Transcript London Drug Treatment Court - Addiction Services Thames Valley

First Year Update and Plans for Year Two
A Community Collaboration
April 2011
 Colloquium
held September 2009
 Willingness in London community
 Offers for partnership
 Several agencies began to meet
 Support and leadership from crowns and
defense
 Availability and interest from Judge Rabley
 Following the energy of “yes” (Wheatley)
 Modelled after other successful courts

Toronto Drug Treatment Court
 John
Howard
Society
 St. Leonard’s
Society
 LPS
 Federal Crown
 Provincial Crown
 Defense Counsel
 Probation
 ADSTV
 WOTCH
 LIHC
 OW
 CAMH
 MSL
– Streetscape
 N’Amerind
 UWO Research
Community
 30
day Assessment Period
 Phases of Treatment
 Certificates for Completion of Phases
 Intensive Addiction Counselling and Case
Management


Group
Individual
 Education
Sessions
 Criminogenic Thinking
 Anger Management
 Mandatory Drug Testing
 Weekly
Court Attendance
 System of Graduated Incentives and
Sanctions
 Incentives and Sanctions are immediate and
equitable
 Unsupervised Housing at WOTCH House
 Volunteerism
 Time Management
 Bail Supervision
 30 day assessment bed at SLCS (intermittent)
 Housing


WOTCH House
SLCS – Gallagher House – 30 day assessment
 Addiction

ADSTV
 Health

Counselling and Education
/ Primary Care
LIHC NP
 Volunteering


(40 hours)
Food bank (initially)
SLCS
 UDS

Gamma Dynacare
 London

Police Services
Curfew checks, bail conditions
 JHS



Groups for family, criminogenic thinking, anger
management
Sanctionable hours
Bail supervision
 CAMH

Evaluation
 Tuesdays


Pre Court
Court
 Intake
and screening to determine eligibility
 Assessment using ADAT Tools

Pre/Post Comparison of scores
 Art
Therapy
 Program Phases I-III (30 Day assessment)
 Graduation Criteria
 Based on honesty about drug use
 Rooted in harm reduction philosophy
 Pain
Management: a concern
 Physical Health: very poor health
 Trauma: is significant
 Self Management: difficulty handling pain,
stress, decision – making
 Safe housing – many homeless or
inadequately housed with family
 Instincts are to panic and run
Probation notes:
 increased attendance, reporting habits and
better organization
 Increased access to counselling > usual
 Previously unsuccessful and now attending
appointments
 Curfew checks more successful
 Reduction in drug use and apparent
compliance with programming
 Reduced recidivism
 LDTC
program Development and
Implementation


Is the program delivered in the manner in which
it was originally intended
Court, Treatment, Working Group/Steering
Committee
 LDTC

Participant Process
Does the program accomplish what it was
intended to accomplish?
 Data


LDTC Program Development/Implementation –
qualitative- Summer 2009-June 30, 2011
LDTC Participants-quantitative/qualitative June
2010-June 30, 2011
 Year

Collection Period
One Report
September 30, 2011 – qualitative analysis,
descriptive quantitative analysis
 Qualitative

Initial meetings, colloquium, formation of
working group, implementation of the program
 Partnership

Formation
Key court/treatment components (Judge, Crown,
Duty Council, Probation, bail Supervision, UDS),
supporting services (adjunct treatment, housing,
volunteer placement)
 Processes,

Timeline Analysis
Protocols, Practices
Admission criteria, rewards/graduated sanctions,
graduation/discharge criteria, treatment
program/plan
 Baseline

Intake socio-demographic/psychological
characteristics, legal involvement, substance
use, family/social support systems
 Process



Participant retention (rates, length of time in
program)
Changes in socio-demographic/psychological
characteristics. Interpersonal / family
relationships
Changes in substance use




Changes in legal involvement
Factors associated with court / treatment
compliance
Availability / accessibility of community
services/resources
Participant perceptions, opinions, beliefs and
experiences of the program (qualitative)







Male
Age range 19-44
Incarcerated for theft,
break & enter,
shoplifting
Addictions to opiates,
cannabinoids and or
crack cocaine
Homeless or marginally
housed (8)
Unemployed (9)
Living in poverty (8)




Physical health issues –
liver disease, MSK
impairments, poor
nutrition (9)
Mental health issues –
childhood trauma and
abuse, insomnia,
depression, anxiety (9)
Developmental issues –
learning disability,
ADHD (4)
Strained or
dysfunctional
relationships (9)
 Saved
the criminal
justice system over
$600,000
 Facilitated housing
for all 9 participants
 Provided
approximately
150 individual
addiction
counselling sessions
 Facilitated 112
group treatment
sessions
 Analyzed
over 500
urine drug screens
 Assisted 2
individuals to
maintain sobriety
 Overall reduction in
substance abuse for
all participants
 Facilitated return to
school (1)
 Personal
identification
acquired (4)
 14
participants admitted – 11 males, 3
females (June 30/10 – present)
 2 participants expelled from program after
incurring new charges
 1 Male and 1 Female dropped out before or
just after the 30 day mark
 1 Female transferred to Therapeutic Court
 Currently
8 active participants
 2 participants attended withdrawal
management services and have completed
short term residential treatment
 8 clients appear to be the maximum caseload
at this time for 1.0 FTE staff (usually
caseloads are 35-50)
 Day
planners work
 Clients have multiple barriers
 Advocacy is key to overcoming barriers
 Health care is significant in early months
 Criminal thinking must be addressed
 Communication between partners essential
 We are learning about each other’s worlds

Legal learning about counselling and vice versa
 Our
clients are hurting, afraid, in pain
 Change happens very slowly (trust)
 Donations
 YMCA
passes
 Programs at WOTCH House
 Person with Lived Experience – Security
Tenant at WOTCH House
 Community Service Opportunities
 Employment Opportunities
 All
partners carrying on for another year
 Seeking funding
 Sharing evaluation results
 Collaboration with other programs nationally
 CADTC conference in Toronto in Nov 2011
 Steering
Committee – 4 x a year
 Operations Committee – 1 x month
 Regular Communication
 Planning on shared professional development
 2 retreats to date – annual plans
 Consensus Models for Decision Making
 http://www.nadcp.org/learn/all-rise
 Canadian
/ Ontario version needed
 Questions?
 Discussion?
 Thank
you!