drug court evaluation using “big data” presented at the

1DSHS | Research and Data Analysis Division ● MAYFIELD ● OCTOBER 2013

Drug Court Evaluation Using “Big Data”

Presented at the

Washington State Association of Drug Court Professionals 16th Annual Conference

Presented byJim Mayfield, Senior Research Associate

Department of Social and Health ServicesResearch and Data Analysis Division

October 18, 2013


Our topic today . . . .

Review social service and criminal justice data integration in Washington State

Demonstrate the use of integrated data to evaluate drug courts


Washington is one of a few states in the nation with an integrated social service client database


That means we can identify costs, risks and outcomes at the state or community level . . .

. . . and at an individual or family level


Internal

Institutions

Dispositional Alternative

Community Placement

Parole

Assessments

Detoxification

Opiate Substitution Treatment

Outpatient Treatment

Residential Treatment

Child Study Treatment Center

Children’s Long-term Inpatient Program

Community Inpatient Evaluation/ Treatment

Community Services

State Hospitals State Institutions

WASHINGTON STATEDepartment of Social and Health Services

INTEGRATED CLIENT DATA BASE

Food Stamps

TANF and State Family Assistance

General Assistance

Child Support Services

Working Connections Child Care

Nursing Facilities

In-home Services

Community Residential

Functional Assessments

Case Management

Community Residential Services

Personal Care Support

Residential Habilitation Centers and Nursing Facilities

Medical and Psychological Services

Training, Education, Supplies

Case Management

Vocational Assessments Job Skills

Child Protective Services

Child Welfare Services

Adoption

Adoption Support

Child Care

Out of Home Placement

Voluntary Services

Family Reconciliation Services

DSHS Mental Health

Services

DSHS Juvenile

Rehabilitation

DSHS Economic Services

DSHS Aging and Adult

Services

DSHS Developmental

Disabilities

DSHS Vocational

Rehabilitation

DSHS Children’s Services

DSHS Behavioral Health and

Rehabilitation

Internal DSHS client services data


External

Administrative Office of the Courts

Employment Security

Department

Department of Health

Department of Corrections

Washington State Patrol

Department of Commerce

Health Care Authority

External client services and outcomes data

Dental ServicesMedical Eligibility Medicaid, State OnlyHospital Inpatient/OutpatientManaged Care ServicesPhysician ServicesPrescription Drugs

Homelessness

Housing Assistance

Arrests Charges

Convictions

Incarcerations

Community Supervision

Hours

Wages

Births

Deaths

External


Employment Security

Department










Homelessness

Housing Assistance

Arrests Charges

Convictions

Incarcerations


Hours

Wages

Births

Deaths

External


Employment Security

Department






Internal

Institutions


Community Placement

Parole

Assessments

Detoxification







Community Services




Food Stamps


General Assistance



Nursing Facilities

In-home Services



Case Management






Case Management




Adoption

Adoption Support

Child Care


Voluntary Services


DSHS Mental Health

Services

DSHS Juvenile

Rehabilitation



Services

DSHS Developmental

Disabilities

DSHS Vocational

Rehabilitation



Rehabilitation

Internal and external sources routinely updated in the Integrated Client Data Base – “The ICDB”


(Includes dropouts)

Drug court participants and study sample

June 2007 through July 2009

Reported admissions (unduplicated)* 2,537

• Opt outs 582

• Did not link with the ICDB 121

• Missing critical data 163

Final Drug Court Sample 1,671

*Source: Administrative Office of the Courts, individual drug courts, and DCCM.


-10 years -9 years -8 years -7 years -6 years -5 years -4 years -3 years -2 years -1 year +1 year +2 years +3 years

INDEXDate felony was filed

Baseline characteristics up to 10 years prior 3 years after filing date

• Age, gender• Race and ethnicity• Employment history• Location

• Arrest rate• Incarceration rate• Days incarcerated• Received AOD treatment• Days of AOD treatment• AOD treatment cost

• Most serious felony charge• Criminal history• AOD treatment need• Previous AOD treatment

BASELINE PERIOD FOLLOW-UP PERIOD

STUDY TIMELINE: Admissions from June 2007 through July 2009



Homelessness

Housing Assistance

Arrests Charges

Convictions

Incarcerations


Hours

Wages

Births

Deaths

External


Employment Security

Department






Internal

Institutions


Community Placement

Parole

Assessments

Detoxification







Community Services




Food Stamps


General Assistance



Nursing Facilities

In-home Services



Case Management






Case Management




Adoption

Adoption Support

Child Care


Voluntary Services


DSHS Mental Health

Services

DSHS Juvenile

Rehabilitation



Services

DSHS Developmental

Disabilities

DSHS Vocational

Rehabilitation



Rehabilitation

Internal and external sources routinely updated in the Integrated Client Data Base – “The ICDB”




