features fieldwork people next issue
home page link preview of next issue link gallery page link people page link fieldwork page link feature stories links

Hard numbers show the dangers and complexities
of a soaring prison population

Robert L. Marsh
Steven B. Patrick

Boise State University

The consequences of overcrowding, driven by factors such as new crimes, new arrests and extended sentences set by the Legislature (issues that are beyond the control of the Department of Correction) will eventually affect all Idahoans. Competition for declining tax revenues makes policy decisions regarding prisons a series of “hard choices.”

“Hard Choices” analyzes the prison population of the Idaho Department of Correction, examining a number of important trends and factors contributing to the long-term and continued growth of the prison population. Crime trends, the types of offenders, offender treatment programs, parole data, recidivism data and ways to control growth are discussed.

          The Idaho Department of Correction has experienced a strong growth in inmate numbers and rates of incarceration (per 100,000 persons) during the past 31 years (Chart 1). In 1973 when the Territorial Prison was closed and the move was made to the new prison site, there were 416 inmates incarcerated in the Idaho Department of Correction. The rate has increased from 54.94/100,000 (416 inmates) in 1973 to approximately 443/100,000 (6,285) in September 2004.
         The new prison (ISCI) built to replace the Territorial Prison had reached full capacity by 1980.
          In a recently completed Urban Institute study of Idaho, the authors commented,

Between fiscal years 1996 and 2003, the Idaho prison population increased by 60 percent from 3,639 to 5,825, and the per capita rate of imprisonment in Idaho rose from 319 to 430 per 100,000 residents in the state between 1996 and 2000, an increase of 35 percent… In fiscal year 1996, 2233 individuals were admitted to Idaho prisons, and by fiscal year 2003, annual admissions had grown to 3,218, a 44 percent increase. (La Vigne, et al, 2004: 1)

Incarceration Rates

          Growth of the incarcerated population has exceeded the growth in the general population and the crime rate. Those under some form of correctional supervision are the result of a many factors in this state. In a time of declining tax revenues and jobs, Idaho is facing a serious set of policy decisions to create safer communities and make decisions that provide a cost-effective correctional response to offenders that present serious risks to community safety.
          The goal of this report is to demonstrate the steps that the Idaho Department of Correction has taken to provide treatment programs that are based on research, are cost effective, implemented to insure community safety, and successful re-integration into the community. Data being provided on the incarceration rate indicates that other factors besides recidivism are influencing the growth in incarceration.


Crime Trends

          The United States and Idaho are experiencing one of the longest periods of decline in violent crime rates since the 1960’s (Statistical Analysis Center, Idaho, 2004). The state of Idaho experiences less than one-half of the violent crime rate of the rest of the United States (Statistical Analysis Center, 2004). At the same time, the country is experiencing the highest rate of incarceration in its history. The increase in incarceration rates at the same time the crime rate is either flat or declining is the result of a number of important factors that need to be understood in order to make policy decisions to control overcrowding.

       According to Chart 2, after a very clear high point in 1996, the violent crime rate has appeared to level off and remain at approximately 250/100,000 in Idaho (Statistical Analysis Center, 2004). Data from the Idaho UCR (2003) shows the property crime rate according to Chart 3 also hit its most recent peak in 1996 and has declined to 3,000/100,000 population since that time.

There are good reasons for building prisons, but our one solution to everything—-drugs, alcohol abuse, minor offenses—-is prison, and that is simply not cost-effective.”
Robert L. Marsh, Ph.D.
as quoted in New York Times
“Quote of the Day”
April 16, 1998


          The national data provides an enlightening picture of what types of offenders are incarcerated. U.S. Department of Justice data provides information to explain who is incarcerated (DOJ, 2002, 2003). Two-thirds of persons in prisons in the United States are the result of tougher sentencing laws, police activities, criminality and the general rate of crime. Eighteen percent are the result of recidivism rates and 16% are the result of probation and parole violations.

Incarceration Rates Nationally and in Idaho

          The following charts provide an interesting insight into the national incarceration rates, the Idaho rates and the contributing factors to continued growth. The rate of incarceration in Idaho has mirrored the rates in the United States. This rates continue to parallel each other because of the changes in a number of factors in the era of harsher sentencing throughout the last 30 years. Ultimately, decision-makers must review the factors contributing to the continued growth rate and intervene in the appropriate areas to control and manage the rate.

