skip navigation


Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 208178 Find in a Library
Title: What Juvenile Drug Courts Do and How They Do It (From Juvenile Drug Courts and Teen Substance Abuse, P 55-106, 2004, Jeffrey A. Butts and John Roman, eds. -- See NCJ-208175)
Author(s): Shelli Bailter Rossman; Jeffrey A. Butts; John Roman; Christine DeStefano; Ruth White
Date Published: 2004
Page Count: 52
Sponsoring Agency: Urban Institute Press
Washington, DC 20037
Sale Source: Urban Institute Press
2100 M Street., NW
Washington, DC 20037
United States of America
Document: HTML
Type: Program/Project Description
Format: Book (Softbound)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper describes the typical components of juvenile drug courts and analyzes differences within the general model observed in the daily operations of six programs.
Abstract: Juvenile drug courts generally work with treatment and rehabilitation agencies to hold offenders accountable for their drug use and other illegal behavior; address social and behavioral problems related to offenders' substance abuse; support offenders and their families in developing positive community relationships and maintaining crime-free and drug-free lives; and ensure effective coordination of the justice system with related service providers. In order to examine differences among programs under this general model, six juvenile drug courts were studied in Charleston, SC; Dayton, OH; Jersey City, NJ; Las Cruces, N M; Missoula, MT; and Orlando, FL. The study was conducted by the Urban Institute during visits to each court during 2001 and 2002. The study involved document reviews, courtroom observations, and interviews with key stakeholders. The focus was on the composition of the drug court team, the procedures used for screening and assessing youth, the conduct of judicial hearings and how cases are coordinated, the use of rewards and sanctions, drug-testing procedures, and the provision of treatment and collateral services. Overall, the study found that operational structures and treatment approaches usually result from adaptive responses to the local context, notably the available resources, perceived gaps in services, and the need to manage increasing caseloads. Consequently, juvenile drug court practices vary significantly from court to court. This diversity is a major reason for the lack of theory-based drug court evaluations and the limited effect of evaluation results on drug court policies. Suggestions for juvenile drug court evaluations are offered. 1 figure and 8 exhibits
Main Term(s): Juvenile drug courts
Index Term(s): Case studies; Diagnostic and reception processing; Florida; Juvenile court procedures; Juvenile drug abusers; Juvenile drug treatment; Juvenile drug use; Montana; New Jersey; New Mexico; Ohio; South Carolina
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 website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.