Search results

This study is part of the Seek, Test, Treat and Retain (STTR) Collaboration Project that involved over twenty studies in the fields of HIV and drug abuse. All studies were independently developed, but were chosen for the collaboration because they focused on one or more steps of the HIV treatment cascade: Seek, Test, Treat and Retain. As part of STTR Collaboration Project, the studies were grouped into Criminal Justice-related studies and Vulnerable Population-related studies. The data collected by these studies included twelve common domains (e.g., Demographic characteristics, Mental Health) in each of which a shared questionnaire or instrument was taken up by the studies and adapted to fit the study.

Using a randomized controlled study design, this study tested the efficacy of an abstinence-reinforcing CM intervention compared with a control condition (performance feedback) on HIV viral load (VL) suppression. The intervention CM group could receive up to $1320 in vouchers over the 16-week intervention based on drug-free urine. Participants were followed for 28 weeks (44 visits), with research visits occurring twice weekly during the Baseline Period (weeks 1-4, visits 1-8) and Intervention Period (weeks 5-20, visits 9-40), then every two weeks during the Post-Intervention Period (weeks 21-28, visits 41-44).

The Adolescent Substance Abuse Prevention Study (ASAPS) was a randomized field trial designed to test the effectiveness of a new school-based substance abuse prevention program called Take Charge of Your Life (TCYL). The program consisted of two curricula, one for middle schools and the other for high schools, which were delivered through the Drug Abuse Resistance Education network of law enforcement officers (D.A.R.E.). TCYL was developed building on existing D.A.R.E. seventh/eighth grade and tenth/eleventh grade curricula and applied principles and strategies suggested by published literature on effective drug abuse prevention programming and effective middle and high school curricula design. ASAPS was conducted among a 2001-2002 multi-site cohort of seventh graders who were followed for five years until the 2005-2006 school year when they were in the eleventh grade. The first TCYL curriculum was delivered in the treatment schools when the students were in seventh grade and the second was delivered when they were in the ninth grade.

Over the five-year study period, the treatment and control students responded to seven self-administered surveys: (1) at baseline in the seventh grade, (2) post-intervention in the seventh grade, (3) in the eighth grade, (4) pre-intervention in the ninth grade, (5) post-intervention in the ninth grade, (6) in the tenth grade, and (7) in the eleventh grade. Topics covered by the surveys include normative beliefs, social skills, attitudes toward drug use, and self-reported use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other illicit drugs. The ASAPS data also include measures of implementation fidelity of the seventh and ninth grade TCYL curricula, which were obtained from trained observers who rated the D.A.R.E. officers' delivery in the classroom. The fidelity measures encompass content coverage and instructional strategy.

This data collection comprises two data files, both with public- and restricted-use versions. The first (the Main Data File) contains the students' survey responses and the seventh grade curriculum fidelity measures, while the second (the 9th Grade Officer Observations Data) contains the ninth grade curriculum fidelity measures.

MOUD remains an underutilized evidence-based practice with potential to reduce opioid use disorder (OUD) and save lives. Washington State expanded its Hub & Spoke (H&S) model for OUD medication treatment (MOUD: buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone) by funding additional networks and developing a low-barrier, Opioid Treatment Network (OTN) model. The Washington H&S model was designed as a flexible approach incorporating primary care and substance use treatment programs, referral organizations, nurse care managers and care navigators. The OTN model offers MOUD induction in non-traditional settings (e.g., emergency departments, jails) with connections to community partners who will offer MOUD maintenance.

