DRUG-COURT PROGRAMS SAVE MONEY AND GET BETTER RESULTS

There is a quiet revolution taking place in the way America's
criminal-justice system treats non-violent drug-using offenders. Over the
past 15 years, drug court programs, which bring a public-health approach to
a law enforcement challenge, have grown from one drug court in 1989 to more
than 1,600 today in all 50 states. In fact, 2004 alone saw an increase of
more than 400 such courts.

Drug courts have become a crossroads for the law enforcement, judicial and
treatment communities that, in the past, dealt with drug users without
effective coordination. Drug courts represent an integrated approach that
is reducing recidivism rates and saving taxpayers' money.

While California legislators consider expansion of Proposition 36 (the
Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act), the California Association of
Drug Court Professionals met in Sacramento last week for their annual
conference to learn more about ways to expand on a program that is already
making a difference in their state -- progress that we regard as superior
to the efforts of Proposition 36.

Drug courts take on cases that involve non-violent drug-using offenders or
individuals under the court's jurisdiction while they are on probation and
supervised in the community. All arrestees are screened for substance
abuse, and for those who test positive, supervised, drug-tested and
monitored with a system of graduated sanctions. These services, as well as
education, job training and housing assistance, are all coordinated by a
team of professionals designated by the presiding drug-court judge.

The main goal of a drug court is not to prosecute but to provide a way for
the offender to change behaviors -- in other words, stay off of drugs and
out of the criminal-justice system. The drug court forms a support system
to build a safety net for the participating offender composed of court and
treatment professionals, as well as other social-service providers.

A program is custom-made for offenders to start their own paths to
recovery. Typical drug courts provide intensive judicial supervision as
well as community supervision, routine drug testing, treatment services and
immediate sanctions and services. A defining characteristic of drug courts,
as opposed to Proposition 36 provisions, is the level of flexibility they
afford individual communities based on local need.

The cooperative effort among community organizations and local government
entities brought together and led by drug-court judges is working to stop
the cycle for repeat offenders. A 2003 study released by the National
Institute of Justice examined 17,000 drug-court graduates from across the
country within one year of graduation from a drug-court program. Only 16.4
percent of the 17,000 graduates had been re-arrested and charged with a
felony offense. Compare this with a 43.5 percent recidivism rate for
non-drug-court graduates. By the two-year mark, the recidivism rate
increased to just 27.5 percent, compared with 58.6 percent for non-graduates.

Most drug courts operate in a manner similar to the intended implementation
of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, or Proposition 36, passed
by California voters in 2000. However, drug courts operating without the
narrow mandates of this measure have significantly higher levels of
accountability and judicial discretion, and therefore, have proven more
effective.

If the directed treatment is not met or performed, the drug-court judge has
the right to revoke participation in the treatment program and direct
consequences such as incarceration. Proposition 36, by contrast, enables
multiple chances for multiple lapses in treatment that result in little or
no individual accountability.

In California, studies published in 2002 by the Judicial Council of
California, the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, NPC
Research Inc. and Judicial Council of California showed that drug courts
save money. According to these studies, drug courts save California a
minimum of $18 million a year through reduced incarceration costs alone.

Drug-court programs are one of the most significant criminal-justice system
initiatives in the past 20 years. Approaching drug offenders from a
public-health perspective is revolutionary. The program has diverted
thousands of non-violent offenders from a revolving door to jail onto a
path of recovery. They have saved millions of dollars for the
criminal-justice system and countless lives.

JOHN P. WALTERS is director of the White House Office of National Drug
Control Policy. He wrote this article for the Mercury News.