This study was an outcome evaluation of the Forever Free Substance Abuse Treatment Program at the California Institution for Women (CIW). Data were collected from 119 women who entered Forever Free between October 1997 and June 1998. Comparison data were collected from 96 women enrolled in Life Plan for Recovery, an eight-week substance abuse education course at CIW, between April and November 1998. Program participants completed an intake questionnaire, approximately one month after the beginning of treatment, designed to collect information on background, therapeutic alliance with counselors, group identification with fellow participants, treatment motivation, and psychological status. Members of the comparison group completed an intake form that collected background information. Treatment participants completed a pre-release form before leaving the program, which collected information on clients' therapeutic alliance with their counselors, psychological status, drug-related locus of control, and post-release treatment plans. Women in both groups participated in 12-month follow-up interviews between September 1999 and August 2000, which were used to update background information and collect information on subjects' relationships with their children, drug use since release, substance abuse treatment since release, vocational training since release, services needed and received, social support, current treatment motivation, psychological status, and drug-related locus of control. Reincarceration data for the entire sample were obtained from the Offender-Based Information System, a database maintained by the California Department of Corrections.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the treatment process and outcomes associated with a Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) In-Prison Therapeutic Community (ITC) component of the 1991 Texas Criminal Justice Chemical Dependency Treatment Initiative, as well as to assess the effectiveness of prison-based drug treatment. Specifically, this study evaluated the RSAT ITC treatment process and outcomes in Kyle, Texas, using the prison-based treatment assessment (PTA) data systems. The study design included process and outcome evaluations using a sample of graduates from the first ITC treatment facility (Kyle cohort) and a matched comparison group of prison inmates who were eligible, but not selected, for assignment to an ITC. Data collection occurred at three points in time -- at the end of treatment in the Kyle ITC, and at six months and one year following an offender's release from the ITC program. Variables in the 19 files for this study include: Part 1 (Educational Demographic Data, Kyle Cohort): Highest grade level achieved by respondent, Texas Department of Criminal Justice education achievement and IQ scores, and the number of days at the Kyle ITC program. Parts 2-4 (Treatment Background Data, Kyle Cohort, Aftercare Treatment Data, Kyle Cohort, Treatment Condition Data, Kyle Cohort): Treatment condition, discharge codes, and whether there were three months of residential aftercare. Part 5 (Session One Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): Gender, ethnicity, age, marital status, whether the respondent was given medication, followed directions, made friends, or got into trouble while in elementary school, whether he held a job prior to prison, if either of his parents spent time with, yelled at, or sexually abused him, whether he used drugs, if so, specific drugs used (e.g., alcohol, inhalants, marijuana, or crack), and whether he did jail time. Part 6 (Session Two Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): Whether drugs kept the respondent from working, caused emotional problems, or caused medical problems, if people were important to the respondent, if he had trouble staying focused, felt sad or depressed, satisfied with life, lonely, nervous, or got mad easily, whether he felt the staff was caring and helpful, whether he showed concern for the group and accepted confrontation by the group, whether the respondent felt the counselor was easy to talk to, respected him, or taught him problem-solving, and whether the respondent viewed himself as thinking clearly, clearly expressing thoughts, and was interested in treatment. Part 7 (Session Three Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): How the respondent saw himself as a child, whether he was easily distracted, anxious, nervous, inattentive, short-tempered, stubborn, depressed, rebellious, irritable, moody, angry, or impulsive, whether the respondent had trouble with school, was considered normal by friends, ever lost a job or friends due to drinking or drug abuse, or was ever arrested or hospitalized for drug or alcohol abuse, and in the last week whether the respondent's mood was one of sadness, satisfaction, disappointment, irritation, or suicide. Parts 8 and 9 (Six-Month Follow-Up Interview Data, Kyle Cohort, and One-Year Follow-Up Interview Data, Kyle Cohort): Organization of meetings and activities in the program, rules and regulations, work assignments, privileges, individual counseling, the care and helpfulness of the treatment staff and custody staff, the respondent's behavior, mood, living situation, drug use, and arrests within the last six months, whether the counselor was easy to talk to, helped in motivating or building confidence, or assisted in making a treatment plan, whether the respondent felt a sense of family or closeness, if his family got along, enjoyed being together, got drunk together, used drugs together, or had arguments or fights, if the respondent had a job in the last six months to a year and if he enjoyed working, whether he was on time for his job, whether he had new

