Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:26 am
Time: 3:26 am
Results for alcohol treatment
6 results foundAuthor: Fell, James C. Title: An Evaluation of the Three Georgia DUI Courts Summary: In the spring of 2002, Georgia embarked on an exploratory demonstration program, establishing three driving-underthe- influence (DUI) courts funded as part of a cooperative agreement from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, with additional funding from the Department of Justice. Following the model of drug courts, three Georgia DUI courts (established in Chatham, Clarke, and Hall counties) were designed to address the underlying alcohol problems of repeat DUI offenders through continuous and frequent judicially supervised treatment, periodic alcohol and other drug testing, the use of graduated sanctions, and other appropriate rehabilitative services. A team comprised of a judge, court personnel, probation officials, and treatment providers met regularly to assess offender progress, and offenders met biweekly with the judge to report their progress. As of May 2006, 1,053 offenders were referred to the three Georgia DUI courts. Of these, 301 (29%) graduated from the program, 532 (51%) were active participants in the DUI courts, and 220 (21%) were either not in compliance or had been removed from the program. The overall retention rate was 79 percent over an approximate 4-year period. There is some evidence that the Georgia DUI court program has successfully encouraged lifestyle changes for the participating offenders and may be a viable alternative to traditional sanctioning. An impact evaluation showed that after 4 years of exposure, the DUI court graduates and terminated offenders combined (intent-to-treat group) showed a recidivism rate of 15 percent compared to 24 percent for a group of matched offenders from three similar counties in Georgia (contemporary group) and a 35 percent rate for matched offenders from the same counties as the DUI court who would have been eligible for the DUI court had it been in existence (retrospective group). Offenders who graduated from the DUI courts experienced a 9 percent recidivism rate while offenders who were terminated from the DUI courts for various reasons had a recidivism rate of 26 percent. The intent-to-treat group (DUI court graduates combined with the DUI court terminated offenders) had significantly lower recidivism rates: 38 percent lower than the contemporary group and 65 percent lower than the retrospective group. It is estimated that the DUI courts prevented between 47 and 112 repeat arrests during a 4-year period due to the reduced recidivism associated with them. Details: Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2011, 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 15, 2012 at http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811450.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811450.pdf Shelf Number: 123614 Keywords: Alcohol Courts (Georgia)Alcohol TreatmentDriving Under the Influence (DUI)RecidivismRepeat Offenders |
Author: Guerin, Paul Title: Evaluation of the Bernalillo County Metropolitan DWI/Drug Court Final Report Summary: As of July 31, 2001, 560 offenders have been served in the Bernalillo County Metropolitan DWI/Drug Court. The first client in the program began in July 1997. This report is divided into four major sections. In the first section, we briefly summarize four years of client demographic, criminal history, treatment, and other programmatic characteristics of individuals served in the Bernalillo County Metropolitan DWI/Drug Court Program. In the second section, we present an analysis of the data using logistic regression modeling. This technique allows us to present the profiles of successful and unsuccessful drug court participants. The third section reflects an indepth look into client recidivism for any new offense for drug court graduates compared to similar groups of successful and unsuccessful probation clients. Finally, an analysis of the difference between the costs of incarceration for drug court clients compared to a similar group of probation clients. The client level drug court information in this report is based solely upon automated data collected and entered by Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court. No attempt was made to verify or validate data quality since the scope of our contract does not include these responsibilities. Similarly, the comparison group data included in the latter sections of this report are drawn from automated records maintained by the Court. We did not attempt to reconstruct any missing, incomplete or incorrect data. Details: NM: The University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, Center for Applied Research and Analysis, 2002. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 15, 2012 at http://www.yourhonor.com/dwi/dwicourts/bernalillocoeval.pdf Year: 2002 Country: United States URL: http://www.yourhonor.com/dwi/dwicourts/bernalillocoeval.pdf Shelf Number: 123615 Keywords: Alcohol TreatmentDriving Under the Influence (DUI)Drug Courts (New Mexico)DWI Courts (New Mexico)RecidivismRepeat Offenders |
Author: Rhyne, Charlene Title: Clean Court Outcome Study Summary: In July 2001, Multnomah County Department of Community Justice was awarded a Targeted Capacity Expansion grant. SAMHSA and the Multnomah County Board of County Commissioners provided support for this post-adjudication drug court named Clean Court. The main thrust of this model was to improve offender referral to and completion of alcohol and drug treatment. The outcome study produced at grant end explores the impact of this endeavor on offender criminal, drug taking, stability and treatment outcomes. The outcome study utilized a quasi-experimental design with 130 research participants enrolled in Clean Court and 130 comparison group offenders who would have been eligible for Clean Court had it been in place in 2001. The research sample data included baseline and 12 month follow-up interviews that asked about social, stability, drug taking, criminal and health issues. Both groups had treatment and arrest data included in the analyses. Details: Portland, OR: Multnomah County Department of Community Justice, 2004. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 20, 2012 at http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/dcj/documents/clean_court_outcome_summary.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/dcj/documents/clean_court_outcome_summary.pdf Shelf Number: 123707 Keywords: Alcohol TreatmentDrug Courts (Oregon)Drug TreatmentDrug Treatment ProgramsRecidivism |
