QUEENS (NY) TREATMENT COURTJACOB GINESTRO

Drug use on any level can lead to further addictive behavior and crime. This program attempts to lower recidivism rates among adult offenders by offering drug and alcohol testing, medical screening, educational and vocational programs, and counseling where participants can set goals for their rehabilitation.

COMMUNITY NEED

Larceny-theft

DUI

Murder

Gambling

Rape

Vandalism

Drug Abuse

0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,000

Estimated Number of Arrests (U.S. 2013)

1

2

3

4

5

42.3%

59.1%

67.9%

73.3%

76.9%

Recidivism Rate of Drug Offenders Based on Years After Release

(2005-2010)

Drug abuse violations accounted for the highest amount of arrests throughout the U.S. in 2013 (approximately, 1,501,043 out of 11,302,102). Rape and murder only accounted for 16,863 and 10,231 respectively. Also, recidivism rates rise for drug offenders the longer after their release. For example, five years after release, the recidivism rate for drug offenders is above 76 percent! However, neither of these studies are able to take unreported crimes into account.

COMMUNITY NEED CONTINUED

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20140

50

100

150

200

250

300

Chart TitleProbationer Drug Arrests in Queens County In Queens County, the number of those rearrested by probation officers for drug offenses has definitely decreased over the years. Overall, this number of rearrests has decreased by almost 200 (278 in 2005 to 90 in 2014). Ultimately, this could be due to probation programs such as the QTC.

COMMUNITY NEED DATA

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-29

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rprts05p0510.pdf

COMMUNITY NEED DATA CONTINUED

http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimnet/ojsa/parolee-and-probationer-arrest.pdf

LOGICAL APPROACH

PROBLEM OR ISSUE RESOURCES ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS

SHORT- TERM OUTCOMES

LONG-TERM OUTCOMES IMPACT

In our community,there is too much recidivism among adults. The rate for offenders one year after release is approximately42.3%. It would be much better to be closer to 15%. This is a result of illegal drug use. (The New York State Adult Drug Court Evaluation (2003)).

To run this program there must be a resource coordinator and case manager. They will collaborate with judges, defense attorneys, and a project director. For rehabilitation, counselors and doctors will be needed. Also, computers, drug testing kits, and office space are needed to assess the data.

Felony drug offenders will participate in the QTC, a program that lowers adult recidivism rates. The program offers drug and alcohol testing, medical screening, educational and vocational programs and counseling. Failure to meet standards results in a agreed-upon prison term.

The outputs will be recorded by a monthly count of how many of these defendants participate in the program.

We expect the percent of illegal drug use will be lower in the next 1 to 3 years for those participating in the program as compared to those not participating.

We expect the recidivism rates will be lower in the next 4 to 6 years for those participating in the program as compared to those not participating.

In the next 7 to 10 years, the community problem of adult recidivism will decline from the current rate of 42.3% closer to the desired lower level of 15%.

LITERATURE REVIEW

• Michael Rempel and several others (2003) discovered that participants in the QTC had approximately half the recidivism rate of those not in the program after 3 years. This was consistent with statistics after the program ended.

• Rachel Porter (2000) studied the QTC through the Vera Institute of Justice and concluded that the program has a high level of retention as well as enrollment of nonviolent felony offenders with no prior offenses, and takes less time than a felony case processing.

• Joan Petersilia (1997) asserted that probation programs can be successfull in reducing recidivism rates and drug use. Furthermore, the public will be more willing to support these programs if they are well-planned as well as rehabilitative.

LITERATURE REVIEW CONTINUED

• Cadonna Dory (2009) from the University of Southern California newspaper determined that offenders are not getting the necessary rehabilitation in order to rejoin society upon release. Most of these prisoners do not have high school diplomas, but have a history of drug abuse. This can be changed with continued connection to the community as well as job training.

• Harriet McDonald (2013) stated that the prison system should focus on rehabilitation instead of incarceration. In fact, she suggests putting nonviolent offenders in programs that will give them job training and drug rehabilitation.

• Even though these two articles discuss the prison system in California, recidivism is a problem around the nation that can be fixed through rehabilitation programs such as the QTC.

WORK CITED

Dory, Cadonna. 2009. “Society Must Address Recidivism, Officials Say,” USC News, April 29. http://news.usc.edu/30029/society-must-address-recidivism-officials-say/.

McDonald, Harriet. 2013. “California's Recidivism Problem,” The Huffington Post, April 29. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harriet-mcdonald/californias-recidivism-pr_b_3267575.html

Petersilia, Joan . 1997 "Probation in the United States." Crime and Justice 22:149-200. Retrieved from JSTOR on Apr 20, 2015. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Porter, Rachel. 2000. Implementing a Drug Court in Queens County: A Process Evaluation. New York, NY: The

Vera Institute of Justice.http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/queensdrugcourt.pdf.

Rempel, Michael, Dana Fox–Kralstein, Amanda Cissner, Robyn Cohen, Melissa Labriola, Donald Farole, Ann Bader, and Michael Magnani. 2003. The New York State Adult Drug Court Evaluation: Policies,Participants, and Impacts. New York, NY: Center for Court Innovations, 157–78.http://www.courts.state.ny.us/whatsnew/pdf/NYSAdultDrugCourtEvaluation.pdf.

ASSESSMENTIn Program (1) vs Not in Program (0) * Did they recidivate? (1=yes, 0=no) Crosstabulation

Did they recidivate? (1=yes, 0=no)

Total0 1In Program (1) vs Not in Program (0)

0 Count 174 180 354% within In Program (1) vs Not in Program (0)

49.2% 50.8%100.0

%

1 Count 213 182 395% within In Program (1) vs Not in Program (0)

53.9% 46.1%100.0

%

Total Count 387 362 749% within In Program (1) vs Not in Program (0)

51.7% 48.3%100.0

%

Chi-Square Tests

Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-

sided)Exact Sig. (2-

sided)Exact Sig. (1-

sided)Pearson Chi-Square 1.702a 1 .192

Continuity Correctionb 1.516 1 .218

Likelihood Ratio 1.703 1 .192

Fisher's Exact Test .213 .109Linear-by-Linear Association

1.700 1 .192

N of Valid Cases 749

As you can see, people in the program were slightly less likely to recidivate than those that are not (50.8% versus 46.1%). However, the program was not statistically significant at the 0.192 level. As a result, the QTC is not effective.

ASSESSMENT CONTINUED

As has been noted, being in the QTC is not statistically significant which is shown further in this binary logistic regression. The significance level is 0.168 for being in or out of the program. Nevertheless, being a female was more statistically significant than being white (0.188 versus 0.869). Also, illegal drug use was not significant in relation to recidivism at 0.472.

Variables in the Equation

B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)Step 1a InProgram1vsNotinPr

ogram0 -.291 .211 1.904 1 .168 .748

Female1yes0no .194 .148 1.737 1 .188 1.215

White1yes -.024 .147 .027 1 .869 .976

HighSchoolGraduate -.130 .147 .783 1 .376 .878

illegaldrugusebinaryvaraible .106 .147 .517 1 .472 1.112

Constant -.043 .180 .059 1 .809 .957

SUSTAINABILITY