Drug Courts 2012: Going Where No System Has Gone Before Presented by Judge Melanie G. May FORGING LEADERSHIP: Applying Best Practices in Drug Demand Reduction April 2, 2012 Star Trek Fans “Live Long and Proper” I see you have a number of speakers from Argentina. I travelled there in 2003 to present on drug courts in Sante Fe.

The Definition of Insanity Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the result to be different. Me

Who Moved the Cheese? Criminalization of behavior Dislike of funding for social services Changes in funding streams De-institutionalization of mental health facilities Recognition of substance abuse as a relapsing disease In the United States

What Do Problem-Solving Courts Require? Better understanding of underlying issues of substance abuse and mental health Knowledge of existing resources and how to access them Recognizing reality – how things REALLY work Linkage and better communication among justice system, treatment, and social services Having more and better information on which to base decisions Share the slide

DRUG COURT - KEY COMPONENTS 1. Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing. 2. Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights. 3. Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court program. 4. Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and related treatment and rehabilitative services. 5. Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing. Me

6. A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses 6. A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants’ compliance. 7. Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential. 8. Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness. 9. Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and operations. 10. Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court program effectiveness. Me

A Short History of Florida’s Drug Courts Established in 1989 in Dade County Replicated in Broward County in 1991 Became Mandatory for each Circuit in 2000 Became Voluntary in 2006 after Art. V, Rev. 7 Expanded by Stimulus Dollars and Legislative Initiative in 2009 Glitch Bill 2011 Reentry, Expanded Misdemeanor, and Veteran’s Courts in 2012

The Growth of Drug Courts

Florida’s Current Statistics 2010 Statewide Admissions and Graduates (including only adult pretrial, post-adjudication, and misdemeanor drug courts) 6,407 admissions 3,405 graduates 2010 Statewide Admissions and Graduates (including family, juvenile, and other drug courts) 11,059 admissions 5,293 graduates

Nationally & Internationally July, 2011 – Nearly 2,500 Drug Courts in U.S. July, 2011 – Drug Courts in Australia, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Cayman Islands, Guam, Ireland, Jamaica, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Scotland, and Suriname 3,800 international participants

National Institute of Justice - 2003 Survey of 2,000 graduates from 100 drug courts Recidivism defined as arrested and charged for offense with sentence of at least one year 16.4% recidivism after one year v. 43.5% 27.5% recidivism after two years v. 58.6% Me

COST EFFECTIVENESS Treatment Costs: $1,800 – $3,000 Incarceration Costs: $18,000 - $26,000 Me

Risk & Needs Matrix High Risk Low Risk High Needs Low Needs Treatment Habilitation Accountability, Treatment & Habilitation High Needs Accountability & Habilitation Prevention Low Needs Doug Marlowe’s Work and what we are finding Define High Risk/Low Risk High Needs/Low Needs science addiction

2009 Expansion Legislation Non-violent third degree felony or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in section 776.08 52 Points or Less Substance Abuse Disorder Probation Violation Eligibility Criteria

Expansion of Pre-Trial Drug Court Non-violent third degree felony or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in section 776.08 Identified as Having Substance Abuse Problem No Prior Felony Conviction Deleted Prior PTI Admission as an Exclusion

Expansion of Drug Offender Probation Added non-violent third degree felony under chapter 810 or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in section 776.08 with 52 Points or less

FUNDING $825,000 to OSCA for data collection $175,000 to OSCA for administration and data collection $750,000 to Public Defenders for Expansion $1.5 million to State Attorneys for Expansion $17,633,222 for treatment, case management, and drug testing All stimulus dollars

GOAL Provide the State with 5 to 1+ return on its investment of $20,883,223 Target 4,000 non-violent, third-degree or other non-forcible felony offenders with scores of 52 or less for post-adjudicatory drug courts Anticipate 2,000 successful completions (a 50% failure rate as indicated by the OPPAGA study) Anticipate 1,600 successful completers will not reenter Florida’s prison system (80 % success as indicated by the OPPAGA study) These percentages were taken from the OPAAGA Study. We believe the completion rate could be higher than the 50% found in the study. Selected 9 counties that sent the most offenders in these categories to prison

5:1+ RETURN ON INVESTMENT Reduce prison building by $100 million = one prison (1,200 offenders) 1,600 offenders diverted from prison Plus yearly operational costs of $32 million over multiple years BONUS: Enhanced Public Safety by Reduction in Recidivism and associated costs $32 million is defined as $20,000 x 1,600 persons we save

Expansion Admissions As of early March 2, 2012, 1,428 are participating in the expansion programs and 577 terminations. Broward leads the admissions with 345 participants. Broward has had 72 terminations All Good News

Challenges Confusion with new post-adjudicatory eligibility criteria Eligibility criteria is too restrictive Increase eligibility criteria to all technical violations of probation rather than limiting them to just failed drug test violations Consider increasing sentencing point threshold above 60 points

2011 Glitch Bill Clarify eligibility criteria for post-adjudicatory drug court programs. Expand criteria to allow more non-violent offenders to participate. This was all accomplished with 2011 legislation championed by Rep. Rousson. All recommendations for expanding eligibility was accomplished.

49,089,868 – prison costs 20,352,574 – drug court costs Nearly $29 million in savings PLUS enhanced public safety, reduction in crime and recidivism Assumptions Expenses to date include all invoices paid plus expenditures incurred but pending final payment through January 2012. On February 13, 2012, the number of active participants in the drug court expansion counties was 860. In 2011, admissions averaged 51 people per month, and terminations averaged 32 people per month, for a net gain of 19 people per month. Program costs to date are averaging $23 per person per day. DOC cost for a prison bed is $53.34 per person per day. On February 13, 2011 there were 416,240 person days in the expansion drug courts. At $53.34 per day, the prison costs for this population would have been $22,202,241. Formula: Active participants x 30 days x $23 = drug court costs. Active participants x 30 days x $53.34 = DOC costs.

Inmate Reentry Program The DOC will identify eligible offenders convicted of non-violent third degree felonies. After the offender has completed at least one half of his prison sentence, the DOC will recommend the offender’s participation to the sentencing judge. The State has the opportunity to object. If accepted, the offender will participate in the in- custody reentry program for 180 days. Upon successful completion, the sentencing judge will modify the offender’s sentence to drug offender probation. SB2714

The offender will step-down into an appropriate community-based treatment program (work release, residential treatment, half-way house, day treatment, out-patient therapy). The local drug court will monitor the offender’s participation. Failure will return the offender to finish the initial sentence with forfeiture of any gain time.

Veteran’s Treatment Court Created in Buffalo New York 2012 Legislation Incorporates Pre-Trial Intervention and Post- Adjudicatory Treatment Coordinates with Services for Veterans Enlists the Help of Other Veterans Addresses Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Misdemeanor Drug Court Expansion Expands Eligibility and Target Population to other non-violent misdemeanor charges Eliminates the exclusion for prior participation

The Cheese Has Moved! Now, I don’t have to explain what a drug court is. Now, the State wants to know how drug courts can improve the criminal justice system and save dollars. Now, the OSCA fully supports drug courts. Now, the Senate Criminal Justice Committee asks for presentations on drug courts. Now, it’s drug court’s time to shine, but not without pulling its own weight.

The Cheese Has Moved!