|
Talking Points/Statistics on Drug Courts
- In the late 1980s, drug courts were developed in response to the costly
and time consuming approach to dealing with non-violent, substance abusing
offenders that were overwhelming the criminal justice system. In contrast
to the traditional "revolving door" approach, drug courts
provide an effective solution to drug and drug-related crime through
the innovative use of comprehensive supervision, drug testing, judicial
monitoring and sanctions and incentives.
- Drug courts are the most effective means of controlling the behavior
and drug addiction of drug-using offenders.
- A drug court is a special court that is given the responsibility to
handle cases involving drug-using offenders through comprehensive supervision,
drug testing, treatment services and immediate sanctions and incentives.
Drug court programs bring the full weight of all intervenors (judges,
prosecutors, defense counsel, substance abuse treatment specialists,
probation officers, law enforcement and correctional personnel, educational
and vocational experts, community leaders and others) to bear, forcing
offenders to deal with their substance abuse problems.
- The design and structure of drug court programs are developed at the
local level, to reflect the unique strengths, circumstances and capacities
of each community. Since 1989, the drug court phenomenon has been sweeping
the nation. Currently, there are over 1,500 drug court programs.
- Since the 12 original drug courts formed the National Association
of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) in May of 1994, the drug court field
has grown to include more than 10,000 practitioners.
- Over 400,000 persons have entered drug court programs. Many of these
programs have achieved remarkable success in reducing the levels of
drug abuse, incarceration and criminal recidivism among drug-using offenders.
- Whether located in a small jurisdiction (population under 200,000)
or a large metropolitan area (population over 750,000), retention rates
for drug courts remain high, from 65% to 85%. (Looking at a Decade of
Drug Courts, 1999)
- As of June, 2001, there were 2,100 drug-free babies born to drug court
participants enrolled in drug court programs. (American University (AU)'s
Drug Court Activity Update: Summary Information on All Programs and
Detailed Information on Adult Drug Courts, 2001)
- Drug courts are tough on crime. Fifty-six percent (56%) of drug court
judges are former prosecutors, while 23% are former public defenders.
As reported in the 1999 Federal Criminal Case Processing, drug prosecutions
have comprised an increasing proportion of the federal criminal caseload
- from 21% of defendants during 1982 to 36% during 1999. (BJS, 1999)
- In 2001, drug offenders accounted for 20.4% of sentenced state inmates
and 55% of sentenced federal inmates. (BJS, 2002)
- Juveniles under age 16 were responsible for 40% (73,500) of drug law
violation cases but almost 60% of delinquency cases in 1997. (BJS, 1997)
- More than 80% of juvenile drug court participants have returned to,
or remained in, school full-time as a result of the program participation
- a significantly higher rate than would have been expected if the juvenile
and family rug court program had not been established. (Juvenile and
Family Drug Courts: An Overview, 1998)
- Drug-using offenders spend an average of three months in jail and
24 months on probation living in our communities. (BJS, 1998)
- An individual who has a severe addiction commits nearly 63 crimes
a year. (The Rebirth of Rehabilitation: Promises and Perils of Drug
Courts, 2000)
- Between 1984 and 1989, the number of defendants charged with a drug
offense in federal courts increased from 11,854 to 29,306. (Federal
Drug Offenders, 1999 with Trends, 2001)
- Drug use is substantially reduced among defendants while they are
participating in drug court programs. For most participants who graduate
from the programs (ranging from 50% to 65%), drug use is eliminated
altogether. (Summary Assessment of the Drug Court Experience)
- Americans spent $64 billion on illegal drugs in 2000. (What America's
Users Spend on Illegal Drugs, 1988 - 2000, 2001)
- Drug testing of arrestees at numerous jails across the nation establishes
that 66% of all arrestees test positive for illegal drugs. (Drug Use
Forecasting Study, US Department of Justice, 1996)
- Most drug court participants have at least a 15-year history of drug
use. (AU's Drug Court Program Survey, 1997)
- The first national survey of adults on probation, conducted in 1995,
reported that 14% of probationers were on drugs when they committed
their offenses. (BJS, 1995)
- In 1997 19% of state prisoners and 16% of federal inmates said they
committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs. (BJS, 1997)
- In 1998 an estimated 138,000 convicted jail inmates (36%) were under
the influence of drugs at the time of the offense. (BJS, 2000)
- An estimated 61,000 (16%) convicted jail inmates said they had committed
their offense to get money for drugs. (Drug Use, Testing and Treatment
in Jails, 2000)
- Eighty-seven percent (87%) of drug court programs target individuals
with moderate to severe drug abuse problems. (AU Drug Court Survey,
1997)
- Drug offenders accounted for 72% of the overall increase in the federal
prison population between 1990 and 1996. The traditional adversarial
system of justice was ineffective at addressing the drug abuse and in
some cases actually contributed to drug problems. Extensive research
confirms that treatment is the most cost effective way to combat drug
abuse and drug-related crime. (Drug Court: A Revolution in Criminal
Justice, Drug Strategies, 1999)
- Drug courts typically require:
1. Weekly drug testing;
2. At least, bi-weekly personal appearances before a drug court judge;
and
3. Personal supervision and treatment contacts at least three times
each week.
