Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 12:19 am
Time: 12:19 am
Results for drug courts (calgary, canada)
2 results foundAuthor: Hoffart, Irene Title: Calgary Drug Treatment Court: 2010 Evaluation Report Summary: The CDTC program seeks to accomplish several outcomes for its clients, for the service providers who are involved with the program and for the community as a whole. Service provider outcomes, including enhanced collaboration and communication as well as the enhanced knowledge of court processes and issues were measured and evaluated for this report. Also measured were pro-social lifestyle indicators as well as participant behavior, relapse and recidivism outcomes. This document represents a second evaluation report, summarizing information about CDTC activities from its inception up to July of 2010. The first evaluation report was produced in December of 2008 and covered the period between February 2007 and November 2008. Recommendations in the first report were directed at responding to clients’ treatment needs, defining roles and structures, clarifying screening policy and criteria, involving the community and seeking new funding. Nineteen program participants were interviewed and their perspectives were gathered regarding the functioning of the program and its effectiveness. Interviews with key program stakeholders helped reflect the perspective of those who work with CDTC on a regular basis. The interviews were used to help identify areas of strength and challenges with respect to program implementation and to gather opinions about the program’s effectiveness in achieving its goals. A total of 12 stakeholders were interviewed. The CDTC evaluation was based on multiple sources of data, was consistent with promising practices in drug court program evaluations and included both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods. As all other evaluations, however, this study was subject to several limitations, such as a comparatively small sample of participants (n=31), limited follow-up information available and comparatively short follow-up period, missing client information, and dated information. In the period between January 2007 and July 13, 2010, CDTC Crown reviewed a total of 141 applications. Over the four years of program operations, the Crown has consistently accepted between 36% and 30% of the applicants, or a total of 44 out of 141 applications received. The reasons for refusing admission were grouped in 18 different categories and often there were more than one reason for Crown decision. Perceived risk to the community was the most frequently cited reasons for non-acceptance (documented in over 55% of the cases) followed by offences for commercial gains cited as the reason for refusal in 14% of the cases. At the time of this report, there were a total of 21 clients who either graduated or were still in the program (68%). Further review showed that seventeen clients (about 56%) remained in the program for a year or longer and an additional 16% were in the program for a period between 9 months and a year. Calgary’s graduation rate of 16% is on the higher end of the graduation rates elsewhere in Canada that range between 7% and 16%. One of CDTC’s objectives is efficient movement of offenders through the process as measured by reduced time from charge to treatment initiation. Presently, there is no system in place that allows CDTC to measure the time required for screening activities, and, particularly, the time between the initial charge and Crown referral to program. It is recommended that a measurement system be developed to accurately capture the time between original charge and Crown referral to the program. There are some trends indicating interaction between client retention and some client characteristics. These characteristics include client age, client gender and client ethno cultural background. Visible minority clients are the most likely group to be discharged early (57% as compared to 40% and 39% of the other groups). Caucasian clients are also more likely to graduate or remain in the program for a long period of time (62% as compared to 60% and 43% of the other ethno-cultural groups). Recommendations to increase retention and success in the program include ensuring programming reflects the needs of younger clients (i.e., more structure, physical activity and attention to relationship issues) and adding addiction treatment programs that specifically target Aboriginal or immigrant clients. The recidivism analysis demonstrated that CDTC program leads to a reduction in criminal behaviour associated with drug use such as theft, assault and trafficking. This result is particularly consistent for CDTC graduates, but is also true for some of the discharged clients, particularly those who appear to have been more engaged with the program, as demonstrated by length of time sober, but also longer program stays and positive attitudes towards program participation. Conclusive recidivism analysis is only possible with continued and long-term access to recidivism information. Information that is currently collected describing CDTC outcomes does not include treatment indicators such as knowledge about substance abuse and drug avoidance skills as well as well-being indicators such as enhanced self-esteem, mental and physical health and enhanced social skills. The specific definition of those outcomes and indicators as well as the relevant tools and measures would need to be developed collaboratively with the treatment providers. Details: Calgary, Alberta: Synergy Research Group, 2011. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 9, 2013 at: http://calgarydrugtreatmentcourt.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/FinalEvaluationReport-2010.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Canada URL: http://calgarydrugtreatmentcourt.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/FinalEvaluationReport-2010.pdf Shelf Number: 128327 Keywords: Drug Courts (Calgary, Canada)Drug Offender TreatmentDrug OffendersProblem-Solving Courts |
Author: Hoffart, Irene Title: Calgary Drug Treatment Court: 2012 Evaluation Report Summary: Since the pilot start-up in May of 2007, the program was granted full Charity Status by Canada Revenue Agency, secured funding until March 2013 from Safe Communities and the City of Calgary and has expanded its roster of treatment agencies. The current CDTC Board of Directors includes representation from the City of Calgary, Calgary Police Services, Private-Corporate sector, Prosecution Branch of Canada, Court Manager and other Not for Profit sector organizations. This document represents a third evaluation report, summarizing information about CDTC activities from its inception up to March 2012. This document builds on the information collected in earlier evaluation reports. It describes and summarizes all evaluative information that has been collected since the inception of the program, including client documentation, client feedback, stakeholder feedback, and the Social Return on Investment Analysis (SROI). In addition to cumulative analysis, and to address specific requirements from the Safe