Author: Loman, Anthony L. Title: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the St. Louis City Adult Felony Drug Court Summary: The St. Louis Adult Felony Drug Court in the City of St. Louis is a pre-plea drug court that accepts individuals charged with drug crimes shortly after arrest. The program is voluntary. Participants must submit to regular breath testing for alcohol and urinalysis for drugs, make regular court appearances, find and maintain employment, and participate in prescribed drug and alcohol treatment. If they successfully complete the program, which averages nearly a year and a half in length, their original charges are dismissed. The St. Louis Adult Felony Drug Court began operating on April 7, 1997 in the City of St. Louis (22nd Judicial Circuit). The graduates selected for this study were the first 219 to successfully complete the program. A number of reforms, including a special program for youthful defendants, have been introduced since that time that are designed to enhance drug court outcomes. This group of graduates predates most of those reforms. Research indicating the benefits of drug courts has accumulated during the previous decade. However, there have been few controlled studies designed to demonstrate whether the value of those benefits to the community offset the costs of operating the programs. The primary goal of the present study was a cost-benefit analysis of the St. Louis Adult Felony Drug Court that compared the first 219 drug court graduates, who had completed drug court before 2001, with a carefully matched group of other individuals charged with drug crimes who were not offered drug court but completed probation. This is the final report of the cost-benefit analysis of the St. Louis Adult Felony Drug Court in the City of St. Louis. The drug court is a voluntary program designed to provide drug treatment and other services to individuals charged with felony drug or drug-related offenses within a program that involves close supervision and monitoring by drug court officials. The primary focus of the report is a comparison in monetary terms of the costs of such services with the benefits to participants who successfully complete the program and to the community as a whole. Details: St. Louis, MO: Institute for Applied Research, 2004. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 20, 2012 at http://www.iarstl.org/papers/SLFDCcostbenefit.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.iarstl.org/papers/SLFDCcostbenefit.pdf Shelf Number: 123708 Keywords: Alcohol TreatmentCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Courts (Missouri)Drug TreatmentDrug Treatment Programs |
Author: Hussain, Qusai Title: Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment within the Context of the Criminal Justice System: A Review of the Literature Summary: This literature review is submitted to the Victorian Department of Human Services' Drugs Policy and Services Branch, as the first part of the Forensic Workforce Training Program project and has been written by the Research, Development and Projects division at Caraniche Pty Ltd. The purpose of the literature review is two-fold. First, it provides a critical review of current best practice in forensic alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and secondly, it provides an analysis of the methodologies employed in developing and delivering effective training programs for AOD workers in the criminal justice system. These findings in combination with the Training Needs Analysis undertaken by the Youth Substance Abuse Service will provide the framework for the development of the Forensic Workforce Training Program. The literature review consisted of three phases, namely on-line database searches, web-based searches and specific website searches. The searches were guided by three content areas comprising: 1. current best practice principles in the provision of drug and alcohol treatment. 2. current best practice principles applied by AOD workers when working with forensic clients. 3. the nature, scope and efficacy of training programs developed for AOD workers working with forensic clients. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Department of Human Services' Drugs Policy and Services Branch, 2015. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2015 at: http://docs.health.vic.gov.au/docs/doc/49D540596D8A390CCA25789A007E9034/$FILE/fwt-litreview.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://docs.health.vic.gov.au/docs/doc/49D540596D8A390CCA25789A007E9034/$FILE/fwt-litreview.pdf Shelf Number: 135502 Keywords: Alcohol Abuse Alcohol TreatmentDrug Abuse and AdditionDrug TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment |
Author: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: Alcohol and other drug treatment services in Australia 2015-16 Summary: In 2015-16, about 796 alcohol and other drug treatment services provided just over 206,600 treatment episodes to an estimated 134,000 clients. The top 4 drugs that led clients to seek treatment were alcohol (32% of treatment episodes), cannabis (23%), amphetamines (23%), and heroin (6%). The proportion of episodes where clients were receiving treatment for amphetamines has continued to rise over the 5 years to 2015-16, from 12% of treatment episodes in 2011-12 to 23% in 2015-16. The median age of clients in AOD treatment services is rising, from 31 in 2006-07 to 33 in 2015-16. Details: Canberra: AIHW, 2017. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Treatment Series No. 29: Accessed July 5, 2017 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=60129559769 Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=60129559769 Shelf Number: 146509 Keywords: Alcohol TreatmentDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment |