Vigo County Drug Court Assessment
description
Transcript of Vigo County Drug Court Assessment
Vigo County Drug CourtAssessment
ISU Summer Research Experience 2013
Research Limitations
o Data self-reportedo Data availabilityo Criminal history datao Personnel changes during the study
periodo No comparison group
2007 NPC Report
• January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2004• 188 participants: 94 graduates, 78
terminated & 11 active • 24 month follow-up for recidivism
GENERAL FINDINGS
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Data
ISU 2013 Study Study Population: 259 participantsResearch Period: January 1, 2008-December 31, 2010.
NPC 2007 ReportNPC 2007 Study Population: 188 participantsNPC 2007 Research Period: January 1, 2002 – December 31, 2004
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Gender
Men Women0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
NPC 2007 Report
ISU 2013 Study
N=259
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Race
White Black Other0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Race 2007 NPC Report
White Black Hispanic Other0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
Race 2013 ISU Report
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Age
NPC 2007 Mean: 33 Years OldMedian: 31 Years OldRange: 18-56
ISU 2013Mean: 32.9 Years Old Median: 30 Years OldRange: 18-60
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Drug of Choice
Alcohol; 38%
Cocaine; 5%
Metham-phetamine; 38%
Marijuana; 18%
NPC 2007 Report
Alcohol; 70%Cocaine; 2%
Methamphetamine; 14%
Marijuana; 8%Prescription Drugs; 6%
ISU 2013 Report
N=188 N=131
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Primary Charge
Forgery1%
Theft/Conversion1%
Poss. Cocaine2% Dealing Marijuana
3% Poss. Precursor3%
Prescription Fraud4%
Poss. Controlled Substance
8%
Poss. Marijuana9%
Poss. Metham-
phetamine14%
OVWI54%
ForgeryTheft/ConversionPoss. CocaineDealing MarijuanaPoss. PrecursorPrescription FraudPoss. Controlled SubstancePoss. MarijuanaPoss. MethamphetamineOVWI
ISU 2013 StudyParticipants by Primary Charge
A small number of charges involved dealing offenses.
• Dealing Marijuana (6) • Dealing Cocaine (1)• Dealing Methamphetamine (1)
ISU 2013 StudyTime between Arrest, Plea and Exit*
Median number of days between arrest date and date of plea agreement.
N=214
78 DaysMedian number of days between plea agreement
date and exit date.N=229
748 Days*Data reliability concerns
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Graduation
Graduated Unsuccessful Still Active Overall Retention0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
NPC 2007 ISU 2013
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Retention Rate
Graduated Unsuccessful Still Active Overall Retention Rate
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
NPC 2007ISU 2013
ISU 2013 STUDYCHARACTERISTICS OF VCDC GRADUATES
GenderMilitary StatusEmployment Income
ISU 2013 StudyThe Successful Participant
• Successful Participant is defined as a graduate of the Vigo County Drug Court program.– A successful graduate MAY OR MAY NOT have had
additional sanctions or arrests placed upon them DURING their time in the program.
– Successful graduate means they completed all necessary requirements.
ISU 2013 StudyGender and VCDC Success
Overall Participation by Gender
Of the 259 participants, 188 or 73% of VCDC participants were men.
Seventy (70) or 27% of VCDC participants were women.*
*For one participant, this information was missing or unavailable.
VCDC Graduates by Gender
112
46
Gender & Graduation
Men Women
N=158
ISU 2013 StudyDoes Gender Matter?
During the study period:• 59.6% of male program participants
graduated from VCDC.• 65.7% of female program participants
graduated from VCDC.NPC 2007 Data did not include information on success based upon gender.6.9% of the men were still active & 2.9% of the women were active
ISU 2013 StudyMilitary Status and VCDC Success
No Yes Missing
Terminated 70 9 6
Successful 125 18 15
Active 13 3 0
ISU 2013 StudyMilitary Status
• 67% Prior Military- Graduated Successfully• Prior Military Status COULD BE PLAUSIBLE
explanation in terms of rate of success.– No significant literature found on this subject.
11.30%
79.10%
9.50%
Military Experience and Successful Participants
Military Experience Yes Military Experience No Military Experience Missing
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Employment
• Holding any type of employment/enrolled in school- 55.7% successful
Frequency Percent
None 129 50Part-Time 41 16Full-Time 80 31Student 4 2Missing 5 1
Total 259 100
N=259
ISU 2013 StudyEmployment at Enrollment
VCDC Graduates
Status Frequency Percentage
No Employment 67 42%
Part-Time 24 15%
Full-Time 61 39%
Student 3 2%
Missing 3 2%
67
24
61
3 3
Employment Status
No Employment Part-Time Full-Time Student Missing
N=158
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Employment
• Employment CAN BE CONSIDERED significant in terms of rate of success.
