Please call 800-503-2899 and enter access code 3084342 for ... · • Educate the team on the foundation of the research behind the practices. Practices are not checkmarks on a to-do

Please call 800-503-2899 and enter

access code 3084342 for the audio portion

of the presentation in addition

to logging in online.

The webinar will begin shortly.

National Center for State CourtsOutcome Evaluation

Hybrid Courts

Courts Involved in StudyHybrid Courts

There were a total of 53 courts in the Hybrid Court sample:

• 10th Circuit, Saginaw

• 10th District, Battle Creek

• 11th Circuit, Alger/Schoolcraft

• 14B District Court, Washtennaw

• 15th District, Ann Arbor

• 16th District, Livonia

• 20th Circuit, Ottawa

• 21st Circuit, Isabella

• 23rd Circuit, Alcona

• 33rd District, Woodhaven

• 35th Circuit, Shiawassee

• 36th Circuit, Van Buren

• 36th District, Detroit

• 37th Circuit, Calhoun Women's

• 37th Circuit, Calhoun Men's

• 37th District, Warren

• 3rd Circuit, Wayne

• 41B District, Clinton Twp.

• 41st Circuit, Iron

• 44th Circuit, Livingston

• 44th District, Royal Oak

• 45th Circuit, St. Joseph

• 48th Circuit, Allegan

• 4th Circuit, Jackson

• 4th District, Cass

• 37th Circuit, Calhoun Women's

• 37th Circuit, Calhoun Men's



• 37th District, Warren

• 3rd Circuit, Wayne

• 41B District, Clinton Twp.

• 41st Circuit, Iron

• 44th Circuit, Livingston

• 44th District, Royal Oak

• 45th Circuit, St. Joseph

• 48th Circuit, Allegan

• 4th Circuit, Jackson

• 4th District, Cass

• 50th Circuit, Chippewa

• 51st District, Waterford

• 52nd 3 District, Rochester Hills

• 52nd 4 District, Troy

• 53rd Circuit, Cheboygan

• 54B District, East Lansing

• 55th District, Ingham

• 56B District Barry

• 56th Circuit, Eaton

• 58th District, Ottawa

• 5th Circuit, Barry

• 61st District, Grand Rapids

• 67th District, Genesee

• 6th Circuit, Oakland

• 7th Circuit, Genesee

• 80th District, Clare/Glan



• 86th District, Grand Traverse

• 87th District, Otsego

• 88th District, Alpena/Montmorency

• 89th District, Cheboygan

• 8th Circuit, Ionia

• 8th District, Kalamazoo

• 92nd District, Mackinac/Luce

• 93rd District, Alger

• 93rd District, Schoolcraft

• 95B District, Iron

• R, 97th District

• UDCI 6th Circuit, Oakland

• UDCI 7th Circuit, Genesee

Participant DemographicsHybrid Courts (n=6,761)

Male, 69.1%

Female, 30.9%

Gender

79.0%

14.9%

3.1%

1.9%

1.1%

Caucasian

AfricanAmerican

Hispanic/Latino

Other*

Multi-racial

Race

*Other includes Asian American/Pacific Islander, and

Native American.

Participant DemographicsHybrid Courts (n=6,761)

Age

6.8%

41.3%

23.9%

17.0%

9.1%

1.9%

<21

21-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

>60

67.5%

15.2%

13.2%

3.2%

0.9%

Single

Divorced

Married

Separated

Widowed

Marital

Status

Education Level at EntryHybrid Courts (n=6,753)

18.9%

10.3%

28.7%

4.4%

24.6%

4.1%

7.2%

1.7%

11th grade or less GED High schoolgraduate

Trade school Some college College graduate 2-year program

College graduate 4-year program

Some postgraduate/advanced

degree

Employment Status at EntryHybrid Courts (n=6,751)

40.7%37.7%

14.1%

6.3%

0.7% 0.4%

Employed full-time Unemployed Employed part-time Not in labor force Disabled Retired

Drug of ChoiceHybrid Courts (n=6,761)

* Other includes barbiturates, club drugs, hallucinogens, inhalants, sedatives, amphetamines,

and benzodiazepines.

