|Juvenile Drug Treatment Court (JDTC) Multiple Site Evaluation
||Michael L. Dennis, Ph.D.
||American Institutes for Research (AIR)
||Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
||November 15, 2017 - October 31, 2020
||This is a multisite evaluation of efforts to implement the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP, 2016) Juvenile Drug Treatment Court (JDTC) Guidelines. Directed by Chestnut Health Systems, it is being conducted in collaboration with Temple University, Northwest Professional Consortium, Inc. (dba NPC Research), and Carnevale and Associates, LLC (CALLC).This work is also a part of a larger cooperative agreement that requires working closely with AIR (prime) and its other subcontractors who have developed and will refine the guidelines based on findings from this effort, as well as OJJDP and its contractors/grantees providing training and technical assistance (TTA) to implement the guidelines and grantees from 15 jurisdictions, and who will implement the new guidelines and collect the data on their JDTC(s) and a comparison standard juvenile court. Over 2 years, each grantee jurisdiction/site will a) to recruit at least 150 youth who are “eligible” for JDTC or Traditional Juvenile Courts (TJC), b) either randomly or quasi-experimentally assign these youth to the JDTC or TJC, and c) collect data from court staff, youth records and youth interview. The primary research question for this study is: Do youth with substance use disorders experience more positive outcomes if assigned to a JDTC rather than to a traditional (i.e., non-JDTC) juvenile court program? The outcomes to be evaluated include changes in a) recidivism, b) substance use and symptomatology, c) academic performance (grades, attendance/truancy), d) mental symptomatology and well-being, and e) relationship with parents/guardians and peers. The study will also look at several secondary research questions, including 1) Are different interpretations of the guidelines by the courts associated with better outcomes? 2) Are there certain guidelines that, if present, are associated with better outcomes? 3) Are there guidelines that, if absent, do not seem to be associated with worse outcomes (i.e., they are not necessary)?