EVALUATION PLAN

for

Virginia's Drug Court Programs

Office of the Executive Secretary

Supreme Court of Virginia

November 2001

***Table of Contents***

*page*

***I. Purposes of Research** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3*

***II. Evaluation Designs** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4*

> *Process Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5*

*Impact Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6*

*Client Impact Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 8*

*System Impact Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 10*

*Qualitative Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10*

> *Cost Benefit Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12*

***III. Impediments to Drug Court Evaluation** . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13*

***IV. Statewide Drug Court Management Information System** . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 15*

***V. Relevant Evaluation Questions at Various Points of Program***

> ***Planning, Implementation and Maintenance** . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . 15*

***VI. Requisite Skills and Competencies of Drug Court***

> ***Evaluation Contractors** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18*

***VII. Virginia Drug Court Evaluation Plan** . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20*

***Appendix A: Drug Court Evaluation References and Resources** . . . .
. . . . . . . 21*

***Appendix B: Sample Request for Proposals for Drug Court***

> ***Evaluation Services** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30*

***Appendix C: Virginia Drug Court Process Evaluation Form** . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 42*

***Appendix D: Virginia Drug Court Management Information System** . . .
. . . . . 52*

***I. Purposes of Research***

*"Without research and evaluation, the drug court field can neither
move*

*forward nor achieve ultimate success. Research and evaluation are
critical*

> *elements in the ongoing development of drug court programs and play
> an*
>
> *essential role in their future." (NDCI, 1999)*

It starts with a recognized problem such as escalating drug addiction,
malaria, or poor reading performance. A treatment approach is applied in
hopes of eliminating or reducing the problem. Research is the best if
not only option to determine if the intended impact is achieved. Drug
court programs were developed to address the problem of
addiction-related criminal activity. Drug courts hold offenders
accountable for treatment compliance and recovery progress. The National
Drug Court Institute (NDCI) in partnership with the National Institute
of Drug Abuse (NIDA) sponsored a committee to develop a drug court
research agenda and the tools for field research. This group identified
four research priorities:

· Assessing the structural design of drug court programs

· Evaluating the effectiveness of different treatment modalities

· Assessing the appropriateness of target populations

· Evaluating the outcomes of drug court programs

The increasing number of new drug court programs and the ongoing
improvement of existing programs are dependent on competent field
research. Field research requires professionals who are well versed in
the intricacies of all three drug court components -- courts, mental
health/substance abuse treatment, and criminal justice.
Interdisciplinary drug court teams are responsible for designing
research studies that will answer the complex questions needed to assess
and guide drug court programs. Along with the straight forward question
"Does the program work?" drug court professionals need to insist on more
sophisticated research questions such as "What combination of treatment
factors works with which type of addict?" Current substance abuse
treatment and accountability methods vary widely and lack standardized
processes and procedures. If judges and drug court team members want to
know what works with which addicts, then the treatment and legal
interventions used with drug court participants must be clearly defined.
There must be a higher level of sophistication to elevate addiction
treatment and drug court intervention from a "hit and miss" intercession
to a scientifically sound and consistent approach. Competent field
research will benefit drug court programs by:

-   answering whether the overall goals of drug court programs are being
    achieved

-   identifying which program elements are effective and which need
    revision

-   determining whether the program is reaching its intended audience

-   assisting drug court proponents in gaining long range support from
    policymakers, local/state officials, and the public

-   helping validate the need to continue drug court programs to funding
    agencies

-   documenting the need for additional program staff

-   identifying additional services needed by participants

The first task is to determine the intended audience(s) of the research.
If the public, policymakers and government officials are the primary
consumers, research will likely focus on program impact regarding
recidivism, public safety and sobriety. If the research goal were to
target sources for continued program funding, the research focus would
likely extend to include cost benefit analyses. If drug court
professionals were the intended audience, multivariate analyses of the
impact of a variety of program components on different types of
participants would help identify critical program needs.

The following paragraphs describe the types of evaluations and list
research questions that may be included in each type of drug court
evaluation.

***II. Evaluation Designs***

There are several types of evaluations needed to assess the impact and
outcomes of drug court programs. Four prominent types of evaluations
include process evaluations, impact evaluations, qualitative
evaluations, and cost benefit analyses. This section includes
definitions, purposes and research questions suggested for the four
evaluation models.

> ***A. [Process Evaluations]{.underline}**:* Process evaluations are
> descriptive surveys of program and participant characteristics. The
> primary purpose of this type of evaluation is to give a "snapshot" of
> the drug court program and the participants enrolled in the program.
> Generally, simple statistical measures such as percentages, averages
> (mean, medium, and mode), and cross tabulation analysis are used in
> process evaluations. Among the variables measured in process
> evaluations are the following:
>
> *1. Participant Characteristics:*
>
> · Drug court participants who were terminated, withdrew, graduated or
> who are currently in good standing
>
> · Number of drug offenders screened for drug court eligibility
>
> · Demographic characteristics (age, race, gender, employment,
> education, residential stability, etc.) of drug court participants
> (also graduates, drop-outs, and those terminated from the program)
>
> · Offense histories of drug court participants
>
> · Substance abuse histories of drug court participants
>
> · Primary drugs of choice
>
> · Mental health assessment results (co-occurring disorders, etc.)
>
> · Treatment histories of drug court participants
>
> · Drug testing results while in program
>
> *2. Program Characteristics:*
>
> · Drug court program description (pre-dispositional or
> post-dispositional, adult felony, adult misdemeanor, juvenile, family)
>
> · Eligibility requirements of program
>
> · Rules for termination from program
>
> · Graduation requirements of program
>
> · Maximum capacity of program
>
> · Total number of participants since beginning of the drug court
> program
>
> · Daily average of drug court participants in each program
>
> · Progress stages and requirements at each stage
>
> · Average length of retention in the drug court program
>
> · Vulnerable periods for participant drop out/expulsion
>
> · Graduation rate
>
> · Number of drug court hearings held per year
>
> · Frequency of drug court hearings
>
> · Frequency of drug testing
>
> · Frequency and types of probation supervision
>
> · Types of therapeutic services and rate of usage
>
> · Frequency of support group attendance
>
> · Ancillary services and usage rates
>
> · Types and frequency of applied sanctions and rewards
>
> · Program resources/staff and unmet program needs

Virginia drug court programs use a standard Process Evaluation Form that
complies with reporting requirements for drug court programs receiving
federal funding from the Drug Court Program Office (DCPO) within the
U.S. Department of Justice. This form is presented in Appendix C. The
Drug Court Process Evaluation Form also asks about the drug court staff
and funding resources. Local drug court staff complete process
evaluations of the programs each year. This descriptive information is
included in the Virginia State of the Judiciary Report.

> ***B. [Impact Evaluations]{.underline}**:* Impact evaluations examine
> the effect of the program on the participants and the involved systems
> (court, treatment agencies, and probation). Client impact evaluations
> question whether drug court programs are more effective in reducing
> recidivism and lessening drug use than are traditional court and
> criminal justice dispositions for drug offenders.
>
> An experimental design using random assignment of subjects to
> different treatments is a scientifically robust research model. An
> example of an experimental design is a medical study where groups of
> patients are randomly assigned different treatments. One group may
> receive a new experimental drug, another may receive only sugar pills
> or placebos, and a third group may receive behavioral therapy rather
> than drug therapy. All other variables affecting the outcome of the
> experiment are controlled. After the experiment's conclusion, the
> "cure rates" of individuals in each of the groups are compared.
>
> Social science research generally cannot conduct strict experimental
> design research for the following reasons: 1) participants are
> generally not confined, so there is little control over the extraneous
> environmental variables that may affect outcome; 2) withholding
> effective treatment from people to achieve random assignment is often
> viewed as inhumane and unethical (particularly in drug court programs
> where successful completion results in dismissal of charges); and 3)
> deficient funding of social science evaluations prohibits a large
> enough sample to divide into groups of significant size for
> experimental research purposes.
>
> Most social science evaluations are quasi-experimental and compare the
> results of experimental groups with matched control groups.
> Quasi-experimental designs control as much variation as possible then
> use statistical analysis techniques to control for other confounding
> variables. A quasi-experimental research study planned for Virginia
> compares the results (recidivism, drug usage rates, employment, family
> unification, etc.) of drug court graduates in one jurisdiction with
> the outcomes of drug offenders from a jurisdiction that does not offer
> a drug court program. This design would not withhold treatment to an
> appropriate population, but rather would compare drug court
> participants' recidivism and sobriety results with a like population
> that does not currently have the drug court program opportunity. The
> control group would be matched to the drug court group on
> characteristics such as age, gender, race, education, offense history,
> and drug history. A quasi-experimental research study would enhance
> confidence that any positive results were a consequence of the drug
> court program and not attributable to individual differences of
> participants.
>
> Thus far, Virginia drug courts have not employed quasi-experimental
> research designs and few national studies have used this research
> model. Drug court evaluation literature cites the lack of using
> control groups as a weakness. Charlottesville and Roanoke have
> conducted descriptive evaluations of their drug court programs.
> Outcome variables such as recidivism rates, sobriety statistics and
> retention rates were reported. In the Roanoke and Charlottesville
> studies, outcome statistics were very encouraging (2 -- 4% recidivism
> rates as compared with 50% recidivism rates for Virginia's convicted
> drug offenders who were treated in traditional ways). Yet, it is
> difficult to give these drug court programs the credit for low
> recidivism. Without comparison groups, some would argue that the
> positive outcomes merely prove that drug courts select the "cream of
> the crop" and these participants would do as well if treated in a
> traditional manner. If this rationale is accepted, then variance
> between the groups is more responsible for outcome than is the
> treatment (drug court). Most drug court participants and staff believe
> the program is responsible for reduced recidivism and increased
> sobriety, but until control groups are utilized, drug court programs
> cannot be fully credited with the positive behavioral outcomes of
> graduates.
>
> *[Client Impact Studies]{.underline}*
>
> In designing client impact studies, the following research questions
> are frequently asked:

-   What are the recidivism rates of drug court graduates?

-   What are the recidivism rates of drug court dropouts and those
    expelled from the program?

-   Compare pre-program frequency of drug use with in-program and
    post-program drug use

-   How does longevity and severity of addiction history impact
    successful program completion?

-   Which drugs of choice are better predictors of successful program
    outcome?

-   How have other life circumstances (housing, education, salary,
    family unity) been affected by drug court services?

-   What are longitudinal post-program recovery findings? (6 mos., 1
    year, 2 years + intervals):

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Has the drug court provided closer supervision of alcohol and
    drug-using offenders than other forms of community supervision?

-   What is the impact of judicial sanctions on defendant adherence to
    treatment and supervision?

-   How many drug free babies have been born to drug court participants?
    Compare this with the health care costs for babies born to addicted
    mothers.

-   What are the recidivism rates for a control group (not referred to
    drug court, but matched on demographics, substance abuse history,
    and criminal history) at six months after release from probation;
    -twelve months after release from probation? -two years after
    release from probation?

-   How does the treatment program design (single treatment provider vs.
    multiple treatment providers; individual vs. group therapy, etc.)
    relate to successful program outcome?

-   Does the use of pharmacological interventions impact successful
    program outcome?

-   Which treatment approaches relate to increased sobriety?

-   How does level of treatment intensity relate to successful treatment
    outcome?

-   How does NA/AA participation relate to successful program
    completion?

-   What is the retention rate of participants in the drug court
    program? When are the critical periods of attrition from the drug
    court program? Who is most vulnerable to leaving (voluntarily or
    involuntarily) the drug court program?

-   What offender profiles have greater/lesser success in the drug court
    program?

-   Has the frequency and types of drugs used changed for drug court
    participants and graduates?

-   Does frequency and duration of court, probation, and/or therapy
    contacts relate to positive program outcome?

-   Is program length related to successful program completion?

*[System Impact Studies]{.underline}*

System impact assessments are generally descriptive in nature and ask
questions about the impact of the program on court, mental health, and
probation systems. Questions about system impact include the following:

-   How are drug courts affecting the costs of operating traditional
    criminal courts and collateral systems?

-   What additional tasks or chores are necessary for the judge and/or
    > clerk's office as a consequence of adding the drug court docket?

-   Has the court needed to hire additional personnel (judges, assistant
    clerks, or other personnel) to accommodate the drug court program?

-   Has the establishment of a specialized drug court docket affected
    the time to disposition for other criminal and civil cases (either
    negatively or positively)?

-   What are the ethical issues of interdisciplinary drug court
    professionals?

-   How do drug courts fit as a community criminal justice initiative?

-   What is the impact of drug courts on the larger community, mental
    health system, or criminal justice system?

-   How has drug court collaboration affected the timeliness of
    processing and referring addicted offenders?

> ***C. [Qualitative Evaluations]{.underline}:*** Qualitative
> evaluations are descriptive and may be either quantitative or
> non-quantitative. These evaluations examine more closely the program
> elements and staff/participants perceptions about the program.
> Qualitative studies may also focus on phenomenological views of
> treatment recipients. Among the questions included in qualitative
> evaluations are the following:

· What are anecdotal reports of success or failure of drug court
participants?

· How do drug court staff and/or participants rate the program on the
following dimensions: (1) team functioning; (2) adequacy of referral
processes; (3) timely processing from arrest to commencement of
treatment; and (4) adequacy of treatment, judicial monitoring, or
probation supervision?

> · What are the strongest and weakest aspects of the drug court's
> operation?
>
> · How have participants changed regarding social responsibility,
> family cohesion, job skills, etc. during their participation in the
> drug court program?
>
> · How does availability of community resources impact drug court
> success?
>
> · Is the drug court model amenable to other offender categories
> (mentally ill offenders, addicted parents, domestic abuse offenders,
> etc.)?

· What are the perceptions of drug court team members, court personnel,
and referral sources of drug court effectiveness?

· What interpersonal behaviors and attitudes of judges, clinicians and
probation officers are linked with positive participant outcomes?

> · What additional mental health issues are handled by the treatment
> provider (multiple loss issues, PTSD, child abuse, relationship abuse,
> sexual abuse, co-occurring disorders, etc.)?
>
> · What are the primary models of substance abuse treatment (disease
> model, cognitive restructuring, rational-emotive therapy,
> psychotherapy, didactic education, etc.)?
>
> · What medications and/or detoxification methods are used in
> conjunction with substance abuse treatment?
>
> · How does the drug court benefit the community?
>
> · Are drug courts reaching the most appropriate target population of
> drug abusers? Can drug court eligibility be expanded to include other
> addicts likely to benefit from the program?

· Are drug court participants representative of the larger drug abusing
population in the community? What percentage of the total number of drug
and alcohol possession and drug-related arrests in each jurisdiction
does the drug court program serve?

> · How do treatment providers measure drug court participant progress
> (changes in drug use, self-esteem changes, decreased lying, increased
> social bonding, increased pro-social peer associations, decreased
> symptoms of secondary psychiatric illness such as depression, changes
> in criminal thinking patterns, recognition of drug use triggers,
> increased drug use resistance skills, more job/family/educational
> successes, lessened impulsive behaviors, responsible decision making,
> etc.)?
>
> · What ancillary services are available to drug court clients and how
> frequently are these services used?
>
> · What social history elements are commonly found with substance abuse
> clients (parental addiction/criminality, abuse/neglect, learning
> disability, low self-esteem, school failure, foster placement,
> unstable home environment, transient life style, etc.)?
>
> · What therapeutic interventions contribute significantly to client
> sobriety (group confrontation of denial, focus on family support,
> cognitive restructuring, emotional catharsis of repressed anger,
> family involvement, grief work, support groups -- AA/NA, etc.)
>
> · What are the issues and concerns treatment, judicial, and probation
> professionals encounter when working as a multidisciplinary drug court
> team?
>
> · What substance abuse treatment components relate to reduced
> substance use?
>
> · What elements of substance abuse treatment are specifically designed
> for the criminal offender addict (criminal thinking patterns, attitude
> toward authority, lying, etc.)?
>
> · What theoretical models of substance abuse treatment are most
> applicable and effective with drug court offenders?
>
> · How do mental health and criminal justice agencies treat the
> offender with co-occurring disorders (substance abuse and mental
> illness)?
>
> · How does substance abuse treatment differ between adult and juvenile
> populations?
>
> · What psychometric measures are used to assess the overall needs and
> progress of drug court clients?
>
> ***D. [Cost Benefit Analyses]{.underline}:***
>
> Cost benefit analyses compare the cost of drug court treatment and the
> costs of alternative handling of drug offenders. Cost benefit analyses
> may also compare the costs of treating addiction with societal costs
> of neglecting addiction treatment. Among the questions asked in cost
> benefit analysis studies are the following:
>
> · What are the societal savings in the number of crimes committed by
> drug court participants or graduates as compared to the crime costs of
> untreated addicts.
>
> · What are the societal savings in the number of crimes committed by
> drug court participants or graduates as compared to the crime costs of
> addicts treated in an alternate judicial manner?

· What is the overall cost (treatment, judicial, and probation costs) of
the drug court per participant per year?

· Compare the cost of drug court treatment with the societal and health
care costs of untreated addiction.

> · What is the amount of court costs and treatment costs paid by drug
> court participants?
>
> · How much child support and taxes have been paid by drug court
> participants during the period they were in the drug court program?
> Compare this amount to the costs of family support and loss of tax
> revenue of a matched group of incarcerated offenders.
>
> · What costs are associated with babies born addicted or affected by
> maternal drug use?
>
> · Compare the health care utilization rates of drug court participants
> and untreated addicts?
>
> · What are victim statistics linked with substance abuse (drunk driver
> fatalities, violent offenses committed by those under the influence,
> etc.)?
>
> · Examining retention rates, hospitalizations, and repeated treatment,
> what is the average cost of voluntary substance abuse treatment versus
> mandated drug court treatment?
>
> · What are average savings in criminal justice processing of drug
> court participants (prosecutors' savings, police testimony savings,
> public defender, etc.)
>
> · Compare drug court treatment costs with other dispositional
> alternatives (pretrial detention, probation supervision, jail
> incarceration, prison incarceration, parole supervision, etc.)

***III. Impediments to Drug Court Evaluation:***

Most drug court research to date has been through descriptive studies.
There is a need to conduct quasi-experimental research that employs
control groups. Concomitant with this need is the reality that obstacles
have impeded drug court research. If these obstacles are not recognized
and addressed in the near future, drug court evaluations run the risk of
continuing to be less than conclusive. Among these inhibitors to quality
research are the following:

**·** Most drug courts are initiated by local officials. While local
autonomy preserves vigor and enthusiasm for the program, it also results
in isolated and fragmented evaluation efforts. Study populations at the
local level generally lack the numbers or diversity for meaningful
comparative research. It is suggested that statewide or regional
evaluations be conducted that have the advantages of large population
totals, diversity in program content and ancillary services, and
variation in participant characteristics.

**·** There is a need for integrated case management information systems
to collect comprehensive information about drug court participants. As
previously suggested, a statewide drug court management information
system would allow for the volume and diversity needed for meaningful
comparative research.

**·** There is a need for a common data set at the state as well as the
national level. These data elements should follow the established goals
and objectives of drug court programs.

**·** There is a need for common definitions of research terms (i.e.,
recidivism, drug use, drug abuse, abstinence, etc.). At present, there
are diverse data collection systems and methods leading to discrepancies
in data definitions and types of information collected.

**·** Because of the rapid spread of drug court programs, it will most
likely become increasingly difficult to find comparable match groups for
quasi-experimental research studies. Therefore, it is imperative to set
up control groups for comparison studies as soon as possible.

**·** Given the rewards of drug court program success (dismissal of
charge, reduction of sentence, enhanced chance of sobriety, etc.), it is
considered unethical to deprive drug offenders of drug court treatment
for the purpose of assigning them to a control group. Therefore, it is
advisable to set up control groups in localities that as yet have not
established drug court programs rather than deprive eligible offenders
in a drug court jurisdiction.

**·** The goals and objectives of juvenile drug courts need further
clarification. While it is acknowledged that adolescent development
requires different court, probation, and treatment interventions, goals
and measurable objectives needed to guide juvenile drug courts must be
explicit.

**·** Cost effectiveness measures need further definition. Cost benefit
studies have relied primarily on comparing the costs of community-based
drug court treatment and the costs of incarceration. Again, there is a
need for control group comparison as well as exploration of all costs
incurred and saved as a consequence of community-based treatment.

**·** There needs to be a drug court evaluation repository and mechanism
for disseminating information to all drug court practitioners.

**·** Researchers have primarily come from one discipline (sociology,
criminal justice, etc.) and lack the interdisciplinary knowledge to
structure research questions pertinent for in-depth examinations of
other drug court facets such as treatment components.

***IV. Statewide Drug Court Management Information System***

During FY2000-2001, the Office of the Executive Secretary, the
Department of Criminal Justice Services, and representatives from local
drug court programs worked together as an Information Technology Team
and designed a comprehensive drug court management information system. A
detailed plan of the data elements forming the drug court MIS is
included in Appendix D. Development of the Virginia drug court
management information system followed a logical format. First, the
goals of drug court programs were defined. The goals suggested the
measurable objective needed in evaluating program effectiveness. The
measurable objectives determined the data elements needed to quantify
each objective. We are now awaiting final decision on the deployment of
the drug court management information system plan before the actual
programming commences.

***V. Relevant Evaluation Questions at Various Points of Program
Planning, Implementation and Maintenance***

Drug court professionals need to be mindful that different research
questions are appropriate at various stages of drug court development.
For example, a drug court will not have a sizable number of graduates
during their first two years of operation, therefore a recidivism study
is not advised. It is suggested that a minimum number of 50 -- 100
graduates constitute the sample for a client impact study. The following
questions are relevant at different stages of drug court development:

***Sample Evaluation Questions Prior to Drug Court Program
Implementation***

> Qualitative and descriptive research studies are relevant at this
> stage of drug court development and may include the following
> questions:
>
> 1\. How many offenders coming through the court or circuit would
> likely be eligible to participate in a drug court program?
>
> 2\. What is the forecast for the maximum number of drug court
> participants in a year?
>
> 3\. What is the short-range impact of a drug court docket on the
> workloads of judges, prosecutors, court-appointed counsel or public
> defenders, law enforcement, treatment providers, and clerks?
>
> 4\. What is the long-range impact of a drug court docket on the
> judicial, clerks, criminal justice and treatment provider workloads?
>
> 5\. How might the current resources of the clerk's office be used to
> support the drug court?
>
> 6\. Are all judges in the circuit/court supportive of adding a
> specialized drug court docket?
>
> 7\. Are all judges in the circuit/court willing to be assigned to
> preside over the drug court docket?
>
> 8\. What substance abuse treatment (in-patient and outpatient)
> services are available to refer drug court participants? Are the
> treatment providers willing to accept participants in their program on
> a timely basis? What evidence is there of their ability to do so?
>
> 9\. Are all drug court team members (judge, prosecutor, public
> defender/defense attorney, treatment providers, probation services)
> supportive of the program?
>
> 10\. Are referral processes clearly defined (referral paths,
> procedures, and timetables)?
>
> 11\. What problems, if any, exist at present with docketing/caseflow
> management procedures on the criminal and civil sides of the docket?
> Are there backlogs of cases awaiting hearing? What is the court's
> continuance policy?
>
> 12\. Have all likely referral sources (police, local bar, school
> officials, etc.) been educated about the drug court program and
> informed about referral procedures?
>
> 13\. What are the expected benefits of the program? How soon will
> these benefits be accessed? When will court personnel decide whether
> the program is effective enough to justify its continuance?
>
> 14\. What are the expected roles and duties for each member of the
> drug court team?
>
> ***Sample Evaluation Questions During First Two Years of Drug Court
> Program Implementation***
>
> Qualitative and descriptive research studies are relevant at this
> stage of drug court development and may include the following
> questions:

1\. Has the establishment of a specialized drug court docket affected
the time to disposition for other criminal and civil cases (either
negatively or positively)?

2\. Is the program reaching the target population planned for the drug
court program?

3\. Are sanctions and rewards effective in producing desired behavior?

4\. Is the drug court team functioning effectively?

5\. What are the perceptions of drug court team members, court
personnel, and referral sources of drug court effectiveness?

6\. What is the cost of drug treatment court services per offender?

7\. What alternative dispositions are available to substance abusing
offenders?

8\. What are the rewards, sacrifices and stresses on drug court staff?

9\. What are the anecdotal reports of success or failure of drug court
participants?

10\. How is the drug court team functioning in these areas: (1) team
work; (2) adequacy of referral processes; and (3) timely processing from
arrest to commencement of treatment.

***Sample Questions After Three Years of Drug Court Program Operation***

> After the program has a sizeable number of graduates (at least fifty),
> relevant impact evaluations can be conducted. It is assumed that a
> comparable control group was identified at the onset of the drug court
> program and data has been routinely collected on the control group as
> well as the drug court group. With this information and an appropriate
> population size, quasi-experimental research is feasible and may
> include the following questions:
>
> 1\. What is the recidivism rate for drug court graduates at: 1) six
> months post graduation; 2) twelve months post graduation? Does length
> of time in the drug court program affect these recidivism rates?
>
> 2\. What is the recidivism rate for drug court dropouts or those
> expelled from the program at: 1) six months after leaving the drug
> court; 2) twelve months after leaving the drug court? Does length of
> time in the drug court program affect these recidivism rates?
>
> 3\. What is the recidivism rate for a control group (not referred to
> drug court, but matched on demographics, substance abuse history, and
> criminal history) at; 1) six months after release from probation; 2)
> twelve months after release from probation?
>
> 4\. What is the cost per drug court participant compared with costs
> for other dispositions for drug-involved offenders (incarceration,
> probation, in-patient treatment, etc.)?
>
> 5\. What is the retention rate of participants in the drug court
> program? When are the critical periods of attrition from the drug
> court program? Who is most vulnerable to leaving (voluntarily or
> involuntarily) the drug court program?
>
> 6\. What offender profiles have greater/lesser success rates in the
> drug court program?
>
> 7\. What are the measures of substance use during the drug court
> program? Has substance use decreased (frequency, type of drug) for
> drug court graduates?
>
> 8\. What long-term impact has the drug court program had on the
> "revolving door" of criminal justice processing for drug court
> participants and graduates?

9\. What judicial, treatment and supervision interventions produce
positive results? What revisions need to be made in the drug court
program?

***VI. Requisite Skills and Competencies of Drug Court Evaluation
Vendors***

As mentioned in the beginning of this report, effective drug court
evaluation requires researchers skilled in field research. The most
effective research vendors will possess knowledge of all drug court
program disciplines-- courts, mental health/substance abuse treatment,
and criminal justice. Some caution should be used in contracting with
academically-oriented researchers who may be deficient in "real world"
experience of working in courts, probation, and/or mental health
agencies and therefore lack the professional vocabulary or insight about
program components that are important in framing research questions.
While most former drug court evaluations contain basic information about
recidivism, retention and elementary analyses linking personal
characteristics with program outcome, they failed to examine components
important to improving overall program effectiveness. More sophisticated
measures needed to answer questions such as "Which program components
relate to successful outcome with which clients" were missing.
Information needed to guide drug court professionals in revising their
programs was not included. These early drug court studies make obvious
the need for drug court professionals to take responsibility for
designing future drug court evaluations.

Many evaluation vendors lack the professional terminology and in-depth
knowledge of interdisciplinary components of drug courts. Therefore,
they are unable to structure research questions that are sophisticated
enough to guide the further development of drug court programs. It is
important to contract with researchers who have the following skills and
competencies:

• Graduate education in research methods and advanced statistics

• Documented experience as lead researcher in conducting field research
for criminal justice, court, and/or mental health agencies

• Familiarity with the mission, functions and processes of the Circuit,
Juvenile, or General District Court

• Knowledge or experience in addiction treatment

• Ability to assess adjustment and expansion needs of the drug court
program

• Skills in using statistical analyses and forecasting methods to
project drug court program needs

• Experience in analyzing and interpreting data about program impact

• Ability to assess cost effectiveness of drug court program

• Competencies in current technology applications

• Effective skills in written and verbal communication

• Ability to relate effectively with drug court team members

Drug court team members should review submissions of the researcher's
previous evaluation studies and call agencies that previously hired the
researcher for references. It is also important to draw up a detailed
contract that specifies the research questions, the types of analyses,
the contents of the final report and the end date for the final
evaluation report. A sample Request for Proposals for Drug Court
Evaluation Services is included in Appendix B.

***VII. Virginia Drug Court Evaluation Plan***

Virginia is developing a statewide drug court management information
system. It is hoped that this system will be operational by the end of
2002. In the interim, operational drug courts will use existing data
collection programs or an Access-based system for collecting drug court
data. It is suggested that this data be submitted to the state oversight
agency for analysis. The state oversight agency will submit a final
report reflecting statewide drug court statistics. The following
timetable is suggested for evaluating Virginia's drug court programs:

\(1\) [Process Evaluations]{.underline} submitted on a yearly basis to
the Office of the Executive Secretary and the Virginia Department of
Criminal Justice Services.

\(2\) [Client Impact Evaluations]{.underline} conducted every two years
after the initial three years of drug court program operation.

\(3\) [System Impact Evaluations]{.underline} conducted every three
years after the first year of drug court program operation.

\(4\) [Qualitative Evaluations]{.underline} conducted for ten Virginia
drug court programs per year.

\(5\) [Cost Benefit Analyses]{.underline} conducted on a statewide basis
each fiscal year.

***VIII. Sample Request for Proposals for Drug Court Evaluation
Services***

Included in Appendix B is a sample Request for Proposals (RFP) for a
Circuit Drug Court client impact study. By using the research questions
outlined in the preceding evaluation plan and adding questions
determined by the local drug court management team, this sample form can
be revised for other types of evaluations (cost benefit analyses,
qualitative studies, or system impact studies). It is assumed that local
drug court teams will not find it necessary to hire outside contractors
to conduct the yearly process evaluation. With access to an adequate
management information system, process evaluation studies require only
basic mathematical skills. The format for the Process Evaluation is
contained in Appendix C.

***APPENDIX A***

***Drug Court Evaluation References and Resources***

*Reprinted from:*

***Drug Courts: A Research Agenda***

*Published by:*

***National Drug Court Institute***

***April 1999***

i

***Drug Court Evaluations***

Anspach, D. F., & Ferguson, A. S. (1999). Cumberland County\'s drug
court program, an evaluation report of project exodus. Portland, ME:
Author.

Belenko, S. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review.
*National Drug Court Institute Review,* 1, 1‑42.

Board of County Commissioners. (1995). A performance review of the drug
court treatment program. Broward County, FL.

Campaign for an Effective Crime Policy. (1994). *Low‑level drug
offenders: lessons from the drug courts*.

Cavanaugh, S., & Harrell, A. (1997). *Preliminary results from the
evaluation of the D.C. Superior Court intervention program for drug
felony defendants.* Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, University of Kentucky (1998).
*Fayette County drug court program evaluation.* Lexington, KY: Author.

Choices Unlimited Las Vegas. (1996). *Clark County drug court. 42‑montb
summary.* Clark County, NV.

Clallam County, Washington Juvenile Drug Court. (1998). *Clallam County
Juvenile drug court evaluation.*

Cosden, M., Peerson, S., & Crothers, L. (1997). *Year 1 evaluation of
the Santa Barbara County substance abuse treatment courts. Report
summary.* Santa Barbara County, CA: University of California, Santa
Barbara.

Delaware Statistical Analysis Center, & Anova Associates. (1998).
*Delaware drug court. A baseline evaluation.* Delaware.

Denman, K., & Guerin, P. (1998). *Status report: An analysis of second
judicial district court drug court client data.* Albuquerque, NM: The
Center for

Applied Research and Analysis, The Institute for Social Research,
University of New Mexico.

Deschenes, E. P., & Torres, S. (1996). *A process evaluation of Los
Angeles County drug courts.* Los Angeles County, CA: California State
University, Long Beach, Department of Criminal Justice.

Deschenes, E. P., Turner, S, & Greenwood, P. (1995). *Drug court or
probation?: An experimental evaluation of Maricopa County\'s drug
court.* Maricopa County, AZ: RAND.

Deschenes, E. P., et al. (1997). *Evaluating what works: A feasibility
analysis of outcome­ based studies with a focus on multi­jurisdictional
task forces and operation revitalization.* California State University
Expert Advisory Panel.

Ellis, P. (1998). *Santa Clara County juvenile drug treatment court
evaluation.* Santa Clara County, CA: Community Crime Prevention
Associates.

Fairview Outpatient Treatment Center. (1998). *Drug treatment court
program, process evaluation report.* Bayou Vista, LA: Author.

Finigan, M. (1998). *An outcome program evaluation of tbe Multnomab
County drug diversion program.* Multnomah County, OR: Northwest
Professional Consortium.

Godley, M. D., Dennis, M. L., Funk, R., Siekmann, M., Weisheit, R.
(1998). *Madison County assessment and treatment alternative court,
final evaluation report.* Bloomington, IN: Lighthouse Institute,
Chestnut Health Systems.

Goldkamp, J. S., & Weiland, D. (1993). *Assessing the impact of Dade
County\'s felony drug court: Final report.* Dade County, FL: Crime and
Justice Research Institute.

Gottfredson, D. C., Coblentz, K., & Harmon, M. A. (1996). *A sbort‑term
outcome evaluation of the Baltimore City drug treatment court program.*
Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland, Department of Criminology and
Criminal Justice.

Granfield, R., & Eby, C. (1997). *An evaluation of the Denver drug
court: impact of a treatment‑oriented drug offender system.* Denver, CO:
University of Denver, Department of Sociology.

Grimm, R. E. (1998). A *process evaluation of the Jacksonville drug
court of the Fourth judicial Circuit of Florida.* Duval County, FL:
Jacksonville, Florida Drug Court, Louis de la Parte Florida, Mental
Health Institute, University of Florida.

Guerin, P., Hyde, et a\]. (1998). *Process evaluation of the
administrative office of the courts drug court programs.‑ First judicial
district court, third judicial district court, and Bernadillo County
Metropolitan Court.* Albuquerque, NM: Institute for Social Research,
University of New Mexico.

Harrison, G. A., Kunkel, C. A., & Ireland, G. T. (1998). *Eleventh
judicial District drug court pilot.* Farmington, NM: 11th Judicial Drug
Court.

Johnson, G. D., et al. (1997). *Report to the drug court of Mobile
County: Comparing drug court graduates to non‑drug court participants.*
Tuscaloosa County, AL: Tuscaloosa County, Alabama Drug Court.

Kelly, W. R. (1996). *7he Travis County drug diversion court: A
preliminary outcome evaluation.* Travis County, TX.

King County, Washington Drug Court. (1995). *Evaluation of Spokane
County drug court.* King County, WA: Author.

Logan, TY, Leukefeld, C., & Williams, K. (1999). *Fayette drug court
program process evaluation.* Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky,
Center on Drug and Alcohol Research.

McDevitt, J., Domino, M., Harris, C., & Sousa, B. (1996). *The Boston
drug diversion court.\' Eleven‑month tabulation of client Statistics.*
Boston, MA: Northeastern University, The Center for Criminal Justice
Policy Research.

Meyer, W. G. (199 8). *Drug court self-assessment: Utilizing the key
components.* Second Judicial District, Court of Denver, Colorado.

Miller, M. L., Scocas, E. A., O\'Connell, J. P. (1998). *Evaluation of
the juvenile drug court diversion program.* Wilmington, DE: Statistical
Analysis Center, State of Delaware.

M. M. Bell, Inc. (1998). *King County drug court evaluation final
report.* King County, WA: King County, Washington Drug Court & M. M.
Bell, Inc.

Multnomah County Department of Community Corrections. (1994). S.TO.P:
*Drug diversion program1program impacts and evaluation.* Multnomah
County, OR‑

National Center for State Courts. (1996). *Oakland drug court
assessment.* Alameda County, CA: Author.

New Mexico Department of Health. (1997). *Evaluation of Las Cruces drug
court program.* Dona Ana County, NM: Las Cruces, New Mexico Drug Court.

Nichols, W., & Nelson, T. (1997). *An evaluation of the Freedom Ranch
drug court programs and the impact of moral reconation therapy (mrt) and
quality control systems.* Oklahoma City, OK: ND Enterprises.

Oberg, J. C. (1996), *An initial evaluation and analysis of the Ventura
County drug court program.* Ventura County, CA.

Okamoto, D., Kassebaum, G., & Anderson, M. (1998). *Evaluation of the
Hawaii drug court: Final report for the judiciary.* Honolulu, HI:
Okamoto Consulting Group.

Parsons, B. V., & Byrnes, E. 1. (1998). *Utah Byrne partnership
evaluation project: Recidivism data synopsis for the Utab juvenile drug
court.* Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Social Research
Institute, Graduate School of Social Work

Patrick, D., & English, K. (1999). *Case processing evaluation of the
Denver drug court.* Denver, CO: Colorado Department of Public Safety,
Division of Criminal Justice, Office of Research and Statistics.

Peters, R\_ H., & Murrin, M. R\_ (1998). *Evaluation of treatment‑based
drug courts in Florida\'s First judicial Circuit.* University of South
Florida, Department of Mental Health Law & Policy, Louis de la Partc
Florida Mental Health Institute.

Peterson, A. N. (1994). *Evaluation of the first year of operation of
the Jackson County drug court.* Jackson County, MO: Ewing Marion Kaufman
Foundation.

Reed, E. A. (1995). *SODAT‑Delaware Inc. drug court diversion program.*
Delaware: SODAT‑Delaware Inc.

Roberts‑Gray, C. (1994). *Process evaluation: SHORT program 1993‑1994.*
Travis County, TX: Resource Network.

Roehl, J. (1998). *Monterey County drug court evaluation report #1.*
Monterey, CA: Justice Research Center.

Santa Clara County, California Drug Court. (1998). *Santa Clara County
drug treatment court two year progress report and outcome comparisons.*
Santa Clara County, CA: Santa Clara County, California Drug Treatment
Court.

Schiff, M., & Terry, W. C., 111. (1997). *Predicting graduation from
Broward County\'s dedicated drug treatment court.* Broward County, FL:
Florida Atlantic University, Department of Criminal Justice, & Florida
International University, School of Policy and Management.

Sechrest, D. K., Shichor, D., Artist, K., & Briceno, G. (1998). *7\'he
Riverside County drug court. Final research report for the Riverside
County probation department, Riverside County, California.* Riverside
County, CA: California State University, San Bernadino, Criminal Justice
Department.

Simpson, M., & Theriot, J. (1998). *Drug court., Impact on family and
perception of program graduates.* Thibodaux, LA: Nicholls State
University.

Smith, L. (1996). *An evaluation of the 13th judicial Circuit drug
court.* Hillsborough

County, FL: Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida Drug Courts
Program.

Tauber, J. S. (1995). *An evaluation of the Oakland drug court after
three years.* Alameda County, CA: Oakland‑Piedmont­ Emeryville Municipal
Court.

Terry, W. C., 111. (1998). *Broward County\'s dedicated drug treatment
court. From post­adjudication to diversion.* Broward County, FL: Florida
International University, School of Policy and Management.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1995). Drug Courts. *Information on a
New Approach to Address Drug Related Crime*. Washington, D.C.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1997). *Drug Courts: Overview of
Growth, Characteristics, and Results*. Washington, D.C.

Vito, G. F., & Tewksbury, R. A. (1998). *Jefferson County drug court
program: impact evaluation, 1997.* Jefferson County, KY: Jefferson
County Drug Court.

Woolf, W. J., Jr., & The Court Administration. (1998). *Process
evaluation of the drug court diversion & treatment program in Florida\'s
Sixteenth judicial Court.* Monroe County, FL: Sixteenth Judicial Circuit
Court Administration.

***Publications:***

Barkdoll, G.L., & Bell, J.B. (1989).

*Evaluation and the federal decision maker. New Directions for Program
Evaluation series, no.* 61. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Bentler, P., Lettlerl, D.J., & Austin, G.A. (eds.). (1976). *Data
analysis strategies and designs for substance abuse research.*
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Berk, R. A., Rossi, P. H. (1990). *Thinking about program evaluation.*
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Brown, B. S. (1994). *Demystifying evalua­tion: Sourcebook of selected
instruments and workbook.* Rockville, MD: The Center for Substance Abuse
Treatment.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice. (1994). *Developing performance measures for
criminal justice programs.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice. (1992). *Law enforcement taskforce evaluation
projects: Results and findings in the states.* Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice. (1992). *Project Reporting System. Washington,
D.C.: U.S.* Government Printing Office.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice. (1994). *Report formatting: Issues of content and
graphic design.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Cavanagh, S., & Harrell, A. (1996). *Designing your own evaluation: The
selection and collection of data elements for process evaluation.* Paper
presented at the National Association of Drug Court Professionals
Conference, Washington, D.C.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (1994). *Developing state outcomes
monitoring systems for alcohol and other drug abuse treatments.*
Rockville, MD: Author.

Conrad, K.J. (1994). *Critically evaluating the role of experiments. New
Directions for Program Evaluation series, no.* 63. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.

Drug Courts Program Office, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department
of justice. (1998). *Drug court monitoring, evaluation, and management
information systems.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Dunworth, T., & Saiger, A. J. (199 1). *Guidelines for state monitoring
under the drug control formula grant*. RAND Corporation.

Fink, A., & Kosecoff, J. (1987). *An evaluation primer.* Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage Publications.

Fitz‑Gibbon, C.T., & Morris, L.L. (1987). *How to design a program
evaluation.* Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Freeman, H.W., Sandefur, G.D., & Rossi, P.H. (1989). *Workbook for
evaluation: A systematic approach.* Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

General Accounting Office. (1991). *Designing evaluations.* Washington,
D.C.: Author.

Goldkamp, J. S. *Overall evaluation issues for drug courts.* Crime and
Justice Research Institute.

Harrell, A. *Evaluation strategies for human service programs.*
Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Hawkins, J.D. (1988). *Handbook for evaluation.* San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.

Hawkins, J. D., Nederhood, B. (1987). *Handbook for evaluating drug and
alcohol prevention programs; Staff Team evaluation prevention programs
(STEPP).* (DHHS publication No. (ADM) 87‑1512). Washington, D.C.:
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, Public Health
Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Herman, J.L., ed. (1989). *Program evaluation kit, volumes 1‑9. 2nd Ed.*
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Herman, J.L., Morris, L.L., & Fitz ­Gibbon. (1987). *Evaluators
handbook.* Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los, Angeles,
Center for the Study of Evaluation.

Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority. (1995). *Evaluation up
close.* The Compiler. Chicago, IL: Author.

Kirchner, R.A. (1995). *Making programs whole: Integrating
implementation with assessment and evaluation.* Washington, D.C.: Bureau
of Justice Assistance.

Kirchner, R. A., Przybylski, R. K., & Cardella, R. A. (1994). *Assessing
the effec­tiveness of criminal justice programs.* Washington, D.C.:
Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of Justice.

Kirchner, R. A., Stawasz, M., Dressler, K. J., & Parisi, L. (1999).
*Volume 1: Orientation to program evaluation.* Washington, D.C.: Bureau
of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of
justice. Klein, M., & Teilmarm, D (eds.). (1980). *Handbook of criminal
justice evaluation.* Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Maxfield, M. G., & Babbie, E. (1995). *Research methods for criminal
justice & criminology.* New York: International Thomson Transport Press.

McNamara, C. (1998). *Basic guide to program evaluation.*

Miller, D.C. (1991). *Handbook of research design and social
measurement.* Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Mohr, L. B. (1995). *Impact analysis for program evaluation.* 2nd ed.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Mullen, J. *Learning from the demonstration programs.* Washington, D.C.:
National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice.

National Institute of Drug Abuse, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. *How good is your drug abuse treatment program?* (DHHS
publication ADM 93‑3608). Rockville, MD:

National Institute of justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of justice. (1992). *Evaluating drug control and system
improvement projects. Guidelines for projects supported by the Bureau of
Justice Assistance.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Institute of justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of Justice. (1992). *Report from the states on what works at
the state and local levels: A compendium of assessment and evaluation
results.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice
Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. (1989). *Evaluating juvenile
justice programs: A design monograph for state planners.* Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Peters, R. H. (1998). *Components of an evaluation program for your drug
court.* University of South Florida, Florida Mental Health Institute,
Department of Health Law and Policy.

Peters, R. H. (1996). *Evaluating drug court programs: An overview of
issues and alternative strategies.* Washington, D.C.: American
University.

