Historique
Article de Périodique
Evaluation of the substance abuse and crime prevention act : Client characteristics, treatment completion and re-offending three years after implementation (2006)
(Evaluation de la consommation de produits et loi sur la prévention : caractéristiques des patients, finalisation du traitement et récidive trois ans après)
Auteur(s) :
EVANS, E. ;
LONGSHORE, D. ;
PRENDERGAST, M. ;
URADA, D.
Année
2006
Page(s) :
357-367
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Refs biblio. :
15
Domaine :
Drogues illicites / Illicit drugs
Thésaurus géographique
ETATS-UNIS
Thésaurus mots-clés
CRIMINOLOGIE
;
LEGISLATION
;
EVALUATION
;
PRISE EN CHARGE
;
RECIDIVE
;
INJONCTION THERAPEUTIQUE
;
EPIDEMIOLOGIE
;
METHAMPHETAMINE
Note générale :
Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 2006, 38(Suppl. 3), 357-367
Note de contenu :
fig.
Résumé :
ENGLISH :
Representing a major shift in criminal justice policy, Proposition 36 became law in November 2000 as the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA), permitting eligible offenders to receive probation with drug treatment instead of probation or incarceration. UCLA's Integrated Substance Abuse Programs was chosen by the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs to conduct an independent evaluation of SACPA. Analysis of the first three years of data provides information on the flow of offenders through SACPA, client and program characteristics, treatment completion rates, and effects on re-offending. Results show that most eligible offenders chose to participate in SACPA; almost two-thirds of these went on to enter treatment. Compared to other treatment clients, SACPA treatment clients included fewer women, were predominately between 26 and 45 years old, were more likely to use methamphetamine, and had been using drugs a longer. Most SACPA clients were referred to outpatient drug-free treatment regardless of primary drug problem, and about one-third completed treatment. Re-offending was lowest among SACPA offenders who completed treatment. Felony and misdemeanor drug arrests were higher among SACPA-era drug offenders than in a similar group of pre-SACPA drug offenders. Future reports will cover possible SACPA cost savings, additional clients outcomes, and overall lessons learned. (Author' s abstract)
Affiliation :
Etats-Unis. United States.
Cote :
Abonnement