PUBLICATIONS

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 227605
	Title:	Impact and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Anchorage Wellness Court
	Document URL:	PDF (Impact/Cost-Benefit Analysis) PDF (Related Report - NCJ 227606)
	Author(s):	John K. Roman ; Aaron Chalfin ; Jay Reid ; Shannon Reid
	Corporate Author:	The Urban Institute United States of America
	Date Published:	07/2008
	Page Count:	73
	Annotation:	This study estimated the costs and benefits of processing misdemeanor DUI (driving under the influence) cases in the Anchorage Wellness Court (AWC), a specialized court that uses principles of therapeutic jurisprudence.
	Abstract:	Generally, the study found that the AWC was effective in reducing recidivism and associated harms for those who chose to participate in the AWC. Among those who were referred to the AWC but who did not choose to enter the program (the “Opt-Out Group”), there was no effect on some outcomes and negative effects on other outcomes, including a finding that this group caused substantial additional harms to society. Thus, if the AWC is assessed solely on the effectiveness of serving those who were sufficiently motivated to enroll in the program, the results indicate the AWC is an unqualified success for DUI offenders; however, if the program is measured by its effectiveness in serving all those referred to it, which is a goal of the program, then the program's effectiveness is modest. The AWC began serving misdemeanor DUI offenders in Anchorage, AK in August 1999, with the goal of reducing alcohol-related offending through treatment and increased individual accountability. Two sets of comparisons were made in estimating the effect of AWC on participants’ behavior. The study first compared the outcomes for 277 individuals who were eligible for the AWC. Of these individuals, 141 had no contact with the program; and 136 were referred to the program. Although not everyone who was referred to the program formally enrolled, all who were referred received at least some exposure to the AWC. 25 tables, 2 figures, 97 references, and appended unweighted results, cost-benefit results, and outcome analysis
	Main Term(s):	Drug Courts
	Index Term(s):	Driving Under the Influence (DUI) ; Alcohol abuse ; Alcoholism treatment programs ; Drunk driver programs ; Recidivism causes ; NIJ final report ; Alaska
	Sponsoring Agency:	National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America University of Alaska Anchorage United States of America
	Grant Number:	2003-DD-BX-1015
	Sale Source:	National Institute of Justice/NCJRS Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20849 United States of America NCJRS Photocopy Services Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20849-6000 United States of America
	Type:	Program/Project Evaluation
	Country:	United States of America
	Language:	English
	To cite this abstract, use the following link: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=249610
* 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.