nmm 22 4500 ICPSR25821 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130523s2009 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 2013-05-23. 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 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 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 130523s2010 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 2013-05-23. 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 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 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 ICPSR27382 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130523s2010 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR27382 MiAaI MiAaI Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS) [electronic resource] National Criminal Justice Treatment Program (NCJTP) Survey in the United States, 2002-2008 Faye S. Taxman 2010-08-09 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2010 ICPSR 27382 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-23. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices (NCJTP) Survey provides a comprehensive inquiry into the nature of programs and services provided to adult and juvenile offenders involved in the justice system in the United States. Participants included key criminal justice administrators, operations managers, and staff. This survey was conducted in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The survey involved a myriad of state, regional, and local organizations employing a mix of their own staff and contracted personnel, and services that might involve multiple levels of government. It was a self-administrated, paper-and-pencil questionnaire. The methodology included a multilevel approach that captured the perspective of executives, front-line administrators, and line staff about current practices in a range of institutional and community correctional settings for adults and juveniles. The goals for this survey were: to describe current drug treatment practices, policies, and delivery systems for offenders on probation or parole supervision, and in jails, prisons, and youth institutions; 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; and to assess coordination and integration across criminal justice agencies and between corrections and treatment systems. Items in the survey included: respondent characteristics, organizational characteristics, correctional programs characteristics (e.g., size, nature, etc.), substance abuse treatment programs characteristics, social networks/agencies collaboration, integration of services with other agencies, attitudes toward punishment and rehabilitation (personal values), organizational needs assessment, organizational culture and climate for treatment, cynicism toward change, organizational commitment to treatment, and perspectives on intradepartmental coordination. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1 addiction icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr cocaine icpsr controlled drugs icpsr correctional facilities (adults) icpsr correctional facilities (juveniles) icpsr drug abuse icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug overdose icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr hallucinogens icpsr heroin icpsr marijuana icpsr steroid use icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency NACJD VI. Criminal Justice System NACJD III. Corrections NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Taxman, Faye S. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 27382 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1