Idaho Offender Population Forecast

         As of September 2004, the Idaho Department of Correction had a net count of 6,285 male and female offenders in custody. The Offender Population Forecast (FY 2005-2008) produced by the Forecast Advisory Committee in 2004 presents a dire set of circumstances for an increasing number of offenders under correctional supervision and tax dollars that must be devoted to building space and providing maintenance for them. As Charts 8 and 9 show, the projected growth in the rate and the numbers of incarcerated offenders from FY 2005—FY 2008 is equal to 1,377 offenders, a number larger than the number of beds at ISCI when it opened in 1973. In the same time the number of offenders under supervision in the community is projected to increase by 1955 offenders (10,839 to 13,540). This number will result in new resources being added to Field and Community Corrections (personnel and facilities).




Controlling Growth in Corrections:
Changing Policy and Treating Offenders

          Prison growth and the increase in the rate of incarceration and numbers of offenders under correctional supervision is the result of a complex set of factors. No one factor explains all of the growth (Chart 5). All make a significant contribution to an ever-increasing (or falling) rate of people serving sentences in the state of Idaho. This analysis is enlightening because it also provides strong evidence as to what policy decisions can be made and what programs can be developed to alter the increase or decrease of inmates in Idaho Department of Correction. In order to reach a point of equilibrium where the state is not forced to devote additional monies to new facilities and ever increasing inmate numbers, a holistic view must be taken to influence, change and modify the factors contributing to growth. These decisions are within the legal purview of the Idaho Legislature, the Governor, the Idaho Board of Pardons and Parole, the Idaho judiciary, and the Department of Correction. Moreover, a very important factor that impacts the size of the prison population is the absolute capacity of the prison.
          As the data indicated, when the new prison site opened in 1973, the number of inmates quickly expanded to fill the existing space. Ultimately, the legislature must decide who is a serious enough offender to justify state tax revenues for their removal from society. And then prison beds must be used for that purpose.

Offender Treatment at
Idaho Department of Correction

Mission and Vision of the Idaho Department of Correction

          The mission of the department is protection of the community. In doing this, the department is charged to manage offenders, provide opportunities for them to change and return offenders to the community (Idaho Department of Correction, 2004).


Offender Programs Intervention Programs

          The goal of this part of the report is to present an analysis of treatment intervention programs in Idaho to determine if the programs are having the purported effect on reducing re-incarceration numbers of inmates leaving the Idaho Department of Correction.
          In order to both protect the community and return offenders who are law-abiding, to the community the department has embarked on a program to intervene in the lives of offenders with research based programs that change inmate behavior, provide taxpayers with good value and make the community a safer place. In doing this, the state reaps cost-benefits that justify the added costs of research-based intervention programs.
          The Department of Correction has engaged in a process of reviewing the “best practices” focusing on “what works.” From that process, the administrators have brought programs forward to the Governor and the Legislature that would provide a high return on the investment of tax dollars to develop these programs. The department has monitored program success to reduce return rates of inmates and make improvements when the research indicated problems.


Evaluation and
Treatment that Works

Risk Assessment
•Develop Interventions
•Community Reentry
•Monitor Success Rates


Research Demonstrates:

•Offender behavior must be analyzed scientifically
•Interventions must be based on research and “best practices”
•Offender reentry into the community must be managed



Level of Service Inventory (LSI) Assesses Risk
(Andrews and Bonta, 1995)

Develop Treatment Interventions

•Review research and “best practices”
•Develop strategies to fund and implement
cost-effective programs
•Implement programs in institutions and community work centers


Community Reentry

• Develop integrated reentry strategies for offenders
• Identify staff and stakeholders
• Train staff to manage offenders in the community
• Eliminate or reduce inmates' return to prison


Monitor Success Rates and Modify Programs Based on Performance

• Ongoing research efforts to determine program effectiveness

Risk, Crime and Inmates

Research Demonstrates:

          Offender risk is a function of assessing the chance of an offender re-offending and the potential harm to the victim/community. The research demonstrates that the high-risk offender needs to be identified, treated and provided a level of supervision to insure community safety.


