The Kansas Supreme Court, with consulting services 

provided by the National Center for State Courts 

(NCSC), performed a feasibility study of the State’s 

drug courts. The objective of this study was to assess the practicality of assuming state-level management over all adult drug court programs throughout 

Kansas. 

This SJI-supported Technical Assistance grant (SJI10-T-011) enabled the Kansas Supreme Court to 

conduct a structural analysis of the 7 drug court programs already in existence, and identify the operational benefits of migrating to a centralized management system, given recent legislative changes that 

are impacting treatment programs for offenders. 

Senate Bill 123 (SB 123) mandates that a target 

population of nonviolent adult offenders, convicted 

of a first or second-degree drug possession offense 

with no prior drug-related criminal history, be provided with assessments, treatment in a certified substance abuse program, and supervision through community corrections. Similar to drug courts, the 

length of treatment an offender receives depends on 

the modality and services provided. Additionally, 

the ability of the offender to pay is considered, although under SB 123, every offender is ordered to 

pay $300. SB 123 provides funding for the activities 

of the Kansas Sentencing Commission (KSC) and 

Kansas Department of Corrections. As part of the 

SJI-funded project, the Supreme Court is determining whether existing drug courts should meet the 

requirements of SB 123. 

NCSC Consultants performed a comparative analysis 

between Kansas and state-level efforts in New Mexico, Missouri, Nebraska, and Utah. The report reviewed SB 123, traditional drug court models, expectations of treatment-based offender programs, 

and needs specific to Kansas. 

The report contained the following recommendations, which will assist Kansas in deciding whether 

to establish statewide oversight of drug courts: 

 conduct complete process and outcome evaluations on existing SB 123 programs; 

 undergo adequate strategic planning focused on 

funding and expansion; 

 utilize the outcome evaluation to determine how 

various programs should co-exist; 

 recognize that the cost benefits of SB 123 programs and/or drug courts are decreased when the 

range of offenders is limited; 

 develop collaborative relationships, and promote 

judicial involvement, since these are key factors in 

supporting programming for offenders where the 

cornerstones are treatment and supervision. 

The report concluded that, regardless of when the 

programs were implemented, SB 123 has fostered 

and supported growth among offender-based treatment programming and services across the state. 

The final report, excluding redacted portions, can be 

obtained from the SJI website. 

Kansas Assesses Feasibility of Drug Courts 

Volume 21, No. 8 May 2011 

E-SJI NEWS

In this Issue 

Kansas Drug Court 

Feasibility Study 

1 

New Mexico Judiciary 

ADR Project 

2 

3rd Quarter Grant 

Applications 

3 

SJI Scholarship Funding 

Expended for FY 2011 

3 

Page 1 

SJI has funded a number of statewide and 

single jurisdiction evaluations of drug 

court and community-based supervision 

programs dating back to the early 1990’s.
value to more than just the New 

Mexico ADR program: 

 structure new and expanded 

ADR initiatives in phases and 

pilot projects; 

 enhance ADR training, management, and operations 

through technology; 

 support different approaches 

in large and small court jurisdictions; 

 publicize and market a “multidoor courthouse” concept; and

 grow the numbers and quality 

of ADR neutrals and court 

programs. 

The final report presents an insightful statewide analysis of 

ADR in New Mexico, and offers 

resources from other states and 

national organizations for operating ADR programs. A copy of 

the report is available on the New 

Mexico Judiciary’s website. 

New Mexico Judiciary Conducts Statewide Study of 

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Page 2 

E-SJI News Volume 21, No.8 May 2011 

The New Mexico Judiciary and 

Administrative Office of the 

Courts (AOC) released its report 

titled, Advancing Alternative 

Dispute Resolution in the New 

Mexico Judiciary: Key Strategies to Save Time and Money, as 

a result of its SJI-funded Technical Assistance Grant (SJI-10-T004). 

Court-annexed ADR is the resolution of a legal dispute after a 

case has been filed in court, but 

prior to formal litigation; it may 

involve an out-of-court agreement, but will traditionally rely 

on an in-court early settlement 

through mediation, facilitation, 

arbitration or informal negotiation. 

The report was prepared by the 

National Center for State Courts 

(NCSC), with guidance from the 

statewide Alternative Dispute 

Resolution (ADR) Steering 

Committee. Participation on the 

12-member ADR Steering Committee included judges, AOC 

and district court leadership, and 

practitioners. The committee 

provided oversight to NCSC 

during the research and proposal 

preparation phases, as well as 

interpretation of the value of 

ADR as described in the Judiciary’s 2008-2013 Long-Range 

Strategic Plan. This plan called 

for the improvement of ADR 

methods and education of the 

public on the availability of 

ADR, and was a contributing 

factor in the AOC’s decision to 

pursue grant funding for the 

study. 