60.1%

16.6%9.8%

5.2% 3.3% 3.4% 1.6%

Alcohol Heroin/Opiates Marijuana Cocaine/CrackCocaine

Methamphetamines Poly Drug Other*

Treatment/Diagnosis InformationHybrid Courts

93.0%

65.2%

30.1%

19.7%

Current Substance Use Disorder Prior Substance Abuse Txt Current Co-Occurring DisorderDiagnosis

Mental Health History

Criminal History

Prior Criminal HistoryHybrid Courts

Prior misdemeanor convictions, 85.1%

Prior felony convictions,

29.6%

Average number of prior

misdemeanor convictions = 4.3

Average number of prior felony

convictions = 2.4

Any prior conviction = 88.4%

Placement Offense

Placement OffensesHybrid Courts

Placement Offense

Severity (n=6,759)

Placement

Offense(n=6,761)

*Other includes non-violent sex offenses.

Felony, 37.7%

Misdemeanor, 61.5%

Other, 0.8%

62.0%

22.1%

8.4%

6.4%

0.7%

0.4%

DUI/AlcoholOffense

Drug Offense

Property Offense

Other/UnknownOffense*

Traffic Offense

DomesticViolence Offense

Services Received in

Hybrid Court

Treatment Received Hybrid Courts

71.0%

20.5% 21.7%

0.8% 0.3%

81.3%

22.2%

14.4%

0.3% 0.3%

56.9%

18.6%

33.6%

1.7% 0.3%

Outpatient Intensive Outpatient Residential Sub-Acute Detox Outpatient Detox

All participants

Graduates

Non-Graduates

There is a significant difference between graduates and non-graduates in outpatient treatment services received (p<.001), intensive

outpatient treatment received (p<.001), residential treatment received (p<.001), and sub-acute detox services received (p<.001).

Treatment ServicesReceived Treatment Services to Match ASAM Level

77%

79%

37%

58%

Level 0.5 Early Intervention (N=100)

Level I Outpatient (N=3,942)

Level II Intensive Outpatient/PartialHospitilization (N=1,735)

Level III Residential/Inpatient (N=940)

Program Completion

Rates

Completion StatusHybrid Courts

59.4%

35.4%

5.2%

Graduates Non-Graduates Other

Unsuccessful CompletionHybrid Courts (n=2,393)

Average time to abscond = 8 months

59.6%

33.4%

7.0%

Non-Compliance Absconded New Offense

Length of Stay Kaplan-Meier Survival AnalysisHybrid Courts

Graduates:

Median: 473 days – 16 months

Non-Graduates:


All Completers:


Statistical Significance

Statistical ImportanceWhat is a statistically significant difference?

• In any analysis, there’s a possibility that a result is simply due to random chance or error, even if it

looks convincing.

• A statistically significant result tells us that a relationship is not due simply to random chance. We

can more confidently say a result is true when it is statistically significant.

• The smaller the p-value, the more confident we are that the result is reliable!

A statistically significant result tells us that a relationship is not the result of random chance.

P-value Possibility Finding is Result of Chance/Error

Possibility Finding is Result of Factors Studied

.05 5% 95%

.01 1% 99%

.001 0.1% 99.9%

Recidivism Rates:

Graduates vs. Non-graduates

Michigan Definition of Recidivism

The Michigan SCAO reports on recidivism within two years and within four years of admission.

In order to be included in the two-year recidivism study, the participant must have been admitted at

least two years prior to the time the evaluation is conducted, and their comparison member had to

have their case opened in the case management system at least two years prior to the evaluation.

In order to be included in the four-year recidivism study, the participant must have been admitted at

least four years prior to the time the evaluation is conducted, and their comparison member had to

have their case opened in the case management system at least four years prior to the evaluation.

General Recidivism Rates: Graduates vs. Non-GraduatesHybrid Courts

Graduates

Non-Graduates

2-year recidivism

*

*There is a significant difference between the general recidivism rates of graduates and non-

graduates (p<.001).

