29.04.2014 Views

0 - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

0 - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

0 - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

e<br />

Procedures<br />

Inmates were identified and selected for comparison and treatment groups using the<br />

criteria described above. Based on current and new admissions to TC, we aimed for a treatment<br />

sample of about 362. We included in our treatment sample all current TC residents as of January<br />

1,2000. We then added new subjects to the study (new admissions after January 1,2000) as they<br />

were admitted to treatment programs. For previously admitted TC residents, we had a limited<br />

i<br />

amount of time to collect institutional and intermediate measures (e.g., responses to and<br />

perceptions of treatment, psychosocial and social hctioning) before any inmates graduated the<br />

program. However, we were still able to collect basic process (C.g., admission and discharge<br />

dates, inmate characteristics) and outcome data (reincarceration, rearrest and drug relapse) for<br />

e<br />

this cohort, and thus maximize our sample size.<br />

With a combined TC capacity of 362 and an anticipated attrition rate of about 20%, we<br />

expected an initial sample of about 450 TC inmates over the one-year data collection period. We<br />

expected a final sample of about 360 inmates to have completed TC treatment prior to their<br />

release fiom prison. Using oversampling to reduce higher anticipated attrition fiom less intensive<br />

Education and Outpatient programs (perhaps as high as 50%), we aimed for an initial comparison<br />

sample of about 1,350 inmates, with no less than 675 expected to complete the programs they<br />

were assigned to.<br />

Al inmates in the treatment and comparison groups had previously undergone initial<br />

assessment via the normal DOC inmate classification system. Inmates in both groups also<br />

completed the Pennsylvania Corrections Screening Instrument (PACSI), the TCU Drug Screen,<br />

44<br />

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of <strong>Justice</strong>. This report has not<br />

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s)<br />

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of <strong>Justice</strong>.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!