Drug Treatment Courts (DTCs) have emerged as an alternative approach to traditional criminal justice responses for individuals with substance use disorders. This quantitative study examines the post-sentencing and reoffense outcomes of a Drug Treatment Court in a Western Canadian city. The study analyzes data from a sample of individuals who participated in the DTC program, comparing their post-sentencing outcomes to a matched comparison group of individuals who went through the regular criminal justice process. Outcome measures include recidivism rates, substance use patterns, treatment completion rates, and social reintegration outcomes. The findings provide insights into the effectiveness of the Drug Treatment Court in reducing recidivism, improving treatment outcomes, and facilitating successful community reintegration among individuals with substance use disorders. The implications of these findings for policy, practice, and future research are discussed.

Drug Treatment Court, substance use disorders, post-sentencing outcomes

Allard, Patricia, Tara Lyons, and Richard Elliott. 2011. Impaired Judgment: Assessing the Appropriateness of Drug Treatment Courts as a Response to Drug Use in Canada. Toronto, ON: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. http://bibliobase.sermais.pt:8008/BiblioNET/upload/PDF2/01680_downloadFile.pdf Google Scholar

Andrews, Donald A., James Bonta, and J. Steven Wormith. 2004. LS/CMI: The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems. Google Scholar

Andrews, Donald A., Lina Guzzo, Peter Raynor, Robert C. Rowe, L. Jill Rettinger, Albert Brews, and J. Steven Wormith. 2012. Are the major risk/need factors predictive of both female and male reoffending? A test with the eight domains of the level of service/case management inventory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 56(1): 113–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x10395716. Medline:21320860 Google Scholar

Apel, Robert J., and Gary Sweeten. 2010. Propensity score matching in criminology and criminal justice. In Handbook of Quantitative Criminology, ed. Alex R. Piquero and David Weisburd, 543–62. New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar

Belenko, Steven R., Nicholas Patapis, and Michael T. French. 2005. The Economic Benefits of Drug Treatment: A Critical Review of the Evidence for Policy Makers. https://www.slideshare.net/NicholasPatapisPsyDM/economicbenefitsofdrugtrx0205. Google Scholar

Bhati, Avinash S., John Roman, and Aaron Chalfin. 2008. To Treat or Not to Treat: Evidence on the Prospects of Expanding Treatment to Drug-Involved Offenders. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center. Google Scholar

Dehejia, Rajeev H., and Sadek Wahba. 2002. Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics 84(1): 151–61. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465302317331982 Google Scholar

Deschenes, Elizabeth P., Susan Turner, and Peter W. Greenwood. 1995. Drug court or probation?: An experimental evaluation of Maricopa county’s drug court. The Justice System Journal 18(1): 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/23277556.1995.10871222 Google Scholar

Festinger, David S., and Patricia A. Lee. 2004. Judge is a key component of drug court. Drug Court Review 4(2): 1–34. Google Scholar

Fischer, Benedict. 2003. “Doing good with a vengeance”: A critical assessment of the practices, effects and implications of drug treatment courts in North America. Criminal Justice 3(3): 227–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/14668025030033001 Google Scholar

Gibbs, Benjamin R., Robert Lytle, and William Wakefield. 2018. Outcome effects on recidivism among drug court participants. Criminal Justice and Behavior 20(10): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818800528 Google Scholar

Goldberg, Susan. 2011. Problem-Solving in Canada’s Courtrooms: A Guide to Therapeutic Justice. Ottawa, ON: National Judicial Institute. Google Scholar

Gutierrez, Lina, and Guy Bourgon. 2012. Drug treatment courts: A quantitative review of study and treatment quality. Justice Research and Policy 14(2): 47–77. https://doi.org/10.3818/jrp.14.2.2012.47 Google Scholar

Healey, Joseph F. 2014. Statistics: A Tool for Social Research. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning. Google Scholar

Iacus, Stefano M., Gary King, and Giuseppe Porro. 2011. Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. Journal of the American Statistical Association 106(493): 345–61. https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2011.tm09599 Google Scholar

Justice Canada. 2009. Drug Treatment Court Funding Program: Summative Evaluation. Ottawa, ON: Evaluation Division. Google Scholar

Justice Canada. 2018. Charter Statement – Bill C-75: An Act to Amend the Criminal Code, Youth Criminal Justice Act and Other Acts and to Make Consequential Amendments to Other ACTS. Ottawa, ON. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/charter-harte/c75.html Google Scholar

Koetzle, Deborah, Shelley Johnson Listwan, Wendy P. Guastaferro, and Kara Kobus. 2015. Treating high-risk offenders in the community: The potential of drug courts. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 59(5): 449–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x13515635. Medline:24363291 Google Scholar

Latimer, Jeff, Kelly Morton-Bourgon, and Jo-Anne Chrétien. 2006. A Meta-Analytic Examination of Drug Treatment Courts: Do They Reduce Recidivism? Ottawa, ON: Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice. Google Scholar

Listwan, Shelley Johnson, Jody L. Sundt, Alexander M. Holsinger, and Edward J. Latessa. 2003. The effect of drug court programming on recidivism: The Cincinnati experience. Crime and Delinquency 49(3): 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128703049003003 Google Scholar