MARK S. WALLER, B.A.

Transcription

1 MARK S. WALLER, B.A. NPC Research 5100 SW Macadam Ave., Ste. 575 Portland OR (503) x 116 (503) (fax) waller@npcresearch.com EDUCATION June 1996 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Bachelor of Arts in Geography, cum laude HONORS National Merit Scholar, Dean's List, University Scholars, Honors Student Association, Alumni Award, Golden Key National Honor Society WORK EXPERIENCE 1/15-Present Cost Analyst/Grants and Benefits Administrator, NPC Research, Portland OR 11/07-1/15 Cost Analyst/Researcher 3 - Specialist, NPC Research, Portland, OR 11/03-10/07 Researcher 2, NPC Research, Portland, OR 11/02-11/03 Research Coordinator, NPC Research, Portland, OR 8/01-11/02 Research Assistant, NPC Research, Portland, OR 12/00-8/01 Institutional Electronic Trading Representative, T.D. Waterhouse, San Diego, CA 1/99-12/00 Online Trading Representative, T.D. Waterhouse, San Diego, CA 9/97-12/98 Team Leader, National Civilian Community Corps, San Diego, CA 9/96-9/97 Corps Member, National Civilian Community Corps, San Diego, CA PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Current Projects Statewide Evaluation of Colorado s Drug Court. ( ). Cost Analyst. Colorado s Administrative Office of the Courts requested a statewide outcome and cost evaluation of Colorado s adult drug courts and DWI courts. This evaluation also encompasses process evaluations, data support and other evaluation tasks for a variety of individual drug courts and for county criminal justice and juvenile justice agencies. NIJs Evaluation of Second Chance Act Adult Reentry Courts (NESCAARC). ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC Research, RTI International, and the Center for Court Innovation (CCI) are collaborating on NIJ s evaluation of specialized reentry court models across 8 sites funded by Second Chance Act through the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The importance of this evaluation stems from growing policymaker attention to the myriad problems associated with prisoner reentry, coupled with a dearth of what works knowledge generally and a paucity of rigorous research examining reentry courts in particular. Little is known about the challenges associated with reentry court implementation, which are likely to be substantial given issues such as jurisdictional authority, courts limited ability to reach in to

2 Page 2 prisons or jails to access participants prior to release, and difficulties meeting the substantial needs of the target population. Even less is known about the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of reentry courts. The evaluation plan includes a process evaluation, impact evaluation, and cost-benefit analysis. District of Columbia Adult Drug Court. ( ). Cost Analyst. The District of Columbia Courts (D.C. Courts) contracted with NPC Research to conduct a process, outcome, and cost evaluation of the Superior Court Drug Intervention Program. Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act Evaluation ( ). Cost Consultant. California Assembly Bill 590 established a pilot project for legal services to be provided to low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues, so that judicial decisions are made on the basis of the necessary information and the parties have an adequate understanding of the orders to which they are subject. Nine pilot projects in seven counties have been selected by the California Judicial Council. NPC is conducting a process evaluation and an outcome study. Past Projects Clark County Children Affected by Meth ( ). Cost Analyst. Process, outcome, and cost evaluation of a family treatment court and its program enhancements. New Mexico DWI Drug Courts. ( ). Cost Analyst. Process, outcome, and cost evaluation of 3 DWI Courts in New Mexico. Family Recovery Program. ( ). Cost Analyst. Process, outcome, and cost evaluation of a family treatment court (or family dependency drug court) that provides intensive judicial oversight for substance-abusing parents of young children involved with the child welfare system. The intent of the FRP is to divert parents to substance abuse treatment and help them navigate the child welfare system, hopefully reunifying the family. Ohio Family Dependency Court Evaluation. ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC Research was contracted by the Ohio Supreme Court Specialized Docket Section to conduct a statewide evaluation of Ohio s Family Drug Treatment Courts. NPC conducted an online assessment of all 20 family drug treatment court sites. The results of this assessment were used to select seven (7) FDTCs for more in-depth process evaluations, and four (4) of these seven sites were then be selected to receive outcome and cost evaluations and add valuable information to the still sparse literature on FDTCs. Testing the Effectiveness of Healthy Families America in an Accredited Statewide System: Outcomes & Cost Benefits of Oregon s Healthy Start Program. ( ). Cost Analyst. This project was a largescale randomized study of Oregon s Healthy Start (ORHS) program, designed to examine the effects of Healthy Start on substantiated maltreatment rates. In addition, the project included detailed costbenefit analysis of ORHS to examine program and child welfare system costs. Furthermore, through this project NPC developed and disseminated a framework and tool for supporting cost-benefit studies of child abuse and neglect prevention programs. Healthy Start is a home visiting program based on the Healthy Families America program model, providing services to first time parents at higher risk for child welfare involvement. Minnesota Statewide DWI Court Evaluation. ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC provided the State of Minnesota with professional and technical services to develop a comprehensive approach to evaluate Minnesota DWI Courts and conducted the evaluation. The evaluation consisted of process assessment relating Minnesota s DWI court practices to drug court best practices, as well as outcome and cost evaluations providing detailed information about the effectiveness of Minnesota s DWI Courts in decreasing DWI recidivism and producing cost savings. Oregon Measure 57 Drug Court Evaluation. ( ). Cost Analyst. Oregon s Measure 57 (M57) provides the opportunity for treatment to prison bound substance abusing offenders in lieu of incarceration. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission received a Second Chance Act grant to fund several drug court programs specifically tailored for the M57 population. This grant also provided funds

3 Page 3 for evaluation. Working collaboratively with the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, NPC performed a multi-method approach to answer a variety of evaluation questions about these M57 programs including topics such as service delivery, adherence to the 10 Key Components of drug courts, commitment and participation of the drug court team members and the cost of the M57 drug court program (DC) as well as participant experience in the program and their views of its effectiveness. NPC performed a full process evaluation as well as a cost analysis of the programs. In addition, NPC performed in-depth participant and control group interviews at two time points, baseline (at the time of random assignment) and 6 months after baseline. Process, Outcome and Cost Evaluation of the Noble County (Indiana) Drug Court. (2013). Cost Analyst. Noble County contracted with NPC to conduct a process, outcome, and cost evaluation to provide detailed information about the effectiveness and costs and benefits of the Noble County Drug Court. Process, Outcome and Cost Evaluation of the Bexar County (San Antonio, Texas) Drug Court. (2013). Cost Analyst. The Bexar County Drug Court (BCDC) was awarded a 3-year SAMHSA grant that began in late In mid-2011, the BCDC contracted with NPC to conduct a process evaluation related to drug court best practices, as well as outcome and cost evaluations to provide detailed information about the effectiveness of the Bexar County Drug Court in affecting outcomes (including recidivism), and to understand the costs and benefits of the BCDC program. Testing the Cost Savings of the New York Judicial Diversion Program, funded by the New York Unified Court System, Office of Court Administration. ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC Research and the Center for Court Innovation (CCI) analyzed the costs and savings of 10 Judicial Diversion drug court programs located throughout the state (two New York City, two suburban, two upstate urban, and four upstate rural counties). Florida Drug Courts. ( ). Cost Analyst. A process, outcome, and cost evaluation of five selected drug court programs in Florida. California Re-Entry Courts Outcome Transaction Cost Study (2011). Cost Analyst. The Administrative Office of the Courts in California contracted with NPC Research to calculate the cost of 6 outcome transactions at 6 different Re-Entry courts in California for use in conducting cost benefit evaluations. Oregon Commission on Children and Families Community Planning and Implementation Data System Exploration. (2011). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. Exploration of statewide data system containing community planning and program/service implementation information. Included extraction, aggregation, and analysis of data and production of a summary report of findings and recommendations. The Library Foundation and Multnomah County Library. (2011). Research Coordinator. Interviewer for financial literacy programs provided by Multnomah County Library, Oregon. 10 Key Components of Drug Court Technical Assistance to the Fort Collins, CO Drug Court. (2011). Research Coordinator. NPC conducted technical assistance with a focus on practices that fall within the 10 Key Components of Drug Courts. NPC synthesized the findings from an online assessment, interviews, and observations; developed a set of recommendations; and convened a conference with the drug court team and NPC staff to discuss the findings and recommendations; and delivered a report with the findings and recommendations. 10 Key Components of Drug Court Technical Assistance to the Island County, WA Drug Court. (2011). Research Coordinator. NPC conducted technical assistance with a focus on practices that fall within the 10 Key Components of Drug Courts. NPC synthesized the findings from an online assessment, interviews, and observations; developed a set of recommendations; and convened a conference with the drug court team and NPC staff to discuss the findings and recommendations; and delivered a report with the findings and recommendations. 10 Key Components of Drug Court Technical Assistance to the Multnomah County S.T.A.R.T. Court. (2010). Research Coordinator. NPC conducted technical assistance with a focus on practices that fall within the 10

