Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Utah Drug Court Annual Report 2010

Utah Drug Court Annual Report 2010

Ratings: (0)|Views: 121|Likes:
Published by State of Utah
Please visit http://www.dsamh.utah.gov for more information.
Please visit http://www.dsamh.utah.gov for more information.

More info:

Published by: State of Utah on Feb 22, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





195 North 1950 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116801-538-3939www.dsamh.utah.govOctober 2010
Utah’s Drug Courts:
Drug Court Works! Data collected by DSAMHshows:Over 12,000 Utahns have participated, or areparticipating in Drug Courts in UtahDrug Court participation has grown 34%from 2001 to 2010Almost 7,000 Utahns have graduated from aDrug Court64% of participants graduated from DrugCourt in
scal year (FY) 2010 compared toapproximately 39% of the general treatmentpopulation who completed treatment success-fully in FY201073% of participants received outpatient treat-ment in FY201017% of participants received intensive outpa-tient treatment in FY201010% of participants received residential treat-ment in FY2010Drug Courts and Drug Boards, through the coordinat-ed effort of the judiciary, prosecution, legal defense,probation, law enforcement, social services and thetreatment community, offer nonviolent, drug abusingoffenders intensive court-supervised drug treatmentas an alternative to jail or prison. These intensiveservices are provided in coordination among the par-ticipating agencies to those individuals identi
ed athigh risk for recidivism and in high need of substanceabuse treatment services. Successful completion of Drug Court results in dropped charges, vacated or re-duced sentences, or rescinded probation. This AnnualReport, required by Utah Code Ann. §51-9-201, sum-marizes the activities of Utah’s Drug Court and DrugBoard programs.
Evolution of Drug Courts in Utah
During the mid 1990s local jurisdictions began re-sponding to the cycle of recidivism commonly identi-
ed among drug offenders. This response included thecreation of the
rst Drug Courts in Utah. As researchon the bene
ts and effectiveness of Drug Courts hasgrown, so has the number of Drug Courts in Utah.Over the past 12 years Utah’s Drug Courts have in-creased from 2, in 1996, to over 32 operating statewidetoday. The Department of Human Services, Divisionof Substance Abuse and Mental Health, providesfunding for 29 Drug Courts.Legislation that created and funded Utah’s DrugCourts was enacted in 2000. The creation of theDrug Court Program, criteria for participation andfunding disbursements are found in Utah CodeAnn. §78A-5-201. Appropriation of Tobacco Set-tlement funds to Drug Courts and Drug Boardsare addressed in Utah Code Ann. §51-9-201. TheLegislature also appropriates State General Fundsto support Drug Courts. Additional funding infor-mation can be found on page 4 of this report.
Drug Court/Drug Board Program
Annual Report to the Utah Legislature, October 2010
State Totals - Drug Court ParticipantsReceiving Services July 1
8058349161,0991,1581,2741,3161,4811,2981,22502004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6002001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
2Using the signi
cant amount of research on DrugCourt effectiveness as a guide, the Division of Sub-stance Abuse and Mental Health (Division) and theAdministrative Of 
ce of the Courts (AOC) have di-rected their combined efforts towards Drug Court ac-countability and quality. Drug Courts are funded bythe Division through and application process and sub-sequent contract for a three year period. Contracts re-quire Adult Felony Drug Courts to follow the 10 KeyComponents identi
ed by the National Associationof Drug Court Pro-fessionals, FamilyDependency DrugCourts to follow theCharacteristics of Family/DependencyDrug Courts identi-
ed by the Centerfor Substance AbuseTreatment and theBureau of JusticeAssistance, and Juvenile Drug Courts to follow theStrategies used by a Juvenile (Youth) Drug Court asidenti
ed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Con-tracts also require Drug Courts to target eligibility to-wards individuals who are at high risk for continuedcriminal behavior (High Risk) due to their continueddrug and/or alcohol use (High Need).During SFY 2010 the Division and AOC monitoredcontracted Drug Courts to these standards and pro-vided technical assistance where indicated. Addition-ally, AOC has formalized a certi
cation process re-quiring all Drug Courts to meet minimum standards inorder to be identi
ed by the Judiciary as a Drug Court.Through this coordinated effort Drug Courts acrossthe state became more focused on their day-to-daypractices ensuring participants’ due process rights aremaintained throughout their Drug Court experience.
Are Drug Courts Effective?
The general effectiveness of Drug Courts on reduc-ing recidivism has been consistently established instudies from across the country (Belenko, 2001). TheGovernment Accountability Of 
