Community Supervision of Drug-Involved Probationers in San Diego County, California, 1991-1993

The Probationers in Recovery (PIR) program, developed by
the San Diego County Probation Department, targeted high-risk,
drug-abusing offenders with the goal of controlling offender behavior
without increasing risks to communities. This evaluation of PIR was
based on a quasiexperimental design that compared program activities
and outcomes for two matched groups of high-risk probationers
receiving different levels of service and supervision. The assessment
included both a process evaluation to discover if expected service
levels were implemented as designed, and an impact evaluation to
assess the effectiveness of drug treatment within an intensive
community supervision program. The experimental group included 209 PIR
participants who received intensive community supervision and drug
treatment, and the control group consisted of 151 probationers who
were assigned to regular high-risk probation caseloads and who met the
PIR screening criteria. The samples were selected from probationers
entering community supervision from February to December 1991. The
length of the PIR program varied, but for purposes of analysis the
minimum time in the program to represent the intervention period was
set at eight months, including relapse prevention. A comparable period
was used for the control group. The subsequent six-month period was
used to measure the effects of PIR and regular high-risk probation
after intervention. Intake interviews were conducted with a subsample
of 96 probationers in PIR and 80 in the control group (Part 1). The
interviews were conducted within the first two weeks after
intake. Follow-up interviews were conducted with these probationers
after they had completed eight months of PIR or regular high-risk
probation to measure experiences on probation and changes in behavior
and attitudes (Part 2). Follow-up interviews were completed with 47
probationers from the experimental group in the PIR program and 35 in
the control group. The case tracking portion of the study involved the
review of probation, treatment, and state and local criminal history
files (Part 3). Data on technical violations and arrests for new
crimes were compiled for the following time periods: (1) six months
prior to the instant offense (the baseline), (2) the first eight
months of community supervision (the in-program period), (3) the six
months after intervention, and (4) the combined 14-month period. The
initial interview (Part 1) included questions regarding
sociodemographic characteristics, current offense, awareness of
probation conditions ordered, perceived consequences for violations of
probation, drug use and drug history, prior drug treatment and
treatment needs, criminal history, expectations regarding the
probation term, opinions regarding probation and treatment, daily
activities prior to the current offense, current life satisfaction,
and prospects for the future. Questions on the follow-up interview
(Part 2) focused on changes in probationers' personal lives (e.g.,
employment, income, education, marital status, living situation, and
relationships with family and friends), technical probation violations
and new offenses committed during the eight-month period, sanctions
imposed by probation staff, contacts with probation and treatment
staff, changes in drug use and daily activities, expectations with
regard to remaining crime- and drug-free in the future, attitudes
regarding probation and treatment, treatment needs, and significant
life changes over the eight-month period. Variables in the tracking
data file (Part 3) include sociodemographic characteristics, current
offense and sentence imposed, probation conditions ordered, drug use
history, offense and probation violations occurring before, during,
and after an eight-month probation period, custody time, changes in
level of probation supervision, and program interventions such as drug
tests, services delivered, and sanctions imposed.

Tags: communities, crime-prevention, drug-offenders, drug-treatment, outcome-evaluation, postrelease-programs, probation-conditions, probationers, process-evaluation, risk-assessment, supervised-liberty, treatment-outcomes
Organization: Department of Justice