• Program graduates are more likely to be of higher socioeconomic status– Including steady employment
• Gliksman, L., Newton-Taylor, & Patra, J. (2009). Toronto Drug Treatment Court: Participant Intake Characteristics as Predictors of "Successful" Program Completion. Journal of Drug Issues, 39(4), 965-987.
• Hartley , R. E., & Phillips, R. C. (2001). "Who graduates from drug courts?" Correlates of client success. 26(1), 107-119.
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Income
Total Participants- Income Frequency
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Income
• Income CAN BE CONSIDERED significant in terms of rate of success. – $30,000+ Participants who exited VCDC during study period - 85% Successful– Employment/Income= Likelihood of successful completion
• Schiff, M., & Terry, W. C. (1997). Predicting graduation from Broward County's dedicated drug court treatment court. Justice System Journal, 19, 291-310.
Income Frequency % of 158 Successful$0-4999 68 43
$5000-9999 13 8$10000-14999 16 10$15000-19999 9 6$20000-24999 14 9$25000-29999 7 4
$30000+ 29 18Missing 2 1.3
Total 158 100
ISU 2013 STUDYTHE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANT
AgeInsuranceEducationDrug of Choice
ISU 2013 StudyImpact of Age on Success
Age of Unsuccessful Participants
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 35 37 38 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 530
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ISU 2013 StudyImpact of Age on Success
• Specifically, older clients are more likely to complete treatment with positive outcomes than are younger clients in rural areas. (Mateyoke-Scrivner, 2004)– Mateyoke-Scrivner, A., Webster, J., Staton, M., & Leukefeld, C. (2004). Treatment Retention Predictors
of Drug Court Participants in a Rural State. American Journal Of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 30(3), 605-625.
ISU 2013 StudyInsurance and Success
Not Insured73%
Insured15%
Missing12%
Not InsuredInsuredMissing
Unsuccessful
Not Insured55%
Insured36%
Missing9%
Not Insured
Insured
Missing
Successful
ISU 2013 StudyUnsuccessful Participants
Missing
Bachelor's Degree
Associates Degree
High School /GED
No High School
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Education Level
N = 85
ISU 2013 StudyEducation Level and Success
• This study found that education could be a positive factor like employment. – (Hartley and Phillips, 2001)
• Hartley, R.E., & Phillips, R.C. (2001). Who graduates from Drug Courts? Correlates of client success. American Journal of Criminal Justice: AJCJ, 26(1), 107-119
• Education/Vocational resources enhanced retention and assisted participants in becoming financially independent. – (Mateyoke-Scrivner et at., 2004)
• Mateyoke-Scrivner, A., Webster, J., Staton, M., & Leukefeld, C. (2004). Treatment Retention Predictors of Drug Court Participants in a Rural State. American Journal Of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 30(3), 605-625.
ISU 2013 StudyDrug of Choice
Alcohol46%
Marijuana13%Co
caine3%
Prescription
Drugs5%
Methamphetamine33%
Terminated Participants Successful Participants
Alcohol77%
Marijuana6%
Cocaine3%
Prescription Drugs
8%
Methamphetamine6%
ISU 2013 StudyRecidivism
• Recidivism Definition– New charges filed in the State of Indiana after
the date of initial participation.
• Recidivism information designated as – During VCDC program participation– After VCDC program participation• Criminal History Information collected June 30, 2013
– 2.5 year period
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Recidivism
New Charge during participation
New charge after participation
No charge during or after participation
Missing
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
GraduateTerminated
2013 ISU StudyVCDC Program Graduates
New Charge during partic-
ipation15%
New charge af-ter participa-
tion21%
No charge dur-ing or after
participation63%
Missing1%N=158
Recidivism Rates of VCDC Program Graduates
ISU 2013 StudyUnsuccessful Participants
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
0.46
0.27 0.25
0.02
Recidivism Rates of Unsuccessful VCDC Participants
N=85
ISU 2013 StudyParticipant Recidivism
New Charge during participation
New charge after participation
No charge during or after participation
Missing
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
GraduateTerminated
ISU 2013 StudyComparison of Recidivism Rates
VCDC Program Graduates
ISU 2013 Study• 21% Post-Graduation Recidivism Rate
2007 NPC Study• 7% Post-Graduation Recidivism Rate8
National Institutes of Justice Multi-Site Survey• 52% National Recidivism Rate Average
– Researchers used the FBI Criminal Database, which gave all arrest nationally.
RECOMMENDATIONS
ISU 2013 StudyRecommendations
• Standardizing information• Improving education and employment– May include investigation of education level and
employment status upon graduation/termination
• Evaluating shift to alcohol-related addiction and charges.