DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02749.v1
title: Strategies for Retaining Offenders in Mandatory Drug Treatment Programs in Kings County, New York, 1994-1995
title: Version 1

description: This study examined the relationship between legal
pressure and drug treatment retention by assessing perceptions of
legal pressure held by two groups of legally-mandated treatment
clients: (1) participants of the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison
(DTAP) program operated by the Kings County (Brooklyn) District
Attorney in New York City, and (2) a matched group of probationers,
parolees, Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) participants,
and other court-mandated offenders attending the same community-based
treatment programs used by DTAP. The Brooklyn DTAP was selected for
study because of the program's uniquely coercive program components,
including the threat of a mandatory prison term for noncompliance.
The goals of this project were (1) to test whether DTAP participants
would show significantly higher retention rates when compared to a
matched sample of other legally-mandated treatment clients, and (2)
to assess the role of perceived legal pressure in predicting
retention for both of these groups. Data were collected from program
participants through interviews conducted at admission to treatment
and follow-up interviews conducted about eight weeks later. Intake
interviews were conducted, on average, one week after the client's
admission to treatment. The one-to-one interviews, which lasted up to
two hours, were administered by trained researchers in a private
location at the treatment site. The intake interview battery included
a mixture of standardized measures and those developed by the Vera
Institute of Justice. Data in Part 1 were collected with the
Addiction Severity Index and include age, sex, race, religion, and
education. Additional variables cover medical problems, employment
history, detailed substance abuse and treatment history, number of
times arrested for various crimes, history of incarceration, family's
substance abuse and criminal histories, relationships with family and
friends, psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and
suicide, current living arrangements, and sources of income. Part 2,
Supplemental Background and Retention Data, contains treatment entry
date, number of days in treatment, age at treatment entry,
termination date, treatment condition, arrest date, detention at
arrest, date released on probation/parole, violation of
probation/parole arrest date and location, problem drug, prior drug
treatment, as well as age, gender, race, education, and marital
status. Part 3, Division of Criminal Justice Services Data, includes
data on the number of arrests before and after program entry, and
number of total misdemeanor and felony arrests, convictions, and
sentences. Part 4, Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence Data, contains
information on type of substance abuse, intoxication or withdrawal at
work, school, or home, effects of abuse on social, occupational, or
recreational activities, and effects of abuse on relationships,
health, emotions, and employment. Parts 5 and 6 contain psychiatric
data gathered from the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised and Beck's
Depression Inventory, respectively. Part 7 variables from the
Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability scale include
family's attitude toward treatment, subject's need for treatment,
subject's desire to change life, and legal consequences if subject
did not participate in treatment. Part 8, Stages of Change Readiness
and Treatment Eagerness scale, contains data on how the subject
viewed the drug problem, desire to change, and history of dealing
with substance abuse. Part 9, Motivational/Program Supplement Data,
includes variables on the subject's need for treatment, attitudes
toward treatment sessions, the family's reaction to treatment, and a
likelihood of completion rating. Part 10, Perceived Legal Coercion
Data, gathered information on who referred the subject to the
treatment program, who was keeping track of attendance, whether
someone explained the rules of participation in the program and the
consequences if the subject failed the program, whether the rules and
consequences were put in writing, who monitored program participants,
the likelihood of using drugs while in treatment, the likelihood of
leaving the program before completion, whether the subject understood
the legal consequences of failing the program, the type and frequency
of reports and contacts with the criminal justice system, and the
subject's reaction to various penalties for not completing the
program. Part 11 contains data from the Community Oriented Programs
Environment Scale (COPES). Part 12, Treatment Services Review Data,
includes data on the number of times the subject received medical
attention, days in school, days employed, days intoxicated, days in
substance abuse treatment, days tested for drugs, number of contacts
with the criminal justice system, days treated for psychological
problems, and time spent at recreational activities. Additional
variables include the number of individual and group treatment
sessions spent discussing medical problems, education and employment,
substance abuse, legal problems, and psychological and emotional
problems.
