Strategies for Retaining Offenders in Mandatory Drug Treatment Programs in Kings County, New York, 1994-1995 (ICPSR 2749)
Version Date: Mar 30, 2006 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Douglas Young, Vera Institute of Justice
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02749.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
This study examined the relationship between legal pressure and drug treatment retention by assessing perceptions of legal pressure held by two groups of legally-mandated treatment clients: (1) participants of the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program operated by the Kings County (Brooklyn) District Attorney in New York City, and (2) a matched group of probationers, parolees, Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) participants, and other court-mandated offenders attending the same community-based treatment programs used by DTAP. The Brooklyn DTAP was selected for study because of the program's uniquely coercive program components, including the threat of a mandatory prison term for noncompliance. The goals of this project were (1) to test whether DTAP participants would show significantly higher retention rates when compared to a matched sample of other legally-mandated treatment clients, and (2) to assess the role of perceived legal pressure in predicting retention for both of these groups. Data were collected from program participants through interviews conducted at admission to treatment and follow-up interviews conducted about eight weeks later. Intake interviews were conducted, on average, one week after the client's admission to treatment. The one-to-one interviews, which lasted up to two hours, were administered by trained researchers in a private location at the treatment site. The intake interview battery included a mixture of standardized measures and those developed by the Vera Institute of Justice. Data in Part 1 were collected with the Addiction Severity Index and include age, sex, race, religion, and education. Additional variables cover medical problems, employment history, detailed substance abuse and treatment history, number of times arrested for various crimes, history of incarceration, family's substance abuse and criminal histories, relationships with family and friends, psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicide, current living arrangements, and sources of income. Part 2, Supplemental Background and Retention Data, contains treatment entry date, number of days in treatment, age at treatment entry, termination date, treatment condition, arrest date, detention at arrest, date released on probation/parole, violation of probation/parole arrest date and location, problem drug, prior drug treatment, as well as age, gender, race, education, and marital status. Part 3, Division of Criminal Justice Services Data, includes data on the number of arrests before and after program entry, and number of total misdemeanor and felony arrests, convictions, and sentences. Part 4, Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence Data, contains information on type of substance abuse, intoxication or withdrawal at work, school, or home, effects of abuse on social, occupational, or recreational activities, and effects of abuse on relationships, health, emotions, and employment. Parts 5 and 6 contain psychiatric data gathered from the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised and Beck's Depression Inventory, respectively. Part 7 variables from the Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability scale include family's attitude toward treatment, subject's need for treatment, subject's desire to change life, and legal consequences if subject did not participate in treatment. Part 8, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness scale, contains data on how the subject viewed the drug problem, desire to change, and history of dealing with substance abuse. Part 9, Motivational/Program Supplement Data, includes variables on the subject's need for treatment, attitudes toward treatment sessions, the family's reaction to treatment, and a likelihood of completion rating. Part 10, Perceived Legal Coercion Data, gathered information on who referred the subject to the treatment program, who was keeping track of attendance, whether someone explained the rules of participation in the program and the consequences if the subject failed the program, whether the rules and consequences were put in writing, who monitored program participants, the likelihood of using drugs while in treatment, the likelihood of leaving the program before completion, whether the subject understood the legal consequences of failing the program, the type and frequency of reports and contacts with the criminal justice system, and the subject's reaction to various penalties for not completing the program. Part 11 contains data from the Community Oriented Programs Environment Scale (COPES). Part 12, Treatment Services Review Data, includes data on the number of times the subject received medical attention, days in school, days employed, days intoxicated, days in substance abuse treatment, days tested for drugs, number of contacts with the criminal justice system, days treated for psychological problems, and time spent at recreational activities. Additional variables include the number of individual and group treatment sessions spent discussing medical problems, education and employment, substance abuse, legal problems, and psychological and emotional problems.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
HideTime Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
-
ICPSR cannot provide variable and value labels in the codebook or data definition statements for Parts 5, 6, and 11 because of copyright restrictions. Information on how to obtain these instruments from their original producers is provided in the codebook.
