the ten key components and best practice...
Post on 29-Mar-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
National Drug Court Institute
Adult Drug Court Planning Initiative Training
The Ten Key Components and Best Practice Standards©
Developed by: National Drug Court Institute (NDCI)
©NDCI, February 21, 2015
The following presentation may not be copied in whole or in part without the written permission of the author or the National Drug Court Institute. Written permission will generally be given without cost, upon request.
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• What are the Ten Key Components of Drug Court?
• How can you incorporate them into your Drug Court Procedure?
• Do you have to incorporate all Ten Key Components into your Drug Court Procedures?
Defining Drug Courts: The Ten Key Components
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with
justice system case processing.
Drug Court Key Component # 1
What team members should attend the
drug court staffing/meetings?
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.10
Drug Courts Where a Treatment Representative
Attends Court Hearings had
100% greater reductions in recidivism
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Treatment attends courthearings
N=57
Treatment does NOTattend court hearings
N=10
38%
19%
Pe
rce
nt
red
uc
tio
n in
re
arr
ests
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Prosecutor attendsstaffings
N=5
Prosecutor does NOTattend staffings
N=5
38%
14%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Drug Courts Where the Prosecutor
Attends Staffings had
a 171% Higher Cost Savings
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where the Defense Attorney Attends Drug
Court Team Meetings (Staffings) had
a 93% Higher Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
Defense attorneyattends staffings
N=59
Defense Attorney doesNOT attend staffings
N=11
29%
15%
Perc
en
t In
cre
ase in
Co
st
Savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts where Law Enforcement is a member of the drug
court team had
88% greater reductions in recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Law enforcement is onteamN=20
Law enforcement is NOTon team
N=29
45%
24%
Pe
rcen
t re
du
cti
on
in
rec
idiv
ism
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Note 2: “Team Members” = Judge, Both Attorneys, Treatment Provider, Coordinator, Probation
Drug Courts where all team members attended staffings had
50% greater reductions in recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
All team membersattend staffings
N=31
All team does NOTattend staffings
N=28
42%
28%
Perc
en
t re
du
cti
on
in
recid
ivis
m
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 2
Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel
promote public safety while protecting participants’ due
process rights.
Does allowing non-drug charges (e.g. violence) threaten public safety?
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts That Accepted Participants With Non-
Drug Charges Had Nearly Twice the Savings
Note 2: Non-drug charges include property, prostitution, violence, etc.
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts That Accepted Participants
With Non-Drug Charges had
98% Greater Reductions in Recidivism
Note 2: Non-drug charges include property, prostitution, forgery, etc.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Drug court accepts non-drug charges
N=42
Drug court does NOTaccept non-drug
chargesN=24
41%
21%
Pe
rcen
t re
du
cti
on
s in
rec
idiv
ism
Note: Difference is NOT significant
Drug Courts That Accepted Participants with
Prior Violence Had No Differences in Graduation
Rates
Note: Difference is NOT significant
Drug Courts That Accepted Participants with
Prior Violence Had No Differences in Cost
Savings
Drug Courts That Accepted Participants With
Prior Violence Had Equivalent Reductions in
Recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Drug Court acceptsparticipants with prior
violenceN=14
Drug Court does NOT acceptparticipants with prior
violenceN=39
36% 38%
Perc
en
t re
du
cti
on
s in
recid
ivis
m
p = n.s.
Carey et al. (2012)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Program excludes offenders
with serious MH issues
N=32
Program does NOT exclude
offenders with serious MH
issues
N=18
21%
37%
Drug Courts That Excluded Participants with
Serious Mental Health Problems Had Over 50% Less
Cost Savings
*p <.05
Carey et al. (2012)
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 3
Eligible participants are identified and placed in the program as soon as
possible.
Is it really important to get participants into the program quickly? What does quickly
REALLY MEAN?
