{"@type": "dcat:Dataset", "accessLevel": "restricted public", "bureauCode": ["011:21"], "contactPoint": {"@type": "vcard:Contact", "fn": "Open Data Office of Justice Programs (USDOJ)", "hasEmail": "mailto:opendata@usdoj.gov"}, "dataQuality": false, "description": "This study was undertaken to evaluate the treatment process\r\nand outcomes associated with a Residential Substance Abuse Treatment\r\n(RSAT) In-Prison Therapeutic Community (ITC) component of the 1991\r\nTexas Criminal Justice Chemical Dependency Treatment Initiative, as\r\nwell as to assess the effectiveness of prison-based drug\r\ntreatment. Specifically, this study evaluated the RSAT ITC treatment\r\nprocess and outcomes in Kyle, Texas, using the prison-based treatment\r\nassessment (PTA) data systems. The study design included process and\r\noutcome evaluations using a sample of graduates from the first ITC\r\ntreatment facility (Kyle cohort) and a matched comparison group of\r\nprison inmates who were eligible, but not selected, for assignment to\r\nan ITC. Data collection occurred at three points in time -- at the end\r\nof treatment in the Kyle ITC, and at six months and one year following\r\nan offender's release from the ITC program. Variables in the 19 files\r\nfor this study include: Part 1 (Educational Demographic Data, Kyle\r\nCohort): Highest grade level achieved by respondent, Texas Department\r\nof Criminal Justice education achievement and IQ scores, and the\r\nnumber of days at the Kyle ITC program. Parts 2-4 (Treatment\r\nBackground Data, Kyle Cohort, Aftercare Treatment Data, Kyle Cohort,\r\nTreatment Condition Data, Kyle Cohort): Treatment condition, discharge\r\ncodes, and whether there were three months of residential aftercare.\r\nPart 5 (Session One Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): Gender, ethnicity,\r\nage, marital status, whether the respondent was given medication,\r\nfollowed directions, made friends, or got into trouble while in\r\nelementary school, whether he held a job prior to prison, if either of\r\nhis parents spent time with, yelled at, or sexually abused him,\r\nwhether he used drugs, if so, specific drugs used (e.g., alcohol,\r\ninhalants, marijuana, or crack), and whether he did jail time. Part 6\r\n(Session Two Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): Whether drugs kept the\r\nrespondent from working, caused emotional problems, or caused medical\r\nproblems, if people were important to the respondent, if he had\r\ntrouble staying focused, felt sad or depressed, satisfied with life,\r\nlonely, nervous, or got mad easily, whether he felt the staff was\r\ncaring and helpful, whether he showed concern for the group and\r\naccepted confrontation by the group, whether the respondent felt the\r\ncounselor was easy to talk to, respected him, or taught him\r\nproblem-solving, and whether the respondent viewed himself as thinking\r\nclearly, clearly expressing thoughts, and was interested in\r\ntreatment. Part 7 (Session Three Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): How the\r\nrespondent saw himself as a child, whether he was easily distracted,\r\nanxious, nervous, inattentive, short-tempered, stubborn, depressed,\r\nrebellious, irritable, moody, angry, or impulsive, whether the\r\nrespondent had trouble with school, was considered normal by friends,\r\never lost a job or friends due to drinking or drug abuse, or was ever\r\narrested or hospitalized for drug or alcohol abuse, and in the last\r\nweek whether the respondent's mood was one of sadness, satisfaction,\r\ndisappointment, irritation, or suicide. Parts 8 and 9 (Six-Month\r\nFollow-Up Interview Data, Kyle Cohort, and One-Year Follow-Up\r\nInterview Data, Kyle Cohort): Organization of meetings and activities\r\nin the program, rules and regulations, work assignments, privileges,\r\nindividual counseling, the care and helpfulness of the treatment staff\r\nand custody staff, the respondent's behavior, mood, living situation,\r\ndrug use, and arrests within the last six months, whether the\r\ncounselor was easy to talk to, helped in motivating or building\r\nconfidence, or assisted in making a treatment plan, whether the\r\nrespondent felt a sense of family or closeness, if his family got\r\nalong, enjoyed being together, got drunk together, used drugs\r\ntogether, or had arguments or fights, if the respondent had a job in\r\nthe last six months to a year and if he enjoyed working, whether he\r\nwas on time for his job, whether he had new friends or associated with\r\nold friends, and which specific drugs he had used in the last six\r\nmonths (e.g., hallucinogens, heroin, methadone, or other\r\nopiates). Part 10 (Treatment Background Data, Comparison Group):\r\nTreatment condition of the comparison group. Part 11 (Educational\r\nDemographic Data, Comparison Group): Whether respondents completed a\r\nGED and their highest grade completed. Parts 12 and 13 (Six-Month\r\nFollow-Up Interview Data, Comparison Group, and One-Year Follow-Up\r\nInterview Data, Comparison Group): How important church was to the\r\nrespondent, whether the respondent had any educational or vocational\r\ntraining, if he had friends that had used drugs, got drunk, dealt\r\ndrugs, or had been arrested, if within the last six months to a year\r\nthe respondent had been arrested for drug use, drug sales, forgery,\r\nfencing, gambling, burglary, robbery, sexual offense, arson, or\r\nvandalism, whether drugs or alcohol affected the respondent's health,\r\nrelations, attitude, attention, or ability to work, whether the\r\nrespondent experienced symptoms of withdrawal, the number of drug\r\ntreatment programs and AA or CA meetings the respondent attended,\r\nwhether the respondent received help from parents, siblings, or other\r\nrelatives, if treatment was considered helpful, and risky behavior\r\nengaged in (e.g., sharing needles, using dirty needles, and\r\nunprotected sex). Parts 14 and 16 (Probation Officer Data, Six-Month\r\nFollow-Up Interview, Kyle Cohort and Comparison Group, and Probation\r\nOfficer Data, One-Year Follow-Up Interview, Kyle Cohort and Comparison\r\nGroup): Date of departure from prison, supervision level, number of\r\ntreatment team meetings, whether there was evidence of job hunting,\r\nproblems with transportation, child care, or finding work, number of\r\ndrug tests in the last six months, times tested positive for\r\nmarijuana, cocaine, heroin, opiates, crack, or other drugs, and number\r\nof arrests, charges, convictions, and technicals. Parts 15 and 17\r\n(Hair Specimen Data, Six-Month Follow-Up Interview, Kyle Cohort and\r\nComparison Group, and Hair Specimen Data, One-Year Follow-Up\r\nInterview, Kyle Cohort and Comparison Group): Hair collection and its\r\nsource at the six-month follow-up (Part 15) and one-year follow-up\r\n(Part 17) and whether parolee was positive or negative for cocaine or\r\nopiates. Part 18 (Texas Department of Public Safety Data, Kyle Cohort\r\nand Comparison Group): Dates of first, second, and third offenses, if\r\nparolee was arrested, and first, second, and third offenses from the\r\nNational Crime Information Center. Part 19 (Texas Department of\r\nCriminal Justice Data, Kyle Cohort and Comparison Group): Treatment\r\ncondition, date of release, race, and a Texas Department of Criminal\r\nJustice Salient Factor Risk Score.", "distribution": [{"@type": "dcat:Distribution", "accessURL": "https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02765.v2", "title": "Process and Outcome Evaluation of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program in Kyle, Texas, 1993-1995"}], "identifier": "3189", "issued": "2003-04-11T00:00:00", "keyword": ["addiction", "alcohol abuse", "correctional facilities", "drug related crimes", "drug use", "inmate programs", "outcome evaluation", "process evaluation", "recidivism", "residential programs", "substance abuse", "substance abuse treatment", "treatment outcome", "treatment programs"], "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}}, "rights": "These data are restricted due to the increased risk of violation of confidentiality of respondent and subject data.", "title": "Process and Outcome Evaluation of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program in Kyle, Texas, 1993-1995"}