Treatment-Based Drug Courts Significantly Reduce Criminal Recidivism Rates - Annotated Bibliography Example

Treatment-based drug courts significantly reduce criminal recidivism rates Treatment-based drug courts significantly reduce criminal recidivism rates Requirement 1: According Vacca (2004) an alternative to incarceration for offenders who get to the judicial system due to obsession or addiction is described as a Treatment-based drug. These programs incorporate alcohol and other drug therapy services together with judicial system case procedures. The programs uses a non- confrontational approach, examination, and defense advise endorse public security while defending participants’ rights. The programs aim at reducing recidivism and drug abuse among the convicts after they get freed (MacKenzie 2008). They may also work as change programs or pre- arbitration models where criminals are proposed access into the drug rehabilitation with an arrangement that the allegations against the convicts will be decreased or discharged upon successful completion of the program (Vacca, 2004). These programs are developed with an aim of reducing crimes that are usually committed because of drug abuse (MacKenzie 2008). Within the programs, people are offered training based on their skills with the aim of making the significant in the community. Through the education offered in these programs, people change their habits and develop positive thinking (MacKenzie 2008). Individuals who undergo proper training in the programs are not likely to get involved in criminal activities. While those who do not get training end up going back to prison because of committing crimes (Vacca, 2004). Despite the development of these programs in most societies there is limited research conducted on the effectiveness of the program (Vacca, 2004). It is typically very problematic to determine the effectiveness of these programs because of different judicial procedures used in most of the programs (Vacca, 2004). It also very difficult to determine the factors that affect the programs within the rehabilitation centers (Vacca, 2004). This study will, therefore, test the hypothesis Treatment-based drug courts significantly reduce criminal recidivism rates. Participants in this program most of the time are given counseling services, and education training services that help them change (MacKenzie 2008). The researcher will use a meta-analysis of several studies collected that combines the importance of an association between the study variables (Vacca, 2004). This method is the most suitable because they can be used to describe the efforts made by the respondents under investigation. The level of significance, and the adaptability, and can offer a chance to discover and recognize potential controlling variables (MacKenzie 2008). Sampling procedures used in this method are very biased and can lead to poor results. The entire research process involves conducting a literature review on studies related to the topic of the study, developing an annotated bibliography, collecting data from respondents, and conducting a data analysis in relation to research objectives and literature review conducted. To avoid sampling biasness, the researcher will purposively sample respondents he believes will give him the accurate information. For this case, the respondents will identify themselves from those who committed crimes after being released. The respondents will give information from which the researcher will conduct analysis and test the significant level of the research hypothesis. From the findings obtained, the researchers will ether rejects or accept the hypothesis stated. Requirement 2: Prepare an annotated bibliography Ameen, A., Jennifer L., & Meghan G. (2010) Evidence-Based Practice Skills Assessment for Criminal Justice Organizations, Version 1.0. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections. Ameen, Jennifer, and Meghan discovered in their study that there is a need to develop evidence-based reports to evaluate training programs within the prisons. This meant to assess and improve these programs. They created a syllabus to be used in rehabilitation centers that assist in provision of suitable education for the inmates. Findings in this study will assist the researcher in developing the literature review section. Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-based public policy options to reduce future prison construction, criminal justice costs, and crime rates. Olympia, WA: State Institute for Public Policy. This policy paper conducted a review of five hundred and seventy one research studies conducted on Treatment-based drug courts. The researchers concluded in the study that within these correctional programs general education is usually provided which in turn reduced crime by seven percent. They also discovered that the participant benefited from taxpayers money and reduced rates of crime within the society. This study is important because the researcher will use information reviewed to develop a general background of the study under investigation. Brewster, D. R., & Sharp, S. F. (2002). Educational programs and recidivism in Oklahoma: Another look. The Prison Journal, 82(3): 314-334. doi: 10.1177/003288550208200302 Brewster and Sharp conducted a study of imprisoned people in Oklahoma to determine if rehabilitation reduced the rates of crime among the court convicts. They concluded in the study that accomplishment of a Treatment-based drug