In Cox v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 507 Pa. 614, 493 A.2d 680 (1985), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated that "at liberty on parole" means "not at liberty from all confinement but at liberty from confinement on the particular sentence for which the convict is being reentered as a parole violator." Cox, 507 Pa. at 618, 493 A.2d at 683 (quoting Haun v. Cavell, 190 Pa. Super. 346, 154 A.2d 257, 261 (Pa. Super. 1959), cert. denied, Elsten v. United States, 363 U.S. 855, 80 S. Ct. 1637, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1736 (1960)). In Cox, our Pennsylvania Supreme Court remanded to determine the nature of the program in which James Cox participated and whether the restrictions on his liberty were the equivalent of incarceration so as to entitle him to credit for time served in the program. The Supreme Court further explained that the burden was on the parolee to establish that the specific characteristics of the program were sufficient to restrict his liberty to warrant credit on his recomputed backtime. Id.