Veterans Treatment Court Standards, Best Practices, and Promising

State Court Administrative Office

Court Services

Problem-Solving Courts

Michigan Association of Treatment Court Professionals

Veterans Treatment Court

Standards, Best Practices,

and Promising Practices

arch 2021

INDEPENDENCE ∙ ACCESSIBILITY ∙ ENGAGEMENT ∙ EFFICIENCY

Introduction

Purpose

This manual is an extension of the Adult Drug Court Standards, Best Practices, and Promising

Practices manual written by staff from the State Court Administrative Office and board members

of the Michigan Association of Treatment Court Professionals. It is intended to assist

Michigan’s veterans treatment courts in complying with the veterans treatment court statute,

best practices, and the 10 Key Components of Veterans Treatment Courts. When applicable,

information about the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is included.

Veterans treatment courts are based on the drug court model, so much of the research in this

manual is from studies of drug courts; relevant information and practices have been applied to

the veterans treatment court concept. Research suggests that veterans treatment court outcomes

are at least as favorable as those of other treatment courts.

The content in this manual comes

from many sources, but it leans most heavily on the National Association of Drug Court

Professionals Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards, Volume I and Volume II. When “drug

court” is referenced in this manual, it is because the research was conducted on drug courts and

not veterans treatment courts. Until veterans treatment court research suggests different

practices are appropriate for veterans treatment courts, the assumption is that drug court research

is applicable to this population. This manual is intended for all veterans treatment court team

members to ensure that their program is following the statute and implementing best practices.

Definitions

The chapters in this manual include three main types of information:

• Standard: Standards are pulled directly from the veterans treatment court statute, the 10

Key Components, state and federal confidentiality law, and case law and precedent that

are binding on Michigan courts.

• Best Practice: Best practices are supported by scientific research and data or nonbinding

case law, and are proven methods to follow. The best practices have either been shown

by empirical research to produce better outcomes than other practices or they are

regarding compliance with confidentiality, due process, or other rules. Their use results

in higher-quality programs.

• Promising Practice: Promising practices are not yet supported by scientific research or

data, but anecdotal evidence and experience suggest they are helpful in adhering to the

model. Promising practices are recommendations for courts to follow to operate a

higher-quality program.

See Appendix A.

See Veterans Courts: Early Outcomes and Key Indicators for Success, written by Justin Holbrook and Sara

Anderson of the Widener University School of Law, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1912655. This research

paper collects data from multiple sources, including a survey. Because the survey had a small number of

respondents, the results should be qualified, but all indications are that veterans treatment courts enjoy favorable

comparisons to drug court outcomes.

How to Use This Manual

Each chapter is divided into relevant topics. Included within each topic are the standards, best

practices, and promising practices, as well as the supporting authority or research. Not all topics

have all three subdivisions: some topics have only best practices, and other topics do not have

promising practices.

There are two kinds of best practices in this manual: best practices that a program must follow in

order to become a certified veterans treatment court (bolded) and best practices that a program

should be following.

There are footnotes throughout the manual that refer to additional research. The 15 appendices

are referenced in the chapters, including model documents that courts can use to comply with

certain standards and required best practices. If you would like to request training or technical

assistance, please contact your regional administrator. If you have questions, please contact

[email protected].

Certification

In order for a program to become a certified veterans treatment court under MCL 600.1201, it

must comply with the standards and required best practices in this manual. All standards and

required best practices are in bold.

iii

Chapter 1: Roles and Responsibilities of the Veterans Treatment Court Judge ......................... 1

I. General .................................................................................................................................... 1

A. Standards .......................................................................................................................... 1

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 1

II. Staffing Meetings and Review Hearings ................................................................................ 2

Standards .......................................................................................................................... 2

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 2

III. Works Cited ............................................................................................................................ 4

Chapter 2: Participant Supervision and Compliance ................................................................... 5

Caseload .................................................................................................................................. 5

Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 5

Frequency ................................................................................................................................ 5

A. Standards .......................................................................................................................... 5

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 5

C. Promising Practices .......................................................................................................... 6

Services to Participants ........................................................................................................... 6

Standards .......................................................................................................................... 6

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 7

Incentives and Sanctions ......................................................................................................... 7

A. Standards .......................................................................................................................... 7

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................... 8

C. Promising Practices .......................................................................................................... 9

Payments ............................................................................................................................... 10

A. Standards ........................................................................................................................ 10

Phase Promotion and Graduation.......................................................................................... 10

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 10

Program Discharge................................................................................................................ 11

A. Standards ........................................................................................................................ 11

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 12

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 13

Chapter 3: Confidentiality ........................................................................................................... 15

Confidentiality ...................................................................................................................... 15

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 15

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 18

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 19

Chapter 4: Due Process ............................................................................................................... 20

Waiver of Rights ................................................................................................................... 20

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 20

1st Amendment ..................................................................................................................... 20

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 20

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 21

4th Amendment ..................................................................................................................... 21

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 21

14th Amendment ................................................................................................................... 22

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 22

Sanctions and Termination ................................................................................................... 22

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 22

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 24

Chapter 5: The Veterans Treatment Court Team ....................................................................... 25

Team Composition ................................................................................................................ 25

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 25

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 25

C. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 26

Staffing Meetings and Review Hearings .............................................................................. 26

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 26

Communication and Decision Making ................................................................................. 27

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 27

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 29

Chapter 6: Veterans Treatment Court Population and Admission ............................................ 30

Screening............................................................................................................................... 30

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 30

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 31

C. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 31

Eligible Offenses ................................................................................................................... 31

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 31

Clinical Substance Use and Mental Health Assessments ..................................................... 33

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 33

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 34

Risk and Need Assessment ................................................................................................... 34

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 34

Legal Outcome ...................................................................................................................... 35

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 35

Admission Factors ................................................................................................................ 36

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 36

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 37

Findings on the Record or in the Court File ......................................................................... 37

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 37

Program Entry ....................................................................................................................... 38

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 38

I Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 38

Chapter 7: Drug and Alcohol Testing ......................................................................................... 40

General .................................................................................................................................. 40

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 40

Randomization ...................................................................................................................... 40

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 40

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 40

Frequency and Breadth of Testing ........................................................................................ 41

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 41

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 41

Scientifically Valid Drug Testing Methods .......................................................................... 42

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 42

Witnessed Collection ............................................................................................................ 44

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 44

Chain of Custody and Results ............................................................................................... 45

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 45

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 46

C. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 46

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 47

Chapter 8: Treatment ................................................................................................................... 48

General and Definition of Veterans Treatment Courts ......................................................... 48

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 48

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 48

Treatment Entry .................................................................................................................... 49

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 49

Treatment Services ................................................................................................................ 49

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 49

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 50

Evidence-Based Models of Treatment .................................................................................. 52

A. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 52

Treatment Duration ............................................................................................................... 52

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 52

Medication-Assisted Treatment ............................................................................................ 53

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 53

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 54

Chapter 9: Education ................................................................................................................... 55

General .................................................................................................................................. 55

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 55

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 55

Chapter 10: Program Evaluation ................................................................................................ 58

Collection and Maintenance of Information ......................................................................... 58

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 58

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 58

Evaluation and Program Modification .................................................................................. 58

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 58

B. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 60

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 61

Chapter 11: Equity and Inclusion ............................................................................................... 62

Equity and Inclusion ............................................................................................................. 62

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 62

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 65

Chapter 12: Veteran Peer Mentors ............................................................................................. 67

General and the Role of Mentors .......................................................................................... 67

Standards ........................................................................................................................ 67

B. Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 67

C. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 67

Recruitment and Screening ................................................................................................... 68

Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 68

Education and Training ......................................................................................................... 68

Best Practices ................................................................................................................. 68

B. Promising Practices ........................................................................................................ 68

vii

Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 70

Appendix A Michigan Veterans Treatment Court Statute ......................................................... 71

Appendix B Model Veterans Treatment Court Discharge Statement ........................................ 81

Appendix C Model Multi-Party Consent for Release of Information ........................................ 82

Appendix D New Staff/Team Member Orientation .................................................................... 87

Appendix E Model Confidentiality Policies and Procedures ..................................................... 89

Appendix F Model DCCMIS User Confidentiality Agreement .................................................. 92

Appendix G Model Confidentiality MOU ................................................................................... 96

Appendix H Model Visitor Confidentiality and Consent for Release of Information............. 103

Appendix I Model Program MOU ............................................................................................. 108

Appendix J Model Veterans Treatment Court Agreement to Participate and Waiver ............ 117

Appendix N Ten Principles of a Good Testing Program .......................................................... 122

Appendix O Veterans Treatment Court Minimum Standard Data .......................................... 123

Chapter 1: Roles and Responsibilities of the

Veterans Treatment Court Judge

This chapter discusses the judge’s roles on the veterans treatment court team. The judge serves

as leader of the team and plays an important part in guiding participants through the program.

Specific topics include the terms veterans treatment court judge, staffing meetings, and review

hearings. Confidentiality is mentioned but discussed in further detail in Chapter 3. The judge is

also important in ensuring participants’ due process rights are protected; best practices regarding

due process are discussed in Chapter 4.

I. General

A. Standards

1. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Ongoing close judicial interaction with each veteran is

essential. (MCL 600.1201(1)(g))

2. An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our

society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and

enforcing, and should personally observe, high standards of conduct so

that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. A

judge should always be aware that the judicial system is for the benefit of

the litigant and the public, not the judiciary. (Michigan Code of Judicial

Conduct, Canon 1)

B. Best Practices

1. Participants ordinarily appear before the same judge throughout their

enrollment in the veterans treatment court.

a) Drug courts that rotated the judicial assignment or where

participants appeared before alternating judges had the poorest

outcomes in several research studies. (Finigan, Carey, & Cox,

2007) (National Institute of Justice, 2006)

2. The judge presides over the veterans treatment court for no less than two

consecutive years.

a) When judges preside over drug courts for at least two years, those

programs have significant cost savings and significantly lower

recidivism. (Carey, Pukstas, Waller, Mackin, & Finigan, 2008)

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Even greater reductions in recidivism were found in courts where

the judges oversaw the drug court on a voluntary basis and the

term was indefinite. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

3. The judge bases interaction with participants on the four principles of

procedural fairness: voice, neutrality, respectful treatment, and trustworthy

authorities.

a) Drug use, probation violations, and recidivism rates were all

reduced in drug courts that applied the four principles of procedural

fairness. (MacKenzie, 2016)

II. Staffing Meetings and Review Hearings

Standards

1. In the performance of judicial duties, the following standards apply:

a) A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional

competence in it. A judge should be unswayed by partisan

interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism. (Michigan Code of

Judicial Conduct, Canon 3(A)(1))

b) A judge should be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants,

jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge

deals in an official capacity, and should require similar

conduct of lawyers and of staff, court officials, and others

subject to the judge’s direction and control. (Michigan Code

of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3(A)(3))

c) Without regard to a person’s race, gender, or other protected

personal characteristic, a judge should treat every person

fairly, with courtesy, and respect. (Michigan Code of Judicial

Conduct, Canon 3(A)(10))

B. Best Practices

1. The judge regularly attends staffing meetings during which the veterans

treatment court team reviews each participant’s progress and discusses

potential consequences for performance.

a) Research has consistently shown that when the judge regularly

attends staffing meetings, cost savings increase and recidivism is

reduced. (Carey, Pukstas, Waller, Mackin, & Finigan, 2008)

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

2. The judge considers the perspectives of all team members before making final

decisions that affect participants’ welfare or liberty interests. The judge relies

on the expert input of duly trained treatment professionals when imposing

treatment-related conditions.

a) The collaborative nature of treatment courts brings together experts

from various disciplines. Their expertise and shared information

allow the judge to make better-informed decisions. (National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2018) (Hora & Stalcup,

2008)

3. The judge spends sufficient time during status review hearings reviewing each

participant’s progress in the program. Evidence suggests judges should spend

a minimum of three minutes interacting with each participant in court.

a) Recidivism was significantly reduced, by as much as 153 percent,

in drug courts where the judge spent at least three minutes

interacting with each participant. The same study showed that cost

savings were also improved when the judge spent the minimum

three minutes with each participant. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan,

2012)

4. The judge offers supportive comments to participants, stresses the importance

of their commitment to treatment and other program requirements, and

expresses optimism about their ability to improve their health and behavior.

The judge does not humiliate participants or subject them to foul or abusive

language. The judge allows participants a reasonable opportunity to explain

their perspectives concerning factual controversies and the imposition of

sanctions, incentives, and therapeutic adjustments.

a) Research has consistently shown that the perceived quality of

interactions between participants and the drug court judge is among

the most influential factors for success in the program. (National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

b) Significantly greater reductions in crime and substance use resulted

when the judges were independently rated as being more fair,

attentive, caring, and enthusiastic. (Zweig, Lindquist, Downey,

Roman, & Rossman, 2012)

III. Works Cited

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Carey, S., Pukstas, K., Waller, M., Mackin, R., & Finigan, M. (2008). Drug courts and state mandated

drug treatment programs: Outcomes, costs, and consequences. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Finigan, M., Carey, S., & Cox, A. (2007). The imapact of a mature drug court over 10 years of

operation: Recidivism and costs. Portland: NPC Research.

Hora, P., & Stalcup, T. (2008). Drug treatment courts in the twenty-first century: The evolution of the

revolution in problem-solving courts. Georgia Law Review, 717-811.

MacKenzie, B. (2016). The Judge Is the Key Component: The Importance of Procedural Fairness in

Drug-Treatment Courts. Court Review, 52, 8-34.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2018). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume 1.

National Institute of Justice. (2006). Drug courts: The second decade. Washington, D.C.: Office of

Justice Programs, US Department of Justice.

Zweig, J., Lindquist, C., Downey, P., Roman, J., & Rossman, S. (2012). Drug court policies and

practices: How program implementation affects offender substance use and criminal behavior

outcomes. Drug Court Review, 43-79.

Chapter 2: Participant Supervision and Compliance

This chapter discusses participant supervision and compliance with program requirements.

Specific topics include the veterans treatment court supervision caseload, frequency of

monitoring events, services provided to participants, incentives and sanctions, phase promotion

and graduation, and termination from the veterans treatment court. Several topics are addressed

in additional detail in other chapters.

Caseload

Best Practices

1. The number of individuals participating in the program as a cohort or a track

should be fewer than 125.

a) Programs that have fewer than 125 individual participants at one

time have statistically significant reductions in recidivism. (Carey,

Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

2. Supervision caseloads should not exceed 50 active participants per

supervision officer (most commonly a probation officer).

a) Probationers on 50:1 caseloads received significantly more

probation office sessions, field visits, employer contacts, telephone

check-ins, and substance use disorder and mental health treatment.

As a consequence of receiving more services, they also had

significantly better probation outcomes, including fewer positive

drugs tests and other technical violations. (Jalbert & Rhodes, 2012)

Frequency

A. Standards

1. A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the

court with all of the following:

a) Consistent, continual, and close monitoring and interaction with

the court, treatment providers, probation, and the participant.

(MCL 600.1207 (1)(a))

b) Periodic evaluation assessments of the participant’s

circumstances and progress in the program. (MCL

600.1207(1)(d))

B. Best Practices

1. Participants appear before the judge for status hearings at least once

every two weeks during the first phase of the program. The frequency of

status review hearings may be reduced gradually after participants have

initiated abstinence from alcohol and illicit drugs and are regularly

engaged in treatment. Status review hearings are scheduled at least once

every four weeks until participants are in the last phase of the program.

a) A substantial body of research demonstrates the importance of

scheduling status hearings no less frequently than every two weeks

during the first phase of a drug court. Participants had significantly

better treatment attendance, substance use abstinence, and

graduation rates when they were required to appear before the judge

every two weeks. (National Association of Drug Court

Professionals, 2013) (Festinger, Marlowe, Lee, Kirby, Bovasso, &

McLellan, 2002)

2. Participants meet individually with a clinical case manager or comparable

treatment professional at least weekly during the first phase of veterans

treatment court.

a) Studies consistently find that drug courts reduce recidivism and are

more cost-effective when participants meet individually with a

clinical case manager or comparable treatment professional at least

weekly during the first phase of the program. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012) (Cissner, et al., 2013)

C. Promising Practices

1. Participants meet with a supervision officer (most commonly a probation

officer) at least twice per month in the early phases of the program. Many

courts require weekly meetings in early phases.

a) While there is no specific research available on this topic, research

on frequency of review hearings and meetings with clinical case

managers is relevant. More frequent meetings allow for closer

supervision.

Services to Participants

Standards

1. A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the

court with all of the following:

a) Substance abuse treatment services, relapse prevention services,

education, and vocational opportunities as appropriate and

practicable. It is the intent of the legislature that, where

practicable, these services shall be provided by the VA. (MCL

600.1207(1)(f))

b) Mental health treatment services as appropriate and

practicable. It is the intent of the legislature that, where

practicable, these services shall be provided by the VA. (MCL

600.1207(1)(g))

2. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Integration of alcohol, drug treatment, and mental health

services with justice system case processing. (MCL

600.1201(1)(a))

B. Best Practices

1. Where indicated, participants receive assistance finding safe, stable, and

drug-free housing beginning in the first phase of veterans treatment court

and continuing as necessary throughout their enrollment in the program.

a) Participants are unlikely to succeed in treatment if they do not have

a safe, stable, and drug-free place to live. (Quirouette, Hannah-

Moffat, & Maurutto, 2015)

2. Participants regularly attend self-help or peer-support groups in addition to

professional counseling. The peer-support groups follow a structured

model or curriculum such as 12-step or Smart Recovery and offer

nonfaith-based options

a) Participation in self-help or peer-support groups is consistently

associated with better long-term outcomes, including greater

abstinence and lower mortality rates, when used in conjunction

with substance use disorder treatment. (Kelly, Stout, Zywiak, &

Schneider, 2006) (Moos & Timko, 2008)

3. Participants with deficient employment or academic histories receive

vocational or educational services beginning in a late phase of veterans

treatment court.

a) At least two studies of drug courts have reported improved

program retention, graduation rates, and treatment retention when

unemployed or underemployed participants received a manualized,

cognitive-behavioral vocational intervention. (Deschenes, Ireland,

& Kleinpeter, 2009) (Leukefeld, Webster, Staton-Tindall, &

Duvall, 2007)

4. Ignition interlock devices and restricted driver licenses are made available to

eligible participants. Veterans treatment courts should use the National

Center for DWI Courts ignition interlock device guidelines when

incorporating the use of these devices into their programs.

a) An evaluation of Michigan’s Ignition Interlock Pilot Program

showed that, compared to non-interlock offenders in DWI/Sobriety

Court and to standard probationers, interlock program participants

have the lowest recidivism rates after one, two, three, and four years

of follow- up. This is true for both drunk driving-related

reoffending and for general criminal reoffending. (Kierkus &

Johnson, 2016)

Incentives and Sanctions

A. Standards

1. A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the

court with all of the following:

The Michigan Secretary of State has interpreted veterans treatment courts to be within the Drug/DWI court model

for purposes of ignition interlock requirements. Thus, veterans treatment courts can offer ignition interlock

restricted licenses to their participants.

a) A regimen or strategy of appropriate and graduated but

immediate rewards for compliance and sanctions for

noncompliance, including, but not limited to, the possibility of

incarceration or confinement. (MCL 600.1207(1)(e))

2. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) A coordinated strategy that governs veterans treatment court

responses to participants’ compliance. (MCL 600.1201(1)(f))

B. Best Practices

1. The veterans treatment court places as much emphasis on incentivizing

productive behaviors as it does on reducing crime, substance use, and

other infractions.

a) Drug courts are able to reduce substance use and better prevent

criminal behavior when they focus as much on incentivizing

productive behaviors as they do on reducing noncompliant or

undesirable behaviors. (Zweig, Lindquist, Downey, Roman, &

Rossman, 2012)

2. The veterans treatment court has a range of sanctions of varying

magnitudes that may be administered in response to program infractions.

a) Programs are able to reduce substance use and recidivism when the

sanctions for failing to meet difficult goals increase progressively in

magnitude over successive infractions. This gives treatment a

chance to take effect, and prepares participants to meet steadily

increasing responsibilities in the program. (National Association of

Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

b) Sanctions that are weak in magnitude can cause habituation in

which the individual becomes accustomed, and thus less responsive,

to punishment. Imposing high-magnitude sanctions when a

participant fails to meet an easy goal helps to avoid habituation.

