“We cannot solve the problems we have created with the same

thinking that created them”

Albert Einstein

The Promise of DWI Courts

(a.k.a. DUI/Drug Courts)

Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP); Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA); National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

Developed by the National Drug Court Institute

(NDCI)

C. West Huddleston, Director

The Good News

American’s roads are safer today as a result of the massive public awareness and enforcement campaigns that began in the early 1980s.

The number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities has

declined by one third since 1982 .

(26,173 people killed in 1982)

The Good News

Since 1982, the total number of alcohol-related

traffic fatalities declined 34 percent, while the

number of youth under 21 alcohol-related traffic fatalities fell 56 percent

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04

Fatality rate/100M VMT

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04

Fatality rate/100M VMT

Motor Vehicle Fatalities: Lowest Rate in Recorded History

Sources: 2004 NCSA, FARS, FHWASources: 2004 NCSA, FARS, FHWA

2004 Rate

1.46

2004 Rate

1.46

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

99 00 01 02 03 04

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

99 00 01 02 03 04Source: FARSSource: FARS

5.1% Decrease Since ’025.1% Decrease Since ’02

Alcohol-Related Fatalities1999 – 2004

Life Saving Traffic Safety Strategies

Safer Roads

Safer Cars

Seat Belt/Restraint Enforcement

Raising Minimum Drinking Age

Lowering BAC Limits to .08

Stiffer DWI Penalties

Enhanced Sobriety Checkpoints

Saturation Patrols

National Campaigns

LawEnforcement:Job Well Done

Driving While Impaired in Driving While Impaired in AmericaAmerica

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and injuries for Americans

Age 2 through 33

Alcohol-related crashes are a substantial part of this problem!

NHTSA National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2005

Driving While Impaired in Driving While Impaired in AmericaAmerica

40% killed in traffic crashes last year died in an alcohol-related crash

65 % injured received their injuries in an alcohol-related crash

NHTSA National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2005

“One by one Americans are needlessly falling through dangerous gaps in the drunk driver control system in nearly

every state and community.” (Millie Webb, MADD, 2002)

How Do We Protect Our Communities?

Punishment

or

Rehabilitation

What if we JUST put them in What if we JUST put them in PRISON?PRISON?

29.9% of prisoners released in 1994 in 15 states were rearrested within 6

months and 67% are rearrested within 3 years. (BJS, 2002)

What if we JUST Put Them in What if we JUST Put Them in PRISON?PRISON?

Criminal Recidivism in 3 Years

• 68% arrested for new crime

• 47% convicted of new crime

• 25% incarcerated for new crime

• 50% re-incarcerated for violations

Relapse to Substance Abuse in 3 Years

• 95% relapse

(University of Penn, 2002)

What if we JUST Refer Them to What if we JUST Refer Them to TREATMENT?TREATMENT?

Attrition

• 50% to 67% don’t show for intake

• 40% to 80% drop out in 3 months

• 90% drop out in 12 months

Outcomes

40% to 60% of clients abstinent at 1 year

Why Can’t People Just Change?

For the Addict and Alcoholic….

“Remaining Addicted Becomes Easier than Trying to Change”

Does Treatment Work in Combating Substance

Abuse?

YES…but

Not if the addict or alcoholicIsn’t there!

Research Findings

• Drug Abuse Reporting Project (DARP)

• Treatment Outcome Prospective Study (TOPS)

• Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS)

• National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study

Research Findings• The length of time a patient spent in

treatment was a reliable predictor of his or her post treatment performance. Beyond a ninety-day threshold, treatment outcomes improved in a direct relationship to the length of time spent in treatment, with one year generally found to be the minimum effective duration of treatment.

• Coerced patients tended to stay longer. This was in light of the finding that most of the legally coerced addicts had more crime and gang involvement, more drug use, and worse employment records than their non-coerced counterparts.

The Answer is the COURTS

Punishment and

AccountabilityTreatment

Courts as Problem-Solver

“Effective trial courts are responsive to emergent public issues such as drug abuse…A trial court that moves deliberately in response

to emergent issues is a stabilizing force in society and acts consistently with its role of

maintaining the rule of law”

Bureau of Justice Assistance’s Trial Court Performance Standards, 1997

DWI Courts

Why Do We Believe DWI Court is the

Answer?

DWI Courts are Based on the Tested and Proven DRUG COURT Model

A Drug Court is a common-sense approach to the drug/alcohol offender.