-
Selected variables in all parts of this data collection were blanked by ICPSR to protect respondent privacy. More information about these variables can be found in the codebook notes.
-
The user guide, codebook, data collection instruments, and SAS syntax statements are provided by ICPSR as Portable Document Format (PDF) files. The PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided on the ICPSR Web site.
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
Shifting the focus from simple comparisons of voluntary and coerced clients, this study examined the relationship between legal pressure and drug treatment retention by assessing perceptions of legal pressure held by two groups of legally-mandated treatment clients: (1) participants of the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program and (2) a matched group of probationers, parolees, Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) participants, and other court-mandated clients attending the same community-based treatment programs used by DTAP. DTAP was developed and operated by the Office of the Kings County (Brooklyn) District Attorney in New York City. It was selected for study because of the program's uniquely coercive program components, such as the threat of a legally-mandatory prison term for noncompliance and an apprehension unit specifically assigned to the program. It also had an exceptional record of participant retention and completion (two to four times greater than the retention rates reported for other long-term residential programs). In lieu of a prison sentence, Brooklyn DTAP provided the option of long-term treatment (generally 15-24 months) in a residential therapeutic community to repeat, nonviolent felony defendants. The charges were dropped if the person completed the program, while those who failed in treatment faced prison terms under New York's mandatory sentencing statutes. The goals of this project were (1) to test whether DTAP participants would show significantly higher retention rates when compared to a matched sample of other legally-mandated treatment clients, and (2) to assess the role of perceived legal pressure in predicting retention for both of these groups.
Study Design View help for Study Design
Data were collected from interviews with program participants that were conducted at admission to treatment and follow-up interviews conducted about eight weeks later. Intake interviews were conducted, on average, one week after the client's admission to treatment. The one-to-one interviews, which lasted up to two hours, were conducted by trained researchers in a private location at the treatment site. The intake interview battery included a mixture of standardized measures and those developed by the Vera Institute. Part 1 consists of extensive history and status information gathered from the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), a widely-used, standardized measure that assessed individuals' family and social backgrounds, employment and education, substance abuse, criminal/legal, medical, and psychiatric status and histories. Part 2 contains supplemental questions to the ASI covering employment history and self-reported criminal behavior. Also included are treatment entry date, number of days in treatment, and termination date, which were used to calculate the study's central outcome measure: retention in treatment. Subjects were tracked for at least six months after admission. Those entering the research early in the data collection period were tracked for about 20 months. Part 3 consists of criminal history data obtained from official records kept by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Part 4 includes additional substance abuse history data gathered using the Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence (CUAD) scale, which employed quantity/frequency measures and probed drug-related life problems. Psychiatric data were collected with two standardized measures often used in research on substance abusers: the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (Part 5) and the Beck Depression Inventory (Part 6). Intake measures of the client's motivation for treatment included the Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability (CMRS) scale (Part 7) and the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness (SOCRATES) scale (Part 8). Additionally, the Vera Institute created a 14-item measure called the Motivational/Program Supplement (M/PS) questionnaire (Part 9), which addressed other motivational and background factors that prior research suggested may influence retention. The final data collection from the intake interview is Part 10, which contains data from the Perception of Legal Pressure (PLP) questionnaire developed by Vera researchers. A follow-up interview focusing on program factors was conducted with all available subjects about eight weeks after admission. The follow-up sample consisted of 131 individuals, including 75 DTAP participants and 56 comparison participants. Two standardized measures were administered in the interview. The Community-Oriented Programs Environment Scale (COPES) (Part 11) included three subscales focusing on staff-client relationships, therapeutic interactions, and program maintenance dimensions such as order, clarity, and control. The Treatment Services Review (Part 12) was a brief instrument designed by the creators of the ASI that yielded quantitative indicators of the number and type of services received by treatment clients.
Sample View help for Sample
Matched sampling.
