0 - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

e
Drug Relapse and Other Parole Data
We received several types of post-release data fiom the Pennsylvania Board of Probation
and Parole (PBPP), including risk supervision level, current supervision status, drug testing
results, and employment status data.36 Different data types varied in completeness.
Of 894 parolees for whom we received risk level data, 46 (5%) were classified by PBPP as
a Minimum risk grade for supervision; 194 (22%) were classified as Medium, 604 (68%) were
I
/
classified as Maximum, and 5 1 (6%) were classified as Enhanced?’ Of the 894 that we received
employment data for, 260 (29%) were employed kll-time, 34 (4%) were employed part time, 257
(29%) were unemployed but able, and 343 (38%) were unemployed and not able to work.
Of 915 parolees for whom we received current supervision status data, 482 (53%) were
e
reporting regularly, although 74 of the 482 were in Community Correctional Centers, where their
fieedom and movement were more restricted. Eighteen parolees (2%) were being held on county
detainers or in mental institutions. The rest of the sample had already gotten into trouble in
various ways. Sixty-one parolees (7%) had simply absconded. No fewer than 124 (14%) were
rearrested, and 230 (25%) were revoked for technical violations. The rearrest and reincarceration
rates reported earlier, therefore, may be conservative outcome measures by comparison. Many of
these wayward parolees may eventually make their way back to state prison, some for a short visit
(Le., technical violators) and others for more extended stays (i.e., new convictions).
0
36 Computerized data on parolee participation in aftercare treatment and more detailed
employment measures (e.g., length and type of employment, employee performance) were not
available &om PBPP at this time. While the quality and intensity of aftercare treatment provided
to ex-offenders was unknown, there was no reason to suspect that inmates in the TC v.
Comparison group received different levels of aftercare, or that aftercare affected either group
differently.
37 There is little doubt that this was a high-risk sample, as also evidenced by its high assessed need
for drug treatment (Table 28).
113
This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s)
and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.