The impact of adult drug courts on crime and incarceration: Findings from a multi-site quasi-experimental design

Journal of Experimental Criminology

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 165-192

  Rempel, Michael ^a   Green, Mia ^b   Kralstein, Dana ^a  

^a Center for Court Innovation ^*  (United States)

^b BRIDGEWATER STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Drug court; Multi site; Substance abuse; Treatment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860664626     PISSN: 15733750     EISSN: 15728315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11292-012-9143-2     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Andrews, D., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 7-27.
2. Aos, S., Phipps, P., Barnoski, R., & Lieb, R. (2001). The comparative costs and benefits of programs to reduce crime. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
3. Barnoski, R., & Aos, S. (2003). Washington State's drug courts for adult defendants: Outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
4. Belenko, S. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review, 1(1), 1-42.
5. Belenko, S. (1999). Research on drug courts: A critical review: 1999 update. National Drug Court Institute Review, 2(2), 1-58.
6. Belenko, S. (2001). Research on drug courts: A critical review: 2001 update. New York: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
7. Berman, G., & Feinblatt, J. (2005). Good courts. New York: New Press.
8. Bhati, A. S., & Roman, J. K. (2010). Simulated evidence on the prospects of treating more drug-involved offenders. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6, 1-33.
9. Carey, S. M., Crumpton, D., Finigan, M. W., & Waller, M. S. (2005). California drug courts: A methodology for determining costs and benefits, phase II: Testing the methodology: Final report. Portland: NPC Research.
10. Casey, P., & Rottman, D. (2003). Problem-solving courts: Models and trends. (Williamsburg, Virginia: National Center for State Courts).
11. Cissner, A. B., & Rempel, M. (2005). The state of drug court research: Moving beyond 'do they work?'. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
12. Collaborative Outcome Data Committee (CODC). (2007). Sexual offender treatment outcome research: CODC guidelines for evaluation: Part 1: Introduction and overview. Retrieved on September 30, 2011 from: http://www. publicsafety. gc. ca/res/cor/rep/codc-eng. aspx.
13. Deschenes, E., Turner, S., & Greenwood, P. (1995). Drug court or probation? An experimental evaluation of Maricopa County's drug court. Justice System Journal, 18, 55-73.
14. Downey, P. M., & Roman, J. K. (2010). Cost-benefit analyses. In S. B. Rossman, J. K. Roman, J. M. Zweig, M. Rempel & C. H. Lindquist (Eds.), The multi-site adult drug court evaluation, vol 4. Washington, D. C.: The Urban Institute.).
15. Fielding, J. E., Tye, G., Ogawa, P., Imam, I. J., & Long, A. M. (2002). Los Angeles County Drug Court Programs: Initial results. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 23, 217-224.
16. Finigan, M., W., Carey, S. M., & Cox, A. (2007). The impact of a mature drug court over 10 years of operation: Recidivism and costs. (Portland, OR: NPC Research).
17. Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B., & Najaka, S. S. (2003). Effectiveness of drug treatment courts: Evidence from a randomized trial. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 171-196.
18. Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B., Najaka, S. S., & Rocha, C. M. (2005). The Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: 3-year outcome study. Evaluation Review, 29(1), 42-64.
19. Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B., Najaka, S. S., & Rocha, C. M. (2006). Long-term effects of participation in the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: Results from an experimental study. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(1), 67-98.
20. Government Accountability Office. (2005). Adult drug courts: Evidence indicates recidivism reductions and mixed results for other outcomes. Washington: United States Government Accountability Office.
21. Gutierrez, L., & Bourgon, G. (2009). Drug treatment courts: A quantitative review of study and treatment quality. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from the Public Safety Canada Web site: http://www. publicsafety. gc. ca/res/cor/rep/2009-04-dtc-eng. aspx.
22. Harrell, A., Roman, J., & Sack, E. (2001). Drug court services for female offenders, 1996-1999: Evaluation of the Brooklyn Treatment Court. Washington: The Urban Institute.
23. Harrell, A., Newmark, L., Visher, C., & Castro, J. (2007). Final report on the evaluation of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration: Volume 1: The impact of JOD in Dorchester and Washtenaw County. Final report for the National Institute of Justice. Washington: The Urban Institute.