Its purpose:

To expedite the time interval to get offenders into accountability and

treatment QUICKLY

To keep the individual engaged in treatment LONG ENOUGH to receive

treatment benefits.

Number of Drug Courts1989 1

1990 1

1991 5

1992 10

1993 19

1994 40

1995 75

1996 139

1997 230

1998 347

1999 472

2000 665

2001 847

2002 1,048

2003 1,183

Drug Courts Today

1,621 drug courts in operation 811 Adult Drug Courts

357 Juvenile Drug Courts 153 Family Dependency Treatment Courts

176 DWI/Drug Courts 54 Tribal Healing to Wellness Courts

68 Reentry Drug Courts 1 Campus Drug Courts1 Federal Drug Court

212 drug courts are planning in 2005

Drug Court Clearinghouse at American University and the

Government Accounting Office (GAO)

Over 350,000 clients have been admitted to U.S. drug court programs since 1989

with a

67-71% retention rate.

“Represents a six-fold increase in treatment retention over most previous efforts (Marlowe et al., 2003).”

The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia

University conducted a meta-analysis and critical review of drug court research and evaluations finding (Belenko 1998, 1999, 2001) :

drug courts provide the most comprehensive and effective control of drug-using offenders’ criminality and drug usage while under the

court’s supervision.

Federal Sentencing Reporter (Marlowe, D.B., DeMatteo, D.S., & Festinger, D.S. 2003, October)

“To put it bluntly, we know that drug courts outperform virtually all other

strategies that have been attempted for drug-involved offenders.”

Key Components of the Model

Non-adversarial ProcessOngoing Judicial Supervision

Intensive Community SupervisionIntensive Treatment

Community Involvement

Law Enforcement

Treatment Provider

Prosecutor

Researcher

Probation

Court Coordinator

JudgeDefense Counsel

A Coordinated Effort

Advocates

Mental Health

Participants attend a status conference hearing with the Judge.

Effective Community Supervision and Home Visits

Bar Sweeps

Approximately 90 “DWI Courts” in operation, 86 “hybrid” Drug/DWI Courts operational and 89 in the planning process

Bernalillo County, New Mexico )Recidivism: 15.5% vs. 28.5% (2 yrs)

Lansing, MichiganRecidivism: 13% vs. 33% (5 yrs)

Kootenai County, Idaho DUI Court

Recidivism: 4% vs. 25% (2 yrs)

70% Retention Rate

DWI Court Evaluations

Arizona – Completed

Alaska – Completed

Pennsylvania - Underway

Georgia- Underway

Approved GHSA Resolution

“GHSA supports DWI courts and urges states to work with their state criminal justice agency

counterparts to implement them where appropriate. GHSA also recommends that NHTSA evaluate DWI courts to determine their effectiveness”

Approved MADD Resolution

“MADD supports the use of post-adjudication DUI/DWI courts that employ the strategies of close

supervision, frequent alcohol and other drug testing, and ongoing judicial interaction to integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with the

justice system.  MADD recommends that DUI/DWI courts should not be used to avoid a record of conviction and/or license sanctions.”

MADD National Board of Directors

DWI Courts: The Guiding Principles

Target the PopulationProvide a Clinical AssessmentDevelop the Treatment ModelSupervise and Detect Behavior

Develop Community PartnershipsTake a Judicial Role

Provide Case ManagementSolve Transportation Barriers

Evaluate the ProgramEnsure Sustainability

DWI CourtsA Serious Solution To a Serious Threat

NDCI’s 2005DWI Court Activities

• NHTSA’s One-Day and Four-Day Training

• Onsite Technical Assistance

• DWI Courts: The Guiding Principles

• Authorization and Appropriation

• Partnerships/Resolutions (MADD, GHSA)

NHTSA DWI Court Trainings

Philadelphia: May 20Nashville: July 15Austin: July 18-21

Lansing: July 25-28Portland: August 26

Minnesota: September 19Salt Lake City: September 29

Denver: September 30Phoenix: October 19-22

St. Louis: October 28Athens: November 7-10

For More InformationNational Drug Court Institute (NDCI)

West Huddleston, Director703-575-9400, ext. 13

whuddleston@ndci.org

Kristen Daugherty DWI Court Manager703-575-9400, ext. 39kdaugherty@ndci.org