The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Formula Grant Program, created by Title III (Subtitle U of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994), was designed by Congress to implement residential substance abuse programs providing individual and group treatment for inmates in residential facilities operated by state and local correctional agencies. Under the Corrections Program Office of the Office of Justice Programs of the United States Department of Justice, state and local correctional agencies received funds to develop or enhance existing programs that: (1) lasted between six and 12 months, (2) provided residential treatment facilities set apart from the general correctional population, (3) were directed at the substance abuse problems of the inmate, (4) were intended to develop the inmate's cognitive, behavioral, social, vocational, and other skills in order to treat related problems as well as the substance abuse, and (5) continued to require urinalysis and/or other proven reliable forms of drug and alcohol testing of individuals assigned to treatment programs during and after release from residential custody. The National Development and Research Institutes, Inc. (NDRI) entered into a cooperative agreement with the National Institute of Justice wherein NDRI would evaluate the extent to which the goals of the RSAT program were being accomplished and the problems that were encountered by the participating states. The methods of this national evaluation were: (1) an initial state survey to ascertain the RSAT programs and program directors in each of the 50 states plus five territories and the District of Columbia and to collect basic information on the aggregate impact of the RSAT-funded programs in each state or territory (Part 1, State Data), (2) a follow-up state survey to collect more detailed information on the aggregate impact of the RSAT-funded programs in each state (Part 1, State Data), and (3) an initial program survey to describe the separate RSAT programs as they came on line and to assess whether a few of the programs might serve as model programs which could undergo subsequent intensive evaluation (Part 2, Program Data). The sampling method used was a census of all the existing RSAT-funded programs and all of the state RSAT officials. Part 1 variables include the amount of RSAT funds received by the state in fiscal years 1996 to 1998, amounts from other sources of funding, and amount spent on salaries, training, drug tests, other supplies, and facilities, as well as number of residents, number of staff, reasons why funding was delayed, RSAT award date, and RSAT end date. Part 2 variables include the number of clients in the program, number of beds available, number of staff by gender, race, age, education, profession, and years of experience, admission inclusion criteria, reporting procedures, treatment type and duration, type of drug testing and number of tests, annual budget, sources of funding, and cost per capita.

As part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Congress provided funding for the development of substance abuse treatment programs in state and local correctional facilities with the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Formula Grant Program. To be eligible for this funding, programs were required to last between six and 12 months, be provided in residential treatment facilities set apart from the general correctional population, be directed at the inmate's substance abuse problems, and be intended to develop the inmate's cognitive, behavioral, social, vocational, and other skills to address substance abuse and related problems. The Illinois Youth Center (IYC) in St. Charles started an RSAT program on September 30, 1999. The primary emphasis of this process evaluation was to describe why and how the St. Charles RSAT program was designed, implemented, and operated. To a lesser degree, attention was also directed toward examining the effects of program participation on offender pre-release behavior. This was considered to be a primary indicator of program impact. This project sought to answer the following research questions: (1) Did the program fit within the institutional environment? (2) Was the program operating as a therapeutic community? (3) Were the appropriate offenders selected for program participation? and (4) Were any short-term impacts evident within the youth? This study followed a process evaluation design with a focus on determining how a product or outcome was produced, rather than on assessing the product or outcome itself. Information in this data collection was collected from youth participants and youth files. Subjects consisted of the 44 youths who began the RSAT program in 1999 (the treatment group), as well as a matched sample of non-program participants (the comparison group). The comparison group was used to contrast institutional behavior of youths not in the treatment program and to establish a non-treatment cohort for an expected follow-up impact study. Part 1 contains data from two surveys of program youth only, and Parts 2-4 contained data on both program youth and the comparison group. Part 2 data were gathered from a review of the youths' master files at the correctional facility. Part 3 data were obtained from behavior action tickets (BATs), which were an institution-wide semi-formal mechanism to recognize positive and negative youth behavior. Part 4 data were collected from institutional disciplinary reports (IDRs). Part 1 surveyed youth about what they hoped to achieve in the RSAT program, whether they thought the program would help them, how well they understood the program, how they assessed their own substance abuse problems, what they liked and disliked about the program, their opinions about program staff, and their recommendations for changing the program. Demographic variables in Part 2 include age, race, and education level. Other variables record reading test scores, math test scores, IQ scores, location of parents, number of siblings, drug use and frequency, criminal history, types of prior substance abuse treatments, family history of drug use, suicidal ideations, and personality test scores. Part 3 contains monthly counts of positive and negative behavior action tickets. Part 4 contains information about the number and types of guilty institutional disciplinary reports, the severity of the offenses, and the number and types of punishments received.