*

5.3%

10.8%

25.1%

38.3%

4 year recidivism

Drug/Alcohol Recidivism Rates – Graduates vs. Non-GraduatesHybrid Courts

Graduates

Non-Graduates

2-year recidivism

*

*There is a significant difference between the drug/alcohol recidivism rates of graduates and

non-graduates (p<.001).

*

3.4%

7.4%

14.2%

24.7%

4 year recidivism

Recidivism Rates:

Participants vs. Comparison Group

Two-Year

Recidivism Rates

2-Year Recidivism RateHybrid Courts (n=3,135)

Hybrid Court

Participants

Comparison

Group

All recidivism

*There is a significant difference between the two-year general recidivism rates and the

drug/alcohol recidivism of hybrid court participants and the comparison group (p<.001).

*

*

13%

8%

19%

12%

Drug/Alcohol recidivism

Two Year Recidivism Rates – Participant VariablesHybrid Courts

Participant Variables Impact

Race A hybrid court participant who is not black or white is 65% less likely to

reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise similar white hybrid

court participant.

Age A hybrid court participant who is between the ages of 31 and 40 is 49% less

likely to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise similar hybrid

court participant who is between the ages of 21 and 30.

Drug of choice – Other

(e.g. cocaine, marijuana,

and poly-substance)

A hybrid court participant whose drug of choice is “other” is 39% less likely

to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise similar hybrid court

participant whose drug of choice is opiates/heroin.

Two-Year Recidivism Rates – Participant VariablesHybrid Courts


Treatment hours

between 100 and 200

A hybrid court participant who receives between 100 and 200 hours of

treatment is 60% less likely to reoffend within two years compared to an

otherwise similar hybrid court participant who receives less than 100 hours

of treatment.

Treatment hours greater

than 200

A hybrid court participant who receives greater than 200 hours of treatment

is 70% less likely to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise

similar hybrid court participant who receives less than 100 hours of

treatment.

Completion status A hybrid court participant who successfully completed the program is 80%

less likely to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise similar

hybrid court participant who did not successfully complete the program.

Two-Year Recidivism Rates – Participant VariablesHybrid Courts


Residential treatment

only

A hybrid court participant who participates in residential treatment only is

258% more likely to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise

similar hybrid court participant who does not attend residential treatment

while enrolled in the court.

Residential treatment

and outpatient treatment

A hybrid court participant who participates in residential treatment and

outpatient treatment is 149% more likely to reoffend within two years

compared to an otherwise similar hybrid court participant who does not

attend residential treatment while enrolled in the court.

Over treated in relation

to ASAM criteria

Participants who are over treated in relation to their assessed ASAM level

are 114% more likely to reoffend within two years compared to an otherwise

similar participant who is treated at the level assessed by ASAM criteria.

Four-Year

Recidivism Rates

4-Year Recidivism RateHybrid Courts (n=1,175)

*The is a significant difference between the four-year general recidivism rates and the

comparison group (p<.008). There is not a significant difference in the four-year

drug/alcohol recidivism of hybrid court participants and the comparison group.

Hybrid Court

Participants

Comparison

Group

All recidivism

23%

15%

28%

18%

Drug/Alcohol recidivism

*

Four-Year Recidivism Rates – Participant VariablesHybrid Courts

Participant Characteristics Impact

Placement charge severity A hybrid court participant whose placement charge is a felony is 77%

more likely to reoffend within four years compared to an otherwise

similar participant charged with misdemeanor who is placed in a

hybrid court.

Summary

of Findings

Summary of FindingsHybrid Courts

• Always try to incorporate evidence-based practices into the design and operation of

your hybrid court.

• Educate the team on the foundation of the research behind the practices. Practices

are not checkmarks on a to-do list.

• Several study specific findings:

The number of treatment hours received is important. Strive for a minimum of

200 hours of treatment – especially if you are serving high-risk clients.

Assess both risk and need and apply appropriate interventions based on both.

This means both supervision and treatment.

Examine your use of residential treatment.

Documents

Please call 800-503-2899 and enter access code 3084342 for ... · • Educate the team on the foundation of the research behind the practices. Practices are not checkmarks on a to-do