The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
This evaluation examined the impact of Break the Cycle (BTC), an initiative designed to reduce drug use and crime among probationers and parolees in the state of Maryland. The BTC strategy uses intensive supervision to encourage offenders on supervision to abstain from using drugs and participate in drug treatment. BTC was adopted by the Division of Parole and Probation (DPP) for all offenders under DPP who were under supervision with a drug condition stipulated by a judge or the Parole Commission. Efforts to increase access to drug treatment took place in many DPP offices across the state and supervising agents were encouraged to apply sanctions for violations of drug conditions. Six of Maryland's largest counties (Baltimore, Charles, Howard, Montgomery, Prince George's, and Washington) and Baltimore City received additional funds from the Maryland Legislature to support the implementation of BTC. These funds were used primarily for additional drug testing. In addition, these BTC areas developed a data system (HATS) to support the monitoring and treatment referral process for eligible probationers and parolees.
The yardstick used to measure the impact of BTC was reduction in the likelihood and number of arrests of probationers and parolees in the year after starting supervision. Only arrests that result in new charges being filed are included.1 Arrest measures include an arrest for any offense and an arrest for a drug offense. Using data from existing computer systems, the evaluation design compares arrest of parolees and probationers in the BTC areas that received funding to arrests of similar offenders in seven non-BTC counties: Anne Arundel, Carroll, Cecil, Harford, Frederick, St. Mary's, and Wicomico. Extensive statistical controls were used in the analysis to adjust for differences in the counties and in the characteristics of individuals supervised by DPP in those areas.
The findings indicate that arrests of probationers and parolees with drug conditions were lower as a result of BTC as follows:
- Probationers and parolees with drug conditions had a slightly, but significantly lower likelihood of arrest for a drug offense and significantly fewer drug arrests;
- In BTC areas that administered more drug tests per person under supervision, probationers and parolees with drug conditions had a significantly lower likelihood of arrest (for any offense and for drug offenses) and significantly fewer arrests (for any offense and for drug offenses); and
- In BTC areas that administered more sanctions (immediate penalties for infraction of drug condition requirements) per person under supervision, probationers and parolees with drug conditions had slightly, but significantly lower likelihood of arrest (for any offense and for drug offenses) and significantly fewer arrests for drug offenses.
We did not find significant reductions in arrest among all offenders, nor were reductions in
arrest associated with the ratio of sanctions to positive drug tests.
We interpret these results to mean that BTC is an effective strategy for reducing drug arrests
among probationers and parolees with drug conditions. The BTC areas that used more drug testing and sanctions in response to infractions of drug conditions experienced greater reductions in new offenses. This suggests that the magnitude of the reductions could be increased by more widespread use of these strategies. One factor that could not be measured by this evaluation was whether BTC increased participation in drug treatment and what role drug treatment played in producing the observed outcomes.
These results are consistent with a growing body of literature that indicates the effectiveness of combining intensive drug testing, sanctioning and drug treatment. The national evaluation of the Breaking the Cycle Demonstration in Birmingham, AL, Jacksonville, FL, and Pierce County, WA, Compared felony defendants who did and did not receive BTC services. It found:
- Statistically significant reductions in drug use among BTC participants in two of three cities studied;
- Statistically significant reductions in self-reported offending, particularly in drug sales and possession, among BTC participants in all three cities;
- Statistically significant reductions in the likelihood of arrest in the following year among BTC participants in two of three cities studied; and
- Statistically significant reductions in family problems among BTC participants in all three cities (Harrell, Mitchell, Merrill, and Marlowe, 2002).
The analysis of costs and benefits found positive returns to the investment in the BTC demonstration in all three sites, ranging from $2.30 to $5.70 for each dollar invested. Not all of these savings could be readily converted into budget dollars for the agencies participating in BTC since they represent savings to a host of stakeholders including potential victims, public jurisdictions, insurers, citizens in general as well as the public law enforcement, courts and
corrections systems. However, the benefits were consistent with the public safety, health, and welfare missions of the investing agencies.
Other studies have found that sanctions and drug treatment are effective in reducing crime and work best in combination:
- Falkin's evaluation of community-based treatment for offenders found that treatment combined with urinalysis and court monitoring with sanctions had higher rates of success than treatment alone (Falkin, 1993).
- The evaluation of the DC Superior Court Drug Intervention program found reductions in drug use prior to sentencing and crime in the year after sentencing among program participants. A greater reduction in arrest was found among those who participated in NA/AA treatment (Harrell, Cavanagh, and Roman, 1999).
- The evaluation of Intensive Supervision Programs (ISP) found that combined treatment with strict surveillance reduced recidivism by as much as 15 percent over high levels of surveillance alone (Petersilia and Turner, 1993; Petersilia, Turner and Deschenes, 1992).
LIMITATIONS
The strength of the findings of BTC impact may be limited because the implementation of the core strategies was not strong across all BTC counties in the full post-BTC time period. The process evaluation of BTC indicates that the program was only partially in place at the end of 2001 (Taxman, Reedy, Moline, Ormand, and Yancey, 2003). However, BTC implementation showed continuing improvement, much of which occurred at the end of (or following) the Urban Institute's study period. It will be important to the continued development of BTC that process and impact evaluation continue as the program attains more complete application of the underlying principles behind drug intervention with probationers and parolees.
The evaluation findings must also be interpreted cautiously in light of the research design and data limitations. The evaluation was based on a retrospective quasi-experimental design that relied on statistical procedures to control for differences between BTC and non-BTC areas and offender populations. For example, the measure of need for drug intervention was limited to a drug condition imposed by the court or Parole Commission, initially or later, in response to a recommendation by the supervising officer. Prospective experimental evaluation of impact would provide much more data to use in measuring exposure to BTC services, individual differences in drug abuse severity, and a wider range of outcome measures including reductions in drug use.
The reliance on secondary data from existing computer systems means that the analysis is limited to the variables collected for other purposes. It would have been very helpful, for example, to have a measure of treatment utilization by offenders under supervision in both BTC and non-BTC areas since, conceptually, treatment is a core component of the strategy for reducing drug use. Data systems containing criminal history and corrections files are subject to variation in data definitions and quality over time and locations. Because the HATS database was under development during the study period, data cleaning involved removing duplicate records and the assumption that missing information on sanctions was random across BTC counties.
Despite these limitations, the evidence suggests that reductions in arrest rates among offenders with drug conditions will occur when drug testing is widely used and accompanied by sanctions. These reductions in arrests on new charges reflect benefits to the community in averted criminal activity and can be expected to reduce future corrections costs.
Notes from this section
1 Revocations of parole or probation based on technical violations of conditions are not included, nor are arrest charges that are dropped.
Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).
The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:
Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.
Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.
If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.
Latest Research
Browse by Topic:
PDF
Printer-friendly summary
