Evaluation of Alternative Programs for Repeat DWI Offenders
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This report evaluates the effectiveness of two alternative sanction programs for repeat Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) offenders: Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, and Electronic Monitoring (EM) in Los Angeles County, California. The study was motivated by the need to assess intermediate sanctions that could alleviate pressure on correctional facilities while improving traffic safety, as traditional incarceration and probation had limitations in addressing repeat offenses. The research aimed to determine if these alternatives significantly reduced future drinking-driving behavior compared to traditional sanctions. The evaluation, conducted by the Mid-America Research Institute for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration between 1993 and 1995, utilized a comparative design. Researchers compared the post-program driving records of participants in the ISP and EM programs against comparison groups who received traditional sanctions. The ISP program focused on early intervention, engaging offenders in treatment and monitoring shortly after arrest during the pretrial period. The EM program involved home confinement with electronic ankle monitors and supervision immediately after conviction and sentencing. The study employed survival analysis to measure recidivism, defined as the time from program entry to another alcohol-related arrest or conviction. Data collection also included surveys of the driving public to assess awareness and support, as well as interviews with program staff and clients. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed by comparing program costs to incarceration expenses. The findings indicated that both programs significantly reduced DWI recidivism compared to traditional sanctions. The ISP program reduced the probability of re-arrest after one year by approximately one-half. The EM program reduced the rate of re-conviction after one year by about one-third. Regarding costs, the Los Angeles EM program was designed to be self-sufficient, with offenders paying monitoring fees, resulting in minimal cost to the county and significant savings from avoided jail space. The Milwaukee ISP program was not initially self-sufficient, with program costs exceeding the savings from reduced jail time, though plans were made to implement a sliding-scale payment system to achieve financial sustainability. Public surveys revealed varying levels of awareness and support for these alternatives. The study concludes that both ISP and EM are effective alternatives to incarceration for repeat DWI offenders, offering significant reductions in recidivism. The authors recommend that jurisdictions consider these programs to reduce correctional facility pressures and enhance traffic law effectiveness. The report suggests that these approaches are adaptable to local needs, such as modifying ISP for post-conviction use or combining EM with ISP for higher-risk clients. The findings support the use of intermediate sanctions as viable, cost-effective strategies for managing repeat DWI offenses.
Key finding
Intensive Supervision Probation reduced one-year rearrest recidivism by approximately one-half, and Electronic Monitoring reduced one-year re-conviction recidivism by approximately one-third compared to traditional sanctions.
Methodology
field_study
Sample size: 1145
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | rosap | — | — | 2 | 2026-05-23 |
| archive | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| chunk | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| embed | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-02 |
| enrich | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 24 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Applied Guidance: countermeasure evaluation