Effectiveness And Efficiency-Drug Courts Study

Effectiveness/Efficiency- Drug Courts This section’s goal is to show the effectiveness and efficiency of 4 studies on the previously outlined programs. To begin, Federal funds paid for a study named The Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE), the study measures the effectiveness of adult drug courts. Since drug courts aim at keeping addicts away from drugs and out of jail, the purpose of the study was to “evaluate the effects of drug courts on substance use, crime, and other practices,” and to note when outcomes proved positive (Rossman, Rempel, Roman, Zweig, Lindquist, Green, Downey, Yahner, Bhati, Farole, Jr., 2011, p. 1). Authors of the report include Shelli B. Rossman, Michael Rempel, John K. Roman, Janine M. Zweig, Christine H.

this study used evidence from 23 drug courts and 6 comparison sites. With the hypothesis “that drug court participants have lower rates of drug use and criminal activity and show improved functioning compared to similar offenders not offered drug court,” the study will offer information on whether or not the drug courts are working enough to be widely used. To see whether the drug courts were performing or not, 7 outcomes measured drug use, criminal activity, incarceration, socioeconomic status, mental health, family support, and homelessness (Rossman, 2011, p.20). Information found through the study points to reduced drug relapse, reduced criminal behavior, and increased court appearance (Rossman, 2011, p. 3-4). Overall, through the MADCE study, results proved that those who go through Drug Courts have less chance of relapse, commit less crime, and Drug Courts even “return a net benefit of $5,680 to $6,208 per participant” (Rossman, 2011, p. 257-258). These results are exactly what the nation and drug addicts need, and a reform for drug incarceration starts

After analyzing 69 adult Drug Courts, every practice found there was higher recidivism reduction compared to another program (NREPP , 2017, p. 4). Through studies on individual participants, SAMHSA found that “drug courts ‘significantly reduced the incidence of incarceration from a base rate of 50% to roughly 42% for jail, 38% for prison, and 32% for overall incarceration’” (NREPP, 2017, p. 6). Drug Courts save people from getting put in jail and this study shows how it works in keeping them out after completion. Low recidivism percentages are another huge plus to the courts. Recidivism reduction is the goal here, and percentages in the study ranged from 5-164% reduction rates (NREPP, 20137, p. 4). Other benefits this study found from Drug Courts are ‘reductions in drug and alcohol misuse and improvements in socioeconomic outcomes (i.e., employment and education), family relationships, and access to needed financial and social services” (NREPP, 2017, p. 6). In all, both of these studies point towards the positives of Drug Courts and give reason as to why the funding should be plentiful and continued for further success in incarceration reduction