Comparative Study and Evaluation of SCRAM Use, Recidivism Rates, and Characteristics [Traffic Tech]

NHTSA · 2015 · ROSA P / United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

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 study, conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), evaluates the effectiveness of Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitoring (SCRAM) devices in reducing recidivism among driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenders. The research addresses the challenge of monitoring alcohol consumption in offenders placed on probation, where self-reporting is inadequate and incarceration is costly and often ineffective. SCRAM devices, which detect transdermal alcohol concentration through perspiration, offer a continuous, non-invasive monitoring solution. The primary objective was to determine whether SCRAM usage influences the rate and timing of re-offense compared to non-monitored offenders. The study analyzed administrative data from Nebraska and Wisconsin, examining alcohol-related arrests from 2002 to 2011. The analysis focused on a "target offense" occurring between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2009, with a fixed two-year follow-up period to identify recidivism. The dataset included over 3,000 offenders, merging Department of Motor Vehicles records with SCRAM usage data to link arrest histories with device assignments. Offenders were categorized into SCRAM users and a comparison group of non-users. To control for confounding variables, the groups were matched based on sex, age, race/ethnicity, county of conviction, and the number of prior arrests within the five years preceding the target offense. Wisconsin utilized SCRAM primarily for pre-trial monitoring, while Nebraska assigned devices post-adjudication. The results indicated that SCRAM users exhibited slightly higher, though statistically insignificant, recidivism rates than the comparison group. In Wisconsin, 7.6% of SCRAM users recidivated compared to 6.2% of non-users. In Nebraska, the rates were 9.8% and 7.7%, respectively. However, among those who did recidivate, SCRAM users took significantly longer to re-offend than non-users. Survival analysis identified SCRAM usage as the strongest predictor of the time to recidivism in both states. Furthermore, very few offenders recidivated while actively wearing the device: less than 2% in Wisconsin (14 of 837) and less than 1% in Nebraska (1 of 672). The findings suggest that while SCRAM may not reduce the overall likelihood of re-offense—potentially because high-risk offenders are disproportionately assigned to the program—it significantly delays the time to recidivism. This delay implies a beneficial effect of continuous monitoring in maintaining sobriety for extended periods. The authors note that the lack of random assignment limits causal inference, suggesting that observed differences may reflect offender characteristics rather than device efficacy alone. Nevertheless, the study concludes that SCRAM provides a valuable tool for monitoring compliance and extending the period of abstinence, warranting further longitudinal research with randomized designs to isolate the device's specific impact.

Key finding

Among DWI recidivists, SCRAM wearers took significantly longer to reoffend than non-wearers, though overall recidivism was slightly higher (7.6% vs 6.2% in Wisconsin; 9.8% vs 7.7% in Nebraska) and not statistically significant.

Methodology

field_study

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 (7 acquisition events logged).

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.

• telematics ubi feedback