U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

MONOGRAPH

Juvenile Drug Courts:

Strategies in Practice

M ARCH 2003
This report was prepared by the National Drug Court lnstitute and the National Council of

Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Preparation of this report was supported by grant number

2000–DC–VX–K007 awarded by the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

Opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the

official positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

John Ashcroft

Attorney General

Deborah J. Daniels

Assistant Attorney General

Richard R. Nedelkoff

Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice Programs

World Wide Web Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Bureau of Justice Assistance

World Wide Web Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also

includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

NCJ 197866
i

Notice

In November 2002, the Bureau of Justice

Assistance (BJA) assumed responsibility for

administering the Drug Court Grant

Program and the Drug Court Training and

Technical Assistance Program. For further

information, please contact BJA.

Bureau of Justice Assistance

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–616–5001

Fax: 202–514–6452

E-mail: AskBJA@ojp.usdoj.gov
ii

Table of Contents

Preface ............................................................................................1

Introduction .....................................................................................5

The Strategies .................................................................................10

Strategy 1: Collaborative Planning .......................................................11

Strategy 2: Teamwork .......................................................................14

Strategy 3: Clearly Defined Target Population and Eligibility Criteria ..........17

Strategy 4: Judicial Involvement and Supervision ....................................20

Strategy 5: Monitoring and Evaluation ..................................................23

Strategy 6: Community Partnerships ....................................................26

Strategy 7: Comprehensive Treatment Planning ......................................29

Strategy 8: Developmentally Appropriate Services ...................................32

Strategy 9: Gender-Appropriate Services ..............................................34

Strategy 10: Cultural Competence .......................................................37

Strategy 11: Focus on Strengths ..........................................................40

Strategy 12: Family Engagement .........................................................43

Strategy 13: Educational Linkages .......................................................46

Strategy 14: Drug Testing ..................................................................49

Strategy 15: Goal-Oriented Incentives and Sanctions .................................53
iii

Strategy 16: Confidentiality ................................................................55

Resource Links ................................................................................58

Glossary ........................................................................................66

Notes ........................................................................................... .72

Bibliography ...................................................................................74
1

Preface

Purpose

Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

was created by a diverse group of juvenile

drug court practitioners, researchers, and

educators from across the country who were

brought together by the National Drug Court

Institute (a division of the National

Association of Drug Court Professionals)

and the National Council of Juvenile and

Family Court Judges. The group included

representatives from courts, prosecution,

public defense, treatment, probation, court

administration, academia, education, and

training.

As a workgroup, their task was to outline a

framework for planning, implementing, and

operating a juvenile drug court and then to

develop a publication that described the

framework. To accomplish this, they set out

to identify:

 Key players in a juvenile drug court and

their roles.

 Essential components of an effective

juvenile drug court.

 Key issues that face juvenile drug

courts—both barriers and

opportunities—and approaches to

address these issues.

 Procedures shown to be effective

through experience and current research.

As the culmination of their work, this

publication became a guide to planning,

operating, and implementing juvenile

drug courts. There are 16 strategies, each 

accompanied by recommendations for 

implementation. Based on the experience 

of juvenile drug courts in operation since 

the mid-1990s, these strategies and 

recommendations reflect the most current 

thinking about the optimal design for a 

juvenile drug court.

However, these strategies and

recommendations are not intended as

research-based benchmarks or as a

regulatory checklist. Because the field is

new, it would be premature to codify policy,

procedure, or best practices. At this stage,

further research is needed to establish

evidence-based practices. It is also important

to allow room for the evolution of

innovative approaches.

In addition to serving as a guide for planning

and implementation, these strategies will

also provide a framework for evaluation and

research. Through dissemination, these

strategies may encourage program

accountability and stimulate research

moving the field toward programs that are

data driven, outcome focused, and research

based.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

2

How To Use This Guide

This guide is organized around the 16

strategies. Together these strategies

comprise the framework for a juvenile

drug court. A section is devoted to each

strategy and discusses why the strategy

is significant for the effective operation

of the court. This significance statement

is followed by recommendations for

implementing the strategy. Occasionally,

specific program examples are used. These

are intended only as examples—not as

blueprints.

To broaden the scope of information

available to the reader and to reflect the

growing body of knowledge in the field, a

bibliography and a list of helpful web sites

are provided. At the BJA web site,

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA, there are samples

of forms, agreements, policies, and

procedures.

Because juvenile drug courts will be

implemented in diverse jurisdictions, the

strategies and recommendations offered are

meant to be adapted to the unique

characteristics of each court and the

community it serves.

A Note About Terminology

The variety of agencies and stakeholders

involved in this field has spawned a variety

of terminology and jargon, which can cause

confusion and miscommunication. In

particular, the term substance abuse may

have many different meanings depending on

the context and the person using it.

For the purposes of this publication,

substance abuse is referred to broadly as

youth involvement with alcohol and other

drugs (AOD) at all problem levels. Although

this definition differs from the strict

diagnostic meaning of the term, it has two

advantages. First, this broad definition

avoids the designation of any particular level

of use, acknowledging that youth who

appear before the court differ in their levels

of use. Second, it allows the consistent use

of a single term rather than multiple terms

that may confuse the reader and detract from

the flow of the text.

Other terms that have multiple meanings are

defined in a glossary in the appendix. These

glossary definitions are intended to clarify

how the terms are used in this publication

and are not a prescription for their use in all

courts.

Acknowledgments

This publication is the product of many

hours spent in discussing relevant

experiences, examining issues, reviewing

drafts, and building consensus for

recommendations. A collaborative work

process of this magnitude, involving the

coordinated efforts of professionals from

across the country, cannot happen without

extensive administrative and logistical

support. We wish to thank those who have

so capably provided this support:

W. Jannise Parker

Project Assistant

National Drug Court Institute

Jessica Pearce

Project Coordinator, AOD Division

National Council of Juvenile and Family

Court Judges

We also wish to thank the drug court

practitioners who reviewed our draft and

offered helpful feedback:
3

Sonya Barbier, MA

New Iberia, LA

Penny Beatty, MS

College Park, MD

Michael D. Clark, CSW, CACI

Mason, MI

Jan Embree-Bever, CACI

Wheat Ridge, CO

Kristen Frescoln

Raleigh, NC

Ken Lusnia

Cleveland, OH

John Marr

Las Vegas, NV

Honorable Charles M. McGee

Reno, NV

Ron Nestle, BSW, LSAI

Las Cruces, NM

Joseph G. Stelma, Jr.

Jacksonville, FL

Honorable Henry Weber

Louisville, KY

Jennifer Dyer Wells

Panama City, FL

Patricia White

Reno, NV

We look forward to hearing from

jurisdictions that have implemented the

strategies from this publication and learning

from their experiences. We hope that this

document will provide a springboard for

further evolution in this field and generate

better services for youth and their families.

The Development Committee

Chair

Susan Finlay

Judge (retired)

San Diego, CA

Vice-Chair

John W. Larson

Judge

Missoula County Youth Drug Court

Missoula, MT

Committee Members

Steven Belenko, Ph.D.

Senior Research Associate

CASA Columbia University

New York, NY

Margaret L. Borg

Public Defender

Missoula County Youth Drug Court

Missoula, MT

Ernest Brown, Ph.D.

Psychologist

San Francisco Youth Treatment and

 Education Center

San Francisco, CA

Sharon Chatman

Judge

Superior Court of California

San Jose, CA

Caroline Cooper

Director

Justice Programs Office

American University

Washington, DC

Wanda King

Consultant

Grover Beach, CA
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

4

Chuck A. Lefevers

Director Court Services

Human Services Associates, Inc.

Windermere, FL

Melanie May

Circuit Court Judge

17th Judicial District

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

Lilas Rajaee-Moore

Program Manager

Denver Juvenile Justice Integrated

 TASC Project

Denver, CO

Darryl Turpin 

Director

Jefferson County Drug Court

Louisville, KY

Project Staff

West Huddleston

Director

National Drug Court Institute

Alexandria, VA

Iris Key

Manager, Alcohol and Other Drugs Division

National Council of Juvenile and Family

 Court Judges

Reno, NV

Drug Courts Program Office (now part of

the Bureau of Justice Assistance)

Steve Antkowiak

Policy Specialist

Jennifer B. Columbel

Deputy Director

Editor

Susan Yeres, Ed.D.

Consultant

San Francisco, CA

Robin Wright

Senior Deputy Court Administrator

Pensacola, FL

1st Judicial Circuit
5

Introduction

Drug Court Movement

The emergence of crack cocaine in the mid1980s had an unprecedented and dramatic

impact on the nation’s criminal justice

system. In an effort to stem the street drug

dealing—and the crime and violence

associated with illegal drug use—arrests and

prosecutions of drug offenders escalated

dramatically, and penalties for the

possession and sale of illegal drugs were

toughened. As a result of this nationwide

war on drugs, unprecedented numbers of

drug offenders were arrested, charged with

felonies, prosecuted, convicted, and

incarcerated.

The influx of drug offenders into the system

severely strained the courts, forcing some to

the brink of collapse. In an effort to address

growing caseloads, courts employed delayreduction strategies, including specialized

court dockets to expedite drug case

processing. However, these strategies did

not address the complex issues underlying

substance abuse—including family and

mental health problems—and did little to

stem the tide of drug offenders flowing

into the system, habilitate drug offenders

already in the system, or reduce recidivism

among released offenders.1 The result was

a revolving door syndrome that cycled

drug offenders in and out of the justice

system.

Frustration with this syndrome propelled a

philosophical shift in the field toward

therapeutic jurisprudence. The premises of

therapeutic jurisprudence are that the law is

a therapeutic agent; positive therapeutic

outcomes are important judicial goals; and

the design and operation of the courts can

influence therapeutic outcomes.2

 A small

number of innovative jurisdictions began to

reexamine the relationship between criminal

justice processing and services for alcohol

and other drugs (AOD). They discovered

that treatment and justice practitioners share

essential goals—stopping the illicit use and

abuse of all addictive substances and

curtailing related criminal activity. Each

system possessed unique capabilities and

resources that complemented and enhanced

the effectiveness of the other.

Out of these discoveries, a partnership

emerged, and the concept of treatmentoriented drug courts was born. Courts began

working closely with a wide range of

stakeholders within a problem-solving

framework and with therapeutic outcomes as

a goal.3

 As one of several criminal justice

initiatives that started at the grassroots level

and spread throughout the nation,4

 drug

courts joined a growing number of

specialized community courts—courts

designed to reflect community concerns and

priorities, access community resources,

include community organizations in

policymaking decisions, and seek general

community participation and support.5
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

6

Between 1989 and 2000, more than 1,000

courts had either implemented or were

planning to implement a drug court to

address substance abuse and drug-related

crime. Therapeutic jurisprudence, formerly

just an academic theory, was being applied

every day in drug courts.6

With the success of adult drug courts in

reducing recidivism, the application of

drug court principles to populations in the

juvenile court was a logical step, and some

juvenile court judges drew on the experience

of an adult court in their locale to begin a

juvenile drug court. However, the

circumstances and needs of youth and their

families are different from those of adult

criminal offenders. It quickly became

apparent that applying drug court principles

to youth populations would not be as simple

as replicating the adult model, and that a

drug court for youth would look very

different from one aimed at adults.

Emergence of the Juvenile Drug

Court

Although the increase in AOD use among

juveniles peaked somewhat later than in

the adult population, by 2000 the Centers

for Disease Control and Prevention reported

that rates of smoking, drinking, and other

illicit drug use among students had increased

in the early 1990s and remained alarmingly

high. Half of all students reported alcohol

use and nearly one-third were binge

drinking. More than one-fourth of high

school students were marijuana users;

9.5 percent had used cocaine by the end

of high school; and 14.6 percent had used

inhalants.7

 Because there is strong evidence

of an association between AOD use and

delinquent behavior of juveniles,8 it is not

surprising that the number of juvenile drug

offense cases processed during 1995 was

145 percent greater than in 1991.9

As they faced the complex issues

surrounding AOD use, juvenile court judges

experienced many of the same frustrations

the adult courts had faced. They found that

dealing with substance-abusing juveniles

within the traditional juvenile court often

meant long treatment waiting lists,

disjointed service delivery, lack of family

engagement, and no input into the nature or

extent of treatment.10 Consequently, in the

mid-1990s, a number of innovative juvenile

courts started drug court dockets that

focused on the problem of substance abuse.

Between 1995 and 2001, more than 140

juvenile drug courts were established, and

more than 125 were being planned.11

However, juvenile courts had a significant

advantage over adult courts in applying the

therapeutic jurisprudence theory. Because

the original orientation of juvenile courts

was rehabilitation, the use of therapeutic

interventions was not new in this setting.12

From its founding, the juvenile court’s

mission was to correct and rehabilitate

children who had violated the law, to protect

the community from their delinquent

behavior, and to strengthen the family.13

Noting this history, a 2001 article in the

Alabama Law Review concluded that, “A

more heightened and intensified emphasis

on therapy and rehabilitation, accompanied

by appropriate accountability and due

process safeguards, does not represent a

dramatic philosophical shift from past and

current juvenile justice considerations and

objectives.”14

As a part of the community’s response to

juvenile offenders, the juvenile drug court

offered an innovative, integrated approach

that reflected the community’s norms,

values, resources, and unique needs. This

integrated approach generated new issues

and demanded new roles for the judge and

all those involved with the drug court
7

program.15 However, despite these

innovations, the program’s basic concepts

remained consistent with the principles of

traditional juvenile court practice. For this

reason, juvenile courts found that these

programs could be successfully operated

within the existing framework of ethical,

legal, and professional standards.

Because juvenile drug courts are still

relatively young, much remains to be

learned about how practitioners can most

effectively intervene with youth populations

in a drug court setting. Over the past several

years, the field has learned that programs for

youth must incorporate individually tailored

and developmentally appropriate,

comprehensive treatments that draw on the

strengths and address the needs of

participants and their families. In addition,

engagement of the neighborhood and

broader community is important to longterm success with the juvenile substanceabusing offender.16

How a Juvenile Drug Court Works:

A Brief Overview

A juvenile drug court is a docket within a

juvenile court to which selected delinquency

cases, and in some instances, status

offenders are referred for handling by a

designated judge. The youth referred to this

docket are identified as having problems

with alcohol and/or other drugs. The

juvenile drug court judge maintains close

oversight of each case through frequent

(often weekly) status hearings with the

parties involved. The judge both leads and

works as a member of a team that comprises

representatives from treatment, juvenile

justice, social services, school and

vocational training programs, law

enforcement, probation, the prosecution, and

the defense. Together, the team determines

how best to address the substance abuse and

related problems of the youth and his or her

family that have brought the youth into

contact with the justice system.17 The goals

of the court are to:

 Provide immediate intervention,

treatment, and structure in the lives of

juveniles who use drugs through

ongoing, active oversight and

monitoring by the drug court judge.

