Drug Court Effectiveness: A Review of California Evaluation Reports, 1995–1999

Abstract

Over the past two decades, drug courts have emerged as a viable alternative for addressing drug cases within the criminal justice system. In California, the Drug Court Partnership Program (DCPP) was created in 1998 and has supported and funded the development of drug courts throughout the State. This article reports on a review of California drug court evaluations through January 2000 conducted as part of an evaluation of the California DCPP. A total of 23 evaluations were collected. Seventeen were reviewed in detail, and six were excluded because they were internal reports rather than evaluations. A standardized review process was initiated which led to a scored rating of the evaluation reports. Results of this review support previous findings that drug court participants may experience reduced rearrest rates by 11% to 14% compared to nonparticipants. The largest reduction in rearrest rates appears among graduates. The graduation rates were between 19% and 54%. Costs and savings associated with drug courts were discussed but no conclusions were possible based on the findings from these evaluations. The evaluation of the effectiveness of drug courts presents unique challenges. This review concludes with a discussion of evaluation methods (e.g. standardizing rate calculations, term definitions) that would strengthen drug court research.

Associations With Substance Abuse Treatment Completion Among Drug Court Participants

“…Program evaluations, utilizing aggregate level data on DTC participants and non-participants at the county level in a variety of jurisdictions, indicate that drug court participation is associated with reduced recidivism and drug use among substance-involved offenders. (Goldkamp and Weiland 1993; Johnson and Latessa 1997; Granfield, Eby et al 1998; Belenko 2001; Brewster 2001; Guydish, Wolfe et al 2001; Listwan, Shaffer et al 2001; Fielding, Tye et al 2002; Carey and Marchand 2005; Marchand, Waller et al 2006) Though encouraging, such aggregate level data fail to take into account a number of critical factors such as selection bias and potentially confounding or modifying factors (e.g. substance use history, prior treatment contacts, criminal justice history, socioeconomic factors, social support, type of treatment received, and other conditions of supervision in drug treatment court) leading to the reductions in recidivism and substance use for DTC participants.…”

Offender Diversion Into Substance Use Disorder Treatment: The Economic Impact of California’s Proposition 36

“…A review of California drug courts in particular found that drug court participants' rearrest rates were reduced by 11% to 14%, with the largest reduction in rearrest rates found among individuals graduating from their treatment programs. 15 Research has also been conducted to determine the economic impact of drug courts in the United States and internationally. 16– 18 Yet many methodological and analytical concerns have been raised in the evaluation of drug courts given the selectivity of participants and other concerns, 19 although comprehensive economic analyses are available in the peer-reviewed literature that display reliable cost savings for drug courts.…”

A research agenda for economic evaluation of substance abuse services

“…Many counties and states now operate adult and/or juvenile programs. Early evaluations suggest that these programs are effective (Guydish, Wolfe, Tajima, & Woods, 2001;Hicks, 1999;Peters & Murrin, 2000), but we were able to find only one published study on costs and economic benefits (Logan et al, 2004). Criminal justice agencies would certainly appreciate rigorous and standardized information on the costs and benefits of these programs before allocating additional resources.…”