Rossi, P. H., & Freeman, H. E. (1993). *Evaluation: A systematic
approach.* 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Rutman, L. (1980). *Planning useful evaluations. Evaluability
assessment.* Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

***Internet Resources:***

*Abt Associates:* [www.abtassoc.com](http://www.abtassoc.com/)

*American Evaluation Association:* [www.eval.org](http://www.eval.org/)

*American University Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance
Project:*
[www.american.edu/justice/dcclear.htm](http://www.american.edu/justice/dcclear.htm)

*Bureau of Justice Assistance Evaluation Website:*
[www.bja.evaluationwebsite.org](http://www.bja.evaluationwebsite.org/)

*Drug Courts Program Office:*
[www.ojp.usdoj.gov/dcpo](http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/dcpo)

*Electronic Resources for Evaluators:*
[www.itrs.usu.edu/AEA/resources.html](http://www.itrs.usu.edu/AEA/resources.html)

*ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation:*
[www.ericae.net/ft/tamu](http://www.ericae.net/ft/tamu)

*The Evaluation Center:*
[www.wmich.edu/evalctr/ess](http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/ess)

*Government Performaace Information Consultants:
www3.sympatico.ca./gpic/eclrsrch.htm*

*National Association of Drug Court Professionals:*
[www.drugcourt.org](http://www.drugcourt.org/)

*National Criminal Justice Reference Service:*
[www.ncjrs.org/hompage](http://www.ncjrs.org/hompage)

*National Institute on Drug Abuse:*
[www.nida.nih.gov](http://www.nida.nih.gov/)

*SEARCH Incorporated:* [www.search.org](http://www.search.org/)

*Vera Institute:* [www.vera.org](http://www.vera.org/)

***APPENDIX B***

***Sample Request for Proposals for Drug Court Evaluation Services***

**REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS**

**DRUG COURT PROGRAM EVALUATION**

Issue Date: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ RFP#:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Title: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court Evaluation

Commodity Code: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Issuing Agency: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court

Address \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Period of Contract: January 31, 2002 to March 31, 2003

Unsealed Proposals Will Be Received Until: 2:00 PM, January 10, 2002

For Furnishing the Goods/Services Described Herein.

All Inquiries For Information Should Be Directed To:

Name \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Title \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Phone Number \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

IF PROPOSALS ARE MAILED, SEND DIRECTLY TO ISSUING AGENCY SHOWN ABOVE. IF
PROPOSALS ARE HAND DELIVERED, DELIVER TO:

Name \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Address \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

In compliance with this Request for Proposals and to all the conditions
imposed herein, the undersigned offers and agrees to furnish the
goods/services in accordance with the attached signed proposal or as
mutually agreed upon by subsequent negotiation.

Name and Address of Firm:

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Date: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ By:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Zip Code \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Title:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FEI/FIN No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Telephone: ( )
\_\_\_\_\_\_ - \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Fax: ( ) \_\_\_\_\_\_ - \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**[TABLE OF CONTENTS]{.underline}**

I. PURPOSE 1

II\. BACKGROUND 1

III\. STATEMENT OF NEEDS 2

IV\. DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS 3

V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 3

VI\. EVALUATION AND AWARD CRITERIA 4

VII\. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 5

VIII\. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 10

IX\. METHOD OF PAYMENT 12

X. PRICING SCHEDULE 13

XI\. CHECKLIST FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL 14

**SAMPLE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS**

**DRUG COURT PROGRAM EVALUATION**

I. [PURPOSE]{.underline}

The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to solicit unsealed
proposals to conduct an impact evaluation of the Drug Court Program for
the Circuit Court of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

II\. [BACKGROUND]{.underline}

Since the mid-1990s, specialized drug case management programs,
including drug courts, have received considerable attention by judges
interested in handling their significant drug related caseloads more
effectively. Specialized drug court programs combine immediacy and
accountability of legal sanctions with intensive supervision and
treatment. Drug courts are developed through a multidisciplinary and
interagency effort between judges, Commonwealths Attorneys, defense
attorneys, treatment professionals, local law enforcement and jail
staff, and personnel from the department of Corrections. The drug court
model includes: a) judicial supervision of structured community-based
treatment; b) timely identification of defendants in need of treatment
and referral to treatment as soon as possible after arrest; c) regular
status hearings before the judge to monitor treatment progress and
program compliance; d) increased defendant accountability through a
series of graduated sanctions and rewards; and e) mandatory periodic
drug testing.

Reported benefits of specialized drug court dockets include: 1) enhanced
public safety vis a vis the coordinated and cooperative efforts of law
enforcement and treatment agencies to effectively address alcohol abuse,
drug use and recidivism; 2) reduction of overcrowding in local jails; 3)
expedited drug case docketing and resulting space for other types of
cases; 4) more cost effective drug case management; and 5) expedited
drug treatment referral at the crisis point of arrest.

Seventy-five people have graduated from the
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court Program
since it was established in 1998. A control group was selected at
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court that matches the drug
court group on demographic characteristics, addiction history, and
criminal history. The winning research proposal will compare the two
groups on outcome data.

III\. [STATEMENT OF NEEDS]{.underline}

> A. Contractor Services: The Contractor shall furnish all labor,
> materials and equipment needed to evaluate the client impact of the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court Program.
> Specifically, the Contractor will conduct research to answer the
> following questions:
>
> 1\. What is the recidivism rate for drug court graduates at six months
> post graduation? -twelve months post graduation? Does length of time
> in the drug court program affect these recidivism rates?
>
> 2\. What is the recidivism rate for drug court dropouts or those
> expelled from the program at six months after leaving the drug court?
> -twelve months after leaving the drug court? Does length of time in
> the drug court program affect these recidivism rates?
>
> 3\. What is the recidivism rate for a control group (not referred to
> drug court, but matched on demographics, substance abuse history, and
> criminal history) at six months after release from probation; -twelve
> months after release from probation?
>
> 4\. What is the cost per drug court participant compared with costs
> for other dispositions for drug-involved offenders (incarceration,
> probation, in-patient treatment, etc.)?
>
> 5\. What is the retention rate of participants in the drug court
> program? When are the critical periods of attrition from the drug
> court program? Who is most vulnerable to leaving (voluntarily or
> involuntarily) the drug court program?
>
> 6\. What offender profiles have greater/lesser success rates in the
> drug court program?
>
> 7\. What are the measures of substance use during the drug court
> program? Has substance use decreased (frequency, type of drug) for
> drug court graduates?
>
> 8\. What judicial, treatment and supervision interventions produce
> positive results? What revisions need to be made in the drug court
> program?
>
> B. Contractor Qualifications: The most successful candidate will have
> the following qualification and/or experience:
>
> • Graduate education in research methods and advanced statistics
>
> • Documented experience as principal researcher in conducting field
> research for criminal justice, court, and/or mental health agencies
>
> • Familiarity with the mission, functions and processes of the circuit
> court
>
> • Knowledge or experience in addiction treatment
>
> • Ability to assess adjustment and expansion needs of the drug court
> program
>
> • Skills in using statistical analyses and forecasting methods to
> project drug court program needs
>
> • Experience in analyzing and interpreting data about program impact
>
> • Ability to assess cost effectiveness of drug court program
>
> • Competencies in current technology applications
>
> • Effective skills in written and verbal communication
>
> • Ability to relate effectively with drug court team personnel

IV\. [DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS]{.underline}

A. The contractor will submit a detailed plan of the research questions
and the analyses used to answer these questions with the submission of
this application. An outline of the report content headings will also be
submitted with the application.

B. The \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team will
revise and approve the final format of research questions and the report
content outline for the study.

C. The contract must be awarded by January 31, 2002. The research study
must be completed by December 31, 2002. The final report must be
delivered by March 31, 2003.

V. [PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS]{.underline}

> A. [RFP Response]{.underline}: In order to be considered for
> selection, Offerors must submit a complete response to this RFP. One
> (1) original and two (2) copies of each proposal must be submitted to
> the issuing State agency. The Offeror shall make no other distribution
> of the proposal.
>
> B. [Proposal Preparation]{.underline}:
>
> 1\. Proposals shall be signed by an authorized representative of the
> Offeror. All information requested must be submitted. Failure to
> submit all information requested may result in the purchasing agency
> requiring prompt submission of missing information and/or giving a
> lowered evaluation of the proposal. Mandatory requirements are those
> required by law or regulation or are such that they cannot be waived
> and are not subject to negotiation.
>
> 2\. Proposals should be prepared simply and economically, providing a
> straightforward, concise description of capabilities to satisfy the
> requirements of the RFP. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and
> clarity of content.
>
> 3\. Each copy of the proposal should be bound or contained in a single
> volume where practical. All documentation submitted with the proposal
> should be contained in that single volume.
>
> 4\. Ownership of all data, materials and documentation originated and
> prepared for the court pursuant to the RFP shall belong exclusively to
> the court and be subject to public inspection in accordance with the
> Virginia Freedom of Information Act. Trade secrets or proprietary
> information submitted by an Offeror shall not be subject to public
> disclosure under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; however, the
> Offeror must invoke the protection of Section 11-52 of the Virginia
> Public Procurement Act prior to or upon submission of the data or
> other materials, and must identify the data or other materials to be
> protected and state the reasons why protection is necessary.
>
> C. [Specific Proposal Requirement]{.underline}: Proposals should be as
> thorough and detailed as possible so that the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team may
> properly evaluate your capabilities to provide the required
> goods/services. Offerors are required to submit the following items as
> a complete proposal:
>
> 1\. The return of this complete RFP, signed and filled out as
> required.
>
> 2\. Complete itemized budget with narrative explanation of budget
> requests.
>
> 3\. A written narrative statement to include:
>
> \(a\) Experience in providing the services described herein and copies
> of research reports and journal articles resulting from previous
> research.
>
> \(b\) Names, qualifications, and experience of the principal
> researcher and all key personnel to be assigned to the project.
>
> \(c\) Three references from other completed projects for private or
> public agencies.
>
> 4\. Specific plan for providing the proposed services including:
>
> \(a\) Description of the statistical package(s) and analyses used to
> evaluate the data.
>
> \(b\) Overall work plan for conducting the study, including a work
> schedule and time frame for completion of research phases.
>
> \(c\) Itemized budget with narrative explanation of budget requests.

VI\. [EVALUATION AND AWARD CRITERIA]{.underline}

> A. [Evaluation Criteria]{.underline}: Proposals shall be evaluated by
> the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Drug Court team using the
> following criteria and weighting scheme:
>
> 1\. Experience of Offerors in producing similar impact research
> studies. (25 points)
>
> 2\. Evidence of other field research studies. (25 points)
>
> 3\. Price. (25 points)
>
> 4\. Overall plan for providing services. (25 points)
>
> B. [Award of Contract]{.underline}: Selection shall be made of two or
> more Offerors deemed to be fully qualified and best suited among those
> submitting proposals on the basis of the evaluation factors included
> in the Request for Proposals, including price. Negotiations shall be
> conducted with the Offerors so selected. Price shall be considered,
> but need not be the sole determining factor. After negotiations have
> been conducted with each Offeror so selected, the agency shall select
> the Offeror which, in its opinion, has made the best proposal, and
> shall award the contract to that Offeror. The
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court may cancel
> this Request for Proposals or reject proposals at any time prior to an
> award, and is not required to furnish a statement of the reason why a
> particular proposal was not deemed to be the most advantageous.
> (Section 11-650, [Code of Virginia]{.underline}.)
>
> Should the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court
> determine in writing and at its sole discretion that only one Offeror
> is fully qualified, or that one Offeror is clearly more highly
> qualified than the others under consideration, a contract may be
> negotiated and awarded to that Offeror. The award document will be a
> contract incorporating by reference all the requirements, terms and
> conditions of the solicitation and the contractor\'s proposal as
> negotiated.

VII\. [GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS]{.underline}

> A. [Vendor\'s Manual]{.underline}: This solicitation is subject to the
> provisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia [Vendor\'s
> Manual]{.underline} and any revisions thereto, which are hereby
> incorporated into this contract in their entirety. A copy of the
> manual is normally available for review at the purchasing office and
> in addition a copy can be obtained by calling the Division of
> Purchases and Supply - (804) 786-3842.
>
> B. [Applicable Laws and Courts]{.underline}: This solicitation and any
> resulting contract shall be governed in all respects by the laws of
> the Commonwealth of Virginia and any litigation with respect thereto
> shall be brought in the courts of the Commonwealth. The Contractor
> shall comply with applicable federal, state and local laws and
> regulations.
>
> C. [Anti-Discrimination]{.underline}: By submitting their bids or
> proposals Bidders or Offerors certify to the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court that they will
> conform to the provisions of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
> amended, as well as the Virginia Fair Employment Act of 1975, as
> amended, where applicable, the Virginians With Disabilities Act, the
> Americans With Disabilities Act and §11-51 of the *Virginia Public
> Procurement Act*. If the award is made to a faith-based organization,
> the organization shall not discriminate against any recipient of
> goods, services, or disbursements made pursuant to the contract on the
> basis of the recipient's religion, religious belief, refusal to
> participate in a religious practice, or on the basis of race, age,
> color, gender or national origin and shall be subject to the same
> rules as other organizations that contract with public bodies to
> account for the use of the funds provided; however, if the faith-based
> organization segregates public funds into separate accounts, only the
> accounts and programs funded with public funds shall be subject to
> audit by the public body. (*Code of Virginia,* § 11-35.1E).
>
> In every contract over \$10,000 the provisions in 1. and 2. below
> apply:
>
> 1\. During the performance of this contract, the Contractor agrees as
> follows:
>
> \- The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or
> applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex,
> national origin, or disabilities, except where religion, sex or
> national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably
> necessary to the normal operation of the Contractor. The Contractor
> agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and
> applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of
> this nondiscrimination clause.
>
> \- The Contractor, in all solicitations or advertisements for
> employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, will state that
> such Contractor is an equal opportunity employer.
>
> \- Notices, advertisements and solicitations placed in accordance with
> federal law, rule or regulation shall be deemed sufficient for the
> purpose of meeting the requirements of this Section.
>
> 2\. The Contractor will include the provisions of 1. above in every
> subcontract or purchase order over \$10,000, so that the provisions
> will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor.
>
> D. [Ethics in Public Contracting]{.underline}: By submitting their
> bids or proposals, Bidders or Offerors certify that their bids or
> proposals are made without collusion or fraud and that they have not
> offered or received any kickbacks or inducements from any other
> Bidder/Offeror, supplier, manufacturer or subcontractor in connection
> with their bid or proposal, and that they have not conferred on any
> public employee having official responsibility for this procurement
> transaction any payment, loan, subscription, advance, deposit of
> money, services or anything of more than nominal value, present or
> promised unless consideration of substantially equal or greater value
> was exchanged.
>
> E. [Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986]{.underline}: By
> submitting their bids or proposals, the Bidders and Offerors certify
> that they do not and will not during the performance of this contract
> employ illegal alien workers or otherwise violate the provisions of
> the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
>
> F. [Debarment Status]{.underline}: By submitting their bids or
> proposals, Bidders or Offerors certify that they are not currently
> debarred by the Commonwealth from submitting bids or proposals on
> contracts for the type of goods and/or services covered by this
> solicitation, nor are they an agent of any person or entity that is
> currently so debarred, from submitting bids or proposals on contracts
> by any agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
>
> G. [Antitrust]{.underline}: By entering into a contract, the
> Contractor conveys, sells, assigns, and transfers to the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team of
> Virginia all rights, title and interest in and to all causes of the
> action it may now have or hereafter acquire under the antitrust laws
> of the United States and the Commonwealth of Virginia, relating to the
> particular goods or services purchased or acquired by the Commonwealth
> of Virginia under said contract.
>
> H. [Mandatory Use of State Form and Terms and Conditions]{.underline}:
>
> 1\. [Invitation for Bids]{.underline}: Failure to submit a bid on the
> official state form provided for that purpose shall be a cause for
> rejection of the bid. Modification of or additions to any portion of
> the invitation for bid may be cause for rejection of the bid; however,
> the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team
> reserves the right to decide, on a case by case basis, in its sole
> discretion, whether to reject such a bid as non-responsive. As a
> precondition to its acceptance, the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> Circuit Court Drug Court team may, in its sole discretion, request
> that the Bidder withdraw or modify non-responsive portions of a bid
> which do not affect quality, quantity, price, or delivery. No
> modification of or addition to the provisions of the contract shall be
> effective unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties.
>
> 2\. [Request For Proposals]{.underline}: Failure to submit a proposal
> on the official state form provided for that purpose may be a cause
> for rejection of the proposal. Return of the complete document is
> required. Modifications of or additions to the General Terms and
> Conditions of the solicitation may be cause for rejection of the
> proposal; however, the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug
> Court team reserves the right to decide, on a case by case basis, in
> its sole discretion, whether to reject such a proposal.
>
> I. [Clarification of Terms]{.underline}: If any prospective Bidder or
> Offeror has questions about the specifications or other solicitation
> documents, the prospective Bidder or Offeror should contact the buyer
> whose name appears on the face of the solicitation no later than five
> working days before the due date. Any revisions to the solicitation
> will be made only by addendum issued by the buyer.
>
> J. [Payment to Subcontractors]{.underline}: A Contractor awarded a
> contract under this solicitation is hereby obligated:
>
> 1\. To pay the subcontractor(s) within seven (7) days of the
> contractor\'s receipt of payment from the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team for the
> proportionate share of the payment received for work performed by the
> subcontractor(s) under the contract; or
>
> 2\. To notify the agency and the subcontractor(s), in writing, of the
> contractor\'s intention to withhold payment and the reason.
>
> The Contractor is obligated to pay the subcontractor(s) interest at
> the rate of one percent per month (unless otherwise provided under the
> terms of the contract) on all amounts owed by the contractor that
> remain unpaid seven (7) days following receipt of payment from the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team, except
> for amounts withheld as stated in 2. above. The date of mailing of any
> payment by U. S. Mail is deemed to be payment to the addressee. These
> provisions apply to each sub-tier contractor performing under the
> primary contract. A contractor\'s obligation to pay an interest charge
> to a subcontractor may not be construed to be an obligation of the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team.
>
> K. [Precedence of Terms]{.underline}: Paragraphs A-J of these General
> Terms and Conditions shall apply in all instances. In the event there
> is a conflict between any of the other General Terms and Conditions
> and any Special Terms and Conditions in this solicitation, the Special
> Terms and Conditions shall apply.
>
> L. [Invoices]{.underline}: Invoices for items ordered, delivered and
> accepted shall be submitted by the Contractor directly to the payment
> address shown on the purchase order/contract. All invoices shall show
> the state contract number and/or purchase order number and the Social
> Security Number (for individual contractors) or the Federal Employer
> Identification Number (for proprietorships, partnerships, and
> corporations).
>
> M. [Payment Terms]{.underline}: Any payment terms requiring payment in
> less than 30 days will be regarded as requiring payment 30 days after
> invoice or delivery, whichever occurs last. This shall not affect
> offers of discounts for payment in less than 30 days, however.
>
> N. [Qualifications of Bidders or Offerors]{.underline}: The
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team may make
> such reasonable investigations as deemed proper and necessary to
> determine the ability of the Offeror to perform the work/furnish the
> item(s) and the Offeror shall furnish to the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team all such
> information and data for this purpose as may be requested. The
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team reserves
> the right to inspect Offeror\'s physical facilities prior to award to
> satisfy questions regarding the Offeror\'s capabilities. The
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team further
> reserves the right to reject any bid or proposal if the evidence
> submitted by, or investigations of, such Offeror fails to satisfy the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team that such
> Offeror is properly qualified to carry out the obligations of the
> contract and to complete the work/furnish the item(s) contemplated
> therein.
>
> O. [Testing or Inspection]{.underline}: The
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team reserves
> the right to conduct any test/inspection it may deem advisable to
> assure supplies and services conform to the specification.
>
> P. [Assignment of Contract]{.underline}: A contract shall not be
> assigned by the Contractor in whole or in part without the written
> consent of the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court
> team.
>
> Q. [Changes to the Contract]{.underline}: Changes can be made to the
> Contract in any one of the following ways:
>
> 1\. The Purchasing Agency may order changes within the general scope
> of the contract at any time by written notice to the Contractor.
> Changes within the scope of the contract include, but are not limited
> to things such as the method of packing or shipment and the place of
> delivery or installation. The Contractor shall comply with the notice
> upon receipt. The Contractor shall be compensated for any additional
> costs incurred as the result of such order and shall give the
> Purchasing Agency a credit for any savings. Said compensation shall be
> determined by one of the following methods:
>
> a\. By mutual agreement between the parties in writing; or
>
> b\. By agreeing upon a unit price or using a unit price set forth in
> the contract, if the work to be done can be expressed in units and the
> Contractor accounting for the number of units of work performed,
> subject to the Purchasing Agency\'s right to audit the Contractor\'s
> records and/or to determine the correct number of units independently;
> or
>
> c\. By ordering the Contractor to proceed with the work and to keep a
> record of all costs incurred and savings realized. A markup for
> overhead and profit may be allowed if provided by the contract. The
> same markup shall be used for determining a decrease in price as the
> result of savings realized. The Contractor shall present the
> Purchasing Agency with all vouchers and records of expenses incurred
> and savings realized. The Purchasing Agency shall have the right to
> audit the records of the Contractor as it deems necessary to determine
> costs or savings. Any claim for an adjustment in price under this
> provision must be asserted by written notice to the Purchasing Agency
> within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order
> from the Purchasing Agency. If the parties fail to agree on an amount
> of adjustment, the question of an increase shall be resolved in
> accordance with the procedures for resolving disputes provided by the
> Disputes Clause of this contract or, if there is none, in accordance
> with the disputes provisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia\'s
> Vendor\'s Manual. Neither the existence of a claim or a dispute
> resolution process, litigation or any other provision of this contract
> shall excuse the Contractor from promptly complying with the changes
> ordered by the Purchasing Agency or with the performance of the
> contract generally.
>
> 2\. The parties may agree in writing to modify the scope of the
> contract. An increase or decrease in the price of the contract
> resulting from such modification shall be agreed to by the parties as
> a part of their written agreement to modify the scope of the contract.
>
> R. [Default]{.underline}: In case of failure to deliver goods or
> services in accordance with the contract terms and conditions, the
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court Drug Court team, after
> due oral or written notice, may procure them from other sources and
> hold the Contractor responsible for any resulting additional purchase
> and administrative costs. This remedy shall be in addition to any
> other remedies which the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Circuit Court
> Drug Court team may have.

VIII\. [SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS]{.underline}

> A. [Proposal Acceptance Period]{.underline}: Any proposal resulting
> from this solicitation shall be valid for 30 days. At the end of 30
> days the proposal may be withdrawn at the written request of the
> Offeror. If the proposal is not withdrawn at that time it remains in
> effect until an award is made or the solicitation is canceled.
>
> B. [Availability of Funds]{.underline}: It is understood and agreed
> between the parties herein that the agency shall be bound hereunder
> only to the extent of the funds available or which may hereafter
> become available for the purpose of this agreement.
>
> C. [Subcontracts]{.underline}: No portion of the work shall be
> subcontracted without prior written consent of the purchasing agency.
> In the event that the Contractor desires to subcontract some part of
> the work specified herein, the Contractor shall furnish the purchasing
> agency the names, qualifications and experience of their proposed
> subcontractors. The Contractor shall, however, remain fully liable and
> responsible for the work to be done by his subcontractor(s) and shall
> assure compliance with all requirements of the contract.
>
> D. [Drug Free Workplace]{.underline}: During the performance of this
> contract, the contractor agrees to (1) provide a drug-free workplace
> for the contractor's employees; (ii) post in conspicuous places,
> available to employees and applicants for employment, a statement
> notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, sale, distribution,
> dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance or
> marijuana is prohibited in the contractor's workplace and specifying
> the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of
> such prohibition; (iii) state in all solicitations or advertisements
> for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor that the
> contractor maintains a drug-free workplace; and (iv) include the
> provisions of the foregoing clauses in every subcontract or purchase
> order of over \$10,000, so that the provisions will be binding upon
> each subcontractor or vendor.
>
> For the purposes of this section, "drug-free workplace" means a site
> for the performance of work done in connection with a specific
> contract awarded to a contractor, the employees of whom are prohibited
> from engaging in the unlawful manufacture, sale, distribution,
> dispensation, possession or use of any controlled substance or
> marijuana during the performance of the contract.
>
> E. [Nondiscrimination of Contractors]{.underline}: A bidder, offeror,
> or contractor shall not be discriminated against in the solicitation
> or award of this contract because of race, religion, color, sex,
> national origin, age, or disability or against faith-based
> organizations. If the award of this contract is made to a faith-based
> organization and an individual, who applies for or receives goods,
> services, or disbursements provided pursuant to this contract objects
> to the religious character of the faith-based organization from which
> the individual receives or would receive the goods, services, or
> disbursements, the public body shall offer the individual, within a
> reasonable period of time after the date of his objection, access to
> equivalent good, services, or disbursements from an alternative
> provider.
>
> F. [Americans with Disabilities Act]{.underline}: By signing this bid,
> the bidder/offeror certifies that it does not and will not during the
> performance of this contract violate the provisions of the Americans
> with Disabilities Act, effective July 1, 1992, with prohibits
> discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment
> because of disabilities.
>
> G. [Minority/Women Owned Business Subcontracting and
> Reporting]{.underline}: When it is practicable for any portion of the
> awarded contract to be subcontracted to other suppliers, the
> contractor is encouraged to offer such business to minority and/or
> women-owned businesses. Names of firms may be available from the buyer
> and/or from the Division of Purchases and Supply. When such business
> has been subcontracted to these firms and upon completion of the
> contract, the contractor agrees to furnish the purchasing office the
> following information: name of firm, phone number, total dollar amount
> subcontracted and type of product/service provided.

IX\. [METHOD OF PAYMENT]{.underline}

> Upon completion of the project, an invoice is to be submitted in
> accordance with Section VII. L. Payment will be made in accordance
> with Section VII.M.

X. [PRICING SCHEDULE]{.underline}

> Include an itemized budget and a budget narrative with submission of
> this application. In determining the personnel costs, include the
> estimated cost per day for the principal researcher and research
> assistants for consulting, data gathering, data analysis, and report
> writing. The budget format may include the following categories:

***Itemized Quote Information***

> In addition to the total bid price information, please provide the
> following itemized pricing information:
>
> I. PERSONNEL
>
> Principal Investigator X days @ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ per day
>
> Research Assistants X days @ \$ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ per day
>
> II\. FRINGE BENEFITS
>
> FICA @ .0765
>
> Retirement @
>
> Health Plan @
>
> Other Fringe Benefits @
>
> TOTAL PERSONNEL
>
> III\. TRAVEL
>
> Non-local miles X mi. @ .325 X \_\_\_\_\_ people
>
> Subsistence \$116/day X \_\_\_\_ days X \_\_\_\_ people
>
> Air Fare -- round trip
>
> TOTAL TRAVEL
>
> IV\. EQUIPMENT
>
> TOTAL EQUIPMENT
>
> V. SUPPLIES
>
> Printing
>
> Office Supplies
>
> Postage
>
> Long Distance Phone
>
> TOTAL SUPPLIES
>
> VI\. OTHER
>
> GRAND TOTAL

XI\. [CHECKLIST FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL]{.underline}

A. Complete RFP response with required signatures.

> B. Written narrative of experience in field research, education and
> experience of principal researcher and key research personnel, and
> references.
>
> C. Specific research plan with proposed analyses and report format.

D. Itemized budget with narrative description of budget needs.

***APPENDIX C***

***Drug Court Process Evaluation Form***

***Process Evaluation: Virginia Drug Courts***

***\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Judicial \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Court***

***\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_***

***Jurisdiction Size: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_***

***I. DRUG COURT STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT***

1\. What type of court and jurisdictional boundaries define this drug
court?

a\. Circuit Court \_\_\_\_ b. General District Court \_\_\_\_ c. Juv&Dom
Rel Court \_\_\_\_

d\. Single jurisdiction \_\_\_\_ e. Multijurisdictional \_\_\_

2\. What general approach does the drug court follow?

a\. Deferred prosecution (withhold finding, pre-adjudication
diversion)\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

b\. Postadjudication (convicted, sentence is deferred or pronounced)
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

c\. Standard first offender alternative
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

d\. Other
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. Why did the Court decide to initiate a drug
court?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. What's the projected total capacity of the drug court program?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. Who was instrumental in developing and continuing the work of your
local drug court?

*[Courts]{.underline}*:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
*[Community Services Board]{.underline}*:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Department of Corrections and Community
Corrections]{.underline}*:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Commonwealth's
Attorneys:]{.underline}*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[*Public
Defenders*:]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Attorneys]{.underline}*
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Police/
Sheriff:\_]{.underline}*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Mental
Health:]{.underline}*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*[Others]{.underline}*:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6.What type of pre-planning activities were conducted by the
court?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

***II. DRUG COURT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES***

1\. Who are the judges directly involved in referring, hearing, and
monitoring drug court cases?

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. Is one judge primarily responsible for programmatic administration
of the drug court program?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3.What are the primary goals and objectives of the Drug
Court?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. Who is eligible for referral to drug court?

Adult men \_\_\_\_\_ Adult women \_\_\_\_\_ Juveniles \_\_\_\_\_

Nonviolent offenders \_\_\_\_\_ Violent offenders \_\_\_\_\_ Drug
addicts \_\_\_\_\_\_

Alcoholics \_\_\_\_\_ Non-addicts \_\_\_\_\_ First-time offenders
\_\_\_\_\_

Repeat Offenders \_\_\_\_\_ Probation violators \_\_\_\_\_

Types of offenses eligible for drug court referral
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. What is the procedure for Drug Court
referral?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6\. What are the program requirements of the Drug Court?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7\. What sanctions follow non-compliance of Drug Court Program
rules?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

8\. What are the procedures followed in sanctioning a drug court
participant for program non-compliance?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9\. How many and how long are the phases of the drug court
program?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

10\. What are the graduation requirements?

\_\_\_\_\_\_ number of months drug free \_\_\_\_ no rearrests \_\_\_\_\_
job \_\_\_\_\_

Other
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

***III. DRUG COURT PARTICIPANT PROFILES***

*(Total number of drug court participants including those terminated,
withdrawn, graduated or currently in good standing)*

1\. Since initiating the drug court program, how many offenders have
participated? \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. What number of current participants are in good standing?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. What number of referred offenders: dropped out\_\_\_\_\_\_ were
terminated \_\_\_\_\_\_ died \_\_\_\_

decided not to accept the drug court alternative \_\_\_\_\_

4\. How many participants have graduated from drug
court?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. Age categories (no.in each under 12 \_\_\_\_ 22 - 30 \_\_\_

age range) 12 - 16 \_\_\_\_ 30 - 40 \_\_\_

17 - 18 \_\_\_\_ 41 - 50 \_\_\_

19 - 21 ***\_\_\_\_*** over 50 ***\_\_\_***

6\. Gender categories: graduates: Male \_\_\_ Female \_\_\_\_

current participants: Male \_\_\_\_ Female \_\_\_\_

total referred: Male \_\_\_\_ Female \_\_\_\_

7\. Number of participants of the following racial or ethnic descent:

> Caucasian \_\_\_\_\_ African American \_\_\_\_ Native American
> \_\_\_\_\_ Hispanic/Latino \_\_\_\_\_ Alaskan Native \_\_\_\_
> Asian/Pacific Island \_\_\_\_ Other \_\_\_\_

8\. Primary Drug of Choice (% by category): Alcohol \_\_\_ Marijuana
\_\_\_ Heroin \_\_\_ Crack \_\_\_

> Cocaine \_\_\_ LSD \_\_\_ Methamphetamines \_\_\_ Uppers \_\_\_
> Downers \_\_\_ Hallucinogens \_\_\_ Narcotics \_\_\_ Multiple primary
> preferences \_\_\_

9\. Number of participants with prior *drug related* arrests: 0 priors
\_\_\_\_ 1-2 priors \_\_\_\_

3-4 priors \_\_\_\_ 5-6 priors \_\_\_\_ 7 or more priors \_\_\_\_

10\. Number of participants with prior *non-drug related* arrests: 0
priors \_\_\_\_ 1-2 priors \_\_\_\_

3-4 priors \_\_\_\_ 5-6 priors \_\_\_\_ 7 or more priors \_\_\_\_

11\. Number with prior substance abuse treatment: No treatment \_\_\_
Detox only\_\_\_

Detox and Therapy \_\_\_Therapy only \_\_\_ AA \_\_\_ NA \_\_\_ Family
program \_\_\_

Inpatient substance abuse \_\_\_ Inpatient multiple times \_\_\_

Outpatient Substance Abuse \_\_\_ Outpatient multiple times \_\_\_

12\. Employment: Number employed when admitted to drug court program
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Number not employed when referred \_\_\_\_\_\_ Number obtaining
employment during drug court participation \_\_\_\_\_ Number employed at
graduation \_\_\_\_\_\_

13\. Type of employment: Professional employment \_\_\_\_\_ Skilled
trade employment \_\_\_\_\_ Unskilled worker \_\_\_\_ Academic school
\_\_\_\_ Vocational school \_\_\_\_\_

Full time employment \_\_\_\_ Part-time employment \_\_\_\_

14\. *Residential Stability*: Family or offender resided locally: less
than 1 year \_\_\_% ;

1- 3 years \_\_\_%; 3 - 5 years\_\_\_%; 6 yr-10 years \_\_\_%; 11 years
or more \_\_\_%

15\. Training: During drug court participation, how many:

Began academic study \_\_\_\_\_ Began vocational training \_\_\_\_\_
Obtained a GED \_\_\_\_\_ Completed vocational training \_\_\_\_\_
Finished academic study \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

***IV. DRUG COURT TREATMENT AND SUPERVISION***

1\. What assessment tools are used with drug court participants?

*Initial
Screening:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Substance Abuse Treatment
Assessment:*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. What therapeutic interventions are available (or mandated) for
drug/alcohol offenders?

Assessment/Evaluation \_\_\_ Individual therapy \_\_\_ Group therapy
\_\_\_ Educational \_\_\_ Detox \_\_\_ Family Therapy \_\_\_ AA\_\_\_
NA\_\_\_ Acupuncture \_\_\_ Pharmacology \_\_\_ Job Training \_\_\_ Job
Placement\_\_\_ Day Reporting Center \_\_\_ Outpatient \_\_\_\_

Inpatient \_\_\_ Parenting classes \_\_\_ Mental health \_\_\_\_ Housing
\_\_\_ Health Care \_\_\_\_

*Wrap Around
Services*:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*Day Supervision and Inpatient
Services*:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. Who provides treatment
services?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. How often are offenders seen individually by a licensed
therapist?\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. What are the specific therapeutic interventions used with drug court
participants?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6\. How often are status hearings before the judge held?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7\. How often are urine screens administered?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

***V. DRUG COURT IMPACT EVALUATION***

***A. Evaluation System:***

*1. How are drug court data gathered and compiled?*

*Manually \_\_\_\_\_ Automated \_\_\_\_\_ Both \_\_\_\_\_*

***B. Treatment Impact on Offenders***

*1. How did you measure the offenders' stages of recovery during their
participation in the
program?***\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

*2. What are longitudinal post-program recovery findings? (6 mos., 1
year, 2 years + intervals):*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*3. What are the findings of qualitative, anecdotal, or descriptive
evaluations of offenders treatment
progress?***\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

***C. Impact on the Court System:***

1\. *Average Cost (per person) for Drug Court Program Treatment:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Total costs assumed by public
funds:\_\_\_\_*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*Total costs assumed by offenders:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

> *(include Medicaid and personal insurance reimbursement, if any)*

*Participant fees charged to offender (purpose of fee and amount):
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*2. Average Costs for Other Dispositional Alternatives:*

*Local average costs of pretrial detention:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Local average costs of probation supervision
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Local average costs of jail incarceration
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*State average costs of prison incarceration
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*State average costs of parole supervision
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Hidden savings in policing costs, theft reduction, public assistance,
medical claims, victimization, etc.*

3\. *Workload Analysis**: ***

*How has the implementation of the drug court impacted on the judges'
workloads?*
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*How has implementation of the drug court impacted the workload of the
Clerk's office?*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*What additional tasks or chores are necessary for the judge and/or
clerk's office?*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Has the drug court program adversely impacted the court's ability to
handle other cases in an expeditious manner?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Has the court needed to hire additional personnel (judges, assistant
clerks, or other state personnel to accommodate the drug court
program?(If so, which positions and how many?)
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*How has the drug court affected statistical reporting of cases by
locality (if referred by another court in your jurisdiction, which court
gets "credit"?)*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

***VI. ISSUES, CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:***

*1. What are the strongest and weakest aspects of the drug court's
operation?*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. *What issues or concerns do judges, drug court personnel or
treatment providers have, if any, with the permanent
institutionalization of the drug court program as part of court
operation?*
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*3. From your experience in planning, implementing, maintaining and
modifying your drug court program, what suggestions can you offer to
other localities interested in setting up drug courts?*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

*4. In your opinion, is the drug court model amenable to other offender
categories (other addictive behaviors that aren't substance-related,
family issues where a parent has a substance abuse problem, etc.?)
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*5. Observations and Recommendations:*

***VII. FUNDING:***

***A. Federal Government Grant Funding**:*

*1. Type of Drug Court Grant
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*2. Grant Award Period
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*3. Date Drug Court Program Started
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*4. Date Started with DCPO funding, if different
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*5. Amount of Grant Award
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

***B. Other Funding Sources (list sources and funding amounts)***

*1. Other Federal Government Funding
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*2. State Government Funding
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*3. Local Government Funding
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*4. Private (grants, donations from foundations, businesses, charitable
organizations)*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

***VIII. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF KEY PERSONNEL***

*1.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

*2.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

*3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

*4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

*5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

*6.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Name Position*

*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_*

*Address Phone Fax E-mail*

***APPENDIX D***

***Virginia Drug Court***

***Management Information System Design***

# 

# **Goal One**

**Goal Statement**

Provide probation supervision, substance abuse services, judicial
monitoring, intervention, and services to non-violent substance abusing
offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure types and intensity of probation supervision

-   Measure types and intensity of substance abuse services

-   Measure number and types of judicial monitoring

-   Measure number and types of sanctions and rewards

-   Measure offender use of ancillary services

## 

## Data Questions

1.  What are the characteristics of the population the program serves?

2.  What are the quantity and types of probation supervision?

3.  What are the quantity and types of substance abuse services?

4.  What are the quantity and types of judicial monitoring?

5.  What are the quantity and types of sanctions and rewards?

6.  What are the quantity and types of ancillary services?

7.  What is the length of time between program commencement and program
    successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

8.  What are the retention rates of the program?

9.  What are the completion rates of the program?

**Data Question 1- What are the characteristics of the population the
program serves?**

### 

### Screening

[Screening]{.underline} (subcategory)

### Screening Date

-   \*Screened

In, Out

-   If Out -- \*Reason

Current Charge-Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of
Dist/Poss, Offender Refused, Not Drug Dependent, Commonwealth Attorney
Objected, Mental Health Condition, Non-resident, Other (description
field)

-   \*Referring Court - for screening (type and locality)

> list of all Virginia cities and counties with their respective types
> of court

-   \*Referring Judge - for screening

#### Locally defined list of Judges

[Charges]{.underline} (subcategory) (allow for modification of charges)

# Arrest Date

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table- allows for
    multiple charges)

-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

[Court Assignment]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Court Date (allow for modification of court date)

-   \*Court (type and locality)

> list of all Virginia cities and counties with their respective types
> of court

[Recommendation / Court Action]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Recommendation Date

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Recommendation to Court

#### Drug Court Recommended, Drug Court Not Recommended

-   If not recommended- \*Reason

Current Charge-Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of
Dist/Poss, Offender Refused, Not Drug Dependent, Commonwealth Attorney
Objected, Mental Health Condition, Non-resident, Other (description
field)

-   Staff Making Recommendation

-   \*Court Action

#### Placed in Drug Court, Not Placed Drug Court, Waived Preliminary Hearing

# If not placed- \*Reason 

Current Charge-Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of Viol/Weap/Sex, Record of
Dist/Poss, Offender Refused, Not Drug Dependent, Commonwealth Attorney
Objected, Mental Health Condition, Non-resident, Other (description
field)

*Placement*

[Placement Information]{.underline} (subcategory) (allows for multiple
placements)

-   \*Referring Court (type and locality)

> list of all Virginia cities and counties with their respective types
> of court

-   \*Referring Judge

> locally defined list of Judges and Magistrates

-   \*Placement Status

> Pending, Open, Closed

-   Status Date

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Phase Level (allows for multiple phases and occurrences)

> I, II, III, IV

-   Date Phase Began (corresponds with each phase occurrence)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Supervision Level (allows for multiple levels and occurrences)

> I, II, III, IV

-   Date Level Began (corresponds with each level occurrence)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Date Graduated

-   Date Placement Closed

-   \*Closure Type

######  Successful Completion

> Unsuccessful Termination

New Criminal Offense, Absconding, Threatening/Assaultive Behavior,
Repeated Minor Violations, Weapon Possession, Unsatisfactory
Performance, Excessive Positive Drug Screens, Other (description field)

######## Other

[Program Requirements]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Number of Community Service Hours

-   \*Payment Type (allows for multiple payment types)

> Court Fines, Court Costs, Restitution, Program Fees

-   Amount (allows for one amount per payment type)

[Charge(s)]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table- allows for
    multiple charges)

-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   Arrest Date (allows for one date per charge- allows for date
    unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Original Adjudication Date (allows for one date per charge- allows
    for date unknown)

-   \*Original Adjudication

Guilty, Not Guilty, Withhold Finding, Diverted, First Offender,
Suspended Prosecution

-   Final Adjudication Date (allows for one date per charge- allows for
    date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Final Adjudication

> Guilty, Not Guilty, Nolle Prossed, Dismissed

### Demographics

-   Virginia State Identification Number (SID)

-   Department of Juvenile Justice Number

-   Local Tracking Number

-   Age (automatically calculated from Date of Birth field)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Race

#  Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native American, White, Other, Unknown

# \*Sex

#  Female, Male

-   \*Religious Preference

Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, Other, None

#### \*Primary Language

English, French, Spanish, Other (description field)

-   \*English Literate

Yes, No

-   \*Interpreter Needed

#  Yes, No

### Residence

-   \*Fixed Address

Yes, No

-   \*Residence Status

Family/Friend, Hotel/Motel, Own, Rent, Residential Facility, Room &
Board, Shelter,

Transient, Other (description field)

-   Address (4 free form lines)

-   Phone Number

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Lives with

Name free form field

-   \*Relationship

> Spouse, Parent, Step-Parent, Grandparent, Sibling, Other Relative,
> Child, Significant Other, Friend, Other

-   Length of Time in Area (measured in years and months)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Length of Time in State (measured in years and months)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Length of Time at Present Address (measured in years and months)

### 

### 

### Family

[Offender]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   \*Marital Status

#  Married, Divorced, Never Married, Separated, Widowed

-   \*Current Living Arrangements

With: Alone, Partner Only, Partner and Child(ren), Parent(s), Child(ren)
Only, Grandparent(s), Other Extended Family, Foster Care Family, Adopted
Family, Friends, Institutional/Inpatient Setting (description field), No
Stable Arrangements, Other (description field)

-   \*Usual Living Arrangements last 3 years

With: Alone, Partner Only, Partner and Child(ren), Parent(s), Child(ren)
Only, Grandparent(s), Other Extended Family, Foster Care Family, Adopted
Family, Friends, Institutional/Inpatient Setting (description field), No
Stable Arrangements, Other (description field)

-   \*Person in Home on Active Supervision

#### Yes, No

[Children/Siblings of Offender]{.underline} (subcategory) (allows for
multiple entries)

-   Name (free form field)

-   Age

-   \*Sex

Male, Female

-   \*Living Situation

With: Offender Alone, Offender and Spouse/Partner, Grandparent, Other
Family Member, Foster Care, Institution/Inpatient Setting (description
field), Adopted, Independent Living, Other (description field)

-   Child or Sibling (select one)

[Parents of Offender]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   \*Marital Status

#  Married, Divorced, Never Married, Separated, Widowed

-   \*Family History of Alcohol, Drug, Psychological Problem

Yes, No

-   \*Relationship-Type (check all that apply)

Mother, Father, Maternal Grandmother, Paternal Grandmother, Maternal
Grandfather, Paternal Grandfather, Alcohol, Drug, Psychological

### Employment (allows for multiple entries)

-   *\**Currently Employed

#  Yes, No

-   \*Current Employment Status

#### Full-time, Part-time, Unemployed, NLF (not in labor force)- Homemaker, NLF- Student, NLF- Retired, NLF- Disabled, NLF- Resident/Inmate of Institution, NLF- Employment Program, NLF- Other, Unknown, Not Collected

