DOI: 10.3886/icpsr03075
title: Evaluation of Pennsylvania's Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program for Drug-Involved Parole Violators, 1998
title: Archival Version

description: This study was a process evaluation of Pennsylvania's two
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) programs in their first
year of implementation. These programs were maintained through the
joint management of the state Department of Corrections (DOC), Board
of Probation and Parole, Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and
Delinquency, and two private sector providers that operated the
programs. Opened in early 1998 in two correctional facilities for men,
each of these programs could serve up to 60 male technical parole
violators (TPVs) with a history of substance abuse. Instead of the
nine- to 36-month terms typical for parolees recommitted for
violations, RSAT participants served six months in prison-based
intensive therapeutic communities (TCs), followed by six months of
aftercare in a DOC-sponsored Community Corrections Center (CCC),
similar to a halfway house. Both programs took a cognitive-behavioral
approach to drug treatment. This study focused on the prison-based
component of the RSAT programs. It examined the extent to which
components of RSAT treatment were in place and the integrity of
program operations. Interviews for this study were conducted between
February and December 1998. At intake, program staff interviewed RSAT
participants (Part 1, Intake Data), and Vera Institute of Justice
onsite researchers conducted participant interviews upon exit (Part 2,
Exit Data). Through December 31, 1998, 160 intake interviews and 77
exit interviews with program graduates were administered.
description: This study was a process evaluation of
 Pennsylvania's two RSAT programs in their first year of
 implementation. These programs were maintained through the joint
 management of the state Department of Corrections (DOC), Board of
 Probation and Parole, Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and
 Delinquency, and two private sector providers that operate the
 programs. Pennsylvania's RSAT programs were unique in targeting
 technical parole violators (TPVs). Opened in early 1998 in two
 correctional facilities for men, each of these programs could serve up
 to 60 male TPVs with a history of substance abuse. These programs were
 also unique in their focus on cost-savings. Instead of the nine- to
 36-month terms typical for parolees recommitted for violations, RSAT
 participants served six months in prison-based intensive therapeutic
 communities (TCs), followed by six months of aftercare in a
 DOC-sponsored Community Corrections Center (CCC), similar to a halfway
 house. This study focused on the prison-based component of the RSAT
 programs. Men selected for RSAT from the state's western region were
 transferred to the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at
 Huntingdon. Men from eastern Pennsylvania were sent to
 SCI-Graterford. Gateway Rehabilitation Services, a private drug
 treatment provider, operated the program at Huntingdon, and
 Civigenics, another private provider, operated the Graterford
 program. Both programs took a cognitive-behavioral approach to drug
 treatment. Their logic model presumed that RSAT participants would
 learn to make socially responsible decisions and develop new responses
 to social and environmental cues that previously led them to use drugs
 and commit crimes. This study provided an interim assessment of the
 implementation of this logic model. It examined the extent to which
 components of RSAT treatment were in place and the integrity of
 program operations. The following questions guided this evaluation:
 (1) What was the underlying treatment philosophy of the RSAT program?
 What therapeutic methods were used and how was the program structured?
 (2) What was the program setting? How did the correctional setting
 affect treatment delivery? (3) How were new RSAT participants
 processed upon entry? What were the program's rules and how were they
 enforced? Were there any particular successes or problems in
 implementing this aspect of the program? (4) What treatment and other
 services were delivered in the program? How did the program's phase
 structure work? What was the program environment? Were there any
 particular successes or problems in implementing this aspect of the
 program? (5) How was the program staffed? Were there any particular
 successes or problems in establishing and maintaining program
 management and staffing? (6) What were the characteristics of program
 participants? What were participant perceptions of the programs? (7)
 What kinds of aftercare were provided after participants completed the
 in-prison treatment phase? Were there any particular successes or
 failures in implementing the program's aftercare components? (8) Did
 the program reach full capacity and remain there? What were the early
 program outcomes regarding participant retention and completion rates?
