U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Evaluating Drug Courts: A Model for Process Evaluation

NCJ Number
215865
Journal
Drug Court Review Volume: 5 Issue: 2 Dated: 2006 Pages: 51-82
Author(s)
Cary Heck Ph.D.; Meridith Thanner Ph.D.
Date Published
2006
Length
32 pages
Annotation
This article presents the elements involved with a drug court process evaluation to assist local drug court programs in working with independent evaluators to develop and sustain ongoing evaluation mechanisms.
Abstract
Process evaluations are conducted with the goal of measuring the efficiency, efficacy, and achievement of drug court program goals. The National Research Advisory Committee (NRAC) recommends that process evaluations be conducted by trained evaluators and should include an analysis of the following critical elements: program goals, target population, drug treatment, court processes, units of service, team cooperation, and community support. A review by the National Drug Court Institute (NDCI) of the evaluation plans of drug courts from across the country indicated that the most significant problem facing drug court evaluators was a lack of quality data in useable forms. Drug court data must be reliable, valid, and uniform and it should capture the important variable of time. The use of standardized and comprehensive electronic systems for capturing drug court data is recommended. Once the appropriate data have been identified and collected, it is important that process evaluations follow accepted and methodologically rigorous research models, such as quasi-experimental research designs that include the use of comparison groups to determine client outcomes and impacts. By following a methodologically sound data collection and analysis process, drug courts can illustrate their successes to potential funders and policymakers. References