This study was an evaluation of the Breaking the
Cycle (BTC) demonstration projects conducted in Birmingham, Alabama,
Jacksonville, Florida, and Tacoma, Washington, between 1997 and
2001. The BTC demonstrations tested the feasibility and impact of
systemwide interventions to reduce drug use among offenders by
identifying and intervening with drug-involved felony defendants. The
BTC strategy was to screen offenders shortly after arrest and require
those found to use drugs to participate in a drug intervention while
under criminal justice supervision. BTC targeted all adult felony
defendants and was not limited to those charged with drug offenses.
Defendants were ordered to report to BTC for drug screening as a
condition of pretrial release. Those who reported drug use, tested
positive for drugs, or were arrested on drug felony charges were
placed in drug testing and, when appropriate, referred to drug
treatment or drug education classes. The goal was to expand the scope
of earlier programs such as drug courts and Treatment Alternatives to
Street Crime (TASC) by incorporating drug reduction activities as part
of handling felony cases. The core reforms called for by the BTC model
were early intervention, judicial oversight, graduated sanctions and
incentives, and collaboration among justice and treatment agencies.
This study contains data collected as part of the impact evaluation of
BTC, which was designed to test the hypotheses that BTC reduced
criminal involvement, substance abuse, and problems related to the
health, mental health, employment, and families of felony drug
defendants in the demonstration sites. The evaluation examined the
relationship between changes in these areas and characteristics of
participants, the kinds and levels of services and supervision they
received, and perceptions of defendants about the justice system's
handling of their cases (Parts 1, 3, and 5). It also assessed how BTC
affected case handling, the length of time required to reach a
disposition, the number of hearings, and the kinds of sentences
imposed (Parts 2, 4, and 6).
The conceptual design of the impact evaluation
focused on two outcomes: (1) goals for offenders, such as reductions
in drug and alcohol use, criminal activity, health, social, and
employment problems, perceptions of offenders concerning the fairness
of the hearings, and the risk and severity of consequences for
noncompliance with court orders, and (2) system changes, such as the
number of hearings, number of days between arraignment and case
disposition, top charge at conviction, and sentences imposed. The
interventions and services hypothesized to affect offender and system
outcomes included drug treatment placements, type and duration of drug
treatment, drug testing, frequency of judicial monitoring, intensity
of contact with case managers or court supervision staff, the types of
incentives and sanctions, and the timeliness and consistency of
sanctioning. In addition, offender characteristics were hypothesized
to affect both the type of services received and the response. These
characteristics included demographics, substance abuse pattern and
severity, employment and educational status, family status and living
situation, physical and mental health, prior criminal activity, and
current charge. To assess the first outcome, goals for offenders, the
impact evaluation consisted of a quasi-experimental comparison of
defendants in BTC with samples of similar defendants arrested in the
year before BTC implementation. Parts 1, 3, and 5 contain the data for
this component of the evaluation for Birmingham, Jacksonville, and
Tacoma, respectively. These data were collected from records
maintained by the Breaking the Cycle (BTC) programs and partner
agencies, as well as from National Crime Information Center (NCIC)
databases. In addition, interviews were conducted by the Treatment
Research Institute (TRI) with sample members shortly following arrest
(baseline) and again nine months later (follow-up). The questionnaires
consisted of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), modified to include
additional questions about illegal activities and participation in
drug treatment services. In Birmingham (Part 1) respondents were also
given the Risk of AIDS Behavior questions. In Jacksonville and Tacoma
(Parts 3 and 5) respondents were asked questions about perceptions of
fairness and the consequences of noncompliance with court
orders. Participation in the evaluation was voluntary. TRI staff
contacted potential sample members shortly after arrest and asked for
their consent. They were guaranteed confidentiality and offered
financial incentives for participation. The participants signed a
written consent form agreeing to participate in the study and allowing
the research team to collect data from criminal justice and treatment
agencies. To assess the second outcome, changes in the criminal
justice system, the impact evaluation assessed how the BTC programs
affected criminal case processing. Parts 2, 4, and 6 contain court
data from Birmingham, Jacksonville, and Tacoma, respectively, gathered
for all felony defendants processed by the courts during a specified
period of time. The samples were chosen to compare felony cases prior
to and during BTC implementation to measure the impact of BTC on court
case processing.
