HOPE Demonstration Field Experiment Multisite Evaluation

NCT ID: NCT01670708

Last Updated: 2017-12-15

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: COMPLETED
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 1504 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2012-08-31
• Study Completion Date: 2015-03-31

Brief Summary

The purpose of the Multisite Evaluation of the Honest Opportunity Probation with Enforcement Demonstration Field Experiment (the HOPE DFE Evaluation) is to conduct a randomized control trial (RCT) replication of the original Hawaii HOPE program and evaluation. The HOPE program provides strict oversight of probationers through a HOPE Court judge and intensive probation supervision, including random drug testing, coupled with swift and certain sanctions in response to positive results on random drug tests and other violations of conditions of supervision. The HOPE DFE Evaluation is being conducted among probation populations in four sites and will identify the effectiveness of swift and certain sanctions on targeted outcomes, both primary (appointment no-shows, positive urine tests, re-arrest rates) and secondary (revocation rates, jail days served, prison days sentenced).

Detailed Description

The Multisite Evaluation of the Honest Opportunity Probation with Enforcement Demonstration Field Experiment (the HOPE DFE Evaluation) has four goals: (1) Design and implement a randomization process in each of the four DFE sites; (2) Conduct a comprehensive process evaluation to assess implementation fidelity and identify lessons learned that will enhance future replications; (3) Conduct a rigorous experimental outcome evaluation to determine the effect of the HOPE model and its components on individual probation outcomes; and (4) Conduct a cost evaluation to assess the cost effectiveness of HOPE. The RCT will involve identifying in each of four sites a pool of HOPE-eligible probationers who will be randomly assigned to HOPE or to probation as usual (PAU). The evaluation will randomly assign approximately 400 eligible probationers to HOPE or PAU in each of the four sites for a total sample size of 1,600 (800 HOPE and 800 PAU). Criteria identifying the HOPE-eligible target population and procedures to identify that population in a timely fashion randomly assigning HOPE-eligible Probationers to HOPE or PAU have been identified. Random assignment will be accomplished using evaluation-provided forms that include study identification numbers and the random assignment that is covered by a scratch-off label. The assignment will be revealed only after the individual has been provided the opportunity to participate in the evaluation and, with consent, completed the baseline interview. The process evaluation/fidelity assessment component will document the extent to which each program conforms to the HOPE model; document the barriers, challenges, facilitators, and lessons learned during implementation to fill gaps in the knowledge base as to what is required to set up a HOPE program; and provide evidence as to the generalizability and sustainability of HOPE programs. This component will also document the PAU control conditions in each site and will assess implementation fidelity of evidence-based drug treatment programs. Implementation and process measures will be collected through stakeholder interviews; observation of initial warning hearings and court appearances; and review of court, probation, and HOPE project records. The process evaluation will also document the PAU practices to identify intervention differences among the control groups and to provide an opportunity to measure changes in practices that could signal contamination of the control arm. Fidelity assessments of drug treatment programs will be conducted using the Correctional Program Checklist. The outcome study will assess whether HOPE participation improves appointment compliance, drug test results, rearrest rates, revocation rates, jail days served, and prison days sentenced. In addition, the evaluation will determine whether HOPE participation changes potential mediators including criminal thinking/attitudes, perceptions of control and justice system fairness and legitimacy, dynamic recidivism risk factors, and employment and housing stability. For the outcome study, administrative data will provide information on appointment compliance, drug test results, re-arrests, violations, revocations, and jail and prison days for all HOPE and PAU evaluation participants. Interview data will be collected from evaluation participants at evaluation enrollment and 6 months post-enrollment on measures that will facilitate understanding of the nature of individual change associated with HOPE participation. All HOPE-eligible Probationers who consent to study participation will complete an audio computer assisted self interview (ACASI) at baseline and 6 months post baseline; a random sample of those completing ACASI baseline interviews will be asked to participate in a twice-weekly series of mini-interviews (telephone-ACASI or T-ACASI). Non-incarcerated individuals are being offered $20 equivalent to complete the ACASI interview. Random drug tests on a subsample of HOPE and PAU evaluation participants will be conducted in conjunction with the 6-month post-enrollment interviews to provide a common measure of current drug use.

Conditions

Substance Use; Criminal Recidivism

Keywords

Substance Use; Illicit Drug Use; Criminal Behavior

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: OTHER
• Blinding Strategy: NONE

Study Groups

HOPE

Participation in HOPE program

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

HOPE

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

HOPE Court Judge provides warning hearing; random drug testing; violation hearing and jail/other sanctions for failed drug test or failure to comply with other probation conditions.

Probation as Usual

Participation in probation as usual

Group Type: ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Probation as Usual

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Probation officer supervises following standard protocols.

Interventions

HOPE

HOPE Court Judge provides warning hearing; random drug testing; violation hearing and jail/other sanctions for failed drug test or failure to comply with other probation conditions.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Probation as Usual

Probation officer supervises following standard protocols.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• adult probationers assessed as high risk for failure on probation (e.g., high likelihood of new arrest, failure to comply with conditions) who live within the geographic boundaries of the study site with at least 11.5 months remaining on their probation sentence

Exclusion Criteria

• Juveniles
• live outside geographic boundaries
• assigned to specialized probation caseloads (e.g., sex offender, DUI, mental health)
• non-English speaking in some sites

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 90 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Penn State University

OTHER

Sponsor Role: collaborator

U.S. Department of Justice

FED

Sponsor Role: collaborator

RTI International

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Pamela K Lattimore, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

RTI International

Locations

Court and Probation Office, Saline County

Benton, Arkansas, United States

Salem County Probation Office, Massachusetts Salem District Court, Essex County Superior Court

Salem, Massachusetts, United States

Court and Probation Office

Oregon City, Oregon, United States

Court and Probation Office, Tarrant County

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Countries

United States

Other Identifiers

2011-RY-BX-0003

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id