ADMITTED to Drug Court


Study timeline andcomparison group

NOT Admitted to Drug Court – but

statistically similar


The study population characteristicsAdults admitted to Drug Courts and a matched comparison group

are statistically identical across multiple dimensions

“Index” Felony:

• The most serious charge associated with admission to drug court

Demographics

• Age

• Gender

• Race/Ethnicity

Criminal History

• Felony Convictions by Type

• Misdemeanor Convictions by Type

• Arrests

• Juvenile Crime

Other Characteristics

• AOD Treatment Need

• AOD Treatment & Detox History

• Employment History

• Geography


The study population characteristicsCharacteristics of adults Admitted to Drug Courts July 2007 through June 2009

and a matched comparison groupDrug Court

n = 1,671Comparison

n=1,671 p-value

DemographicsAge 32.1 32.2 0.8509Male 61.8% 60.7% 0.5228Hispanic 7.3% 6.7% 0.4568White 37.6% 36.9% 0.6815Black 15.5% 13.9% 0.1716Asian/Pacific Islander 5.0% 4.9% 0.8107Native American/Alaska Native 9.2% 8.8% 0.6723

Index Felony (Charge associated with admission to Drug Court)*Drug Possession 67.8% 68.4% 0.7105Property –Theft/Fraud 20.9% 20.8% 0.9661Property – Other 8.1% 7.6% 0.5631Other Drug (excluding delivery) 3.1% 3.1% 1.0000Other Felony (excluding violent, sex, and other drug-related) 3.4% 3.0% 0.4954

Criminal History: Past 10 years (Mean)Adult Felony Convictions 1.15 1.11 0.4441Adult Felony Drug Possession Convictions 0.47 0.47 0.9693Adult Felony Drug Delivery Convictions 0.04 0.04 0.9355Adult Violent Felony Convictions 0.03 0.02 0.5880Adult Non-criminal Convictions 1.79 1.76 0.7085Adult Misdemeanor Convictions 2.12 2.04 0.4224Total Arrests 6.73 6.58 0.5257Juvenile Felony Convictions 0.13 0.12 0.8460Juvenile Violent Felony Convictions 0.02 0.02 0.9117Juvenile Misdemeanor Convictions 0.51 0.47 0.1981

Other CharacteristicsTreatment Need Indicated Prior to Index Felony 100% 100% 1.0000Received AOD Treatment in Prior 2 Years 21.7% 19.6% 0.1349Any Detox Admissions in Prior 2 Years 7.1% 6.8% 0.6842Employed in Quarter Previous to Month of Index Felony 36.7% 36.7% 1.0000Number of Quarters Employed in Prior 2 Years 3.15 3.15 0.9859

Geographic DistributionKing County 28.6% 28.5% 0.9389Pierce County 19.2% 18.3% 0.4786Spokane County 10.8% 11.0% 0.8247Clark County 7.6% 6.8% 0.3501Snohomish County 6.6% 7.0% 0.6303Thurston County 6.4% 6.8% 0.5784Other Drug-Court Counties 20.7% 21.4% 0.5811Rural County 9.9% 10.3% 0.7314

*Index charges for the comparison group were randomly selected in such a way as to coincide with the distribution of charge dates of those admitted to Drug Courts.





Study timeline andcomparison group

ADMITTED to Drug Court

NOT Admitted to Drug Court – but

statistically similar


Study questions

1. How do drug courts influence incarceration (prison only)?

2. What is the impact of drug court on subsequent arrest rates?

3. How do drug courts influence treatment participation?

4. What are the costs and benefits of drug court participation?


Drug Court participants were less likely to be incarcerated

Cumulative incarceration rate over the three-year follow-up period Drug Court and comparison group clients—DOC facilities only

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

MONTHS AFTER INDEX FELONY CHARGE

Drug Court group

Comparison group23%

17%


Drug Court participants in the community were less likely to be re-arrested

Cumulative arrest rate over the three-year follow-up period for individuals in the community Drug Court and comparison group clients

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 360%

30%

60%

90%


Drug Court group

Comparison group 85%

71%


Drug Court participants were more likely to remain free of arrest

*Based on a multivariate predictive model.