•Assess offender risk
•Intervene with high-risk offenders to reduce risk
•Manage their transition to the community


Assessments ($16,439.28)

•LSI-R Assessment (14,301 inmates to 6/14/04)
•TCU Drug Screen
•TABE Locator
•Vocational Assessment


Offenders Assessed and Risk Levels (14,301 with LSI-R)

•38% High Risk
•51% Moderate Risk
•11% Low Risk

•17% High Risk
•57% Moderate Risk
•26% Low Risk


Offender Needs Identified by Assessments but Not Addressed

• 31% of inmate population identified as having severe mental health problem

• 67% of inmate population has significant substance abuse problem

• 975 offenders in prison within 2 years of release need a Therapeutic Community before reentry

• 3,080 (54%) inmates without high school or GED education

A large percentage of inmates identified in the assessment/diagnostic process as needing treatment do not receive it because of limited resources at IDOC.

Therapeutic Community (TC)

          Recent research completed on Idaho’s TC program ranked it second in the nation among therapeutic communities surveyed (University of Cincinnati, 2003). TC targets offenders with chronic criminal and substance abuse histories.
          According to the IDOC Annual Report in 2003, TC programs completers have a 92% parole rate compared to 53% non-completers. Completers have a 43% parole revocation rate versus 62% for non-completers. The length of stay for completers of TC was 2 months less in prison since July 2001.
         A Standardized TC Aftercare component was introduced in January 2003 to further reduce recidivism. Outcome analysis based on 18 months of data projects that the recidivism rate will be reduced to approximately 27% from the current 43%. This is well below the historic recidivism rate.

New Directions Substance Abuse Program—NICI

          North Idaho Correction Institution at Cottonwood implemented the New Directions intensive substance abuse treatment program in 2002 to target high-risk offenders. Approximately 600 offenders have completed the program and 98% of those offenders have been placed on probation. Preliminary analysis indicates a positive impact on rates of recidivism. The historic benchmark for probation revocations for NICI rider completers (1996-2003) is 32%. IDOC preliminary data indicates that only 12.9% have been revoked at this time.
          It should also be noted that during this time period, NICI transitioned from a “boot camp” approach (that was not supported by the recidivism research) to a treatment-based modality with no apparent negative impact on recidivism.

Women’s Programs

          The women’s inmate population is one of the fastest growing populations in the Idaho Department of Correction. There are few programs available for women incarcerated in Idaho compared to male inmates. In the Huskey Report (2004: 64), the researchers note that the following programs are not offered at Pocatello Women’s Correctional Center:

1. Mental Health Treatment

2. Family Reunification and Relationship Program

3. Parenting with Dignity

4. Brain Building Basics Parenting Skills

5. Building Healthy Relationships

6. Anger Management Control Training.

          The Huskey Report (2004: 68) further states, “at Pocatello Women’s Correctional Center, only 28% of the total 279 women confined are involved in treatment on a daily basis.” The report lays out a series of steps that should be taken in assessing female inmates and providing them with treatment interventions based on “best practices research.” IDOC has initiated many of the changes suggested in the report.

Treatment Outcomes Study

          The Idaho Department of Correction has contracted with Drs. Jensen and Reed from the University of Idaho (forthcoming) to conduct a longitudinal study of recidivism of inmates leaving the Idaho Department of Correction. The study will be conducted over the next three years to determine recidivism of inmates relative to program participation. The study will analyze which “grouping” of core programs has had the greatest impact on lowering recidivism. Not every program will be evaluated. The researchers are focusing on the effectiveness of programs at individual locations to determine if there are differences in outcome based on multiple programs and location offered. The research staff is finalizing the programs to be studied, but they will include at a minimum core programs such as CSC, TC, Correctional Industries, and GED classes.

Cognitive Self-Change (CSC)

          Based on an evaluation in 2003, Cognitive Self-Change was modified to create a more effective skill-based program. This program was designed to create a realization in the inmates that change could be made if thinking patterns could be changed. The program teaches inmates about the connection between thought and patterns of action. CSC is a method of teaching inmates to change patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving that lead to anti-social and criminal behavior. The training takes approximately 150 hours to complete. Currently there are 436 offenders enrolled statewide.


          The accredited Robert Janss School has nine prison campuses that teach both academic and vocational curricula. Research shows that inmates have significant issues with school preparation and maintaining stable employment. The programs offered through the Janss School enhance both academic and vocational preparation for offenders entering the free world and the work force. Both programs employ the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) to determine academic ability regardless of grade completed in school.

