{"@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": "In 1986, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) funded a\r\ndemonstration project of intensive supervision programs (ISPs),\r\nalternatives to control sanctions that involve community sanctions and\r\nemphasize stringent conditions and close monitoring of convicted\r\noffenders. The primary intent of the demonstration project was to\r\ndetermine the effects of participation in an ISP program on the\r\nsubsequent behavior of offenders and to test the feasibility of the\r\nISP's stated objectives: (1) to reduce recidivism by providing a\r\nseemingly cost-effective alternative to imprisonment, and (2) to\r\nprovide an intermediate punishment between incarceration and regular\r\nprobation that allows the punishment to fit the crime. Fourteen sites\r\nin nine states participated in the project and each of the selected\r\nsites was funded for 18 to 24 months. Individual agencies in each site\r\ntailored their ISP programs to their local needs, resources, and\r\ncontexts, developed their own eligibility criteria, and determined\r\nwhether probationers met those criteria. While the individual ISP\r\nprojects differed, each site was required to follow identical\r\nprocedures regarding random assignment, data collection, and overall\r\nprogram evaluation. Data collection instruments that differed in the\r\namount of drug-related questions asked were used for the six- and\r\ntwelve-month reviews. The \"non-drug\" data collection instrument,\r\nused in Contra Costa, Ventura, and Los Angeles counties, CA, Marion\r\nCounty, OR, and Milwaukee, WI, gathered drug data only on the number\r\nof monthly drug and alcohol tests given to offenders. The \"drug\"\r\ndata collection instrument was distributed in Atlanta, Macon, and\r\nWaycross, GA, Seattle, WA, Santa Fe, NM, Des Moines, IA, and\r\nWinchester, VA. Variables regarding drug use included the number of\r\ndrug tests ordered, the number of drug tests taken, and the number of\r\npositives for alcohol, cocaine, heroin, uppers, downers, quaaludes,\r\nLSD/hallucinogens, PCP, marijuana/hashish, and \"other\". The drug\r\nquestions on the instrument used in Dallas and Houston, TX, were the\r\nsame as those asked at the drug sites. Once a site determined that an\r\noffender was eligible for inclusion, RAND staff randomly assigned the\r\noffender to either the experimental ISP program (prison diversion,\r\nenhanced probation, or enhanced parole) or to a control sanction\r\n(prison, routine probation, or parole). Assignment periods began in\r\nJanuary 1987 and some sites continued to accept cases through January\r\n1990. Each offender was followed for a period of one year, beginning\r\non the day of assignment to the experimental or control program. The\r\nsix-month and twelve-month review data contain identical variables:\r\nthe current status of the offender (prison, ISP, or terminated),\r\nrecord of each arrest and/or technical violation, its disposition, and\r\nsentence or sanction. Information was also recorded for each month\r\nduring the follow-up regarding face-to-face contacts, phone and\r\ncollateral contacts, monitoring and record checks, community service\r\nhours, days on electronic surveillance (if applicable), contacts\r\nbetween client and community sponsor, number and type of counseling\r\nsessions and training, days in paid employment and earnings, number of\r\ndrug and alcohol tests taken, and amount of restitution, fines, court\r\ncosts, and probation fees paid. Background variables include sex,\r\nrace, age at assignment, prior criminal history, drug use and\r\ntreatment history, type of current offense, sentence characteristics,\r\nconditions imposed, and various items relating to risk of recidivism\r\nand need for treatment. For the two Texas sites, information on each\r\narrest and/or technical violation, its disposition, and sentence or\r\nsanction was recorded in separate recidivism files (Parts 10 and\r\n17). Dates were converted by RAND to time-lapse variables for the\r\npublic release files that comprise this data collection.", "distribution": [{"@type": "dcat:Distribution", "accessURL": "https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06358.v2", "title": "Intensive Supervision for High-Risk Offenders in 14 Sites in the United States, 1987-1990"}], "identifier": "3500", "issued": "1999-07-16T00:00:00", "keyword": ["alternatives to institutionalization", "communities", "community service programs", "diversion programs", "drug testing", "drug use", "offenders", "program evaluation", "recidivism"], "language": ["eng"], "license": "http://www.usa.gov/publicdomain/label/1.0/", "modified": "2013-05-15T14:39:16", "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": "Intensive Supervision for High-Risk Offenders in 14 Sites in the United States, 1987-1990"}