courts program is mainly related to increased endurance period for instance, the time between when one is released from imprisonment and re-incarceration for both female and male criminals. These authors discovered in their study that, of the 11,800 prisoners in the report, approximately 48.7% got in custodial without any education from high school. The researchers also outline that the low proportion of qualified inmates was approximately 18.2% who benefited from the program while in prison. Based on the benefits Treatment-based drug courts programs provided in the correctional centers, the authors provided a recommend proposing these programs to all criminals and inspiring more criminals to participate. Burke, L. O., & Vivian, J. E. (2001). The effect of college programming on recidivism rates at the Hampton County House of Correction: A 5-year study. Journal of Correctional Education, 52(4): 160-162. Burke and Vivian conducted an analysis of people convicted for six-years’ and participated in college-level education provided within the institution in Massachusetts. They discovered that prisoners who finished college education while in prison were 21.9 percent less likely to conduct criminal activities after their discharge than those who had no college education in prison. This report will assist the researcher in explaining the correlation between life skills and educational programs and recidivism. Cecil, D. K., Drapkin, D. A., Mackenzie, D. L., & Hickman, L. J. (2000). The effectiveness of adult basic education and life-skills programs in reducing recidivism: A review and assessment of the research. The Journal of Correctional Education, 51(2): 207-226. These authors conducted as assessment of validity of twelve research studies used to analyze the relationship between life skills and educational programs and recidivism. These researchers discovered that the education provided in prison assisted most countries to reduce the rates of crime within the society. The study will help bring out the study gap under investigation. Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., & Mackin, J. R. (2008). How Drug Court Practices Impact Recidivism and Costs. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, St. Louis, MO. Carey Finigan and Mackin conducted a study on how rehabilitation center reduced rates of crime within the society. The paper was presented to an annual meeting at St. Louis conference. The researchers discovered a positive relationship between prisoners who obtained education in prison from those who obtained none. They also discovered that the program provided a very good range of treatment procedures to the convicts. This study will also assist the research in developing a background of the study on the importance of programs offered in the prisons. Craddock, A. (2002). North Carolina drug treatment court evaluation: Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice: Drug Courts Program Office. Craddock conducted a study on drug treatment court in North Carolina. The study revealed the importance of education training offered in rehabilitation programs. The results of the report will assist in creating the study background information. Caverley, A. and Farrall, S. (2011) The Sensual Dynamics of Processes of Personal Reform: Desistance from Crime and the Role of Emotions In S. Karstedt, I. Loader & H. Strang (eds) Emotions, Crime and Justice. Oxford: Hart Publishing Caverley and Farrall evaluated the reform process in the prisons. The study discovered that educational programs offered in prison influenced the convict’s behavior. The findings will help the researcher in proving the hypothesis. Chappell, C. (2004). Post-secondary correctional education and recidivism: A meta-analysis of research conducted 1990-1999. The Journal of Correctional Education, 55(2): 148-169. Chappell conducted a meta-analysis of fifteen research studies over a ten-year period determines a significant, correlation between collage education and lower reoffending rates. The researchers found a positive relationship between educations and reduced reoffending. A study findings will allow the researcher to elaborate more on what other researcher have done based on the topic under investigation. Dennis, M. L., McCroskey, B. J., & Dennis, K. L. (2000). Meaningful employment needed to reduce recidivism. Offender Employment Report, 1 (3): 33-38. Dennis, McCroskey and Dennis discovered in their study that the rates of unemployment contributed to poverty levels that motivate people into committing crimes. These researchers recommended proper emplacement within the community to reduce crime. The study findings will assist in developing background information on the main sources of crime in the community. Deschenes, E. P., Cresswell, L., Emami, V., Moreno, K., Klein, Z., & Condon, C. (2001). Success of drug courts in Orange County, California: Process and outcome evaluations. Technical Report. Long Beach, CA: California State University Long Beach, Department of Criminal Justice. Deschenes, Cresswell, Emami, Moreno, Klein and Condon conducted a study to determine the success of education offered to offenders in the rehabilitation centers. The results of the report denoted a positive impact of the education programs to the convicts. This study will help in developing the study literature review. Esperian, J. H. (2010). The effect of prison education programs on recidivism. The Journal of Correctional Education, 61(4): 316-334. Esperian conducted a study to determine the effects of prison education. He discovered that the education offered in prison assisted the prison leaders in reducing the rates of crime in the society. These findings will assist the researcher in proving the hypothesis that Treatment-based drug courts significantly reduce criminal recidivism rates. Fabelo, T. (2002). The impact of prison education on community reintegration of inmates: The Texas case. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(3): 106-110. Fabelo conducted an investigation of 32,000 prisoners released from imprisonment in Texas. The researcher discovered that education obtained in prison was related with an 11 percent decrease in re-offense activities. The researcher discovered that the youths below 35 years had an increased rate of reduction in criminal activities. The findings will also help the researcher prove the hypothesis under investigation. Farrall, S. (2002). Rethinking What Works with Offenders: Probation, Social Context and Desistance from Crime. Cullumpton, UK: Willan Publishing. Farrall conducted a study to determine how probation reduced several convicts from committing crime. The findings developed a comprehensive literature review. Gardner, G. (2004). The relationship of higher education programs on recidivism delivered through a North Carolina community college in a correctional setting. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina. Gardner conducted an investigation to determine the relationship between involvement in two college education programs and reoffending in North Carolina. The study revealed that the standard re-offense rate in the government during the time of investigation was at 65 percent and discovered that prisoners who took part in the educational procedures had lower re-offense rates, irrespective of whether the inmates actually finished their education program. Gilbert, K. (2012). Goldman Sachs invests in first U.S. social impact bond. Institutional Investor. Retrieved from http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/ Gilbert conducted a study to determine how institutional invest in reducing the rates of crime within the community. The findings indicated that most prisons invest a lot in providing education to reduce crimes within the community. The results of this report will assist in elaborating the background information especially on how different rehabilitation centers are spending on inmates with an aim of reducing crime in future. Gliksman, L., Newton-Taylor, B., Patra, J., & Rehm, J. (2004). Toronto drug treatment court evaluation project final report. London, ON: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Social, Prevention and Health Policy Research Department. Gliksman, Newton-Taylor, Patra and Rehm reviewed studies in relation to the importance of education offered to convicts. The researchers discovered that, the education offered prevented convicts from committing crimes in the future. Hrabowski, F. A., & Robbi, J. (2002). The benefits of correctional education. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(3): 96–99. Hrabowski and Robbi conducted a study to determine the correlation between training offered in prisons and reoffending activities. The researcher concluded that through proper training in the prisons people tend not to commit crimes in future. The researcher recommended for more provision of funds and grants to support education programs offered in prisons since they reduce the rates of crimes in the society. Jarjoura, G. R., & Haight, K. A. (2011). Estimating the cost savings associated with a 1% reduction in recidivism for Marion County, Indiana. Indianapolis, IN: Center for Criminal Justice Research, Indiana University Public Policy Institute. Jarjoura and Haight conducted an investigation on information obtained from 4,776 criminals freed in 2007 to Marion Region. Out the total number of prisoners, 51.6 percent, or 2,463 criminals, changed their habits within the three years of imprisonment. The findings indicated that most inmates were able to transform their ways through education offered in the prisons. The study will provide more information on the importance of education offered in prisons with an aim of reducing crime rates. Johnson, S., & Latessa, E. J. (2000). The Hamilton County drug court: Outcome evaluation findings. Unpublished Manuscript. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati. Johnson and Latessa conducted an evaluation of educational programs offered in prisons with an aim of determining their effects. They discovered that these forms of education influenced the prisoners positively. The findings will help in developing the study literature review. Lockwood, S., Nally, J. M., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2012). The effect of correctional education on postrelease employment and recidivism: A 5-year follow-up study in the state of Indiana. Crime & Delinquency, 58(3): 380-396. doi: 10.1177/0011128712441695 Lockwood, Nally, and Knutson conducted a study to determine the effects of education offered in the correctional centers. These researchers concluded that training and employment were the most significant predictors of post release reoffending habits. The researchers discovered in their findings that most offenders changed upon their release. Most of them avoided committing crimes and took part in development activities within the community. The researchers also recommended a need for