The academic program includes:
Literacy (including English as a Second Language),
• GED/HSD preparation with GED testing/certification, and
• Special education.


The vocational program has three phases:
• Work force development,
• Work force skills, and
• On-the-job training.

  A total of 686 offenders are currently enrolled in prison educational programs. An additional 40 offenders are enrolled in Phase 1—Work force Readiness in the Vocational Program. A total of 175 offenders are enrolled in Phase 2—Work force Skills in the Vocational Program (IDOC, 2004). The education program at Idaho Department of Correction is one of the first programs developed and has grown to include a number of different components and deal with an array of inmate difficulties entering the correctional system.


Huskey Report on Overcrowding

          The Huskey and Associates report (2004) adds further credible analysis to the problems of overcrowding and causes in the Idaho Department of Correction. The report (2004: 5) concludes that the crisis is the result of seven factors.

1. Increase in the number of non-violent commitments – 7% per year increase, while violent commitments have increased 4.3% per year;

2. Increase in the number of probation and parole violators suggesting a gap in intermediate sanction capacities. Probation revocation commitments represent nearly as many offenders committed directly from court.

3. Increase in the number of drug related offenses committed due to the increase in the number of mandatory sentences for drug crimes.

4. Lack of available drug treatment capacity in local communities.

5. Increase in the length of stay for non-violent commitments to more than two years.

6. Insufficient Core Program capacity for inmates to successfully complete their mandated programs, thus resulting in fewer inmates being eligible for parole the first time.

7. Lack of transitional options to release inmates to during the last months of their sentence.


Who Is In Prison?

          The prison population is growing both nationally and in Idaho. At the national level 66% of inmates in prison are on their first incarceration, 16% are currently in prison for parole or probation revocations (a majority for technical violations), and 18% are currently in prison for recidivism (committing a new crime after release from prison).
          While full information is not currently available in Idaho, a full 16% of current inmates are incarcerated for parole/probation revocation. It is slightly higher than the national average and would be higher without the treatment programs utilized by the Department of Correction.

Less serious offenders should be treated in the community or in much less secure facilities that are more cost effective.

Treatment, whether in the community or in a prison, must be designed around “best practices research” and must be monitored by the IDOC research and third party research to determine effectiveness. (Outcome measures generally require three years of program data for analysis.) Regular reports should be made to both the Governor’s Office and the Legislature.

Efforts should be made to expand treatment programs and interventions with offenders based on “best practices research.”

Reentry and aftercare must be funded and available to offenders leaving prison. That aftercare must focus on the offender successfully residing in the community as a non-criminal.

Programs should be developed to intervene to correct the behavior of probationers and parolees in the community, rather than return inmates to prison who are technical violators of probation and parole conditions.

Parole Data

Commission of Pardons and Parole Trends

          There have been significant changes in the parole patterns and caseload since 1996. The data included in the following charts provides the projections developed (2005-2008) in the “Flow Model Offender Forecast” (2004). The Reinstated Chart and the Total New Parole Admissions charts indicate that over a thousand offenders per year will be added to the caseloads of Probation and Parole Officers from 2001 through 2008. This continued increase would increase state costs to fund new positions and operations monies for Probation and Parole Officers throughout the state. The following charts indicate the magnitude of the changes predicted.
          Data in charts 12 and 13 is included from the recently completed Urban Institute Report (La Vigne et al, 2004:23)


Analysis of Random Sample
of Revocations—Idaho

         In order to analyze probation and parole violations in Idaho, a random sample of 120 males who had their probation or parole revoked in the last year was selected. There were a total of 598 male probation revocations and 378 male parole revocations last year. Due to the fact that inmate files remain at the offenders’ institutions, only 36 of these 120 were available at the medium and minimum-security institution (20 and 16 respectively). The sample contained 20 probation revocations and 16 parole revocations. While this is a rather a small N (sample size), it is still random and therefore provides a limited representative view of revocations in the state. (Optimally, this should be expanded in the future to monitor this.) We have chosen the most important variables to discuss from this sample.
          The average age of the offenders revoked was 33. One half (50%) of them were revoked for technical violations or misdemeanors and 50% for new felonies.


