Multi-site National Institute of Justice Evaluation of Second Chance Act Reentry Courts in Seven States, 2012-2016 (ICPSR 36748)

Version Date: Jul 24, 2018

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Shannon Carey, NPC Research; Michael Rempel, Center for Court Innovation; Christine Lindquist, RTI International

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36748.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The study used a multi-method approach including 1. a process evaluation in all eight sites involving yearly site visits from 2012 to 2014 with key stakeholder interviews, observations, and participant focus groups; 2. a prospective impact evaluation (in four sites) including interviews at release from jail or prison and at 12 months after release (as well as oral swab drug tests) with reentry court participants and a matched comparison group; 3. a recidivism impact evaluation (in seven sites) with a matched comparison group tracking recidivism for 2 years post reentry court entry and 4. a cost-benefit evaluation (in seven sites) involving a transactional and institutional cost analysis (TICA) approach. Final administrative data were collected through the end of 2016.

This collection includes four SPSS data files: "interview_archive2.sav" with 746 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC_Archive_File_3.sav" with 518 variables and 3,710 cases, "Interview Data1.sav" with 1,356 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC Admin Data File.sav" with 517 variables and 3,710 cases, and three SPSS syntax files: "Interview Syntax.sps", "archive_2-17.sps", and "NESCCARC Admin Data Syntax.sps".

Citation

Carey, Shannon, Rempel, Michael, and Lindquist, Christine. Multi-site National Institute of Justice Evaluation of Second Chance Act Reentry Courts in Seven States, 2012-2016. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2018-07-24. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36748.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Funding

United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2010-RY-BX-0001)

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

County, State

Restrictions

Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reasons for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

2012 -- 2016

Date of Collection

2012 -- 2016

Data Collection Notes

  1. These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Hide

Study Purpose

This study of eight SCA reentry courts across the U.S. had four goals:

  1. Describe the SCA reentry courts through a comprehensive process evaluation
  2. Determine the effectiveness of the SCA reentry courts at reducing recidivism and improving individual outcomes through a rigorous impact evaluation
  3. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis
  4. Contribute to the development of a "true" reentry court model

Study Design

The evaluation was performed in two phases. Phase 1 addressed Goal 1 of this evaluation (the process study) and involved annual site visits to examine program policies and practices as well as an evaluability assessment to determine potential quasi-experimental impact designs in each site. Phase 2 addressed Goals 2 through 4 and involved the collection of administrative data; selection of a comparison group for each site; implementation of a longitudinal impact study involving in-depth interviews with program participants and comparison group members in four sites; and the collection of cost data to calculate the costs of the programs and their outcomes/impacts.

Sample

The reentry courts provided a list of their participants and associated data. Those individuals served as the treatment group. To obtain a comparison group, data on individuals recently released from prison or jail (and other criteria depending on the nature of the reentry court) from the relevant agencies, such as the Department of Corrections, State Police, or court system were used. Propensity scores were then used to either match or weight the samples to ensure they were similar. Full details can be found in the report included in the files submitted.

Time Method

Cross-sectional ad-hoc follow-up

Universe

The prospective interview study included individuals enrolled in the reentry court or standard post-release supervision beginning in 2012. The recidivism study samples included all reentry court participants who had entered the seven programs since the implementation of BJA grant activities and could be tracked for at least 1 year after entry--regardless of final program status--along with a comparison group of similar individuals who received treatment as usual in the jurisdiction.

Unit(s) of Observation

Individual

Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection

Description of Variables

This collection includes four SPSS data files: "interview_archive2.sav" with 746 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC_Archive_File_3.sav" with 518 variables and 3,710 cases, "Interview Data1.sav" with 1,356 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC Admin Data File.sav" with 517 variables and 3,710 cases, and three SPSS syntax files: "Interview Syntax.sps", "archive_2-17.sps", and "NESCCARC Admin Data Syntax.sps".

Response Rates

Delaware-72 percent; Missouri-85 percent; Ohio-65 percent; Texas-96 percent; All Interviewees-81 percent

Hide

Original Release Date

2018-07-24

Hide

Weight

Administrative Data: The comparison groups were matched to the participants at each site through propensity score weighting and/or matching techniques. Precise propensity score adjustment strategies varied by site, given relative sample size in treatment and comparison groups and other technical considerations.

Interview Data: Weighting was used to control differences between the participant and comparison interview samples and resolved differences in site distribution.

Hide

Notes

  • These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

  • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.

  • One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.