This study was an outcome evaluation of the Dallas County Judicial Treatment Center (DCJTC), a six-month residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) facility in Dallas County, Texas. The primary goal of this evaluation was to assess offender recidivism following treatment in this six-month community-based modified therapeutic community for probationers. Secondary goals were to examine change in social functioning over time among probationers mandated to this program, to determine which characteristics at intake and which during-treatment social functioning indicators were predictive of dropping out of treatment early, and to identify which indicators predicted being arrested one to two years after treatment. These goals were accomplished by a comparison of outcomes between treated probationers and an untreated comparison group and by an assessment of the relationships among treatment, social functioning, and recidivism. For both treatment and comparison groups, a criminal records search was performed on the Institutional Division database of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for all of the study participants for the two years following discharge for treatment or following commitment to probation. In addition to these records, treatment participants were asked to complete a set of data collection forms over their course of treatment. These forms collected information about mental status, background and psychosocial functioning, substance abuse, psychological status, offenders' perceptions of the program and their experiences in treatment, evaluations of counselors, self-evaluations, and counselors' evaluations of clients.

The goal for this study was to conduct a process evaluation of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program, called the Genesis program, at the Southern New Mexico Correctional Facility (SNMCD) by examining the program's structure and assessing its intermediate impact upon participating inmates. The study focuses on answering three research questions: (1) Who were the program participants? (2) What were the characteristics of the program? (3) Was the program reaching the most appropriate offenders, or were its participants primarily offenders who were not likely to become recidivists? The study contains information on every inmate who entered the Genesis program from July 31, 1997, to July 31, 1998. For evaluation purposes, the researchers designed their own data collection form which they used to collect relevant information from each participant's treatment program file. Each participant's file was maintained by Genesis program staff and was kept for the duration each inmate was in the program. From each program participant at intake, using the data collection instrument, the researchers collected demographic information, substance abuse history, and criminal history. The data are provided in two parts. Both parts are from the same data collection instrument. Part 1 covers Questions 1 through 15 of the data collection instrument, while Part 2 covers Questions 16 through 34 of the data collection instrument. Part 1 includes demographic variables about the inmate such as birth date, age, ethnicity, citizenship, years of education, prior employment status, longest employment, and average weekly income. It also includes incarceration information such as confinement date, length of current sentence, RSAT admission date, and expected parole date, and criminal history information such as age at first adult arrest, number of juvenile arrests, number of adult arrests, date of first adult arrest, date of last adult arrest, and number of years served in prison. There are also variables to address the inmate's drug use history as a juvenile and as an adult. Part 2 continues with the drug use history of the inmate as an adult with information about drugs used by IV injection, number of alcohol withdrawals, number of drug overdoses, number of detoxes, inpatient treatment received, outpatient treatment received, average amount of money spent on drugs, percentage of income spent on drugs, number of family members who use alcohol or drugs, and how they were related to the inmate. In addition, the file contains demographic information, such as current marital status and number of children, and the inmate's psychological history including depression, anxiety, anger, trouble understanding, concentrating, or remembering, attempted suicide, prescribed medication, and hospitalization. Criminal career variables include length of criminal career, all past charges, weapons used during any crime, number of times a weapon was used, and total number of convictions.

This study was an evaluation of a Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program intended to reduce substance abuse and recidivism among youth placed at the W.J. Maxey Boys Training School in Michigan. The purposes of the evaluation were to describe the activities of the RSAT program and the relationship between program participants and success in the new program. There were five primary evaluation questions: (1) Were the participants appropriate? (2) Was the staff trained to deliver the planned services? (3) How did service delivery vary over time? (4) Did the participants make timely progress? and (5) What organizational factors changed service delivery and participant progress? Residents were admitted to the RSAT program and its comparison group on the basis of three criteria: (1) the resident was not a sex offender, (2) he had a known substance abuse history, and (3) he was expected to be released within one year. Youth in the RSAT program underwent intensive substance abuse psycho-education and relapse prevention in addition to the treatment provided in the Maxey Model. Intake data from the Family Independence Agency Information System (Part 1) were gathered for youths who entered Maxey between 1995 and 1998. These data were used to determine if significant differences existed between the RSAT and comparison groups. Additional data were collected through a client survey (Parts 2 and 3), which included questions that evaluated youth satisfaction with services and their predictions for success. Variables in Part 1 include program admission date, whether the youth was a sex offender, substance abuse history, the group and wing to which the youth belonged, age of first offense, age of admission to Maxey, offense class, number of arrests, number of previous placements, number of truancies, legal status, and date of first and second offense. Demographic variables include race, age, marital status, and county. Variables in Parts 2 and 3 assess the youth's opinions about school, food, group sessions, hall staff, family sessions, family visits, the overall program at Maxey, teachers, police, and judges. Additional variables include last grade of school completed, expected educational goal upon leaving Maxey, family substance abuse history, and prevalence of substance abuse in neighborhood.

