Measuring the effectiveness of mental health courts challenges and recommendations

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 539-569

  Wolff, Nancy ^a,b   Pogorzelski, Wendy ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Diversion to treatment; Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project; Mental health court

Indexed keywords

EID: 30544438006     PISSN: 10768971     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.11.4.539     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. America's Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project, Pub. L. No. 106-515, 114 Stat. 2399 (2000).
2. Belenko, S. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review, 1, 1-42.
3. Belenko, S. (2001). Research on drug courts: A critical review 2001 update. New York: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University.
4. Belenko, S. (2002). The challenges of conducting research in drug treatment court settings. Substance Use & Misuse, 37, 1635-1664.
5. Belenko, S., Pagan, A., & Dumanovsky, T. (1994). Effects of legal sanctions on recidivison in special drug courts. Justice System Journal, 17, 53-81.
6. Boldt, R. C. (2002). The adversary system and attorney role in the drug court movement. In J. L. Nolan (Ed.), Drug courts: In theory and in practice (pp. 115-144). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Boothroyd, R. A., Poythress, N. G., McGaha, A., & Petrila, J. (2003). The Broward
7. Mental Health Court: Process, outcomes, and service utilization. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 55-71.
8. Brewster, M. P. (2001). An evaluation of the Chester County (PA) drug court program. Journal of Drug Issues, 31, 177-206.
9. Cook, T. D., & Reichardt, C. (Eds.). (1979). Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10. Cook, T. D., & Shadish, W. R. (1994). Social experiments: Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 545-580.
11. Cordray, D. S. (2000). Enhancing the scope of experimental inquiry in intervention studies. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 401-424.
12. Cosden, M., Ellens, J. K., Schnell, J. L., Yamini-Diouf, Y., & Wolfe, M. M. (2003). Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Behavioral Science and Law, 21, 415-427.
13. Council of State Governments. (2002). Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project Act. New York: Author.
14. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15. Creswell, L. S., & Deschenes, E. P. (2001). Minority and non-minority perceptions of drug court program severity and effectiveness. Journal of Drug Issues, 31, 259-292.
16. Ditton, P. M. (1999). Mental health and treatment of inmates and probationers: Special report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
17. Donaldson, S. I. (2003). Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium. The Stauffer Symposium on Applied Psychology at the Claremont Colleges, (pp. 109-141). London: Erlbaum.
18. Draine, J., & Solomon, P. (1994). Jail recidivism and the intensity of case management services among homeless persons with mental illness leaving jail. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 20, 335-349.
19. Drake, R. E., Alterman, A. I., & Rosenberg, S. R. (1993). Detection of substance disorders in seriously mentally ill patients. Community Mental Health Journal, 29, 175-192.
20. Farrington, D. P. (2003). Methodological quality standards for evaluation research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 49-68.
21. Feder, L., & Boruch, R. F. (2000). The need for experiments in criminal justice settings [Special issue]. Crime & Delinquency, 46(3).
22. Gold, M. R., Siegel, J. E., Russell, L. B., & Weinstein, M. C. (1996). Panel report: Cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
23. Goldkamp, J. S. (2000). The drug court response: Issues and implications for justice change. Albany Law Review, 63, 923-961.
24. Goldkamp, J. S., & Irons-Guynn, C. (2000). Emerging judicial strategies for the mentally ill in the criminal caseload: Mental health courts in Fort Lauderdale, Seattle, San Bernadino, and Anchorage. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance.
25. Goldkamp, J. S., White, M. D., & Robinson, J. B. (2001). Do drug courts work? Getting inside the drug court black box. Journal of Drug Issues, 31, 27-72.
26. Gottfredson, D. C., Najaka, S. S., & Kearley, B. (2003). Effectiveness of drug treatment courts: Evidence from a randomized trial. Criminology & Public Policy, 2, 171-196.
27. Gottfredson, D. M., & Clarke, R. V. (Eds.). (1990). Policy and theory in criminal justice: Contributions in honour of Leslie T. Wilkins. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Avebury.
28. Griffin, P. A., Steadman, H. J., & Petrila, J. (2002). The use of criminal charges and sanctions in mental health courts. Psychiatric Services, 53, 1285-1289.
29. Hargreaves, W. A., Shumway, M., Hu, T., & Cuffel, B. (1998). Cost-outcomes methods for mental health. San Diego: Academic Press.
30. Hindelang, M., Hirschi, T., & Weis, J. (1981). Measuring delinquency. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31. Hoffman, M. B. (2002). The Denver drug court and its unintended consequences. In J. L. Nolan (Ed.), Drug courts: In theory and in practice (pp. 67-88). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
32. Hora, P. H., Schma, W. G., & Rosenthal, J. T. A. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug treatment court movement: Revolutionizing the criminal justice system's response to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review, 74, 439-537.
33. Human Rights Watch. (2003). Ill-equipped: U.S. prisons and offenders with mental illness. New York: Author.
34. Jick, T. D. (1983). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. In J. Van Maanen (Ed.), Qualitative methodology (2nd ed., pp. 135-148). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
35. Krisberg, B. (1980). Utility of process evaluation: Crime and delinquency programs. In M. W. Klein & K. S. Teilmann (Ed.), Handbook of criminal justice evaluation (pp. 217-236). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
36. Lawrenz, F., & Huffman, D. (2002). The archipelago approach to mixed method evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 331-338.
37. Lerner-Wren, G., & Appel, A. R. (2001). A court for the nonviolent defendant with a mental disability. Psychiatric Annals, 31, 453-458.
38. Lipsey, M. W. (2003). Those confounded moderators in meta-analysis: Good, bad, and ugly. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 69-81.
39. Logan, T. K., Williams, K., Leukefeld, C., & Minton, L. (2000). A drug court process evaluation: Methodology and findings. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 369-394.
