Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the New South Wales Adult Drug Court Program

Abstract

In New South Wales, Australia, a cost-effectiveness evaluation was conducted of an adult drug court (ADC) program as an alternative to jail for criminal offenders addicted to illicit drugs. This article describes the program, the cost-effectiveness analysis, and the results. The results of this study reveal that, for the 23-month period of the evaluation, the ADC was as cost-effective as were conventional sanctions in delaying the time to the first offense and more cost-effective in reducing the frequency of offending for those outcome measures selected. Although the evaluation was conducted using the traditional steps of a cost-effectiveness analysis, because of the complexity of the program and data limitations it was not always possible to adhere to textbook procedures. As such, each step involved in undertaking the cost-effectiveness analysis is discussed, highlighting the key issues faced in the evaluation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Belenko, S. 1998. Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review 1(1): 1-42.

Belenko, S. 2001. Research on drug courts: A critical review 2001 update. New York: National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University.

Belenko, S., J. A. Fagan, and T. Dumanovsky. 1994. The effects of legal sanctions on recidivism in special drug courts. Justice System Journal 17:53-81.

Breckenridge, J. F., L. T. Winfree, J. R. Maupin, and D. L. Clason. 2000. Drunk drivers, DWI drugcourt,treatment,andrecidivism:Whofails? Justice Research and Policy 2(1):87-105.

Coast, J., M. Hensher, J. A. Mulligan, S. Shepperd, and J. Jones. 2000. Conceptual and practical difficulties with the economic evaluation of health services developments. Journal of Health Services and Research Policy 5(1): 42-48.

Deschenes, E. P., S. Turner, and P. W. Greenwood. 1995. Drug courtor probation? An experimental evaluation of Maricopa County’s drug court. Justice System Journal 18:55-73.

Drummond, M. F., B. O’Brien, G. L. Stoddart, and G. W. Torrance. 1997. Methods for the economic evaluation of healthcare programmes, 2nd ed.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Freeman, K. 2001. New South Wales drug court evaluation: Interim report on health and wellbeing of participants. Crime and Justice Bulletin 53: 1-19.

Freeman, K., R. Lawrence Karski, and P. Doak. 2000. New South Wales drug court evaluation: Program and participation profiles. Crime and Justice Bulletin 50(April): 1-14.

10.

Frieberg, A. 2000. Drug courts: Some jurisprudential and sentencing issues. Criminal Law Journal 24: 213-235.

11.

Godber, E., R. Robinson, and A. Steiner. 1997. Economic evaluations and the shifting balance towards primary care definitions, evidence and methodological issues. Health Economics 6(3): 275-294.

12.

Graves, N., D. Walker, R. Raine, A. Hutchings, and J. A. Roberts. 2002. Cost data for individual patients included in clinical studies: No amount of statistical analysis can compensate for inadequate costing methods. Health Economics Letters 11(8): 735-739.

13.

Hall, W. 1997. The role of legal coercion in the treatment of offenders with alcohol and heroin problems. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 30(2): 103-120.

14.

Lind, B., D. Weatherburn, S. Chen, M. Shanahan, E. Lancsar, M. Haas, and R. De Abreu Lourenco. 2002. New South Wales drug court evaluation: Cost-effectiveness analysis. Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.

15.

Makkai, T. 1998. Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice: Drug courts: Issues and prospects. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

16.

Peters, R. H., and M. R. Murrin. 2000. Effectiveness of treatment-based drug courts in reducing criminal recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior 27(1): 72-96.

17.

Spohn, C., R. K. Piper, T. Martin, and E. D. Frenzel. 2001. Drug courts and recidivism: The results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism. Journal of Drug Issues 31(1): 149-176.

18.

U.S. Department of Justice. 1997. Defining drug courts: The key components. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

19.

U.S. General Accounting Office. 1997. Drug courts: Overview of growth characteristics and results. Washington, DC: Author.