Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DeMatteo, D.
Right arrow Articles by Arabia, P. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Outcome Trajectories in Drug Court

Do All Participants Have Serious Drug Problems?

David DeMatteo

Drexel University, david.dematteo{at}drexel.edu

Douglas B. Marlowe

Treatment Research Institute; National Association of Drug Court Professionals

David S. Festinger

Treatment Research Institute

Patricia L. Arabia

Treatment Research Institute

Graduation rates in drug courts average 50% to 70%, but it is unclear what proportion of graduates responded to the drug court services and what proportion might not have had serious drug problems on entry. This study cluster analyzes urine drug screen results during the first 14 weeks of treatment on 284 participants from three misdemeanor drug courts. A four-cluster solution (R2 > .75) produced distinct subgroups characterized by (a) consistently drug-negative urine specimens (34% of the sample), (b) consistently drug-positive specimens (21%), (c) consistently missed urine specimens (26%), and (d) urine specimens that began as drug positive but became progressively drug negative over time (19%). These data suggest that approximately one third of the participants might not have had serious drug problems on entry. Approximately one fifth appeared to respond to drug court services, and nearly one half continued to exhibit problems after 14 weeks. Implications for adaptive programming in drug courts are discussed.

Key Words: drug courts • drug-involved offenders • criminal justice • cluster analysis

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 36, No. 4, 354-368 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854809331547
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?