Communities Innovation Fund (SCIF), the report also highlights 2011/2012 fiscal year program activities and results. The CDTC evaluation was based on multiple sources of data, was consistent with promising practices in drug court program evaluations and included both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods. The research that was gathered on evaluation of drug courts provided the context for the development of the evaluation methodology and the analysis of the results. As all other evaluations, however, this study was subject to several limitations, such as a comparatively small sample of participants, limited follow-up information available, comparatively short follow-up period, and missing and/or dated client information. During the period between January 2007 and March 2012, CDTC Crown reviewed a total of 244 applications. Over the five years of program operation, the Crown has accepted 31% or 76 of the applications received. In the period between April 1st 2011 and March 31st 2012 the CDTC Crown reviewed 64 applications and accepted a substantially higher proportion of the applicants (n=25 or about 40%). Reasons for rejection have changed substantially in the 2011/2012 fiscal year. The applicants in that fiscal year were more likely to be rejected as a result of serious mental health issues (39% as compared to 17%), but much less likely to be rejected because they were judged to be risk to the community (36% as compared to 62% of the applicants overall). This shift in the last fiscal year is a reflection of some changes in Crown screening criteria, better clarity among referring sources as to the CDTC eligibility requirements, a larger emphasis in the program on mental health screening to ensure a good fit between participant’s needs and CDTC services, and, in general, the experience gained over time by the court team. Twenty-eight clients have been formally discharged since program start up (a rate of about 42%). The clients were generally discharged for a combination of reasons which often included multiple relapses, behaviour problems in the program, their own choice to withdraw from the program, and/or a team decision that the services did not represent a good match for the needs of the participant. Fourteen clients (21%) successfully graduated and, as of August 17 2012, 25 clients (37%) were still in the program. Of those 17 clients who were in the program after one month in the 2011/2012 fiscal year, to-date 2 have been discharged, 3 graduated, 1 remains in program in Stage I and 11 clients or almost two-thirds of all those admitted in 2011/2012 (65%) are transitioning into the community in Stage II of the program. Efforts were made to complete a comparative analysis of the CDTC retention rates to the retention rates of other Canadian Drug Courts. Unfortunately, this has proven to be a daunting task because of several significant differences among the drug courts. Specifically, the CDTC program may differ from other programs in its admission of higher risk clients and more stringent rules governing discharge and graduation. These differences could lead to lower graduation and higher discharge rates compared to other drug courts. In addition, as compared to most other programs in Canada, CDTC did not receive early Federal funding and this lack of resources may impact CDTC retention rate. Given the limitations above, it is difficult to determine precisely how CDTC retention rates compare to the retention rates in other Canadian courts. However, even with all these limitations, Calgary’s discharge rate of about 42% is lower than the rates in other courts, specifically Toronto (84%) and Vancouver (51%), but is comparable to or higher than the rates in Winnipeg (17%) and in Edmonton (39%). Most notably, Calgary’s graduation rate of 21% is on the higher end of the graduation rates compared to other drug treatment courts elsewhere in Canada that range between 7% and 16%. In general, the information presented in this report demonstrates that CDTC is valuable to the community and the clients that it serves. Some highlights are as follows: •The Social Return on Investment analysis showed that, for every dollar spent, $2.25 are created in savings to the community in the first year of program and $6.50 are created in the second year. •Over half of the program participants remained drug free and sober for a period of 6 months or longer; •Clients describe the program as life changing and the CDTC staff and court team as supportive, caring and helpful; •A comprehensive employment program is in place that provides the participants with crucial work experience as well as long-term employment opportunities. 65% of CDTC participants were employed at the time of graduation and all of these clients have been long-term unemployed at the time of their entry into the program; •The program helps clients develop long-term stability by linking them with multiple supports such as individual and family counseling, skill development programs, money management services, medical, vision and dental services and services needed to acquire necessary identification; •For the engaged participants, the length of time between relapses increases and the nature of the relapse incidents becomes less serious over time. The issue of Governance and sustainable program funding is a barrier to CDTC capacity building and ongoing progressive success in deliverables. Similar programs embedded within the criminal justice system receive better access to services and resources for their designated offender population, than CDTC does as a Not-for-Profit Organization. The evaluation shows that some challenges continue to exist for some client groups in CDTC. There is a shortage of treatment beds for women in Calgary, younger clients tend to leave the program earlier, and the program is less successful with visible minority or First Nations, Métis and Inuit (FNMI) clients than with clients of European backgrounds. Expansion to include day treatment will help address some of these concerns by providing an opportunity to have gender-specific groups, groups for FNMI participants and groups for younger clients. The Day Program will also integrate best practices from both justice and treatment paradigms in a curriculum that is trauma informed and grounded in culturally appropriate approaches. Day programming will also provide treatment opportunities designed to stop the cycle of addictions in families. Those supports may include parenting classes, helping parent participants reconnect with their children and providing programming for women with children. Details: Calgary, Alberta: Calgary Drug Treatment Corut Society, 2012. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 9, 2013 at: http://calgarydrugtreatmentcourt.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/CDTC2012_FinalEvaluationReportOctober2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Canada URL: http://calgarydrugtreatmentcourt.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/CDTC2012_FinalEvaluationReportOctober2012.pdf Shelf Number: 128328 Keywords: Drug Courts (Calgary, Canada)Drug Offender TreatmentDrug OffendersProblem-Solving Courts |