Drug and Alcohol Use
Among Parole and Probation Sample

          Substance abuse problems (drugs and alcohol) were consistent among the members of the revocation sample. Eighty-nine percent had alcohol problems reported in their file and 94% had drug issues.


Treatments Used
on Probation and Parole Sample

         Different treatment modalities were used on the members of the sample. The following data refers to those offenders who did receive treatment services. Forty-seven percent received drug/alcohol treatment, 31% received Living Skills treatment and 28% received other treatment like education. These treatments refer primarily to those incarcerated inmates who were paroled.
          A full 28% of these revocations received NO treatment of any kind. Seventy two percent received one or more treatments.


Implications of Treatment
and Probation and Parole Sample

          The implications of the research data both on the best practices and the rates of recidivism in the limited probation and parole sample are clear. As seen in Chart 5, approximately 18% of the offenders recidivate and approximately 16% of the new offenders are for probation and parole violations. This is a combined total of 34% that can possibly be impacted by more intensive treatment programs in prison and follow-up in the community. This does provide data to impact a third of the recidivists by intensified treatment intervention. This does entail specific costs to the state for new programs.
          The following data is from Idaho Department of Correction
          “Flow Model Forecast, 2004.”


Treatment and Recidivism

          The information in this report presents a clear idea of the daunting task facing the Idaho Department of Correction and policy makers in the state. The data indicate that the growth in the correctional populations has been relentless over the past thirty years. The growth is the result, based on both national and state data, of a number of factors. The rate of the growth is influenced by sentencing laws, the capacity of correctional facilities, the activities of the police, new crime, the crime rate, probation and parole violators, and recidivism. This report reviewed the growth rate and the response of the Idaho Department of Correction to developing treatment programs based on “best practices” research.

As Austin and Fabelo (2004:12) note, “Longer stays in prison make sense as a policy to increase punishment and incapacitation for violent and repeat offenders. However, for the great majority of prisoners—-namely, persons convicted of property and drug crimes—-increasing length of stays in prison beyond certain levels significantly increases costs and does not necessarily produce more public safety.”

          Both national and state research is very clear on the impact of treatment on rates of recidivism, especially for offenders who have substance abuse problems. It is possible to impact rates of return to prison if effective treatment is funded and delivered to offenders. It is also clearly the most cost effective based on policy research that weighed the cost-benefits of traditional incarceration, mandatory sentences, or treatment of drug offenders. In more than 95% of the instances in the policy model, treatment was clearly more cost effective than incarceration alone (Caukins, et al, RAND Study, 1997).
          This research provides a clear insight into the problems that adults face who have had contact with the correctional system. Many offenders will face adult corrections with serious substance abuse and mental health problems that have gone untreated. They will face systems that have chosen a harsh and punitive approach that promise effectiveness rather than an approach to treat their addictions. And those approaches will use the rhetoric of “punishment and accountability” to justify approaches that neither change people nor offer cost-effective solutions to human problems.


Hard Choices: Policy Decisions to
Control Capacity and Inmate Numbers

          The choices facing policy-makers throughout the United States are particularly difficult at this time. Reduced tax revenues and increased demands on state and federal budgets make it difficult to prioritize spending. Agitating the shortfalls in tax revenues are prison populations that continue to grow in a time of a long-term declining crime rate. Put in simple terms, prison overcrowding is the result of a number of policies that promised to be “tough on crime,” not simply the increasing crime rate or increasing population of the state. We incarcerate more people per capita than other nations for longer times and often for lesser crimes. The fact is that the United States is the toughest nation on crime in the western world. But the same policy-makers and professionals in criminal justice that argued that we did not hold people accountable for wrong-doing are now hard pressed to explain an incarceration rate that continues to grow in times of declining rates of crime. The fact of the matter is that a number of factors contribute to the increase in numbers of people in prisons and the tax dollars to support them. The crime rate, growth of the population, and recidivism are but part of the increase in rates of incarceration. An exhausting amount of data analysis over the past twenty years has indicated that the crime rate and recidivism contributes rather a small part to this growth. In order to limit that growth and conserve tax dollars involves a series of political decisions to be sure that the right persons are incarcerated and prisons are using programs that can be objectively evaluated as successful.

