Economic Evaluation of the Juvenile Drug Court/Reclaiming Futures (JDC/RF) Model
Juvenile drug court (JDC) programs are an increasingly popular option for rehabilitating juvenile offenders with substance problems, but research has found inconsistent evidence regarding their effectiveness and economic impact. While assessing client outcomes such as reduced substance use and delinquency is necessary to gauge program effectiveness, a more comprehensive understanding of program success and sustainability can be attained by examining program costs and economic benefits. As part of the National Cross-Site Evaluation of JDC and Reclaiming Futures (RF), an economic analysis of five JDC/RF programs was conducted from a multisystem and multiagency perspective. The study highlights the direct and indirect costs of JDC/RF and the savings generated from reduced health problems, illegal activity, and missed school days. Results include the average (per participant) cost of JDC/RF, the total economic benefits per JDC/RF participant, and the net savings of JDC/RF relative to standard JDC.
The development of this article was funded by the Department of Justice - Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) through an interagency agreement with the Library of Congress (contract number LCFRD11C0007) and by OJJDP (grant number 2013-DC-BX-0081). Additional support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (P30DA040500; R21 DA044378). The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policies of OJJDP, the Library of Congress, or the NIH; nor does mention of trade names, commercial practices, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors do not have financial, commercial, professional, or any other conflicts of interest to report.
- 4.Greene A, Ostlie E, Kagan R, et al. The Process of Integrating Practices: The Juvenile Drug Court and Reclaiming Futures Logic Model. Drug Court Review. 2016;10(1):31–59.Google Scholar
- 5.Nissen LB, Pearce J. Exploring the Implementation of Justice-Based Alcohol and Drug Intervention Strategies with Juvenile Offenders: Reclaiming Futures, Enhanced Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment, and Juvenile Drug Courts. Children and Youth Services Review. 2011;33:S60-S65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Korchmaros J, Baumer P, Valdez E. Critical Components of Adolescent Substance Use Treatment Programs: The Impact of Juvenile Drug Court: Strategies in Practice and Elements of Reclaiming Futures. Drug Court Review. 2016;10(1):80–115.Google Scholar
- 7.Dennis M, Baumer P, Stevens S. The Concurrent Evolution and Intertwined Nature of Juvenile Drug Courts and Reclaiming Futures Approaches to Juvenile Justice Reform. Drug Court Review. 2016;10(1):6–30.Google Scholar
- 9.Barnoski RP, Aos S. Washington State's Drug Courts for Adult Defendants: Outcome Evaluation and Cost-Benefit Analysis. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Available online at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/827/Wsipp_Washington-States-Drug-Courts-for-Adult-Defendants-Outcome-Evaluation-and-Cost-Benefit-Analysis_Full-Report.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 10.Drake E. Inventory of Evidence-Based and Research-Based Programs for Adult Corrections. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Available online at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1542/Wsipp_Inventory-of-Evidence-Based-and-Research-Based-Programs-for-Adult-Corrections_Final-Report.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 11.Lee S, Aos S, Pennucci A. What Works and What Does Not? Benefit-Cost Findings from WSIPP. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Available online at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1602/Wsipp_What-Works-and-What-Does-Not-Benefit-Cost-Findings-from-WSIPP_Report.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 15.Belenko S. Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review. National Drug Court Institute Review. 1998;1(1):1–42.Google Scholar
- 16.Belenko S. Challenges of Integrating Drug Treatment into the Criminal Justice Process The Albany Law Review. 1999;63:833.Google Scholar
- 17.Kuklinski MR, Fagan AA, Hawkins JD, et al. Benefit-Cost Analysis of a Randomized Evaluation of Communities that Care: Monetizing Intervention Effects on the Initiation of Delinquency and Substance Use through Grade 12. Journal of Experimental Criminology. 2015;11(2):165–192.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Belenko S. Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review 2001 Update, National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. Available online at https://www.centeronaddiction.org/addiction-research/reports/research-drug-courts-critical-review-2001. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 21.Einspruch E, Mark KLJ, Waller S, et al. Randomized Controlled Trial of Measure 57 Intensive Drug Court for Medium- to High-Risk Property Offenders. NPC Research. Available online at https://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/CJC_and_NPC_M57_drug_court_eval_March_20_2015.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 22.Carey SM, Mackin, JR, Finigan MW. What Works? The Ten Key Components of Drug Court: Research-Based Best Practices. Drug Court Review. 2012:6–42.Google Scholar
- 23.Mackin J, Lucas L, Lambarth C, et al. Anne Arundel County Juvenile Treatment Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. NPC Research. Available online at file:///C:/Users/aarmstrong2/Downloads/aa_co_juv_dc_outcome-cost_0110.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.Google Scholar
- 24.Carey SM, Waller MS. Oregon Drug Court Cost Study: Statewide Costs and Promising Practices, Final Report. NPC Research. Available online at http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/ORDC_BJA_Cost_and_Best_Practices_Final_Rerelease_03112.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 25.Drake E. Evidence-Based Juvenile Offender Programs: Program Description, Quality Assurance, and Cost. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Available online at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/986/Wsipp_Evidence-Based-Juvenile-Offender-Programs-Program-Description-Quality-Assurance-and-Cost_Full-Report.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 26.Lee S, Aos S, Drake E, et al. Return on Investment: Evidence-Based Options to Improve Statewide Outcomes. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Available online at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1102/Wsipp_Return-on-Investment-Evidence-Based-Options-to-Improve-Statewide-Outcomes-April-2012-Update_Full-Report.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 32.French MT. Brief Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program (Brief DATCAP): Program Version, First Edition. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami, 2003.Google Scholar
- 33.Dennis ML, Titus JC, White MK, et al. Global Appraisal of Individual Needs: Administration Guide for the GAIN and Related Measures. Bloomington, IL: Chestnut Health Systems, 2003.Google Scholar
- 34.Find Occupation. O*Net Online. U.S. Department of Labor. Available online at https://www.onetonline.org. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 35.Our Work. Our 6-Step Model. Reclaiming Futures. Available online at https://www.reclaimingfutures.org/our-model. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 43.Wiest KL, Martin, SJ, Waller M, et al. Indiana Drug Courts: St. Joseph County Drug Court Process, Outcome and Cost Evaluation. NPC Research. Available online at http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/St._Joseph_Adult_Eval_Final3.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.
- 44.Carey SM, Waller MS, Marchand G. Clackamas County Juvenile Drug Court Enhancement: Process, Outcome/Impact and Cost Evaluation Final Report. NPC Research. Available online at http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/CCJDC-Enhancement-Evaluation-Final-Report1.pdf. Accessed on June 15, 2015.