Taxman, Faye S. Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS): National Criminal Justice Treatment Program (NCJTP) Survey in the United States, 2002-2008. ICPSR27382-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2010-08-09. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1
Persistent URL: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1
- RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
- EndNote XML (EndNote X4.0.1 or higher)
correctional facilities (adults),
correctional facilities (juveniles),
substance abuse treatment
Smallest Geographic Unit:
District of Columbia,
Date of Collection:
- 2002--2008 (Phase 1)
- 2008--2010 (Phase 2)
The universe for Part 1 (Survey of Executives Data) includes all executives of state agencies, executives in correctional agencies responsible for programs and services. The universe for Part 2 (Survey of Administrators Data) includes administrators responsible for the facility, office, or program identified in adult prisons, juvenile residential facilities, and community sample. For Part 3 (Survey of Treatment Program Directors Data), the universe includes prison wardens, directors of juvenile facilities, jail wardens and directors (who were sheriffs in some counties), and administrators responsible for local probation and parole offices. The universe for Part 4 (Survey of Correctional, Probation, and Parole Staff Data)
Include staff working in prison and community-based agencies and programs that were located in states covered by the Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS). And the universe for Part 5 (Survey of Treatment Staff Data) includes all the treatment staffs working in prisons and community-based agencies, and programs that were located in states covered by the CJ-DATS.
Data Collection Notes:
The survey involves a myriad of state, regional, and local organizations employing a mix of their own staff and contracted personnel, and the services may involve multiple levels of government.
Reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) overseeing research at each of the 11 research centers comprising National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) CJ-DATS network.
The sampling frame for S2: Survey of corrections clinical directors and alcohol and drug agency directors data was based on having one central person in each agency that was aware of the programs and services offered. It was determined that at the end the data provided could not be validated because most agencies did not have one central person who knew the agency programs and services. It was determined to use S3 data for the national estimates.
The objectives of this study were to describe the current drug treatment practices, policies, and delivery systems of offenders on probation or parole supervision, and in jails, prisons, and youth institutions. In addition, it was meant to examine agency structures, resources, and other organizational factors that may affect service delivery, including mission, leadership, climate, culture, and beliefs about rehabilitation versus punishment. Finally, it assesses the coordination and integration across criminal justice agencies and between corrections and treatment systems.
The mode of the survey was a self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire. This study consisted of a survey delivered to employees within correctional and treatment systems nationally, including agency administrators, wardens, program managers, and counselors and correctional
officers. The survey included questions about the organizational structure and resources, the work
environment, support for treatment, the value and purpose of substance abuse
treatment, and the type and amount of treatment services offered. It was estimated the survey would take about 30 to 60 minutes to complete.
Administrators also requested the permission of agency directors that staff who participate should be allowed
to complete the survey during regular work hours. Participants were able to access the findings at the CJ-DATS
(www.cjdats.org) Web site and by the researchers.
The sampling for the study consisted of: (1) census of state correctional agency executives and clinical coordinators, and state alcohol and drug abuse directors, (2) adult prison sample, (3) juvenile residential facilities sample, and (4) community sample.
Mode of Data Collection:
The response rate for Part 1 (Survey of Executives Data) was 70.8 percent. The response rate for
Part 2 (Survey of Administrators Data) and Part 3 (Survey of Treatment Program Directors Data) totaled 62.5 percent.
The response rate for Part 4 (Survey of Correctional, Probation, and Parole Staff Data) and Part 5 (Survey of Treatment Staff Data) totaled 33.9 percent.
Extent of Processing: 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.
Created online analysis version with question text.
Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Restrictions: This data collection may not be used for any purpose other than statistical reporting and analysis. Use of these data to learn the identity of any person or establishment is prohibited. To protect respondent privacy, the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) has removed direct identifiers, some sensitive text information and characteristics that might lead to identification of data subjects.