 Improve juveniles’ level of functioning

in their environment, address problems

that may be contributing to their use of

drugs, and develop/strengthen their

ability to lead crime- and drug-free lives.

 Provide juveniles with skills that will aid

them in leading productive substancefree and crime-free lives—including

skills that relate to their educational

development, sense of self-worth, and

capacity to develop positive

relationships in the community.

 Strengthen families of drug-involved

youth by improving their capability to

provide structure and guidance to their

children.

 Promote accountability of both juvenile

offenders and those who provide

services to them.18

Most communities that establish juvenile

drug courts initiate these programs to

provide intensive judicial intervention

and supervision of juveniles and families

involved in substance abuse—a level of

intervention not generally available through

the traditional juvenile court process.19 The

juvenile drug court is a unique, communitybased approach that builds strong

community partnerships and enhances the

capacity of these partners to assist in the

habilitation of substance-abusing youth.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

8

Distinguishing Juvenile and Adult

Drug Courts

Juvenile drug courts are fundamentally

different from their adult counterparts

because of the different circumstances of

AOD-using youth. Although youth may rely

upon substances to function, they are seldom

addicted to alcohol and other drugs in the

traditional sense, and they use alcohol and

other drugs for reasons vastly different from

those of adults.

Furthermore, in contrast to adults, youth are

still developing the cognitive, social, and

emotional skills necessary to lead productive

lives. Family members, peers, schools, and

community relationships significantly

influence their development. Because youth

usually live within families (however

defined), the juvenile drug court must shift

its focus from a single participant to the

entire family and expand its services to a

more comprehensive continuum of care.

Finally, youth are required to abide by laws

specific to them, such as the law requiring

school attendance.

All these issues present unique challenges to

practitioners as they design and implement

developmentally appropriate juvenile drug

court programs. As part of this complex

task, practitioners need to:

 Develop motivational strategies that are

specific to adolescents, understanding

that adolescents stop their substance

abuse for reasons that are different from

those of adults.

 Counteract the negative influences of

peers, gangs, and family members.

 Address the needs of the family and, at

times, the intergenerational nature of

abuse problems.

 Comply with confidentiality

requirements while maintaining a

collaborative, information-sharing

framework.

 Respond to the developmental changes

that occur in the lives of juveniles while

they are under the court’s jurisdiction.20

A jurisdiction that is planning or

implementing a juvenile drug court will

need to take very special care to recognize

the differences between juveniles and adults.

Defining Success

From the start, those involved in creating

a juvenile drug court must define success

and how it will be measured. With a clear

and articulated vision of what it wants to

achieve, the court can implement a program

plan that is targeted, coordinated, and

measurable. Given the variation among

jurisdictions, each jurisdiction needs to

establish goals tailored to its unique

characteristics—including geography,

population size, substance use/abuse

patterns, youth characteristics, available

resources, community culture and norms,

and the concerns and interests of its

stakeholders.

The goals statement for a juvenile drug

court is the foundation for high-quality

evaluation research and also for quality

assurance. Working from this statement,

program planners can devise a system for

evaluation, monitoring, and data collection

that tracks participation, retention,

completion, outcomes, and recidivism.

This information serves two purposes.

First, it creates a feedback loop that enables

a juvenile drug court to answer such

questions as:
9

 Are we reaching our targeted

population?

 Do we have the resources to address the

needs of the youth in our court?

 What impact are we having on

delinquency?

 What impact are we having on substance

use and abuse?

Based on the answers to these questions, the

court can enhance, adapt, and adjust its

program structure and offerings to better

meet the unique needs of its youth

population.

Second, the findings from ongoing

monitoring and evaluation will inform the

work of all juvenile drug courts. Given the

limited history of the juvenile drug court and

the lack of longitudinal studies, the field in

general has much to learn from the lessons

of each jurisdiction. It is imperative that

individual courts gather data and evaluation

findings that can be used by researchers to

establish best practices.

Being Part of the Movement

Each new juvenile drug court joins the ranks

of hundreds of jurisdictions across the

country that have instituted drug courts.

Many states have well-established

associations for local drug courts, and

several national organizations provide

educational and networking opportunities

through trainings and conferences

throughout the country.

As this field of practice evolves, there will

be an increasing number of lessons learned

and research findings to share, providing

valuable assistance to all courts—both those

just starting and those seeking to improve

their programs. As a distillation of the

learning to date, this publication is another

step in the evolution of the field.
10

The Strategies

1. Collaborative PlanningEngage all stakeholders in creating an interdisciplinary, coordinated, and

systemic approach to working with youth and their families.

2. TeamworkDevelop and maintain an interdisciplinary, nonadversarial work team.

3. Clearly Defined Target Population and Eligibility CriteriaDefine a target population and

eligibility criteria that are aligned with the program’s goals and objectives.

4. Judicial Involvement and SupervisionSchedule frequent judicial reviews and be sensitive to the

effect that court proceedings can have on youth and their families.

5. Monitoring and EvaluationEstablish a system for program monitoring and evaluation to maintain

quality of service, assess program impact, and contribute to knowledge in the field.

6. Community PartnershipsBuild partnerships with community organizations to expand the range of

opportunities available to youth and their families.

7. Comprehensive Treatment PlanningTailor interventions to the complex and varied needs of youth

and their families.

8. Developmentally Appropriate ServicesTailor treatment to the developmental needs of adolescents.

9. Gender-Appropriate ServicesDesign treatment to address the unique needs of each gender.

10. Cultural CompetenceCreate policies and procedures that are responsive to cultural differences and

train personnel to be culturally competent.

11. Focus on StrengthsMaintain a focus on the strengths of youth and their families during program

planning and in every interaction between the court and those it serves.

12. Family EngagementRecognize and engage the family as a valued partner in all components of the

program.

13. Educational LinkagesCoordinate with the school system to ensure that each participant enrolls in

and attends an educational program that is appropriate to his or her needs.

14. Drug TestingDesign drug testing to be frequent, random, and observed. Document testing policies

and procedures in writing.

15. Goal-Oriented Incentives and SanctionsRespond to compliance and noncompliance with

incentives and sanctions that are designed to reinforce or modify the behavior of youth and their families.

16. ConfidentialityEstablish a confidentiality policy and procedures that guard the privacy of the 

youth while allowing the drug court team to access key information.
11

Strategy 1

Collaborative Planning

Engage all stakeholders in creating an interdisciplinary,

coordinated, and systemic approach to working with youth

and their families.

Significance

Juvenile drug courts depend on the

involvement of many organizations that

traditionally have not worked together in the

juvenile justice process. These organizations

need to be identified and engaged in the

initial planning of the program. At a

minimum, the planning team should include

the judge; court administrator; prosecutor;

public defender or defense counsel; the

evaluator or specialist in management

information systems (MIS); and

representatives from probation, schools,

social services, law enforcement, treatment

providers, and other community-based

organizations. As the convener of the team,

the judge plays an essential leadership role

in establishing the juvenile drug court.

Broad-based interdisciplinary planning is

critical to identify and secure the community

resources that can provide ongoing support

for the program. The planning team needs to

assess the scope and intensity of the

programís activities, determine the services

that will need to be provided (including

collateral support services for youth and

their families), and project the potential

impact of the program on other community

resources. To meet the challenges that will

emerge during program implementation, the

team needs to be flexibleówilling to make

adjustments in the face of new information

and developments.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 On the planning team, include

representatives of all state, county,

local, and community-based agencies

that can provide support for the

program and/or that will be affected

by its operation. Define the roles and

responsibilities of the team members

and ask team members to review the

definitions so that they understand the

role of each organization involved.

 During the planning process, reach team

consensus on:
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

12

Mission.

Measurable goals and objectives

(definition of success).

Decisionmaking processes for

planning and operation.

Roles and responsibilities.

Target population.

Program model (preplea and/or

postplea).

Judicial supervision.

Screening and referral process.

Acquisition of resources and

services.

Treatment approach/intervention(s).

Drug testing frequency and protocol.

Case management and monitoring.

Criteria for and application of

incentives and sanctions.

Graduation and termination criteria.

Program evaluation and monitoring.

Sustainability plan.

 Develop written policies and procedures

for the implementation and operation

of the juvenile drug court. Be sure to

resolve any incompatibilities between

the policies and procedures of the court

and partner organizations (e.g.,

confidentiality policies). During

implementation, revise and fine-tune

these documents to ensure that policies

and procedures support the goals and

mission of the drug court.

 The juvenile drug court processówith

its comprehensive services and

immediate interventionsódemands a

new way of doing business that may

require adjustments in the courtís

existing procedures. For example, it may

be necessary to screen youth referred to

the court more quickly, prepare

status/progress reports more frequently,

and integrate new organizations into the

lines of communication. Review the

courtís existing procedures to determine

what adaptations are needed.

 Identify local collateral resources and

organizations that can provide ongoing

support for the participants and their

families. Engage both traditional and

nontraditional organizations in

developing community networks and

other supports for youth and families.

(See Strategy 6: Community

Partnerships.)

 Before the program is implemented,

create an operational team that

includes representatives from all the

organizations who will be involved in

the day-to-day operation of the program.

 Establish mechanisms for program and

participant oversight and accountability

to ensure that program goals are

achieved and the program is

implemented as planned. Before

program operation begins, develop and

put in place a plan for participant

monitoring, program management, and

evaluation. Create standards for

reporting and make changes as needed in

the required documentation (e.g.,

program attendance).

 Devise an MIS to collect and compile

data for monitoring and evaluation. (For

more detailed information, see Strategy

5: Monitoring and Evaluation.) Enlist all

significant stakeholders in identifying

what information will be collected and

how evaluation results will be reported.

 Begin cross-training and education of

team members during the planning stage

and continue throughout the planning

process. Topics for trainings may

include pharmacology, due process,
13

ethics, confidentiality, and adolescent

development.

 To promote effective collaboration,

remove traditional barriers between

agencies. Use consent waivers and

MOUs (Memoranda of Understanding)

to:

Promote information sharing among

team members.

Codify roles, responsibilities, and

resource commitments.

Provide for interagency oversight

and quality assurance.

Summarize all this information in a case

flowchart―a diagram or other visual

that shows how youth will move through

the program and who will provide

services at each point in the process.

This will help to clarify and articulate

the decisions made by collaborating

organizations.

 Devise a process for researching

potential funding sources and their

requirements.
14

Strategy 2

Teamwork

Develop and maintain an interdisciplinary, nonadversarial

work team.

Significance

To provide a seamless continuum of services

for youth and their families, the juvenile

drug court needs to develop and maintain a

supportive, nonadversarial work team. This

team is central to program planning,

implementation, and operation. The

composition of the team will evolve as the

court moves from conception to

implementation. It is important to ensure

that the team’s commitment and vision are

sustained and each new member of the team

establishes ownership of the work of the

juvenile drug court.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Make certain that the planning and

operational teams comprise a diverse

and broad-based group of key

community stakeholders and agencies,

including individuals who can represent

the interests and experience of the

population to be served. (For

recommended composition, see Strategy

1: Collaborative Planning.)

 During planning, take a proactive

approach to managing potential

conflict by encouraging team members

to actively represent their agency’s

or organization’s goals and interests.

Use the discussion of differences to

bring to the surface key issues that

need resolution and move the team

toward consensus—forging policies

and procedures that represent collective

agreement and commitment. In this way,

even representatives from agencies that

traditionally have competed can focus

on promoting the drug court program.

This proactive approach to resolving

differences is essential to successful

teamwork.

 The transition from planning to

operation often results in a substantial

turnover in team membership. To ensure

that the original commitment to and

ownership of the program is transferred

to the operational team, be sure to orient

new members regarding past decisions

about policies and procedures and the

reasons for these decisions.
15

 To form the operational team, select

team members who work in the juvenile

drug court on a daily basis—the drug

court judge, assigned prosecutor, public

defender or private defense attorneys,

coordinator, probation officer, case

manager, treatment provider, law

enforcement officer, and education

program provider.

 Each team member comes to the

drug court with unique responsibilities

and mandates from the agency or

program he or she represents. To work

effectively, team members need to be

flexible in how they discharge these

responsibilities—willing, when

needed, to relinquish control over

decisionmaking and negotiate the

boundaries of agency turf. This

nontraditional work style, although

time consuming and sometimes

frustrating, leads to a sense of program

ownership within the team and fosters

a lasting commitment to the goals of

the court. As team members assume

nonadversarial roles, the team

significantly changes not only the

functioning of the court, but also its

impact on the youth it serves.

 The judge can foster teamwork from

the bench by modeling shared

decisionmaking and consensus building.

Even though the judge is the ultimate

decisionmaker, he or she can engage

all team members in planning and

operation—encouraging them to share

information and adapt their roles to

further the work of the group. In this

way, the judge becomes a facilitator,

while still retaining ethnical and legal

responsibility for the operation of the

court.

 Develop a protocol or charter signed

by all team members as representatives

of their organizations. In this document,

describe the roles and responsibilities

of each team member and how the team

will operate—include recordkeeping,

attendance, assignments, and

decisionmaking processes. The protocol

can be translated into an MOU or

incorporated into the program’s

written policies and procedures. As

new members replace those who are

departing, this document will help

orient them to the team’s operation and

maintain the program’s consistency

through times of transition.

 Schedule regular meetings of the

operational team—separate from the

precourt staffings—to discuss general

program issues without the pressure of

the day’s upcoming events and evaluate

the team’s group process. Invite key

community stakeholders to join these

meetings to help assess the court’s

practices and plan for the future.

 Provide ongoing, interdisciplinary

education to ensure that team members

share an understanding of the program’s

goals and each member’s role in

achieving them.

Before the first case is heard, orient

all team members to the philosophy,

policies, and procedures of both the

treatment and justice system

components of the program.

As one aspect of training,

discuss how work teams develop

and function and the expectations

for team members. This will help

team members adjust to their

new, nonadversarial roles and

relationships and promote

effective decisionmaking.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

16

Among the possible topics for

ongoing interdisciplinary training,

consider:

–Ethics.

–Legal processes.

–Adolescent development.

–Treatment approaches.

–Cultural competency.

–Monitoring and evaluation.

–Due process.

–Law enforcement guidelines.

–Education resources and

 requirements.

–Safety issues.

–Quality assurance.

Regional, state, and national

conferences are good educational

resources for the team. Consider

sending at least several team

members—and, if possible, the

full team—to conferences.
17

Strategy 3

Clearly Defined Target Population

and Eligibility Criteria

Define a target population and eligibility criteria that are 

aligned with the program’s goals and objectives.

Significance

Given the large population of youth who can

potentially benefit from the intensive

services of a juvenile drug court, one of the

major tasks in its planning is to determine

the characteristics and backgrounds of the

youth who will be served by the program.

This involves two steps—first, define the

target population; and second, set the

program eligibility criteria to screen youth

from the target population. Because this task

is fundamental in setting the direction of the

program, it is essential that all stakeholders

are involved.

