Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An Outcome Evaluation of a Substance Abuse Program for Probationers: Findings from a Quasi-Experimental Design

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study provides an evaluation of a substance abuse treatment program for probationers in a county in the state of Texas. Relying on a quasi-experimental design with a propensity score matched sample of 69 treatment group subjects and 69 control group subjects, the results revealed that while a significant treatment effect was observed for program participants in terms of a reduction in recidivism, a significant treatment effect on the percentage of people failing drug tests or the rate of failed drug tests was not detected. Study limitations and implications are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It is important to note that there does exist a vast literature evaluating drug courts (see Marlowe, 2010), but as this study is evaluating a local in office substance abuse treatment program run by LCDC counselors we do not review or focus on this literature specifically.

  2. After removing cases that did not have complete data, the sample that was considered for the analysis was 284 control group subjects and 91 treatment group subjects.

  3. Due to the strict (and conventional) caliper restriction of .10 applied to identify matches, 69 of the 91 treatment group subjects were effectively matched. Or in other words, 22 of the treatment group subjects were not able to be matched to a control group subject with a high degree of precision based on the caliper restriction. As such, the final sample of matched treatment group subjects and control group subjects was 69 treatment group subjects and 69 control group subjects.

  4. One of the reviewers made an excellent point regarding other potential sources of selection bias that cannot be addressed by PSM in this study due to the data being unavailable. Specifically, length of substance abuse history and other specific eligibility conditions for the SATP program.

References

  • Austin, P. C. (2009). Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: Results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulations. Biomedical Journal, 51, 171–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedict, W. R., Huff-Corzine, L., & Corzine, J. (1998). ‘Clean up and go straight’: Effects of drug treatment on recidivism among felony probationers. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 22, 169–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, E. A., & Anderson, E. (2016). Prisoners in 2015: Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Disbury, K. L., Kopak, A. M., Dean, L. V., Moyes, H. C. A., Breedvelt, J. J. F., Thibaut, B. I., Cole, C. R. F., & Heath, J. J. (2015). Pre- to posttreatment differences in measures of risk of relapse and reoffending for participants of RAPt’s 6-weeks programs. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54, 556–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, E., Jaffe, A., Urada, D., & Anglin, M. D. (2012). Differential outcomes of court-supervised substance abuse treatment among California parolees and probationers. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56, 539–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., & Simpson, D. D. (2006). Recidivism following mandated residential substance abuse treatment for felony probationers. The Prison Journal, 86, 230–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2011). Matchit: Nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. Journal of Statistical Software, (8), 1–28.

  • Huebner, B. M., & Cobbina, J. (2007). The effect of drug use, drug treatment participation, and treatment completion on probationer recidivism. The Journal of Drug Issues, 7, 619–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, D. J. (2004). Profile of jail inmates (p. 2002). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, W. G., Fridell, L. A., Lynch, M., Jetelina, K. K., & Reingle Gonzalez, J. (2017). A quasi-experimental evaluation of the effects of police body-worn cameras (BWCs) on response-to-resistance in a large metropolitan police department. Deviant Behavior, 38, 1332–1339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, W.G., & Hudak, E. (2014). “Police response to the mentally ill.” In R. G. Dunham &. G. P. Alpert (eds.), Critical issues in policing: Contemporary readings (6th edition) (pp. 109–126). Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.

  • Jennings, W. G., Richards, T., Smith, M. D., Bjerregaard, B., & Fogel, S. (2014). A critical examination of the “White victim effect” and death penalty decision-making from a propensity score matching approach: The North Carolina experience. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42, 384–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, W. G., Richards, T., Tomsich, E., & Gover, A. (2015). Investigating the role of child sexual abuse in intimate partner violence victimization and perpetration in young adulthood from a propensity score matching approach. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 24, 659–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs, C. P., Strom, K. J., Koetse, W. H., & Lattimore, P. K. (2009). The impact of residential and nonresidential drug treatment on recidivism among drug-involved probationers: A survival analysis. Crime and Delinquency, 55, 442–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lattimore, P. K., Krebs, C. P., Koetse, W., Lindquist, C., & Cowell, A. J. (2005). Predicting the effect of substance abuse treatment on probationer recidivism. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 159–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linhorst, D. M., Dirks-Linhorst, P. A., & Groom, R. (2012). Rearrest and probation violation outcomes among probationers participating in a jail-based substance-abuse treatment used as an intermediate sanction. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 51, 519–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe, D. B. (2010). Research update on adult drug courts. Washington, DC: National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauer, M., & King, R. (2007). A 25-Year Quagmire: The War on Drugs and its Impact on American Society. Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, H. V., & Miller, J. M. (2010). Community in-reach through jail reentry: Findings from a quasi-experimental design. Justice Quarterly, 27, 893–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. M., & Khey, D. N. (2016). An implementation and process evaluation of the Louisiana 22nd Judicial District’s behavioral health court. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 124–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. M., & Miller, H. V. (2011). Considering the effectiveness of drug treatment behind bars: Findings from the South Carolina RSAT Program. Justice Quarterly, 28, 70–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. M., & Miller, H. V. (2015). Rethinking program fidelity for criminal justice. Criminology & Public Policy, 14, 339–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. M., & Miller, H. V. (2016). Validating program fidelity: Lessons from the Delaware county second chance initiatives. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 112–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minton, T. D., & Zeng, Z. (2016). Jail Inmates in 2015. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L. D., & Elkavich, A. (2008). Who’s using and who’s doing time: Incarceration, the War on Drugs, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 782–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peck, J., & Jennings, W. G. (2016). A critical examination of ‘being Black’ in the juvenile justice system: A propensity score matching approach. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational studies (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observation studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sung, H., Mahoney, A. M., & Mellow, J. (2011). Substance abuse treatment gap among adult parolees: Prevalence, correlates, and barriers. Criminal Justice Review, 36(1), 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., & Belenko, S. (2011). Implementing evidence-based practices in community corrections and addiction treatment. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turan, R., & Yargic, I. (2012). The relationship between substance abuse treatment completion, sociodemographics, substance use characteristics, and criminal history. Substance Abuse, 33, 92–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Census Bureau (2018). Quick facts: McLennan County, Texas. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/mclennancountytexas. Accessed 17 Jan 2019.

  • Weisburd, D., Lu, C. M., & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does research design affect study outcomes in criminal justice? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 50–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, B. C., Peel, M. E., Farrington, D. P., Elffers, H., & Braga, A. A. (2011). Research design influence on study outcomes in crime and justice: A partial replication with public area surveillance. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7, 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ronin Institute, Hillsboro, OR, USA

    Meghan E. Hollis

  2. School of Criminal Justice, College of Applied Arts, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, Hines Room 108, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA

    Wesley G. Jennings

  3. Tarleton State University, Stephenville, TX, USA

    Shannon Hankhouse

Authors
  1. Meghan E. Hollis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wesley G. Jennings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shannon Hankhouse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wesley G. Jennings.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hollis, M.E., Jennings, W.G. & Hankhouse, S. An Outcome Evaluation of a Substance Abuse Program for Probationers: Findings from a Quasi-Experimental Design. Am J Crim Just 44, 395–408 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-9472-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-9472-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation