Search

This study evaluated a contingency management (CM) program in a drug court. Gift certificates for compliance were delivered at 4- to 6-week intervals (total value = $390.00). Participants in one condition earned gift certificates that escalated by $5.00 increments. Participants in a second condition began earning higher magnitude gift certificates, and the density of reinforcement was gradually decreased. No main effects of CM were detected, which appears to be attributable to a ceiling effect from the intensive contingencies already delivered in the drug court and the low density of reinforcement. Preplanned interaction analyses suggested that participants with more serious criminal backgrounds might have performed better in the CM conditions. This suggests that CM programs may be best suited for more incorrigible drug offenders. (Contains 2 tables and 2 figures.)

This study evaluated a contingency management (CM) program in a drug court. Gift certificates for compliance were delivered at 4- to 6-week intervals (total value = $390.00). Participants in one condition earned gift certificates that escalated by $5.00 increments. Participants in a second condition began earning higher magnitude gift certificates, and the density of reinforcement was gradually decreased. No main effects of CM were detected, which appears to be attributable to a ceiling effect from the intensive contingencies already delivered in the drug court and the low density of reinforcement. Preplanned interaction analyses suggested that participants with more serious criminal backgrounds might have performed better in the CM conditions. This suggests that CM programs may be best suited for more incorrigible drug offenders. DESCRIPTORS: drug abuse, drug court, contingency management, criminal justice, operant conditioning

This pilot study (N = 30) experimentally examines the effects of an adaptive intervention in a misdemeanor drug court. The adaptive algorithm adjusted the frequency of court hearings and case management sessions according to prespecified criteria in response to participants' performance. Results reveal that the adaptive algorithm was acceptable to clients and staff, was feasible to implement with greater than 85% fidelity, and showed promise for eliciting substantial improvements in drug abstinence and graduation rates. Compared to drug court as usual, participants in the adaptive condition were more likely to receive responses from the drug court team for inadequate performance and received those responses after a shorter period. This suggests the adaptive algorithm more readily focused the team's attention on poorly performing individuals, allowing them to address problems before they developed too fully. These preliminary data justify further research evaluating the adaptive algorithm in a fully powered experimental trial. Keywords: drug court; adaptive treatment; criminal justice; antisocial personality disorder

A systematic literature review was conducted of published and unpublished DWI Court program evaluations released through April 30, 2007. [See Addendum for a subsequent evaluation released in October 2007]. Each evaluation report was scored for methodological rigor by at least two trained, independent raters according to established scientific criteria. One evaluation exceeded 80% of recommended criteria (deemed methodologically "good") and an additional four evaluations exceeded 65% of recommended criteria (deemed "marginally acceptable"). Many of the evaluations had serious methodological shortcomings, including reporting outcomes only for graduates, failing to account for participant dropout, employing inadequate statistical techniques, and evaluating potentially immature programs. Although the results hint at emerging evidence potentially favoring the effects of DWl Courts, it is not possible to reach scientifically defensible conclusions about the effects of DWI Courts due to the inadequate state of the evaluation literature. It is hoped the methodological criteria outlined in this review article will influence future DWI Court program evaluations and assist practitioners and policymakers to become competent and effective consumers of evaluation findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses how a drug court program can improve the behaviors of drug-abusing offenders if sanctions are actually imposed in accordance with effective principles of behavior modification. Also presented is a brief description of the drug court program and the sanctions imposed on the offenders. Results of a study done by the authors on the perception of the offenders on the severity of various sanctions and therapeutic consequences are also included.

Graduation rates in drug courts average 50% to 70%, but it is unclear what proportion of graduates responded to the drug court services and what proportion might not have had serious drug problems upon entry. This study cluster-analyzed urine drug screen results during the first 14 weeks of treatment on 284 participants from three misdemeanor drug courts. A four-cluster solution (R(2) > .75) produced distinct subgroups characterized by (1) consistently drug-negative urine specimens (34% of the sample), (2) consistently drug-positive specimens (21%), (3) consistently missed urine specimens (26%), and (4) urine specimens that began as drug-positive but became progressively drug-negative over time (19%). These data suggest that approximately one-third of the participants might not have had serious drug problems upon entry. Approximately one-fifth appeared to respond to drug court services, and nearly one-half continued to exhibit problems after 14 weeks. Implications for adaptive programming in drug courts are discussed.