(National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

3. Sanctions are imposed as quickly as possible after noncompliant

behavior. Veterans treatment courts do not wait for the next review

hearing to impose a sanction if the behavior can be addressed more

immediately.

a) The value of having sanctions imposed immediately after

noncompliant behavior is a central tenet of behavior modification.

Study results show that recidivism and cost-savings do not improve

when drug courts wait until the next scheduled court appearance for

noncompliant participants instead of bringing them in earlier.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) If teams wait too long (two weeks or more) before applying a

sanction, the participants may have other issues that are more

relevant by then, or they may even have worked to improve their

behavior by then, in which case they are receiving a sanction at the

same time as they are doing well, providing them with a message

that is unclear and may even be defeating. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

4. Jail sanctions are definite in duration and typically last no longer than five

days. Participants are given access to counsel and a fair hearing if a jail

sanction might be imposed as a liberty interest is at stake.

a) Drug courts significantly lower recidivism and improve cost

savings when they use jail sanctions sparingly. (Carey, Pukstas,

Waller, Mackin, & Finigan, 2008)

b) Research indicates that jail sanctions produce diminishing returns

after approximately three to five days. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan,

2012)

5. Participants do not receive punitive sanctions if they are otherwise compliant

with their treatment and supervision requirements, but are not responding to

the treatment interventions. The appropriate course of action may be to

reassess the individual and adjust the treatment plan accordingly.

a) If a drug court imposes substantial sanctions for substance use

early in treatment, the team is likely to run out of sanctions and

reach a ceiling effect before treatment has taken effect. Therefore,

drug courts should ordinarily adjust participants’ treatment

requirements in response to positive drug tests early in the

program. (Chandler, Fletcher, & Volkow, 2009)

6. Participants are not incarcerated to achieve clinical or social service objectives

such as obtaining access to detoxification services or sober living quarters.

a) Relying on in-custody substance use disorder treatment can reduce

the cost-effectiveness of a drug court by as much as 45 percent.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

7. Team members have a written schedule of sanctions for infractions that is

shared with participants.

a) Drug courts where team members are given a copy of the guidelines

for sanctions had 72% greater cost savings.

b) Multistate research showed the most effective programs with regard

to recidivism included greater predictability of sanctions. (Rossman

& Zweig, 2012)

C. Promising Practices

1. Immediate and tangible rewards help a veterans treatment court demonstrate

the benefits of abstinence and treatment. Courts should seek to include

tangible or token rewards, such as coins, gifts, certificates, or entry into a

drawing in an incentives program.

a) Frequently, the benefits of abstinence, such as better health and

lifestyle, are abstract and distant to the abuser. The point of

motivational incentives is to bring the benefits of abstinence

forward in less time. Both voucher- and prize-based reinforcement

systems have been repeatedly shown to be effective interventions

among substance users. (Stitzer, 2008) These tangible rewards can

be used in veterans treatment court to more quickly improve

behaviors.

Payments

A. Standards

1. The veterans treatment court may require an individual admitted into the

court to pay a veterans treatment court fee that is reasonably related to

the cost to the court for administering the veterans treatment court

program as provided in the memorandum of understanding under

section 1201(2).

(MCL 600.1206(4))

a) Courts can use the SCAO Problem-Solving Court Fee Calculator

to help determine what a reasonable fee would be. This calculator

should be used only as a guide to help determine a program fee; it

is not intended to determine an exact or required amount. Courts

can determine the amount of the fee as it is reasonably related to

the cost for administering the veterans treatment court program.

2. In order to continue to participate in and successfully complete a veterans

treatment court program, an individual shall do all of the following:

a) Pay all court-ordered fines and costs, including minimum state

costs. (MCL 600.1208(1)(a))

b) Pay the veterans treatment court fee allowed under section

1206(4). (MCL 600.1208(1)(b))

c) Pay all court-ordered restitution. (MCL 600.1208(1)(c))

d) Pay all crime victims’ rights assessments under section 5 of

1989 PA 196, MCL 780.905. (MCL 600.1208(1)(d))

3. The court shall not sentence a defendant to a term of incarceration, nor

revoke probation, for failure to comply with an order to pay money

unless the court finds, on the record, that the defendant is able to comply

with the order without manifest hardship and that the defendant has not

made a good-faith effort to comply with the order. (MCR 6.425(3)(a))

4. If the court finds that the defendant is unable to comply with an order to

pay money without manifest hardship, the court may impose a payment

alternative, such as a payment plan, modification of any existing payment

plan, or waiver of part or all of the amount of money owed to the extent

permitted by law. (MCR 6.425(E)(3)(b))

Phase Promotion and Graduation

Best Practices

1. Phase promotion is predicated on the achievement of realistic and defined

behavioral objectives, such as completing a treatment regimen or

remaining drug-abstinent for a specific period of time.

a) Drug courts have significantly better outcomes when they have a

clearly defined phase structure and concrete behavioral

requirements for advancement. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Phase advancement should not be based simply on the amount of

time that participants have been enrolled in the program. (National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

2. In order to graduate, participants who are able to join the labor force must

have a job or be in school in instances where health insurance and other social

benefits such as VA benefits are not at risk.

a) Both having a job and being in school are connected to cost-savings

and reduced recidivism after the participant leaves the program.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

3. A period of greater than 90 continuous days of negative drug test results is

required before a participant is eligible to graduate.

a) Drug courts where participants were expected to have greater than

90 days clean (demonstrated by negative drug tests) before

graduation had 164 percent greater reductions in recidivism

compared with programs that expected less clean time. (Carey,

Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

Program Discharge

A. Standards

1. The veterans treatment court shall be notified if the veterans treatment

court participant is accused of a new crime, and the judge shall consider

whether to terminate the participant's participation in the veterans

treatment program in conformity with the memorandum of

understanding under section 1201(2). If the participant is convicted of a

felony for an offense that occurred after the defendant is admitted to

veterans treatment court, the judge shall terminate the participant's

participation in the veterans treatment court. (MCL 600.1208(2))

2. Upon completion or termination of the veterans treatment court

program, the court shall find on the record or place a written statement

in the court file as to whether the participant completed the program

successfully or whether the individual’s participation in the program was

terminated and, if it was terminated, the reason for the termination.

(MCL 600.1209(1))

3. The court shall send a record of the discharge and dismissal [under MCL

600.1206, and as outlined in MCL 600.1209(4)] to the criminal justice

information center of the department of state police, and the department

of state police shall enter that information into the L.E.I.N. with an

indication of participation by the individual in a veterans treatment

court. (MCL 600.1209(6))

See Appendix B. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/VTC-DischargeStatment.pdf.

B. Best Practices

1. Unless termination is required under MCL 600.1208 or the participant

can no longer be managed safely in the community, veterans treatment

courts do not terminate participants based only on drug or alcohol use or

possession.

a) Drug courts have significantly poorer outcomes and are

considerably less cost-effective when they terminate participants

based only on drug or alcohol use. Drug courts that had a policy of

terminating participants for positive drug tests or new arrests for

drug possession offenses had 50 percent higher criminal recidivism

and 48 percent lower cost savings than drug courts that responded

to new use by increasing treatment or applying sanctions of lower

severity. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Drug courts that terminated participants merely for drug or alcohol

use have significantly poorer recidivism rates and are less cost-

effective. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

Works Cited

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Carey, S., Pukstas, K., Waller, M., Mackin, R., & Finigan, M. (2008). Drug courts and state mandated

drug treatment programs: Outcomes, costs, and consequences. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Chandler, R., Fletcher, B., & Volkow, N. (2009). Treating drug abuse and addiction in the criminal

justice system: Improving public health and safety. Journal of the American Medical

Association, 183-190.

Cissner, A., Rempel, M., Franklin, A., Roman, J., Bieler, S., Cohen, R., et al. (2013). A statewide

evaluation of New York's adult drug courts: Identifying which policies work best. New York:

Center for Court Innovation.

Deschenes, E., Ireland, C., & Kleinpeter, C. (2009). Enhancing drug court success. Journal of Offender

Rehabilitation, 19-36.

Festinger, D., Marlowe, D., Lee, P., Kirby, K., Bovasso, G., & McLellan, A. (2002). Status hearings in

drug court: When more is less and less is more. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 151-157.

Jalbert, S., & Rhodes, W. (2012). Reduced caseloads improve probation outcomes. Journal of Crime

and Justice, 221-238.

Kelly, J., Stout, R., Zywiak, W., & Schneider, R. (2006). A three-year study of addiction mutual-help

group participation following intensive outpatient treatment. Alcoholism: Clinical &

Experimental Research, 1381-1392.

Kierkus, C., & Johnson, B. (2016). Michigan DWI/Sobriety Court Ignition Interlock Evaluation.

Lansing.

Leukefeld, C., Webster, J., Staton-Tindall, M., & Duvall, J. (2007). Employment and work among drug

court clients: 12-month outcomes. Substance Use & Misuse, 1109-1126.

Moos, R., & Timko, C. (2008). Outcome research on 12-step and other self-help programs. In M. G.

Kleber, Textbook of Substance Abuse Treatment (pp. 511-521). Arlington, VA: American

Psychiatric Publishing.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2013). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume 1.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2015). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume II.

Quirouette, M., Hannah-Moffat, K., & Maurutto, P. (2015). 'A precarious place': Housing and clients of

specialized courts. British Journal of Criminology.

Rodriguez, P. (2011). Case management for substance abusing offenders. Handbook of evidence-based

substance abuse treatemnt in criminal justice settings, 173-181.

Rossman, S. B., & Zweig, J. M. (2012, May). The Multistate Adult Drug Court Evaluation. Need to

Know, 3.

Shaffer, D. (2010). Looking inside the black box of drug courts: A meta-analytic review. Justice

Quarterly, 28(3), 493-531.

Stitzer, M. (2008). Motivational incentives in drug courts. Quality Improvement for Drug Court:

Evidence-Based Practices, 99.

Zweig, J., Lindquist, C., Downey, P., Roman, J., & Rossman, S. (2012). Drug court policies and

practices: How program implementation affects offender substance use and criminal behavior

outcomes. Drug Court Reveiw, 43-79.

Chapter 3: Confidentiality

This chapter addresses confidentiality issues in veterans treatment court and shares information

with Chapter 4 (Due Process); readers should review chapters 3 and 4 together. Specific

information in this chapter includes the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

(HIPAA), 42 CFR Part 2, redisclosure, records management, and staff training. Courts should

also review the Patient Rights & Responsibilities information and VA Privacy Practices available

at https://www.va.gov/health/. Specific VA regulations and directives are available from the

VA’s Office of Regulation Policy and Management at https://www.va.gov/orpm/.

Confidentiality

Standards

1. Veterans treatment courts are required to comply with Title 42 of the

United States Code, Section 290dd-2, which is the federal law that

protects the confidentiality of the identity, diagnosis, prognosis, or

treatment of any patient records that are maintained in connection

with the performance of any federally assisted program or activity

relating to substance abuse education, prevention, training, treatment,

rehabilitation, or research. 42 CFR, Part 2, contains the regulations

implementing the alcohol and substance abuse confidentiality law.

Full text of the law is available here.

2. Veterans treatment courts are required to comply with the Health

Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). HIPAA is a

federal law that protects confidentiality and the security of protected

health information. While it does not directly apply to treatment

courts, HIPAA does apply to the treatment agencies partnering with

treatment courts, so veterans treatment courts must also comply with

HIPAA. Full text of the HIPAA privacy law is available here.

3. Information in the record of a recipient, and other information

acquired in the course of providing mental health services to a

recipient, shall be kept confidential and shall not be open to public

inspection. The information may be disclosed outside the department,

community mental health services program, licensed facility, or

contract provider, whichever is the holder of the record, only in the

circumstances and under the conditions set forth in MCL 330.1748

section 748 or section 748a. MCL 330.1748(1). Full text is available

here.

4. Confidential treatment court information and records may not be

used to initiate or to substantiate any criminal charges against a

participant or to conduct any investigation of a participant. (42 CFR,

Section 2.35(d), MCL 600.1203(4), and MCL 600.1207(2))

5. State law may neither authorize nor compel any disclosure prohibited

by the federal regulations, but where state law prohibits disclosure

that would be permissible under the federal regulations, the stricter

standard applies. (42 CFR, Section 2.20)

6. Treatment courts may receive or release information or records of

participants only with the specific knowing, voluntary, and written

consent of the participant, or under certain very limited exceptions.

(42 CFR, Sections 2.22 and 2.31(a)) (Veterans Health Administration

Notice of Privacy Practices)

a) Consent may be paper or electronic, and must include the

following under 42 CFR, Sections 2.14-2.35:

i. The name of the participant permitting disclosure.

ii. The specific name of the program(s) or person(s)

permitted to make the disclosure.

iii. The name(s) of the individual(s) or the name(s) of the

entity(-ies) to which a disclosure is to be made..

iv. The purpose of the (re)disclosure. In accordance with

§2.13(a), the disclosure must be limited to that

information which is necessary to carry out the stated

purpose.

v. How much and what kind of information is to be

disclosed.

vi. A statement that the consent is subject to revocation at

any time except to the extent that the program or

person which is to make the disclosure has already

acted in reliance on it. Acting in reliance includes the

provision of treatment services in reliance on a valid

consent to disclose information to a third-party payer.

vii. Date, event, or condition upon which the consent will

expire. The date, event, or condition must ensure that

the consent will last no longer than reasonably

necessary to serve the purpose for which it is given.

viii. The participant’s signature and, if applicable, the

signature of a person authorized to give consent for a

minor.

ix. The date on which consent is signed.

7. The participant must be advised, orally and in writing, of their rights

regarding confidential information about their substance use

disorder. The notice must cite Section 290dd-2 and the implementing

regulations (Sections 2.1 through 2.67 of Title 42 of the code of

Federal Regulations), and must state the following:

a) Federal law and regulations protect the confidentiality of

substance use disorder treatment records;

b) It is a crime to violate this confidentiality requirement, which

the participant may report to appropriate authorities, with the

authority’s name and contact information provided;

See Appendix C. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/ReleaseInfoMultiParty.pdf.

See Appendix C. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/ReleaseInfoMultiParty.pdf.

c) Notwithstanding this confidentiality requirement, covered

information may be released under specified circumstances

(which should be listed for the participant); and

d) The restrictions on disclosure and use in the regulations in 42

CFR part 2 do not apply to communication with law

enforcement agencies or officials regarding crimes committed

on the premises of the program, and/or crimes against program

personnel, or to reporting of incidents of suspected child abuse

and neglect to the appropriate state or local authorities, under

state law. However, the restrictions continue to apply to the

original substance use disorder patient records maintained by

the part 2 program including their disclosure and use for civil

or criminal proceedings which may arise out of the report of

suspected child abuse and neglect.

8. Treatment courts may not disclose protected health information in

response to a subpoena or a search warrant or any other form of

request, even if signed by a judge, unless that client signs a consent

form authorizing such disclosure, or a court of competent jurisdiction

enters an authorizing order under the standards set forth in the

federal regulations. (42 CFR, Section 2.61)

9. Any documented treatment information distributed on the basis of the

treatment participant’s consent should be accompanied by a Notice of

Prohibition Against Redisclosure. (42 CFR, Section 2.32)

10. Veterans treatment courts must have in place formal policies and

procedures to protect against unauthorized uses and disclosures of

confidential information (42 CFR, Section 2.16). The policies and

procedures must address the following:

a) Paper records, including:

i. Transferring and removing such records;

ii. Destroying such records, including sanitizing the hard

copy media associated with the paper printouts, to

render the patient identifying information non-

retrievable;

iii. Maintaining such records in a secure room, locked file

cabinet, safe, or other similar container, or storage

facility when not in use;

iv. Using and accessing workstations, secure rooms, lcoked

file cabinets, safes, or other similar containers, and

storage facilities that use or store such information; and

v. Rendering patient identifying information non-

identifiable in a manner that creates a very low risk of

re-identification (e.g., removing direct identifiers).

b) Electronic records, including:

i. Creating, receiving, maintaining, and transmitting such

records;

See appendices E and F.

ii. Destroying such records, including sanitizing the

electronic media on which such records are stored, to

render the patient identifying information non-

retrievable;

iii. Using and accessing electronic records or other

electronic media containing patient identifying

information; and

iv. Rendering the patient identifying information non-

identifiable in a manner that creates a very low risk of

re-identification (e.g., removing direct identifiers).

Best Practices

1. Veterans treatment court teams are familiar with relevant federal and

state laws and regulations in order to develop appropriate policies and

procedures.

a) Because court programs are integrally involved with supervising the

participation of drug offenders in substance use disorder treatment,

the programs must take into account federal requirements as well as

applicable state laws. (Holland, 1999)

2. Program personnel’s access to confidential records is restricted after

consent expires or is revoked.

a) All file storage systems include procedures for limiting access to

records after the participant’s consent expires or is revoked. Thus,

paper records that can be accessed by all treatment court personnel

during the duration of the participant’s consent are transferred to a

more restricted storage facility as soon as the consent is terminated.

Records on computers are sealed by changing the password or other

access. (Tauber, Weinstein, & Taube, 1999)

3. Treatment courts establish a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on

confidentiality and have all team members and replacement team

members sign and agree to follow confidentiality procedures.

(Tauber,

Weinstein, & Taube, 1999)

4. Precourt staffing meetings may be closed to participants and the public.

(State of Washington v. Sykes, 2014) If open, compliance with consent

requirements must be obtained.

5. Treatment courts receive training on federal confidentiality requirements and

how they affect treatment court practitioners and contractors. (Meyer, 2011)

6. Treatment courts designate a team member as their confidentiality compliance

officer. The confidentiality compliance officer should be aware of, and

consulted about, all third-party inquiries pertaining to mandated disclosures

and permitted disclosures under the federal regulations. (Meyer, 2011)

See Appendix G. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/ConfidentialityMOU.pdf.

See Appendix H. This model document is also available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-courts/Documents/VisitorConfidentialityForm.pdf.

Works Cited

Holland, S. (1999). Practical guide for applying federal confidentiality laws to drug court operations.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

Kelly v Allegan Circuit Judge, 382 Mich 425 (Michigan Supreme Court 1969).

Meyer, W. G. (2011). Confidentiality. In N. D. Institute, The Drug Court Judicial Benchbook (pp. 181-

194). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

State of Washington v. Sykes, 339 P. 3d 972 (Washington Supreme Court December 18, 2014).

Tauber, J., Weinstein, S., & Taube, D. (1999). Federal confidentiality laws and how they affect drug

court practitioners. Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

Chapter 4: Due Process

This chapter addresses procedural due process in veterans treatment court. Specific information

in this chapter includes the participant waiver of rights, the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment,

and 14th Amendment, as well as sanctions and termination. Please also see the Michigan Court

Rules and Code of Judicial Conduct.

Waiver of Rights

Standards

1. Before an individual is admitted into a veterans treatment court, the

court shall find on the record or place a statement in the court file

establishing all of the following . . . the individual understands the

consequences of entering the veterans treatment court and agrees to

comply with all court orders and requirements of the court’s program

and treatment providers. (MCL 600.1204)

2. If the individual being considered for admission to a veterans treatment

court is charged in a criminal case, his or her admission is subject to all of

the following conditions:

a) The individual waives in writing the right to a speedy trial, the

right to representation by an attorney at veterans treatment

court review hearings, and, with the agreement of the

prosecutor, the right to a preliminary examination. (MCL

600.1205(1)(c))

b) The individual signs a written agreement to participate in the

veterans treatment court. (MCL 600.1205(1)(d))

3. The surrendering of any rights by the participant must be done

knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. (Kelly v Allegan Circuit Judge,

1969)

1st Amendment

Standards

1. The mandating of an individual to attend Alcoholics

Anonymous/Narcotics Anonymous (AA/NA) is a violation of the 1st

Amendment Establishment Clause prohibitions. The 1st Amendment

applies to the states via the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

(Hanas v Inner City Christian Outreach, 2008)

2. Veterans treatment court review hearings must be held open to the

public.

a) Although the 6th Amendment right “is the right of the

accused,” a member of the public can invoke the right to a

See Appendix J. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/VTC-AgreementToParticipate.pdf.

public trial under the 1st Amendment. (United States

Constitution, 1st Amendment and 6th Amendment)

b) The sittings of every court within this state shall be public

except that a court may, for good cause shown, exclude from

the courtroom other witnesses in the case when they are not

testifying and may, in actions involving scandal or immorality,

exclude all minors from the courtroom unless the minor is a

party or witness. This section shall not apply to cases involving

national security. (MCL 600.1420)

c) The party seeking to close the hearing must advance an

overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced, the closure

must be no broader than necessary to protect that interest, the

trial court must consider reasonable alternatives to closing the

proceeding, and it must make findings adequate to support the

closure. (People v Vaughn, 2012)

3. Veterans treatment court conditions of participation, such as area and

association restrictions, must be reasonable and must be narrowly drawn.

a) Analogizing to probation conditions in MCL 771.3(3)), “. . . a

sentencing court must be guided by factors that are lawfully

and logically related to the defendant’s rehabilitation.” (People

v Johnson (Larry), 1995)

B. Best Practices

1. If it is appropriate and beneficial to order 12-step, self-help programs,

offenders who object to the deity-based 12-step programs cannot be ordered to

attend them. In those instances, secular alternatives must be made available.

(Meyer, 2011)

4th Amendment

Best Practices

1. The veterans treatment court conducts home visits on participants, without

reasonable suspicion, as part of a standard monitoring program.

a) Home visits are a critical function of community supervision.

(Harberts, 2011)

b) Home visits as a condition of probation in the absence of reasonable

suspicion are justified. (United States vs Reyes, 2002)

c) “[A] home visit is not a search, even though a visit may result in

seizure of contraband in plain view.” (United States v Newton,

2002)

2. A waiver against unreasonable searches and seizures may be made as a

condition of probation.

See also United States v Tessier, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (02/18/16), citing with favor Reyes, supra;

United States v LeBlanc, 490 F3d 361, 370 (5th Cir. 2007) cases upholding less invasive “home visits” where there

was no reasonable suspicion.

a) Analogizing to probation law, “a waiver of one’s constitutional

protections against unreasonable searches and seizures may

properly be made a condition of a probation order where the waiver

is reasonably tailored to a defendant’s rehabilitation.” (People v

Hellenthal, 1990) (MCL 791.236(19))

b) A warrantless search of a probationer’s home by a probation officer

who had reasonable suspicion was upheld based on a ‘special

needs’ balancing test. (Griffin v Wisconsin, 1987)

14th Amendment

Standards

1. There are objective standards that require recusal when “the probability

of actual bias on the part of the judge or decision maker is too high to be

constitutionally tolerable.” (Withrow v Larkin, 1975)

2. Disqualification of a judge is warranted for reasons that include, but are

not limited to, the following:

a) The judge is biased or prejudiced for or against a party or

attorney. (MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a))

b) The judge, based on objective and reasonable perceptions, has

either (i) a serious risk of actual bias impacting the due process

rights of a party as enunciated in Caperton v Massey, [556 US

868]; 129 S Ct 2252; 173 L Ed 2d 1208 (2009), or (ii) has failed

to adhere to the appearance of impropriety standard set forth

in Canon 2 of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct. (MCR

2.003(C)(1)(b))

c) The judge has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts

concerning the proceeding. (MCR 2.003(C)(1)(c))

3. Participation in a drug court (the model for veterans treatment court) is

not a fundamental right, and drug offenders are not part of any suspect

or semi-suspect class. (Lamont v State, 2006)

Sanctions and Termination

Best Practices

1. Veterans treatment court termination hearings, and sanction hearings

involving a liberty interest where the participant is contesting the facts of the

violation, require procedural protections under due process and under MCR

6.445, including, but not limited to, the following:

a) The court must hold a hearing similar to an arraignment

hearing,

b) The court must ensure that the participant receives written

notice of the alleged violation,

See Appendix K. This model document is also available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-courts/Documents/ModelProgVioAdviceRights.pdf.

c) The court must advise the participant that the participant has a

right to contest the charge at a hearing, and

d) The court must advise the participant that the participant is

entitled to a lawyer’s assistance at the hearing and at all

subsequent court proceedings, and that the court will appoint a

lawyer at public expense if the participant wants one and is

financially unable to retain one.

i. This best practice is based on analogy to due process

requirements in termination from probation; supported by

several state supreme courts that have ruled on drug court

terminations; and it complies with the probation violation

rulings in Gagnon v Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778, 92 S.Ct. 1756,

36 L.Ed.2d 656 (1973), and People v Belanger, 227 Mich

App 637 (1998). See MCR 6.445 for additional information

regarding procedural protections under the court rule.

Works Cited

Griffin v Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (United States Supreme Court 1987).

Hanas v Inner City Christian Outreach, 542 F. Supp 2d 683 (E.D. Michigan 2008).

Harberts, H. (2011). Community Supervision. In N. D. Institute, The Drug Court Judicial Benchbook

(pp. 97-111). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

Kelly v Allegan Circuit Judge, 382 Mich 425 (Michigan Supreme Court 1969).

Lamont v State, 852 NE2d 1002 (Indiana Court of Appeals 2006).

Meyer, W. (2011). Constitutional and legal issues in drug court. In N. D. Institute, The drug court

judicial benchbook (pp. 159-180). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

People v Hellenthal, 186 Mich App 484 (Michigan Court of Appeals 1990).

People v Johnson (Larry), 210 Mich App 630, 634 (Michigan Court of Appeals 1995).

People v Vaughn, 491 Mich 642 (Michigan Supreme Court 2012).

United States v Newton, 181 F.Supp.2d 157, 161 (Eastern District of New York 2002).

United States vs Reyes, 283 F.3d 446, 462 (2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 2002).

Withrow v Larkin, 421 U.S. 35, 47, 95 S.Ct. 1456, 43 L.Ed.2d 712 (United States Supreme Court 1975).

Chapter 5: The Veterans Treatment Court Team

This chapter discusses the various members on a veterans treatment court team and the

importance of collaboration among those members. Specific topics include team composition,

roles of team members, participation in staffing meetings and review hearings, and

communication and decision-making. The role of the judge is discussed in additional detail in

Chapter 1 of this manual. Confidentiality is mentioned briefly here, but discussed in detail in

Chapter 3. Various members of the team work to ensure participants’ due process rights are

protected; best practices regarding due process are discussed in Chapter 4. Teams should also

engage in training as a team; training and education are discussed in Chapter 9.

Team Composition

Standards

1. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Use of a nonadversarial approach; prosecution and defense

counsel promote public safety while protecting any

participant’s due process rights. (MCL 600.1201(1)(b))

b) Forging of partnerships among veterans treatment court,

veterans administration, public agencies, and community-based

organizations generates local support and enhances veteran

treatment court effectiveness. (MCL 600.1201(1)(j))

2. The veterans treatment court shall cooperate with, and act in a

collaborative manner with, the prosecutor, defense counsel, treatment

providers, the local substance abuse coordinating agency for that circuit

or district, probation departments, the United States Department of

Veterans Affairs, local VSOs

in that circuit or district, and to the extent

possible, local law enforcement, the department of corrections, and

community corrections agencies. (MCL 600.1206(3))

B. Best Practices

1. A dedicated multidisciplinary team of professionals manages the day-to-

day operations of the veterans treatment court, including reviewing

participant progress during precourt staff meetings and status hearings,

contributing observations and recommendations within the team

members’ respective areas of expertise, and delivering or overseeing the

delivery of legal, treatment, and supervision services.

2. The team comprises representatives from all partner agencies involved in

creating the program, including but not limited to a judge or judicial officer,

program coordinator, prosecutor, defense counsel representative, treatment

Veterans Service Organization

representative, community supervision officer, veterans justice outreach

specialist, and law enforcement officer.

a) Drug courts enjoy significantly greater reductions in recidivism and

significantly higher cost savings when all team members regularly

participate in staffing meetings and review hearings. (Carey,

Mackin, & Finigan, 2012) (Cissner, et al., 2013)

b) When law enforcement is a member of the drug court team, drug

courts can reduce recidivism by 87 percent and increase cost

savings by 44 percent. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

3. Successful courts had significantly more departmental representation at

staffing and court than in less successful courts. Often, the overabundance of

one department, i.e. treatment or legal, appeared clustered and proved to be

unproductive to the collective goals for the court docket.

a) When too many treatment providers wanted their own view

expressed, the team made no conclusions on how to treat the

participant most effectively. When too many legal representatives

attempted to protect their own clients’ rights at a crowded staffing,

the judge appeared bogged down by details and the staffing slowed

considerably. (Bullard, 2014)

C. Promising Practices

1. An independent evaluator serves as a member of the veterans treatment court

team.

a) The evaluator is responsible for developing reliable and valid

methodologies to study the effectiveness of the treatment court. It

is necessary for all treatment courts to regularly evaluate program

effectiveness. This is primarily done through three evaluations:

process, outcome, and cost-benefit. While an evaluator is an

essential team member of any treatment court, it is not necessarily a

position for a full-time employee in every program. Instead, the

role can be filled at the regional or local level. The evaluator, while

generally considered a part of the team, does not participate in team

reviews as it compromises the objectivity of the evaluator and the

integrity of the evaluation process. (Minnesota Supreme Court,

2006)

b) Courts should consider partnering with local colleges or universities

to find a qualified evaluator.

Staffing Meetings and Review Hearings

Best Practices

1. Team members consistently attend precourt staff meetings to review

participant progress, determine appropriate actions to improve

outcomes, and prepare for status hearings in court.

a) When all team members consistently attend staffing meetings, drug

courts can lower recidivism by 50 percent, and are nearly twice as

cost-effective as those programs where not all team members

attend. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) When a representative from treatment attended staffing meetings,

recidivism was reduced by 105 percent. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

2. Team members attend review status hearings on a consistent basis.

During the status review hearings, team members contribute relevant

information or recommendations when requested by the judge or as

necessary to improve outcomes or protect participants’ legal rights.

a) Drug courts were able to significantly reduce recidivism and

improve cost-savings when the judge, attorneys, treatment,

probation, and coordinator all attended status review hearings.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) When a representative from treatment attended status review

hearings, recidivism was reduced 100 percent over drug courts that

did not have a treatment representative attend. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

c) When a law enforcement officer attended status review hearings,

recidivism was reduced 83 percent over drug courts that did not

have a law enforcement officer attend. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan,

2012)

Communication and Decision Making

Best Practices

1. Team members share information as necessary to assess participants’

progress in treatment and compliance with the conditions of veterans

treatment court. Defense attorneys make it clear to participants and

other team members whether they will share communications from

participants with the team.

a) Several studies have indicated that participants and staff alike rate

communication among team members as one of the most important

factors for success in drug court. (National Association of Drug

Court Professionals, 2015)

b) Please also see Chapter 3, Confidentiality for information on

appropriate scope for information sharing.

2. Team members and the agency they represent execute memoranda of

understanding specifying what information will be shared among team

members.

a) Assuming a participant has executed a valid waiver of his or her

privacy and confidentiality rights, drug court team members are

permitted, and indeed may be required, to share covered

information in the course of performing their professional duties.

Confidentiality and privacy rights belong to the participant, not to

See Appendix G. This model document is also available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-courts/Documents/ConfidentialityMOU.pdf.

staff, and may be waived freely and voluntarily in exchange for

receiving anticipated benefits, such as gaining access to effective

treatment or avoiding a criminal record or jail sentence (Melton et

al., 2007). Failing to abide by a valid confidentiality waiver could,

under some circumstances, be a breach of a staff person’s

professional responsibilities to the participant. (NADCP, V2, 2018)

b) Staff persons also have ethical obligations to other drug court team

members. If a staff person knowingly withholds relevant

information about a participant from other team members, this

omission could inadvertently interfere with the participant’s

treatment goals, endanger public safety, or undermine the

functioning of the drug court team. All agencies involved in the

administration of a drug court should, therefore, execute MOUs

specifying what data elements will be shared among team members

(Harden & Fox, 2011). The data elements listed above might be

included in such MOUs to clarify the obligations of each

professional on the team. (NADCP, V2, 2018)

3. Team members contribute relevant insights, observations, and

recommendations based on their professional knowledge, training, and

experience. The judge considers all team members’ perspectives before

making decisions that affect participants’ welfare or liberty interests and

explains the rationale for such decisions to team members and

participants.

a) Studies in more than 10 drug courts found that implementing a

model designed to improve team communication skills increased

job satisfaction and improved program measures such as admission

rates, wait times for treatment, and no-show rates.

(National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2015)

For additional information on the suggested model, the Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment’s

Organizational Improvement Model, please see page 45 of Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards, Volume 2,

published by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. The model seeks to create an environment

where all team members are able to share differing views in a way that is likely to be heeded by others on the team.

Works Cited

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Cissner, A., Rempel, M., Franklin, A., Roman, J., Bieler, S., Cohen, R., et al. (2013). A statewide

evaluation of New York's adult drug courts: Identifying which policies work best. New York:

Center for Court Innovation.

Minnesota Supreme Court, S. (2006, May 16). Retrieved September 1, 2016, from Minnesota Judicial

Branch:

http://www.mncourts.gov/documents/0/Public/Problem_Solving_Courts/Drug_Court_Roles.pdf

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2015). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume II.

State of Washington v. Sykes, 339 P. 3d 972 (Washington Supreme Court December 18, 2014).

Chapter 6: Veterans Treatment Court Population

and Admission

This chapter discusses screening and eligibility criteria for veterans treatment courts. It can be

used to ensure that programs are targeting the proper population among offenders. Specific

topics include screening, eligible offenses, assessments, admission to the program and legal

outcomes. Veterans treatment courts can use this chapter to address their target population,

screening and assessment practices, program eligibility requirements, and admission practices.

Screening

Standards

1. To be eligible for admission to a veterans treatment court, an individual

shall cooperate with and complete a preadmissions screening and

evaluation assessment and shall agree to cooperate with any future

evaluation assessment as directed by the veterans treatment court. A

preadmission screening and evaluation assessment shall include all of the

following:

a) A determination of the individual’s veteran status. A review of

the DD Form 214 “certificate of release or discharge from

active duty” satisfies the requirement of this subdivision. (MCL

600.1203(3)(a))

b) A complete review of the individual's criminal history, and

whether the individual has been admitted to, has participated

in, or is currently participating in a veterans treatment court,

drug treatment court, or other specialty court, whether

admitted under this act or a law listed under subsection (2), and

the results of the individual's participation. A review of the

L.E.I.N. satisfies the requirements of this subdivision unless a

further review is warranted. The court may accept other

verifiable and reliable information from the prosecution or

defense to complete its review and may require the individual to

submit a statement as to whether or not he or she has

previously been admitted to a veterans treatment court, drug

treatment court, or other specialty court, and the results of his

or her participation in the prior program or programs. (MCL

600.1203(3)(b))

c) An assessment of the risk of danger or harm to the individual,

others, or the community. (MCL 600.1203(3)(c))

d) A review of the individual’s history regarding the use or abuse

of any controlled substance or alcohol and an assessment of

whether the individual abuses controlled substances or alcohol

or is drug or alcohol dependent. It is the intent of the

legislature that, to the extent practicable, an assessment under

this subdivision shall be a clinical assessment completed by the

VA. (MCL 600.1203(3)(d))

e) A review of the individual’s mental health history. It is the

intent of the legislature that, to the extent practicable, this

assessment shall be a clinical assessment completed by the VA.

(MCL 600.1203(3)(e))

f) A review of any special needs or circumstances of the individual

that may potentially affect the individual’s ability to receive

substance abuse treatment and follow the court’s orders. (MCL

600.1203(3)(f))

2. The court may request that the department of state police provide to the

court information contained in the L.E.I.N. pertaining to an individual

applicant's criminal history for the purposes of determining an

individual's admission into the veterans treatment court and general

criminal history review, including whether the individual has previously

been admitted to and participated in a veterans treatment court, drug

treatment court, or other specialty court under this act or a statute listed

under subsection (2), and the results of the individual's participation.

The department of state police shall provide the information requested by

a veterans treatment court under this subsection. (MCL 600.1203(5))

B. Best Practices

1. Use clinical assessments instead of screening tools to determine diagnoses.

a) Substance use screening tools do not accurately identify diagnoses.

(Greenfield & Hennessy, 2008)

C. Promising Practices

1. The veterans treatment court gives careful consideration when deciding

whether to accept a defendant who is still active in the National Guard or

Reserves.

a) Those serving in the National Guard or Reserves can be called to

training, called to active duty, or deployed for extended periods of

time. These assignments may keep a participant away from the

veterans treatment court, unable to participate in hearings,

treatment, or testing. Such an interruption in services can affect

the ability to complete the program, so courts should consider a

guardsman’s or reservist’s ability to participate.

Eligible Offenses

Standards

1. “Violent offender” means an individual who is currently charged with or

has pled guilty to an offense involving the death of, or a serious bodily

injury to, any individual, whether or not any of these circumstances are

an element of the offense, or an offense that is criminal sexual conduct in

any degree. (MCL 600.1200(k)

2. A veterans treatment court shall determine whether an individual may be

admitted to the veterans treatment court. No individual has a right to be

admitted into a veterans treatment court. However, an individual is not

eligible for admission into a veterans treatment court if he or she is a

violent offender. An individual is eligible for admission into a veterans

treatment court if he or she has previously had an offense discharged or

dismissed as a result of participation in a veterans treatment court, drug

treatment court, or other specialty court, but he or she shall not have a

subsequent offense discharged or dismissed as a result of participating in

the veterans treatment court. (MCL 600.1203(1))

3. In addition to admission to a veterans treatment court under this act, an

individual who is eligible for admission under this act may also be

admitted to a veterans treatment court under any of the following

circumstances:

a) The individual has been assigned the status of youthful trainee

under section 11 of chapter II of the code of criminal

procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 762.11. (MCL 600.1203(2)(a))

b) The individual has had criminal proceedings against him or

her deferred and has been placed on probation under any of

the following:

i. Section 7411 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368,

MCL 333.7411 or a local ordinance or another law of

this state, another state, or the United States that is

substantially similar to that section. (MCL 600.1203

(2)(b)(i))

ii. Section 4a of chapter IX of the code of criminal

procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a. (MCL 600.1203

(2)(b)(ii))

iii. Section 430 of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328,

MCL 750.430 or a local ordinance or another law of this

state, another state, or the United States that is

substantially similar to that section. (MCL

600.1203(2)(b)(iii))

iv. Section 350a of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328,

MCL 750.350a and 750.430, or a local ordinance of

another law of this state, another state, or the United

States that is substantially similar to those sections.

(MCL 600.1203(2)(b)(iv))

4. In order to be considered for placement in the [DWI/sobriety court

interlock] program, an individual must have been convicted of either of

the following:

a) Two or more convictions for violating section 625(1) or (3) of

the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.625, or a

local ordinance of this state substantially corresponding to

section 625(1) or (3) of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300,

MCL 257.625. (MCL 600.1084(4)(a))

b) One conviction for violating section 625(1) or (3) of the

Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.625, or a local

ordinance of this state substantially corresponding to section

625(1) or (3) of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL

257.625, preceded by 1 or more convictions for violating a local

ordinance or law of another state substantially corresponding

to section 625(1), (3), or (6) of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949

PA 300, MCL 257.625, or a law of the United States

substantially corresponding to section 625(1), (3), or (6) of the

Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.625. (MCL

600.1084(4)(b))

Clinical Substance Use and Mental Health Assessments

Standards

1. To be eligible for admission to a veterans treatment court, an individual

shall cooperate with and complete a preadmissions screening and

evaluation assessment and shall agree to cooperate with any future

evaluation assessment as directed by the veterans treatment court. A

preadmission screening and evaluation assessment shall include all of the

following:

a) An assessment of the risk of danger or harm to the individual,

others, or the community. (MCL 600.1203(3)(c))

b) A review of the individual’s history regarding the use or abuse

of any controlled substance or alcohol and an assessment of

whether the individual abuses controlled substances or alcohol

or is drug or alcohol dependent. It is the intent of the

legislature that, to the extent practicable, an assessment under

this subdivision shall be a clinical assessment completed by the

VA. (MCL 600.1203(3)(d))

c) A review of the individual’s mental health history. It is the

intent of the legislature that, to the extent possible, this

assessment shall be a clinical assessment completed by the VA.

(MCL 600.1203(3)(e))

d) A review of any special needs or circumstances of the

individual that may potentially affect the individual’s ability to

receive substance abuse treatment and follow the court’s

orders. (MCL 600.1203(3)(f))

2. A veterans treatment court may hire or contract with licensed or

accredited treatment providers, in consultation and cooperation with the

local substance abuse coordinating agency, and other appropriate

persons to assist the veterans treatment court in fulfilling its

requirements under this chapter, including, but not limited to, an

investigation of an individual's background or circumstances, or a

clinical evaluation of an individual, before the individual is admitted or

permitted to participate in a veterans treatment court. It is the intent of

the legislature that, services, including, but not limited to, clinical

evaluations, drug and alcohol treatment, and mental health services, shall

be provided by the VA to the extent that is practical. (MCL 600.1202)

B. Best Practices

1. Clinical assessments use validated tools.

a) The predictive criterion validity of actuarial assessments of major

risk and/or need factors greatly exceeds the validity of unstructured

clinical judgment. (Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2006).

b) Drug courts that use better assessment practices have better

outcomes (Shaffer, 2010).

Risk and Need Assessment

Best Practices

1. The veterans treatment court program accepts participants who are both

high-risk and high-need.

a) Drug courts that focus on high-risk and high-need participants

reduce crime nearly twice as much as those focusing on less

serious participants (Lowenkamp, Holsinger, & Latessa, 2005),

and approximately 50% greater cost savings to their communities

(Bhati et al., 2008; Carey et al., 2008, 2012; Downey & Roman,

2010).

b) If a program has low-risk participants, the program should keep the

low-risk population separate from the high-risk population.

(NADCP 2018)

2. Use a standardized risk and needs assessment to identify the expected

likelihood of a particular outcome (e.g., recidivism) over a specified

period of time (e.g., one year) for an individual.

a) Standardized assessment tools are reliable and valid with regard to

identifying those who are likely to succeed on probation. (Miller

& Shutt, 2001)

3. If a veterans treatment court is unable to target only high-risk and high-need

offenders, the program develops alternative tracks with services that are

modified to meet the risk and need levels of its participants, and does not mix

participants with different risk or need levels in the same counseling groups,

residential treatment milieu, or housing unit.

a) Mixing participants with different risk or need levels together in

treatment groups or residential facilities can make outcomes worse

for the low-risk or low-need participants by exposing them to

antisocial peers or interfering with their engagement in productive

activities, such as work or school (DeMatteo et al., 2006;

Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2004; McCord, 2003; Petrosino et al.,

2000). A free publication from the NDCI provides evidence-based

recommendations for developing alternative tracks in Drug courts

for low-risk and low-need participants.

Alternative Tracks in Adult Drug Courts: Matching Your Program to the Needs of Your Clients.

Available at http://www.ndci.org/sites/default/files/nadcp/AlternativeTracksInAdultDrugCourts.pdf.

b) Providing substance use disorder treatment for nonaddicted

substance users can lead to higher rates of reoffending or substance

use or a greater likelihood of these individuals eventually

becoming addicted (Lovins et al., 2007; Lowenkamp & Latessa,

2005; Szalavitz, 2010; Wexler et al., 2004)

c) The lowest criminogenic risk (LSI-R score) MHC participants had

the highest rate of felony recidivism (20%). Recidivism rates in

MHC participants decreased as risk scores increased; the highest

risk MHC participants had the lowest rate of felony recidivism

(7%). This finding underscores the importance of admitting high risk

and high need applicants and suggests that MHCs have the greatest

benefit with higher risk participants.

4. Ensure that the validation sample of the risk and needs assessment is similar

to the veterans treatment court’s population.

a) Different racial or ethnic groups interpret the same assessment

questions differently. (Carle, 2009)

b) Males and females show differences in the prediction of substance

use dependence. (Perez & Wish, 2011)

c) DWI offenders require different assessments than drug offenders.

(Vlavianos, Floerke, Harrison, & Carey, 2015)

5. Reexamine dynamic risk factors after program admission.

a) Assessments completed within the month preceding the

participant’s failure have greater accuracy than ones done much

earlier. (Lloyd, Hanson, & Serin, 2015)

Legal Outcome

Standards

1. The circuit court in any judicial circuit or the district court in any

judicial district may adopt or institute a veterans treatment court by

statute or court rule if the circuit or district enters into a memorandum of

understanding with each participating prosecuting attorney in the circuit

or district court district, a representative of the criminal defense bar, a

representative or representatives of community treatment providers, a

representative or representatives of veterans service organizations in the

circuit or district court district, and a representative or representatives of

the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. However, the

memorandum will only be required to include the prosecuting attorney if

the veterans treatment court will include in its program individuals who

may be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an offense, a delayed

sentence, deferred entry of judgment, or a sentence involving deviation

from the sentencing guidelines. The memorandum of understanding also

may include other parties considered necessary, such as any other

prosecutor in the circuit or district court district, local law enforcement,

the probation departments in that circuit or district, the local substance

abuse coordinating agency for that circuit or district, a domestic violence

service provider program that receives funding from the state domestic

violence prevention and treatment board, a representative or

representatives of the local court funding unit, and community

corrections agencies in that circuit or district. The memorandum of

understanding shall describe the role of each party, and the conditions

for which the memorandum of understanding must be renewed and

amended.

(MCL 600.1201(2))

2. An individual who may be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an

offense, delayed sentence, deferred entry of judgment, or deviation from

the sentencing guidelines shall not be admitted to a veterans treatment

court unless the prosecutor first approves the admission of the individual

into the veterans treatment court in conformity with the memorandum of

understanding under section 1201(2). (MCL 600.1205(2))

3. An individual shall not be admitted to, or remain in, a veterans treatment

court under an agreement that would permit the discharge or dismissal of

a traffic offense upon successful completion of the veterans treatment

court program. (MCL 600.1205(3))

Admission Factors

Standards

1. If the individual being considered for admission to a veterans treatment

court is charged in a criminal case, his or her admission is subject to all of

the following conditions:

a) The offense or offenses allegedly committed by the individual

are generally related to the military service of the individual,

including the abuse, illegal use, or possession of a controlled

substance or alcohol, or mental illness that arises as a result of

service. (MCL 600.1205(1)(a))

b) The individual pleads guilty to the charge or charges on the

record. (MCL 600.1205(1)(b))

2. In addition to rights accorded a victim under the William Van

Regenmorter crime victim's rights act, 1985 PA 87, MCL 780.751 to

780.834, the veterans treatment court shall permit any victim of the

offense or offenses of which the individual is charged, any victim of a

prior offense of which that individual was convicted, and members of the

community in which the offenses were committed or in which the

defendant resides to submit a written statement to the court regarding

the advisability of admitting the individual into the veterans treatment

court. (MCL 600.1205(4))

3. An individual who has waived his or her right to a preliminary

examination and has pled guilty as part of his or her application to a

veterans treatment court and who is not admitted to a veterans treatment

See Appendix I. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/VTC-ProgramMOU.pdf.

See Appendix J. This model document is also available at http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-

solving-courts/Documents/VTC-AgreementToParticipate.pdf.

court shall be permitted to withdraw his or her plea and is entitled to a

preliminary examination. (MCL 600.1205(5))

B. Best Practices

1. Use only objective criteria when determining eligibility for veterans

treatment court.

a) Some drug courts may screen candidates for their suitability for the

program based on the team’s subjective impressions of the

offender’s motivation for change or readiness for treatment.

Suitability determinations have been found to have no impact on

drug court graduation rates or post program recidivism (Carey &

Perkins, 2008; Rossman et al., 2011).

b) Removing subjective eligibility restrictions and applying evidence-

based selection criteria significantly increases the effectiveness and

cost-effectiveness of drug courts by allowing them to serve the

most appropriate target population (Bhati et al., 2008; Sevigny et

al., 2013).

Findings on the Record or in the Court File

Standards

1. Before an individual is admitted into a veterans treatment court, the

court shall find on the record or place a statement in the court file

establishing all of the following:

a) That the individual is a veteran. (MCL 600.1204(a))

b) That the individual is dependent upon or abusing drugs or

alcohol, or suffers from a mental illness, and is an appropriate

candidate for participation in the veterans treatment court.

(MCL 600.1204(b))

c) That the individual understands the consequences of entering

the veterans treatment court and agrees to comply with all

court orders and requirements of the court's program and

treatment providers. (MCL 600.1204(c))

d) That the individual is not an unwarranted or substantial risk

to the safety of the public or any individual, based upon the

screening and assessment or other information presented to the

court. (MCL 600.1204(d))

e) That the individual is not a violent offender. (MCL

600.1204(e))

f) That the individual has completed a preadmission screening

and evaluation assessment under section 1203(3) and has

agreed to cooperate with any future evaluation assessment as

directed by the veterans treatment court. (MCL 600.1204(f))

See Appendix L. This model document is also available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-courts/Documents/VTC-

AdmissionConditionStatement.pdf.

g) The individual meets the requirements, if applicable, of a

statute listed under section 1203(2). (MCL 600.1204(g))

h) The terms, conditions, and duration of the agreement between

the parties, and the outcome for the participant of the veterans

treatment court upon successful completion by the participant

or termination of participation. (MCL 600.1204(h))

Program Entry

Best Practices

1. Expedite the court process to quickly accept participants into the veterans

treatment court.

a) When the time between arrest and program entry is 50 days or less,

programs see reductions in recidivism. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012).

Works Cited

Andrews, D., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need

assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 7-27.

Bhati, A., Roman, J., & Chalfin, A. (2008). To treat or not to treat: Evidence on the prospects of

expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders. Washington DC: The Urban Institute.

Bruns, E., Pullmann, M., Wiggins, E., & Watterson, K. (2011). King County Family Treatment Court

Outcome Evaluation: Final Report. Seattle, WA: Division of Public Behavioral Health and

Justice Policy.

Carey, S., & Perkins, T. (2008). Methamphetamine users in Missouri drug courts: Program elements

associated with success, final report. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Carle, A. (2009). Assessing the adequacy of self-reported alcohol abuse measurement across time and

ethnicity: cross-cultural equivalenc across Hispanic and Caucasians in 1992, non-equivalence in

2001-2002. BMC Public Health.

Downey, P., & Roman, J. (2010). A Bayesian meta-analysis of drug court cost-effectiveness.

Washington DC: Urban Institute.

Greenfield, S., & Hennessy, G. (2008). Assessment of the patient. In M. Galanter, & H. Kleber,

Textbook of substance abuse treatment (4th ed., pp. 55-78). Washington, DC: American

Psychiatric Publishing.

Grella, C., Needell, B., Shi, Y., & Hser, Y. (2009). Do drug treatment services predict reunification

outcomes of mothers and their children in child welfare? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,

36, 278-293.

Lloyd, C., Hanson, R., & Serin, R. (2015). "Dynamic" stipulates that re-assessment matters: Examining

the hypothesis that repeated measurement enhances the prediction of recidivism. American

Psychology-Law Society Annual Conference. San Diego, CA.

Lowenkamp, C., & Latessa, E. (2004). Understanding the risk principle: How and why correctional

interviews can harm low-risk offenders. Topics in Community Corrections, 3-8.

Lowenkamp, C., Holsinger, A., & Latessa, E. (2005). Are drug courts effective? A meta-analytic review.

Journal of Community Corrections(Fall), 5-28.

Marlowe, D., Festinger, D., Dugosh, K., Arabia, P., & Kirby, K. (2008). An effectiveness trial of

contingency management in a felony preadjudication drug court. Journal of Applied Behavior

Analysis, 41(4), 565-577.

Miller, J., & Shutt, J. (2001). Considering the need for empirically grounded drug court screening

mechanisms. Journal of Drug Issues, 31(1), 91-106.

Perez, D., & Wish, E. (2011). Gender differences in the validity of the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening

Inventory - 3 (SASSI-3) with a criminal justice population. International Journal of Offender

Therapy & Comparative Criminology, 476-491.

Rice, M., Harris, G., & Cormier, C. (1992). Evaluation of a Maximum Security Therapeutic Community

for Psychopaths and Other Mentally Disordered Offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 399-412.

Shaffer, D. (2010). Looking inside the black box of drug courts: A meta-analytic review. Justice

Quarterly, 28(3), 493-531.

State Court Administrative Office. (2015, June 3). Administrative Memoranda. Retrieved May 9, 2016,

from http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/Administrative-

Memoranda/2015-01.pdf

Vlavianos, R., Floerke, S., Harrison, P., & Carey, S. (2015). Retrieved October 12, 2016, from NPC

Research: http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/DWI-and-drug-court-research-best-

practices_NADCP-2015.pdf

Worcel, S., Furrer, C., Green, B., & Rhodes, B. (2006). Family treatment drug court evaluation: Final

Phase I study report. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Chapter 7: Drug and Alcohol Testing

This chapter addresses drug and alcohol testing in veterans treatment court. Specific topics

include randomization, frequency, methods for collection and testing, the use of scientific

information, and chain of custody. In addition to following these standards and best practices,

courts should consult the Ten Principles of a Good Testing Program,

promulgated by the

National Drug Court Institute. The Michigan Association of Treatment Court Professionals

published the MATCP Drug Testing Manual, 2nd Edition, as a reference for treatment courts.

General

Best Practices

1. Upon entering the Veterans Treatment Court, participants receive a clear and

comprehensive explanation of their rights and responsibilities related to drug

and alcohol testing. This information is described in a participant contract or

handbook and reviewed periodically with participants to ensure they remain

cognizant of their obligations.

a) Outcomes are significantly better when drug courts specify their

policies and procedures clearly in a participant manual or

handbook (Carey et al., 2012).

b) Drug courts can enhance participants’ perceptions of fairness

substantially and reduce avoidable delays from contested drug and

alcohol tests by describing their testing procedures and

requirements in a participant contract or handbook. (NADCP V2,

2018)

Randomization

Standards

1. A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the

court with all of the following:

a) Mandatory periodic and random testing for the presence of

any controlled substance or alcohol in a participant’s blood,

urine, or breath, using, to the extent practicable, the best

available, accepted, and scientifically valid methods. (MCL

600.1207(1)(c))

B. Best Practices

1. The probability of being tested on weekends and holidays is the same as other

days.

a) Weekends and holidays are high-risk times for drug and alcohol

use. Providing a respite from detection during these high-risk

times reduces the randomness of testing and undermines the

See Appendix N.

central aims of a drug-testing program. (Kirby, Lamb, Iguchi,

Husband, & Platt, 1995) (Marlatt & Gordon, 1985) (American

Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013)

2. Urine tests are delivered no more than eight hours after a participant is

notified that a test has been scheduled. (National Association of Drug Court

Professionals, 2015) (Auerbach, 2007)

3. Tests with short detection windows such as oral fluid tests should be delivered

no more than four hours after being notified that a test was scheduled.

(National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2015)

Frequency and Breadth of Testing

Standards

1. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Monitoring of abstinence by frequent alcohol and other drug

testing. (MCL 600.1201(1)(e))

B. Best Practices

1. For participants with a substance use disorder, urine testing is performed

at least twice per week until participants are in the last phase of the

program and preparing for graduation.

a) In a multisite study of approximately 70 drug courts, programs

performing urine testing at least twice per week in the first phase

lowered recidivism by 38 percent and were 61 percent more cost-

effective than programs testing less frequently. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

b) The most effective drug courts perform urine drug testing at least

twice per week for the first several months of the program. (Carey

& Perkins, 2008)

2. For participants with no indication of a substance use disorder, urine

testing is performed at least once per week in the first phase of the

program.

a) Mental health courts that tested new clients at least once a week, if

not more, saw a decrease in jurisdictional crime rate. (Bullard,

2014)

3. Test specimens are examined for all unauthorized substances that are

suspected to be used by participants. Randomly selected specimens are

tested periodically for a broader range of substances to detect new

substances that might be emerging in the population.

a) Participants can easily evade detection of their substance use by

switching to drugs that have similar effects but are not detected by

the test. (American Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013)

b) Because new drugs of abuse are constantly being sought out by

offenders to cheat drug tests, treatment courts should frequently

and randomly examine samples for a wide range of potential

substances of abuse. (American Society of Addiction Medicine,

2013)

3. Tests that measure substance use over extended periods of time, such as ankle

monitors, are applied for at least 90 consecutive days followed by urine or

other intermittent test methods.

a) Research indicates that use of an alcohol tether device may deter

alcohol consumption and alcohol-impaired driving among

recidivist DWI offenders if it is worn for at least 90 days. (Flango

& Cheeseman, 2009) (Tison, Nichols, Casanova-Powell, &

Chaudhary, 2015)

Scientifically Valid Drug Testing Methods

Best Practices

1. A veterans treatment court uses scientifically valid and reliable testing

procedures.

a) To be admissible as evidence in a legal proceeding, drug and

alcohol test results must be derived from scientifically valid and

reliable methods. (Meyer, 2011)

b) Appellate courts have recognized the scientific validity of several

commonly used methods for analyzing urine, including gas

chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS); liquid

chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS); the

enzyme multiple immunoassay technique (EMIT); and some

sweat, oral fluid, hair, and ankle-monitor tests. (Meyer, 2011)

c) Appellate courts have recognized the scientific validity of ethyl

glucuronide (ETG) testing. (Lawrence)

2. If a participant denies substance use in response to a positive screening

test, a portion of the same specimen is subjected to confirmatory analysis

using an instrumented test, such as GC/MS or LC/MS. Unless a

participant admits to using the drug identified by the screening

procedure, confirmation of presumptive positive tests is mandatory.

a) Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) provides

chemical fingerprint identification of drugs and is recognized as

the definitive confirmation technology. (Cary, 2011)

b) Confirmation with an instrumented test virtually eliminates the

odds of a false positive result, assuming the sample was collected

and stored properly. (Auerbach, 2007)

c) It is necessary to validate positive screening results in order to rule

out the potential of a false positive by performing a confirmation

procedure. (Cary, 2011)

3. Confirmatory tests are not withheld due to the participant’s inability to

pay.

a) Courts commonly require participants to pay the cost of

confirmation tests if the initial screening result is confirmed.

(Cary, 2011) (Meyer, 2011)

4. Metabolite levels are not used as evidence of new substance use or

changes in participants’ substance use patterns.

a) Some drug courts interpret changes in quantitative levels of drug

metabolites as evidence that new substance use has occurred or a

participant’s substance use pattern has changed. Unless a drug

court has access to an expert trained in toxicology, pharmacology,

or a related discipline, such practices should be avoided. Most drug

and alcohol tests used in drug courts were designed to be

qualitative, meaning they were designed to determine whether a

drug or drug metabolite is present at levels above a pre-specified

concentration level. The cutoff concentration level is calculated

empirically to maximize the true-positive rate, true-negative rate,

or classification rate. When drug courts engage in quantitative

analyses, they are effectively altering the cut-off score and making

the results less accurate. (NADCP, Adult Drug Court Best Practice

Standards, Vol. II.)

b) Quantitative metabolite levels can vary considerably based on a

number of factors, including the total fluid content in urine or

blood (Cary, 2004; Schwilke et al., 2010). Moderate changes in

participants’ fluid intake or fluid retention could lead drug courts

to miscalculate substance use patterns.

c) Quantitative metabolite levels can vary considerably based on a

number of factors, including the total fluid content in urine or

blood. (Cary, 2004)

d) Numeric results do not accurately discriminate between whether a

participant’s overall drug level is increasing or decreasing even if

compared to previous urine drug concentrations from the same

client and for the same drug. (Cary, 2004)

e) The routine use of urine drug levels by court personnel in an effort

to define substance use behavior and formulate appropriately

measured sanctions is a practice that can result in inappropriate,

factually unsupportable conclusions and a decision-making process

that lacks a sound scientific foundation. (Cary, 2011)

5. Test specimens are examined routinely for evidence of dilution and

adulteration.

a) The temperature of each urine specimen should be examined

immediately upon collection to ensure it is consistent with an

expected human body temperature. An unusual temperature might

suggest the sample cooled down because it was collected at an

earlier point in time, or was mixed with water that was too cold or

too hot to be consistent with body temperature. (National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2015)

b) Under normal conditions, urine specimens should be between 90

and 100 degrees Fahrenheit within four minutes of collection; a

lower or higher temperature likely indicates a deliberate attempt at

deception. (American Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013)

c) Specimens should be tested for creatinine and specific gravity. A

creatinine level below 20 mg/dL is rare and is a reliable indicator

of an intentional effort at dilution or excessive fluid consumption.

