Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:36 pm
Time: 8:36 pm
Results for problem-solving courts (vermont, u.s.)
1 results foundAuthor: Wicklund, Peter Title: Chittenden County Rapid Intervention Community Court: Outcome Evaluation Summary: The Chittenden Rapid Intervention Community Court (hereafter the “RICC”) is a program that is available to non-violent offenders whose crimes have been driven by untreated addiction or mental illness. The program is designed as a pre-charge system through which offenders are quickly assessed using evidence-based screening tools and offered diversion to community programming, services, and community-based accountability programs. The RICC staff work closely with the Chittenden County State’s Attorney and the Burlington Police Department to identify individuals who may benefit from a rapid intervention program, without which they may reoffend and engage in conduct that is costly both to them and to the community. The Burlington Community Justice Center accepts referrals from RICC for individuals who agree to meet with a restorative justice panel to take responsibility for the crime, learn how individuals and the community were impacted, and take steps to repair the harm caused by the crime. An outcome evaluation attempts to determine the effects that a program has on participants. In the case of the RICC the objective of this outcome evaluation was to determine the extent to which the RICC reduced recidivism among program participants. An indicator of post-program criminal behavior that is commonly used in outcome evaluations of criminal justice programs is the number of participants who recidivate -- that is, are convicted of a crime after they complete the program. An analysis of the criminal history records of the 654 subjects who entered the RICC from September 14, 2010 to December 5, 2012, was conducted using the Vermont criminal history record of participants as provided by the Vermont Criminal Information Center at the Department of Public Safety. The Vermont criminal history records on which the recidivism analysis was based included all charges and convictions prosecuted in a Vermont Superior Court – Criminal Division that were available as of September 17, 2012. The criminal records on which the study was based do not contain Federal prosecutions, out-of-state prosecutions, or traffic tickets. For this evaluation, the study cohort was divided into three segments – subjects who successfully completed the RICC program (n=470), a segment that did not complete the program and were returned to docket (n=71), and a segment that were currently in the RICC and pending outcome (n=113). Summary of Conclusions 1. The RICC appears to be a promising approach for reducing recidivism among participants who successfully complete the program. Only 7.4% of the successful participants of the RICC were reconvicted of a crime after leaving the program. In comparison, 25.4% of participants who were unsuccessful at completing the RICC were convicted of a new crime after leaving the program. Although this is a significantly higher rate of recidivism compared to the successful participants, the rate is still relatively low. This indicates that even an abbreviated exposure to the benefits of the RICC may provide a positive influence on those participants who do not complete the program. 2. The RICC was shown to be very effective in producing successful participants that remained conviction free in the community during their first year after leaving the program. Approximately 93% of the successful participants of the RICC had no arrest for any new criminal conviction within one year after program completion. The unsuccessful participants had a significantly lower success rate – only 78% remained conviction free within the first year after leaving the program. 3. The RICC appears to be a promising approach for reducing the number of post-program reconvictions for participants who successfully complete the RICC. The successful participants of the RICC had a significantly lower reconviction rate of 15 per 100 participants compared to 48 reconvictions per 100 participants for those who did not complete the program. 4. A large majority of the recidivists who completed the RICC were reconvicted in Chittenden County (91%), followed by Franklin and Addison counties. The recidivists who did not complete the RICC showed a similar pattern with most of their crimes occurring in Chittenden County (76%), and the remaining occurring in Franklin, Addison, Grand Isle, and Lamoille counties. 5. Comparing the demographic and criminal history profiles between the subjects who were successful in completing the RICC and those who were unsuccessful revealed no significant differences. This leads to the conclusion that the reduced recidivism rates observed for the successful participants compared with those who were unsuccessful at completing the program were more likely due to the benefits of the RICC program rather than to differences in characteristics of the study segments. Details: Northfield Falls, VT: Vermont Center for Justice Research, 2013. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 2, 2013 at: http://www.vcjr.org/reports/reportscrimjust/reports/chittricc_files/Chitt%20Rapid%20Referral%20Rpt2.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.vcjr.org/reports/reportscrimjust/reports/chittricc_files/Chitt%20Rapid%20Referral%20Rpt2.pdf Shelf Number: 128188 Keywords: Community CourtsDrug OffendersMentally Ill OffendersProblem-Solving Courts (Vermont, U.S.)Recidivism |