Parts 1, 3, and 5 consisted of a quasi-experimental
comparison of defendants in BTC with samples of similar defendants
arrested in the year before BTC implementation. The sample selection
procedures were designed to select individuals who would be eligible
for BTC services, even if selected prior to BTC implementation. Sample
members were required to be (1) age 18 or older, (2) residents of the
county or BTC service area, (3) facing a felony charge, and (4)
involved with illegal drugs as measured by a current drug charge, a
positive urinalysis screen, or self-reported drug use. A small number
of potential sample members were excluded because of a language
barrier, psychiatric impairment, or intoxication at the time they were
contacted. For Parts 2, 4, and 6 all felony court cases processed
during specified periods of time before and during BTC implementation
were selected.
Parts 1, 3, and 5: Felony defendants involved with illegal
drugs in Birmingham, Alabama, Jacksonville, Florida, and Tacoma,
Washington, respectively. Parts 2, 4, and 6: All felony court cases
processed in Birmingham, Alabama, Jacksonville, Florida, and Tacoma,
Washington, respectively, between 1997 and 2001.
Parts 1, 3, and 5: individuals. Parts 2, 4, and 6:
court cases.
For Parts 1, 3, and 5, data were collected from records
maintained by the Breaking the Cycle (BTC) programs and partner
agencies, as well as from National Crime Information Center (NCIC)
databases. Data were also collected from interviews with sample
members. Interviews were either conducted face-to-face or by telephone.
Parts 2, 4, and 6 consist of official records data obtained from court
records on filings and case outcomes.
administrative records data, and survey data
In Parts 1, 3, and 5, data were collected from the
BTC program on the sample entry charge, disposition, sentence, and
re-arrests after BTC. Additional information was gathered with the
Addiction Severity Index. In particular, respondents were asked about
medical problems, medical history, education and employment histories,
income from various sources, drug and alcohol use and abuse, criminal
history, current living arrangements, family life, and psychological
problems. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, religious
preference, years of education, and type of occupation. Interviews in
Birmingham (Part 1) also included questions from the Risk of AIDS
Behavior questionnaire. Respondents in Jacksonville (Part 3) and
Tacoma (Part 5) were only asked a couple of questions about Risk of
AIDS, including history of sharing needles and cleaning needles and
sexual history. Additional questions in Jacksonville (Part 3) and
Tacoma (Part 5) were asked about respondents' assessments of the
likelihood of arrest or sentencing if they committed another serious
crime or tested positive for drugs, and respondents' perceptions of
the fairness of the criminal justice system. Parts 2, 4, and 6 contain
information from court records. Variables in Part 2 (Birmingham)
include the type of offense, case status, case action, number of
hearings to disposition, disposition at first hearing, days from
arrest to case filing, days from arrest to first hearing, and days
from arrest to disposition. Part 4 (Jacksonville) includes offender's
age, race, gender, offense type, number of charges, disposition, type
of sentence, number of convictions, days from arrest to intake, days
from arrest to plea, total number of hearings, and days from arrest to
first hearing. Part 6 (Tacoma) variables include age at arrest,
gender, race, type of offense, number of counts, method of
disposition, type of sentence, total sentence in days, days from
arrest to disposition, days from arrest to arraignment, days from
arrest to pretrial conference, and number of convictions.
In Birmingham (Part 1), 91 percent of the felony
defendants initially identified as eligible for BTC agreed to
participate in the study. In Jacksonville (Part 3), 47 percent of the
pre-BTC defendants and 72 percent of the BTC defendants consented to
participate in the study. In Tacoma (Part 5) 54 percent of the pre-BTC
sample and 83 percent of the BTC sample agreed to participate in the
study. However, after gaining consent, some participants in each of
the sites were subsequently dropped from the study because they were
later determined to be ineligible.
Parts 1, 3, and 5 contain several scales from the
Addiction Severity Index, as well as several Likert-type scales.