California Drug Courts: Outcomes, Costs and Promising Practices: An Overview of Phase II in a Statewide Study

Preliminary evaluation of extended-release naltrexone in Michigan and Missouri drug courts

“…Using data from a previous Michigan DUI court study not involving XR-NTX and from other costs studies of drug court (Carey, Finigan, Crumpton, & Waller, 2006;Carey, Waller, & Marchand, 2006), the annual reduction in rearrest rate found in this study suggests that treatment with XR-NTX may be associated with a cost offset advantage in the range of $4,000-$12,000 per person over the 2 years following the initial arrest. (If a formal cost analysis on a larger controlled sample confirms a cost offset advantage, this would potentially have policy implications for drug courts nationwide.…”

Cost analysis of long-term outcomes of an urban mental health court

“…TCA is a subset of cost-benefit analysis; it considers total costs and compares those costs to the cost savings inherent in prevention. This approach accommodates the complex nature of specialty courts where participants interact with multiple publically funded agencies, utilizing resources, or participating in transactions (Carey, Finigan, Crumpton & Waller, 2006). Use of the TCA approach, as adapted by Carey and Finigan (2004), differs from a more traditional form of TCA because it carefully identifies the level of resources provided by each agency, including both indirect and direct costs, so all resources can be determined and calculated into overall costs (Carey & Finigan, 2004).…”

“…Nearly all previous analyses focused on the period following admission to the program, or the period during which members of the treatment group (i.e., program participants) were still under intensive judicial supervision (Carey & Finigan, 2004;Carey et al, 2006;Crumpton et al, 2004). Only one study considered the outcomes incurred in the period following discharge from the program when participants were no longer under judicial supervision (Marchand et al, 2006).…”

“…Finally, most study designs employed a comparison group (Carey & Finigan, 2004;Carey et al, 2006;Crumpton et al, 2004;Marchand et al, 2006), but the composition of those groups varied widely. While randomized controlled trial is considered to be the ''gold standard'', most previous studies utilized a quasi-experimental design in which a comparison sample was selected and matched to the treatment group retrospectively.…”

Examining a Drug Court Treatment Program in New Jersey: A Perspective from the Field

“…Although basic analyses on the effectiveness of drug courts is ongoing, preliminary research indicates that drug courts can reduce recidivism and promote other positive outcomes (Carey, Finigan, Crumpton, & Waller, 2006). The magnitude of a court's impact may depend upon how consistently court resources match the needs of the offenders in the drug court program.…”