Decide Your Time

Researchers tested their hypotheses by evaluating whether the Decide Your Time (DYT) programs’ Swift, Certain and Fair (SCF) principles could reduce recidivism rates among persistent drug-using offenders. The evaluation used an experimental design trial with a sample of 400 high-risk probationers for precise testing of whether a program of periodic monitoring, graduated sanctions, and treatment referrals could reduce drug use and recidivism rates among incurable drug-using offenders on probation. Researchers examined whether individuals randomized to the treatment condition (DYT) would have significantly better outcomes than the standard condition (standard probation). Specifically, researchers hypothesized that participants randomized into DYT would demonstrate a smaller likelihood of arrest and drug use than would those placed on standard probation (STDP). In

addition, researchers tested whether those placed in DYT were less likely to miss an appointment and more likely to complete their term of probation.

Researchers approached the analysis in terms of probation process outcomes and recidivism outcomes. Process outcomes were those related to drug use and missed appointments while on probation and probation term completed. To control recidivism, researchers evaluated whether individuals experienced any arrest (new crime, and arrest for Violation of Probation, Violation of Probation technical violation, and incarceration) at 6, 12, and 18 months after randomization.

The implementation of DYT and its evaluation was conducted in a probation setting located in a mid-Atlantic state hosting a diverse population.

Located in a medium-sized city, this probation facility serves a population both from urban and suburban areas. The office is staffed with 56 officers, with an average daily caseload (moderate and high–risk probationers) of 2,250. The state maintains a combined probation and parole division as part of the Bureau of Community Corrections that functions within a unified Department of Correction. As a result, Probation and Parole (P&P) services are part of the state’s blended sentencing system based on levels ranging from one through five: Level 1 includes non-reporting probation, Level 2 denotes standard probation requiring monthly contact with a PO, Level 3 is intensive probation requiring weekly contact with a PO, Level 4 includes community corrections, and Level 5 represents secure corrections incarceration. Although the P&P Division is responsible for levels 1 through 3, the Bureau of Community Corrections also uses Level 4 community correction centers for

violators.

Offenders under probation supervision at the study locations were a combination of direct commitments to probation from judges and persons reentering the community from either a halfway house (Level 4) or a secure (Level 5) facility. POs use the Level of Service Inventory-Revisited for an initial risk assessment, and depending on the outcome of this assessment, individuals are referred for further on-site substance abuse assessment and treatment referrals. At the time of the study, the overall philosophy of the officers at the project location was heavily crime control oriented with officers licensed to wear firearms while in the office. However, the officers who volunteered for DYT expressed frustration with the tension created by, on the one hand, the office’s control orientation and, on the other, the probationary philosophy of close monitoring coordinated with social service referrals. Thus, the DYT officers were open to alternative approaches to supervising offenders that involved therapeutic and restorative justice models. Therefore, DYT was significantly different than “probation in Delaware, and DYT officers supervised (and counseled) DYT clients differently than they did standard POs.