John Roman
Senior Fellow At NORC, University Of Chicago
Key Findings
- The most effective drug courts worked with mid- to high-risk offenders.
- Drug courts were found to increase recidivism for low-risk participants.
- Regardless of the severity of addiction, drug courts generally produced similar results for all participants.
- Drug courts that only focused on admitting participants who exclusively were addicted to marijuana fared worse than courts that rehabilitated all types of drug addictions.
- Drug courts focusing on felony participants were able to reduce recidivism at higher rates than drug courts that focused on misdemeanor participants.
- The impact of drug courts did not vary by participant race, gender, or age.
- Successful drug courts served more felony participants, required guilty pleas to enter and had a pre-set jail/prison sentence for participants that failed.
- For high-need participants, courts with more intensive treatment, like residential living, were more successful than ones that were not intensive.
Description
In the article, “A Statewide Evaluation of New York’s Adult Drug Courts,” Roman and his co-authors examine the effectiveness of drug courts in New York and determine aspects of successful courts. Previous research has shown that drug courts do have the ability to reduce recidivism, but the effectiveness of these courts varies even within the state. To conduct their research, the authors used data from 86 drug courts in New York state to compare the sentencing and recidivism outcomes and determine the practices that worked. The results confirmed findings from previous research that the impact of each drug court was varied. The most effective drug courts worked with mid- to high-risk offenders, and drug courts were found to increase recidivism for low-risk participants. Regardless of the severity of addiction, drug courts generally produced similar results for all participants. Drug courts that only focused on admitting participants who exclusively were addicted to marijuana fared worse than courts that rehabilitated all types of drug addictions. Drug courts focusing on felony participants reduced recidivism at higher rates than drug courts that focused on misdemeanor participants. The impact of drug courts did not vary by participant race, gender, or age. Successful drug courts served more felony participants, required guilty pleas to enter and had a pre-set jail/prison sentence for participants that failed. For high-need participants, courts with more intensive treatment, like residential living, were more successful than ones that were not intensive. The researchers note that for future studies, more emphasis could focus on the procedural aspects of drug courts and the role that judges play in the rehabilitation outcomes.