As opioid intervention courts launch across the country, it is increasingly important to define the model and identify the core practices these courts should include. This publication is intended to help urban, suburban, rural, and tribal jurisdictions develop programs that incorporate the practices most likely to prevent overdoses and save lives.
New justice system approaches are needed respond to the opioid crisis and prevent overdose deaths through immediate access to evidence-based treatment—including medication-assisted treatment—and wraparound supports. This document provides a snapshot of some of the strategies being used by courts and justice system practitioners around the country to prevent overdose deaths and save lives.
The movement to elect reform-minded prosecutors has been around long enough and scored enough victories that progressive D.A.s now have their own support network: Fair and Just Prosecution. Miriam Krinsky, its executive director, explains why she thinks "starry-eyed idealists" who want to transform the justice system need to get the message that "the biggest difference they can make is to go and work in a prosecutor's office."
The Allegheny County (Pennsylvania) Mental Health Court has served as a dedicated criminal court docket for defendants with underlying mental health diagnoses since 2001. During the period from 2010 through 2016, this evaluation found mental health court participants had significantly fewer new arrests in the three years following the conclusion of their cases than similar defendants who went through traditional court.
How effective is therapy or treatment when it's used instead of incarceration, and what are the challenges to conducting it inside the coercive context of the criminal justice system? New Thinking host Matt Watkins is joined by clinical psychologist Jacob Ham who works with justice-involved young people affected by trauma, and John Jay College's Deborah Koetzle who evaluates programs aiming to help participants rebuild lives outside of the justice system.
This document details the implementation of innovative teleservices programs in seven jurisdictions around the country. The jurisdictions featured in this publication use teleservices to increase treatment court capacity, overcome treatment barriers, supervise participants, and provide training for staff.
This study suggests relying on summary risk scores alone to decide on treatment options for an important, hitherto under-emphasized, subpopulation of drug court participants may be leading to counter-productive outcomes.
Aimed at statewide problem-solving court systems, this fact sheet addresses the importance of strategic planning for goals such as the creation of performance standards, the efficient allocation of resources, and the development of statewide training programs. It also outlines how the Center for Court Innovation’s guided strategic planning process can help strengthen problem-solving court operations.
This webinar discusses strategies for enhancing drug court capacity, meaning getting more of your target population into drug court. Strategies include universal screening and assessment, arrest data analysis to reduce racial disparities, and case “portability” (transferring cases to a jurisdiction with a drug court).