This study examined the implementation and effectiveness of the H&S and OTN models for increasing MOUD treatment and improving outcomes for people with OUD. Washington's H&S and OTN interventions were funded through federal STR/SOR opioid response grants, and the expanded H&S networks were funded through the state. The study, Hub and Spoke Opioid Treatment Networks: 2nd Generation Approaches to Improve Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorders (R01DA0561067), and its supplement (R01DA0561067S1) was part of NIH's HEAL initiative, and built on an earlier study (R33DA045851). All three studies were supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Expanding Access to Low-Barrier Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in Non-Traditional Settings: Washington's Opioid Treatment Network

• Increasing utilization of medications that treat opioid use disorders (MOUD) remains an essential strategy to curb the opioid crisis nationwide, especially among rural areas where access can present challenges. Washington State expanded access to MOUD through its opioid treatment networks (OTN), which provide low-barrier access to MOUD in non-traditional settings with an emphasis on buprenorphine and rural locations. The study examined changes in buprenorphine utilization between Medicaid beneficiaries who initiated treatment at OTNs compared to individuals outside OTN facilities and by rural-urban residence.

Differential Changes in Use of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder by Race-Ethnicity: Effects of a Hub-and-Spoke Model

• This study assessed whether delivery of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment through a hub and spoke (HS) model is associated with better adherence to psychotropic medication treatment, compared to usual treatment. Washington State's HS model required each network to include at least one mental health program, so it was hypothesized that it would improve psychotropic medication adherence for people with both a mental health disorder (MHD) and an OUD.

Treatment for Comorbid Mental Health Disorders Among Patients Treated for Opioid Disorder: The Role of a Hub and Spoke Intervention

• The research team examined, separately for different racial-ethnic groups, whether use of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) increased more among people treated in a hub-and-spoke care model than among people treated in a non-hub-and-spoke model.

The California Families Project (CFP) is an ongoing longitudinal study of Mexican origin families in Northern California. This study uses community, school, family, and individual characteristics to examine developmental pathways that increase risk for and resilience to drug use in Mexican-origin youth. This study also examines the impact that economic disadvantage and cultural traditions have in Mexican-origin youth. The CFP includes a community-based sample of 674 families and children of Mexican origin living in Northern California, and includes annual assessments of parents and children. Participants with Mexican surnames were drawn at random from school rosters of students during the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 school year. Data collection included multi-method assessments of a broad range of psychological, familial, scholastic, cultural, and neighborhood factors. Initiation of the research at age 10 was designed to assess the focal children before the onset of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drug (ATOD) use, thus enabling the evaluation of how hypothesized risk and resilience mechanisms operate to exacerbate early onset during adolescence or help prevent its occurrence. This study includes a diversity of families that represent a wide range of incomes, education, family history, and family structures, including two-parent and single-parent families.

The accompanying data file consists of 674 family cases with each case representing a focal child and at least one parent (Two-parent: n=549, 82 percent; Single-parent: n=125, 18 percent). Of the 3,139 total variables, 839 pertain to the focal child, 1,376 correspond to the mother, and 908 items pertain to the father.

Please note: While the California Families Project is a longitudinal study, only the baseline data are currently available in this data collection.

The Community Vulnerability and Responses to Drug-User-Related HIV/AIDS, 1990-2013 [96 Metropolitan Statistical Areas, United States] study (CVAR) was a research study of why large United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) vary over time in their vulnerability to HIV/AIDS among drug users and in MSA responses to HIV/AIDS. This collection contains estimates of HIV prevalence among people who injected drugs (PWID) and among sub-populations of PWID. This collection is comprised of ten datasets with differing amounts of variables and provides trend data that describe the following:

• Epidemiologic outcomes including population prevalence of PWIDs and Non-injecting drug users (NIDUs), and particularly their prevalence among youth; and, among PWIDs, HIV prevalence, late-diagnosis HIV cases, and AIDS incidence and mortality.
• Implementation of evidence-based drug-related interventions including drug abuse treatment, syringe exchange, HIV counseling and testing.
• Implementation of non-evidence-based drug-related interventions including incarceration and arrests of drug users.

The collection contains data on the MSA sub-populations including Black, Hispanic, White and "other" race categories. In addition, some statistics are presented in age range categories such as ages 15-29, 30-64 and 15-64.

The Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies 2 (CJ-DATS 2) was launched in 2008 with a focus on conducting implementation research in criminal justice settings. NIDA's ultimate goal for CJ-DATS 2 was to identify implementation strategies that maximize the likelihood of sustained delivery of evidence-based practices to improve offender drug abuse and HIV outcomes, and to decrease their risk of incarceration.

