-26 population of the Department of Corrections were examined. Interest centered on the magnitude of the incidence rate and on possible indications of change in incidence over time. Findings Data from a Board of Parole sponsored survey in June 1968 indicated that narcotic involvement among inmates could be estimated at about 23 percent of the inmate population. A computer print-out from the automatic data processing system disclosed that approximately 18 percent of the inmate population was narcotic-involved. Approximately threefifths of the involved inmates had been committed for narcotic offenses. A special survey of the closed files at the D.C. Jail for the period 1958 through 1968 indicated that commitments to the Department of Corrections for narcotic offenses had increased at a moderate rate between 1958 and 1966. During 1967 and 1968 commitments had increased at a phenomenally high rate. The exponential rate of increase disclosed by the Jail survey data was a confirmation of a similar pattern of increase suggested by but not definitely confirmed by the computer print-out from the automated inmate record system. The Jail files survey and the automated record print-out both indicate that the Department of Corrections and the District of Columbia will both be confronted soon by a critical situation in the housing and management of narcotic offenders or of narcotic-involved offenders. Recommendations To cope with what appears to be a muchhigher-than-realized addict population in the District and a higher-than-anticipated rate of commitment to prison, there is need for 1) better -28 knowledge about the drug culture of the District, rates of addiction, and rates of production of addict-offenders; 2) clear-cut strategies of prevention ranging from interdiction of major supplies of drugs to aggressive school and neighborhood educational programs and family counseling; and 3) accelerated development of treatment programs modeled on plans that have proved successful in other localities. Of special interest as programs that should be actively worked with here are 1) the methadone maintenance programs that are being used in New York and several other cities, 2) the narcotic-antagonist programs that are undergoing development in Chicago and New York City, and 3) the self-help programs that make use of "encounter" therapies in both residential and outpatient formats. Publication Stuart Adams, Dewey F. Meadows and Charles W. Reynolds, Narcotic-Involved Inmates in the Department of Corrections, pp. 23, February 1969 13) IN-PROGRAM AND POST-RELEASE PERFORMANCE OF WORK-RELEASE INMATES: A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE WORK-RELEASE PROGRAM Purpose and Method To obtain information on in-program and post-release performance of Work Release graduates," the 281 cases that moved into and out of the Work Release Program between its start in April 1966 and the end of July 1967 were identified and their records were traced. Follow-ups were made through the record systems of the Work Release Unit, the D.C. Jail, the Board of Parole, the institutions of the Department of Corrections, and the FBI. -29 To facilitate analysis of the data, the study group was separated into 156 felony offenders and 125 misdemeanants. Findings Of the 156 felony offenders, a total of 50 (32.2%) absconded or were revoked during their stay in the Work Release Unit. The absconds and revokes were reincarcerated for periods that averaged 4.9 months and then released to the community. A post-release follow-up of the graduates from work-release and from reincarceration showed that at twelve months out, about 26% of the 156 felony offenders had been detained in the D.C. Jail. The remaining 74% may be defined as "successes" at the end of the twelvemonth follow-up. Of the 125 misdemeanants, a total of 36 (28.8%) absconded or were revoked during their stay in the Work Release Unit. The absconds and revokees were reincarcerated for an average of 3.0 months and then released to the community. A post-release follow-up of the 125 misdemeanants showed that after an exposure time of twelve months, about 24% of the group had been detained in the D.C. Jail. The remaining 76% may be regarded as successes at the end of one year of community exposure. The 125 misdemeanants included a group of 51 who had been ordered to work release by the adjudicating courts. This group showed no absconds during the stay in the Unit; it also showed a revocation rate of only about 14%, which was about one-half the revocation and abscond rate (28.8%) for all misdemeanants and about one-third of the revoke and abscond rate of the non-court-ordered misdemeanants (40%). The 76 percent success rate for the 156 felony offenders on work release is somewhat lower than the 85 percent success rate for the 432 felony offenders who were released from the Reformatory in 1965, comparing the two groups at 12 months out. This comparison is not wholly valid since the work releasees were |