluating police behavior, was administered to all adult arrestees in the five boroughs of New York City (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Staten Island, and Queens) who had completed an Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program interview, provided a urine specimen, and were willing to answer additional questions concerning QOL policing. Part 1, Policing Study Data, is a large integrated dataset containing all of the variables derived from the 1999 ADAM interviews, the Policing Supplement instrument, and administrative records data from the Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) and the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. This dataset is linked, via an anonymous case number, to Part 2, Arrestee Criminal History Data, which contains each arrestee's official criminal history. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03604.v1 arrest records icpsr career criminals icpsr criminal histories icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD IX. Police ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Johnson, Bruce D. Golub, Andrew Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3604 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03604.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR33201 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR33201 MiAaI MiAaI Monitoring Drug Epidemics and the Markets That Sustain Them, Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) and ADAM II Data, 2000-2003 and 2007-2010 [electronic resource] Andrew Golub , Henry H. Brownstein , Eloise Dunlap 2012-12-13 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 33201 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study examined trends in the use of five widely abused drugs among arrestees at 10 geographically diverse locations from 2000 to 2010: Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Denver, Indianapolis, Manhattan, Minneapolis, Portland Oregon, Sacramento, and Washington DC. The data came from the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program reintroduced in 2007 (ADAM II) and its predecessor the ADAM program. ADAM data included urinalysis results that provided an objective measure of recent drug use, provided location specific estimates over time, and provided sample weights that yielded unbiased estimates for each location. The ADAM data were analyzed according to a drug epidemics framework, which has been previously employed to understand the decline of the crack epidemic, the growth of marijuana use in the 1990s, and the persistence of heroin use. Similar to other diffusion of innovation processes, drug epidemics tend to follow a natural course passing through four distinct phases: incubation, expansion, plateau, and decline. The study also searched for changes in drug markets over the course of a drug epidemic. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33201.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr arrests icpsr cocaine icpsr crack cocaine icpsr crime patterns icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr heroin icpsr marijuana icpsr methamphetamine icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Golub, Andrew Brownstein, Henry H. Dunlap, Eloise Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 33201 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33201.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR22381 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2009 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR22381 MiAaI MiAaI Monitoring Drug Markets in Manhattan [New York City], With the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program, 1998-2002 [electronic resource] Andrew Golub , Bruce D. Johnson 2009-06-03 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2009 ICPSR 22381 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of the study was to determine how much Manhattan (New York City) arrestees surveyed by the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program spend on drug expenses. The program obtained both self-report and urinalysis data from a total of 5,210 Manhattan arrestees surveyed by the ADAM program from 1998 to 2002. The principal investigators developed a formula for an episodic estimator of a respondent’s drug expense for cash, noncash, and cash-combination transactions. The dataset contains a total of 267 variables relating to Manhattan arrestees' demographics, interview information, criminal history, urinalysis test results, drug use, drug market transactions, and drug expenses. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22381.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr criminal histories icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Golub, Andrew Johnson, Bruce D. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 22381 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22381.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR25724 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2009 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR25724 MiAaI MiAaI Outcome Analysis Study of Drug Courts and State Mandated Drug Treatment in Los Angeles and San Joaquin Counties, California, 1998-2007 [electronic resource] Shannon M. Carey 2009-11-23 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2009 ICPSR 25724 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The California Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) of 2000 targeted nonviolent offenders who have a history of substance abuse and were primarily charged with misdemeanor or felony possession, excluding selling charges, for diversion from incarceration into community-based substance abuse programs. The two sites selected for this study (the El Monte Drug Court in Los Angeles County and San Joaquin County Drug Court) had SACPA programs that differed from each other and from the Drug Court model. The data for the outcome analysis were collected from administrative databases and from paper files where necessary and available. The data link an individial's criminal activity data, treatment data, and other program activity data. The outcome analysis consisted of Drug Court and Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) samples from San Joaquin and El Monte (Los Angeles) counties. Part 1, San Joaquin County Data, had a total of 725 participants and Part 2, El Monte (Los Angeles) County Data, had a total of 587 participants. The Drug Court cohort included pre- and post-SACPA Drug Court participants. The pre-SACPA Drug Court participants included all those who