(American Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013)

d) A creatinine level below 20 mg/dL is rare and is a reliable

indicator of an intentional effort at dilution or excessive fluid

consumption barring unusual medical or metabolic conditions

(ASAM, 2013; Cary, 2011; Jones & Karlsson, 2005; Katz et al.,

2007). (American Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013)

e) Specific gravity reflects the amount of solid substances that are

dissolved in urine. The greater the specific gravity, the more

concentrated the urine; and the lower the specific gravity, the

closer its consistency to water. The normal range of specific

gravity for urine is 1.003 to 1.030, and a specific gravity of 1.000

is essentially water. Some experts believe a specific gravity below

1.003 reflects a diluted sample (Katz et al., 2007). Although this

analysis, by itself, may not be sufficient to prove excessive fluid

consumption, dilution is likely to have occurred if the specific

gravity is low and accompanies other evidence of tampering or

invalidity, such as a low creatinine level or temperature. (Dasgupta

et al., 2004; Mikkelsen & Ash, 1988).

Witnessed Collection

Best Practices

1. Direct observed collection requires that an observer watch the donor

urinate into the collection container. The observer's gender must be the

same as the donor's gender, which is determined by the donor's gender

identity, with no exception to this requirement. (Substance Abuse and

Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), HHS, 2017)

a) Gender identity means an individual's internal sense of being male

or female, which may be different from an individual's sex

assigned at birth. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017-

00979/p-349

b) Before an observer is selected, the donor is informed that the

gender of the observer will match the donor's gender, which is

determined by the donor's gender identity. The collector then

selects the observer to conduct the observation:

i. The collector asks the donor to identify the donor's gender

on the Custody and Control Form (CCF) and initial it.

ii. The donor will then be provided an observer whose gender

matches the donor's gender.

iii. The observer's name and gender is documented on the

CCF. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017-00979/p-593

2. Collection of test specimens is witnessed directly by a staff person who

has been trained to prevent tampering and substitution of fraudulent

specimens.

a) The most effective way to ensure that the sample collection is valid

and to avoid tampering is to ensure the collection is witnessed

directly by someone who has been properly trained. (American

Society of Addiction Medicine, 2013) (Cary, 2011)

3. Breathalyzers must be calibrated according to certification standards

established by the U.S. Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Health

and Human Services (HHS) and/or the state toxicologist. The test must

be administered by breath alcohol technicians who are trained in the use

and interpretation of breath alcohol results. (U.S. Department of Justice,

Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office & American

University, 2000)

4. Barring exigent circumstances, participants are not permitted to undergo

independent drug or alcohol testing in lieu of being tested by trained personnel

assigned to or authorized by the mental health court.

a) Because specialized training is required to minimize tampering of

test specimens, under most circumstances participants should be

precluded from undergoing drug and alcohol testing by

independent sources. In exigent circumstances, such as when

participants live a long distance from the test collection site, the

drug court might designate independent professionals or

laboratories to perform drug and alcohol testing. As a condition of

approval, these professionals should be required to complete

formal training on the proper collection, handling, and analyses of

drug and alcohol test samples among drug court participants or

comparable criminal justice populations. (NADCP V2, 2018)

b) Mental health courts are also required to follow generally accepted

chain-of-custody procedures when handling test specimens

(ASAM, 2013; Cary, 2011; Meyer, 2011). Therefore, if

independent professionals or laboratories perform drug and alcohol

testing, they must be trained carefully to follow proper chain-of-

custody procedures. (NADCP V2, 2018)

Chain of Custody and Results

Standards

1. If the court determines that scientific, technical, or other specialized

knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to

determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge,

skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of

an opinion or otherwise if (1) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or

data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods,

and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the

facts of the case. (Michigan Rules of Evidence, Rule 702. Adopted from

the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702. Based on Daubert v. Merrell

Dow Pharmaceuticals)

B. Best Practices

1. A chain-of-custody form is completed once a urine sample has been

collected. This form ensures the identity and integrity of the sample

through transport, testing, and reporting of results. (Kadehjian, 2010)

2. Test results, including the results of confirmation testing, are available to the

veterans treatment court within 48 hours of sample collection.

a) A study of approximately 70 drug courts reported significantly

greater reductions in recidivism and significantly greater cost

benefits when the teams received drug and alcohol test results

within 48 hours of sample collection. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan,

2012)

C. Promising Practices

1. In order to comply with the 48-hour results best practice, veterans treatment

courts that use tethers or in-home units should require download at least 3

times per week.

Works Cited

American Society of Addiction Medicine (2013). Drug testing: A white paper of the American Society of

Addiction Medicine (ASAM). Chevy Chase: American Society of Addiciton Medicine.

Auerbach, K. (2007). Drug Testing Methods. In Drug Courts: A New Approach to Treatment and

Rehabilitation (pp. 215-233). New York: Springer.

Bullard, C. E., & Thrasher, R. (2014). Evaluating mental health courts by impact on jurisdictional crime

rates. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 27(3), 227-246.

Carey, S., & Perkins, T. (2008). Methamphetamine users in Missouri drug courts: Program elements

associated with success, final report. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Cary, P. (2004). Urine drug concentrations: The scientific rationale for eliminated the use of drug test

levels in drug court proceedings. NDCI Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet 4(1), pp. 1-2.

Cary, P. (2011). The Fundamentals of Drug Testing. In N. D. Institute, The drug court judicial

benchbook (pp. 113-140). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

Flango, V., & Cheeseman, F. (2009). The effectiveness of the SCRAM alcohol monitoring device: A

preliminary test. Drug Court Review, 109-134.

Kadehjian, L. D. (2010, June). Urine drug testing in drug court programs. MADCP Newsletter.

Kirby, K., Lamb, R., Iguchi, M., Husband, S., & Platt, J. (1995). Situations occasioning cocaine use and

cocaine abstinence strategies. Addiction, 90(9), 1241-1252.

Lawrence, K. (n.d.). Retrieved September 9, 2016, from National Drug Court Resource Center:

http://www.ndcrc.org/sites/default/files/etg_case_lawdaubert1.pdf

Marlatt, G., & Gordon, J. (1985). Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in the treatment of

addictive behaviors. Clinical Chemistry, 34(3), 471-473.

Meyer, W. (2011). Constitutional and legal issues in drug court. In N. D. Institute, The drug court

judicial benchbook (pp. 159-180). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

National Assoc. of Drug Court Professionals, Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards. Vol. II (2015).

Tison, J., Nichols, J., Casanova-Powell, T., & Chaudhary, N. (2015). Comparative study and evaluation

of SCRAM use, recidivism rates, and characteristics (Report No. DOT HS 812 143).

Washington, D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office & American

University. (2000, May). Drug testing in a drug court environment: Drug courts resource series.

Retrieved September 2, 2016, from National Criminal Justice Reference Service:

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojp/181103.pdf

Chapter 8: Treatment

This chapter discusses treatment in veterans treatment court. Specific topics include treatment

entry, services, treatment duration, and medication-assisted treatment. Some of the topics in this

chapter are also addressed in chapter 2 regarding participant supervision and compliance and in

chapter 6 regarding population and admission.

General and Definition of Veterans Treatment Courts

Standards

1. “Veterans treatment court” or “veterans court” means a court adopted

or instituted under section 1201 that provides a supervised treatment

program for individuals who are veterans and who abuse or are

dependent upon any controlled substance or alcohol or suffer from a

mental illness. (MCL 600.1200(j))

2. “Mental illness” means a substantial disorder of thought or mood that

significantly impairs judgment, behavior, capacity to recognize reality, or

ability to cope with the ordinary demands of life, including, but not

limited to, post-traumatic stress disorder and psychiatric symptoms

associated with traumatic brain injury. (MCL 600.1200(d))

B. Best Practices

1. A veterans justice outreach specialist (VJO) from the VA is a member of

the veterans treatment court team.

a) VA has developed the veterans justice outreach initiative to

provide direct services to veterans in the criminal justice system.

VJO staff work with courts to help justice-involved veterans get

mental health assessment, treatment planning, and referrals to VA

services. (United States Department of Veterans Affairs, 2017)

2. If the program regularly uses treatment agencies outside of the VA,

clinically trained representatives from these agencies are core members

of the veterans court team and regularly attend team meetings and status

hearings.

a) Recidivism may be reduced twofold when representatives from the

treatment court’s primary treatment agencies regularly attend

staffing meetings and status review hearings. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

3. Treatment should address major criminogenic needs. Eight major

criminogenic needs have been identified that contribute to the risk for

recidivism among offenders and that are dynamic or changeable via

programmatic interventions.

a) Reductions in recidivism are proportional to the number of

criminogenic needs addressed within offender treatment programs.

(Peters, 2011)

4. One or two treatment agencies, including the VA, are primarily responsible

for managing the delivery of treatment services for veterans treatment court

participants.

a) In studies surveying veterans treatment courts, 92 percent of

respondents listed the Department of Veterans Affairs as essential

for their courts’ success. (Holbrook & Anderson, 2011)

b) Drug courts that worked with two or fewer treatment agencies

were able to reduce recidivism by 74 percent over drug courts that

used more agencies. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

Treatment Entry

Best Practices

1. Veterans treatment courts link participants to treatment as soon as

possible.

a) People mandated to treatment by the criminal justice system

experience similar outcomes related to substance use and

recidivism as those seeking treatment voluntarily. Retention in

treatment is often higher among those coerced into treatment.

Such participants perform as well as voluntary participants across a

range of in-treatment indicators of progress (e.g., self-efficacy,

coping skills, clinical symptoms, 12-step involvement). (Peters,

2011)

b) Participants who enter drug court quickly tend to enter treatment

more quickly. (Worcel, Furrer, Green, & Rhodes, 2006)

2. Veterans treatment courts consider using the Risk Needs Responsivity (RNR)

Model.

a) The RNR model has led to better risk assessment instruments to

predict criminal behavior and better treatment programs that match

services to the level of risk and needs. As a result, the RNR

model, when properly applied, has led to a reduction in recidivism.

(Bonta & Andrews, 2007)

Treatment Services

Standards

1. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Provision of access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, mental

health, and related treatment and rehabilitation services.

(MCL 600.1201(1)(d))

B. Best Practices

1. The veterans treatment court offers a full spectrum of mental health

treatment and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) services.

a) The first studies to evaluate the efficacy of veterans treatment

courts have found that involvement in veterans treatment court

produces sustainable improvements in recovery and PTSD for

participants. (Knudsen & Wingenfeld, 2015)

2. The veterans court offers trauma-informed services.

a) In a study of the efficacy of veterans treatment courts, veterans

improved in all study measures , including improvement in PTSD

symptom severity and depression symptoms, and a decrease in

self-harm , when they were provided with a combination of

trauma-specific treatment, peer-mentor services, and medication.

(Knudsen & Wingenfeld, 2015)

b) Although some participants with trauma histories do not require

formal PTSD treatment, all staff members, including court

personnel and other criminal justice professionals, need to be

trauma-informed for all participants (Bath, 2008). Staff members

should remain cognizant of how their actions may be perceived by

persons who have serious problems with trust, are paranoid or

unduly suspicious of others’ motives, or have been betrayed,

sometimes repeatedly, by important persons in their lives. Safety,

predictability, and reliability are critical for treating such

individuals. Several practice recommendations should be borne in

mind (Bath, 2008; Covington, 2003; Elliott et al., 2005; Liang &

Long, 2013) (National Association of Drug Court Professionals,

2015)

3. Mental illness and substance use disorders are treated concurrently using an

evidence-based curriculum that focuses on the mutually aggravating effects of

the two conditions.

a) Treating either disorder alone without treating both disorders

simultaneously is rarely, if ever, successful. Addiction and mental

illness are reciprocally aggravating conditions, meaning that

continued symptoms of one disorder are likely to precipitate

relapse in the other disorder (Chandler et al., 2004; Drake et al.,

2008). For this reason, best practice standards for drug courts and

other treatment programs require mental illness and addiction to be

treated concurrently as opposed to consecutively (Drake et al.,

2004; Kushner et al., 2014; Mueser et al., 2003; Osher et al., 2012;

Peters, 2008; Steadman et al., 2013).

b) Whenever possible, both disorders should be treated in the same

facility by the same professional(s) using an integrated treatment

model that focuses on the mutually aggravating effects of the two

conditions. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Administration (SAMHSA, 2010) has published therapist toolkits

to assist in delivering evidence-based integrated treatments for co-

occurring substance-use and mental health disorders.

4. Participants receive psychiatric medication to treat serious mental health

symptoms.

a) Psychiatric medication decreased the odds of negative termination.

(Linhorst, 2015)

b) Participants who were prescribed psychiatric medications were

seven times more likely to graduate successfully from drug court

than participants with mental health symptoms who did not receive

psychiatric medication. (Marlowe, 2016)

c) A participant should only be denied psychiatric medication if the

decision is based on expert medical evidence from a qualified

physician who has examined the participant and is adequately

informed about the facts of the case (Peters & Osher, 2004;

Steadman et al., 2013).

5. The veterans treatment court offers a continuum of care for substance use

disorder treatment, including detoxification, residential, sober living, day

treatment, intensive outpatient, and outpatient services.

a) Outcomes, including graduation rates and recidivism, are

significantly better in drug courts that offer a continuum of care for

substance use disorder treatment, which includes residential

treatment and recovery housing in addition to outpatient treatment.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012) (Koob, Brocato, & Kleinpeter,

2011)

b) Community aftercare treatment for offenders can significantly

reduce rates of substance use and recidivism. (Peters, 2011)

c) The same study found trauma-specific treatment to be important

for veterans with combat exposure. (Knudsen & Wingenfeld,

2015)

6. The drug court offers gender-specific substance use disorder treatment groups.

a) A study of approximately 70 drug courts found that programs

offering gender-specific services reduced criminal recidivism

significantly more than those that did not. (Carey, Mackin, &

Finigan, 2012)

b) In a randomized controlled experiment, female drug court

participants with trauma histories who received manualized

cognitive-behavioral PTSD treatments, Helping Women Recover

(Covington, 2008) or Beyond Trauma (Covington, 2003), in

gender-specific groups were more likely to graduate from drug

court, were less likely to receive a jail sanction in the program, and

reported more than twice the reduction in PTSD symptoms than

participants with trauma histories who did not receive PTSD

treatment (Messina et al., 2012).

c) Given the design of these studies, separating the effects of the

PTSD treatments from the effects of the gender-specific groups is

not possible. Studies have reported superior outcomes when

women in the criminal justice system received various types of

substance use disorder treatment in female-only groups (Grella,

2008; Kissin et al., 2013; Liang & Long, 2013; Morse et al., 2013).

7. Participants are not incarcerated to achieve clinical or social service objectives

such as obtaining access to detoxification services or sober living quarters.

a) Relying on in-custody substance use disorder treatment can reduce

the cost-effectiveness of a drug court by as much as 45 percent.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Some drug courts may place participants in jail as a means of

providing detoxification services or to keep them “off the streets”

when adequate treatment is unavailable in the community. This

practice is inconsistent with best practices, unduly costly, and

unlikely to produce lasting benefits. (National Association of Drug

Court Professionals, 2013)

Evidence-Based Models of Treatment

A. Best Practices

1. Treatment providers use evidence-based models and administer

treatments that are documented in manuals and have been demonstrated

to improve outcomes for persons involved in the criminal justice system.

a) Outcomes from correctional rehabilitation are significantly better

when evidence-based models are used, and fidelity to the model is

maintained through continuous supervision of the treatment

providers. (National Association of Drug Court Professionals,

2013)

b) Examples of manualized cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)

curricula that have been proven to reduce criminal recidivism

among offenders include Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT),

Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R), Thinking for a Change

(T4C), Relapse Prevention Therapy (RPT), and the Matrix Model.

(National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

Treatment Duration

Best Practices

1. Participants receive a sufficient dosage and duration of substance use

disorder and/or mental health treatment to achieve long-term sobriety

and recovery from addiction and mental illness.

a) Providing continuous treatment for at least one year is associated

with reduced recidivism. (Warren, 2007)

b) The longer participants remain in treatment and the more sessions

they attend, the better their outcomes. (National Association of

Drug Court Professionals, 2013)

The VA provides clinical practice guidelines for substance abuse and several mental health issues. These

guidelines, available at http://www.healthquality.va.gov/HEALTHQUALITY/guidelines/MH/index.asp, inform

courts about treatment duration.

Medication-Assisted Treatment

Best Practices

1. Veterans treatment courts allow the use of medication-assisted treatment

(MAT) when appropriate, based on a case-specific determination and

handle MAT very similarly to other kinds of treatment.

a) Numerous controlled studies have reported significantly better

outcomes when addicted offenders received MAT including opioid

antagonist medications such as naltrexone, opioid agonist

medications such as methadone, and partial agonist medications

such as buprenorphine. (Chandler, Fletcher, & Volkow, 2009)

(Finigan, Perkins, Zold-Kilbourn, Parks, & Stringer, 2011)

b) Buprenorphine or methadone maintenance administered prior to

and immediately after release from jail or prison has been shown to

significantly increase opiate-addicted inmates’ engagement in

treatment, reduce illicit opiate use, reduce rearrests, and reduce

mortality and hepatitis C infections. (National Association of Drug

Court Professionals, 2013)

2. The court does not determine the type, dosage, and duration of medication-

assisted treatment.

a) The basic purpose of probation is to provide an individualized

program of rehabilitation. (Roberts v United States, 1943)

See the VA guidelines, supra, for information on the use of medication-assisted treatment for substance abuse and

alcohol dependence.

Works Cited

Bruns, E., Pullmann, M., Wiggins, E., & Watterson, K. (2011). King County Family Treatment Court

Outcome Evaluation: Final Report. Seattle, WA: Division of Public Behavioral Health and

Justice Policy.

Carey, S. M., Mackin, J. R., & Finigan, M. W. (2012). What works? The ten key comkponents of drug

court: research-based best practices. Drug Court Review Volume VIII, Issue 1.

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Cobbina, J., & Huebner, B. (2007). The effect of drug use, drug treatment participation, and treatmetn

completion on probationer recidivism. Journal of Drug Issues, 619-641.

Holbrook, J.G.., & Anderson, S. (2011). Veterans courts: early outcomes and key indicators for success.

Widender Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-25.

Knudsen, K.J., & Wingenfeld, S. (2015). A specialized treatment court for veterans with trauma

exposure: implications for the field. Community Mental Health Journal, 127-135.

Koob, J., Brocato, J., & Kleinpeter, C. (2011). Enhancing residential treatment for drug court

participants. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 252-271.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2013). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume 1.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2015). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume II.

Peters, R. (2011, November). Drug court treatment services: Applying research findings to practice.

Retrieved September 8, 2016, from research2practice.org:

http://research2practice.org/projects/treatment/pdfs/Issues%20Commentary%20and%20Resource

%20Brief.pdf

United States Department of Veterans Affairs (2017). PTSD: National Center for PTSD. Retrieved

February 27, 2017, from ptsd.va.gov: http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/provider-

type/community/veterans-PTSD-Justice-System.asp

Warren, R. K. (2007). Evidence-based practice to reduce recidivism: Implications for state judiciaries.

