DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02652
title: Evaluation of the New York City Department of Probation's Drug Treatment Initiative, 1991-1994
title: Archival Version

description: This study was undertaken to evaluate the New York City
 Department of Probation's initiative to place clients in specialized
 Substance Abuse Verification and Enforcement (SAVE) units for
 treatment and management. The main analytical strategy of this study
 was to determine whether clients who were appropriately matched to
 outpatient drug treatment were less likely to recidivate after
 treatment in this modality. The focus of the research was not so much
 on developing powerful prediction models, but rather on determining
 whether outpatient drug treatment was appropriate and effective for
 certain types of probationers. The evaluation research involved an
 in-depth analysis of a sample of 1,860 probationers who were sentenced
 between September 1991-September 1992 and referred to contracting
 outpatient drug treatment programs one or more times as of December
 31, 1993. The following types of data were collected: (1) the New
 York City Department of Probation's demographic and drug use
 information, obtained during the presentence investigation and at
 intake to probation, (2) the Department of Probation's Central
 Placement Unit (CPU) database records for each referral made through
 the CPU, as well as monthly progress reports filled out by the
 treatment programs on each probationer admitted to drug treatment, (3)
 the New York State Department of Criminal Justice Statistics' data on
 criminal histories, and (4) probation officers' reports on whether
 clients were referred to treatment, the kind of treatment modality to
 which they were referred, and the dates of admission and
 discharge. Demographic and socioeconomic variables include age at
 first arrest and sentencing, gender, race or ethnicity, marital
 status, family composition, educational attainment, and employment
 status. Other variables include drug use history (e.g., age at which
 drugs were first used, if the client's family members used drugs, if
 the client was actively using heroin, cocaine, or alcohol at time of
 intake into treatment), criminal history (e.g., age at first arrest,
 number of arrests, types of crimes, prior convictions, and prior
 probation and jail sentences), and drug treatment history (e.g.,
 number and types of prior times in drug treatment, months since last
 treatment program, number of admissions to a CPU program, and number
of AIDS education programs attended).
description: This study was undertaken to evaluate the New
 York City Department of Probation's initiative to place clients in
 specialized Substance Abuse Verification and Enforcement (SAVE) units
 for treatment and management. At the time, probation departments
 throughout the country were struggling with large caseloads of
 drug-involved offenders. This was especially true in areas such as New
 York City, where drug-related arrests had risen sharply and
 alternatives to incarceration had been expanded to alleviate
 overcrowding in jails and prisons. Many community corrections agencies
 had established specialized or intensive drug supervision units that
 monitored clients' drug use with urine testing and referred those who
 tested positive to drug treatment programs. In 1989, the New York City
 Department of Probation established Substance Abuse Verification and
 Enforcement (SAVE) units. These specialized units were created to
 provide closer supervision of high-risk cocaine-abusing probationers
 by having lower caseloads than regular units and by developing
 stronger linkages with community-based drug treatment programs. In
 1991, the department created a Central Placement Unit (CPU), which
 contracted with nine outpatient drug-free treatment programs for
 treatment slots. Referrals were made through the CPU, which operated
 like an 800-number reservation service that probation officers could
 call in order to place clients in contracting treatment programs. The
 main analytical strategy of this study was to determine whether
 clients who were appropriately matched to outpatient drug treatment
 were less likely to recidivate after treatment in this modality. The
 focus of the research was not so much on developing powerful
 prediction models, but rather on determining whether outpatient drug
 treatment was appropriate and effective for certain types of
 probationers. The study aimed to answer the question: Is outpatient
 drug treatment capable of reducing recidivism among a significant
number of probationers?
description: The evaluation research involved an in-depth
 analysis of a sample of 1,860 probationers who were sentenced between
 September 1991 and September 1992 and referred to contracting
 outpatient drug treatment programs one or more times as of December
 31, 1993. The following types of data were collected: (1) the New
 York City Department of Probation's demographic and drug use
 information, obtained during the presentence investigation and at
 intake to probation, (2) the Department of Probation's Central
 Placement Unit (CPU) database records for each referral made through
 the CPU, as well as monthly progress reports filled out by the
 treatment programs on each probationer admitted to drug treatment, (3)
 the New York State Department of Criminal Justice Statistics' data on
 criminal histories, and (4) probation officers' reports on whether
 clients were referred to treatment, the kind of treatment modality to
 which they were referred, and the dates of admission and
 discharge. Demographic and socioeconomic variables include age at
 first arrest and sentencing, gender, race or ethnicity, marital
 status, family composition, educational attainment, and employment
 status. Other variables include drug use history (e.g., age at which
 drugs were first used, if the client's family members used drugs, if
 the client was actively using heroin, cocaine, or alcohol at time of
 intake into treatment), criminal history (e.g., age at first arrest,
 number of arrests, types of crimes, prior convictions, and prior
 probation and jail sentences), and drug treatment history (e.g.,
 number and types of prior times in drug treatment, months since last
 treatment program, number of admissions to a CPU program, and number
of AIDS education programs attended).
description: Demographic and socioeconomic variables include age
 at first arrest and sentencing, gender, race or ethnicity, marital
 status, family composition, educational attainment, and employment
 status. Other variables include drug use history (e.g., age at which
 drugs were first used, if the client's family members used drugs, if
 the client was actively using heroin, cocaine, or alcohol at time of
 intake into treatment), criminal history (e.g., age at first arrest,
 number of arrests, types of crimes, prior convictions, and prior
 probation and jail sentences), and drug treatment history (e.g.,
 number and types of prior times in drug treatment, months since last
 treatment program, number of admissions to a CPU program, and number
of AIDS education programs attended).
description: Response Rates: Not applicable
description: Presence of Common Scales: None
description: Probationers who were sentenced between September
 1991-September 1992 and referred to contracting outpatient drug
treatment programs one or more times as of December 31, 1993.
description: Datasets: 
DS1: Evaluation of the New York City Department of Probation's Drug Treatment Initiative, 1991-1994
description: Probationers referred to contracting outpatient drug
treatment programs in New York City.