California drug courts: A methodology for determining costs and avoided costs

Journal of Psychoactive Drugs

Volumn 36, Issue , 2004, Pages 147-156

  Byrne, Francine ^a   Schauffier, Richard ^b   Lightman, Lisa ^a   Finigan, Michael ^c   Carey, Shannon ^c  

^a Administrative Office of the Courts   (United States)

^b National Center for State Courts   (United States)

^c NPC Research   (United States)

Author keywords

Drug court evaluation; Transactional cost analysis

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ARTICLE; CRIMINAL LAW; DRUG CONTROL; ECONOMICS; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; METHODOLOGY; UNITED STATES; CONFERENCE PAPER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; COURT; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DRUG DEPENDENCE; LAW ENFORCEMENT;

CALIFORNIA; CRIMINAL LAW; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; STATE GOVERNMENT; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 6044236702     PISSN: 02791072     EISSN: 21599777     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02791072.2004.10400050     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Belenko, S.R. 1998. Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review 1 (1): 1-55.
2. Cartwright, W.S. 1998. Cost/benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis of drug abuse treatment services. Evaluation Review 22 (5): 609-36.
3. Cooper, C. 2003. Conversation with author. Drug Court Clearinghouse, American University, Washington, D.C., 24 June.
4. French, M.T. 1995. Economic evaluation of drug abuse treatment programs: Methodology and findings. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 21 (1): 111-35.
5. French, M.T.; Rachal, J.V. & Hubbard, R.L. 1991.Conceptual framework for estimating the social cost of drug abuse. Journal ofHealth and Social Policy 2 (3): 1-22.
6. Goldkamp, J.S. 2001. Do drug courts work? Getting inside the drugcourt black box. Journal of Drug Issues 31 (1): 27-72.
7. Martinez, R.J. & Dacin, M.T. 1999. Efficiency motives and normative forces: Combining transactions costs and institutional logic. Journal of Management 25 (I): 75-97.
8. Miller, T.R.; Cohen, M.A. & Wiersema, B. 1996. Victim Costs and Consequences:A New Look. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
9. New York State Commission on Drugs and the Courts. 2000. Confronting the Cycle ofAddiction and Recidivism: A Report to Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye. New York: State Commission on Drugs and the Courts.
10. Perrow, C. 1986. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
11. Powell, W.W. & DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds.) 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
12. Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department ofJustice. 2003. Drug Court Clearinghouse, American University. Washington, D.C.: American University.
13. Riley, K.J.; Evener, P.A.; Chiesa, J.R.; Turner, S. & Ringel, J. 2000. Drug Offenders and the Criminal Justice System: Will Proposition 36 Treat or Create Problems?. Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation.
14. Scott, W.R. 2001. Institutions and Organizations, Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
15. Wilson, D.J. 2000 Drug Use Testing andTreatment in Jails. Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.