To define the target population, the planning

team needs to look at both the charge and its

related behavior. Most adolescent AOD use

has not progressed to addiction and the

AOD use is often associated with other risky

behaviors. The size and makeup of potential

drug court participants may be quite broad.

A clearly defined target population makes it

more likely that the program will maintain

its focus on community problems that were

identified by the stakeholders during

planning. In turn, this increases the drug

court’s chances of achieving its goals and

objectives.

With the target population clearly defined,

the planning team can develop eligibility

criteria for screening potential program

participants. The eligibility criteria should

answer this question: “Out of the total target

population, whom can we serve?”

Eligibility takes into account such practical

limitations as funding requirements and

availability of treatment resources. Based

on the eligibility criteria, the team develops

a screening instrument that is used to

determine which of the youth referred are

appropriate for the program. All applicants

who meet the eligibility criteria are given

the opportunity to participate.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

18

Recommendations for

Implementation

 As a first step in defining the target

population, revisit the data collected

during the initial needs assessment (on

substance use, arrests, and criminal

activity in the community). Then review

the mission statement for the juvenile

drug court, its goals for solving the

problem(s), and the objectives for

reaching those goals. The definition of

the target population should flow

logically from the mission statement,

goals, and objectives. It may help to

frame the issues by asking:

What are the patterns of substance

use among youth in the jurisdiction?

For example:

–Are some substances more often

 used in combination with others?

–Is the use of a substance associated

 with truancy, theft, or other

 misbehavior?

–Do males and females differ in their

 substance use?

–Does substance use differ among

 age groups?

How does this substance abuse affect

the community?

What is the volume of crime and

arrests among youth in the

jurisdiction?

What are the characteristics of youth

who are arrested? in detention?

repeat offenders?

Is there a problem with the way

substance abuse cases are handled in

the existing juvenile justice system?

How will the selection of a particular

target population solve the

community problem identified by

the planning team?

 In determining the target population,

assess the jurisdiction’s resources in

order to make the best use of outpatient

and inpatient substance abuse services,

mental health services, funding,

supervision, and drug testing.

Ultimately, the type and scope of

available resources will affect both

the number of youth served and their

characteristics.

 Involve all team members in creating the

criteria that will be used to screen youth

for program eligibility. Make certain the

eligibility criteria reflect the program’s

goals for both juvenile justice and

treatment. Document the criteria in

writing.

 In determining the eligibility criteria,

review legal requirements for

participation that might relate to the type

of crimes stated in the current charge(s),

criminal history, adjudication status (pre

or post), or age. Funders and other local

stakeholders may have their own criteria

for eligibility that need to be considered

during the planning process.

Legal questions may include:

–Can the current charge be a felony?

–Can the charge involve weapons or

 violence?

–Can the charge be a misdemeanor?

–Must the current charge be for a

 drug crime, such as drug use or

 possession?

–Will the drug crimes considered be

 limited by type of drugs, such as

 alcohol or marijuana?

–Can cases be pending?

–Can youth legally continue in the

 program after they are no longer

 minors?

Base decisions about the

requirements for adjudication status
19

on statute and on the authority and

resources available to the court.

 Once the criteria for eligibility are

determined, incorporate them in a

written set of guidelines that delineates

a sequence for referral and screening and

a timeframe for efficient processing. In

these guidelines, specify each person

involved in the referral and screening

process and the time and place for each

step. Followed consistently, these

guidelines will ensure that eligible youth

are not turned away and that youth who

are ineligible are not accepted into the

program.

 Conduct ongoing evaluation to

determine whether the court is reaching

the target population identified by the

planning team and whether this target

group is the one most affected by AOD

use. Also use evaluation to determine

whether the program’s goals, target

population, and eligibility criteria need

to be updated to reflect changes in

available resources, shifting priorities of

stakeholders, or agency operations.
20

Strategy 4

Judicial Involvement and Supervision

Schedule frequent judicial reviews and be sensitive to the

effect that court proceedings can have on youth and their

families.

Significance

The judge’s involvement in and supervision

of youth participation in the juvenile drug

court is essential. Frequent court hearings

provide an open forum where everyone

involved in a case can gather to share

information, discuss issues, and reach

consensus on the next step(s) toward a

youth’s successful rehabilitation and

completion of the juvenile drug court

program. Hearings also provide leadership

and team building opportunities for juvenile

drug court staff.

As they conduct judicial reviews, judges

need to take into account the delicate nature

of adolescent behavior and consider what

setting will provide the most positive

atmosphere for the discussion of sensitive

issues. Although statutes and court rules

dictate the conduct of review hearings, in

most jurisdictions hearings may be either

open (in the presence of all drug court

participants, their families, and others

involved with their cases) or closed (only in

the presence of the drug court team). For

most cases, an open hearing is appropriate,

but the unique circumstances of some cases

may warrant an adjustment to the open court

procedure. For example, to avoid conflicts

between a parent and youth during an open

court session, it may be necessary for the

case manager to report sensitive issues

during a staff meeting.

One of the hallmarks of the juvenile drug

court—in contrast to adult courts or other

juvenile courts—is the personal relationship

between each youth and the judge. Often,

the judge is the only constant in the youth’s

life, providing the structure and support that

are otherwise absent. In loco parentis has a

special meaning in this context: judges need

to demonstrate interest in each youth’s

accomplishments and sensitivity to his or

her unique issues.
21

Recommendations for

Implementation

 The juvenile drug court team apprises

the judge of the youth’s attendance and

participation, attitude, drug test results,

and progress or lack of progress in

treatment and at school. The team also

reports about behavior at home

(including adherence to curfews) and

about the quality of the youth’s

relationship with the parent or parental

figure. During the hearing, the judge

draws attention to accomplishments as

well as poor performance. The judge

may invite the youth and their parents to

talk about his or her progress from their

own perspectives.

 Court staffings, which precede the

formal hearings, are an opportunity

to discuss cases freely—without the

presence of other youth, their families,

and providers. However, occasionally

a judge may prefer a more public

discussion of a youth’s case—using

courtroom theater—to take advantage

of peer pressure to encourage program

compliance. When choosing to do this,

it is essential to assess the maturity of

the youth and the sensitivity of the issues

to be discussed (e.g., abuse, pregnancy,

and problem behavior). A youth’s need

to be admonished or to view the

admonishment of another must be

balanced with the need to avoid harmful

embarrassment that can diminish selfesteem. Adolescents may perceive their

own or another youth’s public

admonishment as an indicator of the

court’s unfairness and may learn a lesson

that was not intended by the court.

 Keeping in mind the differences between

adult and adolescent culture, the judge is

flexible in his or her expectations for

youth. Without relinquishing the

authority and dignity of the court, the

judge can be understanding of language,

attitudes, and lifestyles of youth that in

an adult court might be interpreted as

uncooperative or offensive. (See

Strategy 8: Developmentally

Appropriate Services and Strategy 9:

Gender-Appropriate Services.) Just as

effective parents respond quickly and

definitively to their youth’s behavior, it

is critical that rewards and sanctions be

applied within a short time following an

accomplishment or an infraction of

program rules. (See Strategy 15: GoalOriented Incentives and Sanctions.)

 To maintain the relationship between

youth and the judge, assign judges to the

court for a designated period of time,

with a single substitute to fill in when

the judge cannot be present.

 Base the frequency of court hearings

on need. During the first weeks of the

program, hearings are usually weekly.

They extend to longer intervals as a

youth moves into the next phase of

the program or exhibits exemplary

participation. For some youth, however,

weekly hearings may continue to be

necessary to ensure adherence to

treatment, scholastic, and behavioral

goals. For other youth, less frequent

hearings may be warranted to avoid

interference with school, work, therapy,

special activities, and other priorities.

In setting the hearing schedule,

remember that the judge may be the only

constant in the youth’s life; be sure to

maintain the consistency and structure

that will enhance the youth’s habilitation

or rehabilitation.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

22

 Be flexible in scheduling hearings.

Because the court may need to attend to

emergencies quickly, an open door

policy is ideal. Similarly, allow case

managers to waive the youth’s

appearance as a reward if the youth is

compliant and to schedule hearings at a

time of day when the youth is not in

school.

 Require at least one parent (or parental

figure) to attend and participate in court

hearings. When the parent appears with

the youth, the court has an opportunity

to observe their interaction and learn

more about the problems and issues in

the youth’s life. While gentle

encouragement is the best way to

involve a parent, be willing to enforce

participation—even by initiating

contempt procedures against parents

who fail to participate. Occasionally,

it may become necessary to order

substance abuse evaluations and/or

treatment for the parent (if this is

authorized by statute).

 In general, invite all relevant people to

participate in the hearing and determine

on a case-by-case basis whether they

will appear separately or together. Often,

either the youth or the parent is reluctant

to speak with the other present. For

example, if the parent is fearful of the

youth, he/she may not be willing to

report curfew violations or disruptive

behavior in the youth’s presence.

Similarly, the youth may be unwilling

or unable to report a parent’s substance

abuse for fear of repercussions after the

hearing. And yet, the hearing may be the

only setting in which this information

can be safely exchanged. In situations

like these, allow for as open a discussion

as possible, but avoid volatile family

interaction that could erupt again at

home. If there appears to be a need for

a private audience, talk with the youth

and the parent separately. The judge

may want to prepare a set of guidelines

for the team to clarify the circumstances

in which this separation is appropriate.
23

Strategy 5

Monitoring and Evaluation

Establish a system for program monitoring and evaluation to

maintain quality of service, assess program impact, and

contribute to knowledge in the field.

Significance

The juvenile drug court needs to gather

short- and long-term information about the

program’s effectiveness. With this

information, the drug court team can learn

from the program’s experience and adjust

procedures and revise plans to make the

program more effective in serving youth and

their families. At the same time, by pooling

and evaluating data, the field can learn from

the accumulated experience of juvenile drug

courts throughout the country.

To make ensure that information is gathered,

the planning team needs to devise a system

to monitor and evaluate the program.

Monitoring is an immediate, day-to-day

view of the program, and evaluation is a

longer review—looking back at what the

program has accomplished during a

specified time period. There are two kinds of

evaluation: Process evaluation, which

assesses whether the program has completed

the work it set out to do; and outcome

evaluation, which focuses on whether and

how the program’s activities have affected

the problem that they were intended to

impact.

The foundation for monitoring and

evaluation is a comprehensive and accurate

information management system that is

based on sound data collection strategies.

This means that process and outcome

evaluations need to be integral to program

planning and implementation.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 During the planning process, determine

what information key stakeholders will

need and develop a plan to collect and

maintain this information. Make sure the

plan provides for the collection of the

data necessary for monitoring and for

process and outcome evaluation. This

system needs to be designed before the

program starts, so that data collection

tools and procedures are in place from

the beginning, baseline data can be
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

24

gathered before program operations

begin, and comparison groups can be

identified.

 As part of the data collection system

(manual or computerized), incorporate a

quality control assessment for data

accuracy, completeness, and timeliness.

Design the system so that data are easy

to retrieve for research purposes.

 In planning for data collection, consider:

Staffing issues.

Hardware and software needs.

Platform, resources, and system

capacity.

Standardized data collection forms.

Schedules for data collection and

data entry.

Capabilities for analyzing the data

and generating reports.

 Identify personnel who will be

responsible for collecting and entering or

recording data and allow them adequate

time to perform these tasks.

 Establish systems to maintain

confidentiality during data collection

 and data management. Determine who

will have access to different kinds of

information. Develop releases, assent

and consent forms, data sharing

agreements, and MOUs to protect

participant rights, adhere to laws and

regulations, and ensure that collaborating

agencies provide necessary data. Identify

and work through barriers to sharing

data.

 Arrange for the gathering of key data

from agencies that are partners with the

juvenile drug court—treatment

providers, other service providers,

school personnel, and the participants

themselves.

 As part of program planning, identify the

evaluation needs of key stakeholders.

Form an evaluation workgroup with drug

court practitioners and an outside

evaluator to recommend deliverables,

products, and timelines. Clarify the goals

of the program and the evaluation, and

define key outcome measures for

success.

 Ongoing feedback can improve program

operations and effectiveness. Monitoring

is defined as “an on-going process of

reviewing a program’s activities to

determine whether set standards or

requirements are being met” (BJA web

site, 2002). Did the program provide the

services that were planned at the level of

quality the planners specified, and were

they delivered to the correct people? To

elicit this feedback, arrange for the

evaluator to submit regular reports.

 Outside, independent evaluators are

preferable to internal evaluators. Choose

the evaluator through a competitive

request for proposal (RFP) process. To

get the most value from limited

evaluation funds, draw on the expertise

of local colleges and universities,

including graduate students.

 Allocate sufficient funds to support highquality evaluation. Evaluation costs will

vary depending on the size of the

program, the number and types of

evaluation reports needed, and the

availability of comprehensive

computerized data. Underfunded

evaluations have much lower utility.
25

 As part of the process evaluation,

collect basic information on program

implementation and operations. Track

referrals made, services provided, and

client characteristics. Gather data about

the screening and assessment process,

client flow through the program,

sanctions and rewards imposed, and the

number of status hearings. Consider the

following questions:

Is the program reaching its target

population?

What services are being provided to

youth and families?

Are partner agencies fulfilling their

contracts?

How are youth and families

responding to the services?

 As part of the outcome evaluation,

address the following questions:

What difference is the program

making in the lives of youth and their

families?

What effect is the program having on

the community problem it was

designed to ameliorate?

Collect data to track client behavior

(e.g., drug test results, rearrests, school

attendance and performance) and

treatment retention.

 Make certain the outcome evaluation

incorporates a comparison group, a

group of youth not being served by the

drug court who are similar to the drug

court participants in their demographic

characteristics, criminal histories, type

and severity of charges against them,

substance use histories, education, and

family status. The comparison group

allows the evaluator to determine to

what extent the evaluation outcomes can

be attributed to the drug court program.

One possible source of a comparison

group is the youth found eligible for the

program but who have chosen not to

participate.

 Try not to limit outcome measures to

recidivism and program completion. If

feasible, also incorporate other important

indicators of the program’s impact, such

as school performance, AOD use, and

mental health status. Base recidivism

measures on official juvenile justice

records. Track reconviction and

reincarceration as well as rearrest.

 Juvenile drug courts will benefit from

the collection of data from many courts.

National data can provide the field with

information from which to draw

conclusions about:

How juvenile drug courts can best be

structured.

How they impact different target

populations.

How they affect delinquency and

drug use.

What their relative economic costs

and benefits are.

What factors affect a participant’s

retention in the program and

postprogram outcomes.
26 

Strategy 6

Community Partnerships

Build partnerships with community organizations to

expand the range of opportunities available to youth

and their families.

Significance

In many jurisdictions, community

organizations offer an array of support

services, recreational opportunities, and

treatment and educational programs for

youth and their families. To the extent that

the juvenile drug court can incorporate these

resources in its comprehensive interventions,

the court can be more effective in meeting

the varied needs of the youth it serves. By

building partnerships with a wide variety of

local resources—agencies, businesses,

service organizations, art councils, and the

faith community—the court can create the

much needed network of community support

for youth and families.