          The factors that contribute to the growth in prison bed space are:

Sentencing Laws

Reduction in the Use of Good Time

Prison Capacity

Crime Rate

General Population Growth

Recidivism Rate

Probation and Parole Technical Violations

Probation and Parole Violations for New Crime; and

Pardons and Parole Commission Policy.

   In order to control the growth of tax revenues devoted to increasing prison bed space, policy-makers must address the issues contributing to growth.

There should be a limit established by policy makers on the number of prison beds and who has priority for
those in this state.

Idaho sentencing law should be reformed to target the most violent and dangerous offenders.

Laws should be designed to insure the most violent and dangerous have a priority for those beds.

Lesser offenders should be treated in the community or in much less secure facilities that are
more cost effective.

Treatment, whether in the community or in a prison, must be designed around “best practices research”
and must be monitored by IDOC research and third party research to determine effectiveness. (Outcome measures generally require three years of program data for analysis.) Regular reports should be made to both the Governor’s Office and the Legislature.

Efforts should be made to expand treatment programs and interventions with offenders based on
“best practices research.”

Reentry and aftercare must be funded and available to offenders leaving prison. That aftercare must focus
on the offender successfully residing in the community as a non-criminal.

Programs should be developed to intervene to correct the behavior of probationers and parolees in
the community rather than return to prison inmates who are technical violators of probation and
parole conditions.

“If you build it, they will come.”
Field of Dreams

Features: Badly Battered • Hard Choices • New Asylums • Diminishing Returns


This report is the result of the efforts of a number of people and was completed under a contract between the Idaho Department of Correction and the Department of Criminal Justice at Boise State University.

Amanda Freeman and Megan Sweesy served as Research Assistants collecting data directly from the Department of Correction. Information and data was provided by a number of persons who work at Idaho Department of Correction. Among those who made a special effort to provide the research team data for this study were Gary Barrier, Steve Nelson, and Greg Sali. Adele Thomsen at Adele’s Design produced the layout and graphics.

The conclusions drawn from these data are those of the Principal Researchers, Robert L. Marsh, Ph.D. from the Boise State University Department of Criminal Justice and Steve Patrick, Ph.D. from the Department of Sociology.


Andrews, D. A., and Bonta, J. (1995). LSI-R: The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems.

Austin, James and Tony Fabelo (2004). The Diminishing Returns of Increased Incarceration: A Blueprint to Improve Public Safety and Reduce Costs. Washington, D.C.: JFA Institute.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2003). “Prevalence of Imprisonment in the U.S. population, 1974-2001.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. (NCJ 197976).

Caukins, Jonathan P., C. Peter Rydell, William L. Schwabe, and James Chiesa. (1997). Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences: Throwing Away the Key or the Taxpayers’ Money? Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation.

Eagen, Timothy (1998). “As Idaho Booms, Its Prisons Fill, While Spending on the Poor Lags.” New York: New York Times, April 16, 1968.

References continued

Hall, Allison and Robert L. Marsh. (1981). Idaho Department of Correction Master Plan. Boise, Idaho.

Huskey and Associates. (2004). “Program and Capacity Assessment for the Idaho Department of Correction.

Idaho Department of Correction (2004). “Creating Safer Communities.” Boise, ID: Operations Support Division.Idaho Department of Correction (2004). “Flow Model Offender Forecast.” Boise, ID.

Idaho Department of Correction (2003). “Flow Model Offender Forecast.” Boise, ID.

Idaho State Police (2003). Uniform Crime Reports-Idaho, 2003. Boise, Idaho: Statistical Analysis Unit.

Langan, P., and D. Levin (2002). “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994.” Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report (NCJ 193427). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.

Latessa, Edward (2003). “CPAI Baseline Report—Idaho Department of Correction.” University of Cincinnati: Center for Criminal Justice Research.

La Vigne, Nancy G., Cynthia A. Mamalian, Gillian Thompson, Jamie Watson. (2004). Prisoner Reentry in Idaho. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.

National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (2004). Criminal Neglect—Substance Abuse, Juvenile Justice and the Children Left Behind. New York: Columbia University.

Vazquez, Salvador P. (2004). Drug Arrests and Violent Crime Trends. Boise, Idaho: Idaho State Police, Statistical Analysis Center.

past issues
idaho history & politics sspa college univeristy news support us about us