In October 1990, the Kings County (Brooklyn, NY) District Attorney's Office implemented the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program to divert nonviolent felony drug offenders from prison to community-based residential drug treatment. This article presents an estimate of the costs and benefits of the DTAP program based on a cohort of DTAP participants and prison comparisons who entered treatment or prison in 1995–1996 and were tracked for 6 years. The analysis focuses on the criminal justice system (CJS) costs associated with criminal recidivism. Findings show that the DTAP program is cost-beneficial compared to the usual criminal justice process (benefit-cost ratio equals 2.17 after 6 years).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BavonA. (2001). The effect of the Tarrant County drug court project on recidivism. Evaluation and Program Planning, 24, 13–22.
2.
BelenkoS. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review, I(1), 1–42.
3.
BelenkoS. (2002). Drug courts. In LeukefeldC.TimsF., & FarabeeD. (Eds.), Treatment of drug offenders: Policies and issues (pp. 301–318). New York: Springer.
4.
BelenkoS.FoltzC., & LangM. (2004). Diversion of prison-bound offenders to drug treatment: Effects on post-program drug use. Presented at College on Problems of Drug Dependence, San Juan, PR.
5.
BelenkoS.FoltzC.LangM., & SungH. -E. (2005). Recidivism among high-risk drug felons: A longitudinal analysis following residential treatment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 40(1–2), 106–132.
6.
BelenkoS., & PeughJ. (1998). Behind bars: Substance abuse and America's prison population—technical report. New York: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
7.
ButzinC. A.MartinS. S., & InciardiJ. A. (2002). Evaluating component effects of a prison-based treatment continuum. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 63–69.
8.
CampC. G., & CampG. M. (1997). The corrections yearbook 1998. Middletown, CT: Criminal Justice Institute, Inc.
9.
CareyS. M., & FiniganM. W. (2004). A detailed cost analysis in a mature drug court setting: A cost-benefit evaluation of the Multnomah County Drug Court. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 20(3), 315–338.
10.
De LeonG. (2000). The therapeutic community: Theory, model, and method. New York: Springer.
11.
DyniaP., & SungH. -E. (2000). The safety and effectiveness of diverting felony drug offenders to residential treatment as measured by recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11(4), 299–311.
12.
FarabeeD.HserY.AnglinM. D., & HuangD. (2004). Recidivism among an early cohort of California's Proposition 36 offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 3(4), 563–584.
13.
FiniganM. W. (1998). An outcome program evaluation of the Multnomah County S.T.O.P. drug diversion program. Report prepared for the Multnomah County Department of Community Corrections, Multnomah County, Oregon.
14.
GoldM. R.SiegalJ. E.RussellL. B., & WeinsteinM. C. (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
GoldkampJ. S. (1994). Miami's treatment drug court for felony defendants: Some implications of assessment findings. The Prison Journal, 74(2), 110–166.
16.
GriffithJ. D.HillerM. L.KnightK., & SimpsonD. D. (1999). A cost-effectiveness analysis of in-prison therapeutic community treatment and risk classification. The Prison Journal, 79(3), 352–368.
17.
HarrellA.CavanaughS. E., & RomanJ. (1999). Final report: Findings from the evaluation of the DC Superior Court drug intervention program. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
18.
Kings County District Attorney's Office (KCDA). (1995). Drug treatment alternative-to-prison of the Kings County district attorney: Fifth annual report of operations, October 15, 1994 to October 15, 1995. Kings County, NY: C. J. Hynes, District Attorney.
19.
KnightK.HillerM. L., & SimpsonD. D. (1999). Evaluating corrections-based treatment for the drug-abusing criminal offender. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 31(3), 299–304.
20.
KnightK.SimpsonD. D., & HillerM. L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. The Prison Journal, 79(3), 337–351.
21.
LangM. A., & BelenkoS. (2000). Predicting retention in a residential drug treatment alternative to prison program. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 19, 145–160.
22.
LeukefeldC. G., & TimsF. M. (Eds.). (1992). Drug abuse treatment in prison and jails (NIDA Research Monograph 118). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
23.
MarloweD. B. (2003). Integrating substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision. NIDA Science & Practice Perspectives, 2, 4–14.
24.
MartinS. S., & InciardiJ. A. (1997). Case management outcomes for drug-involved offenders. Prison Journal, 77(2), 168–183.
25.
MauserE.Van StelleK. R., & MobergD. P. (1994). The economic impact of diverting substance-abusing offenders into treatment. Crime & Delinquency, 40(4), 568–588.
26.
Mott-McDonald Associates, Inc. (1978). The cost of justice: An analysis of case processing costs in the Bronx criminal justice system. A report to the Special Committee on Criminal Justice and the Association of the Bar of the City of New York. Vol. 1. Methods, findings and recommendations. (Funded by The Florence V. Burden Foundation).
27.
The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA). (2003). Crossing the bridge: An evaluation of the Drug Treatment Alternative-to-Prison (DTAP) program (A CASA white paper). New York, NY: Author.
28.
PrendergastM. L.WellischJ., & WongM. M. (1996). Residential treatment for women parolees following prison-based drug treatment: Treatment experiences, needs, services, and outcomes. Prison Journal, 76(3), 253–274.
29.
SungH. -E.BelenkoS.FengL., & TabachnickC. (2004). Predicting treatment compliance among criminal-justice mandated clients: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 26, 315–328.
30.
ThannerM. H., & TaxmanF. S. (2003). Responsivity: The value of providing intensive services to high-risk offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 24, 137–147.
31.
WeinmanB. (1992). Coordinated approach for drug-abusing offenders: TASC and parole. In LeukefeldC. G. & TimsF. M. (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (NIDA Research Monograph 118). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
32.
WexlerH. K.FalkinG. P.LiptonD. S., & RosenblumA. B. (1992). Outcome evaluation of a prison therapeutic community for substance abuse treatment. In LeukefeldC. G. & TimsF. M. (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (NIDA Research Monograph 118). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
