skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 223853   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
Title: Exploring the Key Components of Drug Courts: A Comparative Study of 18 Adult Drug Courts on Practices, Outcomes, and Costs
  Document URL: PDF 
Author(s): Shannon M. Carey Ph.D. ; Michael W. Finigan Ph.D. ; Kimberly Pukstas Ph.D.
Corporate Author: NPC Research, Inc.
United States of America
Date Published: 03/2008
Page Count: 136
  Annotation: This study explored how various drug court programs were implementing the “10 Key Components” that all drug courts should share as benchmarks for performance, as identified in “Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components” (National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 1997).
Abstract: The analysis found that drug courts exercise a significant degree of discretion in how they implement the 10 key components. For each of the 10 components, there were both similarities and differences in how drug courts were operated. Variation in how various components are designed and implemented is not a negative finding in itself, since differences across drug courts are expected as each program tailors its components to meet the needs of the population served. Still, the identification of any variation in practice within a key component is helpful, since it may explain why some drug courts are more effective than others. The practices that show variation among the courts in this sample are the practices that may be the most fruitful in determining promising or best practices for drug courts. Any variation in outcomes among drug courts in different jurisdictions, however, must take into account not only the variation in features of the examined practice but also the variation in clients being served and how a given practice interacts with these clients. Client differences include drug of choice; level of addition; legal issues; and life issues such as employment, education, and health needs. Future research in a larger number of drug courts should focus on best practices for specific client populations and within specific contexts. This report lists promising practices related to reduced costs and lower recidivism. The evaluation, conducted between 2000 and 2006, involved 18 adult drug courts from jurisdictions across the United States, with attention to process, outcome, and cost variables. 36 tables, 32 figures, and 35 references
Main Term(s): Drug Courts
Index Term(s): Drug law offenses ; Drug treatment ; Comparative analysis ; Drug offenders ; Court management ; Program design ; NIJ final report
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Grant Number: 2005-M-114
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Country: United States of America
Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.