The Medication-Assisted Therapy (MAT) study focuses on implementing linkages to medication assisted treatment in correctional settings. During the study period community corrections staff engaged in training about addiction pharmacotherapies, while leadership in the corrections and treatment facilities engage in a joint strategic planning process to identify and resolve barriers to efficient flow of clients across the two systems.

This study includes 28 datasets and over 1,400 variables. The first five datasets for this study contain data on the baseline characteristics of the treatment and corrections sites that participated in the study as well as the characteristics of the staff working at those facilities. Opinions about Medication Assisted Treatment surveys were administered to personnel at the participating corrections and treatment sites (D6). Data on Inter-organization Relations between Probation and Parole staff with Treatment Providers were also collected (DS7-DS18).

Information was extracted from the charts of clients about their alcohol and opioid dependence as well as the referrals and treatment the clients received (DS19). Probation and parole officers and treatment providers were surveyed about monthly counts of referrals (DS20-DS21).

During the study 10 staff members from the community corrections agency and local treatment providers where MAT services were available were nominated to participate in a Pharmacotherapy Exchange Council (PEC). PEC members were involved with strategic planning for implementing changes to improve the usage of Medication-Assisted Therapy. PEC members were surveyed several times throughout the study.

PEC members completed surveys on how well the sites were adhering to the Organizational Linkages Intervention (OLI) process (DS22). Community corrections staff, PEC members and Connections Coordinators in the experimental group were surveyed about their perceptions of organizational benefits and costs associated with the MATICCE intervention (DS23). The PEC rated the Connections Coordinators (DS24)and the Connections Coordinators rate the PEC (DS25). PEC researchers completed surveys on how much of the OLI was completed (DS26) as well as what the sustainability of the changes made through the MATTICE project (DS27). The final dataset provides a key for who took the KPI (Key Performance Indicators) training and who was a PEC member (DS28).

The Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies 2 (CJ-DATS 2) was launched in 2008 with a focus on conducting implementation research in criminal justice settings. NIDA's ultimate goal for CJ-DATS 2 was to identify implementation strategies that maximize the likelihood of sustained delivery of evidence-based practices to improve offender drug abuse and HIV outcomes, and to decrease their risk of incarceration.

The Organizational Process Improvement Intervention (OPII) study (aka Assessment study) focused on implementing assessment and treatment planning processes. Screening and assessment were used to identify substance abuse-related problems and to develop programming to address the problems so identified.

The OPII study engaged corrections and treatment agencies to improve the quality of interagency communication through the effective use of assessment and case planning processes and treatment referrals. Both inter-agency and intra-agency change processes were targeted. A multi-phase implementation protocol was used, wherein agencies engaged in team development, needs assessment, planning, implementation, and sustainability in distinct steps. Early- and delayed-start sites allowed the research team to control for effects of environmental changes within states. The protocol targeted critical communications channels between otherwise often highly segregated correctional and treatment agencies.

Evaluation of the OPII used a multi-site cluster randomized design with multiple measures over the course of the intervention. Clusters consisted of a criminal justice agency and one or more community treatment providers that received referrals from that criminal justice agency. Each of the 9 centers had two clusters (one had three), and each cluster was randomized to an Early-Start or a Delayed-Start condition with multiple measures over the course of the intervention. After randomization, the Early-Start sites began the OPII, while the Delayed-Start sites conducted business as usual, without any additional intervention. After approximately 12 months, or when the Early-Start change team completed the Implementation phase, the Delayed-Start change team began to carry out the protocol.