40. Lurigio, A. J., & Swartz, J. A. (2000). Changing the contours of the criminal justice system to meet the needs of persons with serious mental illness. In Criminal Justice 2000: Vol. 3. Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system (pp. 45-108). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
41. Luskin, M. L. (2001). Who is diverted? Case selection for court-monitored mental health treatment. Law & Policy, 23, 217-236.
42. MacKenzie, D. L. (2000). Evidence-based corrections: Identifying what works. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 457-471.
43. Mark, M. M., Henry, G. T., & Julnes, G. (2000). Evaluation: An integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
44. Marlowe, D. B., Festinger, D. S., Lee, P. A., Schepise, M. M., Hazzard, J. R., Merrill, J. C., et al. (2003). Are judicial status hearings a key component of drug court? During-treatment data from a randomized trial. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 141-162.
45. McConney, A., Rudd, A., & Ayres, R. (2002). Getting to the bottom line: A method for synthesizing findings within mixed-method program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 121-140.
46. McGaha, A., Boothroyd, R. A., Poythress, N. G., Petrila, J., & Ort, R. G. (2002). Lessons from the Broward County Mental Health Court evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25, 125-135.
47. McHugo, G. J., Hargreaves, W., Drake, R., Clark, R. E., Xie, H., Bond, G. R., & Burns, B. J. (1998). Methodological issues in assertive community treatment studies. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 246-260.
48. Miller, J. M., & Shutt, J. E. (2001). Considering the need for empirically grounded drug court screening mechanisms. Journal of Drug Issues, 31, 91-106.
49. Moore, M. H. (2002). The limits of social science research in guiding policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 2, 33-42.
50. National Institute of Mental Health. (2000). Bridging science and service: A report by the National Advisory Mental Health Council's Clinical Treatment and Services Research Workgroup. Washington, DC: Author.
51. Nolan, J. L. (2001). Reinventing justice: The American drug court movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52. Nolan, J. L. (Ed., 2002). Drug courts: In theory and in practice. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
53. Petrila, J. (2003). An introduction to special jurisdiction courts. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 3-12.
54. Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., McGaha, A., & Boothroyd, R. A. (2001). Preliminary observations from an evaluation of the Broward County Mental Health Court. Court Review, 37, 14-22.
55. Petrosino, A. (2003). Why randomized field trials happen: Understanding "feast or famine" in criminological experiments [Special issue]. Evaluation Review, 27(3).
56. Roman, J., Townsend, W., & Bhati, A. S. (2003). Recidivism rates for drug court graduates: Nationally based estimates, final report. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
57. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
58. Sherman, L. (2003). Misleading evidence and evidence-led policy: Making social science more experimental. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589, 6-19.
59. Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising: A report to the United States Congress. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
60. Solomon, P., Draine, J., & Marcus, S. (2000). Incarceration of clients of a psychiatric probation and parole service. Psychiatric Services, 53, 50-56.
61. Spohn, C., Piper, R. K., Martin, T., & Frenzel, E. D. (2001). Drug courts and recidivism: The results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism. Journal of Drug Issues, 31, 149-176.
62. Steadman, H. J., Davidson, S., & Brown, C. (2001). Law and psychiatry: Mental health courts: Their promise and unanswered questions. Psychiatric Services, 52, 457-458.
63. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
64. Taxman, F. S., & Bouffard, J. (2002). Treatment inside the drug treatment court: The who, what, where, and how of treatment services. Substance Use & Misuse, 37, 1665-1688.
65. Ten Have, T. R., Coyne, J. C., Salzer, M., & Katz, I. R. (2003). Research to improve the quality of care for depression: Alternatives to the simple randomized clinical trial. General Hospital Psychiatry, 25, 115-123.
66. Teplin, L. (1984). Criminalizing mental disorder: The comparative arrest rate of the mentally ill. American Psychologist, 7, 794-803.
67. Trupin, E., & Richards, H. (2003). Seattle's mental health courts: Early indicators of effectiveness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 33-53.
68. Watson, A., Hanrahan, P., Luchins, D., & Lurigio, A. (2001). Mental health courts and the complex issue of mentally ill offenders. Psychiatric Services, 52, 477-481.
69. Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does research design affect study outcomes in criminal justice? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 50-70.
70. Wenzel, S. L., Turner, S., & Ridgely, M. S. (2004). ollaboration between drug courts and service providers: Characteristics and challenges. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 254-263.
71. Winick, B. (2003). Outpatient commitment: A therapeutic jurisprudence analysis. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 9, 107-144.
72. Wolf, E. M. (2002). Systemic constraints on the implementation of a northeastern drug court. In J. L. Nolan (Ed.). (2002). Drug courts: In theory and in practice (pp. 27-50). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
73. Wolff, N. (2000). Using randomized controlled trials to evaluate socially complex services: Problems, challenges, and recommendations. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 3, 97-109.
74. Wolff, N. (2001). Randomised trials of socially complex interventions: Promise or peril? Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 6, 123-126.
75. Wolff, N. (2002). Courts as therapeutic agents: Thinking past the novelty of mental health courts. Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 30, 431-437.
76. Wolff, N. (2003). Courting the court: Courts as agents for treatment and justice. In W. H. Fisher (Ed.), Community-based interventions for criminal offenders with severe mental illness (pp. 143-197). Boston: Elsevier.
77. Wolff, N., & Helminiak, T. W. (1993). The anatomy of cost estimates-the "other" outcome. In R. Scheffler & L. F. Rossiter (Eds.), Advances in health economics and health services research (Vol. 14, pp. 159-179). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.