admission to freed offenders proper education and training for to obtain relevant jobs in the community. The study will help the research explain more information on what other researchers have done based on the area under investigation. Apart from this, the findings will help the researcher test the hypothesis. MacKenzie, D. L. (2008). Structure and components of successful educational programs. Unpublished paper presented at the Reentry Roundtable on Education, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York. MacKenzie discovered in his study that the success of training in reducing re-offense and offers numerous potential foundations for this discovery. He noted that the education provided in the prisons improves cognitive abilities, which may provide convicts improved problem-solving skills, improved social conduct, and creates an increased awareness of good morality. He noted that the more one gets educated the more he or she gets the ability to be employed. He recommended that the skills offered in prisons should be evaluated to ensure that they contribute to positive effects among the prisoners. The study will help the research in developing the knowledge gap under investigation. Miethe, T. D., Lu, H., & Reese, E. (2000). Reintegrative shaming and recidivism risks in drug court: Explanations for some unexpected findings. Crime & Delinquency, 46 (4): 522-541. Miethe, Lu and Reese conducted a study on the factors that affected education programs offered in the prisons. They discovered that several factors that influenced the entire process like poor management, lack of enough resources among others. The study will help in developing the research background. Palmer, T., Patricia Van V., Faye T., & Doris, M. (2012). Insights from Ted Palmer: Experimental Criminology in a Different Era. Journal of Experimental Criminology 8 (2):103-115. Palmer, Patricia Van, Faye and Doris discovered in their study that proper education implemented in prisons had positive effects on the prisoners. They recommended for improvement in most prisons with an aim of developing qualified persons that fit in the community. The information obtained in this study will form part of the literature review in relation to the topic under investigation. Peters, R. H., & Murrin, M. R. (2000). Effectiveness of treatment-based drug courts in reducing criminal recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 27(1): 72-96. Peters and Murrin conducted a study to determine the Effectiveness of treatment-based drug courts in reducing crimes. They discovered that most courts provide education that changed the ways of most convicts. Results of the report will be used to explain the background of the study and test the stated hypothesis. Roman, J., Townsend, W., & Bhati, A. S. (2003). Recidivism rates for Drug Court graduates: Nationally based estimate - Final report. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute and Caliber. Roman, Townsend and Bhatia conducted a study to review the effects education programs offered in prisons. The researchers discovered a positive effect of these programs. The conclusions of the report will assist in developing the literature review. Steurer, S. J., & Smith, L. G. (2003). Education reduces crime, three-state recidivism study, executive summary. Lanham, MD: Correctional Education Association. Steurer and Smith conducted an investigation on how education reduces crimes. The researchers investigated participants three years after their release from prisons. They discovered that most of the participants who obtained education while in prison had not committed crimes since they were released from prisons. They recommended that more training and education should be offered in prisons to reduce crimes in future. These findings will help the researcher in proving his hypothesis. Spohn, C., Piper, R. K., Martin, T., & Frenzel, E. D. (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. Spohn, Piper, Martin and Frenzel conducted an evaluation of two groups and several indicators of repetition in offenses. The study revealed that most court programs implemented education programs used to reduce crime in the community. The findings will be used to elaborate more literature review in relation to study topic. Vacca, J. S. (2004). Educated prisoners are less likely to return to prison. Journal of Correctional Education, 55(4): 297-305 Vacca, in her study, discovered that educated inmates are less likely to commit crimes ones they get out of prison. Furthermore, the researcher observes that achievement of education is not essential to realize a decrease in recidivism. This is because prisoners who get educated do not commit crimes in the future. The findings will help the researcher in proving his hypothesis under investigation. Wolfe, E., Guydish, J., & Termondt, J. (2002). A drug court outcome evaluation comparing arrests in a two year follow-up period. Journal of Drug Issues, 32 (4): 1155-1172. Wolfe, Guydish and Termondt conducted a study on the effects of education program by conducting a follow up activity among the criminals released from prison. There was a positive relationship between the convicts behavior after obtaining education from prisons. The study will help develop the background of the study and explain what other researchers have done. References Ameen, A., Jennifer L., & Meghan G. (2010) Evidence-Based Practice Skills Assessment for Criminal Justice Organizations, Version 1.0. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections. Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-based public policy options to reduce future prison construction, criminal justice costs, and crime rates. Olympia, WA: State Institute for Public Policy. Brewster, D. R., & Sharp, S. F. (2002). Educational programs and recidivism in Oklahoma: Another look. The Prison Journal, 82(3): 314-334. doi: 10.1177/003288550208200302 Burke, L. O., & Vivian, J. E. (2001). The effect of college programming on recidivism rates at the Hampton County House of Correction: A 5-year study. Journal of Correctional Education, 52(4): 160-162. Carey, S. M., Finigan, M. W., & Mackin, J. R. (2008). How Drug Court Practices Impact Recidivism and Costs. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, St. Louis, MO. Caverley, A. &Farrall, S. (2011) The Sensual Dynamics of Processes of Personal Reform: Desistance from Crime and the Role of Emotions In S. Karstedt, I. Loader & H. Strang (eds) Emotions, Crime and Justice. Oxford: Hart Publishing Cecil, D. K., Drapkin, D. A., Mackenzie, D. L., & Hickman, L. J. (2000). The effectiveness of adult basic education and life-skills programs in reducing recidivism: A review and assessment of the research. The Journal of Correctional Education, 51(2): 207-226. Craddock, A. (2002). North Carolina drug treatment court evaluation: Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice: Drug Courts Program Office. Chappell, C. (2004). Post-secondary correctional education and recidivism: A meta-analysis of research conducted 1990-1999. The Journal of Correctional Education, 55(2): 148-169. Dennis, M. L., McCroskey, B. J., & Dennis, K. L. (2000). Meaningful employment needed to reduce recidivism. Offender Employment Report, 1 (3): 33-38. Deschenes, E. P., Cresswell, L., Emami, V., Moreno, K., Klein, Z., & Condon, C. (2001). Success of drug courts in Orange County, California: Process and outcome evaluations. Technical Report. Long Beach, CA: California State University Long Beach, Department of Criminal Justice. Esperian, J. H. (2010). The effect of prison education programs on recidivism. The Journal of Correctional Education, 61(4): 316-334. Fabelo, T. (2002). The impact of prison education on community reintegration of inmates: The Texas case. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(3): 106-110. Farrall, S. (2002). Rethinking What Works with Offenders: Probation, Social Context and Desistance from Crime. Cullumpton, UK: Willan Publishing. Gardner, G. (2004). The relationship of higher education programs on recidivism delivered through a North Carolina community college in a correctional setting. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina. Gilbert, K. (2012). Goldman Sachs invests in first U.S. social impact bond. Institutional Investor. Retrieved from http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/ Gliksman, L., Newton-Taylor, B., Patra, J., & Rehm, J. (2004). Toronto drug treatment court evaluation project final report. London, ON: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Social, Prevention and Health Policy Research Department. Hrabowski, F. A., & Robbi, J. (2002). The benefits of correctional education. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(3): 96–99. Jarjoura, G. R., & Haight, K. A. (2011). Estimating the cost savings associated with a 1% reduction in recidivism for Marion County, Indiana. Indianapolis, IN: Center for Criminal Justice Research, Indiana University Public Policy Institute. Johnson, S., & Latessa, E. J. (2000). The Hamilton County drug court: Outcome evaluation findings. Unpublished Manuscript. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati. Lockwood, S., Nally, J. M., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2012). The effect of correctional education on postrelease employment and recidivism: A 5-year follow-up study in the state of Indiana. Crime & Delinquency, 58(3): 380-396. doi: 10.1177/0011128712441695 MacKenzie, D. L. (2008). Structure and components of successful educational programs. Unpublished paper presented at the Reentry Roundtable on Education, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York. Miethe, T. D., Lu, H., & Reese, E. (2000). Reintegrative shaming and recidivism risks in drug court: Explanations for some unexpected findings. Crime & Delinquency, 46 (4): 522-541. Palmer, T., Patricia Van V., Faye T., & Doris, M. (2012). Insights from Ted Palmer: Experimental Criminology in a Different Era. Journal of Experimental Criminology 8 (2):103-115. Peters, R. H., & Murrin, M. R. (2000). Effectiveness of treatment-based drug courts in reducing criminal recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 27(1): 72-96. Roman, J., Townsend, W., & Bhati, A. S. (2003). Recidivism rates for Drug Court graduates: Nationally based estimate - Final report. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute and Caliber. Spohn, C., Piper, R. K., Martin, T., & Frenzel, E. D. (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. Steurer, S. J., & Smith, L. G. (2003). Education reduces crime, three-state recidivism study, executive summary. Lanham, MD: Correctional Education Association. Vacca, J. S. (2004). Educated prisoners are less likely to return to prison. Journal of Correctional Education, 55(4): 297-305. Wolfe, E., Guydish, J., & Termondt, J. (2002). A drug court outcome evaluation comparing arrests in a two year follow-up period. Journal of Drug Issues, 32 (4): 1155-1172. Read More