Reentry Court New Castle County Delaware (From Partnerships for Building Safer Communities: Best Practices and Promising Approaches, Conference Papers of the National TASC 8th Conference on Drugs and Crime, P 33-40, 2001)

• NCJ Number: 191657
• Author(s): Richard S. Gebelein
• Date Published: October 2001
• Length: 8 pages
• Corporate Author: National TASC (Treatment Accountability for Safer Communities)
• Sale Source: National TASC (Treatment Accountability for Safer Communities)
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Conference Material
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: See NCJ-191658-59 for additional conference papers.

Annotation

This conference paper presented at the 2001 Eighth National TASC Conference on Drugs and Crime in Orlando, Florida, presents an overview of the New Castle County, Delaware Reentry Court Program.

Abstract

The County’s Drug Court became operational in 1994 under the TASC case management model, coordinating the provision of substance abuse treatment, coordination with probation, and coordination with the court. The Drug Court model was seen as aiding in the reentry process with its supervised probation after release, imposed sanction flexibility, and ability to modify imposed sentences. From the Drug Court model came the Reentry Court of New Castle County. The pilot program began with participants selected at random 6 to 9 months away from release. It used the TASC management plan and excluded sex offenders and those not residing in the county. Substance abuse treatment plans are developed by TASC managers and probation officers offer tight supervision. There are two phases of the program: Phase I lasts 6 months and takes the place of the last 6 months of the custodial sentence and Phase II is a more relaxed probation supervision with continued treatment. Following these phases is a court status hearing and a 6-month graduation from Phase II. Early observations include: (1) active case management provided valuable assistance in successful efforts; (2) enhanced supervision resulted in early return to custody; (3) lack of resources support a positive reentry to the community; and (4) active case management is essential to program success.