Series1

15%

30%

Arrest-free during follow-up period*Adjusted

Drug Court Group

Comparison Group

2x HIGHER

n = 1,290 n = 1,384

*


Chemical dependency treatment experiences differed significantly

Any AOD Treatment received during follow-up

DRUG COURT GROUP

3%No Treatmentn = 53

97%Received Treatment

n = 1,618


Chemical dependency treatment experiences differed significantly

Any AOD Treatment received during follow-up

DRUG COURT GROUP COMPARISON GROUP

3%No Treatmentn = 53

97%Received Treatment

n = 1,61854%

No Treatment

n = 896

46%Received Treatmentn = 775


Drug Court participants entered treatment more quickly

TIME TO TREATMENT

179

115 Drug Court

Group

Comparison Group

64DAYS EARLIER TO TREATMENT

n = 775 n = 1,618 Series1

16%

55%

Drug Court Group

Comparison Group

3x HIGHER

n = 775 n = 1,618

Number of days before entering treatment

Percent entering treatment within 90 days


Drug Court participants entering treatment stayed longer

DAYS IN TREATMENT

Series1

62

190

Drug Court Group

Comparison Group

128 MORE

DAYS IN TREATMENT

n = 775 n = 1,618 Series1

18%

73%

Drug Court Group

Comparison Group

4x HIGHER

n = 775 n = 1,618

Number of days spent in treatment

Percent spending 90 days or more in treatment


More treatment = higher treatment costs

Average monthly chemical dependency treatment cost Drug Court and comparison group clients

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500


Drug Court group

Comparison group


More treatment = higher treatment costs

Average monthly chemical dependency treatment cost Drug Court and comparison group clients

Series1

$2,093

$8,624

Total per-person treatment costs

$6,531

NET INCREASE


1 DSHS-RDA estimates of chemical dependency treatment costs based on TARGET.2 Cost effectiveness of Washington State adult prison offenders, final report, October 2012. Olympia: Criminal Justice Planning Services/KGM Consulting. 3 Barnosky, R., & Aos, S. (2003). Washington State’s drug courts for adult defendants: Outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis (Document No. 11-07-1201). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.4 Bhati, A., Roman, J., & Chalfin, A. (2010). To treat or not to treat: Evidence on the prospects of expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Justice Policy Center.

Drug Court cost per participant

PARTICIPANT COST DETAIL

2010 DollarsDrug

CourtOrdinary

Court Net Cost

Chemical Dependency Treatment 1 $8,624 $2,093 $6,531

Incarceration (@$94.50 per offender/day)2 $4,631 $7,655 $3,024

Superior Court Costs 3 $3,947 $2,114 $1,833

Sanction-related Costs (Jail) 3 $4,425 $6,917 $2,492

Drug Court Administration and Monitoring 4 $4,270 $0 $4,270

TOTAL $25,897 $18,779 $7,118


$20,865

8404

Benefit to Taxpayers

Benefit to Society

Additional Costper Participant

TOTAL BENEFIT

$29,269 NET BENEFIT

$21,987

Benefits associated with reduced crime

Lifetime BenefitsPresent Values

SOURCE: Washington State Institute for Public Policy Benefit-Cost Model based on parameters provided by DSHS-RDA.


$20,865

8404

$7,282

Benefit to Taxpayers

Benefit to Society

Additional Costper Participant

TOTAL BENEFIT

$29,269

NET COST

$7,282

NET BENEFIT

$21,987

Cost effectivenessLifetime Costs and Benefits

Present ValuesBenefit-Cost Ratio

= $4.02[Benefit of $29,269 Total Cost of $7,282]

SOURCE: Washington State Institute for Public Policy Benefit-Cost Model based on parameters provided by DSHS-RDA.

1 DSHS-RDA estimates of chemical dependency treatment costs based on TARGET.2 Cost effectiveness of Washington State adult prison offenders, final report, October 2012. Olympia: Criminal Justice Planning Services/KGM Consulting. 3 Barnosky, R., & Aos, S. (2003). Washington State’s drug courts for adult defendants: Outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis (Document No. 11-07-1201). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.4 Bhati, A., Roman, J., & Chalfin, A. (2010). To treat or not to treat: Evidence on the prospects of expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Justice Policy Center.

PARTICIPANT COST DETAIL

2010 Dollars DrugCourt

Ordinary Court Net Cost

Chemical Dependency Treatment 1 $8,624 $2,093 $6,531

Incarceration (@$94.50 per offender/day)2 $4,631 $7,655 $3,024

Superior Court Costs 3 $3,947 $2,114 $1,833

Sanction-related Costs (Jail) 3 $4,425 $6,917 $2,492

Drug Court Administration and Monitoring 4 $4,270 $0 $4,270

TOTAL $25,897 $18,779 $7,118


Summary

RDA is building a foundation for evaluative research of specialty courts

A foundational analysis by RDA demonstrates the cost effectiveness of drug courts statewide

Ongoing, actionable research requires a systematic and consistent approach to reporting court data statewide


Questions?


http://publications.rda.dshs.wa.gov/1485/

Available Report

http://publications.rda.dshs.wa.gov/1485/

drug court evaluation using “big data” presented at the

Documents

dshs research

big data

use of integrated data

byjim mayfield

health servicesresearch

drug court evaluation

drug courts

family level