Bureau of Justice Assistance - Center for Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement

Bibliography

Examples of Comparative Post-Test Design

State Justice Institute, An Outcome Program Evaluation of the Multnomah County S.T.O.P. Drug Diversion Program, 1998. (Oregon)
This evaluation project compared a sample of project graduates and non-completers with a matched group of those found eligible for the program but who did not participate for several reasons. Outcome measures included subsequent arrests, convictions, incarcerations, type of crimes, supervision experiences, and use of public assistance resources.

Criminal Justice Policy Council, Implementation and Cost-Effectiveness of the Correctional Substance Abuse Treatment Initiative, 1997. (Texas)
In this study, post-release recidivism of completed and terminated clients was compared to post-release recidivism of a group of similar offenders in alternate programs. Findings were used to develop a cost-effectiveness analysis between programs.

Washington State Community, Trade and Economic Development, Washington State Patrol Multi-Jurisdictional Drug Enforcement Task Force Participation and Support Program: Program Evaluation, 1996. (Washington)
In this evaluation, Task Forces that included State Patrol participation were compared to Task Forces without State Patrol participation on such factors as number of cases activated and investigated, arrests made, etc.

Criminal Justice Council of San Mateo County, Evaluation of the Biochemical Restoration Program for Multiple DUI Offenders, 1995. (California)
In this evaluation, follow-up measures such as numbers of charges, bench warrants, and probation violations were compared for program participants and a control group of individuals found eligible for the program, but who were unable to get to the site or refused to participate.

University of Pennsylvania, Center for Studies of Addiction, School-Based Probation in Pennsylvania: Final Report, 1997. (Pennsylvania)
This evaluation design involved random ex-post-facto selection of program participants for comparison with a matched group of non-school-based probationers. Follow-up comparisons were made on re-arrests, probation violations, subsequent placements, and time in the community.

Latessa, Edward and Lawrence Travis, Prepared for the Office of Criminal Justice Services, Evaluation of Ohio's Pilot Day Reporting Program: Final Report, 1998. (Ohio)
This evaluation design involved a comparison of Day Reporting program participants with a sample of offenders from three alternative correctional populations - probation, community corrections, and prison. Comparisons were provided for offender characteristics and risks, sanctions, re-arrests, probation violations, and subsequent incarcerations.

Back to Impact Evaluations by Type of Research Design

| | |
| | |