ce’s (GAO) review of adult Drug Court evaluations (2005) found that moststudies have shown reductions in recidivism both dur-ing program and post-program (up to one year).Utah Drug Courts have been the subject of at least11 independent evaluations. All of the independent re-ports showed positive outcomes. Studies consistentlyshow lower recidivismfor Drug Court graduatesthan non-Drug Courtcomparison groups andlower recidivism forDrug Court graduatesthan unsuccessful cli-ents. Citations for all11 of these independentevaluations are listed atthe end of this report.Drug Courts also reduce costs. The
ndings of theInstitute of Applied Research, an independent socialscience research
rm, indicated that nonviolent drugoffenders who were placed in treatment instead of prison generally earned more money and took lessfrom the welfare system than those who successfullycompleted probation.Drug Courtsare an effectivemode of treat-ment and super-vision for meth-amphetaminedependent of-fenders. As aseasoned judge,I have foundthat frequentand immediateresponses arethe most effective way to deal with the methamphet-amine addict. In addition, it is essential through treat-ment and court intervention to get to the underlyingcause of the addiction and deal with the physiologi-cal and psychological reasons for the addiction. DrugCourts are the most effective way to deal with theseproblems—The Honorable Dennis Fuchs, Salt LakeCity, Utah (2005).
 Drug court retains of- fenders in treatment.The research suggests that retention is the most critical factor in successful outcomes.(Marlowe, DeMatteo, & Festinger, 2003)
To put it bluntly, we know that drug courts outperform virtually all other strategies that have been attempted for drug-involved offenders.(Marlowe, DeMatteo, & Festinger, 2003)What you learn is that drug courts, which involve treat- ment for all the individuals and real support–along with sanctions when they fail–are a more cost effective method  of dealing with drug prob-lems than either probation or prison. (Institute for Applied  Research, 2004)
Types of Drug Courts in Utah
Adult Felony Drug Courts:
Adult Felony DrugCourts focus upon individual adult offenders chargedwith a felony drug crime. Though restrictions mayvary by location and program, Adult Felony DrugCourt is generally available to:Certain nonviolent offenders charged with afelony drug crime. These crimes include forgedprescriptions, possession with intent, and felo-ny possession of a controlled substanceOffenders with at least one previous drug con-viction for which a sentence was givenOffenders who are in the country legally
Juvenile Drug Courts:
Juvenile Drug Courts providean alternative approach for dealing with young drugoffenders. They involve the family and school systemin addition to Judicial, Case Management and Treat-ment involvement. This increased level of commu-nity involvement offers additional resources to assistcourts as they address adolescent developmental andfamily concerns as well as substance abuse problems.Juvenile Drug Courts require participants and theirfamilies to attend court as often as weekly. Partici-pants are also required to attend treatment, school andcommunity service. Treatment services are individu-ally tailored and developmentally appropriate.
Dependency Drug Courts:
Family Drug Courts—also known as Family Dependency TreatmentCourts—have emerged in response to both metham-phetamine-using parents who have neglected theirchildren and the court’s responsibility to enforce in-tervention in non-criminal, family cases. Family DrugCourts employ a multidisciplinary team approach inaddressing children’s safety and permanency issues aswell as parental substance use. Parental accountabilityat all levels is enforced by the court’s intensive super-vision. As in adult Drug Courts, participants in familyDrug Courts are required to take random and frequentdrug tests and appear weekly before a judge. In manycases, addicted parents achieve sobriety and are ableto provide a safe and
t home for their children.
Drug Board:
Drug Board provides community-basedservices through a Drug Court model to help drug-involved offenders reintegrate into their communitiesafter being released from prison. Drug Board uses theauthority of the Board of Pardons and Parole to ap-ply graduated sanctions, positive reinforcement andto coordinate resources to support the prisoner’s rein-tegration. Central to the Drug Board are the goals of tracking, supporting, and supervising offenders uponrelease. During the 2010 legislative session fundingfor Drug Boards was cut beginning July 1, 2010 andforward and these Boards are no longer operating asDrug Boards.
Misdemeanor Drug Courts:
Six Justice Court-level Drug Courts provide nonviolent misdemean-or offenders with the opportunity to participate in judicially supervised substance abuse treatment.Most of the participants in the misdemeanor courtshave been arrested on marijuana or alcohol charges.These courts usually target
rst-time offenders andare generally shorter in duration than felony DrugCourts. None of the misdemeanor Drug Courts havereceived state funding. Judges donate time and re-sources to make these programs a reality.
Level of Care for Drug Court Participants
Fiscal Year 2010
OutpatientIntensive OutpatientResidential
Substance Use for Drug CourtParticipants
Fiscal Year 2010
Other Opiates/Synthetics4%Heroin22%Marijuana/Hashish16%Cocaine/ Crack7% Alcohol19%Meth-amphetamine23%Oxycodone/Hydrocodone6% All Other 3%

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->