 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Bibliography
Examples of Randomized-Comparative Post-Test DesignsState of California, Dept. of the Youth Authority, LEAD: A Boot Camp and Intensive Parole Program, The Final Impact Evaluation, 1997. (California)
In this evaluation design, offenders were randomly placed in either treatment (boot camp) or control groups after eligibility determinations were made. The groups were compared on the basis of recidivism (arrests and removals from parole) at 12-, 18-, and 24- month intervals.
Blueprints for Violence Prevention, Book Two: Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, 1997. (Colorado)
In this evaluation study, youth who applied for program participation were randomly assigned to either treatment or control groups. Self-reported behaviors (e.g., alcohol use, peer relationships) were compared at follow-up.
RAND, Intensive Community Supervision in Minnesota: A Dual Experiment in Prison Diversion and Enhanced Supervised Release, 1995. (Minnesota)
In this study, eligibility screening, client willingness to participate, and judicial approval were all obtained prior to random assignment to treatment and control groups. Follow-up comparisons were made for drug screening, technical violations, and re-arrests.
Office of Research and Statistics, Colorado Department of Public Safety, Evaluation of the Reasoning and Rehabilitation Cognitive Skills Development Program as Implemented in Juvenile ISP in Colorado, 1996. (Colorado)
In this evaluation, random assignment of 20 clients each was made to experimental and control groups. Follow-up was completed on client recidivism and compared between groups.
Back to Impact Evaluations by Type of Research Design
Main Page | About the Center | Evaluation and Performance Measurement Resources | Program Areas
BJA Required Performance Measures | Contact Us | Site Map | BJA Home