Throughout the study period different subsets of individuals working at correctional facilities and treatment programs at the study sites were asked to complete surveys. During the Baseline period of the study survey data were collected from correctional staff, correctional directors, treatment staff, treatment directors, correctional executives and treatment executives. These data can be found in (DS1-DS12). The executive respondents provided information at the organizational level for the programs they oversaw (DS5, DS6). Next, Needs Assessments were completed by the change teams and their facilitators (DS13-DS14). The change teams and facilitators also responded to surveys on Process Improvement Planning (DS15-DS19). During the Implementation stage, surveys were administered to select substance abuse treatment programs, change team facilitators, change team members and the immediate supervisors of the change team members (DS20-DS27). Selected correctional and treatment staff members (in the Early-Start sites only) were asked to complete Follow-up surveys at the end of the OPII process (DS28-DS33). Staff members who completed surveys also provided demographic data (DS36-DS41). DS42 is a restricted use version of DS41. Change team members kept track of the time they spent on OPII activities (DS35). Change team success was evaluated by a subset of raters (DS34).

Surveys were administered at 21 study sites and there was a total of over 2,700 survey respondents.

The data files from this project are not available through NAHDAP/ICPSR. For information about accessing the data from this project, please contact the Principal Investigator.

Feedback from Tribal communities were gathered about a future Tribally specific near real-time opioid overdose monitoring dashboard. A questionnaire about an example dashboard with questions about overdose information, Narcan usage, and feedback about the dashboard's uses were included.

Drug-Abuse Treatment Outcomes Study (DATOS) is a prospective study designed to determine the outcomes of adult drug abuse treatment delivered in typical, stable, community-based programs and to provide comprehensive information on continuing and new questions about the effectiveness of drug abuse treatment for adults currently available in a variety of publicly funded and private programs. The study examined the role of treatment outcomes and program type, client characteristics (including dependence, treatment history, and physical and mental health comorbidities), treatment received (e.g., length and intensity of services provided), therapeutic approaches, provision of aftercare, and research on the components of effective treatment, including factors that engage and retain clients in programs. Four types of programs were included: outpatient methadone (OPM), short-term inpatient (STI), long-term residential (LTR), and outpatient drug-free (ODF). Respondents were sampled from among adults admitted to drug abuse treatment programs in 11 representative U.S. cities during 1991-1993.

Clients entering treatment completed two comprehensive intake interviews (Intake 1 and Intake 2), approximately one week apart. This information is provided in Parts 1 and 2 of the data collection. These interviews were designed to obtain baseline data on drug use and other behaviors, as well as information on background and demographic characteristics, patterns of dependence, living situation and child custody status, education and training, income and expenditures, and HIV risk behaviors, along with assessments of dependence, mental health, physical health, and social functioning. Data on criminal justice status and criminal behavior are reported in Part 5, Illegal Activities Data, and are drawn from the Intake 1 interview. Data reflecting during-treatment progress, including service delivery and client satisfaction, were collected in the one-, three-, and six-month in-treatment interviews (Parts 3, 4, and 8). The 12-Month Post-Treatment Follow-Up Interview (Part 6) replicated many of the intake questions and focused on key behaviors in the year following treatment. Part 7 includes variables for time in treatment and interview availability indicators. The 12-Month Follow-Up Urine Result data (Part 9) provide the results from urine sample tests that were given to a sample of subjects at the time of the 12-Month Follow-Up Interview. Urine specimens were tested for eight categories of drugs (amphetamines, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cannabinoids, cocaine metabolite, methaqualone, opiates, and phencyclidine). The drugs covered in the study were alcohol, tobacco, marijuana (hashish, THC), hallucinogens or psychedelics such as LSD, mescaline, and PCP, cocaine (including crack), heroin, narcotics or opiates such as morphine, codeine, Demerol, Dilaudid, and Talwin, downers or depressants such as sedatives, barbiturates, and tranquilizers, amphetamines or other stimulants such as speed or diet pills, and other drugs. Part 10 contains data for 1393 clients who were interviewed 5 years post treatment. This part contains many of the same types of questions asked during previous interviews.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Teenage adolescent females residing in Baltimore, Maryland who were involved in a relationship with a history of violence were sought after to participate in this research study. Respondents were interviewed and then followed through daily diary entries for several months. The aim of the research was to understand the context regarding teen dating violence (TDV). Prior research on relationship context has not focused on minority populations; therefore, the focus of this project was urban, predominantly African American females.

