Major Survey of Drug Treatment Courts

New survey of drug treatment courts in 12 countries supports previous evaluations that these programs are effective in reducing rates of repeat offences and relapse into drug use compared to regular incarceration of people with addiction.

«Because drug abuse is compulsive, it does not stop at the prison door»
James F. Mack, Executive Secretary,
Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission, CICAD, OAS

New survey of drug treatment courts in 12 countries supports previous evaluations that these programs are effective in reducing rates of repeat offences and relapse into drug use compared to regular incarceration of people with addiction.

The survey was commissioned by Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission of the Organisation of American States (OAS), conducted by School of Public Affairs, American University and funded by the European Commission.

In its appendix you will find summaries of several comprehensive evaluation reports from Ireland, Australia and the USA.

The report was presented at the EU-OAS Lugo Summit, in April 2010. The report is made available by kind permission by CICAD, see bottom of page.

Addressing the revolving door syndrome

CICADs motivation is to show that this approach can "reduce prison overcrowding, calm the general public’s concerns about crime, and slow down the revolving door of recidivists for whom prison has done little but exacerbate their problems". (James F. Mack, Executive Secretary, Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission in his foreword).

In spite of its positive evaluations in many countries, promoting DTC is often difficult. It seems like both governments and the public may be hesistant about its benefits. The aim of this publication is therefore to address the doubts and fears over drug courts and to inform about the impact and benefits thesee programs have had in 12 countries where they have been in use.

The report is also an excellent guide for those who are in process of establishing new programs or reviewing existing ones. There will according to CICAD be a follow up report with recommendations and best practice.

A need for more documentation

One of the key messages fromt the project is that to attract sustainable political support and funding a drug treatment court needs to effectively document and communicate how it contributes to lower rates of recidivism and lower rates of relapse into drug use than drug dependent offenders who are incarcerated.

"Although much still needs to be done, the information compiled from the 12 countries responding to the CICAD survey presents a cogent argument about why DTCs are a good idea, and gives a snapshot of what they cost in terms of human and other resources, what savings they can create for their respective societies in economic as well as human terms, and what benefits can accrue, particularly in terms of public safety and community wellbeing."

Does it work?

The team performed a survey from DTC in 12 countries. the result gives a picture of ite effectiveness. The report notes that "Not including the United States, the reporting DTCs, all of which have been established since 2001, have enrolled over 3,800 participants, of whom over 500 have successfully completed their respective program.

Most of the respondents indicated that these figures were lower than those anticipated when the DTCs were opened, primarily as a result of shortagesof funding necessary to adequately develop the programs.

In Dublin, recidivism declined by over 75%. "Although no firm statistics are available for the U.S., it is estimated that well over 500,000 have enrolled in DTCs and well over 100,000 have graduated."

What do they treat

The DTC in the 12 countries report that "treatment services come from a wide array of service providers, including treatment centers, hospitals, NGOs, nonprofit organizations, and public health departments."

Treating drug dependence means not only attempting to overcome addictions that may have persisted for many years, but also addressing the underlying causes of the addiction, such as prior physical and/or sexual abuse, or mental health disorders.

Most programs also reported referrals to other service like education and training, employment, and housing. Some respondents thought services should expand to include counseling, child care, as well as vocational training and career oriented job opportunities.

Cost - benefit?

The authors note that "where statistics have become available, they show that drug courts are significantly less expensive than incarceration which, when combined with the decline in recidivism, indicates a much greater degree of costeffectiveness."

In spite of this, a common problem reported by many was the constant struggle for sustained funding.

Who take part?

Most offenders taking part in DTC programs are in general "nonviolent individuals who are addicted to drugs and who are committing offenses either while under the influence of drugs or to procure funds to obtain drugs".

Interstingly, in the US Approximately two thirds of DTC participants are parents of minor children, and are often in danger of losing custody or have already lost custody them and individuals are remaining in DTC programs at double the rate for traditional treatment programs.

Some drug treatment courts treat serious problem drug users (heroin, cocaine) only while other courts target anyone with a significant addiction including those related to alcohol, cannabis and even prescription drugs.

How does it work?

A drug treatment court normally entails the following elements, according to the respondents:

Early identification of individuals involved with the justice system as a result of their drug abuse;
Suspension of the justice system proceedings in which the individual is involved pending the individual’s participation in the DTC program;
Provision of intensive outpatient treatment services to the individual, overseen by the court, and additional services the individual may require based on comprehensive screening and assessment. [Often these entail mental health, housing, literacy, vocational and other services that wouldn’t ordinarily be identified and/or provided in the traditional justice system process);
Frequent and usually random drug testing (e.g., up to three – four times per week initially);
Frequent review hearings before the judge (often weekly at first) at which the judge reviews with the individual his/her progress/compliance with the DTC requirements, acknowledges progress made and determines how best to address difficulties encountered, either through changes in the treatment plan or other means;
Immediate responses to noncompliance, such as not appearing for treatment sessions, drug tests, or court hearings, which can range from a required writing assignment to community service to several days in jail16; continued nonresponsiveness to the DTC program or commission of a new offense that disqualifies the individual from participation results in program termination and the resumption of the traditional justice system process;
Gradual reductions in supervision as the individual increases his/her periods of sobriety and is able to benefit from the treatment and other services provided, recognizing, however, that the chronic relapsing nature of drug addiction may likely require renewed court intervention periodically, with adjustments to treatment and other services;
Graduation from the DTC after 12 – 15months of continued progression in treatment and a significant period of sobriety