Williamsburg: Crime and Justice Institute and National Institute of Corrections and National

Center for State Courts.

Worcel, S., Furrer, C., Green, B., & Rhodes, B. (2006). Family treatment drug court evaluation: Final

Phase I study report. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

Chapter 9: Education

Education and training are important components in any veterans treatment court. This chapter

discusses standards, best practices, and promising practices regarding education and training of

the veterans treatment court team.

General

Standards

1. A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key

components of drug treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court, which include all of the following essential

characteristics:

a) Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective

veterans treatment court planning, implementation, and

operations. (MCL 600.1201(1)(i))

2. A court that is adopting a veterans treatment court shall participate in

training as required by the state court administrative office. (MCL

600.1201(3))

B. Best Practices

1. Team members participate in continuing education workshops at least

annually to gain up-to-date knowledge about best practices on veterans

treatment court topics.

a) A multisite study involving more than 60 drug courts found that

participation in annual training conferences was the single greatest

predictor of program effectiveness. (Shaffer, 2006) (Shaffer,

2010)

2. New team members complete a formal orientation training as soon as

practical after assuming their position.

a) A multisite study of approximately 70 drug courts found that

programs were over 50 percent more effective at reducing

recidivism when they routinely provided formal orientation

training for new staff. (Carey et al., 2012)

3. The veterans treatment court judge attends current training events on

legal and constitutional issues in treatment courts, judicial ethics,

evidence-based substance use disorder and mental health treatment,

behavior modification, and community supervision. Attendance at

annual training conferences and workshops ensure contemporary

knowledge about advances in the treatment court field.

a) Because judges have such a substantial impact on outcomes in

treatment courts, continued training is especially important.

(Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Outcomes are significantly better when the drug court judge attends

annual training conferences on evidence-based practices in

substance use disorder and mental health treatment and community

supervision. (Carey et al., 2008, 2012; Shaffer, 2010)

II. Works Cited

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

Carey, S., Pukstas, K., Waller, M., Mackin, R., & Finigan, M. (2008). Drug courts and state mandated

drug treatment programs: Outcomes, costs, and consequences. Portland, OR: NPC Research.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2013). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume 1.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2015). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards.

Volume II.

Shaffer, D. (2006). Reconsidering drug court effectiveness: A meta-analytic review. Cincinatti:

University of Cincinatti.

Shaffer, D. (2010). Looking inside the black box of drug courts: A meta-analytic review. Justice

Quarterly, 493-521.

Chapter 10: Program Evaluation

This chapter addresses program evaluation of a veterans treatment court. Specific topics include

collection and maintenance of information, evaluation, and program modification.

Collection and Maintenance of Information

Standards

1. Each veterans treatment court shall collect and provide data on each

individual applicant and participant and the entire program as required

by the state court administrative office.

(MCL 600.1210)

B. Best Practices

1. Maintain program data for evaluation purposes in an electronic database rather

than paper files.

a) Drug courts are 65 percent more cost effective when they enter

data for evaluations into an electronic database rather than storing

it in paper files. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

b) Michigan’s Drug Court Case Management Information System

(DCCMIS) can be accessed at

https://dccmis.micourt.org/default.aspx.

2. Staff members are required to record information concerning the provision of

services and in-program outcomes within 48 hours of the respective events.

Timely and reliable data entry is required of each staff member and is a basis

for evaluating staff job performance.

a) After 48 hours, errors in data entry have been shown to increase

significantly. After one week, information is so likely to be

inaccurate that it may be better to leave the data as missing than

attempt to fill in gaps from faulty memory. (Marlowe, 2010)

Evaluation and Program Modification

Best Practices

1. The veterans treatment court monitors its adherence to best practice

standards on at least an annual basis, develops a remedial action plan and

timetable to rectify deficiencies, and examines the success of the remedial

actions. Outcome evaluations describe the effectiveness of the veterans

treatment court in the context of its adherence to best practices.

a) Adherence to best practices is generally poor in most sectors of the

criminal justice and substance use disorder treatment systems

(Friedmann et al., 2007; Henderson et al., 2007; McLellan et al.,

See Appendix O. The minimum standard data set for Michigan veterans health courts is also available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-

courts/Documents/MinimumStandardDataVeterans.pdf.

2003; Taxman et al., 2007). Programs infrequently deliver

services that are proven to be effective and commonly deliver

services which have not been subjected to careful scientific

scrutiny. Over time, the quality and quantity of the services

provided may decline precipitously. (Etheridge et al., 1995; Van

Wormer, 2010) The best way for a drug court to guard against

these prevailing destructive pressures is to monitor its operations

routinely, compare its performance to established benchmarks, and

seek to align itself continually with best practices

b) Studies reveal that drug courts are significantly more likely to

deliver effective services and produce positive outcomes when

they hold themselves accountable for meeting empirically

validated benchmarks for success. A multisite study involving

approximately 70 drug courts found that programs had more than

twice the impact on crime and were more than twice as cost-

effective when they monitored their operations on a consistent

basis, reviewed the findings as a team, and modified their policies

and procedures accordingly. (Carey et al., 2008, 2012)

Understanding what distinguishes effective drug courts from

ineffective and harmful drug courts is now an essential goal for the

field. Unless evaluators describe each drug court’s adherence to

best practices, there is no way to place that program’s outcomes in

context or interpret the significance of the findings. (NADCP V2)

2. Enlist the services of independent evaluators and implement appropriate

recommended changes.

a) Programs that had external independent evaluators review their

program and suggest changes, and then implemented those

changes, were 100 percent more effective at reducing cost and 85

percent more effective in reducing recidivism than programs that

did not. (Carey, Mackin, & Finigan, 2012)

3. Outcomes are examined for all eligible participants who entered the mental

health court regardless of whether they graduated, withdrew, or were

terminated from the program.

a) Outcomes must be examined for all eligible individuals who

participated in the drug court regardless of whether they graduated,

were terminated, or withdrew from the program. This is referred

to as an intent-to-treat analysis because it examines outcomes for

all individuals whom the program initially set out to treat.

Reporting outcomes for graduates alone is not appropriate because

such an analysis unfairly and falsely inflates the apparent success

of the program. For example, individuals who graduated from the

drug court are more likely than terminated participants to have

entered the program with less severe drug or alcohol problems, less

severe criminal propensities, higher motivation for change, or

better social supports. As a result, they might have been less likely

to commit future offenses or relapse to substance use regardless of

the services they received in drug court.

B. Promising Practices

1. Evaluate short-term outcomes frequently while participants are enrolled in the

program.

a) The National Research Advisory Committee developed a list of

performance measures that drug courts should use to measure their

efficiency, efficacy, and achievement of program goals. (National

Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2015) Veterans

treatment courts can use a similar methodology.

b) Short-term outcomes provide significant information about

participants’ clinical progress and the likely long-term impacts of

the drug court on public health and public safety. Studies have

consistently determined that post program recidivism is reduced

significantly when participants attend more frequent treatment and

probation sessions, provide fewer drug-positive urine tests, remain

in the program for longer periods of time, have fewer in-program

technical violations and arrests for new crimes, and satisfy other

conditions for graduation. (Gifford et al., 2014; Gottfredson et al.,

2007, 2008; Huebner & Cobbina, 2007; Jones & Kemp, 2011;

Peters et al., 2002. drug courts should, therefore, monitor and

report on these in-program outcomes routinely during the course of

their operations. Several resources are available to help drug

courts define and calculate.

2. Independent evaluators should examine the program’s three- to five-year

performance outcomes at least once every five years.

a) External evaluators should examine recidivism three years to five

years after participants’ program admission. Program admission

should be the latest start date for the evaluation because that is

when the drug court becomes capable of influencing participant

behavior. (National Association of Drug Court Professionals,

2015)

b) While no specific research exists with regard to how frequently a

program should be evaluated, a new evaluation is warranted when

a program significantly changes its operations or has staff turnover.

(National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2015)

Works Cited

Carey, S. M., Mackin, J. R., & Finigan, M. W. (2012). What works? The ten key comkponents of drug

court: research-based best practices. Drug Court Review Volume VIII, Issue 1.

Carey, S., Mackin, J., & Finigan, M. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 6-42.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2015). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards;

Volume II. Alexandria, Virginia: National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

Chapter 11: Equity and Inclusion

Equity and Inclusion

Best Practices

1. Individuals who have historically experienced sustained discrimination or

reduced opportunities because of their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual

orientation, sexual identity, physical or mental disability, religion, or

socioeconomic status receive the same opportunities as other individuals to

participate and succeed in veterans treatment court.

a) Veterans treatment courts are first and foremost courts, and the

fundamental principles of due process and equal protection apply

to their operations. (Meyer, 2011) Veterans treatment courts have

an affirmative legal and ethical obligation to provide equal access

to their services and equivalent treatment for all individuals.

2. Eligibility criteria for the veterans treatment court are nondiscriminatory in

intent and impact. If an eligibility requirement has the unintended effect of

differentially restricting access for members of groups that have historically

experienced discrimination, the requirement is adjusted to increase the

representation of such persons unless doing so would jeopardize public safety

or the effectiveness of the veterans treatment court.

a) Some commentators have suggested that unduly restrictive

eligibility criteria might be partly responsible for the lower

representation of minority persons in drug courts (Belenko et al.,

2011; O’Hear, 2009). Although there is no empirical evidence to

confirm this hypothesis, drug courts must ensure that their

eligibility criteria do not unnecessarily exclude minorities or

members of groups that have historically experienced

discrimination. If an eligibility criterion has the unintended impact

of differentially restricting access to the drug court for such

persons, then extra assurances are required that the criterion is

necessary for the program to achieve effective outcomes or protect

public safety.

3. The veterans treatment court regularly monitors whether member of groups

that have historically experienced discrimination complete the program at

equivalent rates to other participants. If completion rates are significantly

lower for members of a group that have historically experienced

discrimination, the veterans treatment court team investigates the reasons for

the disparity, develops a remedial action plan, and evaluates the success of the

remedial actions.

a) Numerous studies have reported that a significantly smaller

percentage of African-American or Hispanic participants graduated

successfully from drug court as compared to non-Hispanic

Caucasians. (Finigan, 2009; Marlowe, 2013) These findings are

not universal, however. A smaller but growing number of

evaluations has found no differences in outcomes or even superior

outcomes for racial minorities as compared to Caucasians.

(Brown, 2011; Cissner et al., 2013; Fulkerson, 2012; Saum et al.,

2001; Somers et al., 2012; Vito & Tewksbury, 1998)

Nevertheless, African-Americans appear less likely to succeed in a

plurality of drug courts as compared to their nonracial minority

peers. These findings require drug courts to determine whether

racial or ethnic minorities or members of other groups that have

historically experienced discrimination are experiencing poorer

outcomes in their programs as compared to other participants, and

to investigate and remediate any disparities that are detected.

4. Members of groups that have historically experienced discrimination receive

the same levels of care and quality of treatment as other participants with

comparable clinical needs. The veterans treatment court administers

evidence-based treatments that are effective for use with members of groups

that have historically experienced discrimination who are represented in the

mental health court population.

a) The National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP)

minority resolution directs drug courts to remain vigilant to

potential differences in the quality or intensity of services provided

to minority participants and to institute corrective measures where

indicated. In one study, outcomes were improved significantly for

young African-American male participants when an experienced

African-American clinician delivered a curriculum that addressed

issues commonly confronting these young men, such as negative

racial stereotypes. (Vito & Tewksbury, 1998) Similarly, a study

of approximately 70 drug courts found that programs offering

gender-specific services reduced criminal recidivism significantly

more than those that did not. (Carey et al., 2012)7. Studies

indicate the success of culturally tailored treatments depends

largely on the training and skills of the clinicians delivering the

services. (Castro et al., 2010; Hwang, 2006) Unless the clinicians

attend comprehensive training workshops and receive ongoing

supervision on how to competently deliver the interventions,

outcomes are unlikely to improve for women and minority

participants.

5. Except where necessary to protect a participant from harm, members of

groups that have historically experienced discrimination receive the same

incentives and sanctions as other participants for comparable achievements or

infractions. The veterans treatment court regularly monitors the delivery of

incentives and sanctions to ensure they are administered equivalently to all

participants.

a) The NADCP minority resolution places an affirmative obligation

on drug courts to continually monitor whether sanctions and

incentives are being applied equivalently for minority participants

and to take corrective actions if discrepancies are detected.

6. Members of groups that have historically experienced discrimination receive

the same legal dispositions as other participants for completing or failing to

complete the veterans treatment court program.

a) Due process and equal protection require drug courts to remain

vigilant to the possibility of sentencing disparities in their

programs and to take corrective actions where indicated.

7. Each member of the veterans treatment court team attends up-to-date training

events on recognizing implicit cultural biases and correcting disparate impacts

for members of groups that have historically experienced discrimination.

a) One of the most significant predictors of positive outcomes for

racial and ethnic minority participants in substance use disorder

treatment is culturally sensitive attitudes on the part of the

treatment staff, especially managers and supervisors. (Ely &

Thomas, 2001; Guerrero, 2010) When managerial staff value

diversity and respect their clients’ cultural backgrounds, the clients

are retained significantly longer in treatment and services are

delivered more efficiently. (Guerrero & Andrews, 2011) Cultural-

sensitivity training can enhance counselors’ and supervisors’

beliefs about the importance of diversity and the need to

understand their clients’ cultural backgrounds and influences.

(Cabaj, 2008; Westermeyer, & Dickerson, 2008)

Works Cited

Belenko, S., Fabrikant, N., & Wolff, N. (2011). The long road to treatment: Models of screening and

admission into Drug Courts. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 38(1), 1222–1243.

Brown, R. (2011). Drug court effectiveness: A matched cohort study in the Dane County Drug Treatment

Court. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(4), 191–201.

Cabaj, R.P. (2008). Gay men and lesbians. In M. Galanter & H.D. Kleber (Eds), Textbook of Substance

Abuse Treatment (4th Ed.; pp. 623–638). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Carey, S.M., Mackin, J.R., & Finigan, M.W. (2012). What works? The ten key components of Drug Court:

Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 8(1), 6–42.

Castro, F.G., Barrera, M., & Steiker, L.K.H. (2010). Issues and challenges in the design of culturally

adapted evidence-based interventions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 213–239.

Cissner, A., Rempel, M., Franklin, A.W., Roman, J.K., Bieler, S., Cohen, R., & Cadoret, C.R. (2013, March).

A statewide evaluation of New York’s adult drug courts: Testing which policies work best. Paper

presented at the New York Association of Drug Treatment Court Professionals Training.

Available at http://www.nyadtcp.org/userfiles/file/presentation/The%202012

%20New%20York%20State%20Drug%20Court%20Evaluation.pdf.

Ely, R.J., & Thomas, D.A. (2001). The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and

outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly 46(2), 229–273.

Finigan, M.W. (2009). Understanding racial disparities in drug courts. Drug Court Review, 6(2), 135–142.

Fulkerson, A. (2012). Drug treatment court versus probation: An examination of comparative recidivism

rates. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 8(2), 30–45.

Guerrero E. (2010). Managerial capacity and adoption of culturally competent practices in outpatient

substance abuse treatment organizations. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 39(4), 329–

339.

Guerrero E., & Andrews C.M. (2011). Cultural competence in outpatient substance abuse treatment:

Measurement and relationship to wait time and retention. Drug & Alcohol Dependence 119(1),

13–22.

Hwang, W. (2006). The psychotherapy adaptation and modification framework: Application to Asian

Americans. American Psychologist, 61(7), 702–715.

Marlowe, D.B. (2013). Achieving racial and ethnic fairness in drug courts. Court Review, 49(1), 40–47.

Marsh, S. (2009, summer). The lens of implicit bias. Juvenile & Family Justice Today, 18, 16–19.

Meyer, W.G. (2011). Constitutional and legal issues in drug courts. In D.B. Marlowe & W.G. Meyer (Eds.),

The drug court judicial benchbook (pp. 159–180). Alexandria, VA: National Drug Court Institute.

Available at http://www.ndci.org/sites/default/files/nadcp/14146_NDCI_Benchbook_v6.pdf.

National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (2018). Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards;

Volume I. Alexandria, Virginia: National Association of Drug Court Professionals

O’Hear, M.M. (2009). Rethinking drug courts: Restorative justice as a response to racial injustice.

Stanford Law & Policy Review, 20(2), 101–137.

Saum, C.A., Scarpitti, F.R., & Robbins, C.A. (2001). Violent offenders in drug court. Journal of Drug Issues,

31(1), 107–128.

Somers, J.M., Rezansoff, S.N., & Moniruzzaman, A. (2012). Mediators of drug treatment court outcomes

in Vancouver Canada. British Columbia, Canada: Simon Fraser University.

Vito, G., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). The impact of treatment: The Jefferson County (Kentucky) Drug Court

program. Federal Probation, 62(2), 46–51.

Westermeyer, J., & Dickerson, D. (2008). Minorities. In M. Galanter & H.D. Kleber (Eds.), Textbook of

Substance Abuse Treatment (4th Ed.; pp. 639–651). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric

Publishing.

Chapter 12: Veteran Peer Mentors

This chapter discusses the standards, best practices, and promising practices regarding veteran

mentors as part of the veterans treatment court. Specific topics include the role of mentors and

mentor coordinators, recruitment, and training.

General and the Role of Mentors

Standards

1. A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the

court with all of the following:

a) A mentorship relationship with another veteran who can offer

the participant support, guidance, and advice. It is the intent

of the legislature that, where practicable, the assigned mentor

should be as similar to the individual as possible in terms of

age, gender, branch of service, military rank, and period of

military service. (MCL 600.1207(1)(b))

B. Best Practices

1. Mentors play an active role in helping veterans both in the courtroom

and in the community.

a) In a study of the Buffalo Veterans Treatment Court, 100 percent of

participants reported that the mentors helped them stay focused

and be successful in the program. (Washousky, et. al., 2012)

2. The veterans treatment court maintains a broad and diverse corps of volunteer

mentors.

a) The presence of a diverse and qualified veterans mentor program

was identified as a key factor in the success of the Buffalo

Veterans Treatment Court. (Washousky, et. al., 2012)

C. Promising Practices

1. The veterans treatment court retains a mentor coordinator who is responsible

for recruitment, training, and some oversight of mentors.

a) The mentor coordinator manages interaction between the mentors

and the veterans treatment court team, and also schedules mentors

to be present during court hearings.

2. Veteran mentors attend court sessions when scheduled.

a) Having a mentor attend a court session with the veteran participant

provides support for the participant, especially when he or she may

be feeling isolated.

Recruitment and Screening

Promising Practices

1. The veterans treatment court adopts a recruitment and screening policy for

new mentors.

a) It is important to recruit and retain respectable veterans to serve as

mentors. A screening policy may include a requirement that

mentors are in good current standing with the law, willing to

commit to the program for a minimum length of time, and willing

participate in training before beginning to work with a participant.

2. The veterans treatment court gives careful consideration to whether law

enforcement officers or other government employees can serve as mentors.

a) Law enforcement officers and other government employees, such as

court staff, have certain duties with regard to reporting violations of

the law. If a police officer who is serving as a mentor becomes

aware of a participant’s illegal drug use or other program violation,

that officer is put in a difficult situation between his or her job

duties and role as a mentor. The court should carefully consider

this balance when establishing a mentor recruitment policy.

3. The veterans treatment court partners with local Veterans service

organizations to recruit mentors.

a) Organizations such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW),

Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA), and AMVETS can provide

access to veterans who are active in their communities and willing

to volunteer.

4. The veterans court accepts qualified program graduates as mentors.

a) Many courts have reported positive results when using program

graduates as mentors. Most courts require a graduate to wait a

minimum amount of time, usually six months, before beginning to

volunteer as a mentor.

Education and Training

Best Practices

1. Mentoring is most effective when the roles of the mentor and mentee are

clearly delineated (Tsai & Helsel, 2016) and when potential mentors are

properly identified and trained (Greden et al., 2010) (Douds & Hummer,

2019)

B. Promising Practices

1. All prospective mentors complete required initial training.

a) Training is crucial for new mentors. Training can include observing

court sessions, learning the fundamentals of the court system and

criminal justice case processing, basic information on substance use

and mental health, and staying current on veterans’ issues and

resources in the community.