Universe View help for Universe
Participants in four drug treatment programs in Kings County, New York, between 1994 and 1995.
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Source View help for Data Source
personal interviews, and official records from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
Data in Part 1 were collected with the Addiction Severity Index and include age, sex, race, religion, and education. Additional variables cover medical problems, employment history, detailed substance abuse and treatment history, number of times arrested for various crimes, history of incarceration, family's substance abuse and criminal histories, relationships with family and friends, psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicide, current living arrangements, and sources of income. Part 2, Supplemental Background and Retention Data, contains treatment entry date, number of days in treatment, age at treatment entry, termination date, treatment condition, arrest date, detention at arrest, date released on probation/parole, violation of probation/parole arrest date and location, problem drug, prior drug treatment, as well as age, gender, race, education, and marital status. Part 3, Division of Criminal Justice Services Data, includes data on the number of arrests before and after program entry, and number of total misdemeanor and felony arrests, convictions, and sentences. Part 4, Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence Data, contains information on type of substance abuse, intoxication or withdrawal at work, school, or home, effects of abuse on social, occupational, or recreational activities, and effects of abuse on relationships, health, emotions, and employment. Parts 5 and 6 contain psychiatric data gathered from the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised and Beck's Depression Inventory, respectively. Part 7 variables from the Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability scale include family's attitude toward treatment, subject's need for treatment, subject's desire to change life, and legal consequences if subject did not participate in treatment. Part 8, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness scale, contains data on how the subject viewed the drug problem, desire to change, and history of dealing with substance abuse. Part 9, Motivational/Program Supplement Data, includes variables on the subject's need for treatment, attitudes toward treatment sessions, the family's reaction to treatment, and a likelihood of completion rating. Part 10, Perceived Legal Coercion Data, gathered information on who referred the subject to the treatment program, who was keeping track of attendance, whether someone explained the rules of participation in the program and the consequences if the subject failed the program, whether the rules and consequences were put in writing, who monitored program participants, the likelihood of using drugs while in treatment, the likelihood of leaving the program before completion, whether the subject understood the legal consequences of failing the program, the type and frequency of reports and contacts with the criminal justice system, and the subject's reaction to various penalties for not completing the program. Part 11 contains data from the Community Oriented Programs Environment Scale (COPES). Part 12, Treatment Services Review Data, includes data on the number of times the subject received medical attention, days in school, days employed, days intoxicated, days in substance abuse treatment, days tested for drugs, number of contacts with the criminal justice system, days treated for psychological problems, and time spent at recreational activities. Additional variables include the number of individual and group treatment sessions spent discussing medical problems, education and employment, substance abuse, legal problems, and psychological and emotional problems.
Response Rates View help for Response Rates
Not applicable.
Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales
The following scales were used in this data collection: Addiction Severity Index (Parts 1 and 2), Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence scale (Part 4), Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (Part 5), Beck's Depression Inventory (Part 6), Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability scale (Part 7), Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness scale (Parts 8 and 9), Community Oriented Programs Environment scale (Part 11), and Treatment Services Review scale (Part 12). In addition to the above common scales, the principal investigator also created a scale for Part 10 to specifically measure Perceived Legal Coercion among legally-mandated treatment clients.
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
2001-09-20
Version History View help for Version History
- Young, Douglas. STRATEGIES FOR RETAINING OFFENDERS IN MANDATORY DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMS IN KINGS COUNTY, NEW YORK, 1994-1995. ICPSR version. New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice [producer], 2001. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2001. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02749.v1
2006-03-30 File CB2749.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads.
2006-03-30 File UG2749.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads.
2005-11-04 On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable, and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to reflect these additions.
2001-09-20 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
- Standardized missing values.
- Performed recodes and/or calculated derived variables.
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Notes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
This dataset is maintained and distributed by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD), the criminal justice archive within ICPSR. NACJD is primarily sponsored by three agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice: the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.