 What did findings on those who failed say about the program? (9) What
 were the lessons of this evaluation for other prison treatment
programs nationally?
description: Interviews for this study were conducted between
 February and December 1998. At intake, program staff interviewed RSAT
 participants, and Vera Institute of Justice onsite researchers
 conducted participant interviews upon exit. Through December 31, 1998,
 160 intake interviews and 77 exit interviews with program graduates
 were administered. The intake interview included a supplemented form
 of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), a widely used and studied
 assessment measure for substance abusers. The ASI was supplemented
 with additional questions, developed at Vera Institute of Justice,
 about criminal behavior and employment history. The exit interview
 included the Community Oriented Programs Environment Scale, program
 rating and satisfaction measures developed by researchers at Texas
 Christian University, an adapted version of the Treatment Services
Review, and a series of questions about experiences on parole.
description: Part 1, Intake Data, variables include sex, date of
 birth, date of admission, date of interview, RSAT site, current
 residence, ethnicity, religion, whether in controlled environment in
 last 30 days and length of stay, medical history, education,
 employment, sources of financial support, dependents, history of
 alcohol use, history of use of different types of drugs, which
 substance was most problematic, history of abstinence from drugs and
 alcohol, sexual activity, number of times overdosed on drugs, money
 spent on alcohol or drugs in last 30 days, and how bothered patient
 was by use of alcohol and drugs. Also included were data on history of
 alcohol and drug treatment, criminal history, family history of
 alcohol use, drug use, and psychological problems, marital status,
 satisfaction with marital status, living arrangements, number of
 self-help meetings attended in last month, number of children, age of
 each child, living arrangement of each child, and who had legal
 custody of each child, how patient spent free time, number of close
 friends, relationship with family and friends, emotional, physical,
 and sexual abuse, and mental health history. Variables also include
 the patient's rating of the importance of receiving treatment for
 problems relating to health, employment, drug and alcohol use,
 criminal activity, social relations, and mental health. The
 interviewer's ratings of the severity of the patient's problems, his
 level of misrepresentation, and his ability to understand are also
 included for each of these areas. Part 2, Exit Data, variables include
 interview date, RSAT site, admission date, CCC location, medical care
 received while in program, participation in RSAT classes/sessions
 regarding health, legal problems, education/employment,
 family/relationship problems, psychological/emotional problems, and
 drug/alcohol use, a patient rating for helpfulness of each type of
 class/session, psychiatric medication, frequency of drug/alcohol
 tests, and detox medication, whether program helped patient obtain an
 ID, public assistance, or unemployment benefits, time spent in
 non-therapeutic activities, participation in individual counseling,
 frequency with which different issues were discussed in individual
 counseling, patient ratings for different aspects of RSAT program,
 parole history prior to reincarceration, whether the patient received
 drug treatment when first released, reasons treatment was not
 received, whether the patient had to find a job upon release and
 whether a job was found, whether the patient had to attend any other
 programming/counseling and what kind, curfew when first released and
 just before violating parole, requirements to submit urine for drug
 testing, other conditions of parole, living situation while on parole,
 access to transportation while on parole, reason violated parole,
 whether the patient made a legal promise to enter treatment, patient's
 understanding of consequences if treatment was not completed, whether
 the patient thought he would complete the entire RSAT program, and the
 patient's opinion of what factors would have helped him get more out
of the program.
description: Response Rates: Through December 31, 1998, 160 of the 237
 individuals who entered the programs had completed intake interviews,
and 77 of 110 program graduates had completed exit interviews.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Scales used were the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), the
 Community Oriented Programs Environment Scale, and an adapted version
of the Treatment Services Review.
description: To be eligible for RSAT, technical parole violators must
 have had at least 18 months remaining on their (maximum) sentence, a
 demonstrated need for drug abuse treatment, and no history of escape,
 arson, or significant difficulties in the community corrections
 centers. All RSAT recommitments carried a mandatory time limit of 12
 months regardless of time spent in the Community Corrections Centers
(CCCs), resulting in varying lengths of stay in CCC aftercare.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Intake Data
DS2: Exit Data
description: Male technical parole violators in the ten counties served
by RSAT programs in the eastern and western parts of Pennsylvania.
description: Data cover the first year of RSAT operations in
Pennsylvania and many of the implementation issues that arose had been resolved
by Spring 1999. Users are encouraged to obtain a copy of the project's final
report for more information.The user guide and codebook are provided by
ICPSR as Portable Document Format (PDF) files. The PDF file format was
developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader
software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy
of the Acrobat Reader is provided on the ICPSR Web site.