DOI: 10.3886/icpsr20348
title: Evaluation of Drug Treatment Programs at the State Correctional Institution in Chester, Pennsylvania, 2003-2004
title: Archival Version

description: The purpose of this project was to evaluate the alcohol and
other drug (AOD) treatment programs at a specialized treatment prison,
the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at Chester, Pennsylvania. The
Chester prison is a 1,215-bed medium security prison for male inmates
with a documented history of substance abuse. Programs included an
intensive, 12-month therapeutic community (TC) drug treatment for
high-need inmates and a 12-month outpatient (OP) program for inmates
requiring less intensive treatment. Inmates who met eligibility
criteria for the Chester facility were randomly assigned to the TC (n
= 347) or OP (n = 384) program. The researchers utilized individual
measures and outcome measures in this study.
description: The purpose of this project was to evaluate the
alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment programs at a specialized
treatment prison, the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at Chester,
Pennsylvania. The study attempted to address some of the gaps and
questions in the current literature surrounding the effectiveness of
prison-based therapeutic community (TC) drug treatment through the
examination of short-term, intermediate, and long-term outcomes of a
prison-based, TC drug treatment program. The goal of this study was to
inform agencies about designing, implementing, evaluating, and
revising programs that address the AOD treatment needs of offenders
and ex-offenders.
description: The Chester prison is a 1,215-bed medium
security prison for male inmates with a documented history of
substance abuse. Programs included an intensive, 12-month therapeutic
community (TC) drug treatment for high-need inmates and a 12-month
outpatient (OP) program for inmates requiring less intensive
treatment. Graduates of both programs were required to complete a
mandatory, six-month aftercare program. Inmates who met eligibility
criteria for Chester were randomly assigned to the TC (n = 347) or OP
(n = 384) program. The OP program provided the comparison group since
a no-treatment control group was not feasible. The TC, however, was
much more intensive (i.e., 1,300 v. 150 total hours of treatment),
and the TC was based upon a well-integrated and structured treatment
model that combined critical elements of peer support and professional
counseling (individual and group). This randomized, "response-dosage"
design compared different levels of treatment, but the research
subjects in the two groups were equivalent.
All inmates transferred to the Chester facility as of the study
start date were approached and asked to participate in the study.
Inmates were informed that their decision to participate or not
would have no effect on their treatment or any decision regarding
their release. Those who agreed to participate were asked to sign a
Subject Consent Form.
The researchers utilized individual measures and outcome measures
in this study. Specifically, individual measures included the Texas
Christian University (TCU) Drug Screen, the TCU Self Rating Form
(SRF), the TCU Resident Evaluation of Self and Treatment (REST) form,
and the TCU Counselor Rating of Client (CRC) form. The TCU Drug Screen
II is a screening tool used to determine the overall level of drug use
and dependency of an individual. The TCU Drug Screen II was
administered by treatment counselors upon the inmates' reception at
Chester. Upon reception, counselors also administered the TCU Self
Rating Form (SRF), which includes four measures of treatment
motivation: problem recognition, desire for help, treatment readiness,
and external pressures. Subjects were asked to complete the TCU
Resident Evaluation of Self and Treatment (REST) form at 3 time
periods (1 month after admission, 6 months after admission, and 12
months after admission). Treatment counselors were asked to complete
the TCU Counselor Rating of Client (CRC) form for each TC inmate on
their caseload at 3 time periods (1 month after admission, 6 months
after admission, and 12 months after admission).
Three main types of post-release outcome data were collected:

Reincarceration data
Rearrest data
Drug testing and parole data
description: Variables include Chester reception date, age,
current and prior offenses, offense severity, minimum and maximum
release date, institutional violence, and TCU Drug Screen II total
score. Scores on the problem recognition, desire for help, treatment
readiness, and external pressures scales from the TCU Self Rating Form
(SRF) are also included. Eight items from the Counselor Rating of
Client (CRC) form were measured at three time periods. SRC items
include therapeutic engagement, rapport with others, denial,
psychological problems, self confrontation, life skills development,
family, and financial management. A total of 18 items from the
Residential Evaluation of Self and Treatment (REST) Administration
were also measured at 3 time periods. REST items include self-esteem,
depression, anxiety, self efficacy, hostility, risk taking, social
conformity, treatment readiness, external pressures, therapeutic
engagement, personal progress, trust group, program staff, counselor
rapport, counselor competence, program structure, program sessions,
and peer support. Other variables include the difference in score
between Time 1 and Time 3 for the 8 CRC items and the 18 REST
variables. A total of 5 variables were included from the Correctional
Plan Evaluation (CPE), 13 variables were included from the Department
of Corrections (DOC) databases and inmate records system, and 7
variables were included from the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and
Delinquency. The type of release, date discharged from the Chester
facility, participation in aftercare treatment, successful or
unsuccessful inmate completion of treatment, and the length of time in
treatment are also variables that are included in this study. A total
of 20 variables relate to drug tests during the prerelease period and
a total of 17 variables pertain to drug tests while on parole. Race,
employment status, case type, current status on parole, Pennsylvania
Board of Probation and Parole (PBPP) level of supervision, and
deletion code comprise other variables. A total of five variables
relate to restrictive housing unit (RHU) assignments. Final program
assignment, override, motivation, and risk are additional variables in
this study.
description: None
description: Response Rates: The overall participation rate for the research
study was 95 percent (790 out of 831 admissions, excluding inmates who
were removed from the institution prior to being approached for
subject recruitment). Up to the end of the subject recruitment period,
59 of 831 admissions (7.1 percent) were designated for overrides. A
total of 38 individuals were removed from the study because they
refused to participate, and 3 individuals were removed from the study
because they were serving life sentences.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Scales used were the Texas Christian University (TCU)
Resident Evaluation of Self and Treatment (REST) Psychological
Functioning Scales and Motivational Scales, the Texas Christian
University Counselor Rating of Client (CRC) treatment scales, the
Texas Christian University Self Rating Form (SRF) motivational scales,
and the TCU Drug Screen II.
description: To obtain their sampling frame, the researchers initially
planned on recruiting subjects for a 12-month time period. The
researchers extended the original 12-month subject recruitment period
for 3 months to make up for the shortfall in admissions and ensure a
reasonable statistical power (.80) for the study. Power analysis
indicated that a minimum sample of 600 (300 TC, 300 OP) was required
to achieve a statistical power of .80. By extending the recruitment
period by 3 months, a total of 843 inmates were admitted between
January 13, 2003, and March 23, 2004. Once all refusals, overrides,
and removals from the institution were excluded, a total sample of 731
inmates remained. The proportions of inmates randomly assigned to TC
and OP were fairly even, with 347 (47 percent) of the inmates
designated for TC, and 384 (53 percent) designated for OP.
description: Datasets: 
DS1: Evaluation of Drug Treatment Programs at the State Correctional Institution in Chester, Pennsylvania, 2003-2004
description: All inmates transferred to the State Correctional
Institution in Chester, Pennsylvania, between January 13, 2003, and
March 23, 2004. Smallest Geographic Unit: None
description: record abstracts; face-to-face interview; paper and pencil interview (PAPI); self-enumerated questionnaireData from the alcohol or other drug (AOD) program
census, staff interview form, inmate interview form, and observation
checklist form are not available as part of this collection.