- Drug court participants, more than 25% of whom had been in at least
one treatment program during the previous three years and had left that
program unsuccessfully, named three factors that led to their success
in drug court programs (An Honest Chance: Perspectives on Drug Courts,
2002):
1. Close supervision and encouragement by judges
2. Intensive treatment
3. Ongoing monitoring
- The recently updated study from Columbia University's prestigious
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) is the first
to look at the effectiveness of the drug court model on offenders while
in a program, as compared to other forms of community supervision. (Research
on Drug Courts: A Critical Review, 2001 Update, The National Center
on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University, June,
2001)
- The study concludes that drug courts provide closer, more comprehensive
supervision and much more frequent drug testing and monitoring during
the program, than other forms of community supervision. In addition,
it found that drug use and criminal behavior are substantially reduced
while offenders are participating in drug court. (CASA, 2001)
- Over 70% of all drug-using offenders who have entered drug court programs
since their inception in 1989 have either successfully completed or
are currently participating in a drug court program. (General Accounting
Office, 1997)
- Less than ½ of those on probation have ever been drug tested
during their probation term. (BJS, 1995)
- Less than ¼ of all probationers currently are being drug tested.
(BJS, 1995)
- Only 45% of those probationers reporting prior drug use are being
drug tested during their first year of probation. (BJS, 1995)
- Less than 5% of probationers are in intensive supervision programs.
(BJS, 1995)
- Overall, about 2/3 of probationers, approximately 2 million persons,
may be characterized as alcohol or drug-involved offenders. (BJS, 1995)
- Probationers account for 58% of adults under correctional supervision,
including persons held in jails and prisons and also on parole. (BJS,
1995)
- Less than 1/3 of those placed on probation have a drug testing condition
as part of their probation. (BJS, 1995)
- Seventy percent (70%) of drug court programs already have probation
and post-plea based programs that work with offenders with more extensive
drug usage and criminal histories (AU Drug Court Survey, 1997)
- The research literature confirms the importance of program retention
and completion for positive outcomes - participants "who stay in
treatment longer and who complete the program regime are more likely
to have better outcomes (reductions in drug use and criminal behavior)
than clients who drop-out of services." (National Drug Court Institute
Review, "Drug Treatment: The Case for Coercion," Sally Satel,
MD, Vol. III, Issue I, Winter, 2000)
- "In a study comprising two models of residential services . .
. , researchers found that completion of the treatment regime, regardless
of the type of services, was the factor affecting the reduced positive
urines and arrests." (Satel, 2000).
- "...during even brief exposures to treatment almost all addicts
will use fewer drugs and commit fewer crimes than they otherwise would,
which means that almost any treatment produces benefits in excess to
cost." (Satel, 2000)
- "Beyond a 90 day threshold, treatment outcomes improved in direct
relationship to the length of time spent in treatment, with one year
generally found to be the minimum effective duration of treatment."
(Satel, 2000)
- "The second major finding was that coerced patients tended to
stay in treatment longer." (Satel, 2000)
- Drug courts generate savings in jail costs, especially for pretrial
detention. In addition, cost savings were noted in probation, supervision,
police overtime and other criminal justice costs. (National Drug Court
Institute Review, "Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review -
1999 Update," Steven Belenko, Ph.D., Vol. II, Issue II, Winter,
1999)
- In Washington, DC, a year of drug court costs $1,800 to $4,400 per
participant This compares to at least $20,000 per year to jail an offender.
(Notre Dame Law Review, "Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Drug
Treatment Court Movement: Revolutionizing the Criminal Justice System's
Response to Drug Abuse and Crime in America," Vol. 72, Issue 2,
January, 1999)
- The Conference of Chief Justices and the Congress of State Court Administrators
passed a joint resolution endorsing drug courts in 1999.
- Prior to that endorsement, the National District Attorneys' Association
and the National Sheriffs' Association passed resolutions in favor of
drug courts.
- Researchers estimate that more than 50% of defendants convicted of
a drug possession will recidivate within 2 to 3 years. Recidivism among
all drug court participants has ranged from 5 to 28% and less than 4%
for drug court graduates. (Looking
at a Decade of Drug Courts, 1999)
- From 1988 to 1997, the number of juvenile drug violation cases increased
125%. (Juvenile
Court Statistics, 1997)
- An estimated 61,000 (16%) convicted jail inmates committed their offenses
to get money for drugs. (Drug
Use, Testing, and Treatment in Jails, 2000)
- President Bush stated the following:
Drug courts are an effective and cost efficient way to keep non-violent
drug offenders commit to a rigorous drug treatment program in lieu
of prison. By leveraging the coercive power of the criminal justice
system, drug courts can alter the behavior of non-violent, low-level
drug offenders through a combination of judicial supervision, case
management, mandatory drug testing, and treatment to ensure abstinence
from drugs, and escalating sanctions. (Blueprint for New Beginnings,
February 28, 2001)
- Representative of over 17,000 annual drug court graduates nationwide,
the NIJ Report, entitled "Recidivism Rates For Drug Court Graduates:
National Based Estimates" states that recidivism rates for drug
court participants one year after graduation is a mere 16.5 percent
and only 27.5 percent after two years.
- The NIJ report also found that participants from 38 drug courts throughout
the country have recidivism rates lower than ten percent on year after
graduation.
|