2 Initial training includes a confidentiality workshop.

a) The court should provide confidentiality training to all mentors, in

accordance with the confidentiality policy. Mentors will be more

comfortable knowing what they can share and what they must share

with the court.

3. The veterans treatment court provides regular training for all mentors.

a) Courts should offer training for all mentors, including experienced

ones, on a regular basis. Many courts offer short topical training

sessions once monthly or twice yearly to help mentors keep abreast

of VA operations, substance use or mental health, or life skills.

Works Cited

Buffalo Veteran’s Treatment Court (2009). Buffalo veteran’s court and veterans mentor handbook.

Douds, A., Hummer, D. (2019). When a Veterans’ Treatment Court Fails: Lessons Learned from a

Qualitative Evaluation, Victims & Offenders, 14:3, 322-343,

DOI:10.1080/15564886.2019.1595248

Greden, J. F., Valenstein, M., Spinner, J., Blow, A., Gorman, L. A., Dalack, G. W., … Kees, M. (2010).

Buddy-to-Buddy, a citizen soldier peer support program to counteract stigma, PTSD, depression,

and suicide. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1208, 90–97. doi:10.1111/j.1749-

6632.2010.05719.

Russell, R.T. (2009). Veterans treatment court: a proactive appraoch. Criminal and Civil Confinement.

Volume 35, 357-372.

Tsai, P. I., & Helsel, B. S. (2016). How to build effective mentor-mentee relationships: Role of the

mentee. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 151, 642–644.

doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.10.017

Washousky, R., Washousky, D., Greenwood, S., and Taylor, T. (2012). Buffalo Veterans Treatment

Court: Enhancement, Expansion, and Evaluation. Recovery Solutions through United States

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

Appendix A

Michigan Veterans Treatment Court Statute

600.1200 Definitions.

As used in this chapter:

(a) "Department of Veterans Affairs" or "VA" means the United States Department of Veterans

Affairs.

(b) "Domestic violence offense" means any crime alleged to have been committed by an

individual against his or her spouse or former spouse, an individual with whom he or she has a

child in common, an individual with whom he or she has had a dating relationship, or an

individual who resides or has resided in the same household.

policy council act, 1974 PA 163, MCL 28.211 to 28.215.

(d) "Mental illness" means a substantial disorder of thought or mood that significantly impairs

judgment, behavior, capacity to recognize reality, or ability to cope with the ordinary demands of

life, including, but not limited to, post-traumatic stress disorder and psychiatric symptoms

associated with traumatic brain injury.

(e) "Participant" means an individual who is admitted into a veterans treatment court.

(f) "Prosecutor" means the prosecuting attorney of the county, the city attorney, the village

attorney, or the township attorney.

(g) "Traffic offense" means a violation of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1

to 257.923, or a violation of a local ordinance substantially corresponding to a violation of that

act, that involves the operation of a vehicle and, at the time of the violation, is a felony or

misdemeanor.

(h) "Veteran" means an individual who meets both of the following:

(i) Is a veteran as defined in section 1 of 1965 PA 190, MCL 35.61.

(ii) Served at least 180 days of active duty in the armed forces of the United States.

(i) "Veteran service organization" or "VSO" means an organization that is accredited by the

United States Department of Veterans Affairs, as recognized under 38 CFR 14.628.

(j) "Veterans treatment court" or "veterans court" means a court adopted or instituted under

section 1201 that provides a supervised treatment program for individuals who are veterans and

who abuse or are dependent upon any controlled substance or alcohol or suffer from a mental

illness.

(k) "Violent offender" means an individual who is currently charged with or has pled guilty to an

offense involving the death of, or a serious bodily injury to, any individual, whether or not any of

these circumstances are an element of the offense, or an offense that is criminal sexual conduct

in any degree.

600.1201 Veterans court; compliance; characteristics; adoption or institution of veterans

treatment court; memorandum of understanding; training; participants from other

jurisdiction; validity of transfer; certification by state court administrative office.

(1) A veterans court shall comply with the modified version of the 10 key components of drug

treatment courts as promulgated by the Buffalo veterans treatment court, which include all of the

following essential characteristics:

(a) Integration of alcohol, drug treatment, and mental health services with justice system

case processing.

(b) Use of a nonadversarial approach; prosecution and defense counsel promote public

safety while protecting participants' due process rights.

treatment court program.

(d) Provision of access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, mental health, and related

treatment and rehabilitation services.

(e) Monitoring of abstinence by frequent alcohol and other drug testing.

(f) A coordinated strategy that governs veterans treatment court responses to participants'

compliance.

(g) Ongoing judicial interaction with each veteran is essential.

(h) Monitoring and evaluation to measure the achievement of program goals and gauge

effectiveness.

(i) Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective veterans treatment court

planning, implementation, and operations.

(j) Forging of partnerships among veterans treatment court, veterans administration,

public agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and

enhances veteran treatment court effectiveness.

(2) The circuit court in any judicial circuit or the district court in any judicial district may adopt

or institute a veterans treatment court by statute or court rule if the circuit or district court enters

into a memorandum of understanding with each participating prosecuting attorney in the circuit

or district court district, a representative of the criminal defense bar, a representative or

representatives of community treatment providers, a representative or representatives of veterans

service organizations in the circuit or district court district, and a representative or

representatives of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. However, the memorandum

of understanding will only be required to include the prosecuting attorney if the veterans

treatment court will include in its program individuals who may be eligible for discharge and

dismissal of an offense, a delayed sentence, deferred entry of judgment, or a sentence involving

deviation from the sentencing guidelines. The memorandum of understanding also may include

other parties considered necessary, such as any other prosecutor in the circuit or district court

district, local law enforcement, the probation departments in that circuit or district, the local

substance abuse coordinating agency for that circuit or district, a domestic violence service

provider program that receives funding from the state domestic violence prevention and

treatment board, a representative or representatives of the local court funding unit, and

community corrections agencies in that circuit or district. The memorandum of understanding

shall describe the role of each party, and the conditions for which the memorandum of

understanding must be renewed and amended.

(3) A court that is adopting a veterans treatment court shall participate in training as required by

the state court administrative office.

(4) A court that has adopted a veterans treatment court under this section may accept participants

from any other jurisdiction in this state based upon either the residence of the participant in the

receiving jurisdiction or the unavailability of a veterans treatment court in the jurisdiction where

the participant is charged. The transfer can occur at any time during the proceedings, including,

but not limited to, prior to adjudication. The receiving court shall have jurisdiction to impose

sentence, including, but not limited to, sanctions, incentives, incarceration, and phase changes. A

transfer under this subsection is not valid unless it is agreed to by all of the following:

(a) The defendant or respondent.

(b) The attorney representing the defendant or respondent.

(d) The judge of the receiving veterans treatment court and the prosecutor of a court

funding unit of the veterans treatment court.

(5) Beginning January 1, 2018, a veterans treatment court operating in this state, or a circuit

court in any judicial circuit or the district court in any judicial district seeking to adopt or

institute a veterans treatment court, must be certified by the state court administrative office. The

state court administrative office shall establish the procedure for certification. Approval and

certification under this subsection of a veterans treatment court is required to begin or to

continue the operation of a veterans treatment court under this chapter. The state court

administrative office shall not recognize and include a veterans treatment court that is not

certified under this subsection on the statewide official list of veterans treatment courts. The state

court administrative office shall include a veterans treatment court certified under this subsection

on the statewide official list of veterans treatment courts. A veterans treatment court that is not

certified under this subsection shall not perform any of the functions of a veterans treatment

court, including, but not limited to, any of the following functions:

(a) Charging a fee under section 1206.

(b) Discharging and dismissing a case as provided in section 1209.

(d) Certifying to the secretary of state that an individual is eligible to receive a restricted

license under section 1084 of this act and section 304 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949

PA 300, MCL 257.304.

600.1202 Hiring or contracting with treatment providers.

A veterans treatment court may hire or contract with licensed or accredited treatment providers,

in consultation and cooperation with the local substance abuse coordinating agency, and other

appropriate persons to assist the veterans treatment court in fulfilling its requirements under this

chapter, including, but not limited to, an investigation of an individual's background or

circumstances, or a clinical evaluation of an individual, before the individual is admitted or

permitted to participate in a veterans treatment court. It is the intent of the legislature that,

services, including, but not limited to, clinical evaluations, drug and alcohol treatment, and

mental health services, shall be provided by the VA to the extent that is practical.

600.1203 Admission to veterans treatment court.

(1) A veterans treatment court shall determine whether an individual may be admitted to the

veterans treatment court. No individual has a right to be admitted into a veterans treatment court.

However, an individual is not eligible for admission into a veterans treatment court if he or she is

a violent offender. An individual is eligible for admission into a veterans treatment court if he or

she has previously had an offense discharged or dismissed as a result of participation in a

veterans treatment court, drug treatment court, or other specialty court, but he or she shall not

have a subsequent offense discharged or dismissed as a result of participating in the veterans

treatment court.

(2) In addition to admission to a veterans treatment court under this act, an individual who is

eligible for admission under this act may also be admitted to a veterans treatment court under any

of the following circumstances:

(a) The individual has been assigned the status of youthful trainee under section 11 of

chapter II of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 762.11.

(b) The individual has had criminal proceedings against him or her deferred and has been

placed on probation under any of the following:

(i) Section 7411 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7411, or a

local ordinance or another law of this state, another state, or the United States that

is substantially similar to that section.

(ii) Section 4a of chapter IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175,

MCL 769.4a, or a local ordinance or another law of this state, another state, or the

United States that is substantially similar to that section.

(iii) Section 350a or 430 of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL

750.350a and 750.430, or a local ordinance or another law of this state, another

state, or the United States that is substantially similar to those sections.

(3) To be eligible for admission to a veterans treatment court, an individual shall cooperate with

and complete a preadmissions screening and evaluation assessment and shall agree to cooperate

with any future evaluation assessment as directed by the veterans treatment court. A

preadmission screening and evaluation assessment shall include all of the following:

(a) A determination of the individual's veteran status. A review of the DD Form 214

"certificate of release or discharge from active duty" satisfies the requirement of this

subdivision.

(b) A complete review of the individual's criminal history and whether the individual has

been admitted to, has participated in, or is currently participating in a veterans treatment

court, drug treatment court, or other specialty court, whether admitted under this act or a

law listed under subsection (2), and the results of the individual's participation. A review

of the L.E.I.N. satisfies the requirements of this subdivision unless a further review is

warranted. The court may accept other verifiable and reliable information from the

prosecution or defense to complete its review and may require the individual to submit a

statement as to whether or not he or she has previously been admitted to a veterans

treatment court, drug treatment court, or other specialty court, and the results of his or her

participation in the prior program or programs.

community.

(d) A review of the individual's history regarding the use or abuse of any controlled

substance or alcohol and an assessment of whether the individual abuses controlled

substances or alcohol or is drug or alcohol dependent. It is the intent of the legislature

that, to the extent practicable, an assessment under this subdivision shall be a clinical

assessment completed by the VA.

(e) A review of the individual's mental health history. It is the intent of the legislature

that, to the extent practicable, this assessment shall be a clinical assessment completed by

the VA.

(f) A review of any special needs or circumstances of the individual that may potentially

affect the individual's ability to receive substance abuse treatment and follow the court's

orders.

(4) Except as otherwise permitted in this act, any statement or other information obtained as a

result of an individual's participation in a preadmission screening and evaluation assessment

under subsection (3) is confidential, is exempt from disclosure under the freedom of information

act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246, and shall not be used in a criminal prosecution, except

for a statement or information that reveals criminal acts other than personal drug use.

(5) The court may request that the department of state police provide to the court information

contained in the L.E.I.N. pertaining to an individual applicant's criminal history for the purposes

of determining an individual's admission into the veterans treatment court and general criminal

history review, including whether the individual has previously been admitted to and participated

in a veterans treatment court, drug treatment court, or other specialty court under this act or

under a statute listed under subsection (2), and the results of the individual's participation. The

department of state police shall provide the information requested by a veterans treatment court

under this subsection.

600.1204 Findings or statement.

Before an individual is admitted into a veterans treatment court, the court shall find on the record

or place a statement in the court file establishing all of the following:

(a) That the individual is a veteran.

(b) That the individual is dependent upon or abusing drugs or alcohol, or suffers from a

mental illness, and is an appropriate candidate for participation in the veterans treatment

court.

court and agrees to comply with all court orders and requirements of the court's program

and treatment providers.

(d) That the individual is not an unwarranted or substantial risk to the safety of the public

or any individual, based upon the screening and assessment or other information

presented to the court.

(e) That the individual is not a violent offender.

(f) That the individual has completed a preadmission screening and evaluation

assessment under section 1203(3) and has agreed to cooperate with any future evaluation

assessment as directed by the veterans treatment court.

(g) That the individual meets the requirements, if applicable, of a statute listed under

section 1203(2).

(h) The terms, conditions, and duration of the agreement between the parties, and the

outcome for the participant of the veterans treatment court upon successful completion by

the participant or termination of participation.

600.1205 Admission of individual charged in criminal case; conditions.

(1) If the individual being considered for admission to a veterans treatment court is charged in a

criminal case, his or her admission is subject to all of the following conditions:

(a) The offense or offenses allegedly committed by the individual are generally related to

the military service of the individual, including the abuse, illegal use, or possession of a

controlled substance or alcohol, or mental illness that arises as a result of service.

(b) The individual pleads guilty to the charge or charges on the record.

by an attorney at veterans treatment court review hearings, and, with the agreement of the

prosecutor, the right to a preliminary examination.

(d) The individual signs a written agreement to participate in the veterans treatment court.

(2) An individual who may be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an offense, delayed

sentence, deferred entry of judgment, or deviation from the sentencing guidelines shall not be

admitted to a veterans treatment court unless the prosecutor first approves the admission of the

individual into the veterans treatment court in conformity with the memorandum of

understanding under section 1201(2).

(3) An individual shall not be admitted to, or remain in, a veterans treatment court under an

agreement that would permit the discharge or dismissal of a traffic offense upon successful

completion of the veterans treatment court program.

(4) In addition to rights accorded a victim under the William Van Regenmorter crime victim's

rights act, 1985 PA 87, MCL 780.751 to 780.834, the veterans treatment court shall permit any

victim of the offense or offenses of which the individual is charged, any victim of a prior offense

of which that individual was convicted, and members of the community in which the offenses

were committed or in which the defendant resides to submit a written statement to the court

regarding the advisability of admitting the individual into the veterans treatment court.

(5) An individual who has waived his or her right to a preliminary examination and has pled

guilty as part of his or her application to a veterans treatment court and who is not admitted to a

veterans treatment court shall be permitted to withdraw his or her plea and is entitled to a

preliminary examination.

600.1206 Admission to veterans treatment court; conditions; length of jurisdiction;

collaboration; fee; information contained in L.E.I.N. pertaining to criminal history.

(1) All of the following conditions apply to an individual admitted to a veterans treatment court:

(a) For an individual who is admitted to a veterans treatment court based upon having a

criminal charge currently filed against him or her, the court shall accept the individual's

plea of guilty.

(b) One of the following applies to an individual who pled guilty to a criminal charge for

which he or she was admitted to a veterans treatment court, as applicable:

(i) If the individual pled guilty to an offense that is not a traffic offense and may

be eligible for discharge and dismissal under the agreement with the court and

prosecutor upon successful completion of the veterans treatment court program,

the court shall not enter a judgment of guilt.

(ii) If the individual pled guilty to a traffic offense or another offense but is not

eligible for discharge and dismissal under the agreement with the court and

prosecutor upon successful completion of the veterans treatment court program,

the court shall enter a judgment of guilt.

defer further proceedings as provided in section 1 of chapter XI of the code of criminal

procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 771.1, or proceed to sentencing, as applicable in that case

under that agreement, and place the individual on probation or other court supervision in

the veterans treatment court program with terms and conditions according to the

agreement and as considered necessary by the court.

(2) Unless a memorandum of understanding made pursuant to section 1088 between a receiving

veterans treatment court and the court of original jurisdiction provides otherwise, the original

court of jurisdiction maintains jurisdiction over the veterans treatment court participant as

provided in this act until final disposition of the case, but not longer than the probation period

fixed under section 2 of chapter XI of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 771.2.

(3) The veterans treatment court shall cooperate with, and act in a collaborative manner with, the

prosecutor, defense counsel, treatment providers, the local substance abuse coordinating agency

for that circuit or district, probation departments, the United States Department of Veterans

Affairs, local VSOs in that circuit or district, and, to the extent possible, local law enforcement,

the department of corrections, and community corrections agencies.

(4) The veterans treatment court may require an individual admitted into the court to pay a

veterans treatment court fee that is reasonably related to the cost to the court for administering

the veterans treatment court program as provided in the memorandum of understanding under

section 1201(2). The clerk of the veterans treatment court shall transmit the fees collected to the

treasurer of the local funding unit at the end of each month.

(5) The veterans treatment court may request that the department of state police provide to the

court information contained in the L.E.I.N. pertaining to an individual applicant's criminal

history for purposes of determining the individual's compliance with all court orders. The

department of state police shall provide the information requested by a veterans treatment court

under this subsection.

600.1207 Veterans treatment court; responsibilities to individual.

(1) A veterans treatment court shall provide an individual admitted to the court with all of the

following:

(a) Consistent, continual, and close monitoring and interaction with the court, treatment

providers, probation, and the participant.

(b) A mentorship relationship with another veteran who can offer the participant support,

guidance, and advice. It is the intent of the legislature that, where practicable, the

assigned mentor should be as similar to the individual as possible in terms of age, gender,

branch of service, military rank, and period of military service.

or alcohol in a participant's blood, urine, or breath, using, to the extent practicable, the

best available, accepted, and scientifically valid methods.

(d) Periodic evaluation assessments of the participant's circumstances and progress in the

program.

(e) A regimen or strategy of appropriate and graduated but immediate rewards for

compliance and sanctions for noncompliance, including, but not limited to, the possibility

of incarceration or confinement.

(f) Substance abuse treatment services, relapse prevention services, education, and

vocational opportunities as appropriate and practicable. It is the intent of the legislature

that, where practicable, these services shall be provided by the VA.

(g) Mental health treatment services as appropriate and practicable. It is the intent of the

legislature that, where practicable, these services shall be provided by the VA.

(2) Any statement or other information obtained as a result of participating in assessment,

treatment, or testing while in a veterans treatment court is confidential and is exempt from

disclosure under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246, and shall

not be used in a criminal prosecution, except for a statement or information that reveals criminal

acts other than, or inconsistent with, personal drug use.

600.1208 Duties of individual; notification of new crime; payment of fines, fees, and costs.

(1) In order to continue to participate in and successfully complete a veterans treatment court

program, an individual shall do all of the following:

(a) Pay all court-ordered fines and costs, including minimum state costs.

(b) Pay the veterans treatment court fee allowed under section 1206(4).

(d) Pay all crime victims' rights assessments under section 5 of 1989 PA 196, MCL

780.905.

(e) Comply with all court orders. Violations of a court order may be sanctioned within the

court's discretion.

(f) Meet with a member of a veteran service organization or a county veteran counselor to

discuss available veterans benefit programs for which the individual may qualify.

(2) The veterans treatment court shall be notified if the veterans treatment court participant is

accused of a new crime, and the judge shall consider whether to terminate the participant's

participation in the veterans treatment court program in conformity with the memorandum of

understanding under section 1201(2). If the participant is convicted of a felony for an offense

that occurred after the defendant is admitted to the veterans treatment court, the judge shall

terminate the participant's participation in the veterans treatment court.

(3) The court shall require that a participant pay all fines, costs, the fee, restitution, and

assessments described in subsection (1)(a) to (d) and pay all, or make substantial contributions

toward payment of, the costs of the treatment and the veterans treatment court program services

provided to the participant, including, but not limited to, the costs of urinalysis and such testing

or any counseling provided. However, if the court determines that the payment of fines, the fee,

or costs of treatment under this subsection would be a substantial hardship for the individual or

would interfere with the individual's substance abuse or mental health treatment, the court may

waive all or part of those fines, the fee, or costs of treatment.

