The Problems (and possible solutions) of assessing risk, race and recidivism in long operating drug treatment courts

IF 1.5 4区社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Evaluation and Program Planning Pub Date : 2024-10-05 DOI:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102510

Kristen E. DeVall , Paul D. Gregory , David J. Hartmann

{"title":"The Problems (and possible solutions) of assessing risk, race and recidivism in long operating drug treatment courts","authors":"Kristen E. DeVall , Paul D. Gregory , David J. Hartmann","doi":"10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Formal criminogenic risk tools can be an important control in assessing racial inequities in access to treatment courts and in evaluating both proximal and distal outcomes from those programs. To achieve this potential, however, it is important that risk tools themselves operate in a racially neutral fashion and that they operate consistently over the period assessed. Tools that are not properly calibrated by race and changes in the tools used over the life of a program are therefore significant evaluation concerns. Our paper is the first to assess the adequacy of an important risk-needs instrument, the LSI-R, across racial groups in a drug treatment court setting. The main contribution of the current study is not as a test of that instrument, which has been widely studied in other settings. Rather, because two different criminogenic risk tools were used over the study time period, we took this opportunity to explore the use of a readily constructible “proxy” measure of risk to support analysis of risk and race interactions over the life of the program.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48046,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation and Program Planning","volume":"108 ","pages":"Article 102510"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation and Program Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718924001125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Formal criminogenic risk tools can be an important control in assessing racial inequities in access to treatment courts and in evaluating both proximal and distal outcomes from those programs. To achieve this potential, however, it is important that risk tools themselves operate in a racially neutral fashion and that they operate consistently over the period assessed. Tools that are not properly calibrated by race and changes in the tools used over the life of a program are therefore significant evaluation concerns. Our paper is the first to assess the adequacy of an important risk-needs instrument, the LSI-R, across racial groups in a drug treatment court setting. The main contribution of the current study is not as a test of that instrument, which has been widely studied in other settings. Rather, because two different criminogenic risk tools were used over the study time period, we took this opportunity to explore the use of a readily constructible “proxy” measure of risk to support analysis of risk and race interactions over the life of the program.

查看原文本刊更多论文

长期运作的戒毒法庭在评估风险、种族和累犯方面存在的问题（以及可能的解决方案

正式的犯罪风险工具可以作为一种重要的控制手段，用于评估进入治疗法庭的种族不平等情况，以及评估这些项目的近端和远端结果。然而，要实现这一潜力，风险工具本身必须以种族中立的方式运作，并且在评估期间持续运作。因此，未按种族进行适当校准的工具，以及在计划实施期间所使用工具的变化，都是重要的评估问题。我们的论文首次评估了一种重要的风险需求工具--LSI-R---在戒毒治疗法庭环境下在不同种族群体中的适用性。本研究的主要贡献不在于对该工具进行测试，因为该工具已在其他环境中得到广泛研究。相反，由于在研究期间使用了两种不同的犯罪风险工具，我们借此机会探讨了如何使用一种易于构建的风险 "替代 "测量方法，以支持对项目实施期间风险与种族之间的相互作用进行分析。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Evaluation and Program Planning SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-

CiteScore

3.10

自引率

6.20%

发文量

112

期刊介绍： Evaluation and Program Planning is based on the principle that the techniques and methods of evaluation and planning transcend the boundaries of specific fields and that relevant contributions to these areas come from people representing many different positions, intellectual traditions, and interests. In order to further the development of evaluation and planning, we publish articles from the private and public sectors in a wide range of areas: organizational development and behavior, training, planning, human resource development, health and mental, social services, mental retardation, corrections, substance abuse, and education.