Evaluation of the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) Community Supervision Strategy, 2007-2009

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) community supervision strategy for substance-abusing probationers. The study involved the administration of key stakeholder surveys as part of a process evaluation of the HOPE program and the comparison...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Hawken, Angela (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Research Data
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar] [Verlag nicht ermittelbar] 2011
En:Año: 2011
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002 4500
001 1840050268
003 DE-627
005 20230325055116.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 230324s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.3886/ICPSR27921.v1  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1840050268 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1840050268 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Hawken, Angela  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Evaluation of the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) Community Supervision Strategy, 2007-2009 
264 1 |a [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar]  |b [Verlag nicht ermittelbar]  |c 2011 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The purpose of the study was to evaluate the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) community supervision strategy for substance-abusing probationers. The study involved the administration of key stakeholder surveys as part of a process evaluation of the HOPE program and the comparison of HOPE probationers with control-group probationers on two primary outcome measures: no-shows for probation appointments and positive urine tests for illicit-substance use. For Part 1 and Part 2, data were collected from administrative data sources. Missed Appointments Data (Part 1) were collected from 2007 to 2009 on a total of 1,174 probationers including 1,078 HOPE probationers, 78 comparison probationers, and 18 probationers for which study group information was not available. Specifically, for Part 1, the research team compiled data on the proportion of missed appointments in the three-month period before the study start date (baseline), in the three-month period following baseline, and in the six-month period following baseline. Drug Test Results Data (Part 2) were collected from 2007 to 2009 on the same 1,174 probationers. Specifically, for Part 2, the research team compiled data on the proportion of positive urine tests in the three-month period before the study start date (baseline), in the three-month period following baseline, and in the six-month period following baseline. Stakeholder survey data were collected from September 2008 through March 2009 on 50 Integrated Community Sanctions or "Specialized Unit" probationers (Part 3), 28 probationers in treatment (Part 4), 16 probationers in jail (Part 5), 20 probation officers in the Integrated Community Sanctions Unit (Part 6), 11 public defenders (Part 7), 12 prosecutors (Part 8), 7 judges (Part 9), and 11 court staff (Part 10). Part 1 contains a total of eight variables including group (high intensity or control), demographics, and mean missed appointments scores for three periods. Part 2 contains a total of eight variables including group (high intensity or control), demographics, and mean positive urine tests for illicit-substance use scores for three periods. The Integrated Community Sanctions Probationers Survey Data (Part 3), the Probationers in Treatment Survey Data (Part 4), and the Probationers in Jail Survey Data (Part 5) each include variables about the respondent's general perceptions and opinions of the HOPE program. Part 3 contains 24 variables, Part 4 contains 30 variables, and Part 5 contains 30 variables. The Probation Officers Survey Data (Part 6), Public Defenders Survey Data (Part 7), Prosecutors Survey Data (Part 8), Judges Survey Data (Part 9), and Court Staff Survey Data (Part 10) include variables about workload issues and the respondent's general perceptions and opinions of the HOPE program. Part 6 contains 65 variables, Part 7 contains 45 variables, Part 8 contains 55 variables, Part 9 contains 36 variables, and Part 10 contains 36 variables. 
540 |a ICPSR Terms of Use 
650 4 |a Drug offenders 
650 4 |a Drug Testing 
650 4 |a Evaluation 
650 4 |a Judges 
650 4 |a outcome evaluation 
650 4 |a Probation 
650 4 |a probation conditions 
650 4 |a Probation officers 
650 4 |a probationers 
650 4 |a process evaluation 
650 4 |a prosecuting attorneys 
650 4 |a Public defenders 
650 4 |a Sanctions 
650 4 |a urinalysis 
655 7 |a Forschungsdaten  |0 (DE-588)1098579690  |0 (DE-627)857755366  |0 (DE-576)469182156  |2 gnd-content 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27921.v1  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4296797697 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1840050268 
LOK |0 005 20230324125215 
LOK |0 008 230324||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)ICPSR27921 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a foda  |a nacj 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw