Process Evaluation of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program at the Illinois Youth Center, St. Charles, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3102)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Hide

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

As part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Congress provided funding for the development of substance abuse treatment programs in state and local correctional facilities with the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Formula Grant Program. To be eligible for this funding, programs were required to last between six and 12 months, be provided in residential treatment facilities set apart from the general correctional population, be directed at the inmate's substance abuse problems, and be intended to develop the inmate's cognitive, behavioral, social, vocational, and other skills to address substance abuse and related problems. The Illinois Youth Center (IYC) in St. Charles started an RSAT program on September 30, 1999. The primary emphasis of this evaluation was to describe why and how the St. Charles RSAT program was designed, implemented, and operated. To a lesser degree, attention was also directed toward examining the effects of program participation on offender pre-release behavior. This was considered to be a primary indicator of program impact. This project sought to answer the following research questions: (1) Did the program fit within the institutional environment? (2) Was the program operating as a therapeutic community? (3) Were the appropriate offenders selected for program participation? and (4) Were any short-term impacts evident within the youth?

Study Design View help for Study Design

This study followed a process evaluation design with a focus on determining how a product or outcome was produced, rather than on assessing the product or outcome itself. Process evaluations permit decision-makers to understand the dynamics of program operations and decide whether a program is operating according to their expectations. Information in this data collection was collected from youth participants and youth files. Subjects consisted of the 44 youths who began the RSAT program in 1999 (the treatment group), as well as a matched sample of non-program participants (the comparison group). The comparison group was used to contrast institutional behavior of youths not in the treatment program and to establish a non-treatment cohort for an expected follow-up impact study. Part 1 contains data from two surveys of program youth only, and Parts 2-4 contain data on both program youth and the comparison group. The first survey administration took place on October 14, 1999, approximately two weeks following program implementation. The survey instrument included 11 questions and asked youths about their prior drug and/or alcohol usage, whether they believed they needed treatment, if they previously had been in treatment, and what they believed they would get out of the program. The instrument was written at approximately a 4th-grade reading level. The second survey administration occurred on April 4, 2000, less than one week following program completion for the majority of program youths. The instrument included 11 questions and was designed to elicit evaluative information about the program from each youth. Specific questions included what the youths liked, disliked, and would change about the program. Additional questions focused on the actions of the program staff. This instrument was also written at a 4th-grade reading level. Part 2 data were gathered from a review of the youths' master files at the correctional facility. Demographic, social history, substance abuse, and criminal history information were included. Part 3 data were obtained from behavior action tickets (BATs), which were an institution-wide semi-formal mechanism to recognize positive and negative youth behavior. They were written at the discretion of a staff member. BATs were monitored by each youth's counselor and used as one factor in determining the privileges granted. The research team asked the counselors to save individual BATs of study youth from December of 1999 through June of 1999 so that information could be coded into a data file. Part 4 data were collected from institutional disciplinary reports (IDRs). Staff wrote IDRs whenever they observed a youth committing a more serious negative behavior. Unlike BATs, IDRs never reflected positive behavior. IDRs were classified as major or minor, depending upon the seriousness of the act. An officer reviewed minor IDRs, while the adjustment committee reviewed major IDRs. IDRs commonly resulted in confinement, a delay in recommending the youth's parole to the Prisoner Review Board, or a reduction in privileges. Individual IDRs were maintained permanently in each youth's master file. The IDRs for this study were collected between July 1, 1999, and June 30, 2000, in order to allow the evaluators to review behavior three months prior to the program, during the program, and during a three-month follow-up period.

Sample View help for Sample

Matched comparison sampling.

Universe View help for Universe

Youths aged 13 to 18 with substance abuse problems in the St. Charles, Illinois, Youth Center in 1999.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Source View help for Data Source

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables

Part 1 surveyed youth about what they hoped to achieve in the RSAT program, whether they thought the program would help them, how well they understood the program, how they assessed their own substance abuse problems, what they liked and disliked about the program, their opinions about program staff, and their recommendations for changing the program. Demographic variables in Part 2 include age, race, and education level. Other variables record reading test scores, math test scores, IQ scores, location of parents, number of siblings, drug use and frequency, criminal history, types of prior substance abuse treatments, family history of drug use, suicidal ideations, and personality test scores. Part 3 contains monthly counts of positive and negative behavior action tickets. Part 4 contains information about the number and types of guilty institutional disciplinary reports, the severity of the offenses, and the number and types of punishments received.

Response Rates View help for Response Rates

For Part 1, 86.4 percent of youth participated in the first youth survey, 56.8 percent completed the second survey, and 47.7 percent completed both surveys. Parts 2-4: Not applicable.

Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales

Several Likert-type scales were used in Part 1. Several psychological scales were used in Part 2.

Hide

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2002-11-01

Version History View help for Version History

Hide