U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Bureau of Justice Assistance 

B ureau of Justice Assistance 

BULLETIN 

Domingo S. Herraiz, Director 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA 

May 2005 

Drug Courts: An Effective


Strategy for Communities


Facing Methamphetamine 


C. West Huddleston III 

In recent years, methamphetamine, a highly addictive, easy-to-


manufacture stimulant, has become one of the most destructive 


and widespread illegal drugs in the United States. The drug induces


violent and erratic behavior in addicts, endangers children living in the


vicinity of its manufacture, and jeopardizes the safety of communities


in which it is present. Dealing with this epidemic has been extremely


difficult for law enforcement agencies: methamphetamine is often


produced in vans and trailers that can be moved across jurisdictional


lines, and only a small percentage of addicts have responded to


traditional methods of treatment and punishment. To fight this


scourge, many states and counties are sharing law enforcement


resources through multijurisdictional task forces, which make


manpower and expertise available to underserved areas. But the


primary tool for fighting methamphetamine addiction and trafficking is


the drug court, which combines intensive drug rehabilitation services


for addicts with legal requirements to complete treatment. Drug


courts offer longer treatment periods, an emphasis on addressing 


co-occurring mental health disorders, and intensive community


supervision and monitoring. They are also helping children who are


exposed to methamphetamine use by providing them with health


care, educational, and child protective services. Positive outcome


data and anecdotal evidence have created broad support for drug


courts in communities, law enforcement agencies, and academia.


Bureau of 

Justice Assistance 

Overview
2 

T he methamphetamine crisis that began more 

throughout the nation and poses a significant public 

can be produced using a variety of household 

and is often made in clandestine laboratories such as 

kitchen cabinets. 

The effects of methamphetamine on the user are 

are the neurological damage and psychotic symptoms 

accountability is required. 

The rise of methamphetamine is often compared with 

the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s. 

methamphetamine-abusing population and 

Response to a National Crisis 

that has worked with this population. 

and lifetime member of the 

of addiction in some of the most methamphetamineof the justice system with effective treatment 

than 20 years ago in the western and 

southwestern regions of the country has now spread 

to the central and southeastern areas of the United 

States (Drug Enforcement Administration, 2004). Use 

of the drug has increased to epidemic proportions 

health threat (Rawson, Anglin, and Ling, 2002). 

Methamphetamine is a toxic, illegal, and highly 

addictive central nervous system stimulant that can 

be injected, snorted, smoked, or swallowed. The drug 

chemicals and inexpensive over-the-counter ingredients 

car trunks, hotel rooms, backyard garages, and 

destructive. Addicts suffer from post-use responses 

that range from violence, paranoia, and agitation to 

cognitive impairments such as memory loss, confusion, 

insomnia, depression, and boredom. Most alarming 

that persist for months or years after use has ceased. 

Therefore, to ensure methamphetamine-addicted 

offenders are abstinent and progressing in their 

recovery, a long-term view of treatment and 

Unlike crack cocaine, however, which affected primarily 

urban areas, methamphetamine has infiltrated 

unprepared rural regions of the country. Many, if not 

most, of these rural communities did not experience 

the crack epidemic and therefore did not develop 

resources to address the personal and social 

devastation caused by stimulant addiction. As a 

result, law enforcement, corrections, social services, 

drug treatment agencies, and courts in rural areas are 

overwhelmed with the management of the risks and 

needs of methamphetamine users and manufacturers. 

Urban communities know all too well the strain these 

users and manufacturers create on health care and 

dental services, mental health and drug treatment 

providers, child welfare, environmental protection, 

and even real estate markets. In addition to these 

effects, methamphetamine poses serious safety 

challenges to police and probation officers in rural 

areas, who often encounter toxic chemicals and 

violent behavior. 

In many communities, the central response to this 

crisis is the drug court, which is unprecedented 

in its ability to effectively intervene with the 

unequalled by any other criminal justice response. 

This document provides state and local policymakers 

with the information needed to build safer 

communities, reduce recidivism, reunite families, 

and promote abstinence from methamphetamine. 

Drug Courts: A Long-Term 

We are 30 years deep in the methamphetamine 

epidemic in Butte County, California, 

and drug courts are the only thing 

—Helen Harberts, Special Assistant District Attorney 

California Narcotic Officers’ Association 

For more than a decade, a number of drug courts 

have been extremely effective in stemming the tide 

affected areas of the nation. Federally funded drug 

courts in California, Oregon, Hawaii, Nevada, 

Oklahoma, and Kentucky have been using the drug 

court model—that is, pairing the coercive power 

strategies—to successfully intervene and manage 

the methamphetamine-addicted offender. Drug courts 
3 

demonstrated that the following are among the most 

effective strategies for helping methamphetamine 

addicts: 

◆ 

◆ 

hearings. 

◆ Longer treatment periods. 

◆ 

◆ 

abstinence. 

treatment assumes a central role rather than being 

peripheral to punitive ends. Responsibility for ensuring 

and consistently to infractions in the program 

effectively managing and treating a methamphetaminei

for noncompliance and the repetitive reinforcement of 

before the judge for the appropriate sanction, 

to deal with these problems. 

tackling the methamphetamine epidemic have 

Intensive community supervision and monitoring. 

Ongoing accountability with increased court 

Treatment for co-occurring mental health disorders. 

Implementation of evidence-based treatment. 

Drug courts provide the added accountability and 

service coordination that methamphetamine addicts 

desperately need to recover. Using these tested 

methods, drug courts are building safer communities, 

reducing recidivism, reuniting families, and promoting 

Effective Methods Employed 

by Drug Courts 

Added Accountability 

To effectively address the methamphetamine user’s 

potential for volatile behavior and deep cognitive 

impairments, drug courts apply increased 

accountability, supervision, monitoring, and 

structure. 

Drug courts integrate public health and public safety 

to optimize outcomes for offenders. Substance abuse 

that participants attend treatment and avoid drug 

use and criminal activity is not, however, delegated 

to treatment personnel. Rather, the court and law 

enforcement maintain substantial supervisory control 

over offenders and are thus able to respond rapidly 

(Marlowe, 2003). This added accountability from the 

court, probation, and law enforcement is central to 

involved offender. 

Role of the Court 

Drug courts bring to bear added accountability to the 

methamphetamine user. F rst, participants must 

frequently appear in court before highly trained judges. 

In many cases, the participant attends drug court 

weekly for at least the first 90 days of the program. 

During hearings, the judge explores the participant’s 

compliance with treatment, random drug testing, and 

other court requirements. The immediacy of sanctions 

target behaviors and requirements are especially 

important because of the cognitive impairments that 

occur in this population. In addition, drug courts have 

been able to expedite the bench warrant process; 

therefore, when participants fail to appear in court, 

law enforcement officers rapidly bring the offender 

continued treatment, and ongoing community 

supervision. 

As a seasoned judge, I have found that frequent 

and immediate responses are the most effective 

way to deal with the methamphetamine addict. 

In addition, it is essential through treatment 

and court intervention to get to the underlying 

cause of the addiction and deal with the 

physiological and psychological reasons for the 

addiction. Drug courts are the most effective way 

—The Honorable Dennis Fuchs, Salt Lake City, Utah 
4 

often called on to educate the greater community 

officer speaks to such groups to help citizens spot 

scripted media presentation about methamphetamine. 

addicts affect public safety and increase risk in the 

methamphetamine labs also present real risks to 

from methamphetamine labs to the 

Finally, many drug court professionals throughout the 

nation have joined local or state methamphetamine 

action committees and task forces. In Oregon, a 

retired drug court judge chairs that state’s 

methamphetamine task force. On a local level and 

as a central function of a community, the courts are 

about drug and crime trends. In that role, drug court 

prosecutors and police personnel volunteer to speak 

to community groups, churches, and business leaders 

about the dangers of methamphetamine and the 

precursor chemicals used to manufacture the drug. 

In Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, a drug court police liaison 

and report individuals purchasing large quantities of 

precursor materials at local retailers. In Washington, 

the drug court coordinator sits on a community 

methamphetamine task force and, together with other 

leaders, speaks throughout the community using a 

These strategies are just more examples of how drug 

courts coordinate community resources to combat 

methamphetamine on the state and local levels. 

Role of Probation and Law Enforcement 

Participants are closely monitored by law enforcement 

and probation officers through creative and effective 

community supervision. Because methamphetamine 

field for supervising officers, they are among the 

highest risk offenders and require intensive 

supervision. 

Methamphetamine users are volatile, unpredictable, 

and often violent. More so than users of other drugs, 

they can misinterpret body language and become 

violent in response to a perceived threat. They 

demonstrate paranoia and may seem fine, only to 

become agitated at a moment’s notice. Clandestine 

officers. Breathing fumes from an active lab can be 

life threatening, and the risk of a chemical explosion 

is high. Coupled with the methamphetamine addict’s 

belligerent and unpredictable behavior, clandestine 

labs place officers at great risk. 

For these reasons, drug courts are proactive in their 

supervision of methamphetamine-involved 

participants. As the courts’ eyes and ears, law 

enforcement and probation officers are highly trained 

to work with this population and employ community 

supervision and community policing strategies to 

ensure safety and effectiveness. Proactive supervision 

requires probation and police officers to work in 

tandem and randomly and regularly visit the 

participant’s home. While there, officers administer a 

drug test and canvas the property for signs of drug 

use and laboratory agents. When a participant is 

found in violation, he or she is immediately detained 

and brought before the drug court judge at the 

earliest opportunity. When a participant is “caught 

doing right,” the officer gives the participant positive 

reinforcement before leaving. 

In 15 years of law enforcement responding 

to situations that encompassed everything 

methamphetamine addict, drug courts are 

the most effective criminal justice strategy 

I’ve seen to treat the offender, reduce criminal 

activity, and build safer communities. 

—Sergeant Vanessa Price, 

Oklahoma City Police Department 

Whether it is the judge, probation supervisor, or law 

enforcement officer, the drug court’s coercive power 

is the key to providing what research characterizes 

as “closer, more comprehensive supervision and 

monitoring during the program than other forms of 

community supervision.” (Belenko, 1998, 2001). 
5 

protocols. 

Effects of Methamphetamine 

on the Addict 

The effects of methamphetamine addiction are both 

demeanor can rapidly change from friendly to hostile. 

increased risk of attempting suicide (Center for 

The chronic effects of methamphetamine addiction 

significantly reduces brain dopamine and serotonin 

treatment needs of the methamphetamine addict are 

sizeable and distinct. 

uniquely suited to promote a positive treatment 

assured. Research shows that the length of time 

ensure lasting reductions in methamphetamine use. 

the client to reinforce treatment attendance and 

complete it. This represents a sixfold increase in 

Because of the acute and chronic effects of 

methamphetamine addicts that are more intensive 

case management and case planning are intensive. 

comorbid conditions and implements community 

reinforcement models coupled with cognitiveService Coordination 

To effectively address the chronic, acute, and longterm effects of methamphetamine abuse, drug 

courts implement comprehensive, long-term, and 

evidence-based stimulant-specific treatment 

acute and chronic. When used in high doses, the drug 

can cause irritability, aggressive behavior, excitement, 

auditory hallucinations, and paranoia (delusions and 

psychosis). Mood swings are common; the addict’s 

Because of the long-lasting effects of the drug, 

withdrawal may be severe and protracted. Several 

hours after the last use, the addict experiences a 

drastic drop in mood and energy and may sleep for 

days. On waking, the addict may experience severe 

depression that can last for several weeks or longer. 

Cravings are pronounced, and the addict is at 

Substance Abuse Treatment, 1999). 

have been well documented. Prolonged use drastically 

disrupts brain function in fundamental and long-lasting 

ways (Swan, 2003). Chronic use of methamphetamine 

levels with ramifications that can last from 1 to 4 

years. Some neurological impairments may be 

permanent. These impairments in brain functioning 

may underlie the cognitive and emotional deficits 

seen in many methamphetamine addicts (Center for 

Substance Abuse Treatment, 1999). Thus, the 

Keeping the Client Engaged in Treatment 

To benefit from treatment, the client must attend 

treatment sessions as prescribed. Drug courts are 

response in methamphetamine users because 

ongoing attendance and participation in treatment are 

spent in treatment is a reliable predictor of a client’s 

post-treatment performance. The longer a client stays 

in treatment, the better he or she does (Simpson and 

Sells, 1982; Hubbard et al., 1989; Simpson and 

Curry, 1997). Twelve months or more of drug abuse 

treatment may be the optimum length of time to 

Because drug courts have ongoing contact with 

participation, a high percentage of participants 

complete long-term treatment. In fact, more than 

two-thirds of participants who begin treatment 

treatment retention over most previous efforts 

(Marlowe, DeMatteo, and Festinger, 2003). 

Providing Effective Treatment Protocols 

methamphetamine, drug courts provide services for 

and longer in duration than those received by 

offenders struggling with other drugs. In addition, 

Treatment plans are based on a sound assessment, 

individualized to meet the client’s specific needs, and 

designed to be easily understood by the client. 

Treatment services are structured and supportive. The 

court addresses co-occurring mental health and other 

behavioral treatment modalities and continuing care. 
6 

Fi

comprehensive assessment to address all biocognitions; and self-efficacy and motivation to 

change. Bio-psycho-social assessments are critical 

clinically competent treatment plan for each individual. 

professionals during the assessment process also 

and again after a month of abstinence. This regimen 

address the specific conditions and needs of the 

educates the client about the impact of 

slips are addressed. 

addressed within one month of abstinence and 

simultaneously with treatment for methamphetamine 

appropriate. Antidepressants are often used in 

Community Reinforcement 

is community reinforcement. The approach uses 

individualized treatment to promote lifestyle changes 

rst, drug courts provide an objective and 

psycho-social domains, including drug use severity; 

level-of-care placement; drug involvement; medical 

status; psychiatric status; employment and financial 

status, family and social status, and triggers and 

to characterizing a client’s needs, strengths, and 

resources along each dimension. Armed with the 

assessment information, the clinician then develops a 

The information gathered by clinicians and other 

helps drug court case managers, defense attorneys, 

and law enforcement and community supervision 

officers in establishing a baseline and monitoring for 

changes in the client’s behavior and living environment. 

Once the treatment plan is completed, drug court 

clinicians ensure that the client understands the 

treatment process, the rules and expectations of each 

program phase, and expectations about his or her 

participation. Most drug courts that work with a 

methamphetamine-involved population provide clients 

with clear, written agreements or contracts that are 

reviewed with the client at the onset of the program 

is especially vital for methamphetamine users 

because of typical cognitive impairments that may be 

present at the onset of services. 

Drug court providers adjust treatment services to 

methamphetamine user. Early in the program, the 

clinician helps the participant establish behaviors that 

will have short-term benefit and long-term utility. 

Specifically, for the brain to begin to recover from 

methamphetamine use, the clinician structures sleep, 

exercise, and eating goals for the client. In addition, 

the court sets short-term treatment attendance and 

abstinence goals and rewards the participant when he 

or she achieves them. The court also establishes 

support structures such as self-help groups and 

sponsors, provides drug avoidance strategies, and 

methamphetamine on the brain and behavior. 

Together, the court and participant plan ways to 

identify and manage his or her triggers and cues to 

relapse. Family participation is enlisted, and early 

Addressing Co-Occurring Mental Disorders 

As the client progresses, so does the treatment 

protocol. Mental health disorders such as major 

depression, dysthymia, bipolar disorder, antisocial 

personality disorder, panic disorder, post-traumatic 

stress disorder, and schizophrenia may coexist with a 

methamphetamine or other substance use disorder. 

Generally, such co-occurring mental disorders are 

and other drugs. Mental health specialists are 

brought to bear, and medication is prescribed when 

concert with psychotherapy to reduce depressive 

symptoms and produce short-term reductions in 

methamphetamine use and craving. 

Another treatment strategy used by drug courts 

during the treatment of methamphetamine users 

in three key areas: marital therapy, employment and 

vocational counseling and assistance, and the 

development of new social networks and recreational 

practices (Meyers and Smith, 1995). 
7 

Contingency Management 

seriously affects gums and teeth. 

often associated with the client is extended to the 

a critical component of successful outcomes with 

strategies to ensure the best odds for a positive 

and carefully prepared treatment manuals such as the 

Matrix model,1 which is specifically designed to be 

puzzle. Relaxation strategies such as acupuncture are 

alumni groups. 

Addressing Child Protective 

present where methamphetamine is used or 

because their exposure to methamphetamine puts 

often suffer abuse and neglect. Methamphetamine 

clothed. Because of the paranoia and violent 

these children suffer gross abuse and neglect. 

Drug courts have repeatedly demonstrated the 

importance of positive reinforcement (i.e., rewards that 

are contingent on positive behavior) as an effective 

behavioral change strategy. Short-term incentives are 

immensely important as rewards to methamphetamine 

users for treatment compliance and abstinence. 

Rewards need not be tangible to be effective. Praise, 

for example, when delivered both immediately and 

continuously, for achieving target behavior is effective 

(Deci, Koestner, and Ryan, 1999). To that end, drug 

court judges use public praise, clapping, and 

handshakes in court to reward compliance. More 

tangible rewards are also used. Some drug courts 

provide vouchers that can be redeemed for retail items 

such as food and transportation or children’s books 

to promote good parenting skills. Such vouchers 

are contingent on negative urine drug screens or 

compliance with treatment sessions. Other drug courts 

provide stars, cookies, or free dental care. The last 

is particularly helpful because methamphetamine 

Drug court treatment programs are subject to 

higher standards of performance accountability by 

the judicial system. Due to the collaborative nature 

of the drug court model and the development of an 

extended team approach, the accountability most 

team as a whole. This results in a superior level of 

treatment planning and service integration, which is 

methamphetamine addicts. 

—Joe Carloni, MSM, Specialty Court Programs, 

Pensacola, Florida 

Other Treatment Approaches 

Finally, drug courts use a full range of other treatment 

outcome. Cognitive behavioral treatment strategies 

used with stimulant addicts, are among the additional 

approaches used by drug court providers. Relapse 

prevention modalities that systematically teach clients 

to cope with their cravings and develop refusal and 

assertiveness skills, coping and problem-solving 

skills, and strategies to prevent relapse (Marlatt and 

Gordon, 1985) are also a piece of the treatment 

also used. Finally, to ensure clients are prepared for 

long-term recovery, drug courts provide spiritually 

oriented programs, continuing care/aftercare, and 

Cases in Drug Court 

An increasing number of households have children 

manufactured. As a consequence, an increasing 

number of children are considered “drug endangered” 

them at risk of long-term physical and mental damage. 

In addition, children who are not exposed to a lab but 

are being raised by methamphetamine-using parents 

users, while high, do not sleep for days. Once they 

stop use and crash, they may sleep for days at a 

time. During this time, their children are uncared for 

and unsupervised—often unfed, unbathed, and poorly 

tendencies that accompany parents’ methamphetamine 

use, children in the home are often irrationally and 

brutally punished. At a critical time in their development, 
8 

the large number of children who are abused or 

parents’ addiction through a collaborative, 

a more accurate and realistic assessment of the 

specializes in the treatment of methamphetaminean initial visitation with their children and full 

home on a regular basis are trained to recognize the 

reunited in a timely manner that promotes family 

In addition, methamphetamine-involved parents 

frequently exploit gaps in communication between the 

courts, treatment, child welfare, law enforcement, and 

other service agencies to better insulate themselves 

from intervention. Their erratic behavior and elusive 

lifestyle often make them difficult to find by authorities 

and has kept systems from being able to provide help. 

Family drug courts—also known as family dependency 

treatment courts—have emerged in response to both 

neglected by methamphetamine-using parents and 

the court’s responsibility to enforce intervention in 

noncriminal, family cases. Family drug courts consider 

children’s safety and permanency in addition to the 

multidisciplinary team approach. 

By jointly staffing child protective cases, the discrete 

disciplines on the family drug court team develop a 

full understanding of a family’s history and dynamics 

and work together toward the best interest of the 

child, parent, and extended family. Treatment providers 

are better informed from the beginning and can make 

parents’ needs, taking into consideration community 

and family resources, strengths, and weaknesses. In 

a number of communities, the family drug court 

addicted women and provides specialized services for 

co-occurring disorders, trauma-oriented interventions, 

and parenting skills. The court recognizes the initial 

limitations of parents and the time they need to 

regain cognitive functioning before they are ready for 

implementation of their service plans. Parental 

accountability at all levels is enforced by the court’s 

intensive supervision. Caseworkers who visit the 

paraphernalia and characteristics of methamphetamine 

use. As in adult drug courts, participants in family 

drug courts are required to take random and frequent 

drug tests and appear weekly before a judge. 

In many cases, addicted parents achieve sobriety and 

are able to provide a safe and fit home for their 

children. As a result, parents and children are 

healing and stability. 

Whether children reside in a home where 

methamphetamine is cooked or in a home where 

their caretakers use this deadly drug, children are 

exposed to toxins and face numerous 

medical problems, developmental delays, 

and brain damage. The coordination between 

law enforcement, child welfare, and medical 

providers addresses the immediate safety needs 

for the child, but the long-term safety 

and permanency needs require ongoing and 

extensive collaboration. Family dependency 

treatment courts provide the necessary array of 

services that support the child’s connection to 

family and provide the parental treatment needs 

while working toward safe and timely permanence. 

—Rebecca Kessel, Social Work Program Director, 

Buncombe County, North Carolina 
Research in Action Orange County, California, 

Below are exemplary drug court practices that Superior Court Drug Court Program 

effectively address the methamphetamine user. The Orange County Superior Court Drug Court 

Program began in March 1995 with support and 

Butte County, California, 

Drug Court Program 

funding from the U.S. Department of Justice in 

response to a major methamphetamine-involved 

criminal justice population. Of approximately 11,500 

The Butte County Drug Court is an adult criminal drug new probation cases each year, 60 percent test 

court that began operation in June 1995 with support positive for methamphetamine. Composed of 5 drug 

and funding from the U.S. Department of Justice. courts that operate throughout Orange County, the 

Methamphetamine has been the drug of choice in program serves 500 participants each year, of which 

Butte County for nearly 30 years. In 2003, 7,072 73 percent are methamphetamine involved. 

criminal cases were filed in Butte County that resulted Additionally, of the new drug court admissions each 

in approximately 1,800 felony probation cases. Of year, 62 percent are unemployed and 38 percent 

those felony cases, more than 60 percent are do not have a high school diploma or GED. 

methamphetamine involved. Currently, 87 percent of 

the drug court clients are methamphetamine users. 

The Butte County Drug Court Program includes 

frequent and random drug testing, assertive community 

supervision, and intensive case management. 

Communication with treatment and the court team is 

The Orange County Drug Court approach is to place 

the participants on formal probation and require them 

to complete a minimum 18-month treatment program. 

Substance abuse treatment is provided by the Orange 

County Health Care Agency. The assigned probation 

virtually seamless and is conducted in an immediate 

fashion, or in real time. Response to client behavior is 

always therapeutic, evidence based, and applied in a 

manner consistent with the research on behavior 

officer and health care therapist form a treatment 

team and collaboratively provide case management 

services. The supervision of the participant requires 

regular reporting to the probation officer, announced 

modification techniques. This level of accountability is 

an excellent strategy for addressing methamphetamine 

addicts. The court and treatment services are 

and unannounced visits to the participant’s home, 

random searches, and frequent drug testing. 

Probation also plays a role in keeping the participant 

structured to maximize motivation and meet the engaged in the treatment program. The sheriff’s 

challenges unique to methamphetamine addicts in 

early recovery. Approximately 500 participants have 

department helps supervise and monitor participants 

in the southern region of the county. 

graduated from the Butte County Drug Court over the To successfully complete the program, graduates 

past 9 years, with an aggregate reconviction rate for must test drug free for at least 180 consecutive days, 

any misdemeanor or felony of 14.9 percent. achieve and maintain a stable living arrangement, 

and achieve gainful, consistent employment or be 

significantly involved in a vocational or academic 

program. More than 1,000 offenders have successfully 

graduated in the past 9 years of operation. The drug 

court has a 72 percent retention rate; 80 percent of 

the graduates have no rearrest for a drug-related crime 

and 74 percent have no rearrests at all. 

9 
10 

planned in 1995 and implemented in 1996 with 

Justice. With additional funding from the Substance 

cases being methamphetamine-related offenses. In 

where approximately 25 percent of the 12,395 cases 

the program such as anger management and 

began operation in March 2000 with the dual aim of 

treating addicted parents and protecting their children 

from child abuse and neglect. The program has since 

Initiative to address methamphetamine-using 

specifically designed to reunite families in which 

methamphetamine abuse resulted in children being 

Citizens Against Substance Abuse child representative, 

their methamphetamine addiction and other coSalt Lake County, Utah, 

Felony Drug Court Program 

The Salt Lake County Felony Drug Court was first 

support and funding from the U.S. Department of 

Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and 

local resources, the court serves up to 1,000 active 

participants at any given time, with the majority of the 

fact, 81 percent of drug court participants report 

methamphetamine as their primary or secondary 

drug of choice. The drug court seeks to reduce 

methamphetamine-related crime in Salt Lake County, 

filed in 2004 were methamphetamine involved. 

The Salt Lake County Drug Court serves both men 

and women and offers a full spectrum of evidencebased treatment and mental health services. 

Supervision and service coordination are provided by 

specialized case managers. Treatment requirements 

are intensive, averaging 3 days per week per client. 

Participants are afforded other services throughout 

educational and vocational services. Participants are 

drug tested an average of 3 times per week and are 

afforded aftercare and alumni support and assistance 

upon graduation. In a recent outcome study, only 

15.4 percent of graduates were arrested on new 

drug charges, compared with 64 percent of eligible 

defendants who did not attend drug court. In addition, 

39.3 percent of participants who did not graduate 

were arrested on new drug-related charges. 

Thurston County, Washington, 

Family Treatment Court 

The Thurston County Family Treatment Court Program 

received funding from the U.S. Department of Justice 

and the Washington Governor’s Methamphetamine 

participants. Methamphetamine remains the primary 

drug driving child welfare cases throughout Thurston 

County. In 2004, 168 cases were filed by the 

Department of Child and Family Services; of those, 

70 percent were methamphetamine involved. 

The Thurston County Family Treatment Court is 

placed in foster care. The program provides a 

strength-based, supportive, yet highly accountable 

environment to the families served. This is 

accomplished by weekly court appearances with the 

family treatment court team, which includes the case 

manager, treatment provider, mental health therapist, 

defense attorney, assistant attorney general, and a 

volunteer parenting mentor. 

Through frequent drug testing and other accountability 

measures coupled with community support group 

meetings, methamphetamine-specific substance 

abuse and mental health treatment services, and 

regular court status hearings, participants are 

ensured the help they need to successfully address 

occurring problems. If a participant is noncompliant, 

the court immediately responds with treatment 
services, case management intensification, 

adjustment to the frequency and level of monitoring 

during child visitations, suspension from the program, 

or, as a last resort, termination. 

2.	 Drug courts should increase contact with a 

methamphetamine-using population by increasing 

drug court status hearings for the first 90 days of 

the program. They should implement contingency 

To successfully complete the program, participants 

must complete all treatment requirements, abstain 

from drugs and alcohol, attain stable housing, 

management strategies coupled with vouchers 

and other positive reinforcements for short-term 

achievements and provide the necessary repetitive 

consistently illustrate that they can provide a safe, reinforcements of target behaviors and 

drug-free environment for their child, and be enrolled requirements. 

in vocational or educational programming. From March 3. Drug courts should ensure that treatment services 

2000 to October 2003, the Thurston County Family are longer, evidence based, and relevant to their 

Treatment Court served 54 adults and 82 children. methamphetamine-using population. They should 

Of the 82 children, 75 percent have been placed with offer stimulant abuse-specific strategies and use 

the birth family or are pending return from foster care cognitive-behavioral treatment modalities; afford 

to the birth family. Of children who could not be total service coordination and comprehensive case 

returned to the birth family, 14 percent have been management coupled with simultaneous treatment 

adopted by relatives or foster parents. All of the for co-occurring mental health disorders; provide 

pregnant women participants have graduated and physical health, comprehensive relapse 

delivered a total of 13 drug-free babies. prevention, community reinforcement, and 

continuing care and aftercare services before 

discharge; and maintain monthly telephone Recommendations 

Policy Recommendations for 

Drug Courts Planning To Target a 

Methamphetamine-Using Population 

contact and provide ongoing alumni with support 

meetings after discharge. 

Recommendations for Policymakers 

To ensure public safety, behavioral accountability, 

better treatment outcomes, and the overall success 

of their operations, drug courts that are planning to 

expand their target population to include 

methamphetamine users should consider the 

following recommendations: 

1.	 Communities facing an increase in 

methamphetamine use should mobilize quickly 

and develop a plan that encompasses the law 

enforcement, legal, judicial, health care, 

environmental, and retail communities. The 

establishment of state and local task forces 

1.	 Drug courts should expand community supervision 

strategies to include random and unannounced 

home visits and drug testing. They should also 

involve probation and law enforcement officers 

who are highly trained in detecting 

methamphetamine laboratories and use. 

will ensure cross-education and a coordinated 

strategy for stemming the spread of 

methamphetamine. Adult and family drug courts 

should be a key component of any community’s 

response to methamphetamine. 

11 
12 

2. Those who use and manufacture 

of methamphetamine manufacturing; what to do 

of methamphetamine abuse; and where to find 

treatment. 

Methamphetamine production and use continue to 

Note 

1. The Matrix model combines techniques and 

treatment manual. 

In an eight-site UCLA study of methamphetamine 

received treatment as usual and 75 patients received 

periods of abstinence from methamphetamine use 

methamphetamine put themselves, their 

neighbors, their family, and especially their 

children in grave danger. Strategies should be 

put in place that address the risk at each level 

and provide education and services to all who 

may be in danger. This includes educating 

neighbors, local businesspeople, and other 

community members on how to detect the signs 

with that information; how to detect the signs 

Conclusion 

rise and move eastward across the United States, 

wreaking havoc on communities. Research shows 

that sustained abstinence from drugs is associated 

with a 40 to 75 percent reduction in crime (Harrell 

and Roman, 2001). Although drug courts are not 

the only solution, they are the most effective tool 

available to restore communities, reduce recidivism, 

reunite families, and promote abstinence from 

methamphetamine. Drug courts are successful at 

sustaining abstinence with methamphetamine-involved 

offenders because of their added accountability, 

service coordination, and the precise milieu for 

evidence-based treatment to be practiced. Drug 

courts provide the means for a number of systems 

to work together within a community to ensure public 

safety, effectively treat methamphetamine addicts, 

and restore hope to families ravaged by this 

destructive drug. 

materials from the cognitive-behavioral therapy 

literature; it includes information about stimulants’ 

effects, family education, 12-step program 

participation, and positive reinforcement for behavior 

change and treatment compliance. The 16-week 

intensive treatment protocol is available in a detailed 

treatment, seven sites were voluntary participants and 

one site was a drug court. At each site, 75 patients 

treatment with the Matrix model. In the seven 

voluntary sites, people treated with Matrix did better 

than those who received treatment as usual (Rawson 

et al., 2004). 

In the overall sample and the majority of sites, Matrix 

participants attended more clinical sessions, stayed in 

treatment longer, had more methamphetamine-free 

urine samples while in treatment, and had longer 

than those who were in the treatment-as-usual group. 

However, the study showed that the drug court effects 

overwhelmed even the Matrix treatment effect. There 

was little question that the patients treated in the 

drug court program did better in treatment than 

non-drug-court patients. 
Ref Marlowe, D.B. 2003. “Integrating Substance Abuse erences 

Treatment and Criminal Justice Supervision.” NIDA 

Belenko, S.R. 1998. “Research on Drug Courts: Science and Practice Perspectives 2: 4–14. 

A Critical Review.” National Drug Court Institute Review 

(1)(1): 1–42. Marlowe, D.B., D.S. DeMatteo, and D.S. Festinger.

2003. “A Sober Assessment of Drug Courts.” Federal 

Belenko, S.R. 2001. Research on Drug Courts: A Sentencing Reporter 16(2): 153–157. 

Critical Review 2001 Update. New York: National 

Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Meyers, R.J., and J.E. Smith. 1995. Clinical Guide to 

Columbia University. Alcohol Treatment: The Community Reinforcement 

Approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. 1999. 

Treatment for Stimulant Use Disorders. Treatment Rawson, R.A., M.D. Anglin, and W. Ling. 2002. “Will 

Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series No. 33. Rockville, the Methamphetamine Problem Go Away?” Journal of


MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Addictive Diseases 21(1): 5–19.


Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Rawson, R.A., P. Marinelli-Casey, M.D. Anglin, A.


Administration, SMA 99–3296. Dickow, Y. Frazier, C. Gallagher, G.P. Galloway, J. Herrell,


Deci, E.L., R. Koestner, and R.M. Ryan. 1999. “A A. Huber, M.J. McCann, J. Obert, S. Pennell, C. Reiber,


Meta-Analytic Review of Experiments Examining the D. Vandersloot, J. Zweben, and the Methamphetamine


Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation.”


Psychological Bulletin 125(6): 627–668.


Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). 2004. 


“Drug Trafficking in the United States.” DEA Briefs 


and Background (online). Retrieved March 15, 2005


from http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/


drug_trafficking.html.


Treatment Project corporate authors. 2004. “A MultiSite Comparison of Psychosocial Approaches for the 

Treatment of Methamphetamine Dependence.” 

Addiction 99: 708–717. 

Simpson, D.D., and S.J. Curry (eds.). 1997. “Special 

Issue: Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study 

(DATOS).” Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 11(4). 

Harrell, A., and J. Roman. 2001. “Reducing Drug Use Simpson, D.D., and S.B. Sells. 1982. “Effectiveness 

and Crime Among Offenders: The Impact of Graduated of Treatment for Drug Abuse: An Overview of the DARP 

Sanctions.” Journal of Drug Issues 31(1): 207–232. Research Program.” Advances in Alcohol and 

Substance Abuse 2(1): 7–29. 

Hubbard, R.L., M.E. Marsden, J.V. Rachal, J.H.

Harwood, E.R. Cavanaugh, and H.M. Ginsburg. Swan, N. 2003. “New Imaging Technology Confirms 

1989. Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of 

Effectiveness. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North 

Carolina Press. 

Earlier PET Scan Evidence: Methamphetamine 

Abuse Linked to Human Brain Damage.” NIDA Notes 

18(2): 6–7. 

Marlatt, G.A., and J.R. Gordon. 1985. Relapse 

Prevention. New York: Guilford Press. 

13 
1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

operations. 

The 10 Key Components of a Drug Court* 

Drug courts combine intensive judicial supervision, mandatory drug testing, escalating sanctions, and 

treatment to help substance-abusing offenders break the cycle of addiction—and the crime that often 

accompanies it. Drug court judges work with prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers, and drug 

treatment specialists to determine appropriate treatment for offenders, monitor their progress, and ensure 

the delivery of other services, like education or job skills training, to help offenders remain crime- and 

drug-free. Below are the 10 key components that describe the basic elements of a drug court. 

Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing. 

Using a nonadversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while 

protecting participants’ due process rights. 

Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court program. 

Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and other related treatment and 

rehabilitation services. 

Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing. 

A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants’ compliance. 

Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential. 

Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness. 

Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and 

10. Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations generates 

local support and enhances drug court effectiveness. 

* Excerpted from Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components, published by the Bureau of Justice Assistance and developed 

in cooperation with the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. For the full text of this document and more information on 

drug courts, visit www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/drugcourts.html. 

14

15 

Bureau of Justice Assistance 

202–616–6500 

activities. The clearinghouse can be contacted at: 

Bureau of Justice Assistance Clearinghouse 

P

1–800–851–3420 

BJA mailing list. 

JUSTINFO 

Office of Justice Programs 

and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this 

Bureau of Justice Assistance 

Information 

BJA’s mission is to provide leadership and services in 

grant administration and criminal justice policy to support 

local, state, and tribal justice strategies to achieve safer 

communities. For more indepth information about BJA, its 

programs, and its funding opportunities, contact: 

810 Seventh Street NW. 

Washington, DC 20531 

Fax: 202–305–1367 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA 

E-mail: AskBJA@usdoj.gov 

The BJA Clearinghouse, a component of the National 

Criminal Justice Reference Service, shares BJA program 

information with federal, state, local, and tribal agencies 

and community groups across the country. Information 

specialists provide reference and referral services, 

publication distribution, participation and support for 

conferences, and other networking and outreach 

. O. Box 6000 

Rockville, MD 20849–6000 

Fax: 301–519–5212 

www.ncjrs.org 

E-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org 

Clearinghouse staff are available Monday through Friday, 

10 a.m. to 6 p.m. eastern time. Ask to be placed on the 

To subscribe to the electronic newsletter 

and become a registered NCJRS user, visit 

http://puborder.ncjrs.org/register. 

Partnerships for Safer Communities 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov 

This document was prepared by C. West Huddleston III, Director 

of the National Drug Court Institute (NDCI), under a grant 

awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice 

Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, 

document are those of the authors and do not necessarily 

represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department 

of Justice. For more information regarding this paper or for 

related resources, contact NDCI at 703–575–9400 or 

www.ndci.org. 
*NCJ~209549* 

◆ 

◆ Illegal production of methamphetamine is extremely dangerous 

the “cooking” process can be fatal. 

◆ Children are especially vulnerable to gross abuse and neglect 

from addicted parents and exposure to the toxins that 

methamphetamine manufacture produces. 

◆ 

◆ 

◆ 

specific treatment protocols. 

◆ 

◆ 

◆ 

compared with 64 percent of eligible defendants who did not 

◆ 

specifically designed to treat addicted parents and protect their 

children from child abuse and neglect. Of the 82 children 

◆ 

associated with a 40- to 75-percent reduction in crime. 

At a Glance 

The manufacture and use of methamphetamine, a highly addictive 

stimulant, is spreading from the west coast and southwestern 

states into the Midwest and along the east coast. 

both to manufacturers and to people in the vicinity of laboratories. 

The risk of chemical explosions is high, and breathing fumes from 

Drug courts provide effective, long-term help to addicts and 

families struggling with methamphetamine through— 

Increased accountability, supervision, monitoring, and structure. 

Comprehensive, long-term, and evidence-based stimulantNumerous drug courts that focus on methamphetamine abusers 

have experienced positive outcomes: 

The Orange County, California, Drug Court has graduated 

more than 1,000 addicts to date; of those, 80 percent have 

no rearrest for a drug-related crime and 74 percent have no 

rearrests at all. 

The Salt Lake County, Utah, Felony Drug Court reports that only 

15.4 percent of graduates were arrested on new drug charges, 

attend drug court. 

The Thurston County, Washington, Family Treatment Court is 

served from March 2000 to October 2003, 75 percent have 

been placed with the birth family or are pending return to the 

birth family. 

Sustained abstinence from methamphetamine and other drugs is