The study determined that responsivity adherence (implementing the treatment as designed) was not significantly associated with rearrests among AOP participants, nor was it significantly associated with substance-use severity scores. In addition, the odds of rearrest were significantly greater among individuals who received interventions with a higher EBT-use (evidence-based treatment) score across programs; however, there was no association between the average EBT-use scores across programs and the odds of rearrest. Among JDTC participants, an increase in responsivity adherence was associated with an increase in the odds of rearrest and substance-use severity. These results suggest the need for further specification of both general responsivity adherence and "evidence-based" treatment for use in future research and theory. Specifically, there should be further elaboration of the general responsivity-adherent techniques and clear criteria for classifying interventions as "evidence-based treatment." The findings also imply that certain types of treatment interventions are more compatible with the JDTC model than other interventions. Future research may benefit by exploring EBT as a criterion for adherence to the general responsivity principle. 19 tables, approximately 180 references, and 12 appendices with detailed supplementary information