To collaborate successfully with outside

agencies and organizations, the court needs

to define clearly the services that will be

provided, maintain continuous and open

communication, and monitor service quality.

To accomplish this, traditional systems may

need to be modified for initial intake and

case processing, supervision, treatment and

service provision, and aftercare activities.

The challenge is to make necessary changes

in current policies and procedures and still

meet the constitutional, statutory, and ethical

requirements that apply to the services that

are provided.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 During planning, review existing court

practices in light of what is needed to

operate a juvenile drug court. Determine

what new functions and services need to

be added, when these functions will be

performed, who is best suited to perform

them, and what additional resources may

be needed to support them. The new

functions and services most frequently

needed are:

Substance abuse assessment that is

developmentally appropriate for

adolescents.

Treatment referral and monitoring.

Dedicated treatment services that are

developmentally appropriate for

adolescents.
27 

Client case management.

Drug testing.

Family involvement and services.

Transportation.

Coordination with local social

service agencies, community

agencies, and school system(s).

Opportunities for youth to build

skills and competencies (e.g.,

recreation, computer literacy,

job training, and art therapy).

 The building of community partnerships

and the changes to traditional systems

that they necessitate are best

accomplished by the collaboration of

representatives from all the agencies that

may be affected—the court, prosecution,

defense, probation, social services,

treatment agencies, schools, and other

entities that are involved in the delivery,

monitoring, and evaluation of services

to youth. Working together, these

representatives can articulate clear

policies, procedures, and practices to

govern all aspects of the partnerships—

how each agency will operate and how

the agencies will relate to one another.

 Throughout the operation of the drug

court, new partnerships will form, and

the nature of existing partnerships will

evolve. Review policies and procedures

regularly and modify them to reflect

changes in program operation and

services and to ensure that they continue

to support the mission and goals of the

drug court.

 To contract for existing services or to

arrange for the development of a new

service that is not currently provided in

the community, the court may be

required to follow a formal procurement

procedure. Sometimes the court may

need to issue an RFP that many agencies

can respond to. In other jurisdictions, the

court may go directly to a sole source to

develop a contract that specifies the:

Services to be delivered and their

costs.

Person responsible for overseeing

the provision of these services.

Person responsible for assuring that

the services provided meet the needs

of the drug court.

 Throughout the operation of the drug

court program, continue to build new

community partnerships. Consider 

both nontraditional services and more

traditional community-based

organizations (e.g., Boys & Girls Clubs,

Lions Clubs, and faith-based community 

programs).

 Encourage families and youth to connect

with neighborhood resources, including

groups that share their culture, faith, and

other interests. A neighborhood support

network can provide support even after a

youth and his or her family have

completed the drug court program.

 Involve the business community in the

work of the drug court by appealing to

their investment in developing a

productive workforce. Businesses can

provide resources for incentives (e.g.,

tickets, certificates, gifts), volunteers,

scholarships, program funding, job

training, and employment for youth or

their families.

 One way to build community

partnerships is by joining forces with
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

28

agencies and organizations that can

provide alternative programming,

volunteers, and fiscal resources. For

example, courts with strong ties to law

enforcement have gained access to

physical training programs, dollars from

asset forfeiture funds, grants for

community policing efforts, and special

programs such as midnight basketball

and surveillance and monitoring of

youth.
29

Strategy 7

Comprehensive Treatment Planning

Tailor interventions to the complex and varied needs of

youth and their families.

Significance

Juvenile drug court participants and their

families present a variety of complex issues

and needs. In addition to their substanceabuse problems, many participants have

mental disorders and many lack the basic

social and life skills necessary to function

well at school and at home.

To identify and meet these diverse and

complex needs, services must be

comprehensive and interventions must be

tailored to individual participants and their

families. An effective juvenile drug court

provides a continuum of treatments for

substance abuse that is based on harm

reduction and geared to the goal of

abstinence. The program also provides

mental health treatment to address emotional

problems and competency programs to

develop prosocial behavior and enhance the

life skills of participants.

Treatment programs and services are

coordinated through case management,

which begins with a comprehensive

assessment of each participant and family.

This initial assessment identifies treatment

issues and generates the information that is

necessary to develop an individualized,

strengths-based treatment plan. The case

manager matches the needs of the

participant with available services to create a

treatment plan, taking into consideration the

least restrictive environment for treatment,

the best use of limited resources, the costeffectiveness of the treatment choice, and

the best potential for participant success.

The plan can be revised as additional issues

or needs emerge. During the program

(generally 9–18 months) each youth moves

through progressive phases and assumes

greater responsibility as he or she moves

toward graduation.

This individualized, holistic approach

enhances participant performance and

maximizes the effectiveness of the juvenile

drug court.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

30

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Before or soon after a youth enters

the juvenile drug court, arrange for

a qualified professional to carry out

a strengths-based, biopsychosocial

assessment using testing instruments

and interview techniques that are

appropriate for adolescents. The

assessment may include a chemical

dependency/substance-abuse evaluation.

Use the information generated by the

assessment as the basis for the youth’s

individualized plan.

 Soon after a youth enters the juvenile

drug court, develop and put in writing a

comprehensive, individualized plan that

matches the needs of the participant with

the resources of the juvenile drug court.

In this plan, identify the services to be

provided and state the expected results

as goals and measurable objectives. The

individual or program that provides

treatment generally creates the treatment

portion of the plan, while the person who

is preparing the biopsychosocial

assessment may create the plan for

collateral services. Review the plan at

least once every 90 days.

 During planning, designate a standard

sequence of phases for progressing

through the program. For each phase,

designate a minimum number of weeks

for participation, but allow the flexibility

to accelerate or extend the period of time

for an individual youth. Also specify the

frequency of judicial review and drug

testing, levels of treatment, required

programs, and access to earned

programs. Describe what a youth must

achieve to move to a new phase,

including abstinence, program

attendance, treatment participation,

and school performance. Integrate

aftercare as a final phase following

graduation or as a postdrug court

intervention. Working from this

standard sequence of phases, devise

an individualized completion plan for

each youth that tailors the sequence to

his or her needs.

 At significant junctures in a youth’s

progress through the program, reassess

the youth and the family, either by

repeating the initial assessment to

measure improvement or by

administering different tests.

Reassessment helps to determine

whether the needs and strengths

originally identified are still accurate

and what changes may be made to

improve services and facilitate

participant performance.

 Provide a continuum of treatment

for AOD problems. Make certain that

all treatment approaches focus on

solutions, relapse prevention, potential

harm reduction, and abstinence as their

goals. The treatment continuum may

include residential, day treatment,

outpatient, intensive outpatient, familybased, aftercare, and transition services.

Make individual, group, and family

treatment options available. Approaches

that are nonconfrontational and

individualized increase the likelihood

of bonding to prosocial adults and peers.

Select services that are strengths based,

least restrictive, and cost effective.

 Family-based services will vary

depending on the needs of the individual

youth and family. Whether inside or

outside the home, treating the youth

within the context of his or her family

environment is critical. Many juvenile

drug courts make services available
31

in the home. However, for participants

who cannot be treated successfully

while living at home, out-of-home

placements—such as group homes,

foster care, and independent living

options—may be needed.

 One way to individualize services for

youth is by engaging the support and

participation of parents, guardians,

and/or significant family members.

Expect the family to support the efforts

of the youth in the drug court, but be

sure to encourage their participation.

Assess the family’s needs and, if

appropriate, offer support groups, parent

education, family therapy, and other

services. Families are more likely to take

advantage of these services if the court

offers childcare, transportation, and

other assistance.

 Effective juvenile drug courts provide

collateral programs that enhance social

and life skills for participants. Some

examples are:

Literacy programs that develop

and improve reading, writing, and

interpersonal communication skills.

Vocational and job training.

Recreational activities.

Mentoring.

Community service.

Health care screening and referral.

Some juvenile drug courts require all

participants to complete certain

collateral programs.

 To expand the range of available

services, contract with outside agencies

or programs to provide existing services

or develop new services. Hold each

agency or program accountable for the

goals and objectives specified in the

court’s written plan for each youth.

Community collaborations strengthen

the capacity of the drug court to

respond to the needs of individual youth

and their families. When resources in

the community are unavailable or

inappropriate, juvenile drug courts may

choose to create in-house programs. (See

Strategy 6: Community Partnerships.)

 Make certain that treatment and

collateral programs are affordable,

conveniently located, accessible by

public transportation, and available at

convenient times for the participant

and the family.

 Assign a professional case manager—

a juvenile probation officer, court

administrator, treatment provider, or

staff member from a community

organization—to coordinate services

for juvenile drug court participants. To

avoid duplication or gaps in services,

clearly define case management

roles and responsibilities.
32

Strategy 8

Developmentally Appropriate Services

Tailor treatment to the developmental needs of adolescents.

Significance

Because juvenile drug courts are 

developing in the shadow of adult drug

courts, it is important to understand the 

factors that distinguish treatment for

juveniles from treatment for adults.

Drug court programs that attempt to

replicate an adult service approach for

juveniles—for example, using only an

addiction model—will be less successful

than programs that tailor their treatment to

the unique needs and issues of adolescents.

Because the brain develops in stages, young

people think and react differently from

adults. Juveniles are more likely than adults

to be impulsive and less likely to link the

use of AOD to negative consequences. Since

most juveniles have not experienced the

long-term physical effects of addiction, their

motivation for using drugs and their patterns

of use are dramatically different from those

of adults. In its early stages, adolescent

substance abuse generally occurs in a social

context and is strongly related to other

problem behaviors.

For all these reasons, treatment

interventions must be thoughtfully

conceived and based on principles and

practices that are developmentally

appropriate and take into account the

emotional age and the chronological age

of each youth. Treatment must address all

aspects of adolescent behavior and the

relational and environmental issues that

influence behavior. Regardless of the

specific therapeutic model, when treatment

is developmentally appropriate, youth are

more likely to change their behaviors.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 The most important feature of

adolescent treatment programs is a

design that adapts to the developmental

level of each youth participant. Make

certain that the language and cognitive

approaches are appropriate not only to

the chronological age of the youth,

but also to his or her emotional and

psychological age, which may be very

different. Among adolescents of the

same chronological age, those who are
33

psychologically younger will have

different developmental needs than those

who are psychologically older. At the

same time, keep in mind that age

differences matter more to adolescents

than to adults.

 Use self-help groups and treatment

programs geared specifically to

adolescents. Avoid placing youth in

predominantly adult groups or providing

them with services designed exclusively

for adults.

 Not all adolescents who use substances

are or will become dependent or

addicted. Be careful not to prematurely

diagnose or label adolescents or

otherwise pressure them to accept that

they have a disease, as this may do more

harm than good in the long run. In

designing treatment interventions, assess

the youth’s level of substance

involvement, being careful to distinguish

use, abuse, dependency, and addiction.

 Conduct periodic assessments of each

youth to respond to the developmental

changes that may occur during the

course of drug court participation.

 Take into account the participant’s

gender, ethnicity, culture, sexual

orientation, special needs, and stage of

readiness to change. Youth experience

and perceive each of these

characteristics differently at different

stages of adolescent development. Tailor

treatment to the ever changing needs of

each individual youth.

 Effective services for both males and

females recognize the significance of

emerging sexual identities and sexual

experimentation.

 Youth are not independent of their

families—no matter how the family is

defined. During adolescence, a youth’s

relationship with parents and/or other

central caregivers undergoes a change.

To assist in this transition, make every

effort to involve the adolescent’s family.

(See Strategy 12: Family Engagement.)

 Account for negative influences that

adolescents may experience from peer

groups, gangs, and family members. It is

not enough to require youth to stay away

from particular individuals or groups.

The program needs to develop strategies

based on youths’ interests to counteract

these negative influences.

 For youth who appear unmotivated to

change, develop strategies to foster

motivation. For example, team members

may:

Engage youth in planning.

Conduct strengths-based assessments

(see Strategy 11).

Use motivational interviewing

techniques.

Involve youth and their families in

setting goals for their individual

treatment plans.

 Provide each youth with opportunities

and encouragement to develop

relationships with caring adults (e.g.,

Big Brothers, Big Sisters, or other

mentoring programs).
34

Strategy 9

Gender-Appropriate Services

Design treatment to address the unique needs of each

gender.

Significance

Females and males have distinct

characteristics and experiences that

distinguish their program needs. Girls are

much more frequently victims of sexual

and physical abuse, and they attempt suicide

more often.21 Their substance abuse tends

to result in more serious emotional and

physical consequences than it does for

boys.22 Because they appear to use drugs as

a means of emotional escape, they also have

more need to learn strategies that can help

them to cope with emotional stress.

Boys outnumber girls in learning disabilities

and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

(ADHD) and, partly as a consequence of

this, are at greater risk of dropping out of

school. Although boys are more likely to

repress their emotional life, they also

experience an increase in testosterone 10 to

20 times higher than girls. This results in

heightened aggression, increased sexual

drive, physical risk taking, and a shortened

temper.23

To accommodate these differences,

specialized treatments are required for males

and females. Traditionally, the juvenile

justice system has served boys primarily.

Therefore, most existing systems have

evolved with young men in mind and are

less suited to the unique needs of young

women. Usually young people come to the

attention of the juvenile justice system

through overt actions that are typical of

young men. Young women, who are more

private in their substance use, may go

unnoticed. The unfortunate consequence is

that by the time they appear for treatment,

most females have progressed much further

in their AOD abuse than male substance

users.

Although existing programs may be more

aligned with the needs of boys, there is

undoubtedly room for improvement in

responding to the gender-specific needs of

boys. With growing knowledge of male

development, the field needs to update its

treatment approaches to be more effective in

treating boys. For this reason, more genderspecific programs are needed for both girls

and boys.
35

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Design substance abuse treatment

programs to focus on the gender-specific

factors that contribute to drug use. For

girls these factors may include sexual

abuse, domestic violence, other trauma,

and relationship issues. For boys, drug

use is often affected by a family history

of drug use, self-medication for ADHD

and learning disabilities, and risk taking.

 In offering vocational training, be

careful not to limit girls to traditional

female occupations or boys to traditional

male occupations. To step beyond

gender stereotyping—which is more

often an issue for girls—focus on the

specific interests and needs of each

youth through strengths-based

assessment and programs.

 Girls are more likely than boys to deal

at a young age with issues such as

parenting and childcare. In designing

programs for girls, address their health

and reproduction needs, including

planned parenthood and parenting

education. Keep in mind, however, that

increasingly boys have to deal with

fatherhood and need programs that

address their roles and responsibilities

as fathers.

 Relationship issues affect females in

different ways than males. For females,

these issues may result in low selfesteem and aggression toward

themselves rather than others. Because

girls have more need for intimacy,

personal relationships are critically

important. To be most effective with

girls, characterize their need for intimacy

as a strength and not as a deficit. Most

girls benefit from cooperative learning

environments; boys may thrive better in

self-paced individualized programs.

 In creating programs designed for

females, equitable treatment is of

paramount importance. According to the

Institute for Public Sector Innovation,

equitable treatment means that programs

and services for girls have the same

meaning and relationship to girls’

development, needs, and interests as the

overall system has for boys. Programs

that aim to serve girls should

consciously explore the underlying

causes of female delinquency and create

treatment programs that deal explicitly

with these issues. However, equitable

treatment does not imply that girls are

not involved in coeducational treatment

settings. Boys and girls who are engaged

in productive activities can use these

experiences to learn how to interact

appropriately with one another in order

to develop healthy, respectful

relationships with the opposite sex.

 One important program goal is to help

youth build strong, healthy relationships

with positive peers, family members,

and other adults. In the context of the

drug court, youth need to develop

appropriate relationships with their

counselor and with the drug court team.

In designing services to help youth

build these positive relationships, tailor

approaches to gender-specific issues. In

general, girls:

Desire more verbal engagement.

Are more likely to question rules and

ask for explanations.

Are more likely to request and accept

help.

Need to learn how to develop and

maintain appropriate, healthy

boundaries in relationships.24
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

36

On the other hand, boys:

Need encouragement to express their

feelings.

Often repress emotion at the cost of

losing their ability to connect with

others compassionately.25

Often express emotion through

action rather than words (e.g.,

teasing, wrestling, or taking on a

task). These nonverbal expressions

need to be recognized.26

 In designing and delivering

coeducational treatment, be responsive

to boys’ and girls’ needs to process

issues in different ways.
37

Strategy 10

Cultural Competence

Create policies and procedures that are responsive to

cultural differences and train personnel to be culturally

competent.

Significance

Culture is a system of shared meanings that

is transmitted from one generation to

another. Culture is central to human wellbeing because it provides a general design

for living and patterns for interpreting

reality.

Cultures differ in their languages, values,

codes of behavior, customs, beliefs,

knowledge, symbols, myths and stories, and

institutions. Without an understanding of

these differences, drug court professionals

may attach erroneous meanings to behaviors

they do not understand. They may also fail

to acknowledge the strengths inherent in a

youth’s culture that might be used to

facilitate progress in treatment.

Professionals who are culturally competent

value the broad spectrum of human behavior

and understand how culturally determined

beliefs can shape the way that reality is

perceived. They are aware of their own

culture and knowledgeable about the

interaction between cultural and individual

factors in the development of the youth they

serve. As a consequence of these qualities,

these professionals work with youth and

their families in a way that is responsive to

cultural issues.

A culturally responsive drug court reflects

the competence of its practitioners. Its

policies and procedures acknowledge the

importance of culture. These drug courts:

 Incorporate an assessment of crosscultural relationships.

 Recognize dynamics that may result

from cultural differences and

ethnocentric approaches.

 Require staff to expand their cultural

knowledge.

 Adapt services to meet culturally unique

needs.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

38

Juvenile drug courts that respect cultural

differences are more likely to attract, retain,

and graduate participants.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Prior to implementation, schedule

cultural competency training for all drug

court team members. Train new team

members during their orientation and

provide continuing education on a

regular basis. Having a broad, inclusive,

and common understanding of cultures

will assist the team in effectively

addressing the needs of youth and

families.

 To intervene most effectively with youth

and their families, recognize their unique

cultures. Be aware of the difference

between culture and race or ethnicity:

understand that within a single race or

ethnicity there may be distinct

subcultures. Even characteristics such as

geographic area, socioeconomic status,

or age can create cultural barriers

between a youth and the court. These

barriers may manifest as difficulties in

communication, ineffective programs, or

resistance to intervention.

 Make certain that every component of

the juvenile drug court addresses the

cultural diversity of the population

served. These components of the

juvenile drug court include:

Judicial hearings.

Staffing.

Planning and operating teams.

Decisionmakers.

Program services, including:

–Treatment.

–Primary health.

–Mental health.

–Education.

–Community service.

–Vocational training.

–Collateral service.

 Use ongoing monitoring and evaluation

to gauge the program’s success in

serving different cultural groups. As an

indicator of whether the program is

connecting with youth and families from

various groups, examine retention rates

for youth from different cultures.

Analyze whether the program is losing a

particular youth group and at what point

they are dropping out. Then, using this

information, determine how services

may be adapted to better address the

needs of this particular group.

 Whenever possible, form cooperative

agreements with local churches,

community centers and civic

organizations that reflect the diversity of

the client population. This aids the

program in providing mentors and

support systems for youth and families.

 When hiring new staff, use cultural

competence as a criterion for recruitment

and selection. Seek out professionals

who have the skills, knowledge, and

experience that enable them to

communicate with the cultural groups

served and represent their interests

effectively.

 To make offices appear friendly and

inviting to youth and their families,

encourage staff to incorporate cultural

images in the decorating scheme. As a

symbol of a staff’s appreciation for

cultural ties and their desire to relate to

the youth whom they serve, office decor
39

can help to build connections between

youth and the drug court personnel.

 Through interactions with individual

youth and their families, learn about a

youth’s culture and make comments that

demonstrate interest and understanding.

 If a youth uses language or behavior that

is unclear or appears inappropriate,

observe and ask questions rather than

make assumptions about the meaning or

motivation behind the behavior.

 Because popular youth culture has its

own values, attitudes, and behaviors

(reflected in music, language, and

technology), cultural barriers may

separate generations within the same

family. Be prepared to help youth and

their parents understand one another’s

viewpoints. Generation gaps may be

especially prominent in families that

have recently immigrated to this country.

Tensions may arise as youth are called to

serve as a bridge between the parent’s

traditional culture and their new culture.
40

Strategy 11

Focus on Strengths

Maintain a focus on the strengths of youth and their families

during program planning and in every interaction between

the court and those it serves.

Significance

Traditionally, our ways of responding to

youth have focused primarily on youth

problems and how to reduce or contain

them. Youth have been viewed either as

victims who are damaged and incomplete or

as villains who are innately destructive and

have bad intentions. This deficit-based

approach has been ineffective.

The deficit-based approach restricts the

justice and professional communities to

reacting to or acting for youth and families.

It fails to recognize that problems are

interrelated and cannot be addressed in

isolation.27 This strategy limits court

personnel’s capacity to engage youth and

families in the process of change.28

Juvenile drug courts have moved beyond the

deficit-based approach to the idea that youth

and their families—even though they have

problems—have innate resources that can

positively change their lives. This strengthsbased perspective allows juvenile drug court

personnel to act with participants. It

encompasses participants’ capabilities and

weaknesses, and it recognizes youth as

potential contributors to their communities.

Working from this perspective, everyone

associated with the court strives to identify,

harness, and build the strengths and

competencies of the youth and families they

serve.

Although the concept of a strengths-based

approach is relatively simple, implementing

it within the context of a juvenile drug court

is not easy. However, the planning team can

incorporate a number of features into the

program’s design.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 From the first contact with a potential

participant and throughout eligibility

screening and assessment, employ

motivational interviewing techniques by

asking questions that elicit information

about the youth’s successes and

accomplishments. Some questions to ask

youth are:
41

What are you proud of?

What positive changes have you

made in the past?

How did you make those changes?

Questions to ask a parent or caregiver

are:

What do you think is important for

us to know about your child?

What kinds of things have you done

as a parent that have worked well?

As the youth and family respond to these

questions, let them take the lead in

telling their story, listen attentively, and

acknowledge their challenges. Although

motivational interviewing takes more

time than conventional screening and

assessment, it is an investment in

building a partnership between the drug

court team and the youth and his or her

family.

 In designing a comprehensive plan for

each youth, assess not only the youth’s

weaknesses that need to be remedied,

but also his or her talents and abilities

that need to be nurtured. Look beyond

existing services to analyze what it

would take to build these strengths or

meet these needs. In some cases,

tailoring a comprehensive case plan to

an individual youth will require meeting

with traditional and nontraditional

providers to request new and different

services. Craft every service to build on

a specific strength or to meet a specific

need. (See also Strategy 7:

Comprehensive Treatment Planning.)

 In all decisions about a youth, consult

with the youth and family. Treat them as

experts on their own case. As youth and

families become more aware of their

strengths, they begin to feel more

capable. This in itself is a powerful

intervention tool. Not only do youth

become more motivated, but they also

come to believe that they have what it

takes to accomplish their goals.

 In every interaction with a youth and his

or her family, foster motivation by

acknowledging and praising their

accomplishments and abilities. Recent

research indicates that youth and their

families are the “engine of change” in

their treatment programs.29 They, not the

staff or providers, make treatment

work.30 The youth’s motivation is the

key to successful treatment. When youth

and families are recognized for their

talents, positive intentions, and

achievements, rather than being viewed

as problems, they are less resistant and

more motivated to participate actively in

the drug court program, and they take

greater responsibility for completing the

requirements that are specified in the

comprehensive case plan. Recognizing

accomplishments and abilities is

especially important in the open court

forum where other youth and families

are present.

 As often as possible, focus on a youth’s

future rather than on the past—on what

can be accomplished rather than failures.

Placing attention on past failures opens

the door to demoralization and

resignation. Focusing on the future

nourishes hope and the possibility of

change. Helping youth and their families

to clarify their goals encourages them to

look ahead.

 Incorporate the principles of restorative

justice in a youth’s comprehensive case

plan. Giving a youth an opportunity to

rectify the effect of past actions
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

42

communicates the message that he or

she can be responsible and capable of

making reparations for past misdeeds.

This approach creates community ties.

It gives youth opportunities to play

meaningful roles and to be seen as

positive resources in their community.

Restorative justice builds competency

as it develops responsibility and

accountability.

 Traditionally, judges, prosecutors,

probation officers, and treatment

providers have been trained to focus on

problems rather than solutions. To

counter this, provide all partners in the

drug court program with an orientation

to the strengths-based philosophy.

 Assess all service providers to ensure

that they share the strengths-based

philosophy and that they focus on

strengths in their programs and services.
43

Strategy 12

Family Engagement

Recognize and engage the family as a valued partner in all

components of the program.

Significance

The quality of the relationship between

juvenile drug court professionals and

families is a significant predictor of case

success. For this reason, developing

collaborative relationships with families is

an essential goal for juvenile drug courts.

Unlike adults, youth are usually dependent

on and involved with family members

who powerfully influence their choices.

By building alliances with families,

recognizing their strengths, and helping

them address possible barriers to change

in their children’s lives, the drug court

team increases the likelihood of youth

success in the program. At the same time,

by empowering families to build stronger

relationships with their children, the team

lays a foundation for continuing care and

supervision that are crucial for youth after

they graduate from the program.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Involve youth in identifying the

significant caretakers in their lives.

Because family may have different

meanings depending on a youth’s life

history, cultural background, and living

situation, it is important to define family

for each individual case. For some

youth, a relative other than a parent, an

unrelated godparent, or even a longtime

neighbor may be an important source of

day-to-day supervision and support.

 Use the assessment process to

determine the need to reinvolve absent

parents, involve a youth’s extended

family, and/or find mentors. Consider

using family-focused interventions, and

monitor the progress being made to build

the supportive home environment that is

needed for a youth’s ongoing success.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

44

 Disenfranchised families often face

overwhelming problems, such as

poverty, substance abuse, and lack of

opportunity. It may appear that family

members possess few strengths or

resources. To build their confidence

and decrease their resistance to the

intervention of outside authorities, take

time to acknowledge their challenges,

recognize their survival skills, and praise

their strengths. Recognizing what a

family does well does not mean that

problems are ignored. Rather,

acknowledgment and praise help family

members to capitalize on their strengths

and empower them in their efforts to

change.

 Unless family members genuinely

agree with the drug court team, they

are not likely to change or provide

support for changing their child. One

way to achieve genuine agreement

with the family is to involve them in

the assessment, planning, and case

management of their child’s program.

This can happen during family group

conferences that bring together the

immediate and extended family (e.g.,

the foster family and/or other significant

adults) in the youth’s life. After the

family has helped assess a youth’s

needs and has developed a case plan,

establish a contract between the drug

court team and the family that outlines

the responsibilities of each family

member for implementing the case plan.

Over time, revise the contract as the plan

changes in response to emerging needs.

 In some cases, it may be possible to

enlist the family to seek services that

address substance abuse, safety issues,

school performance, mental health

problems, and primary health care.

Encourage families to connect with

continuing support networks—such

as parent groups, faith-based family

programs, and neighborhood-based

resources—to help them establish and

sustain a healthy family system.

 Beyond the family’s involvement in

planning and decisionmaking, there

are other practical ways to demonstrate

respect for families as invaluable

partners in the work of the juvenile drug

court. Some ways to acknowledge the

value of their efforts are to:

Schedule hearings during times that

family members can be present.

Provide transportation and childcare.

Find resources that are accessible

(open evenings and weekends and

easy for the family to reach).

Provide an opportunity, when

needed, for audiences without the

youth present.

Empower the family to impose

sanctions and incentives.

 Respect and respond to family needs

based on gender, race, and culture. To

show this:

Provide interpreters and written

materials in languages other than

English.

Recruit multicultural and bilingual

staff.

Recognize culturally based family

norms. (See Strategy 10: Cultural

Competence.)

 Avoid the adversarial dynamics that

sometimes evolve between families and

juvenile court personnel. Families who

have previously been involved with the

“system” may feel they have reason not

to trust court personnel. At the same
45

time, providers—based on their own

negative past experiences—often view

the family as a burdensome risk factor

that adds complexity to the case. To step

beyond these patterns:

Avoid arguing and reacting to

behavior that appears uncooperative.

Be willing to share power in the

collaboration process.

Allow time for trust to grow between

the family and each provider who is

involved with the case.

Try not to let the authority of the

drug court team members or the

client’s resistance predict the case

outcome.

When needed, provide forums such

as mediation, counseling, or familyfocused meetings to find common

interests and build sustainable

agreements between families and the

drug court.
46

Strategy 13

Educational Linkages

Coordinate with the school system to ensure that each

participant enrolls in and attends an educational program that is

appropriate to his or her needs.

Significance

Educational programs—whether they are

schools, alternative schools, vocational

centers, special education programs, or GED

programs—play a significant role in the

lives of youth who are served by the juvenile

drug court. Unless a juvenile drug court

participant successfully engages in an

educational program, he or she will not be

adequately prepared for life after the drug

court or for adulthood.

In designing comprehensive case plans,

consider each youth’s educational needs 

and what kind of program will best meet

those needs. At the same time, refer to a

youth’s educational program for test 

results, psychological assessments, teacher 

or counselor observations, and other

information that may help the court to 

serve the youth more effectively.

To make certain that each youth is enrolled

and succeeding in an educational program

suited to her or his needs and to take

advantage of the education system’s

resources, forge strong linkages with many

levels of the educational system—teachers,

principals, and district superintendents.

Throughout each youth’s participation in the

juvenile drug court, stay abreast of how he

or she is doing in school. One way to ensure

ongoing communication is by including a

school representative on both the planning

and operational teams. By supporting one

another’s efforts, the juvenile drug court and

the educational system can enhance their

effectiveness.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 To facilitate the exchange of information

between the juvenile drug court and the

educational institution, develop an

interagency agreement or consent form

allowing the release of students’ grades,

attendance records, behavior reports, and

assessments of the educational program

best suited to the youth.
47

 Consider the coordination of testing

resources. Many youth who are referred

to the drug court may have been

evaluated by the educational system

already, and the evaluation results may

be included with the team’s treatment

recommendations. An agreement to

share evaluation results will avoid

duplication of effort and unnecessary

expense.

 After a youth has been evaluated, take

into account any special needs the tests

might have identified. For example, tests

reveal an array of diagnoses, such as

those who are classified as severely

emotionally disturbed, emotionally

handicapped, specifically learning

disabled, or ESE (exceptional student

education). If the youth’s current

educational program does not meet these

needs, ask that special classes and/or

additional supports be provided for the

youth in a classroom setting and that

these modifications be added to the

youth’s comprehensive plan.

 In designing a plan for each youth,

consider the youth’s level of cognitive

development and reading ability. Ask,

for example, “Does this therapy or

service require reading ability?” When

needed, arrange for tutoring in reading or

other cognitive skills.

 Not all students profit from a

conventional school setting. When

appropriate, assist youth in moving to

other kinds of educational programs,

perhaps vocational training or a GED

course.

 When a school system has suspended or

expelled a youth for drug use, weapons

possession, or other zero-tolerance

behavior, it may be difficult to find

another school or placement in a

program that will meet his or her needs.

In these situations, work with the

original school to find an alternative

placement, assuring the school that the

drug court program will supervise the

youth, monitor his or her accountability,

and provide treatment.

 As part of the court’s effort to involve

the family, encourage the family to

support the youth’s educational program

by, for example:

Enrolling him or her in the program.

Attending teacher conferences.

Getting involved with the school.

(See Strategy 12: Family

Engagement.)

 Respond to a youth’s failure to attend

school as a sign of a possible problem.

To determine what the problem may be,

ask questions like:

Why is the youth missing school?

Has there been a change at home that

makes attendance difficult?

Do conflicts with teachers or peers

impede learning?

Is the program appropriate for the

youth’s educational level or needs?

In some cases, this additional adult

attention—knowing that someone is

noticing and cares about whether or not

they are attending school—is sufficient

to encourage a youth to attend. If it is

determined that a youth’s program is

appropriate and useful and that there are

no other barriers to participation,

consider establishing a system of
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

48

incentives and sanctions related to

school attendance. (See Strategy 15:

Goal-Oriented Incentives and Sanctions.)
49

Strategy 14

Drug Testing

Design drug testing to be frequent, random, and observed.

Document testing policies and procedures in writing.

Significance

Drug testing is an important means of

verifying youth accountability to the drug

court program. The testing provides

feedback that is objective and quickly

available, and when properly administered,

it can be a reliable measure of abstinence, an

essential aspect of program compliance and

progress. To be reliable, drug testing needs

to be frequent, random, and observed. A

written policy and procedure should outline

the:

 Type of testing that will be conducted.

 Frequency of the testing.

 Steps to be followed in a sample

collection.

 Procedures to follow if a youth

challenges a test result.

However, quality case management cannot

rely solely on drug testing results. Drug

testing is only one component of the juvenile

drug court’s coordinated approach.

Treatment decisions should also factor the

youth’s behavior and other key indicators of

progress. Further, drug testing should be

conducted only to monitor and supervise

treatment. Test results should never be used

for subsequent prosecution.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Train all members of the planning and

operation teams in drug testing. Among

the topics covered, include:

Methods of identifying drug use (the

science of current chemical testing

and the types of tests).

How to determine frequency.

How to design a random system of

testing.

Observation.

The chain of custody for test

samples.

Onsite and contract services.

Safety measures.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

50

Quality assurance.

How to report, confirm, and respond

to results.

The usefulness of baseline testing as

a way of increasing reliability.

 Provide additional training to team

members who will administer the drug

tests.

 Involve the planning team in developing

the goals and objectives for drug testing

and the process for quality assurance.

When choosing a testing method, review

the drugs that are currently used among

the target population and the feasibility

of particular testing methods. Although

cost is a consideration, it is important to

align the method and frequency of

testing with the program’s goals and to

budget for testing as part of the overall

cost of the program. When needed,

allocate funds for a certified lab to

confirm the drug test results. Some

courts require that youth and their

families help pay for testing.

 As part of the written policy and

procedures, define the specific roles and

responsibilities of each team member for

testing, documentation, and reporting the

results. Make certain that team members

review and understand the role of each

member and agency involved.

 Obtain a signed consent for drug tests

and the method of testing from each

youth admitted into the program. To

ensure that youth and their families are

informed when they give this consent,

develop a guide to drug testing

procedures and distribute it to each youth

and his or her family on the youth’s

enrollment in the program. In the guide,

describe their rights, and arrange for a

representative team member to review

the entire guide with each youth and his

or her family.

 To ensure that test results are reliable,

consistent, and accurate, clearly define

the procedures for test administration,

including the chain of custody for test

samples. Maintain a record of the

location and possession of test

specimens and results. This record

should document how the specimen was

handled, stored, transported, and tested

and how the results were disseminated.

Establish a protocol to determine when

confirmation is needed of results that

show the presence and/or level of drugs.

 The frequency of drug testing depends

on the drug being tested, the resources

available, and the design of the program.

Many drug courts test two to three times

weekly during the first phase, tapering to

a minimum of once a week during the

second and subsequent phases. In

establishing frequency, keep in mind that

some drugs are detectable for no more

than 24 to 48 hours after consumption.

 Use spot testing and random testing.

Spot testing is conducted when a youth

is suspected of being under the influence

of a drug. Random testing is scheduled

so that juveniles are prevented from

planning ahead to avoid detection.

Designing random drug testing may

appear straightforward, but it is actually

very complex. For example, testing that

occurs only on a specific day each week

is not random (even though youth may

be selected at random for testing that

day), because youth can avoid detection

simply by abstaining a day or two before

the designated day. There are many ways

to ensure that testing is random.
51

 Research them carefully during planning.

(See reference to Drug Identification and

Testing in the Juvenile Justice System

[Crowe and American Probation and

Parole Association, 1998] in the

Bibliography.)

 Because the reliability of drug tests

depends on the test sample’s integrity,

observe sample collection procedures.

To avoid test tampering, be alert for

common ploys that are used by youth

including:

Substitution of a specimen taken

earlier or from another individual.

Addition of other substances to the

test specimen.

Ingestion of other fluids before

testing.

Damage to the collection materials.

 Some tests are designed to detect

adulterants; however, observation

protects against other forms of

tampering. Train staff regularly about

current approaches to drug test

tampering.

 While testing for a youth’s drug choices

(which may include alcohol), continue to

test for other drugs. Some youth will

switch drugs in an attempt to avoid

detection. Never accept a youth’s

admission of drug use in lieu of

administering a test. The youth may

admit use of one drug but fail to report

the use of others.

 In deciding what type and frequency of

drug testing are appropriate for a

particular youth, account for any history

of sexual abuse, emotional problems, or

developmental conditions that may

create a risk of emotional trauma caused

by the testing. At the very least, carefully

discuss the need for testing with the

youth and elicit and respond to his or her

personal concerns about testing and

observation.

 Another way to safeguard the reliability

of test results is by using more than one

type of test. There are four common

types of drug tests—urinalysis, saliva,

the patch, and hair testing. The following

chart outlines the advantages and

disadvantages of each test.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

52

Type of test Advantages Disadvantages

Urinalysis  Inexpensive.

 Immediate results.

 Same gender staff must

observe.

Saliva  Less invasive.

 Either gender can observe.

 Cannot detect drugs used

more than 2 days previously.

Patch  Gives a good picture of the types of

drugs that were used over a period of

time.

 High initial expense.

 Results are not immediate.

Hair Testing  Detects drug use over a longer time

period.

 Does not measure immediate

use (2 week lag).

 Cost.

 Results are not immediate.

 Does not calibrate amount.
53

Strategy 15

Goal-Oriented Incentives and Sanctions

Respond to compliance and noncompliance with incentives

and sanctions that are designed to reinforce or modify the

behavior of youth and their families.

Significance

While the concept of rewarding positive

behavior and sanctioning negative or

noncompliant behavior is not new, it

requires special attention in the context of

juvenile drug courts. Given its heightened

levels of intervention and supervision along

with its coordinated team response, the

juvenile drug court has a unique opportunity

to use behavior modification strategies.

An effective system of incentives and

sanctions (sometimes referred to as rewards

and consequences) promotes each youth’s

ability to account for his or her own actions.

To ensure that incentives and sanctions elicit

productive changes in behavior, the team

needs to identify specific goals for their use.

Incentives and sanctions must be appropriate

for each youth’s developmental level and

graduated as the youth progresses through

the program. The judge plays a central role

in administering sanctions and incentives,

often in the presence of other youth and

families. To motivate youth and their

families, incentives and sanctions must be

applied in a way that is immediate,

predictable, and consistent.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 A successful juvenile drug court

individualizes each youth’s experience.

This is true for incentives and sanctions

as well. Something that may motivate or

deter one youth may not have the same

effect on another. By tailoring sanctions

and rewards to the individual youth, the

court personalizes its reactions and

strengthens the relationships among the

youth, family, and court. (See Strategy

7: Comprehensive Treatment Planning.)

 Use incentives and sanctions to build

youth competencies and skills. Before

devising a system of rewards and

consequences for a youth, determine the

goals of the intervention by identifying

the competencies or skills the court is

trying to help the youth develop. With

these goals in mind, devise a system of

meaningful and targeted incentives and
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

54

sanctions and a way to assess their

impact.

 During the initial assessment of the

youth’s strengths and needs, invite the 

youth and her or his family to participate

in creating a range of potential incentives

and sanctions. Devise incentives and

sanctions that are developmentally

appropriate, culturally responsive, and

gender specific, and that correspond

directly to the youth’s perception of a

reward or consequence. Be clear about

which infractions result in automatic

expulsion from the program, and make

certain that the youth is capable of

understanding how his or her actions

lead to the corresponding reaction from

the court.

 In creating incentives and sanctions,

identify and use community resources.

Community partnerships are a core

component of many drug courts, and

these partnerships can enhance the

court’s ability to deliver a variety of

tangible rewards and skills-building

sanctions. For example, local merchants

may contribute movie passes, concert

tickets, or discount certificates as

rewards. Similarly, civic organizations

and mentoring groups may provide

opportunities for community service

work that builds social skills and fosters

a sense of accountability.

 Because family participation and

compliance can have a significant

impact on a youth’s success in the drug

court program, determine if the court has

jurisdiction over family members. After

this is determined, identify how and to

what degree family members will be

rewarded or sanctioned for their

participation in a youth’s plan or actions

that hinder the youth’s progress in the

plan.

 For maximum effectiveness, deliver

incentives and sanctions immediately.

Their impact is diminished by delays

between the youth’s actions and the

court’s reactions. When there are

language or other cultural barriers to

communication, be certain that the youth

and his/her family understand the reason

for the incentive or sanction.

 Be consistent and fair in delivering

incentives and sanctions. Just as the use

of sanctions and incentives holds youth

accountable for their behavior, the drug

court team is accountable for how

sanctions and incentives are

administered. This does not mean,

however, that every youth must receive

the same reward or consequence for

similar behavior. The best approach is to

establish general parameters for

graduated responses, allowing for

flexibility in how the court applies them

to individual youth and their families.

 Distinguish between juvenile justice

sanctions and treatment responses and

ensure that incentives and sanctions are

therapeutically sound. Make certain that

changes in a youth’s treatment regimen

come from the treatment provider at the

recommendation of the team. Be

cautious about making changes in a

youth’s treatment plan from the bench,

especially if the infraction is a treatmentrelated issue.
55

Strategy 16

Confidentiality

Establish a confidentiality policy and procedures that guard

the privacy of the youth while allowing the drug court team to

access key information.

Significance

To design and supervise the best treatment

plan for each youth, the entire juvenile drug

court team needs information about his or

her progress in the program. At the same

time, the team must honor federal and state

confidentiality laws that are designed to

protect the privacy of minors and their

families. This assurance of confidentiality is

important for more than just legal reasons; it

is more likely that substance abusers will

seek treatment that facilitates their recovery

by encouraging honesty.

The challenge for the juvenile drug court

planning team is to devise confidentiality

policies and procedures that will give team

members access to the information they need

without violating the privacy rights of youth

and their families.

Recommendations for

Implementation

 Before drafting confidentiality policies

and procedures, review state and federal

privacy laws. Remember that federal law

applies unless the state law is more

restrictive, in which case the state law

takes precedence. To make certain that

confidentiality policies and procedures

comply with legal requirements, consult

a county or state agency counsel who is

familiar with this area of the law.

 Develop a clear, self-explanatory

consent and waiver form. Review the

form with each youth, the youth’s

parents or guardians, and the youth’s

defense attorney. Some youth may need

assistance from their attorneys to

understand their privacy rights and the

consequences of any consent and waiver

they are asked to sign. After the form is
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

56

signed, review it periodically to make

certain that its provisions are still

adequate and appropriate to the services

that the youth is receiving through the

court.

 Unlike adult proceedings, juvenile court

proceedings are usually closed to the

general public. However, in many

jurisdictions, the juvenile drug court has

the option of conducting its hearings in

the presence of all the drug court

participants, their families, and other

interested parties. This is referred to as

an open hearing in contrast to a closed

hearing, which is conducted privately for

an individual participant. Many juvenile

drug courts prefer the open court because

of its potential therapeutic benefits. By

sharing the experience of court hearings,

participants can learn from and support

one another during recovery. A group

proceeding also makes more efficient

use of staff and court time.

During planning for the juvenile drug

court, consider the advantages and

disadvantages of open court sessions.

Consider the following questions:

Does state law prohibit or mandate

open court sessions?

Will a waiver and consent suffice?

Exactly who may be present in the

sessions—parents? friends? invited

guests?

Will graduations also be open

sessions?

 Even if the planning team has stated a

preference for open hearings, always

consider whether this option is in the

best interests of a particular youth and/or

family at a particular stage of recovery.

In very sensitive cases or situations, a

closed hearing may be more

constructive, which justifies using

more court time and resources.

 During planning, determine who will

be present at staffings (closed team

meetings) and what types of information

these staff members will need to discuss

cases effectively. Identify the types of

information that will be discussed in

court, particularly in open court hearings

(e.g., school attendance, meeting

attendance, test results, and other

indicators of participant compliance).

Then design a youth-progress form to

elicit this information. Keep it simple—

easy to complete and read, and

preferably one page. At the conclusion

of each court hearing, collect the forms

that have been distributed to staff and

destroy them so they are not

inadvertently placed in another agency’s

files (an automatic violation of

confidentiality laws).

 In using the youth-progress form,

review the special circumstances in

each case. Limit requests for disclosure

to the information needed to monitor

a youth’s compliance and to make

recommendations to the court that will

best facilitate the youth’s recovery.

 During planning, decide how

confidential information will be

managed and stored. What information

will appear in the participant’s case

file? Who will be permitted to see the

file? Where will files be kept? To make

parallel computer records, enlist the

help of a computer professional who

has expertise with access codes and

other electronic security techniques.

Keep in mind, however, that all

personnel working with confidential
57

information, such as computer

technicians and program evaluators,

must sign the appropriate nondisclosure

forms.

 Incorporate educational confidentiality

requirements into the policy and

procedure. Outline the use of MOUs

and/or waivers and include the

appropriate forms.

 Juvenile drug courts frequently receive

requests for information from law

enforcement agencies, the media, and

others. In the policy and procedures

manual, state how these requests will

be handled.

 Educate everyone who works in the

juvenile drug court program (staff,

court personnel, attorneys, probation

officers, education program

representatives, and law enforcement

officers) about the rules and procedures

for guarding confidentiality, including

the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 290, a 

federal confidentiality statute that

covers both youth and adults.

 At the time a youth enters the

program, inform both the youth and

his or her family about their rights to

confidentiality and what they can do

if they believe these rights have been

violated. This encourages the

participants’ cooperation in signing the

consent and waiver. Youth and families

who are aware of their rights can alert

the court or their attorney of any

breaches in confidentiality. This helps

the drug court team monitor the

effectiveness of the written

confidentiality procedures. Be sure to

have a grievance procedure in place.

 As new team members transition into the

program, confidentiality issues should be

a routine part of their orientation and

education.
58

Resource Links

Addiction Technology Transfer Centers (ATTC)

www.nattc.org

ATTC is a national network of 13 regional centers that provides current addiction treatment

information to practitioners throughout the United States. Publication downloads are available in

Adobe Acrobat Reader (PDF) format. Special focuses of this site are addiction science, news

from the field, online courses, and state-by-state licensing and certification requirements.

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

www.aap.org

AAP is a professional organization for pediatricians and pediatric surgeons in the United States.

This site provides synopses of current pediatric-related news and research, publication abstracts

and ordering information, organizational policy statements, and a calendar of available medical

education courses.

American Council for Drug Education (ACDE)

www.acde.org

ACDE offers a substance abuse prevention and education information site directed to health

professionals, parents, college students, educators, youth, and employers. The online store

features publications, books, and videos produced by ACDE and the affiliated Children of

Alcoholics Foundation. Both of these organizations are affiliates of Phoenix House.

American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)

www.asam.org

ASAM is a membership organization of physicians who are engaged in treatment of addictive

diseases. This site contains current articles and research on addiction medicine, a calendar of

upcoming medical scientific conferences, certification information, and organizational services

available to member physicians.
59

Blueprints for Violence Prevention

www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/index.html

This site is provided by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence at the University

of Colorado at Boulder. This site identifies 11 prevention and intervention programs (blueprints)

that meet strict criteria for effectiveness in reducing adolescent violent crime, aggression,

delinquency, and substance abuse. In addition, using these criteria, it identifies another 19

programs as promising in these areas. An overview and video segment are available for each

program. Video segments may take time to load via modem connections.

Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA)

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

The BJA web site has a Publications database to locate BJA publications; a Related Web Sites

database to locate topically related web sites; and a Training and Technical Assistance database

to locate information on training and technical assistance. On this site, BJA also provides a

Grantee Resource Center and information on and links to BJA grant programs.

Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies (CAPT)

www.captus.org

The CAPT site provides links to 6 regional centers that serve all 50 states. It also provides a

calendar, news, contact information, publications, and prevention resources. A Virtual

Conference Center enables real-time communication over the Internet. This includes scheduled

meetings among site visitors, chats, facilitated conferences, and/or auditorium events with

audiences via nationwide satellite.

Center for Substance Abuse Research (CESAR)

www.cesar.umd.edu

This site is sponsored by a research center within the College of Behavioral and Social Sciences

at the University of Maryland—College Park. The site emphasizes state-related topical

information, grants, publication library resources, and regional drug information.

Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA)

www.cadca.org

The site is part of CADCA, a privately supported organization that represents 5,000 community

coalitions throughout the country. Contact information is available on community coalitions,

technical assistance, training, public policy, media strategies, marketing programs, conferences,

and upcoming special events including the annual CADCA National Leadership Forum.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

60

Drug Policy Research Center (DPRC), RAND

www.rand.org/multi/dprc

DPRC is a division of the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit policy development think tank. This

site features research on drug policy and trends at the state, local, national, and international

levels. Topics examined include substance abuse prevention, treatment, enforcement, drug use

and consequences, data systems, and modeling and forecasting future trends.

Join Together—Take Action Against Substance Abuse and Gun Violence

www.jointogether.org

This site, sponsored by Boston University, examines substance abuse and gun violence. Visitors

interested in substance abuse are provided with community-based action plans and a legislative

action center with ZIP-code-based links to congressional votes on substance abuse laws. This site

also contains news summaries, resources, publications, and dates of upcoming substance abuse

conferences.

Monitoring the Future

http://monitoringthefuture.org

Monitoring the Future is the home of an ongoing study of the behaviors, attitudes, and values of

American secondary school students, college students, and young adults. The overview of the

group’s annual survey of 50,000 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-graders is highlighted with key findings

that are available in PDF format.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP)

www.nadcp.org

NADCP is a membership and outreach organization for the country’s 1,200 drug courts. This site

provides information on drug-court-related training and technical assistance, resources,

upcoming events, membership information, and public relations. Key drug court components are

featured, along with synopses of current research findings and downloadable publications.

Contact information is provided for the national NADCP Mentor Court Network.
61

National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University

(CASA)

www.casacolumbia.org

This site, sponsored by Columbia University, features survey and other research results that

examine the economic and social costs of substance abuse. Recent research subject areas include

children at risk, ex-offenders and ex-addicts, and substance-abusing women on welfare. The site

also publishes results of CASA’s annual survey of the attitudes of teenagers, their parents,

teachers, and principals. Web cast transcripts are available with RealPlayer software and Adobe

Acrobat Reader.

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ)

www.ncjfcj.unr.edu

This is the site of the nation’s oldest judicial membership organization, which provides

information on training and technical assistance available to judges and other professionals in the

field of juvenile justice, including alcohol and other substance abuse by young people.

National Criminal Justice Reference Center (NCJRS)

www.ncjrs.org

NCJRS is a federally sponsored clearinghouse that provides information on research, policy, and

practices that are related to criminal and juvenile justice and drug control. Major resource

subjects catalogued online include courts, drugs, crime, international juvenile justice, law

enforcement, victims of crime, and statistics. The site offers a comprehensive database of

research abstracts. Search functions are available to browse full-text publications (HTML files)

and current grants and funding sources.

National Drug Court Institute (NDCI)

www.ndci.org

NDCI is the education, research, and scholarship division of NADCP. Its site features numerous

publications in Microsoft Word format. The site also features a drug court listserv, an

announcement board for drug court professionals who subscribe by e-mail and receive periodic

notices about education-, research-, and scholarship-related news and publications.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

62

National Drug Strategy Network (NDSN)

www.ndsn.org

With the support of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, a nonprofit educational charity, this

site provides citations to news stories, journal articles, research, legislation, and regulations. An

extensive series of links to related sites is also available.

National GAINS Center for Persons With Co-occurring Disorders in the

Justice System

www.gains.com/

This site provides information and links to effective mental health and substance abuse services

for people with co-occurring disorders who come in contact with the justice system. A complete

online tutorial is available for juvenile justice, mental health, and substance abuse treatment

professionals. Main topics include:

 Overview of the juvenile justice and treatment systems.

 Screening and assessment tools.

 Effective treatment approaches.

 Strategies for improving communication among systems.

The curriculum consists of 4 training modules and a concluding 50-question test.

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)

www.niaaa.nih.gov

NIAAA, a division of the National Institutes of Health, sponsors this site. The site provides

access to the Alcohol and Alcohol Problems citation database known as ETOH. It also has links

to the full-text version of Alcohol Alert and selected pamphlets. In addition, it provides

summaries from Alcohol Health & Research World, surveillance reports, and other publications.

(Some publications also are offered in Spanish.)
63

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

www.nida.nih.gov/

This site provides fact sheets that present national statistics on drug abuse among adolescents and

college students. Indexed and searchable topics include a common-drugs-of-abuse index,

research reports, newsletters, prevention and treatment research, and trends and statistics.

Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment can be downloaded at

www.nida.nih.gov/PODAT/PODATindex.html.

National Parenting Center

www.tnpc.com

The National Parenting Center provides guidance and relays information to parents from

child-rearing authorities. This site provides a parents’ corner, a chat room, an approved products

and services section, and product recall notices.

OJP Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project

www.american.edu/spa/justice/drugcourts.html

The Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project, a program of the Bureau of

Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, under the direction of

American University, assists treatment professionals in addressing issues relating to planning,

implementing, managing, and evaluating drug court programs. The project’s web site allows

onsite searches for reference materials by subject, drug court activity summaries and synopses,

juvenile/dependency/family drug court information, drug court publications, and related technical

assistance reports.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)

www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org

The OJJDP web site contains current facts and figures on juvenile justice, delinquency

prevention, violence, and victimization. This site is organized into subject areas and provides:

 Information on case flow in juvenile justice.

 A statistical briefing book with statistics, charts, and tables.

 Publication and resource links.

 A self-help e-mail address to submit questions about juvenile justice.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

64

Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)

www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov

The ONDCP web site provides federally sponsored drug-related statistics, links, resources, and

presentations (provided in PowerPoint and HTML formats). Brief topical fact sheets are also

available, along with state-level drug-related resources and contacts. A searchable database

defines street terms for drugs and drug-related terminology.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)

www.samhsa.gov

This site provides access to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, which reports on the

prevalence, patterns, and consequences of drug and alcohol use and abuse in the general

population age 12 and over. The site also includes the Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Statistics Sourcebook, which gives a comprehensive overview of substance abuse and mental

illness in the United States.

SAMHSA Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)

www.samhsa.gov/centers/csap/csap.html

This site features the new Underage Drinking Prevention Action Guide and Planner (PDF

format), descriptions of SAMHSA Model Programs and promising programs for substance abuse

prevention, community-based programs, a partnership exchange network for professionals, and

drug-free workplace information. CSAP’s new Decision Support System—a logic model for the

strategic planning, implementation, and evaluation of prevention programs—is provided

(requires JavaScript).

SAMHSA Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT)

www.samhsa.gov/centers/csat/csat.html

This site provides a searchable database on CSAT programs, data, and web resources. It offers

quick links to all SAMHSA clearinghouses, documents, and state-based information such as

directories and state government web servers. The site is linked to the Treatment Improvement

Exchange, which allows information exchange between CSAT staff and state and local alcohol

and substance abuse agencies.
65

SAMHSA’s National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information

(NCADI)

www.health.org

This is the site of the Prevline Prevention Hotline, which offers an extensive searchable database

on drugs of abuse. This site’s search engine allows responses to be directed to specific audiences

and professional groups or to provide information regarding specific publication series.

SAMHSA Office of Applied Studies

www.drugabusestatistics.samhsa.gov

This site provides recent national data on:

 Alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other drug abuse.

 Drug-related emergency department episodes and medical examiner cases.

 The nation’s substance abuse treatment system.

Visitors can receive drug use and substance abuse admission data; examine OAS reports on

substance abuse; locate a drug or alcoholism treatment facility; request OAS publications;

consult data sets; and examine OAS data collection systems.

Search Institute: Practical Research Benefiting Children and Youth

www.search-institute.org

This site offers practical strategies for identifying and building developmental assets in the

community for children and teenagers by working together with families, schools, churches, and

organizations. The site provides an online catalog of resources, survey services, training

opportunities, and articles.

Surgeon General’s Report on Mental Health—Children’s Mental Health

www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/chapter3/sec8.html

This site provides the complete text of chapter 3 of the 1999 White House Conference on Mental

Health and the Secretarial Initiative on Mental Health, which examined children and mental

health in the United States. Chapter 3 encompasses theories of development, risk factors and

prevention, mental disorders in children, depression and suicide in children and adolescents,

substance use, service interventions, and service delivery. The complete report is also posted.

PDF versions of each section can be downloaded.
66

Glossary

Abstinence-based

Treatment with the goal of becoming free of alcohol and other drugs.

Adjudication

Determination of the charges contained in the court petition.

Assessment

A comprehensive biopsychosocial appraisal of a youth and his or her family that is conducted by

a trained professional using a multidisciplinary approach.

Case management

The process of coordinating and monitoring services and supports for a youth who is under the

jurisdiction of the drug court and his or her family. This process is generally assigned to a

designated professional—the case manager. As the youth transitions through different settings,

the case is consistently managed across systems using a single, comprehensive case plan. The

case plan is developed and changed as needed by the drug court team.

Collateral services

Activities that build competencies in youth and families. Some examples are literacy programs,

recreation activities, and health care screening.

Collateral supports

Activities that help families access services. Some examples are transportation, brokering

services through contacts with other agencies, and employment and training referrals for parents.

Comparison group

A group of individuals whose characteristics are similar to those of a program’s participants, but

who do not receive the same services as those being evaluated. These individuals may not receive
67

any services, or they may receive a different set of services, activities, or products. As part of the

evaluation process, the experimental group (those receiving program services) and the

comparison group are assessed to determine which types of services, activities, or products

provided by the program did or did not produce the expected changes.

Continuum of care

A wide array of programs that ensures that there are no gaps in service and that options for all

levels of care are available throughout a youth’s involvement in the drug court and after the

youth has graduated from the drug court program (see continued care below).

Continued care (aftercare)

The services and support systems that are available to a youth and his or her family after

graduation from the drug court program. Some drug court programs include a continued care

phase or component within their program. Planning for continued care is initiated at the

beginning of the program.

Disposition

The court’s sentence in juvenile proceedings. A disposition may be a warning or reprimand,

probation, or placement in a group home or training school.

Family-focused

An approach that strengthens families. Treatment and services are aimed at improving family

relationships that are known to be directly related to youth behavior problems and improving

relationships between the family and other important systems that influence that youth. Its goals

are to:

 Keep families together.

 Provide parents with assistance in developing parenting skills and resources.

 Help youth learn to interact appropriately with others within the context and demands of his

or her environment.

 Integrate the youth and family with community networks.

Intervention

Any program, service, or action taken by the drug court to bring about or reinforce change in the

participant.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

68

Level of care

The number of hours and array of services to be provided to a youth, as determined during the

initial and ongoing assessments. The level of care is described in the youth’s comprehensive plan

and is updated as the youth’s needs change.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine’s criteria establish four levels of care; these have

been adapted by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) for adolescents. They define

three major categories of responses to AOD use: pretreatment services, outpatient treatment, and

inpatient treatment. Each category has several subsets.

For purposes of this document, definitions have been adapted and are provided for inpatient and

outpatient treatment.

 Outpatient treatment

Also referred to as ambulatory care, these services provide a broad range of intensity levels

without overnight accommodation. Some of these levels may be used following inpatient

treatment.

Nonintensive outpatient treatment

This AOD-focused treatment includes regularly scheduled sessions of professionally

directed evaluation and treatment. These sessions may also address related psychiatric,

emotional, and social issues. These sessions typically last less than 9 hours per week.

Intensive outpatient treatment

This is AOD-focused, professionally directed evaluation and treatment that typically

provides approximately 9–20 hours per week in a structured program. These programs

may be afterschool or evening programs and frequently include some weekend

programming.

Day treatment or partial hospitalization

This is AOD-focused, professionally directed evaluation and treatment that provides more

than 20 hours per week in a structured program.

 Inpatient treatment

These levels can include intensive medical, psychiatric, and psychosocial treatment that is

provided in residential care on a 24-hour basis. The levels of the residential care continuum

range from psychosocial care at the most intensive end to group home living without any

professional involvement or supervision at the least intensive end.

Medically monitored intensive inpatient treatment

This level of care involves around-the-clock medical and nurse monitoring, evaluation,

and treatment in an inpatient setting. This level of care is used for adolescents who have

acute and severe AOD-use disorders and who may also have a coexisting medical or

psychiatric problem. This generally involves a short to intermediate length of stay (7–45

days).
69

Medically managed intensive inpatient treatment

This level of care involves around-the-clock medically directed evaluation and treatment

in an acute care inpatient setting. This level of care is appropriate for the treatment of

medical and psychiatric problems that may require biomedical treatment. This generally

involves a short to intermediate length of stay (7–45 days).

Intensive residential treatment

This is an adolescent-specific, AOD-focused, long-term (6–24 months) treatment model

that may be professionally or medically directed. This model, which shares characteristics

with an adult therapeutic community model, is appropriate for adolescents with multiple

problems (e.g., dual or co-occurring disorders involving personality and AOD-use

disorders).

Psychosocial residential care

This is an adolescent-specific, AOD-focused, long-term (6–24 months), professionally

directed psychosocial care model. This model relies on peer pressure and formal

treatment to shape behavior. It is appropriate for AOD-abuse problems and behavioral

disorders that do not require acute medical or psychiatric intervention.

Halfway house

This is a residential, transitional living situation with minimal treatment. Residents are

supervised by paid staff. Programs, services, and treatment may be provided both inside

and outside of the house. The length of stay varies based on the attainment of specific

progress goals.

Group home living/therapeutic foster home

This refers to a residential, transitional living situation with minimal staff supervision.

Programs, services, and treatment are generally outside the home. Length of stay varies

and requires AOD abstinence.

Juvenile petition

An application for a court order or other judicial action. These are formal charging documents

filed with the court that allege that a youth is delinquent, a status offender, or a dependent child.

This starts the juvenile case brought before the judge.

Monitoring

An ongoing process of reviewing a program’s activities to determine whether set standards or

requirements are being met.

Monitoring system

An ongoing system to collect data on a program’s activities and outputs. The data collected by

the system are designed to provide feedback on whether the program is fulfilling its functions,

addressing the targeted population, and/or producing the intended services. For example, a

computerized intake system may be used that captures client characteristics and provides

monthly reports on the number of clients who were processed and received services.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

70

Outcome evaluation

An evaluation used by management to identify and access the results of a program’s effort. It

seeks to answer management’s question, “What difference did the program make?” It provides

management with a statement about the net effects of a program after a specified period of

operation. This type of evaluation provides management with knowledge about the:

 Extent to which the problems and needs that the program is meant to solve or reduce still

exist.

 Ways to ameliorate adverse effects and enhance desired effects.

 Program design adjustments that may be indicated for the future.

Process evaluation

Process evaluation focuses on how a program was implemented and how it operates. It identifies

the procedures undertaken and the decisions made in developing the program. This process

describes the program operations, its functions, and the services it delivers. Like a monitoring

evaluation, a process evaluation addresses whether the program was implemented as designed

and is providing the intended services. By documenting the program’s development and

operation, assessments can be made based on its successful or unsuccessful performance. These

assessments provide information for potential replication or modification of the program.

Screening

The use of brief assessment instruments and established criteria to determine the eligibility and

suitability of potential drug court participants.

Staffing

A meeting of the juvenile drug court team that is held before a youth’s court hearing to discuss

the progress made by a youth and his or her family and to determine what response from the

program would be appropriate.

Strengths-based

An approach to working with youth and families that is focused on the positive characteristics of

the participants—assets, achievements, and goals. Practices that are strengths-based engage youth

and families as full partners in the process of change.
71

Substance dependence (adapted from DSM IV)

A maladaptive pattern of substance use that leads to clinically significant impairment or distress,

as manifested by three or more of the following symptoms, occurring at any time during a 12-

month period:

1. The user experiences tolerance—as defined by either of the following:

a. A need for markedly increased amounts of the substance to achieve intoxication or

the desired effect.

b. Markedly diminished effect with continued use of the same amount of the substance.

2. The user suffers withdrawal when he or she stops using the substance.

3. The user takes the substance in larger amounts or over a longer period than was intended.

4. The user’s efforts to cut down or control substance use are unsuccessful.

5. The user spends a lot of time in activities to obtain the substance, use the substance, or

recover from its effects.

6. The user gives up or reduces important social, occupational, or recreational activities because

of substance use.

7. The user continues to abuse the substance even though he or she has a persistent or recurrent

physical or psychological problem that is likely to have been caused or exacerbated by the

substance.

Substance abuse (adapted from DSM IV)

A maladaptive system of substance use that leads to clinically significant impairment or distress,

as manifested by one or more of the following symptoms within a 12-month time period:

1. Recurrent substance use that results in failure to fulfill major obligations at work, school, or 

home.

2. Recurrent substance use in situations where it is physically hazardous.

3. Recurrent substance-related legal problems.

4. Continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal

problems that are caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance.

The symptoms have never met the criteria for substance dependence for this class of substance.

Treatment

The entire therapeutic process, which may include substance-abuse counseling, family therapy,

and/or training in anger management.
72

Notes

1. Drug Courts Program Office, 2001, Drug Court Grant Program Description, Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

2. Janet Gilbert, Richard Grimm, and John Parnham, Summer 2001, “Applying Therapeutic

Principles to a Family-Focused Juvenile Justice Model,” Alabama Law Review 52: 1153.

3. Ibid.

4. See note 1 above, Drug Court Program Office, 2001, Drug Court Grant Program Description.

5. Drug Courts Program Office, January 1997, Defining Drug Courts: Key Components,

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

6. Peggy Fulton Hora, William G. Schma, and John T.A. Rosenthal, January 1999, “Therapeutic

Jurisprudence and the Drug Treatment Court Movement: Revolutionizing the Criminal Justice

System’s Response to Drug Abuse and Crime in America,” Notre Dame Law Review 74(2).

7. National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, September 2001,

Malignant Neglect: Substance Abuse and America’s Schools, New York, New York: Columbia

University.

8. Ann Crowe, May 1998, Drug Identification and Testing in the Juvenile Justice System.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention, NCJ 167889.

9. Anne L. Stahl, June 1998, Drug Offense Cases in Juvenile Court 1986−1995, OJJDP Fact

Sheet #81. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention.

10. Charles McGee, John Parnham, Thomas T. Merrigan, and Michael Smith, June 2000 rev.,

Applying Drug Court Concepts in the Juvenile and Family Court Environments: A Primer for

Judges, Carolyn S. Cooper, ed., Washington, D.C.: American University.

11. Carolyn Cooper, May 2001, Juvenile Drug Court Programs, Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ 184744.
73

12. See note 2 above, Gilbert et al., “Applying Therapeutic Principles to a Family-Focused

Juvenile Justice Model,” 23.

13. Leonard Edwards, 1992, “The Juvenile Court and the Role of the Juvenile Court Judge,”

Juvenile and Family Court Journal 43(2).

14. See note 2 above, Gilbert et al., “Applying Therapeutic Principles to a Family-Focused

Juvenile Justice Model,” 23.

15. National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, July 1999, The Promise and

Challenge of Juvenile Drug Courts, Reno, Nevada: National Council of Juvenile and Family

Court Judges.

16. Drug Courts Program Office, 2000, Drug Court Grant Program Application Kit, Washington, 

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

17. See note 10 above, McGee et al., Applying Drug Court Concepts in the Juvenile and Family

Court Environments: A Primer for Judges.

18. See note 11 above, Cooper, Juvenile Drug Court Programs.

19. Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project, 1998, Juvenile and Family

Drug Courts: An Overview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice

Programs, Drug Courts Program Office, NCJ 171139.

20. Ibid.

21. Belknap, 1996.

22. Acoca, 1998; Rotheram-Borus, 1993.

23. Gurian, 1996.

24. OJJDP, 1999.

25. See note 23 above.

26. Pollack, 1998.

27. Benson, 1997.

28. Zehr, 1995.

29. Duncan and Miller, 2000.

30. Clark, 2001.
74

Bibliography

Abt Associates, Inc., 1997, Community Readiness for Drug Abuse Prevention: Issues, Tips and

Tools. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of

Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Amen, D.G., 1998, Change Your Brain, Change Your Life: The Breakthrough Program for

Conquering Anxiety, Depression, Obsessiveness, Anger, and Impulsiveness. New York, New York:

Times Books.

Amen, D.G., 2001, Healing ADD: The Breakthrough Program That Allows You to See and Heal the

6 Types of ADD. New York, New York: Putnam Publishing Group.

Bilchik, S., July 1998, Mental Health Disorders and Substance Abuse Problems Among Juveniles,

OJJDP Fact Sheet #82. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention.

Cooper, C., ed., June 1998, Applying Drug Court Concepts in the Juvenile and Family Court

Environments: A Primer for Judges. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, NCJ

179318.

Cooper, C., May 2001, Juvenile Drug Court Programs, Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block

Grants (JAIBG) Program Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ 184744.

Crowe, A.H., and American Probation and Parole Association, May 1998, Drug Identification

and Testing in the Juvenile Justice System. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office

of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ 167889.

Dickenson, T., and Crowe, A., December 1997, Capacity Building for Juvenile Substance Abuse

Treatment, Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ 167251.

Kimbrough, R.J., 1998 (unpublished draft report), Addressing planning and operational issues in

juvenile and family drug courts. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice

Programs, Drug Courts Program Office.
75

Kindlon, D., and Thompson, M., 2000, Raising Cain, Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys. New

York, New York: Ballantine Books.

Legal Action Center, 2000, Confidentiality and Communication: A Guide to the Federal Drug

and Alcohol Confidentiality Law (4th ed.). New York, New York: Author.

Mahoney, B., Carver, J., Cooper, C., Polansky, L., Weinstein, S., Wells, J., and Westerfield, T.,

1998, Drug Court Monitoring, Evaluation, and Management Information Systems. Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office.

McGovern, G., 1997, Terry: My Daughter’s Life-and-Death Struggle With Alcoholism. New York,

New York: Plume.

Mitchell, E.R., 1995, Fighting Drug Abuse With Acupuncture, the Treatment That Works. Berkeley,

California: Pacific View Press.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 1997, Defining Drug Courts: The Key

Components. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug

Courts Program Office, NCJ 165478.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 1998, Mentor Drug Court Network Brochure: A

Regional Approach to Technical Assistance. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office

of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office, NCJ 179636.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 1999, Developing Linkages Between Law

Enforcement and the Courts: Community Policing and Drug Courts/Community Courts Project, a

Two Year Progress Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2000, Developing Linkages Between Law

Enforcement and the Courts: Community Policing and Drug Courts/Community Courts Project, a

Three Year Progress Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services, NCJ 183365.

National Crime Prevention Council, 1998, How Are We Doing? A Guide to Local Program

Evaluation. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of

Justice Assistance, NCJ 176292.

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, August 2000, The Promise and Challenge of Juvenile Drug Courts.

Reno, Nevada: Author.

National Drug Court Institute, February 2000, “Effective Drug Court Program Evaluation,”

Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet 2(1). Alexandria, Virginia: Author.
Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice

76

National Drug Court Institute, 1999, Federal Confidentiality Laws and How They Affect Drug

Court Practitioners: Excerpts From a Treatise on Ethics and Confidentiality in Drug Courts.

Alexandria, Virginia: Author.

National Drug Court Institute, May 2001, Ethical Considerations for Judges and Attorneys in

Drug Court. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug

Courts Program Office, NCJ 197080.

Office of Justice Programs, Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project at

American University, 1999 rev, Juvenile and Family Drug Courts: An Overview. Washington,

D.C.: Author.

Papolos, D., and Papolos, J., 1999, The Bipolar Child, the Definitive and Reassuring Guide to

Childhood’s Most Misunderstood Disorder. New York, New York: Broadway Books.

Robbins, J., 2000, A Symphony in the Brain: The Evolution of the New Brain Wave Biofeedback.

New York, New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, an imprint of Grove/Atlantic Press, Inc.

Robinson, J.J., and Jones, J.W., May 2000, Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: Common

Issues To Address, Issue Paper Series. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Justice Programs, Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project at American

University.

Tauber, J., March 2000, NADCP/COPS Chiefs of Police Focus Group on the Linkages Between

Law Enforcement and Courts: What’s Working: A Broader Look at Law Enforcement/Court

Collaborations. Alexandria, Virginia: National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

Tauber, J., and Huddleston, C.W., May 1999, Development and Implementation of Drug Court

Systems. Alexandria, Virginia: National Drug Court Institute.

Tauber, J., Snavely, K., and Wiklosz, M., May 2000, Drug Court Publications: Resource Guide,

Second Edition. Alexandria, Virginia: National Drug Court Institute.

Wolin, S., and Wolin, S., 1993, The Resilient Self: How Survivors of Troubled Families Rise Above

Adversity. New York, New York: Villard Books.
Bureau of Justice Assistance

Information

For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its funding opportunities, requesters can call

the BJA Clearinghouse. The BJA Clearinghouse, a component of the National Criminal Justice Reference

Service (NCJRS), shares BJA program information with state and local agencies and community groups

across the country. Information specialists are available to provide reference and referral services, publication

distribution, participation and support for conferences, and other networking and outreach activities. The

clearinghouse can be reached by:

❒ Mail

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

❒ Visit

2277 Research Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20850

❒ Telephone

1–800–688–4252

Monday through Friday

8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.

eastern time

❒ Fax

301–519–5212

❒ BJA Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

❒ NCJRS Home Page

www.ncjrs.org

❒ E-mail

askncjrs@ncjrs.org

❒ JUSTINFO Newsletter

E-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org

Leave the subject line blank

In the body of the message,

type:

subscribe justinfo 

[your name]