The available data in this collection includes three SAS (.sas7bdat) files and a single SAS formats file that contains variable and value label information for all three data files. The three data files are:

• final_baseline.sas7bdat (157 cases / 252 variables)
• final_partnergrid.sas7bdat (156 cases / 76 variables)
• hart_final_sas7bdata (7004 cases / 23 variables)

The Epidemiologic Catchment Area (ECA) program of research was initiated in response to the 1977 report of the President's Commission on Mental Health. The purpose was to collect data on the prevalence and incidence of mental disorders and on the use of and need for services by the mentally ill. Independent research teams at five universities (Yale University, Johns Hopkins University, Washington University, Duke University, and University of California at Los Angeles), in collaboration with the National Institute for Mental Health, conducted the studies with a core of common questions and sample characteristics. The sites were areas that had previously been designated as Community Mental Health Center catchment areas: New Haven, Connecticut, Baltimore, Maryland, St. Louis, Missouri, Durham, North Carolina, and Los Angeles, California. Each site sampled over 3,000 community residents and 500 residents of institutions, yielding 20,861 respondents overall. The longitudinal ECA design incorporated two waves of personal interviews administered one year apart and a brief telephone interview in between (for the household sample). The diagnostic interview used in the ECA was the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS), Version III (with the exception of the Yale Wave I survey, which used Version II). Diagnoses were categorized according to the DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS, 3rd Edition (DSM-III). Diagnoses derived from the DIS include manic episode, dysthymia, bipolar disorder, single episode major depression, recurrent major depression, atypical bipolar disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence, drug abuse or dependence, schizophrenia, schizophreniform, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobia, somatization, panic, antisocial personality, and anorexia nervosa. The DIS uses the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), which measures cognitive functioning, as an indirect measure of the DSM-III Organic Mental Disorders. In the ECA survey, this diagnosis is called cognitive impairment.

This collection features data from 17,327 participants across 2,005 variables. Data from the Los Angeles, California, Catchment (UCLA) are not included. Baseline data (Wave 1) and Wave 2 data were linked to the National Death Index through 2007, which includes primary and contributing causes of death, International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes, and nature of injury variables.

The Great Smoky Mountain Study (GSMS) is a longitudinal epidemiological study of 1,420 children begun in 1992 in 11 rural counties in western North Carolina. Originally, the study had three aims: 1) to estimate the prevalence of common psychiatric disorders; 2) to study their development over time; and 3) to determine the level of mental health service use. The study expanded over time to include correlates and predictors of substance abuse and psychiatric problems. The study continued for over 20 years, with the original participants assessed up to 11 times from ages 9 to 30 (over 11,000 assessments total).

This collection includes data from study modules related to alcohol, cannabis, and depressive disorders in addition to core data on participants. This core data includes demographic variables related to age, sex, socioeconomic status, and race.

The study is comprised of interviews from 227 Hispanic males aged 45 or older living in the area of Houston, Texas to address the gaps in knowledge on the social factors and health consequences of injection heroin use among aging Mexican American males. Specifically, the study investigated how the life course transitions of incarceration and drug treatment and drug abuse and family trajectories affect both the heroin career status and health consequences of these aging Mexican American men.

The study used a cross-sectional, field-intensive outreach methodology augmented with respondent-driven sampling. Recruitment was focused in two Houston neighborhoods that are predominantly Mexican American areas with high rates of crime, poverty, and psychosocial challenges. Trained Outreach Specialists familiar with these communities identified community gatekeepers and gained their trust through continued presence in the community and ongoing dialogue about the study. These gatekeepers then helped identify individuals meeting the inclusion criteria: Mexican American men aged 45 years or older with a history of injection drug use for at least 3 years. The men were then classified into one of three groups: current injectors (current group), former injectors not in treatment (former group), or former injectors currently enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment programs (MMTP group).

The second part is a second survey asking questions about social networks the respondent participates in. Questions ask the respondent to answer on one individual in their network and answer questions about that person and their interaction with them. Questions include basic demographics, history injecting drugs and sexual contact with the person.