-   \*Occupation Type

Skilled, Semi-skilled, Unskilled

-   Total Net Monthly Employment Income (dollar amount)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Total Net Monthly Income (dollar amount)

### 

### 

### Other Income (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Type

> Alimony, Child Support, Disability, Food Stamps, Medical Assistance,
> Refugee Settlement, Retirement, Social Security, SSI Disability,
> Unemployment, VA Benefits, Welfare, Workman's Compensation, Illegal
> Activity, Other

# Amount (allows for one amount per other income type)

### Education

-   \*Able to Read English

Yes, No

-   \*Able to Write English

Yes, No

-   \*Currently a Student

Yes, No

-   \*School Type

#### Home, Alternative, Home Bound, GED Program, Public/Private, Trade, College

-   \*Student Status

Full-time, Part-time

-   \*Last Grade Completed

> 1^st^ Grade, 2^nd^ Grade, 3^rd^ Grade, 4^th^ Grade, 5^th^ Grade, 6^th^
> Grade, 7^th^ Grade, 8^th^ Grade, 9^th^ Grade, 10^th^ Grade, 11^th^
> Grade, 12^th^ Grade, GED, Trade School, 1 Year College, 2 Years
> College, 3 Years College, College Graduate, Graduate Education

# 

# *Substance Use* (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Substance (modified with ASI base)

> [Category]{.underline} [Drugs]{.underline}
>
> Alcohol Beer, Wine, Liquor
>
> Amphetamine Monster, Crank, Benzedrine, Dexedrine, Ritalin, Preludin,
>
> Methamphetamine, Speed, Ice, Crystal, MDMA (Ecstacy), STP, Unknown
>
> Barbiturate Nembutal, Seconal, Tuinol, Amytal, Pentobarbital,
> Secobarbital,
>
> Phenobarbital, Fiorinol, Unknown

#### Cannabis Marijuana, Hashish, THC- Tetrahydrocannabinol 

> Cocaine Crystal, Free-Base, Crack/Rock
>
> Hallucinogen LSD (Acid), Mescaline, Mushrooms (Psilocybin), Peyote,
> Green,
>
> PCP (Phencyclidine), Angel Dust, Unknown
>
> Heroin Heroin
>
> Inhalant Nitrous Oxide, Amyl Nitrate (Whippits, Poppers), Glue,
> Solvents,
>
> Gasoline, Toluene, Unknown

Methadone Dolphine, LAAM

#### Opiate Morphine, Dilaudid, Demerol, Percocet, Percodan, Opium, Darvon, Talwin, Codeine, Tylenol 2, 3, 4, Robitussin, Fentanyl, Vicodin, OxyContin, Unknown

> Sedative/Hypnotic Valium, Librium, Activan, Serax, Tranxene, Xanax,
> Miltown,

/Tranquilizer ChloralHydrate (Noctex), Quaaludes, Dalmane, Halcion,
Unknown

Prescription Drug Description field

Over the Counter Description field

Other Description field

-   \*Frequency

> Daily, Weekly, Bi-Weekly, Monthly, Bi-Monthly, Semi-Annually,
> Annually, Quarterly, Hourly, Other

-   Length of Use (measured in years and months)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Method of Intake

> Drink, Inhale, Inject, Ingest, Smoke, Snort, Various

##### Number of Times used Last 30 Days

##### Age at First Use

##### Date of Last Use

-   \*Self Reported Information (provides a check box for a factor if
    the offender reports any of the following)

Substance Abuse Concern

> Primary Drug of Choice
>
> Secondary Drug of Choice

Interest in Treatment

Overdose

Withdrawal Symptoms

Dual Diagnosis

Black Outs

-   Money Spent in Last 30 Days on Drugs (dollar amount)

*Substance Abuse Treatment* (history of treatment prior to program
entry- allows for

multiple treatments)

-   \*Treatment Type

> Outpatient, Intensive Outpatient, Detox (3-5 days), Day Treatment,
> Partial Hospitalization, Hospitalization, AA/NA, Relapse Prevention,
> Residential

-   \*Primary Substance (same values as "substance")

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Secondary Substance (same values as "substance")

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Status

Currently in Treatment, Completed Treatment, Not Completed

-   Dates

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Entered Program

Voluntarily, Court Ordered, Employment Directed, Other (description
field)

Note: the following are single entry fields within the Substance Abuse
Treatment category

-   Number of Prior Outpatient Treatment(s)

-   Number of Prior Inpatient Treatment(s)

### Health Issues 

### [Health]{.underline} (subcategory) (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Health Issue

#### HIV/AIDS, Allergies, Asthma, Diabetes, Epilepsy, Heart Disease, Hepatitis, High Blood Pressure, Intestinal Disorders, Kidney Dysfunction, Physical Disability, Pregnant, Sexually Transmitted Disease, Tuberculosis, Depression, Dual Diagnosis, Emotional Disability, Learning Disability, Mental Illness, Suicidal Ideation or Attempt, Abuse, Other (description field)

-   \*Status

Currently in Treatment, Completed Treatment, Not in Treatment/Not
Completed

-   Dates

# Note: the following are single entry fields within the Health subcategory

-   Number of Mental Health Outpatient Treatment(s)

-   Number of Mental Health Inpatient Treatment(s)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Currently Taking Medication

#### Yes, No

-   If yes, name of medication

Free form description field

[DSM --IV Code]{.underline} (subcategory) (allows for multiple entries)

-   Date of Diagnosis

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Axis I Primary

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis I Secondary

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis I Tertiary

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis II Primary

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis II Secondary

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis III

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

-   \*Axis V

Valid DSM-IV-TR Codes

[Abuse]{.underline} (subcategory) (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Type of Abuse

Emotional, Physical, Sexual

\*Last 30 days? Yes, No

\*Lifetime? Yes, No

-   Perpetrator or Victim (check one or both)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Relationship (check all that apply)

> Spouse, Parent, Step-Parent, Grandparent, Sibling, Other Relative,
> Child, Significant Other, Friend, Foster Parent, Stranger, Other

-   Date Range

[Suicide]{.underline} (subcategory)

Serious Thoughts of Suicide:

-   \*Last 30 days? Yes, No

-   \*Lifetime? Yes, No

Attempted Suicide:

-   \*Last 30 days? Yes, No

-   \*Lifetime? Yes, No

-   Number of Suicide Attempts (1 -- 10+)

-   \*Types of Suicide Attempts (check all that apply)

> Gun, Knife, Drugs, Alcohol, Vehicle Accident, Jumping, Hanging,
> Dangerous Activity, Other

Assessment Tests (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Test Type

ACDI - Corrections Version II (Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Addiction Severity Index (ASI)

Adult Substance Use Survey (ASUS)

Alcohol Dependence Scale (ADS)

Alcohol Use Inventory (AUI)

Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS)

Community Risk/Needs Management Scale (Canada)

Conflict Tactics Scale

> Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions
> (COMPAS)

Craig Analysis of the Substance Abuse Syndrome (CASAS)

> Defendant Questionnaire (DQ - Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.) Domestic
> Violence Behavioral Checklist

Domestic Violence Inventory (DVI - Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Domestic Violence Inventory Pre-Post (DVI Pre-Post)

Driver Risk Inventory (DRI)

Driver Risk Inventory II (DRI-II - Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Drug Abuse Screening Tests (DAST)

Hopkins 20 - Questions Test

Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R)

Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI)

Life Activities Inventory (LAI)

MacAndrew Scale of MMPI (MAC Scale)

Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST)

Minnesota Assessment of Chemical Health (MACH)

Multnomah Community Abilities Scale (MCAS)

Modified Criteria - National Council on Alcoholism Diagnosis (MOD-CRIT)

> Mortimer-Filkins Test

Other

Risk Supervision Inventory (RSI)

Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Instrument (SASSI 3)

SAQ - Adult Probation III (Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Sexual Adjustment Inventory (SAI - Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Shoplifting Inventory (SI - Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.)

Simple Screening Instrument (SSI)

Stage of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES)

Substance Abuse/Life Circumstance Evaluation (SALCE)

Substance Use History Matrix (SUHM)

University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA)

Wisconsin Risk, Needs, Client Management Classification (CMC)

-   Score

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Subscores (allows for 10)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Date Given

### Pending Charge(s) (allows for multiple entries)

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table)

-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   Arrest Date (allows for date unknown)

-   Court Date (allows for date unknown)

-   \*Locality

# List of all Virginia cities and counties and "Out of State"

### Criminal/Status Record (allows for multiple entries)

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table)

-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Arrest Date (allows for date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Disposition Date (allows for date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Disposition

> Guilty, Not Guilty, Nolle Prossed, Withhold Finding, Dismissed, Bench
> Warrant/Capias Issued, Diverted, Disposition Not Received

-   \*Locality

List of all Virginia cities and counties and "Out of State"

# *Sentence Information*

-   Active Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Suspended Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Court Fines

-   Court Costs

-   Restitution

-   \*Community Supervision Type

> Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP), Community Corrections, Day
> Reporting, Drug Court, Other, Pretrial, State Parole, State Probation

#### (Supervision time measured in years, months, days)

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

###  

### Current Charge(s) (allows for multiple entries)

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Arrest Date (allows for date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Disposition Date (allows for date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Disposition

> Guilty, Not Guilty, Nolle Prossed, Withhold Finding, Dismissed, Bench
> Warrant/Capias Issued, Diverted, Disposition Not Received

# Sentence Information

-   Active Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Suspended Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Court Fines

-   Court Costs

-   Restitution

-   \*Community Supervision Type

> Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP), Community Corrections, Day
> Reporting, Drug Court, Other, Pretrial, State Parole, State Probation

#### (Supervision time measured in years, months, days)

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

#########  

######### Data Question 2- What are the quantity and types of probation supervision?

### Probation Supervision

-   Date

-   \* Setting

Office Visit, Home Visit, Out of Office Visit, Phone

-   \* Type

#### Individual, Group, Family, Employer, School, Other (description field)

-   \*Offender Present?

Yes, No

-   \*Time Unit

> \< ½ hour, ½ hour, 1 hour, 1 ½ hours, 2 hours or more

-   \*Response

#### Exemplary, Satisfactory, Inhibited, Uncooperative, Unable to Benefit

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

### 

### UDS/Breathalyzer

###  

-   Date Collected

-   Date of Results

-   \*Test Type

> Confirmation/Lab Results, Drug Screen - On Site, Drug Screen - Off
> Site, Voluntary Admission, Breathalyzer

-   \*Drugs Tested with corresponding results (positive or negative)

Types of drugs- see "substance" (allows for multiple drugs per test)

-   Breathalyzer Level (if breathalyzer test for alcohol)

######### 

######### Data Question 3- What are the quantity and types of substance abuse services?

# *Substance Abuse Services*

# Date 

-   \* Setting

> Outpatient Treatment, Intensive Outpatient Treatment, In-Home
> Treatment, Day Treatment, Inpatient Residential Treatment, 12 Step
> Program, Other (description field)

-   If Inpatient Residential Treatment, Total Cost (dollar amount)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \* Type

#### Individual, Group, Family, Other (description field)

-   \*Mode

#### Cognitive, Behavioral, Psychodynamic, Physiological, Support Group

-   \*Time Unit

> \< ½ hour, ½ hour, 1 hour, 1 ½ hours, 2 hours or more

-   \*Response

#### Exemplary, Satisfactory, Inhibited, Uncooperative, Unable to Benefit

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

######### Data Question 4- What are the quantity and types of judicial monitoring?

# *Judicial Monitoring*

-   Date

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \* Type

Court Hearing, Case Staffing, Other (description field)

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

######### Data Question 5- What are the quantity and types of sanctions and rewards?

### Sanctions

-   Date

-   \*Sanction Type

> Reprimand, Written/Oral Report, Submit Daily Itinerary, Community
> Service, Enter Detoxification Program, Increased Drug/Alcohol Testing,
> Increased Treatment or NA/AA Attendance, Adult Detention or Diversion
> Program, Inpatient Treatment, Increased Court Appearances, Increased
> Counseling Sessions, Increased Supervision Contacts, Increased Length
> in Drug Court Program, Demotion to Earlier Phase, Curfew, Home
> Electronic Monitoring, Jail Time, Juvenile Detention, Work Release,
> Issuance of Warrant, Termination, Penalty Box Day in Court, Cleaning
> Chore, Prohibit Contact with Peer/Family Member, Suspend/Restrict
> Driver's License, Other (description field)

-   Number of hours/days (allows for one per sanction occurrence)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Imposed By

> Judge, Probation Supervisor, Treatment Provider

-   Date to Complete

-   Date Completed

### Rewards

-   Date

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Reward Type

Event Ticket, Movie Pass, Meal Pass, Bus Pass, Gift Certificate,
Recovery Material,

Applause, Day Off, Phase Advancement, Certificate, Travel Permission,
Curfew

Adjustment, Other (description field)

-   \*Granted By

Judge, Probation Supervisor, Treatment Provider

-   Reason Granted (free form field)

######### Data Question 6- What are the quantity and types of ancillary services?

### Ancillary Services

[Offender]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Date

-   \*Ancillary Service Type

Life Skills Training, Job Training, Employment Assistance, Medical Care,
Housing/Clothing/Food Assistance, Financial Management, Anger
Management, Parenting Skills, Cognitive Restructuring, Relationship
Counseling, Grief Counseling, Early Substance Abuse Intervention,
Recidivism Prevention, Acupuncture, Women's Issues, Men's Issues, Sexual
Abuse Survival Group, Batterers Intervention, Domestic Violence Support
Group, Mentoring, Other (description field)

[Non-Offender Services]{.underline} (subcategory)

-   Date

-   \*Ancillary Service Type

Children's Group, Al-Anon, Substance Abuse Orientation, Family Support
Services, Other (description field)

Data Question 7- What is the length of time between program commencement
and program successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

**Data Question 8- What are the retention rates of the program?**

######### Data Question 9- What are the completion rates of the program?

######### 

####### Time in Program

### Retention Rates

### Completion Rates

-   Date Placement Opened

-   Date Graduated

-   Date Placement Closed

-   \*Closure Type

######  Successful Completion

> Unsuccessful Termination

New Criminal Offense, Absconding, Threatening/Assaultive Behavior,
Repeated Minor Violations, Weapon Possession, Unsatisfactory
Performance, Excessive Positive Drug Screens, Other (description field)

Other

# **Goal Two**

## 

## 

## Goal Statement

# Provide timely processing of non-violent substance abusing offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure time between arrest and drug court screening

-   Measure time between arrest and court adjudication

-   Measure time between arrest and treatment referral

-   Measure time between arrest and treatment commencement

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Measure time between non-compliance and sanction imposition

-   Measure time between non-compliance and sanction commencement

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Measure time between commencement of treatment and successful
    completion or unsuccessful termination of treatment

-   Measure length of time in aftercare

## 

## Data Questions

1.  What is the length of time between arrest and drug court screening?

2.  What is the length of time between arrest and court adjudication?

3.  What is the length of time between arrest and treatment referral?

4.  What is the length of time between arrest and treatment
    commencement?

5.  What is the length of time between non-compliance and sanction
    imposition?

6.  What is the length of time between non-compliance and sanction
    commencement?

7.  What is the length of time between commencement of treatment and
    successful completion or unsuccessful termination of treatment?

8.  What is the length of time an offender participates in aftercare?

**Data Question 1- What is the length of** **time between arrest and
drug court screening?**

# Arrest Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

# Screening Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

## Data Question 2 - What is the length of time between arrest and court adjudication?

# Arrest Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

# Court Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

## Data Question 3 - What is the length of time between arrest and treatment referral?

# Arrest Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

# Treatment Referral Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

## Data Question 4 - What is the length of time between arrest and treatment commencement?

# Arrest Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

# Treatment Commencement Date (date format must allow for subtraction of dates to produce days)

## Data Question 5 - What is the length of time between non-compliance and sanction imposition?

## Data Question 6 - What is the length of time between non-compliance and sanction commencement?

### Non-compliance 

# Date of Non-Compliance

# \*Non-compliance Type 

Missed Office Contact, Missed Phone Contact, Missed Drug Test, Missed
Treatment Meeting, Failure to Appear for Court Hearing, Missed Ancillary
Service Meeting, Failure to Complete Community Service Work, Failure to
Make Fee Payment, Failure to Make Fine Payment, Failure to Make Court
Cost Payment, Failure to Make Restitution Payment, Positive Drug Test,
Failure to Comply with Sanction, Receive a New Arrest, Failure to Report
Change in Address, Employment, etc., Other (description field)

### Sanction

# Date Sanction Imposed 

-   \*Sanction Type (allows for multiple sanctions to be linked to one
    non-compliance occurrence)

> Reprimand, Written/Oral Report, Submit Daily Itinerary, Community
> Service, Enter Detoxification Program, Increased Drug/Alcohol Testing,
> Increased Treatment or NA/AA Attendance, Adult Detention or Diversion
> Program, Inpatient Treatment, Increased Court Appearances, Increased
> Counseling Sessions, Increased Supervision Contacts, Increased Length
> in Drug Court Program, Demotion to Earlier Phase, Curfew, Home
> Electronic Monitoring, Jail Time, Juvenile Detention, Work Release,
> Issuance of Warrant, Termination, Penalty Box Day in Court, Cleaning
> Chore, Prohibit Contact with Peer/Family Member, Suspend/Restrict
> Driver's License, Other (description field)

-   Number of hours/days (allows for one per sanction occurrence)

# Date of Sanction Commencement 

## Data Question 7 - What is the length of time between commencement of treatment and successful completion or unsuccessful termination of treatment?

## 

-   \*Treatment Setting (allows for multiple entries)

> Outpatient, Intensive Outpatient, In-Home, Day Treatment, Inpatient
> Residential, Other (description field)

-   Date of Treatment Commencement (date format must allow for
    subtraction of dates to

produce days- allows for one date per treatment type)

-   \*Treatment Closure Type (allows for one closure per treatment type)

Successful Completion, Unsuccessful Termination, Other

-   Date of Treatment Closure (date format must allow for subtraction of
    dates to produce days-

allows for one date per treatment type)

**Data Question 8 - What is the length of time an offender participates
in aftercare?**

-   Date of Referral to Aftercare (date format must allow for
    subtraction of dates to produce

days- allows for multiple entries)

-   Date of Commencement of Aftercare (date format must allow for
    subtraction of dates to

produce days- allows for one date per aftercare referral)

-   \*Type of Aftercare Closure

Successful Completion, Unsuccessful Termination, Other

-   Date of Aftercare Closure (date format must allow for subtraction of
    dates to produce

days- allows for one date per aftercare closure)

# **Goal Three**

## 

## 

## Goal Statement

# Reduce criminal behavior among non-violent substance abusing offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure offending behavior prior to program entry

-   Measure recidivism rates while in the program

-   Measure recidivism rates after program successful completion and
    unsuccessful termination

## 

## Data Questions

1.  What are the number and types of status offenses prior to program
    entry?

2.  What are the number and types of arrests prior to program entry?

3.  What are the number and types of convictions and sentences prior to
    program entry?

4.  What are the number and types of status offenses during program
    participation?

5.  What are the number and types of arrests during program
    participation?

6.  What are the number and types of convictions and sentences during
    program participation?

7.  What are the number and types of status offenses after program
    successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

8.  What are the number and types of arrests after program successful
    completion or unsuccessful termination?

9.  What are the number and types of convictions and sentences after
    program successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

# **Data Questions** 

### **1. What are the number and types of status offenses prior to program entry?**

# **2. What are the number and types of arrests prior to program entry?**

**3. What are the number and types of convictions and sentences prior to
program entry?**

# **4. What are the number and types of status offenses during program participation?**

**5. What are the number and types of arrests during program
participation?**

6.  **What are the number and types of convictions and sentences during
    program**

**participation?**

**7. What are the number and types of status offenses after program
successful completion or unsuccessful termination?**

**8. What are the number and types of arrests after program successful
completion or unsuccessful termination?**

**9. What are the number and types of convictions and sentences after
program successful completion or unsuccessful termination?**

### 

### 

### Criminal/Status Record (enter all arrests regardless of disposition) (allows for multiple charges)

-   Criminal Offense, Status Offense, Local Ordinance (select one)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Virginia Statute (selection from a Va statute table)

-   \*Charge Category (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Descriptor (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   \*Charge Class (automatically filled in from selected charge)

-   Arrest Date (allows for date unknown)

-   Disposition Date (allows for date unknown)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Disposition

> Guilty, Not Guilty, Nolle Prossed, Withhold Finding, Dismissed, Bench
> Warrant/Capias Issued, Diverted, Disposition Not Received

-   \*Locality

List of all Virginia cities and counties and "Out of State"

# *Sentence Information*

-   Active Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Suspended Incarceration

#### Measured in years, months, days

-   Court Fines

-   Court Costs

-   Restitution

-   \*Community Supervision Type

> Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP), Community Corrections, Day
> Reporting, Drug Court, Other, Pretrial, State Parole, State Probation

#### (Supervision time measured in years, months, days)

-   Notes (Free form notes field)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Date Placement Opened (reflects date of program entry)

-   Date Placement Closed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Closure Type

######  Successful Completion

> Unsuccessful Termination

New Criminal Offense, Absconding, Threatening/Assaultive Behavior,
Repeated Minor Violations, Weapon Possession, Unsatisfactory
Performance, Excessive Positive Drug Screens, Other (description field)

Other

**Goal Four**

**Goal Statement**

Reduce substance use and abuse among non-violent substance abusing
offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure types and frequency of substance use prior to program entry

-   Measure treatment readiness of program participants upon program
    entry

-   Measure types and frequency of substance use while in the program

-   Measure length of time offenders stay in treatment

-   Measure intermediate progress during treatment

-   Measure types and frequency of substance use after program
    successful completion or unsuccessful termination

## 

## Data Questions

1.  What are the types and frequency of substance use prior to program
    entry?

2.  What is the treatment readiness of offenders upon program entry?

3.  What are the types and frequency of substance use during program
    participation?

4.  What are the lengths of stay in treatment for offenders who complete
    or are terminated from treatment?

5.  What is the intermediate progress of offenders during treatment?

6.  What are the types and frequency of substance use after program
    successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

**Data Questions**

**1. What are the types and frequency of substance use prior to program
entry?**

# **3. What are the types and frequency of substance use during program participation?**

6\. What are the types and frequency of substance use after program
successful completion or unsuccessful termination?

# *Substance Use* (allows for multiple entries)

-   Date

-   \*Status

Prior to Program Entry, During Program, After Program

-   \*Substance -- see "substance" page 6

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Frequency

> Daily, Weekly, Bi-Weekly, Monthly, Bi-Monthly, Semi-Annually,
> Annually, Other, Quarterly, Hourly

-   \*Method of Intake

> Drink, Inhale, Inject, Ingest, Smoke, Snort, Various

##### Number of Times used Last 30 Days 

**Data Question 2 - What is the treatment readiness of offenders upon
program entry?**

**Data Question 5 - What is the intermediate progress of offenders
during treatment?**

*Assessment Tests* (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Test Type

(Values not yet defined)

-   Score

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Subscores (allows for 10)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Date Given

**Data Question 4 - What are the lengths of stay in treatment for
offenders who are terminated or complete treatment?**

# *Substance Abuse Treatment Services* (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Treatment Type

Outpatient, Intensive Outpatient, In-Home, Day Treatment, Inpatient
Residential, Other

(description field)

-   Date of Treatment Commencement

-   \*Date of Treatment Closure

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \*Treatment Closure Type

> Successful Completion, Unsuccessful Termination, Other

# **Goal Five**

**Goal Statement**

Provide more cost efficient means of handling non-violent substance
abusing offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure cost of drug court program

-   Measure comparative criminal justice costs (substance abuse
    treatment costs, probation options, detention, jail, correctional
    facilities, etc.)

-   Measure offender payments of treatment costs

-   Measure offender payments of criminal justice costs

-   Track offender payments of financial obligations (child support,
    taxes, etc.)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Measure the criminal justice costs of untreated substance abusers

-   Measure the health care costs of untreated substance abusers

-   Measure the social services costs of untreated substance abusers

**Data Questions**

1.  What is the cost of the drug court program?

2.  What are the costs of comparative criminal justice alternatives?

3.  How much of the treatment costs are paid by the offenders while in
    the program?

4.  How much of the court fines, court costs, restitution, and program
    fees are paid by the offenders while in the program?

5.  How much child support, taxes, and other fees are paid by the
    offenders while in the program?

6.  What are the criminal justice costs of untreated substance abusers?

7.  What are the health care costs of untreated substance abusers?

8.  What are the social services costs of untreated substance abusers?

**Data Questions**

**1. What is the cost of the drug court program?**

# **2. What are the costs of comparative criminal justice alternatives?**

### Not measured by MIS

\* Cost of inpatient treatment see Page 12 Substance Abuse Services

# **Data Questions**

# **3. How much of the treatment costs are paid by the offenders while in the program?**

**4. How much of the court fines, court costs, restitution, and program
fees are paid by the offenders while in the program?**

**5. How much child support, taxes, and other fees are paid by the
offenders while in the program?**

# *Payments While in Program* (allows for multiple entries)

-   \*Date

-   \*Payment Type

#  Court Fines, Court Costs, Restitution, Program Fees, Treatment, Child

Support, Taxes, Other (description field)

-   Amount (dollar amount)

# **Data Questions**

**6. What are the criminal justice costs of untreated substance
abusers?**

**7. What are the health care costs of untreated substance abusers?**

**8. What are the social services costs of untreated substance
abusers?**

### Not measured by MIS

# **Goal Six**

**Goal Statement**

Improve the life circumstances of non-violent substance abusing
offenders

## 

## Measurable Objectives

-   Measure academic achievements

-   Measure gains in employment status

-   Measure gains in pro-social family/peer association

-   Measure housing situation improvements

-   Measure gains in income

-   Measure gains in health status

-   Measure gains in financial management skills

-   Measure gains in parenting skills

**Data Questions**

1.  Have offenders improved their academic performance?

2.  Have offenders improved their employment status?

3.  Have offenders improved their pro-social family/peer associations?

4.  Have offenders improved their housing situation?

5.  Have offenders increased their income?

6.  Have offenders improved their health status?

7.  Have offenders improved their financial management skills?

8.  Have offenders improved their parenting skills?

**Data Question 1 - Have offenders improved their academic
performance?**

-   \*Increased Education Level

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \*Level

> One Year Grade Advancement, Multiple Year Grade Advancement, High
> School Graduation, GED, Trade School Diploma, 1 Year College, 2 Years
> College, 3 Years College, College Graduate, Graduate Education

-   \*Education Class Completed

Yes, No

-   \*Literacy Achieved

Yes, No

-   Grade Point Average (allows for multiple entries)

-   Date of GPA (allows for one date per GPA)

-   Daily Average Attendance (allows for multiple entries)

-   Date of DAA (allows for one date per DAA)

-   \*School Sanction (allows for multiple entries)

Out of School Suspension, In-School Suspension, Other (description
field)

-   Number of Days (allows for entry per sanction)

-   Date of Sanction (allows for date per sanction)

**Data Question 2 - Have offenders improved their employment status?**

-   \*Improved Employment Status

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \*Status Type

> Unemployed to Part-time, Unemployed to Full-time, Part-time to
> Full-time, Other (description field)

**Data Question 3 - Have offenders improved their pro-social family/peer
associations?**

-   \*Improved Pro-Social Family/Peer Associations?

Yes, No

### 

**Data Question 4 - Have offenders improved their housing situation?**

-   \*Improved Housing Situation

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \*Improvement Type

> Homeless to Transitional, Temporary to Permanent, Rent to Own,
> Dependent to Independent Living, Lower Crime/Drug Use Area, Other
> (description field)

**Data Question 5 - Have offenders increased their income?**

-   \*Increased Net Monthly Income

Yes, No

-   If Yes, Amount of Increase

**Data Question 6 - Have offenders improved their health status? (allows
for multiple entries)**

-   \*Improved Health Status

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \* Type

> Received TX for Existing Condition, Physical Check-up, Dental Care,
> Eye Exam, Established PCP, Improved Proportionate Weight, Birth of
> Drug Free Baby, Other (description field)

**Data Question 7 - Have offenders improved their financial management
skills? (allows for multiple entries)**

-   \*Improved Financial Management Skills

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \* Type

> Pay Bills on Time, Increased Savings, Develop and Adhere to Budget,
> Establish Checking/Savings Account, Responsible Use of Credit, Other
> (description field)
>
> \*Class Completed

Yes, No

**Data Question 8 - Have offenders improved their parenting skills?
(allows for multiple entries)**

-   \*Improved Parenting Skills

Yes, No

-   If Yes, \* Type

> Offender Perceives Improved Parent/Child Relationship, Staff Observed
> Improved Parent/Child Relationship, Increased Communication Skills,
> Increased Discipline Skills, Parent/Child Reunited, Child Custody,
> Other (description field)

-   \*Parenting Class Completed

Yes, No

***V. Drug Court Evaluation Results:*** Drug courts began as a model
project in Miami, Florida in 1989. By mid- 1997, the number of drug
court programs in the United States had grown to over 550 operational or
planned drug courts. Research on drug court effectiveness did not keep
pace. The U.S. General Accounting Office relied on only 20 evaluations
of 16 drug courts for its report to Congress in 1997. In 1998, the
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia
published a critical review of 30 evaluations of 24 drug courts. A
summary of the major findings of this study includes the following:

• Drug courts are successful in engaging and retaining felony offenders.

• Drug courts provide closer and more comprehensive supervision of
drug-using offenders than other forms of community supervision.

• Drug courts are successful at reducing drug use and criminal behavior
both during and after program participation.

• The judge is a key factor in program stability.

• Sanctions are instrumental in influencing defendants to adhere to the
drug court contract.

• Drug courts are bridging the gap between the courts and treatment
systems.

• Drug courts are cost effective.