{"@type": "dcat:Dataset", "accessLevel": "public", "bureauCode": ["011:21"], "contactPoint": {"@type": "vcard:Contact", "fn": "Open Data Office of Justice Programs (USDOJ)", "hasEmail": "mailto:opendata@usdoj.gov"}, "dataQuality": false, "description": "The Probationers in Recovery (PIR) program, developed by\r\nthe San Diego County Probation Department, targeted high-risk,\r\ndrug-abusing offenders with the goal of controlling offender behavior\r\nwithout increasing risks to communities. This evaluation of PIR was\r\nbased on a quasiexperimental design that compared program activities\r\nand outcomes for two matched groups of high-risk probationers\r\nreceiving different levels of service and supervision. The assessment\r\nincluded both a process evaluation to discover if expected service\r\nlevels were implemented as designed, and an impact evaluation to\r\nassess the effectiveness of drug treatment within an intensive\r\ncommunity supervision program. The experimental group included 209 PIR\r\nparticipants who received intensive community supervision and drug\r\ntreatment, and the control group consisted of 151 probationers who\r\nwere assigned to regular high-risk probation caseloads and who met the\r\nPIR screening criteria. The samples were selected from probationers\r\nentering community supervision from February to December 1991. The\r\nlength of the PIR program varied, but for purposes of analysis the\r\nminimum time in the program to represent the intervention period was\r\nset at eight months, including relapse prevention. A comparable period\r\nwas used for the control group. The subsequent six-month period was\r\nused to measure the effects of PIR and regular high-risk probation\r\nafter intervention. Intake interviews were conducted with a subsample\r\nof 96 probationers in PIR and 80 in the control group (Part 1). The\r\ninterviews were conducted within the first two weeks after\r\nintake. Follow-up interviews were conducted with these probationers\r\nafter they had completed eight months of PIR or regular high-risk\r\nprobation to measure experiences on probation and changes in behavior\r\nand attitudes (Part 2). Follow-up interviews were completed with 47\r\nprobationers from the experimental group in the PIR program and 35 in\r\nthe control group. The case tracking portion of the study involved the\r\nreview of probation, treatment, and state and local criminal history\r\nfiles (Part 3). Data on technical violations and arrests for new\r\ncrimes were compiled for the following time periods: (1) six months\r\nprior to the instant offense (the baseline), (2) the first eight\r\nmonths of community supervision (the in-program period), (3) the six\r\nmonths after intervention, and (4) the combined 14-month period. The\r\ninitial interview (Part 1) included questions regarding\r\nsociodemographic characteristics, current offense, awareness of\r\nprobation conditions ordered, perceived consequences for violations of\r\nprobation, drug use and drug history, prior drug treatment and\r\ntreatment needs, criminal history, expectations regarding the\r\nprobation term, opinions regarding probation and treatment, daily\r\nactivities prior to the current offense, current life satisfaction,\r\nand prospects for the future. Questions on the follow-up interview\r\n(Part 2) focused on changes in probationers' personal lives (e.g.,\r\nemployment, income, education, marital status, living situation, and\r\nrelationships with family and friends), technical probation violations\r\nand new offenses committed during the eight-month period, sanctions\r\nimposed by probation staff, contacts with probation and treatment\r\nstaff, changes in drug use and daily activities, expectations with\r\nregard to remaining crime- and drug-free in the future, attitudes\r\nregarding probation and treatment, treatment needs, and significant\r\nlife changes over the eight-month period. Variables in the tracking\r\ndata file (Part 3) include sociodemographic characteristics, current\r\noffense and sentence imposed, probation conditions ordered, drug use\r\nhistory, offense and probation violations occurring before, during,\r\nand after an eight-month probation period, custody time, changes in\r\nlevel of probation supervision, and program interventions such as drug\r\ntests, services delivered, and sanctions imposed.", "distribution": [{"@type": "dcat:Distribution", "accessURL": "https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02023.v1", "title": "Community Supervision of Drug-Involved Probationers in San Diego County, California, 1991-1993"}], "identifier": "2778", "issued": "2000-09-29T00:00:00", "keyword": ["communities", "crime prevention", "drug offenders", "drug treatment", "outcome evaluation", "postrelease programs", "probation conditions", "probationers", "process evaluation", "risk assessment", "supervised liberty", "treatment outcomes"], "language": ["eng"], "license": "http://www.usa.gov/publicdomain/label/1.0/", "modified": "2006-03-30T00:00:00", "programCode": ["011:060"], "publisher": {"@type": "org:Organization", "name": "National Institute of Justice", "subOrganizationOf": {"acronym": "OJP", "id": 22, "name": "Office of Justice Programs", "parentOrganization": {"acronym": "DOJ", "id": 10, "name": "Department of Justice"}, "parentOrganizationID": 10}}, "title": "Community Supervision of Drug-Involved Probationers in San Diego County, California, 1991-1993"}