This study is also available on the HEAL Data Platform (study record HDP00331).

The Iowa Adoption Studies were conducted between 1975 and 2008. The group of studies consist of 5 independent waves of data collection each of which examined genetic (biological) and environmental influences on psychopathology. The adoption paradigm allowed separation of genetic and environmental influences on behavior, as well as joint influences due to gene x environment interaction. Adoptees were interviewed about lifetime psychopathology including substance abuse and dependence, antisocial personality, and mood disorders. A follow-up study was conducted from 2000-2004 that recruited all previous participants and natural offspring of the adoptive parents when available. Standardized psychiatric assessments were administered along with measures of personality disorders and traits, retrospective reports on childhood experiences with adoptive parents, and current symptomatology. An extensive neurocognitive assessment was conducted on a subset of participants who had standardized school achievement scores. The goal of this last wave of assessment was to evaluate the influence of substance use on mid-life cognition and health.

The respondents were assessed using a number of different surveys over the study period. The following describes the notable variables as well as descriptions of the surveys included in the dataset.

The first variables in the dataset identify sibling pairs and provides data on whether the respondents' biological parents suffered from mental health or substance abuse issues. Next birth records are provided that give basic information about the health of the person when he or she was born. This information is followed by the survey results of "The Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality" (SNAP) as well as variables that reflect the diagnosis of personality disorders and nonadaptive personality traits based on the SNAP survey responses.

The next section includes responses from "The Iowa Personality Disorder Screen," a quick personality disorder screen developed in 1999 intended for use in clinical and research settings.

Next, responses to Pearson Assessments "Brief symptoms inventory" are included as well as the scores calculated based on these survey responses. The results of this survey assess the mental state of the patient including scales on Somatization, Obsessive-Compulsive, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Depression, Anxiety, Hostility, Phobic Anxiety, Paranoid Ideation and Psychoticism.

The respondents also completed the "Buss-Durkee Hostility Questionnaire" and were assessed on measure regarding the following hostility traits: negativism, resentment, indirect hostility, assault, suspicion, irritability and verbal hostility.

Reponses to the "The Social Provisions Scale" survey are also included. The purpose of this survey is to assess the relationship the respondents have to other people. The 6 social provisions assessed include: guidance, reliable alliance, reassurance of worth, attachment, social integration, and opportunity for nurturance.

"The Parental Bonding Instrument" instrument was utilized to assess the respondents' relationships to their mothers and fathers.

A series of cognitive tests were administered to respondents. ICPSR is unable to provide the survey instruments used in the cognitive test due to copy write issues. These tests include:

Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT)

North American Adult Reading Test (NAART)

Rey Figure and Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial (RCFT)

Shipley Institute of Living Scale (SILS)

Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)

Tower of Hanoi (TofH)

Comprehensive Trailmaking Test (CTMT)

Weschler Adult Intelligence Test (WAIS)

Weschler Memory Test (WMS)

The dataset also includes respondents' results of the Comprehensive Performance Test (CPT) and the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT)

Scores from the "Iowa Test of Basic Skills," a test of academic achievement that evaluates students knowledge in subjects including, mathematics, reading comprehension, and science, are included in the dataset. Respondents are evaluated in grades 4, 8 and 11.

The final section of the dataset includes two waves of the "Semi Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Alcoholism," a survey intended to assess the physical, psychological, and social manifestations of alcohol abuse. These survey responses make up the bulk of the dataset and include variables on a variety of topics including: demographics, medical history, substance use, eating disorders, depression, dysthymia, mania, ASP, suicide, PTSD, generalized anxiety disorder, OCD, social phobia, agoraphobia, panic disorder, home environment, gambling, and ADHD. Substances use investigated includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, sedatives, stimulants, cocaine, opiates, solvents, hallucinogens, and other drugs.

This dataset includes 934 cases and 9,370 variables.

The Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) study included 23 drug courts and 6 comparison sites selected from 8 states across the country. The purpose of the study was to: (1) Test whether drug courts reduce drug use, crime, and multiple other problems associated with drug abuse, in comparision with similar offenders not exposed to drug courts, (2) address how drug courts work and for whom by isolating key individual and program factors that make drug courts more or less effective in achieving their desired outcomes, (3) explain how offender attitudes and behaviors change when they are exposed to drug courts and how these changes help explain the effectiveness of drug court programs, and (4) examine whether drug courts generate cost savings.

Offenders in all 29 sites were surveyed in 3 waves, at baseline, 6 months later, and 18 months after enrollment. The research comprises three major components: process evaluation, impact evaluation, and a cost-benefit analysis. The process evaluation describes how the 23 drug court sites vary in program eligibility, supervision, treatment, team collaboration, and other key policies and practices. The impact evaluation examines whether drug courts produce better outcomes than comparison sites and tests which court policies and offender attitudes might explain those effects. The cost-benefit analysis evaluates drug court costs and benefits.

The NCS-2 was a re-interview of 5,001 individuals who participated in the Baseline (NCS-1). The study was conducted a decade after the initial baseline survey. The aim was to collect information about changes in mental disorders, substance use disorders, and the predictors and consequences of these changes over the ten years between the two surveys. The collection contains three major sections: the main survey, demographic data, and diagnostic data.

In the main survey, respondents were asked about general physical and mental health. Questions focused on a variety of health issues, including limitations caused by respondents' health issues, substance use, childhood health, life-threatening illnesses, chronic conditions, medications taken in the past 12 months, level of functioning and symptoms experienced in the past 30 days, and any services used by the respondents since the (NCS-1). Additional questions focused on mental disorders including depression, bipolar disorder, specific and social phobias, generalized anxiety, intermittent explosive disorder, suicidality, post-traumatic stress disorder, neurasthenia, pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and separation anxiety. Respondents were also asked about their lives in general, with topics including employment, finances, marriage, children, their social lives, and stressful life events experienced in the past 12 months. Additionally, two personality assessments were included consisting of respondents' opinions on whether various true/false statements accurately described their personalities. Another focus of the main survey dealt with substance use and abuse, nonmedical use of prescription drugs, and polysubstance use. Interview questions in the NCS-2 Main Survey were customized to each respondent based on previous responses in the Baseline (NCS-1).

The middle section contains demographic and other background information including age, education, employment, household composition, household income, marital status, and region.

The last section of the collection focused on whether respondents met diagnostic criteria for psychological disorders asked about in the main survey.

The NCS-2 was a re-interview of 5,001 individuals who participated in the Baseline (NCS-1). The study was conducted a decade after the initial baseline survey. The aim was to collect information about changes in mental disorders, substance use disorders, and the predictors and consequences of these changes over the ten years between the two surveys. The collection contains four major sections: the main survey, demographic data, diagnostic data, and state, county, and tract FIPS data.

In the main survey, respondents were asked about general physical and mental health. Questions focused on a variety of health issues, including limitations caused by respondents' health issues, substance use, childhood health, life-threatening illnesses, chronic conditions, medications taken in the past 12 months, level of functioning and symptoms experienced in the past 30 days, and any services used by the respondents since the (NCS-1). Additional questions focused on mental disorders including depression, bipolar disorder, specific and social phobias, generalized anxiety, intermittent explosive disorder, suicidality, post-traumatic stress disorder, neurasthenia, pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and separation anxiety. Respondents were also asked about their lives in general, with topics including employment, finances, marriage, children, their social lives, and stressful life events experienced in the past 12 months. Additionally, two personality assessments were included consisting of respondents' opinions on whether various true/false statements accurately described their personalities. Another focus of the main survey dealt with substance use and abuse, nonmedical use of prescription drugs, and polysubstance use. Interview questions in the NCS-2 Main Survey were customized to each respondent based on previous responses in the Baseline (NCS-1).

The second part contains demographic and other background information including age, education, employment, household composition, household income, marital status, and region.

The third part focuses on whether respondents met diagnostic criteria for psychological disorders asked about in the main survey.

The fourth part contains respondents' state, county, and tract FIPS data.