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts In Which Participants Entered the
Program within 50 Days of Arrest Had
63% Greater Reductions in Recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Participants enterprogram within
50 days of arrestN=15
Participants enterprogram within
50 days of arrestN=26
39%
24%
Perc
ent re
ductio
ns in
recid
ivis
m
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and other related treatment and rehabilitation services.
Drug Court Key Component # 4
Is it better to have a single treatment agency or to have multiple treatment options?
How important is relapse prevention?
Drug Courts That Used One or Two Primary Treatment
Agencies Had 76% Greater Reductions in Recidivism
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
1 2 3 4 4 - 10 > 10
Number of agencies
Fewer treatment providers is related to greater reductions in recidivism
% reduction in recidivism
Drug Courts That Included a Phase Focusing on Relapse
Prevention Had Over 3 Times Greater Savings
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 5
Abstinence is monitored by frequent drug and alcohol
testing.
How frequently should participants be tested?
How well do drug courts really reduce drug use?
How important is it for drug test results to be available quickly?
What does quickly REALLY MEAN?)
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.15 (Trend)
Drug Courts Where Drug Tests are Collected at Least Two Times
per Week In the First Phase had
a 61% Higher Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Participants drug testedat least 2X per week
N=53
Participants tested LESSoften than 2X per week
N=12
29%
18%
Pe
rcen
t in
cre
ase
in
co
st
sav
ing
s
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where Drug Test Results are Back in 48
Hours or Less had
68% Higher Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Drug tests are back within48 hours
N=21
Drug testsare back in
LONGER THAN48 hours
N=16
32%
19%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.15 (Trend)
Drug Courts Where Participants are expected to have greater than
90 consecutive days clean before graduation had 164% greater reductions in recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Participants are cleanat least 90 days before
graduationN=57
Participants are cleanLESS THAN 90 daysbefore graduation
N=9
37%
14%
Perc
en
t re
du
cti
on
s in
recid
ivis
m
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 6
A coordinated strategy governs responses to participant’s compliance.
How important is jail as a
sanction?
Do your guidelines on
team response to client
behavior really need to
be in writing?
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.15 (Trend)
Drug Courts Where Team Members are Given a Copy of
Written Guidelines For Sanctions And Rewards Had
72% Higher Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Team has guidelinesN=33
Team DOES NOT haveguidelines
N=11
31%
18%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where Sanctions Are Imposed Immediately After Non-compliant Behavior had
a 100% Increase in Cost Savings
Note 2: Immediately = Before the next regular court hearing (or one week of less to court hearing)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Sanctions are imposedimmediately
N=36
Sanctions are NOTimposed immediately
N=17
28%
14%
Pe
rcen
t in
cre
ase
in
co
st
sav
ing
s
Courts that use jail greater than 6 days have worse
(higher) recidivism
NCDC: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Staffing
Integrates the
Ten Key Components
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• What – The purpose of staffing is to present a coordinated response to
offender behavior.
• Who
– Judge – Coordinator – Prosecutor – Defense Counsel – Treatment – Probation – Law Enforcement
• Why – Shared Decision Making, Docket Control, Informed Approach,
Empowerment of Team
Drug Court Staffing / Pre-Case Conferencing
• When Anytime prior to seeing the participant
• Eligibility
• Arraignment
• Progress Report
• Probation Revocation / Termination
• Regression / Advancement
• Return on Warrant
• Pre-Graduation/Graduation
Drug Court Key Component # 7
Ongoing judicial interaction
with each participant is essential.
Does it matter how long the judge spends
interacting with each participant in court?
How often should participants appear
before the judge?
How long should the judge stay on the drug court bench?
Is longevity better or is it better to rotate regularly?
