Study
Abrahamse and colleagues (1991) conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of the Phoenix (Ariz.) Repeat Offender Program. To locate individuals for the program, nine criteria were examined of subjects in Phoenix: current criminal activity, substance abuse, lifestyle, probation failure, felony convictions, prior juvenile record, past informant activity, family background, and method of operation. This data was obtained from Phoenix Police Department records.
Using this information, eligible individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the experimental or the control group. If arrested, those in the experimental group received special attention from the Repeat Offender Program by police and prosecutors, while those in the control group received no special attention and were handled with standard departmental procedures. The total sample was 473 assignments, with an experimental group of 270 assignments and a control group of 203. The higher amount of assignments in the experimental group did not affect the validity of the findings: the researchers compared the control group to the experimental group on prior records, probation and parole status, and pretrial custody status, and found no statistically significant differences. There was no demographic information provided about the study sample. No subgroup analysis was conducted.
From December 1988 to June 1989, every case had 6 months’ exposure to either the Repeat Offender Program or standard operating procedures. In June 1989, a data collection team conducted a follow-up of the outcome of each case. The team examined which people were arrested, prosecuted, convicted, incarcerated, and imprisoned, and what sentences were imposed. The outcomes of the prosecuted cases were examined to determine the effectiveness of the Repeat Offender Program on conviction rates, likelihood of incarceration and imprisonment, and sentence length. This information was obtained from the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.
Because the Repeat Offender Program is designed to increase the likelihood that high-risk persons will be convicted and incarcerated, higher conviction and incarceration rates for the experimental group indicated a positive program effect.