U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Day Reporting Centers as an Intermediate Sanction: Evaluation of Programs Operated by the ATTIC Correctional Services

NCJ Number
165726
Author(s)
A Craddock; L A Graham
Date Published
1996
Length
169 pages
Annotation
This report presents the methodology and findings of a process and outcome evaluation of three Wisconsin day reporting centers (DRC's) operated by the ATTIC Correctional Services.
Abstract
Two of the DRC's have similar schedules and content. They consist of three 4-week phases in decreasing levels of intensity, followed by 3 months of aftercare. All clients have a case manager who monitors client progress, provides individual counseling, and coordinates client activities with the Division of Probation and Parole and other agencies. Programming is provided in three major areas: alcohol and other drug abuse, criminality issues, and independent living skills. The third DRC is one of a statewide group of programs modeled on the Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime approach. ATTIC provides case management for male clients and conducts a Corrective Thinking group. Case management includes assessment, referral to appropriate services, urinalyses, and periodic meetings regarding progress and plans. The program is designed to last 6 months. The evaluation used a quasi-experimental design and compared ATTIC clients to probationers overall in their respective counties and to ATTIC-eligible probationers (substance-abusing probationers). The process evaluation focused on DRC differences by type of location, implementation issues, types of offenders served, and factors associated with the successful completion of DRC programs. The evaluation of client outcomes addressed factors associated with the rearrest of DRC clients and the arrests of DRC clients compared to other probationers. Overall, the evaluation shows that DRC's provide a viable correctional treatment option for the highest risk offenders supervised in the community; however, because the evaluation did not use an experimental design, it cannot conclude that program participation, or the lack thereof, is the primary factor that influenced recidivism. Recommendations are offered for improving program operations and evaluation research. 13 references and appended interview protocols, program observation protocol, client satisfaction survey, and focus group protocol