ADR programs are increasing as 

court budgets continue to shrink. 

However, the New Mexico ADR 

study is unique, since the entire 

state court system participated 

with the goal of strengthening 

and crafting a more vibrant, 

responsive system of ADR services for the public. New Mexico currently supports a courtannexed ADR program in its 

appellate, district, metropolitan, 

the legal community to increase 

their comfort with ADR; 3) creating a positive public image of 

court-annexed ADR by relating 

the benefits of the program as 

opposed to traditional litigation 

methods; 4) embracing the diversity in various communities by 

encouraging a customized approach to ADR; and 5) enhancing ADR services to selfrepresented litigants through 

and magistrate courts, with the 

intended goal of saving time and 

money for both the public and 

the courts. 

Included in the report is a breakdown of the strengths and vulnerabilities of the current program. A common theme cited 

by respondents to the 2009 Court 

ADR Survey was a lack of resources, including staffing, funding, volume of cases, and time. 

However, the report suggests 

that much of this can be positively impacted by small advancements through the following: 1) breaking down silos and 

working towards collaboration; 

2) conducting training to educate 

existing initiatives. 

Survey respondents, comprised 

of judges, court staff and administrators, attorneys, neutrals, and 

providers, were represented. 

The diversity of their responses 

and experiences with ADR 

helped to ensure that a sufficient 

cross-section of perspectives was 

achieved for the analysis. Results of their survey and responses are included in the report. 

Among the highlights of the 

report is a list, “Ten Ways to 

Advance Court-Annexed ADR 

Within New Mexico.” Included 

in the list are the following recommendations, which have 
SJI received 15 grant applications requesting a 

total of $1,208,909 for the 3rd quarter of FY 

2011. The Board will meet on June 3, 2011 to 

make decisions on grant awards for the 3rd

quarter. The results of this Board meeting will 

be available the following week. 

SJI has received over $1 million in grant applications per quarter in FY 2011; Technical 

Assistance (TA) and Curriculum Adaptation 

(CAT) grant applications are very popular. 

As competition for SJI grant funds remains 

strong, potential applicants are encouraged to 

do the following during the preparation of 

their proposals: 1) review the Grant Guideline

for directions on how to submit a grant application; 2) initiate contact with SJI if there are 

questions about the proposed project, or during 

preparation if there are questions about the 

requirements; and 3) be aware of, and plan to 

use in the proposed project, best practices and 

available research, including results from previously funded SJI grants. 

Third Quarter Grant Applications for FY 2011 

Page 3 

SJI Grant funding remains available on a firstcome, first-served, basis for applications 

that merit funding. 

The 4th quarter deadline for grant applications 

is August 1, 2011. 

All applicants are required to submit an original and two copies of the grant application. 

These should be mailed to SJI’s new address: 

11951 Freedom Drive, Suite 1020, Reston, 

VA, 20190. 

SJI Board of Directors

Chairman 

James R. Hannah 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Arkansas 

Little Rock, AR 

Vice Chairman 

Daniel J. Becker 

State Court Administrator 

Utah AOC

Salt Lake City, UT 

Secretary 

Gayle A. Nachtigal 

Judge 

Washington County Circuit Court 

Hillsboro, OR 

Treasurer 

Hernan D. Vera 

President & CEO 

Public Counsel 

Los Angeles, CA 

Robert A. Miller 

Chief Justice (Ret.) 

Supreme Court of South Dakota 

Pierre, SD 

Chase T. Rogers 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Connecticut 

Hartford, CT 

Wilfredo Martinez 

County Judge 

9th Judicial Circuit of Florida 

Orlando, FL 

Marsha J. Rabiteau 

Policy Consultant 

Rabiteau Consulting 

Bloomfield, CT 

John B. Nalbandian 

Partner 

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP 

Cincinnati, OH 

Isabel Framer 

President 

Language Access Consultants, LLC 

Copley, OH 

Jonathan D. Mattiello 

Executive Director 

The State Justice Institute is a federallyfunded, non-profit corporation established by 

federal law in 1984 to improve the quality of 

justice in state courts, and foster innovative, 

efficient solutions to common issues faced by 

all courts. SJI is governed by a Board of Directors appointed by the President. 

to the end of the 4th and final quarter of the 

fiscal year. The program is in high demand 

among judges and court managers. 

For more information on scholarships and the 

application materials required, please visit the 

SJI website.

There is no remaining funding in SJI’s Scholarship Program for FY 2011. 

Potential scholarship applicants are advised to 

hold their requests until the first quarter of FY 

2012. The deadline for those applications is 

November 1, 2011. 

This marks the second fiscal year in a row that 

all scholarship funds have been awarded prior 

SJI Scholarship Funding Expended For FY 2011 

E-SJI News Volume 21, No.8 May 2011