description: Shifting the focus from simple comparisons of
 voluntary and coerced clients, this study examined the relationship
 between legal pressure and drug treatment retention by assessing
 perceptions of legal pressure held by two groups of legally-mandated
 treatment clients: (1) participants of the Drug Treatment Alternative
 to Prison (DTAP) program and (2) a matched group of probationers,
 parolees, Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) participants,
 and other court-mandated clients attending the same community-based
 treatment programs used by DTAP. DTAP was developed and operated by
 the Office of the Kings County (Brooklyn) District Attorney in New
 York City. It was selected for study because of the program's
 uniquely coercive program components, such as the threat of a
 legally-mandatory prison term for noncompliance and an apprehension
 unit specifically assigned to the program. It also had an exceptional
 record of participant retention and completion (two to four times
 greater than the retention rates reported for other long-term
 residential programs). In lieu of a prison sentence, Brooklyn DTAP
 provided the option of long-term treatment (generally 15-24 months)
 in a residential therapeutic community to repeat, nonviolent felony
 defendants. The charges were dropped if the person completed the
 program, while those who failed in treatment faced prison terms under
 New York's mandatory sentencing statutes. The goals of this project
 were (1) to test whether DTAP participants would show significantly
 higher retention rates when compared to a matched sample of other
 legally-mandated treatment clients, and (2) to assess the role of
 perceived legal pressure in predicting retention for both of these
groups.
description: Data were collected from interviews with program
 participants that were conducted at admission to treatment and
 follow-up interviews conducted about eight weeks later. Intake
 interviews were conducted, on average, one week after the client's
 admission to treatment. The one-to-one interviews, which lasted up to
 two hours, were conducted by trained researchers in a private
 location at the treatment site. The intake interview battery included
 a mixture of standardized measures and those developed by the Vera
 Institute. Part 1 consists of extensive history and status
 information gathered from the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), a
 widely-used, standardized measure that assessed individuals' family
 and social backgrounds, employment and education, substance abuse,
 criminal/legal, medical, and psychiatric status and histories. Part 2
 contains supplemental questions to the ASI covering employment
 history and self-reported criminal behavior. Also included are
 treatment entry date, number of days in treatment, and termination date,
 which were used to calculate the study's central outcome measure:
 retention in treatment. Subjects were tracked for at least six months
 after admission. Those entering the research early in the data
 collection period were tracked for about 20 months. Part 3 consists
 of criminal history data obtained from official records kept by the
 New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Part 4 includes
 additional substance abuse history data gathered using the Chemical
 Use, Abuse, and Dependence (CUAD) scale, which employed
 quantity/frequency measures and probed drug-related life
 problems. Psychiatric data were collected with two standardized
 measures often used in research on substance abusers: the Symptom
 Checklist-90-Revised (Part 5) and the Beck Depression Inventory (Part
 6). Intake measures of the client's motivation for treatment included
 the Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability (CMRS)
 scale (Part 7) and the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment
 Eagerness (SOCRATES) scale (Part 8). Additionally, the Vera Institute
 created a 14-item measure called the Motivational/Program Supplement
 (M/PS) questionnaire (Part 9), which addressed other motivational and
 background factors that prior research suggested may influence
 retention. The final data collection from the intake interview is
 Part 10, which contains data from the Perception of Legal Pressure
 (PLP) questionnaire developed by Vera researchers. A follow-up
 interview focusing on program factors was conducted with all
 available subjects about eight weeks after admission. The follow-up
 sample consisted of 131 individuals, including 75 DTAP participants
 and 56 comparison participants. Two standardized measures were
 administered in the interview. The Community-Oriented Programs
 Environment Scale (COPES) (Part 11) included three subscales focusing
 on staff-client relationships, therapeutic interactions, and program
 maintenance dimensions such as order, clarity, and control. The
 Treatment Services Review (Part 12) was a brief instrument designed
 by the creators of the ASI that yielded quantitative indicators of
the number and type of services received by treatment clients.