entered the Drug Court program July 1998 through June 1999 and included 202 participants in San Joaquin and 127 participants in El Monte. The post-SACPA Drug Court participants included all those who entered the Drug Court program in July 2002 through June 2003. This sample provided 128 participants in San Joaquin and 147 participants in El Monte who experienced the Drug Court program after any changes in eligibility and Drug Court processes due to SACPA, as well as allowing for outcome data for three years post-program entry. The SACPA samples in San Joaquin and El Monte consisted of all SACPA participants who were first time enrollees in SACPA programs between July 2002 and June 2003. These samples included 395 participants in San Joaquin and 313 participants in El Monte who experienced a reasonably well-established SACPA program while still allowing three years of outcomes post-program entry. The data for both San Joaquin county and El Monte (Los Angeles) county include the demographic variables age, race, gender, and drug of choice. Drug Court Treatment variables include dates or number of group sessions, dates or number of individual sessions, dates or number of days in residential treatment, other Drug Court service dates and types. Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) Treatment variables include dates or number of group sessions or episodes, dates or number of individual sessions or episodes, dates or number of urinalysis tests, dates or number of days in residential treatment, and other SACPA service dates and types. Other variables include arrest data, new court cases data, jail data, prison data, and probation data. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25724.v1 crime control programs icpsr diversion programs icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr outcome evaluation icpsr substance abuse icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Carey, Shannon M. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 25724 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25724.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03499 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2003 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03499 MiAaI MiAaI Pathological Gambling in Arrestee Populations in Des Moines, Iowa, and Las Vegas, Nevada, 2000-2001 [electronic resource] Richard McCorkle 2003-06-05 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2003 ICPSR 3499 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study sought to examine the extent, nature, and consequences of pathological gambling disorders in arrestee populations. Five research questions were addressed: (1) What is the prevalence of pathological gambling in arrestee populations? (2) What is the profile of the pathological gambler arrested for felony and misdemeanor offenses? (3) How does the nature and level of criminal activity among pathological gamblers compare to that of non- pathological gamblers? (4) What proportion of the crime committed by offenders with pathological gambling disorders is linked to their gambling activities (either to fund gambling or pay off gambling debts)? and (5) How does substance abuse interact with pathological gambling to affect the nature and extent of criminal activity? The data for this research were collected in conjunction with the National Institute of Justice's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) programs. Arrestees in Las Vegas, Nevada, and Des Moines, Iowa, who had completed the ADAM interview and provided a urine specimen were asked if they would be willing to answer an additional set of questions concerning their gambling behavior. Data from the ADAM interview and drug screening were merged with data collected using the gambling addendum, producing the dataset for this study. Variables from the ADAM instruments were comprised of demographic data on each arrestee, calendar of admissions to drug treatment-related programs, data on dependence and abuse, drug market and use data, and urine test results. The gambling addendum was used to collect data on five topics: (1) past-year gambling activity, (2) the use of alcohol and illegal drugs prior to and during gambling, (3) substance abuse and/or self-reported gambling problems, (4) past-year criminal activity (property, drug, and violent offending), and (5) motivations for criminal activity (gambling or non-gambling related). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03499.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr addiction icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr gambling icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program McCorkle, Richard Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3499 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03499.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04577 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130522s2008 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR04577 MiAaI MiAaI Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence in a Sample of Arrestees in Sacramento, California, 1999 [electronic resource] Carole Barnes , Bruce G. Taylor 2008-06-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2008 ICPSR 4577 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-22. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study served as the pilot study for the domestic violence addendum to the National Institute of Justice's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program. The domestic violence addendum was administered during the third (Part 1) and fourth (Part 2) quarters of 1999 in Sacramento, California, to all arrestees who completed the ADAM interview, provided a urine specimen, and agreed to answer additional questions about domestic violence. The addendum was based on the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (Staus and Gelles, 1986) and sought to examine the issue of being the victim and/or perpetrator of domestic violence, age of onset of domestic violence, and injuries from domestic violence. The data also include demographic variables, arrest and charge variables, and alcohol and drug use variables. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04577.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr domestic violence icpsr drug use icpsr offenders icpsr substance abuse icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD X. Victimization Barnes, Carole Taylor, Bruce G. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 4577 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04577.v1