4 Page 4 Key Components of Drug Courts. NPC synthesized the findings from an online assessment, interviews, and observations; developed a set of recommendations; and convened a conference with the drug court team and NPC staff to discuss the findings and recommendations; and delivered a report with the findings and recommendations. Benton County Drug Court Cost Evaluation, funded by the USDOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance. ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC Research conducted a detailed process, outcome, and cost-benefit analysis of the drug court program in Benton County, Oregon. 10 Key Components of Drug Court Technical Assistance to SAMHSA Adult Drug Court Grantees (2010). Research Coordinator. Technical assistance to 22 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)-funded adult drug courts. Through a subcontract from JBS International, NPC conducted technical assistance with a focus on practices that fall within the 10 Key Components of Drug Courts. NPC synthesized the findings from online assessments, interviews, and observations; developed a set of recommendations; and convened a video conference with the drug court team, NPC staff, and a nationally recognized drug court expert to discuss the findings and recommendations. In addition, NPC provided each site, JBS, and SAMHSA with a written report containing the assessment information and detailed recommendations. Compiled process reports for multiple sites (in Florida, Kentucky, Vermont, and Alabama) using an online assessment tool. Performed phone and in-person stakeholder interviews. Observed drug court protocols. Facilitated video conference calls. Civil Right to Counsel, Phase 2. (2010). Cost Analyst. Pilot study looking at the need for legal representation in evictions cases. A study of two sites (Philadelphia, PA, and Tacoma [Pierce Co.], WA) to identify data availability and establish variables and cost proxies to include in a larger cost and outcome study of providing legal support services to indigent individuals in landlord/tenant legal disputes. Understanding the Return on Investments for the Oregon Relief Nurseries: A Community-Based Participatory Research Study, funded by Northwest Health Foundation. ( ). Cost Analyst. Relief Nursery programs provide a unique constellation of evidence-based services to high-risk families with children under age 5, including home visitation, therapeutic child care, parent education classes and groups, case management, and respite care. NPC Research, in partnership with Family Building Blocks (FBB) in Salem and the Children s Relief Nursery (CRN) in Portland, conducted a Community-Based, Participatory Research (CBPR) project to assess the long-term returns on investments for the Relief Nurseries. Development of a Web-Based Drug Court Cost Tool in Michigan. ( ). Cost Analyst, Research Coordinator. In 2007, the Michigan State Courts Administrative Office (SCAO) determined a need for developing systems and infrastructures that can provide all drug courts in the state with cost effective tools for managing, measuring and evaluating each programs performance, outcomes, and cost-benefits. NPC Research was hired to develop a web-based cost tool that drug courts in Michigan can use to determine their own costs and benefits and that the state can use to determine the costs and benefits of drug courts statewide. Oregon Byrne Drug Court Evaluation ( ). Cost Analyst. The State of Oregon Criminal Justice Service contracted with NPC Research to conduct the third year of the Byrne/CJC Methamphetamine Drug Court Grant Evaluation. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine characteristics and outcomes of successful Byrne-funded adult, juvenile, and family drug court programs in Oregon and to understand how Oregon Drug Courts implement the 10 Key Components. Two of the Family Drug Court sites received full process, impact and cost evaluations. In these programs the evaluation focused on child welfare, treatment, program, and criminal justice outcome, and potential societal cost savings. This study of Byrne-funded Oregon drug courts used a mixed-methods design involving: (1) analyzing existing drug court data housed in Oregon s statewide drug court database, (2) collecting detailed program-related information using surveys and observation tools collect during site visits, (3) Administrative data collection (including criminal justice, treatment, child welfare, mental health and program data), and (4) cost-benefit data using NPC s Transactional and Institutional Cost Analysis approach.

5 Page 5 Oregon Drug Courts Cost Evaluation, funded by the USDOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance. ( ). Cost Analyst. Oregon s Criminal Justice Commission, in partnership with the Oregon Judicial Department, contracted with NPC Research to conduct a detailed statewide cost-benefit analysis of several of the 26 adult drug courts in Oregon. Maryland Statewide Drug Court Evaluation ( ). Cost Analyst/Cost Consultant. The Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts contracted with NPC Research to conduct process, outcome, and cost evaluations at juvenile and adult courts at multiple sites throughout the state. NPC will utilize the TICA approach to determine the relative costs and benefits to taxpayers for individuals going through drug court vs. traditional court processing. California Collaborative Justice DUI Courts Cost Study ( ). Cost Analyst, Research Coordinator. The Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC), a division of the Administrative Office of the Courts in California contracted with NPC Research to conduct a cost analysis of 5 DUI courts in California, identify a comparison group for DUI courts, and create a web-based DUI court self-evaluation tool for DUI courts to conduct the cost benefit evaluations. The project is designed to assist in the development, expansion and evaluation of DUI courts in California. A Cost Benefit Evaluation of California Drug Courts, Phase III: Statewide Evaluation, funded by the USDOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance. ( ). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. The Administrative Office of the Courts (Judicial Council of the State of California) contracted with NPC Research to conduct a longterm statewide cost analysis of drug courts in 3 phases. The purpose of Phase III is to use the drug court self-evaluation tool (developed in Phase II) to perform a statewide cost benefit evaluation of drug courts. Michigan Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation ( ). Research Coordinator/ Cost Analyst. The Michigan Administrative Office of the Courts contracted with NPC Research to perform an outcome/impact evaluation and cost-benefit evaluation of an adult drug court and a juvenile drug court. The outcome/impact evaluation utilized both key stakeholder interviews and administrative data to determine whether the programs were having their intended impact on the local population of adults and juveniles involved with the criminal justice system who also have substance abuse issues. Program outcomes were assessed by using data from the drug court program, substance abuse agencies, the court and other criminal justice databases. The impacts of the program were assessed by comparing the drug court group with a comparison group using statewide and local criminal justice, substance abuse treatment, and probation data. The final component of the evaluation utilized the TICA approach to determine the relative costs and benefits to the taxpayers for individuals going through drug treatment court vs. traditional court processing. Rutland County (Vermont) Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation (2008). Cost Analyst. The Vermont Supreme Court Office of the Court contracted with NPC Research to conduct an outcome evaluation and cost-benefit evaluation of the Rutland County Drug Court program. The drug court participants were examined in terms of outcomes such as reductions in drug use and graduation rate. The impacts of the program on recidivism (e.g., re-arrests, time on probation and time in jail) were assessed using statewide and local criminal justice, substance abuse treatment, and probation data by comparing the drug court participants with a comparison group of offenders who were eligible for the program but did not attend. The evaluation utilized the TICA approach to determine the relative costs and benefits to the taxpayers for individuals going through drug treatment court vs. traditional court processing. Baltimore City Goodwill Employment Enhancement Outcome and Cost Study ( ). Cost Analyst/Cost Consultant. Assisted in obtaining and analyzing data from multiple sources for outcome and cost analyses of adult drug court participants who received Goodwill Employment Enhancement services compared to participants who did not receive these services. National Institute of Justice Oxford House Washington County ( ). Cost Consultant for study of the outcomes and cost effectiveness of a substance-free housing initiative in Washington County, Oregon.

6 Page 6 Washington County Juvenile Department Substance Abuse Unit Database (2007). Database Co-Creator. NPC created an Access database for the Juvenile Department s Substance Abuse Unit to use for tracking and reporting purposes on juveniles in one of three Substance Abuse Unit programs- S.A.F.E., S.O.A.P., and Violational Drug Court. This project also included training and assistance with drug courts and with using the database. Indiana Drug Court Evaluation ( ). Cost Analyst. NPC performed process evaluations in three juvenile courts, as well as impact and cost-benefit analyses in five adult drug courts in Indiana. The study examined the efficacy and success of the selected drug courts in implementing their programs as intended and in reducing recidivism. The cost-benefits of drug court participation were examined using NPC s TICA approach. The evaluation results were used to garner support from stakeholders and legislators to provide state funding in Further, the results helped assist the drug courts that participated in the evaluation in identifying whether or not the court is meeting its stated goals and objectives, to improve the services to drug court participants, and to gain support from their communities. A Process, Outcome and Cost Analysis of the Effect of State Mandated Treatment on Drug Court Programs ( ). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. In November 2000, California voters approved Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA), the primary goal of which was to provide an alternative to incarceration for low-level, non-violent drug possession offenders. At the time SACPA was implemented, California had also already broadly implemented the drug court model, with over 120 in operation. NPC Research completed a cost-benefit evaluation of the drug courts in California before the implementation of SACPA. Results showed that the criminal justice system saved money on offenders who participated in drug court due to reduced recidivism after program entry. In March 2005 the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded a grant to NPC Research to conduct a process, outcome and cost study of SACPA and drug courts after the implementation of SACPA. Guam Adult Drug Court Process and Outcome Evaluation ( ). Research Coordinator. NPC Research conducted a process and outcome evaluation of the Guam Adult Drug Court using the 10 Key Components of Drug Courts as a framework. The process evaluation included site visits, focus groups, key informant interviews, document reviews, and administrative data analysis. In addition, NPC Research conducted an outcome evaluation, gathering data from administrative databases on drug court participants and a comparison group of similar offenders who did not participate in drug court. Michigan Adult Drug Treatment Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation ( ). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. The Michigan Administrative Office of the Courts contracted with NPC Research to perform an outcome/impact evaluation and cost-benefit evaluation of two Michigan Adult Drug Treatment Courts (Barry County and Kalamazoo County). The outcome/impact evaluation utilized both key stakeholder interviews and administrative data to determine whether the programs were having their intended impact on the local population of adults involved with the criminal justice system who also have substance abuse issues. Program outcomes were assessed by using data from the drug court program, substance abuse agencies, the court and other criminal justice databases. The impacts of the program were assessed by comparing the drug court group with a comparison group using statewide and local criminal justice, substance abuse treatment, and probation data. The final component of the evaluation utilized the TICA approach to determine the relative costs and benefits to the taxpayers for individuals going through drug treatment court vs. traditional court processing. Process, Impact and Cost Evaluation of the Malheur County Adult Drug Court. ( ). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. The Malheur County Adult Drug Court S.A.F.E. Court received funds from the USDOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance for a cost study. Malheur County chose NPC Research to perform the cost evaluation. Responsibilities included: interviewing key stakeholders, collaboration on the development of procedures for data management and sample selection, obtaining and maintaining cost and process data, analyzing cost data, assisting in the collection of utilization data, and report writing and editing. A Process, Impact and Cost Evaluation of the Clackamas County Juvenile Drug Court Enhancement. ( ). Research Coordinator/Cost Analyst. The Clackamas County Juvenile Drug Court (CCJDC) received an

7 Page 7 enhancement grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance to improve the services the drug court provides to the families of participating juveniles. NPC Research updated the process and impact evaluations performed in a previous evaluation to examine the changes due to the enhancements and also performed a cost evaluation of the enhancements and the attendant outcomes. Responsibilities included: supervision of data collection staff, data verification and cleaning, interviewing key stakeholders, collaboration on the development of procedures for data management and sample selection, obtaining and maintaining cost and process data, assisting in the collection of utilization data, and report writing and editing. A Cost Benefit Evaluation of California Drug Courts, Phase II: Testing the Methodology, Cost Studies in 6 Drug Courts, funded by the USDOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance. ( ). Research Coordinator. The Administrative Office of the Courts (Judicial Council of the State of California) contracted with NPC Research to conduct a long-term statewide cost analysis of drug courts in 3 phases. The purpose of Phase II was to test the methodology developed in Phase I in 6 additional drug courts and to create a drug court self-evaluation tool that can be used by drug courts to perform their own on-going costbenefit evaluations. NPC Research was funded to complete an initial, intensive evaluation phase in 3 adult drug courts. Phase II extended the evaluation to six additional courts. The purpose of this evaluation was to answer two critical drug court policy questions: Are adult drug courts cost effective? What adult drug court practices are most promising and cost beneficial? The study developed procedures for efficiently gathering relevant, reliable and consistent information both on an individual court and a statewide basis. Responsibilities included: creation of interview protocols, creation and management of an Access database, data entry, supervision of interviewers and data collection staff, data verification and cleaning, interviewing key stakeholders, collaboration on the development of procedures for data management, obtaining and transferring cost and process data, assisting in the collection of utilization data, and report writing and editing. A Cost Benefit Evaluation of California Drug Courts, Phase I: Building the Methodology. ( ). Research Assistant. The Administrative Office of the Courts (Judicial Council of the State of California) with funding from DCPO, contracted with NPC Research to conduct a long-term statewide cost analysis of drug courts in 3 phases. Phase I was a detailed cost case study and outcome evaluation in 3 adult drug courts Butte County, San Diego, and Los Angeles. Duties included conducting key stakeholder interviews, compiling findings from interviews and utilization data, data entry, data cleaning, report writing, and quantitative, qualitative, and archival data collection and analysis. The Multnomah County Drug Court Cost Evaluation: A Detailed Cost Analysis in a Mature Drug Court Setting, funded by National Institute of Justice ( ). Research Assistant. An intensive cost analysis at a single mature drug court. Involved tracking court and criminal justice resource utilization and unit costs for a small intensive study group composed of a sample of those in the drug court program and a sample of those eligible but receiving standard court processing. Drug court participants and a comparison group of non-participants were timed in court sessions, treatment sessions and other interactions with the criminal justice and treatment systems to get a more exact look at the resources being used in running these programs. The final report on this study is available on the NPC website and was published by NIJ in Responsibilities included: coordination and collection of field data, tracking and data entry in Access database, coding and entering raw criminal justice history data, maintenance of tracking database, and report writing and editing.

8 Page 8 TECHNICAL REPORTS, PUBLICATIONS, PRESENTATIONS Kissick, K., Waller, M.S., Johnson, A.J., & Carey, S.M. (2015). Doña Ana County Magistrate DWI Drug Court, Las Cruces, NM: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Submitted to New Mexico, Administrative Office of the Courts, April Kissick, K., Waller, M.S., Johnson, A.J., & Carey, S.M. (2015). Santa Fe County Magistrate DWI Drug Court, Santa Fe, NM: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Submitted to New Mexico, Administrative Office of the Courts, April Kissick, K., Waller, M.S., Johnson, A.J., & Carey, S.M. (2015). Valencia County Magistrate DWI Drug Court, Belen, NM: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Submitted to New Mexico, Administrative Office of the Courts, April Kissick, K., Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2015). Clark County Family Treatment Court: Striding Towards Excellent Parents (STEP) Vancouver, WA Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research Carey, S.M., Zil, C.E., Waller, M.S., Harrison, P.M., & Johnson, A.J. (2014). Minnesota DWI Courts: A Summary of Evaluation Findings in Nine DWI Court Programs. Submitted to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, July Zil, C. E., Waller, M. S., Harrison, P. M., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2014). South St. Louis County DWI Court, St. Louis County, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Harrison, P. M., Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., Zil, C. E., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Ramsey County DWI Court, Ramsey County, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Harrison, P. M., Waller, M. S., Zil, C. E., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Otter Tail County DWI Court, Fergus Falls, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Harrison, P. M., Zil, C. E., Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Fourth Judicial District Adult DWI Court, Hennepin County, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Harrison, P. M., Zil, C. E., Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Crow Wing County DWI Court, Crow Wing County, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Zil, C. E., Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., Harrison, P. M., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Cass County/Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Wellness Court Walker, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Zil, C. E., Waller, M. S., Harrison, P. M., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2014). Beltrami County DWI Court, Beltrami County, MN: Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Report. Portland, OR: NPC Research. Carey, S. M., Herrera Allen, T., Perkins, T., & Waller, M. S. (2013). A detailed cost evaluation of a juvenile drug court that follows the juvenile drug court model (16 strategies). Juvenile and Family Court Journal:Online, 64(4), doi: /jfcj Waller, M. S., Johnson, A. J., & Carey, S. M. (2013). Fourth Judicial District Adult DWI Court Process Evaluation, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Submitted to the Minnesota Office of Traffic Safety, February Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2011). Oregon Drug Courts: Statewide Costs and Promising Practices. Submitted to the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission and the U.S.D.O.J. Bureau of Justice Assistance, March 2011.

9 Page 9 Mackin, J. R., & Waller, M. S., & Aborn, J. A. (2011). Oregon Commission on Children and Families Community Planning and Implementation. Data System Results Summary. A report to the Oregon Commission on Children and Families, Salem, OR. Mackin, J. R., Waller, M. S., & Aborn, J. A. (2011). Marion County Family Drug Treatment Court Process Evaluation Report. A report to the Marion Superior Court, Indianapolis, IN. Finigan, M. W., Mackin, J. R., Herrera Allen, T., Waller, M. S., & Weller, J. M. (2010). Civil Right to Counsel, Phase II Pilot Study: Needs Assessment and Cost Elements. A report to the Northwest Justice Project & the Civil Right to Counsel Leadership and Support Initiative. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Carey, S. M., Waller, M. S., & Weller, J. M. (2010). California Drug Court Cost Study: Phase III: Statewide Costs and Promising Practices, final report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts, April Key Component Technical Assistance Reports for Sanford, FL; Viera, FL; Marion, KY; Rutland, VT; and Guntersville, AL: NPC Research provided JBS International and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) individual reports describing the assessment, local process, and recommendations for technical assistance and program improvement for grantees. Carey, S. M., Sanders, M. B., Waller, M. S., Burrus, S. W. M., & Aborn, J. A. (2010) Marion County Fostering Attachment Treatment Court Process, Outcome and Cost Evaluation (Family Drug Court). Submitted to the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission and the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Carey, S. M., Sanders, M. B., Waller, M. S., Burrus, S. W. M., & Aborn, J. A. (2010) Jackson County Community Family Court Process, Outcome and Cost Evaluation Final Report. Submitted to the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission and the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2010). Montgomery County Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W. (2010). St. Mary's County Juvenile Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2010). Howard County District Court Drug Treatment Court Program Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Herrera Allen, T., Waller, M. S., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2010). Baltimore County Juvenile Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W. (2010). Anne Arundel County Juvenile Treatment Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Mackin, J. R., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Weller, J. M., & Linhares, B. (2009). Maryland Problem-Solving Courts Evaluation, Phase III: Integration of Results from Process, Outcome, and Cost Studies Conducted A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR.

10 Page 10 NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2009). Wicomico County Circuit Court Adult Drug Treatment Court Program Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2009). Howard County District Court DUI Court Program Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Herrera Allen, T., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2009). Anne Arundel County DUI Court Program Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. NPC Research. [Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W.] (2009). Baltimore City Circuit Court Adult Drug Treatment Court and Felony Diversion Initiative: Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Mackin, J. R., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., Waller, M. S., Weller, J. M., Aborn, J. A., Linhares, R., Allen, T. L., Carey, S. M., & Finigan, M. W. (2009). Baltimore City District Court Adult Drug Treatment Court 10-Year Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Carey, S. M., Lucas, L. M., Waller, M. S., Furrer, C., Kissick, K., & Finigan, M. W. (2009). Michigan Drug Courts: Oakland County Adult Treatment Court Cost Evaluation, Final Report. Submitted to the Michigan Supreme Court, State Courts Administrative Office, March Carey, S. M., Lucas, L. M., Waller, M. S., Furrer, C., Kissick, K., and Finigan, M. W. (2009). Michigan Drug Courts: Oakland County Family Focused Juvenile Treatment Court Cost Evaluation, Final Report. Submitted to the Michigan Supreme Court, State Courts Administrative Office, March Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. ( ). How to Use the California Drug Court Cost Self-Evaluation Tool in Your Drug Court. Multiple trainings at multiple regional sites in California. Multiple trainings with individual court through conference calls and web conference. Carey, S. M., Lucas, L. M., Waller, M. S., Lambarth, C. H., Linhares, R., Weller, J. M., & Finigan, M. W. (2009). Vermont Drug Courts: Rutland County Adult Drug Court Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Vermont Judiciary. NPC Research, Portland, OR. Mackin, J. R., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Lucas, L. M., Lambarth, C. H., & Waller, M. S. (2008). Employment Enhancement Program at Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: Outcome & Cost Evaluation. A report to the Goodwill Industries of the Chesapeake and the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits PHASE III: DCCSET Statewide Launch Superior Court of Sacramento County Sacramento Drug Court Site-Specific Report. A report to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of Yuba County: Yuba County Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Bernardino County: Central Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts.

11 Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Bernardino County: Redlands Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Mark Waller Page 11 Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Bernardino County: Joshua Tree Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Francisco County: San Francisco County Drug Court Site- Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Mateo County: South Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2008). California Drug Courts: Costs and Benefits, Phase III: DCCSET Statewide Launch, Superior Court of San Mateo County: Northern Branch Drug Court Site-Specific Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Lucas, L. M., Mackin, J. R., Strong, S., & Waller, M. S. (2008). Prince George s County Circuit Court Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem- Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Lucas, L. M., Mackin, J. R., Strong, S., & Waller, M. S. (2008). Harford County District Court Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Lambarth, C. H., Lucas, L. M., Mackin, J. R., & Waller, M. S. (2008). Goodwill Industries of the Chesapeake Employment Enhancement Program at Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation. A report to the Maryland Judiciary, Office of Problem-Solving Courts. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Carey, S. M., Pukstas, K., & Waller, M. S. (2007). A Cost Benefit Study of Drug Courts and State Mandated Drug Treatment: Outcomes, Costs and Consequences. Submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2007). Guam Adult Drug Court Outcome Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Guam Adult Drug Court and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. Report can be found at Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A., Linhares, R. (April 2007). Indiana Drug Courts: A Summary of Evaluation Findings in Five Adult Programs. NPC Research: Portland, OR. Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A., Linhares, R., & Crumpton, C. D. (2007). Marion County Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Indiana Judicial Center and the Marion County Drug Court. Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A., Linhares, R., and Crumpton, C. D. (2007). Monroe County Drug Treatment Court Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Indiana Judicial Center and the Monroe County Drug Court. Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A., Linhares, R., & Crumpton, C. D. (2007). St. Joseph County Drug Court Program Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Indiana Judicial Center and the St. Joseph County Drug Court.

12 Page 12 Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A., Linhares, R., & Crumpton, C. D. (2007). Vanderburgh County Day Reporting Drug Court Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Indiana Judicial Center and the Vanderburgh County Drug Court. Wiest, K. L., Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Martin, S. J., Waller, M. S., Cox, A. A., Linhares, R., & Crumpton, C.D. (2007). Vigo County Drug Court Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Indiana Judicial Center and the Vigo County Drug Court. Carey, S. M., Waller, M. S., & Marchand, G. (2006). Kalamazoo County Adult Drug Treatment Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Michigan Supreme Court State Court Administrative Office and the Kalamazoo County Adult Drug Treatment Court. Carey, S. M., Waller, M. S., & Marchand, G. (2006). Barry County Adult Drug Court Outcome and Cost Evaluation: Final Report. Submitted to the Michigan Supreme Court State Court Administrative Office and the Barry County Adult Drug Court. Carey, S. M., Waller, M. S., & Marchand, G. (2006). Clackamas County Juvenile Drug Court Cost Evaluation Final Report. Submitted to the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Carey, S. M., Waller, M. S., & Marchand, G. (2005). Malheur County Adult Drug Court S.A.F.E. Court Cost Evaluation Final Report. Submitted to Malheur County Circuit Court, S.A.F.E. Court. Carey, S. M., & Waller, M. S. (2005). Guam Adult Drug Court Process Evaluation Final Report. Submitted to the Guam Adult Drug Court and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. Report can be found at Carey, S. M., Finigan, M.W., Waller, M. S., Lucas, L. M., & Crumpton, D. (2005). California Drug Courts: A Methodology for Determining Costs and Avoided Costs, Phase II: Testing the Methodology, Final Report. Submitted to the California Administrative Office of the Courts. Revision submitted to the Bureau of Justice Assistance, April Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Crumpton, C. D., Worcel, S. D., & Waller, M. S. (2002). California Drug Courts: A Methodology for Determining Costs and Avoided Costs, Phase I: Building the Methodology, San Diego East County Drug Court, Site-Specific Report. Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Crumpton, C. D., Worcel, S. D., & Waller, M. S. (2002). California Drug Courts: A Methodology for Determining Costs and Avoided Costs, Phase I: Building the Methodology, Los Angeles County Central Drug Court, Site-Specific Report. Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Crumpton, C. D., Worcel, S. D., & Waller, M. S. (2002). California Drug Courts: A Methodology for Determining Costs and Avoided Costs, Phase I: Building the Methodology, Butte County Drug Court, Site-Specific Report. Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., Crumpton, C. D., Worcel, S. D., & Waller, M. S. (2002). California Drug Courts: A Methodology for Determining Costs and Avoided Costs, Phase I: Building the Methodology, Final Report. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Spring 2005 Data Analysis I: Attended a graduate level data analysis course at Portland State University.