Drug Courts That Held Status Hearings Every 2 Weeks During Phase 1 Had 50% Greater Reductions in
Recidivism
Note: Difference is significant at p<.1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Drug court hasreview hearingsevery two weeks
N=14
Drug court hasreview hearings
more or less oftenN=35
46%
31%
Perc
en
t R
ed
ucti
on
in
Recid
ivis
m
Different judges had different impacts on recidivism
Judges did better their second time
8%
27%
4%
28%
42%
30%
34%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Judge 1A Judge 2 Judge 3A Judge 3B Judge 1B Judge 4 Judge 5
% im
pro
ve
me
nt
in #
of
re-a
rre
sts
The Longer the Judge Spent on the Drug Court Bench, the Better the Client Outcomes
Drug Courts That Have Judges Stay Longer Than Two Years Had 3 Times Greater Cost Savings
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
0%
10%
20%
30%
Judge is on bench at least2 years
N=9
Judge is on bench LESSTHAN 2 years
N=3
25%
8%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where the Judge Spends an Average of 3 Minutes or
Greater per Participant During Court Hearings had 153%
greater reductions in recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Judge spends at least 3min. per participant
N=23
Judge spends LESSTHAN 3 min. per
participantN=12
43%
17%
Perc
en
t re
du
cti
on
in
recid
ivis
m
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where the Judge Spends an Average of 3 Minutes or
Greater per Participant During Court Hearings had 153%
greater reductions in recidivism
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• Judge as leader of the team.
• Continuity of relationship between judge and participant
• Relationship from acceptance in program throughout treatment - commencement - aftercare
• The message is “Someone in authority cares”
The “Power” of the Judge
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 8
Monitoring and Evaluation measure the
achievement of program goals and
effectiveness. Does it matter whether data are kept in paper files or in a database?
Does keeping program stats make a difference?
Do you really need an evaluation? What do you get out of it?
Drug Courts That Used Paper Files Rather Than
Electronic Databases Had 65% LESS Savings
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Program usespaper files
N=8
Program haselectronic database
N=3
20%
33%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where Review of The Data and Stats Has Led to Modifications in Drug Court Operations had a 131%
Increase in Cost Savings a 131% Increase in Cost Savings
Program reviews their ownstatsN=20
Program does NOT reviewstatsN=15
37%
16%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts Where The Results Of Program Evaluations Have
Led to Modifications In Drug Court Operations had
a 100% Increase in Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Used evaluation to makemodifications to program
N=18
Did NOT use evaluationto make modifications
N=13
36%
18%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• Measures progress against goals
• Results are used to monitor progress
• Results are used to improve operations
Program Monitoring
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Drug Court Key Component # 9
Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court
planning, implementation, and operations.
Can your team save money by training on-the-job or by
selecting only certain team members for formal training?
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts That Provided Formal Training for
ALL New Team Members
Had 57% Greater Reductions in Recidivism
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
All new teammembers have formal
trainingN=30
All team membersNOT formally trained
N=17
40%
26%
Note: Difference is significant at p<.05
Drug Courts That Received Training Prior to
Implementation Had 238% Higher Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Team trained BEFOREimplementation
N=12
Team members NOTtrained before
implementationN=5
27%
8%
Perc
en
t in
cre
ase in
co
st
savin
gs
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies and
community-based organizations generates support and increases
effectiveness.
Drug Court Key Component # 10
How important are partnerships in the
community for your drug court?
Note: Difference is significant as a trend at p<.15
Drug Courts That Had Formal Partnerships
with Community Organizations Had
133% Greater Cost Savings
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Drug court has formalpartnerships in
communityN=15
Drug court doees NOThave formal partnerships
N=5
35%
15%
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• Concentrate on the high value cases
• Fidelity to the 10 Key Components
• Ongoing judicial authority
• Interagency team approach
• Get it right the first time
Recipe for Success
NDCI: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
Success in Drug Court Depends on Applying ALL of The Ten Key Components as a Framework
Summary
NCDC: A Professional Services Division of NADCP
• Please remember to complete your evaluations!
This project was supported by Grant No. 2012-DC-BX-K003 awarded by the Bureau
of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the SMART Office, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice.
top related