Program Profile: Gender-Specific Drug Treatment Court (Midwestern State)

This is a drug court program that provides treatment services to women on probation to reduce their risk of reoffending. The program gives preference to women who have higher need and risk profiles, are mothers, and have substance use problems. The program is rated Promising. Women in the treatment group were statistically significantly less likely to have a new conviction, compared with similar women on probation who did not participate in the program, at the 2-year follow-up.

A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).

Program Goals/Target Population

This gender-responsive drug treatment court began in 2007 to address the growing number of women becoming involved in the criminal justice system. It operates in an urban county of a midwestern state and serves women who are on probation. This court seeks to treat women with higher risk and need profiles and gives preference to women who have substance use problems and are mothers (including women who have custody, have had custody removed, and who have adult children). The goal of the program is to meet the unique needs of women in the criminal justice system and reduce their risk of recidivism.

Program Components/Key Personnel

Women may be referred to the gender-specific drug treatment court program as a condition of their sentence or as an alternative to revocation while on probation. Referrals may come from a judge, a district attorney, a public defender, a private attorney, community corrections, jail, or human services staff. Once a woman has been referred, a member of the drug treatment court meets with her and conducts an interview to determine her eligibility and suitability for admission to the court.

The drug treatment court operates in phases similar to a traditional mixed-gender drug court. The women typically move through four phases. Phase 1 consists of court case managers and the female participant together developing a case plan based on assessment information and the needs of the participant. The participant is expected to undergo random drug testing, appear in court weekly, and meet regularly with the court staff, her probation officer, and the case manager throughout phases 1 through 3 of the drug treatment court.

Phase 2 of the drug treatment court involves the participant undergoing treatment services and programming, based on her specific needs. Treatment services can include inpatient or outpatient substance abuse treatment for women only; participating in the program Thinking for a Change (Bush, Glick, and Taymans, 1997) delivered to a group comprised only of women; participating in the program Trauma Recovery Empowerment Model (Harris, 1998) delivered only to women; and 12-step programming. Women in the court may also receive services from a female peer support specialist. These meetings are designed to be supportive of women in recovery. Participants meet with a female court coordinator for one-on-one case management that seeks to create an environment of safety, respect, and dignity. Finally, women may also receive services aimed at addressing housing, employment, child service issues, and money management. Referral to these services is made on a case-by-case basis by the treatment coordinator, sometimes in consultation with the treatment court team.

Phase 3 usually involves a decrease in the frequency of services, if the participant is progressing in treatment. Meetings with case managers and appearances in court decrease to every other week. The focus of treatment at this phase is on community connections and supports that can be sustained after treatment court completion.

The fourth and last phase focuses on continuing care under court supervision. The participant may continue to participate in programming and receive support from alumnae meetings. The average completion time for all four phases of the drug treatment court program is about 15 months.

Study

Myer and Buchholz (2018) used a quasi-experimental matched case design to evaluate the effect of a gender-specific drug treatment court on recidivism, measured by new convictions, at a 2-year follow-up. The gender-specific drug treatment court program took place in an urban county of a midwestern state (although the study authors did not specify which specific county or state).

Data on women referred and/or admitted to the drug treatment court since its inception in 2007 were provided by the court coordinator. Only participants who were admitted to the drug treatment court before the end of 2012 (n = 63) were included in the treatment group, to ensure an adequate timeframe for treatment court completion and follow-up. The comparison group consisted of females on probation owing to a drug charge who did not participant in the drug treatment court. Data on these individuals were provided by the state’s correctional department. The treatment and comparison samples were then matched on gender, race, the year (2007–12) they started the intervention (i.e., treatment court or probation), risk, and age (within 2 years). After matching, there were 63 female participants in the treatment group and 63 female participants in the comparison group.

The treatment and comparison group participants who started either the treatment court or probation before 2010 were assessed on the Wisconsin Risk Needs Scale. Treatment and comparison group participants beginning treatment court or probation in 2010 and after were administered the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions actuarial assessment. The results from these scales were used to match treatment group participants with comparison group participants on their risk level, as either low, moderate, or high risk.

The matching process resulted in no statistically significant baseline differences between groups. The all-female treatment group was 92.1 percent white, 6.3 percent Native American, and 1.6 percent Black. Most treatment group women fell into three age ranges: 36.5 percent were 23–28 years old; 28.6 percent were 29–34 years old; and 17.5 percent were ages 35–40. The majority (54 percent) of women in the treatment group scored as high risk for reoffending at baseline. The all-female comparison group was also 92.1 percent white, 6.3 percent Native American, and 1.6 percent Black. Most comparison group women also fell into three age ranges: 38.1 percent were ages 23–28; 27.0 percent were ages 29–34; and 14.3 percent were ages 35–40. The majority (54 percent) of women in the comparison group also scored as high risk for reoffending at baseline.

Recidivism data were drawn from online public records of the state circuit court that serves the treatment court and probation department. Bivariate tests were used to determine whether recidivism, measured as any new conviction after admission to either the treatment court or probation period, differed across groups at the 2-year follow-up. Gender, offense category, age, race, and risk level to reoffend were controlled for in the analysis. Subgroup analysis was conducted by drug treatment court completion success and by baseline risk level.

Subgroup Analysis

Myer and Buchholz (2018) conducted subgroup analyses by drug treatment court completion and baseline risk level. Treatment group participants who successfully completed the drug treatment court were 28.6 percent less likely to have a new conviction, compared with their matched persons on probation in the comparison group. This difference was statistically significant. However, there was no statistically significant difference in recidivism between treatment group women who did not complete the drug treatment court and their matched comparison persons on probation. Women who did not complete the drug treatment court program had a 66.7 percent reconviction rate, compared with 61.9 percent for the matched group of comparison persons on probation.

The study authors also found no statistically significant differences in new convictions between low- and moderate-risk treatment group women and low- and moderate-risk comparison group women. However, treatment group participants assessed as high risk to reoffend at baseline were 23.5 percent less likely to have a new conviction, compared with high-risk participants in the comparison group. This difference was statistically significant.

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

Adult Drug Courts

Drug courts are specialized courts that combine drug treatment with the legal and moral authority of the court in an effort to break the cycle of drug use and drug related crime.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes

	Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types
	Crime & Delinquency - Drug and alcohol offenses
	Drugs & Substance Abuse - Multiple substances

Rehabilitation Programs for Adults Convicted of a Crime

This practice includes programs that are designed to reduce recidivism among adults by improving their behaviors, skills, mental health, social functioning, and access to education and employment. They may become participants in rehabilitation programs during multiple points in their involvement with the criminal justice system. This practice is rated Promising for reducing recidivism among adults who have been convicted of an offense.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes

Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?