Drug Court Victoria. Katharine Biffin Program Manager Drug Court Melbourne May 2018

Similar documents
Pioneering, addiction medicine, wrap-around service

GOVERNMENT OF BERMUDA Ministry of Culture and Social Rehabilitation THE BERMUDA DRUG TREATMENT COURT PROGRAMME

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

Community-based sanctions

An Overview of Procedures and Roles: A Case Study on the Drug Courts of Jamaica

Drug Abuse. Drug Treatment Courts. a social, health, economic and criminal justice problem global in nature

Corrections, Public Safety and Policing

Summary Crime Program Victoria Legal Aid

bulletin criminal justice Police drug diversion in Australia Key Points Jennifer Ogilvie and Katie Willis

Dr Danny Sullivan. Dr Danny Sullivan, Assistant Clinical Director, Forensicare

Report-back on the Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court Pilot and other AOD-related Initiatives

NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DRUG COURT. An Overview

SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DRUG COURT PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK. Calhoun and Cleburne Counties

HARRIS COUNTY FELONY MENTAL HEALTH COURT PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK JUDGE BROCK THOMAS JUDGE DAVID MENDOZA

Responding to Homelessness. 11 Ideas for the Justice System

Offender Desistance Policing: Operation Turning Point Experiment in Birmingham UK. Peter Neyroud CBE QPM University of Cambridge


COURT OF COMMON PLEAS DRUG DIVERSION PROGRAM

ACCREDITED PROGRAMMES AND INTERVENTIONS

Mental health: targeting new investment

Crime, persistent offenders and drugs: breaking the circle A Cumberland Lodge Conference 6 8 th June 2003

Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service Co-operative Ltd.

PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY VETERANS TREATMENT COURT

PROGRAMME GUIDE FOR SENTENCING

Problem-Solving Courts : A Brief History. The earliest problem-solving court was a Drug Court started in Miami-Dade County, FL in 1989

TURNING POINT ASSESSMENT/TREATMENT WOMAN ABUSE PROTOCOL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

Responding to Homelessness. 11 Ideas for the Justice System

West Virginia Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety

The New Face of Monroe County Community Supervision

Assessing ACE: The Probation Board s Use of Risk Assessment Tools to Reduce Reoffending

Findings from the NIJ Tribal Wellness Court Study: 68 Key Component #8

Judicially Managed Accountability and Recovery Court (JMARC) as a Community Collaborative. Same People. Different Outcomes.

I understand that the Royal Commission is particularly interested in:

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Evaluating the Success of Written Mitigation in Reducing Prison Sentences and Achieving Alternatives to Incarceration for Parole Violations

Winnipeg Drug Treatment Court Program Evaluation For Calendar Year 2015

Eric L. Sevigny, University of South Carolina Harold A. Pollack, University of Chicago Peter Reuter, University of Maryland

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTOR. Strategic Intent YEAR PLAN

TUCSON CITY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT

Components of good drug policy

Criminal Justice in Arizona

MCJRP 2016 Evolving Evidence Based Practice. LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL May 3, 2016

How to evaluate probation. Lecturer PhD Ioan Durnescu CEP Unity & Diversity Conference Tallinn, September 2007

Hennepin County Drug Court & Change the Outcome

The Wise Group Community Justice Briefing

DRUG COURT PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK

COMPLIMENTARY TREATMENT STANDARD VI SOCIAL SERVICES AND

Master Clinical Forensic Psychology & Victimology

JUSTICE REINVESTMENT: FOUNDATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY-CENTERED OFFENDER REHABILITATION. Hon. Frank L. Racek

Assessment of the Safe Streets Treatment Options Program (SSTOP)

Smart on Crime, Smart on Drugs

Risk assessment principle and Risk management

A True Continuum of Care

AQA A Level Psychology

Footsteps - Road to Recovery

An Overview of Risk-Needs- Responsivity Model: Application to Behavioral Health Populations

The Role of the Treatment Provider. Carrie L. Thompson Deputy State Public Defender Colorado Springs, CO

Review of Youth Justice Group Conferencing Program

Index. Handbook SCREENING & TREATMENT ENHANCEMENT P A R T STEP. Guidelines and Program Information for First Felony and Misdemeanor Participants

Behavior Modification and the Seriously Mentally Ill or Functionally Impaired: Special Issues to Consider

FASD: A Justice Perspective

Douglas B. Marlowe, J.D., Ph.D. Chief of Science, Law & Policy. National Association of Drug Court Professionals

West Virginia Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety

Community re-integration and release from prison of people convicted of sexual offences.

INSIDE ACCESS Advocacy in Prison for People with a Mental Illness. Venetia Bombas Mental Health Legal Centre

The Right Prescription for the Mentally Ill in the Texas Corrections System

HEALTHIER LIVES, STRONGER FAMILIES, SAFER COMMUNITIES:

14. EMPLOYMENT Occupational segregation Commonwealth Employment by industry for males and females who identify as

Barnsley Youth Justice Plan 2017/18. Introduction

Gateway to Opportunity: The City of Calgary s Response to Youth Diversion. Janice Bidyk BA, BSW, RSW

The Offender Assessment System (OASys): Development, validation and use in practice

MINNESOTA DWI COURTS: A SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS IN NINE DWI COURT PROGRAMS

BJA GRANT PROJECT: Utah s Adult Drug Treatment Courts. Project Overview

D R. D IO N G E E PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS

Eighth Judicial District Court. Specialty Courts. Elizabeth Gonzalez. Chief Judge. DeNeese Parker. Specialty Court Administrator

ADHD in forensic settings

Delegations will find in annex the draft Council conclusions on the above-mentioned subject, as endorsed at the HDG meeting on 1 March 2018.

The Costs of NSW Drug Court

Reoffending Analysis for Restorative Justice Cases : Summary Results

Reducing Prisoner Reoffending

Impact evaluation of the prison-based Core Sex Offender Treatment Programme: a success story. Laura Di Bella, Mark Purver, and Aidan Mews

Live Free...Drug Free Tools for Hope

Kia Ora! Ko little yellow te waka. Ko Conjola te moana Ko Keira te maunga. Ko Celtic clan te hapu. Ko Lesbian clan te hapu. Ko Michelle Tziarkas ahau

CHEROKEE TRIBAL DRUG COURT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING made and entered into on the 1 st day

TASC. Services Booklet

Berks County Treatment Courts

Criminal Justice Reform: Treatment and Substance Use Disorder

Jackson County Community Family Court Process, Outcome, and Cost Evaluation Final Report

RISK-NEED-RESPONSIVITY & HOW IT APPLIES TO DRUG COURTS

Restorative Opportunities Victim-Offender Mediation Services Correctional Results for Face-to-Face Meetings

Community Supervision Agencies and Collaborative Comprehensive Case Plans

Moving Beyond Incarceration For Justice-involved Women : An Action Platform To Address Women s Needs In Massachusetts

StopSO. Specialist Treatment Organisation for the Prevention of Sexual Offending. Juliet Grayson

Comparative Analysis of Drug Courts: Effectiveness of Sentencing an Offender to Treatment and Rehabilitation. Marissa Hundelt

Transition from Jail to Community. Reentry in Washtenaw County

2017 Social Service Funding Application - Special Alcohol Funds

Overcoming Perceived Pitfalls of DWI Courts

Sequential Intercept Model and Problem Solving/Specialty Courts: The Intersection with Brain Injury

Assessing Short Term Risk of Reoffending for Intellectually Disabled Offenders

Addressing a National Crisis: Too Many Individuals with Mental Illnesses in our Jails

Transcription:

Drug Court Victoria Katharine Biffin Program Manager Drug Court Melbourne May 2018

Drug Court of Victoria Drug Court is a division of the Magistrates Court Started 2002 in Dandenong March 2017 in Melbourne Melbourne has 2 Courts Participants of the program are seen at an office called Drug Court House, Court Reviews are held at Magistrates Court.

History of Drug Courts 1989 Florida was the first Now 3,400 Drug Courts in the USA Also in 20 other countries In Australia - Vic, Tas, QLD, SA, ACT (soon). Victoria has the largest Drug Court now, total capacity 230 participants

What Does the Drug Court Do? Administers Drug Treatment Orders (DTOs). A DTO is a sentencing order: s18 Z Sentencing Act 1991. Uses the coercive force of the law with the best treatment options available

Who is eligible for a DTO? Serious offenders whose crimes are drug or alcohol related Facing jail sentence up to 2 years If not serious enough for jail, no DTO Must live in Drug Court catchment area Must be pleading guilty No current sex offences or serious violent offences

DTO Two main aims 1. Rehabilitation of participants Treatment for drug and/or alcohol addictions Address criminal behaviour Health (mental and physical) interventions Stable accommodation Reintergration with family and life outside prison and drug use Training and employment.

DTO - Two main aims 2. Increase community safety Reducing crime Less victims Less trauma Reducing cost Less burden on police, courts, health, prisons, welfare systems, families and individuals

What is the chemistry that makes DTOs work? There are four characteristics of a DTO that deliver the results: 1. Coercion 2. Intensive support and treatment 3. Supervision 4. Behaviour modification principles

1. Coercion The person is given a jail sentence which can be served in the community (as long as there is compliance)

2. Intensive Support Comprehensive AOD assessments Criminogenic needs assessments Clinical needs addressed substance and alcohol use, mental illness, acquired brain injury, intellectual disabilities. Physical health Accommodation Reconnection with family Referrals for specialist assessment and treatment

3. Supervision Corrections Victoria Provide criminogenic needs assessment and interventions Weekly appointments with case manager Weekly Court reviews with the Drug Court Magistrate Home visit in first 3 months Victoria Police Dedicated Drug Court Vic police lawyers who know the participants Provide information to the team about any new charges or participants breaching curfew Minor reoffending does not necessarily mean DTO cancellation

4. Behaviour Modification INCENTIVES Rewards for positive behaviour (eg attending appointments, court, admitting drug use) Can range from applause from Magistrate, Police, Lawyers, team and other participants to having a prison sanction day removed. SANCTIONS For not complying with (not attending, not admitting drug use, antisocial behaviours) Range from homework tasks to community work days up to prison days. Collect a tally, once have 7 prison days the person goes to custody 1 week

The Drug Court Team Magistrate Participant Program Manager Court Registrar and Court clerks Case Managers (Corrections Victoria) Clinical Advisors (Magistrates Court Victoria) Housing Assistance Team (Launch in Melbourne, WAYSS in Dandenong) AOD Counsellors (onsite at Melbourne Odyssey & Regen) Victoria Police Lawyers Legal Aid Lawyers

DTO Structure: Three Phases Two year order (maximum) Phase 1. Stabilisation at least 3 months Phase 2. Consolidation at least 3 months Phase 3. Re-integration at least 6 months

Phase 1 - Stabilisation Required every week to attend: Appointment with Case Manager Appointment with Clinical Advisor Session with AOD Counsellor Court review Housing worker (if needed) Appointments as directed (GP, rehab info sessions, NA, other AOD services, mental health appointment etc) 3 supervised urine tests at the Court

Phase 2 - Consolidation Required to attend: Case Manager fortnightly AOD Counsellor fortnightly Court review fortnightly Clinical Advisor as required Treatment planning meetings as required Housing worker as required Attend external appts as directed Supervised (random) urine screens 2 x week

Phase 3 - Reintegration Every month required to attend: Case Manager AOD Counsellor Court Review Supervised urine test 2 x week (random) Clinical Advisor as needed Ancillary Services as required Treatment Planning Meetings

What the research shows about Drug Court Vic 2015 Evaluation KPMG findings

Drug Court Dandenong outcomes 40% completion rate Recidivism reduced by 29% over 2 years Severity of reoffending reduced by 90% for trafficking offences and 54% in violence/weapon offences Saving of $145,000 per participant per year in prison costs Saving $1.2 million in recidivism prison costs over 2 years Increasing community safety through improving health and wellbeing of DC participants

Rehabilitation measures AOD how did we go? Participants showed a significant reduction in drug & alcohol risk. Urinalysis testing provides evidence that the DCV is effective in reducing drug & alcohol usage and risk levels. amphetamine using clients actually performed slightly better than nonamphetamine using clients. KPMG 2014

Rehabilitation measures Physical health how did we go? 54% of Participants showed pronounced & measurable reduction in medical risk. The evidence indicates that the DCV program is very effective in reducing the levels of medical risk. KPMG 2014

Rehabilitation Mental Health how did we go? 54% of Participants showed a significant & measurable reduction in psychiatric risk. The DCV program is effective in reducing the levels of psychiatric risk however 16% (of the 54%) require further support to improve mental wellbeing. KPMG 2014

Completion of a DTO 17% of participants graduate: Drug free, crime free, employed. Another 23% complete the two year order: Demonstrated reduction in drug use & criminal behaviour

What are the other findings? Improved family & social relationships Improved rates of education & employment Improved housing stability Improved motivation to change Improved consequential thinking Improved time management & accountability.

Reducing Crime how did we go? Frequency of reoffending: 24 months post DTO, drug court participants showed a reduction in reoffending of 34% compared to the control group. KPMG 2014

Reducing Crime how did we go? Severity of reoffending: Drug court participants showed a 67% reduction in more serious offences Drug trafficking offences reduced 90% amongst the drug court cohort and increased 70% amongst the control cohort. KPMG 2014

$$$ Money saving talks For every $1 spent on Drug Court, community benefits to $5.81 Acumen Alliance, Benefit and Cost Analysis of the Drug Court Program, January 2005 Overall, the cost benefits are up to five times those of jail sentences Prof Arie Freiberg, Monash University Dean of Law, Herald-Sun, 27 th August 2007 $145,000 saved per participant per year in imprisonment costs $1.2 million saved in recidivism related imprisonment costs over two years

Annual Financial Bottom Line: Dandenong Saving to Corrections: $3.8m Cost of running the court: -$3.2m Profit: $0.6m A return on investment of 118%!

How to refer to Drug Court Melbourne Drug Court referrals Drug Court Registry Team Ph: 8615 3889 or email drugcourtmelbourne@courts.vic.gov.au Dandenong Drug Court referrals Ph: 9767 1344 or email drugcourtdandenong@courts.vic.gov.au

Questions? Katharine Biffin Program Manager Drug Court Melbourne katharine.biffin@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au 8396 3928