Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS): National Criminal Justice Treatment Program (NCJTP) Survey in the United States, 2002-2008 (ICPSR 27382)
Principal Investigator(s): Taxman, Faye S., George Mason University
Summary: 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 s... (more info)
Series: Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS) Series
Access Notes
This data is freely available.
Dataset(s)
ASCII + SAS Setup SPSS Setup Stata Setup
ASCII + SAS Setup SPSS Setup Stata Setup
ASCII + SAS Setup SPSS Setup Stata Setup
ASCII + SAS Setup SPSS Setup Stata Setup
ASCII + SAS Setup SPSS Setup Stata Setup
Study Description
Citation
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. doi:10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1
Persistent URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27382.v1
Export Citation:
- RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
- EndNote XML (EndNote X4.0.1 or higher)
Funding
This survey was funded by:
- United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse
Scope of Study
Summary: 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.
Subject Terms: addiction, alcohol abuse, cocaine, controlled drugs, correctional facilities (adults), correctional facilities (juveniles), drug abuse, drug dependence, drug offenders, drug overdose, drug testing, drug use, hallucinogens, heroin, marijuana, steroid use, substance abuse treatment
Smallest Geographic Unit: county
Geographic Coverage: District of Columbia, United States
Time Period:
- 2002--2008
Date of Collection:
- 2002--2008
- 2008--2010
Universe: 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 Types: survey data
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.
Methodology
Study Purpose: 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.
Study Design: 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.
Sample: 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: mail questionnaire, mixed mode
Response Rates: 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.
Version(s)
Original ICPSR Release: 2010-08-09
Related Publications
- List all ~27 citations associated with this study
- List ~1 citations that match your query
- View citations for the entire series
Top Publications that Match your Query
Variables
Browse Matching Variables
DS1: S1: Survey of Executives Data
14b. Below are examples of programs that may be offered to offenders in correctional settings. Using the scale shown, rate the importance of providing each program compared to substance abuse treatment. c. Mental health counseling
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? a3) Budget issues mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? b3) Special or legislative initiatives mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? c3) Memorandum of understanding related to treatment issues for offenders mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? d3) General prison or facility issues (e.g. overcrowding, physical space, recent violence) mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? e3) General probation issues (e.g. case size, space, staffing, etc.) mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? f3) Assessment/screening issues for treatment programs mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? g3) Clinical programming for treatment programs mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? h3) Service gaps for treatment programming mental health or other offender program director
23. In your position, on which issues do you have direct contact (in person or via phone) with people in the following positions within your organization? j3) Transitional or reentry planning for drug offenders mental health or other offender program director
DS2: S3A: Survey of Administrators Data
33. Please indicate whether these procedures occur at your facility/location(s). a. Medication-based treatment may be used for treating mental health problems
34. Approximately how many offenders are provided the following services through your facility/location by your staff or by referral to another agency? g. Mental health counseling
36b. Below are examples of programs that may be offered to offenders in correctional settings. Using the scale shown, rate the importance of providing each program compared to substance abuse treatment. c. Mental health counseling
44. Please indicate what standardized assessment tools are used in your facility/location and about how many offenders are assessed with that tool. m. Other standardized mental health instrument (specify)
25. b. What type of offender population(s) is served in this specialized facility/location? 3) Mental health offenders
34. Approximately how many offenders are provided the following services through your facility/location by your staff or by referral to another agency? f. Assessments for mental health problems
Whether a facility uses Mental Health Tool
19. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about crime reduction? f. Provide criminals with treatment to address addiction, mental health problems, or other problems
DS3: S3B: Survey of Treatment Program Directors Data
39. Please check the services that are provided in your program on a regular basis. 3. Mental health counseling disorders
33. Please indicate what standardized assessment tools are used in your facility/location and about how many offenders are assessed with that tool. m. Other standardized mental health instrument (specify)
51c. Below are examples of programs that may be offered to offenders in correctional settings. Using the scale shown, rate the importance of providing each program compared to substance abuse treatment. c. Mental health counseling
48. Please identify the level of involvement that your facility/location has with other organizations or offices on issues related to providing substance abuse services to offenders. g. Mental health programs
31. Please tell us about how many primary substance abuse counselors in your program have the following experiences and educational backgrounds. c. Have certification in a general mental health specialty (such as psychology)
32. Using the following scale, indicate your substance abuse treatment staffs need for training in the following areas: e. Providing counseling for offenders mental health problems
DS4: S4A: Survey of Correctional, Probation, and Parole Staff Data
Importance of providing each program: Mental health counseling
Service provided in your facility/location? Mental health counseling
28. Using the following scale, indicate your substance abuse treatment staff need for training in the following areas: Treatment staff needs training in providing counseling for offenders mental health problems
32. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about crime reduction? The best way to reduce crime is f. Provide criminals with treatment to address addiction, mental health problems, or other problems.
Which particular client/offender population? Co-occurring clients (mental health & substance abuse)
DS5: S4B: Survey of Treatment Staff Data
Below are examples of programs that may be offered to offenders in correctional settings. Using the scale shown, rate the importance of providing each program compared to substance abuse treatment. Mental health counseling
Please check the services that are provided in your program on a regular basis. Mental health counseling
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about crime reduction? Provide criminals with treatment to address addiction, mental health problems, or other problems.
Using the following scale, indicate how much you think you need training in each of the following areas: I need training in Providing counseling for offenders mental health problems
Utilities
Update Notification
Use any of the notification links to add this study to your RSS feed; you will then receive notification if the study is substantively updated.
Metadata Exports
- Citations exports are provided above.
Export Study-level metadata (does not include variable-level metadata)
If you're looking for collection-level metadata rather than an individual metadata record, please visit our Metadata Records page.