Study 1
Boots and colleagues (2018) used a quasi-experimental design to compare outcomes of gang members who participated in Supervision with Immediate Enforcement (SWIFT) Court with two matched comparison groups on measures of revocations and reoffending.
Data for this study were provided by the Tarrant County (Texas) Supervision and Corrections Department and included individuals who were supervised on the specialized Gang/High Risk Offender (G/HRO) caseloads, as well as individuals supervised on a specialized high-risk caseload. The overall sample of 232 individuals included the treatment group and two comparison groups. The treatment group included gang-involved individuals, supervised on the G/HRO caseload, who participated in SWIFT (n = 72).
The first comparison group (n = 108) included young adults who were gang-affiliated but not assigned to SWIFT and were supervised on G/HRO caseloads. To be eligible for G/HRO assignment, individuals had to be 1) between 17 and 25 years old, 2) placed on felony supervision (case-by-case for misdemeanors) for a minimum of 24 months, or had a minimum of 24 months remaining on supervision; 3) identified as an active gang member by self-report, tattoos, official gang identification system, and/or police reports; and 4) considered high-risk for probation because of other risk factors such as no high school education, gang associations, violations of probation, unemployment, and instability. The second comparison group (n = 52) included young adults who were not gang-affiliated but were considered high-risk for recidivism. These individuals were not supervised under SWIFT or G/HRO but under a specialized caseload for high-risk individuals. This comparison group was included to understand the differences in outcomes that may be a result of gang involvement. The CrimeSolutions review of this study focused on the differences in outcomes between the SWIFT Court treatment group and the gang-affiliated, non-SWIFT Court, first comparison group.
Supervision for individuals in the two comparison groups differed from individuals in the SWIFT Court treatment group. For example, the comparison groups only had two monthly face-to-face contacts; one contact per month with a family member, friend or employer; and one contact with a treatment provider. Though individuals in the comparison condition had a curfew, had to participate in a cognitive–behavioral therapy class, and had to call into the daily drug-testing automated line, they were not subject to the same drug-testing protocol. Most important, the main difference between the treatment and comparison groups was that the treatment group received immediate sanctions in response to violations.
To determine group differences, the study authors conducted comparisons across the three groups in terms of sociodemographics and prior criminal history. The results suggested that the groups were similar in terms of sociodemographic and criminal history characteristics. Across all groups, individuals were 19.68 years old, had a 10th grade education, and were approximately 15.96 years old at their first arrest. Additionally, individuals had 3.54 arrests, 0.95 placements on probation, and 0.41 jail sentences prior to their current placement on probation. About half of the sample comprised persons or color and/or who were Hispanic, and half of the sample was unemployed. Bivariate group comparisons for the supervision variables also showed no statistically significant differences across the three groups in terms of the most serious offense category for which the individuals were placed on supervision, or differences in the length of supervision. The average length of the supervision across the three groups was 4.62 years.
The outcomes of interest were probation revocation, technical violations, and new arrests (however, the CrimeSolutions review of this study focused on the impact of the program on probation revocation and new arrests). The authors used logistic regression analyses to determine the influence of the SWIFT Court on the outcomes. No subgroup analysis was conducted.