24. Huddleston, W., & Marlowe, D. B. (2011). Painting the current picture: A national report on drug courts and other problem-solving court programs in the United States. (Washington, D. C.: National Drug Court Institute).
25. Labriola, M., Bradley, S., O'Sullivan, C. S., Rempel, M., & Moore, S. (2009). A national portrait of domestic violence courts. Final Report to the National Institute of Justice. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
26. Latessa, E. J., Shaffer, D. I., & Lowenkamp, C. (2002). Outcome evaluation of Ohio's drug court efforts. Report submitted to the Ohio Office of Criminal Justice. Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati.
27. Luellen, J. K., Shadish, W. R., & Clark, M. H. (2005). Propensity scores: An introduction and experimental test. Evaluation Review, 29, 530-558.
28. Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Weller, J. M., Aborn, J. A., Linhares, R., Allen, T. L., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W. (2009). Baltimore City District Court Adult Drug Treatment Court 10-year outcome and cost evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. Portland: NPC Research.
29. Marlowe, D., DeMatteo, D. S., & Festinger, D. S. (2003). A sober assessment of drug courts. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 16(1), 113-128.
30. Marlowe, D. B., Festinger, D. S., Lee, P. A., Schepise, M. M., Hazzard, J. E. R., Merrill, J. C., Mulvaney, F. D., & McLellan, A. T. (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.
31. Miethe, T. D., Lu, H., & Reese, T. (2000). Reintegrative shaming and recidivism risks in drug court: Explanations for some unexpected findings. Crime and Delinquency, 46(4), 522-541.
32. Mitchell, O., Wilson, D. B., Eggers, E., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2012). Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: A meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40, 60-71.
33. National Institute of Corrections. (2010). A framework for evidence-based decision-making in local criminal justice systems. Silver Spring: Center for Effective Public Policy.
34. Nolan, J. L. (2001). Reinventing justice: The American drug court movement. (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press).
35. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods, 2nd edition. Newbury Park: Sage.
36. Rempel, M., & Farole, D. J. (2011). Impact methodology: Analytic strategy for producing unbiased estimates of drug court impact. (In S. B. Rossman, J. K. Roman, J. M. Zweig, M. Rempel & C. H. Lindquist (Eds.), The multi-site adult drug court evaluation: Volume 4: The impact of drug courts, Chapter 2 and Technical Appendix. (Washington, D. C.: The Urban Institute.).
37. Rempel, M., Fox-Kralstein, D., Cissner, A., Cohen, R., Labriola, M., Farole, D., Bader, A., & Magnani, M. (2003). The New York State adult drug court evaluation: Policies, participants, and impacts. Report submitted to the New York State Unified Court System and the U. S. Bureau of Justice Assistance. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
38. Roman, J., & DeStefano, C. (2004). Drug court effects and the quality of existing evidence. (In J. Butts & J. Roman (Eds.), Juvenile Drug Courts and Teen Substance Abuse. Washington, D. C.: The Urban Institute Press).
39. Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational studies, 2nd edition. New York: Springer.
40. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41-55.
41. Rubin, D. B. (1973). The use of matched sampling and regression adjustment to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 29(1), 184-203.
42. Rubin, D. B., & Thomas, N. (1996). Matching using estimated propensity scores: Relating theory to practice. Biometrics, 52, 249-264.
43. Shaffer, D. K. (2006). Reconsidering drug court effectiveness: A meta-analytic review. Dissertation: University of Cincinnati.
44. Shanahan, M., Lancsar, E., Haas, M., Lind, B., Weatherburn, D., & Chen, S. (2004). Cost-effectiveness analysis of the New South Wales adult drug court program. Evaluation Review, 28, 3-27.
45. Turner, S., Greenwood, P., Fain, T., & Deschenes, E. (1999). Perceptions of drug courts: How offenders view ease of program completion, strengths and weaknesses, and the impact on their lives. National Drug Court Institute Review, 2(1), 61-85.
46. Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A. & Linhares, R. (2007). Indiana drug courts: A summary of evaluation findings in five adult programs. (Portland, OR: NPC Research).
47. Wilson, D., Mitchell, O., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2006). A systematic review of drug court effects on recidivism. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 459-487.
48. Wolf, R. V. (2009). Race, bias, and problem-solving courts. National Black Law Journal, 21(1), 27-52.
49. Zweig, J., Rossman, S. B., & Roman, J. (2011). What's happening with drug courts: A National Portrait of adult drug courts. Washington: The Urban Institute.