description: Data in Part 1 were collected with the Addiction
 Severity Index and include age, sex, race, religion, and
 education. Additional variables cover medical problems, employment
 history, detailed substance abuse and treatment history, number of
 times arrested for various crimes, history of incarceration, family's
 substance abuse and criminal histories, relationships with family and
 friends, psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and
 suicide, current living arrangements, and sources of income. Part 2,
 Supplemental Background and Retention Data, contains treatment entry
 date, number of days in treatment, age at treatment entry,
 termination date, treatment condition, arrest date, detention at
 arrest, date released on probation/parole, violation of
 probation/parole arrest date and location, problem drug, prior drug
 treatment, as well as age, gender, race, education, and marital
 status. Part 3, Division of Criminal Justice Services Data, includes
 data on the number of arrests before and after program entry, and
 number of total misdemeanor and felony arrests, convictions, and
 sentences. Part 4, Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence Data, contains
 information on type of substance abuse, intoxication or withdrawal at
 work, school, or home, effects of abuse on social, occupational, or
 recreational activities, and effects of abuse on relationships,
 health, emotions, and employment. Parts 5 and 6 contain psychiatric
 data gathered from the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised and Beck's
 Depression Inventory, respectively. Part 7 variables from the
 Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability scale include
 family's attitude toward treatment, subject's need for treatment,
 subject's desire to change life, and legal consequences if subject
 did not participate in treatment. Part 8, Stages of Change Readiness
 and Treatment Eagerness scale, contains data on how the subject
 viewed the drug problem, desire to change, and history of dealing
 with substance abuse. Part 9, Motivational/Program Supplement Data,
 includes variables on the subject's need for treatment, attitudes
 toward treatment sessions, the family's reaction to treatment, and a
 likelihood of completion rating. Part 10, Perceived Legal Coercion
 Data, gathered information on who referred the subject to the
 treatment program, who was keeping track of attendance, whether
 someone explained the rules of participation in the program and the
 consequences if the subject failed the program, whether the rules and
 consequences were put in writing, who monitored program participants,
 the likelihood of using drugs while in treatment, the likelihood of
 leaving the program before completion, whether the subject understood
 the legal consequences of failing the program, the type and frequency
 of reports and contacts with the criminal justice system, and the
 subject's reaction to various penalties for not completing the
 program. Part 11 contains data from the Community Oriented Programs
 Environment Scale (COPES). Part 12, Treatment Services Review Data,
 includes data on the number of times the subject received medical
 attention, days in school, days employed, days intoxicated, days in
 substance abuse treatment, days tested for drugs, number of contacts
 with the criminal justice system, days treated for psychological
 problems, and time spent at recreational activities. Additional
 variables include the number of individual and group treatment
 sessions spent discussing medical problems, education and employment,
 substance abuse, legal problems, and psychological and emotional
problems.
description: Response Rates: Not applicable.
description: Presence of Common Scales: The following scales were used in this data collection:
 Addiction Severity Index (Parts 1 and 2), Chemical Use, Abuse, and
 Dependence scale (Part 4), Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (Part 5),
 Beck's Depression Inventory (Part 6), Circumstances, Motivation,
 Readiness, and Suitability scale (Part 7), Stages of Change Readiness
 and Treatment Eagerness scale (Parts 8 and 9), Community Oriented
 Programs Environment scale (Part 11), and Treatment Services Review
 scale (Part 12). In addition to the above common scales, the
 principal investigator also created a scale for Part 10 to
 specifically measure Perceived Legal Coercion among legally-mandated
treatment clients.
description: Matched sampling.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Addiction Severity Index Data
DS2: Supplemental Background and Retention Data
DS3: Division of Criminal Justice Services Data
DS4: Chemical Use, Abuse, and Dependence Data
DS5: Symptom Checklist-90-Revised Data
DS6: Beck's Depression Inventory Data
DS7: Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, and Suitability Data
DS8: Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Data
DS9: Motivational/Program Supplement Data
DS10: Perceived Legal Coercion Data
DS11: Community Oriented Programs Environment Data
DS12: Treatment Services Review Data
description: Participants in four drug treatment programs in Kings
County, New York, between 1994 and 1995.
description: ICPSR cannot provide variable and value labels in
the codebook or data definition statements for Parts 5, 6, and 11
because of copyright restrictions. Information on how to obtain these
instruments from their original producers is provided in the
codebook.Selected variables in all parts of this data collection
were blanked by ICPSR to protect respondent privacy. More information
about these variables can be found in the codebook notes.The
user guide, codebook, data collection instruments, and SAS syntax
statements 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.