This study was a process evaluation of the Michigan Department of Corrections' (MDOC) residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) program at the Cooper Street Correctional Facility in Jackson, Michigan. The 272-bed program was designed to treat male, minimum-custody inmates with a history of serious chemical dependency. The phase of treatment at the Jackson Cooper Street facility lasted six months, and was followed by a 12-month aftercare component. The main theory of change behind the program was that education about drugs and their physical, familial, and social effects, coupled with opportunities to learn about recovery and identify triggers for substance use, would help substance-abusing offenders to avoid both substance abuse and criminal behaviors once released into the community. This study used multiple data sources. Part 1, Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) Data, was acquired from the MDOC's Correctional Management Information System, which included demographic, criminal history, programming, and institutional misconduct information for a snapshot of the entire inmate population. These data provided information on all 44,061 inmates in the custody of MDOC on July 1, 1999. Part 2, RSAT Applications data, contains data for the 834 applications received by August 30, 1999. These data were received from University of Michigan (UM) researchers studying the long-term impact of the RSAT program on offender substance abuse and recidivism. The data were collected using a screening form for each application, and were initially generated and entered into an electronic format by RSAT program staff. Part 3, Service Tracking Data, contains RSAT admission and parole data, which were manually collected.

This study was a process evaluation of the three residential substance abuse treatment programs in the state of Ohio. These programs include MonDay Community Correctional Institution (MonDay), Mohican Youth Center, and Noble Choices. MonDay is a locally operated, community-based correctional facility for felony offenders to which male and female offenders are sentenced in lieu of prison for a period not to exceed six months. MonDay's RSAT program began in October 1997, and a Therapeutic Community (TC) was fully implemented by January 1, 1998. Offenders identified as needing long-term residential treatment were assigned to MonDay's RSAT for six months. Mohican Youth Center (MYC) is an institutional-based TC and is operated by the Ohio Department of Youth Services. Youth convicted of felonies and assessed as needing long-term residential substance abuse treatment are sent to MYC for the last six months of their sentence. Noble Choices is a TC for adult males within the Noble Correctional Institution, a medium security prison operated by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections. The specific research questions addressed in this study were: (1) What is the profile of offenders being served by the Ohio RSAT programs? (2) What is the nature of the services being delivered by the Ohio RSAT programs? (3) What are the intermediate outcomes of Ohio RSAT programs? (4) How are offenders performing under post-release supervision in terms of relapse and recidivism? and (5) What factors are associated with successful program completion and post-release recidivism and relapse? A one-group post-test design was used to conduct this process evaluation. Each program was studied as a separate entity. The study period for each program began at the date of first admission, which was January 1, 1998, for MonDay, March 3, 1998, for MYC, and October 18, 1998, for Noble Choices. The study period ended on March 31, 1999, for MYC and Noble Choices and on April 30, 1999, for MonDay. The sample consists of 466 individuals, including 90 from MonDay, 343 from MYC, and 33 from Noble Choices. Staff at each of the three sites collected intake, treatment, and termination data on their respective program clients using standardized forms developed by the University of Cincinnati. The intake form was used to collect basic demographic information on each offender along with information on past substance abuse, prior treatment experiences, and criminal history. The termination form collected data on type of termination (successful or unsuccessful) and criminal justice placement and residency upon termination. Each site also provided agency-specific assessment information on each offender. Offenders at MonDay were given the Level of Services Inventory (LSI), which measures the risk of recidivism, and the Adult Substance Use Survey (ASUS), which measures the severity of substance abuse problems. Offenders at MYC were administered the Juvenile Automated Substance Abuse Evaluation (JASAE), which measures the severity of substance abuse problems, and the Youthful Offender Level of Services Inventory (YO-LSI). Offenders at Noble Choices were given the Prison Inmate Inventory (PII), which measures several risk factors. In addition, offenders at MonDay and MYC were given the Personal Drug Use Questionnaire (PDUQ), which measures motivation for treatment at intake and 90 days after intake, and offenders at MonDay also completed the PDUQ upon termination. Offenders at MonDay were also administered a Client Self-Rating Form, which measures levels of social and psychological functioning, at intake, 90 days after intake, and termination. Follow-up forms were sent to probation and parole officers to collect information on MYC and MonDay offenders' treatment and supervision activities during the period of supervision after release from the program. Follow-up data were collected on terminated cases from the date of release until August 30, 1999. Part 1, MonDay Data,