NCJ Number
237313
Date Published
June 2009
Length
82 pages
Annotation
This report describes the Baltimore City District Court Adult Drug Treatment Court (DTC) and its participants over time, evaluates the effectiveness of the DTC in reducing recidivism, and determines the cost-benefits of drug treatment court participation.
Abstract
In almost all analyses, DTC graduates had better outcomes (lower recidivism rates, fewer new arrests) than non-graduates and the comparison group during a 10-year follow-up period. When examining all DTC participants (graduates and non-graduates together), the results were less consistent. Participants who started DTC later in the program's history were more likely to graduate. Also, graduates had significantly fewer months of program participation on average than non-graduates. Younger participants and individuals with more arrests prior to DTC participation were more likely to reoffend. Of the recidivism study cohort, 28 percent successfully graduated, and 72 percent were unsuccessful. Overall, the DTC resulted in cost savings, especially for program graduates. Outcomes for DTC participants over 10 years cost the criminal justice system $61,756 per participant, which is $2,945 less than for comparison group members. Recidivism outcome analyses were based on a cohort of 694 DTC participants who entered the DTC program from January 1, 2005, through July 31, 2008, and a comparison group of 860 offenders eligible for DTC but who received traditional probation rather than DTC. Their criminal histories were examined prior to DTC participation and after their entry into the DTC program for the following 10 years. The DTC was established in 1994, with the goal of identifying people with a substance abuse addiction and offering them a program with treatment rather than incarceration. The program focuses on individuals with misdemeanor charges. The DTC is implemented through a collaborative process between multiple agencies, including the court, State's attorney, public defender, probation, law enforcement, and substance abuse treatment agencies. 12 tables, 12 figures, 14 references, and appended examples of rewards and sanctions used by other drug courts and suggested list of data elements for drug treatment court programs