DOI: 10.3886/icpsr03023.v1
title: Cooperative Agreement for AIDS Community-Based Outreach/Intervention Research Program, 1992-1998: [United States]
title: Version 1

description: The purpose of the Cooperative Agreement (CA) Research
Program was to monitor risk factors, risk behaviors, and rates of HIV
seroprevalence and seroincidence among out-of-treatment,
multi-ethnic/racial injection drug users and crack cocaine users. The
program evaluated the efficacy of experimental interventions designed
to prevent, eliminate, or reduce HIV risk behaviors and developed new
treatment interventions. All participants received the standard
intervention, which consisted of street-based outreach and HIV
prevention counseling. Those assigned to enhanced interventions
received more counseling sessions, educational videos, social
gatherings, and support group activities. The public-use data file
contains 31,088 respondent records, collected from 21 CA program
facilities in the United States and one facility each in Puerto Rico
and Brazil. Hence, the process data file contains 23 records of
facility information that can be linked to individual
respondents. Respondent interviews include a baseline Risk Behavior
Assessment (completed prior to first intervention) and a Follow-Up
Assessment, conducted either three months or six months after the
baseline survey. Respondent data were augmented with eligibility
information, biological markers of drug use, HIV test results, and
intervention assignment. At baseline and post-intervention, the
surveys measured drug use and drug treatment, sexual activity and sex
for money/drugs, arrests, work/income, HIV/STD/pregnancy status,
perceptions of risk, and risk reduction behaviors. The process
questionnaires were completed by staff or principal investigators at
the 23 site locations. Process data describe the program structure and
process, other intervention projects in the community, needle exchange
programs and pharmacy syringe sales, and local HIV infection
rates. Drugs reported on include alcohol, marijuana/hashish,
crack/cocaine, heroin (including speedball), non-prescription
methadone, other opiates, and amphetamines.
description: The Cooperative Agreement (CA) used a randomized and
quasi-experimental design. Respondents were recruited using a targeted
sampling strategy that employed mapping geographic areas of local drug
use activity and HIV infection. These ethnographic and epidemiologic
sampling techniques were utilized at the individual and community
level. Each site had a monthly recruitment goal of 35
multi-ethnic/racial male (70 percent) and female (30 percent) drug
injectors and crack users who were at risk for HIV. Respondents were
eligible if they had self-reported injection, crack, or cocaine use
within the past 30 days, were at least 18 years of age at the time of
baseline, were not currently enrolled in treatment, and had not been
interviewed by the National AIDS Demonstration Research program or the
CA program within the past year. Individuals or communities were
randomly assigned to a standard or enhanced intervention track.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Respondent Data
DS2: Process Data
description: Multi-ethnic/racial male and female drug injectors and
crack users at risk for HIV in the United States.
description: Data were collected and prepared for release by
CSR Incorporated, Washington, DC.To protect the privacy of
respondents, all variables that could be used to identify individual
clients or facilities have been encrypted, collapsed, or removed from
the public use files. These modifications should not affect the
analytic uses of the public use files.All participants received
the standard intervention, while those assigned to the enhanced
intervention received more sessions. Additional information about the
study interventions can be found in the codebook.The original
study protocol allowed for a follow-up window of six months. However,
these guidelines were amended and the window expanded to fifteen
months or longer in order to permit assessments of migrant
populations, high rates of incarceration, or other difficulties making
follow-up contact. In addition, some sites opted for a three-month
follow-up window. To identify the follow-up time period, users should
refer to the variable XDRBFINT, which records number of days between
baseline and follow-up surveys.Respondents were administered
either the six-month Risk Behavior Follow-Up Assessment (RF4) or the
three-month Risk Behavior Follow-Up Assessment (RF5), but not
both. However, about 42 percent of respondents are missing a Follow-Up
Assessment form. Under these circumstances (i.e., when the client was
lost to follow-up), efforts were made to complete a Client
Participation Summary form approximately 9 to 15 months after the
baseline interview.Responses to questions from the RF4 and RF5
surveys can be compared to responses from the RB3 to identify changes
between two points in time. The common variable names were copied from
RB3 when possible and prefixed by a capital "F" to indicate
"Follow-Up". For variables not common with RB3, the variable naming
convention is "F + sectionletter + other identifying characters".Most, but not all records, contain post-intervention process and
attrition data captured by the Client Participation Summary (CPS/CP2)
forms. The majority of records (24,409) have both CPS variables and
CP2 variables. The CPS variables are urine test and follow-up HIV test
results, reason lost to follow-up, presence of needle tracks,
referrals, and number and length of intervention sessions. The CP2
variables include all of the CPS variables plus detailed intervention
process information, number and length of enhanced intervention
sessions, and unscheduled session participation. There were 3,807
records with only the CPS variables and 2,872 records missing both CPS
and CP2 variables.Specific instruments were used to collect HIV
test results at baseline (BHT3), three-month follow-up (FHT33), and
6-month follow-up (FHT36). Every HT3 instrument includes ELISA test
results.