600.1209 Veterans treatment court program; finding or statement upon completion or

termination of program; discharge or dismissal of proceedings; duties of court upon

successful completion of probation or court supervision; termination or failure to

successfully complete program; duties of court.

(1) Upon completion or termination of the veterans treatment court program, the court shall find

on the record or place a written statement in the court file as to whether the participant completed

the program successfully or whether the individual's participation in the program was terminated

and, if it was terminated, the reason for the termination.

(2) If a participant successfully completes probation or other court supervision and the

participant's proceedings were deferred or the participant was sentenced under section 1206, the

court shall comply with the agreement made with the participant upon admission into the

veterans treatment court, or the agreement as it was altered after admission by the court with

approval of the participant and the prosecutor for that jurisdiction as provided in subsections (3)

to (8).

(3) If an individual is participating in a veterans treatment court under a statute listed in section

1203(2), the court shall proceed under the applicable section of law. There shall be not more than

1 discharge or dismissal under this subsection.

(4) Except as provided in subsection (5), the court, with the agreement of the prosecutor and in

conformity with the terms and conditions of the memorandum of understanding under section

1201(2), may discharge and dismiss the proceedings against an individual who meets all of the

following criteria:

(a) The individual has participated in a veterans treatment court for the first time.

(b) The individual has successfully completed the terms and conditions of the veterans

treatment court program.

crimes to which he or she has pled guilty.

(d) The individual is not currently charged with and has not pled guilty to a traffic

offense.

(e) The individual has not previously been subject to more than 1 of any of the following:

(i) Assignment to the status of youthful trainee under section 11 of chapter II of

the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 762.11.

(ii) The dismissal of criminal proceedings against him or her under section 7411

of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7411, section 4a of chapter IX

of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a, or section 350a or

430 of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.350a and 750.430.

(5) The court may grant a discharge and dismissal of a domestic violence offense only if all of

the following circumstances apply:

(a) The individual has not previously had proceedings dismissed under section 4a of

chapter IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a.

(b) The domestic violence offense is eligible to be dismissed under section 4a of chapter

IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a.

IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a, and the discharge and

dismissal of proceedings are processed and reported under section 4a of chapter IX of the

code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.4a.

(6) A discharge and dismissal under subsection (4) shall be without adjudication of guilt and is

not a conviction for purposes of this section or for purposes of disqualifications or disabilities

imposed by law upon conviction of a crime. There shall be not more than 1 discharge and

dismissal under subsection (4) for an individual. The court shall send a record of the discharge

and dismissal to the criminal justice information center of the department of state police, and the

department of state police shall enter that information into the L.E.I.N. with an indication of

participation by the individual in a veterans treatment court. Unless the court enters a judgment

of guilt, all records of the proceedings regarding the participation of the individual in the

veterans treatment court under subsection (4) are closed to public inspection and are exempt

from public disclosure under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to

15.246, but shall be open to the courts of this state, another state, or the United States, the

department of corrections, law enforcement personnel, and prosecutors only for use in the

performance of their duties or to determine whether an employee of the court, department, law

enforcement agency, or prosecutor's office has violated his or her conditions of employment or

whether an applicant meets criteria for employment with the court, department, law enforcement

agency, or prosecutor's office. The records and identifications division of the department of state

police shall retain a nonpublic record of an arrest and the discharge and dismissal under this

subsection.

(7) Except as provided in subsection (3), (4), or (5), if an individual has successfully completed

probation or other court supervision, the court shall do the following:

(a) If the court has not already entered an adjudication of guilt or responsibility, enter an

adjudication of guilt.

(b) If the court has not already sentenced the individual, proceed to sentencing.

responsibility and disposition to the criminal justice information center of the department

of state police. The department of state police shall enter that information into the

L.E.I.N. with an indication of successful participation by the individual in a veterans

treatment court.

(8) For a participant whose participation is terminated or who fails to successfully complete the

veterans treatment court program, the court shall enter an adjudication of guilt if the entering of

guilt was deferred or sentencing was delayed under section 1206 and shall then proceed to

sentencing or disposition of the individual for the original charges to which the individual pled

guilty prior to admission to the veterans treatment court. Upon sentencing or disposition of the

individual, the court shall send a record of that sentence or disposition and the individual's

unsuccessful participation in the veterans treatment court to the criminal justice information

center of the department of state police, and the department of state police shall enter that

information into the L.E.I.N., with an indication that the individual unsuccessfully participated in

a veterans treatment court.

600.1210 Collection of data.

Each veterans treatment court shall collect and provide data on each individual applicant and

participant and the entire program as required by the state court administrative office.

600.1211 Funds; report.

(1) Where practicable, the supreme court has authority to expend state funds for the

establishment and operation of veterans treatment courts. Federal funds provided to the state for

the operation of veterans treatment courts shall be distributed by the department of community

health or the appropriate state agency as otherwise provided by law. Nothing in this subsection

prevents a local unit of government or circuit or district court from expending funds for the

establishment and operation of veterans treatment courts.

(2) The state treasurer may receive money or other assets from any source for deposit into the

appropriate state fund or funds for the purposes described in subsection (1).

(3) Each veterans treatment court shall report quarterly to the state court administrative office on

the funds received and expended by that veterans treatment court in a manner prescribed by the

state court administrative office.

600.1212 State drug treatment court advisory committee; monitoring; recommendations.

The state drug treatment court advisory committee created under section 1082 shall monitor the

effectiveness of veterans treatment courts and the availability of funding and present annual

recommendations to the legislature and supreme court regarding statutory changes regarding

veterans treatment courts.

Appendix B

Model Veterans Treatment Court Discharge Statement

STATE OF MICHIGAN

[court number and type]

VTC Program Discharge

CASE NO.

[case/file number]

In the matter of:

[defendant name and DOB]

[defendant address]

On this [number] day of [month], [year] the defendant:

_ Successfully completed the VTC program

_ Voluntarily withdrew from the program

_ Was discharged from the program as unsuccessful due to:

_ Violation of the program

_ Conviction of new criminal charges

_ Being a risk to public safety

_ Other: [specify]

_________________________________________P_________ __________

Honorable [name of VTC judge] Date

This model document is provided by SCAO as a resource and for informational purposes only to facilitate the

operation of problem solving courts by local units of government and courts in compliance with statutory

requirements. SCAO's sharing this model document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

Since there might be a delay in updating the model document on the web page and updating the model document in

this manual, the most up-to-date version of the model document is always available at

http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/admin/op/problem-solving-courts/Documents/VTC-DischargeStatment.pdf

Appendix C

Model Multi-Party Consent for Release of Information

Model Document Information

This model document is provided by the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) as a resource

and is for informational purposes only. It is intended only to assist courts with operating a

problem-solving court and to comply with the problem-solving court statutes. This model

document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

Customize the sections that are in bold and highlighted in yellow. Once customized, the court

should remove the brackets, bold, and highlighting. The parties listed in the model document do

not include agencies that are likely a “Qualified Service Organization” (QSO) as defined in 42

CFR section 2.11. If there is an agency that the program would exchange confidential

information with, and that agency is not a QSO

as defined in 42 CFR, you will need to add that

agency as a party in this form.

As a model document, this is generic in nature and should be modified to fit your program.

Before developing your confidentiality documents please review the University of New

Hampshire’s School of Law/Institute for Health Policy & Practice’s “Substance Use Disorder

Treatment Confidentiality Boot Camp” guide located at

https://chhs.unh.edu/sites/default/files/substance-use-disorder-privacy-part-2-idn-workbook-unh-

1017.pdf.

Page 56 of the “Substance Use Disorder Treatment Confidentiality Boot Camp” guide has an example of the

written agreement required for a QSO.

[Name of problem-solving court]

Multiple-Party Consent for Release of Information

Participant’s Full Name: _____________________________ DOB: ____________

I authorize the following parties:

1. [Name of problem-solving court],

2. [Name of county] MDOC probation/parole department

3. [Name of district court] probation department

4. [Name of county] prosecutor’s office

5. [Name of treatment agency]

6. [Name of law enforcement agency]

7. [Name of law firm/office]

8. Michigan Secretary of State (Interlock Program)

To Communicate with and disclose to one another the following information:

INFORMATION TO BE SHARED

1. Name, address, and other personal identifying information of the participant.

2. [Name of problem-solving court] program assessments (GAIN, COMPAS, risk and

needs, etc.).

3. [Name of problem-solving court] program behavior summaries and updates.

4. Treatment information, including assessments, attendance, progress and compliance

reports, treatment plans, and discharge summaries.

5. Drug and alcohol screening, testing, confirmation results, and payment information.

6. Health information.

7. Reportable communicable disease information, including HIV, sexually transmitted

infections, hepatitis, and tuberculosis.

8. Health plan or health benefits information.

9. Electronic monitoring information, including compliance and payment information.

10. Information required to obtain a restricted license through the ignition interlock program.

11. Other (specify, if any): ______________________________________________

Note: I authorize all of the foregoing information to be shared unless I indicate here, by

number, one or more categories of information not to be shared: _____________

PURPOSE AND USE OF DISCLOSURE

The purposes for the disclosures authorized by this form are:

• To assess the participant’s need for substance use, mental health, or developmental

disabilities services and treatment.

• To provide, manage, and coordinate [name of problem-solving court] program and

substance use, mental health, and developmental disabilities services and treatment

for the participant.

• To develop a Person-Centered Plan, Service Plan, and/or Treatment Plan for the

participant.

• To make dispositional recommendations for a court-involved participant.

• To monitor payment for services, and establish financial assistance if determined

necessary.

• To improve service and treatment outcomes for participants involved in the [name of

problem-solving court] program.

• To monitor my participation in the [name of problem-solving court] program and

my compliance with the program rules.

• To provide information for evaluation of the [Name of problem-solving court]

program

• To disclose to the Michigan Secretary of State (Interlock Program) information

required on Michigan form MC393 to obtain a restricted license through the ignition

interlock program.

• Other (please specify): ________________________________________________

REDISCLOSURE AND CONFIDENTIALITY

Once health care information is disclosed pursuant to this signed authorization, I understand that

the federal health privacy law (45 CFR, Parts 160 and 164) protecting health information may

not apply to the recipient of the information and, therefore, may not prohibit the recipient from

redisclosing information to others. However, substance-abuse treatment information protected

by federal law (42 CFR, Part 2), shall remain confidential and must not be redisclosed by the

recipient except as authorized by those laws or this authorization

. The federal rules restrict any

use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient.

CONSENT EXPIRATION

The date, event, or condition upon which consent expires must ensure that the consent will last

no longer than reasonably necessary to serve the purpose for which it is given.

This consent for release of information shall expire upon my discharge from the [name of

problem-solving court] program.

An individual within the criminal justice system who receives patient information under 42 CFR § 2.35 may re-

disclose and use it only to carry out that individual's official duties with regard to the patient's conditional release or

other action in connection with which the consent was given.

REVOCATION

I understand that I may revoke this consent, orally or in writing, at any time except to the extent

that action has been taken in reliance on it. I also understand that I do not have to fill out this

form. If I do not fill it out, I cannot participate in the [Name of problem-solving court]

program, but can still get health insurance, treatment, and other medical benefits from a health

care provider.

I also understand that if I refuse to consent to disclosure, or attempt to revoke my consent prior

to the expiration of this consent such action is grounds for immediate termination from the

[name of problem-solving court] program.

CONFIDENTIALITY RIGHTS

Federal law protects the confidentiality of treatment records under 42 CFR, Section 2.1 through

Section 2.67; and Section 290dd-2. This means that:

• Treatment information is ordinarily kept confidential.

• Review hearings are held in open and public courtrooms, and although the court attempts

to minimize confidential information in court, it is possible that an observer could

connect a participant’s identity with the fact that he or she is in treatment as a condition

of participation in the [name of problem-solving court] program or that confidential

information may be revealed. I specifically consent to a potential disclosure to third

persons.

• Staffing meetings, which are held before review hearings, are typically closed to the

public. Confidential information may be discussed by the [name of problem-solving

court] team members at a staffing meeting. I understand that if a non-team member is

invited to participate in a staffing meeting they must receive my consent prior to

observation.

• It is a crime to violate confidentiality requirements, and the participant may report such

violations to Michigan's attorney general at 517-373-1110.

• Notwithstanding this confidentiality requirement, covered information may be released

under specified circumstances and may include communication with administration and

qualified service organizations working with the [name of problem-solving court]

program, outside auditors, central registries and researchers.

• The restrictions on disclosure and use in the regulations in 42 CFR part 2 do not apply to:

1. Communication with law enforcement agencies or officials regarding a crime

committed on program premises or against program personnel

2. The reporting under state law of incidents of suspected child abuse and neglect to

the appropriate state or local authorities. However, the restrictions continue to

apply to the original substance use disorder patient records maintained by the part

2 program including their disclosure and use for civil or criminal proceedings

which may arise out of the report of suspected child abuse and neglect

3. Court orders signed pursuant to 42 CFR part 2 for release of specific information

4. Disclosure to medical personnel if there is a determination that a medical

emergency exists, i.e., there is a situation that poses an immediate threat to the

health of any individual and requires immediate medical intervention -

Information disclosed to the medical personnel who are treating such a medical

emergency may be redisclosed by such personnel for treatment purposes as

needed

5. Reporting an immediate threat to the health or safety of an individual or the public

to law enforcement if patient-identifying information is not disclosed

I acknowledge that I have been advised of my rights, have received a copy of the

advisement, and have had the benefit of legal counsel or have voluntarily waived the right

to an attorney. I am not under the influence of drugs or alcohol. I fully understand my

rights and I am signing this Consent voluntarily.

SIGNATURE CONSENTING TO RELEASE OF INFORMATION

_____________________________________________ _____________

Participant signature Date

_____________________________________________ _____________

Staff witness signature Date

_____________________________________________

Staff witness printed name

SIGNATURE CONFIRMING PARTICIPANT WAS ADVISED OF CONFIDENTIALITY

RIGHTS BOTH VERBALLY AND IN WRITING

_____________________________________________ _____________

Participant signature Date

_____________________________________________ _____________

Staff witness signature Date

_____________________________________________

Staff witness printed name

Parts of this form were adapted from:

Mark F Botts, L. B. (2015, April 7). https://www.sog.unc.edu/publications/reports/north-carolina-

juvenile-justice-%E2%80%93-behavioral-health-information-sharing-guide. Retrieved April 11,

2018, from https://www.sog.unc.edu:

https://www.sog.unc.edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/Information%20Sharing%20Guide%20FIN

AL%20PDF%20to%20authors%202015-06-25.pdf

Appendix D

New Staff/Team Member Orientation

New Staff/Team Member Orientation Sheet for

[Name of veterans treatment court program]

Welcome to your new role with [name of veterans treatment court program]. Please

complete the following checklist to learn about Veterans Treatment Courts and how your role on

the team can positively change lives.

☐ Received/Read the [name of veterans treatment court program] Policy Manual

☐ Received/Read [name of veterans treatment court program] Participant Handbook

☐ Understand the Phase Structure and Phase Requirements

☐ Received/Read Revised Judicature Act 236 of 1961 Chapter 12, Veterans Treatment

Courts

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(hmyaufl31ybwg23vudcpwock))/documents/mcl/pdf/mc

l-236-1961-12.pdf

☐ Reviewed the Following Lessons at Treatment Courts Online www.treatmentcourts.org:

All:

☐ Incentives and Sanctions (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Confidential Information in Drug Court (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Cultural Competency (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Procedural Fairness (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Implementing Evidence-Based Practice (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Successful Drug Testing (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Males and Trauma (Veterans Treatment Court Lessons)

☐ Veterans Health Administration (Veterans Treatment Court Lessons)

☐ Mental Illness, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Substance Abuse (Veterans

Treatment Court Lessons)

Judge:

☐ Role of the Judge (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

This model document is provided by the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) as a resource and for

informational purposes only to facilitate the operation of problem-solving courts by local units of government and

courts in compliance with certification requirements. SCAO's sharing this model document is not intended (and

cannot be construed) as legal advice.

Name:

Date of

hire:

Orientation completion date

(within 6 months from hire):

Mentor Coordinator:

☐ How to Build a Mentoring Program for your Veterans Treatment Court (Veterans

Treatment Court Lessons)

Veterans Justice Outreach Specialist:

☐ Role of the VHA Veterans Justice Outreach Specialist (Veterans Treatment Court

Lessons)

Defense Attorney:

☐ Role of the Defense Attorney (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

Coordinator:

☐ Role of the Coordinator (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Maximizing Participant Interactions (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Developing a Veterans Treatment Court (Veterans Treatment Court Lessons)

☐ How to Build a Mentoring Program for your Veterans Treatment Court (Veterans

Treatment Court Lessons)

Prosecutor:

☐ Role of the Prosecutor (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

Supervision Officer:

☐ Role of the Probation Officer (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Maximizing Participant Interactions (Adult Drug Court Lessons)

☐ Reviewed the Following Publications:

☐ Veterans Treatment Court Standards, Best Standards and Promising Practices

https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/bestpra

ctice/VTC-BPManual.pdf

☐ The Ten Key Components of Veterans Treatment Court

http://justiceforvets.org/sites/default/files/files/TenKeyComponentsofVeteransTre

atmentCourts.pdf

☐ Attended the Following Trainings:

☐ SCAO’s DCCMIS Training (Held Tri-annually) – for team members entering data

☐ SCAO’s Fundamentals of Problem Solving Courts (Held in March and October)

☐ Other:

Parts of this document are based on the NDCI New Staff Training Guide available at

https://www.ndci.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/NDCI-New-Staff-Training-Guide.pdf

Justice for Vets, The National Clearinghouse for Veterans Treatment Courts at the National Association of Drug

Court Professionals

Appendix E

Model Confidentiality Policies and Procedures

[Name of problem-solving court program]

Policies and Procedures Regarding Access to and Use of

Confidential Records

1. Access and Use of Written and Electronic Confidential Records

a. Except as otherwise permitted in the Michigan problem-solving court statute,

any statement or other information obtained as a result of participating in a

preadmission screening and evaluation assessment is confidential and is

exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 1976 PA 442,

MCL 15.231 to 15.246, and shall not be used in a criminal prosecution, unless

it reveals criminal acts other than, or inconsistent with, personal drug use.

b. Confidential treatment court information and records may not be used to

initiate or to substantiate any criminal charges against a participant or to

conduct any investigation of a participant.

c. Written/paper program files of open cases shall be kept in a locked filing

cabinet in [specify secure location], with access limited to authorized

individuals.

d. Upon expiration of consent for release of information written/paper program

files shall be moved to [specify secure location where only program staff

may access files] and shall be kept in a locked filing cabinet.

e. Pre-court staffing meeting reports shall be returned to the [title of problem-

solving court staff] upon conclusion of the meeting.

f. Electronic data that is subject to confidentiality standards is protected by

security walls and is password protected. Access is limited, and

disclosure/redisclosure is subject to approval by the treatment court judge and

team.

g. The [name of problem-solving court] program stores electronic confidential

information in the Drug Court Case Management Information System

(DCCMIS). All users of DCCMIS shall sign a DCCMIS user confidentiality

agreement prior to being assigned a username and password, and are only

given access to information as permitted under 42 CFR part 2 regulations.

h. Upon expiration of consent for release of information confidential records on

computers are protected by changing the password or otherwise restricting

access.

i. Generally, unless access to a court file is restricted by statute, court rule or an

order pursuant to MCR 8.119(I), any person may inspect pleadings and other

papers in a court clerk's office and may obtain copies as provided in MCR

8.119(J).

This model document is provided by the State Court Administrator’s Office (SCAO) as a resource and for

informational purposes only, to assist courts with operating a problem-solving court and to comply with the

problem-solving court statute. This model document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

j. Responses to all requests for access to nonpublic and limited-access records

shall be made per the following resources:

i. Michigan Trial Court Records Management Standards Data, Case, and

Other Court Records – Section 2: Access to Records.

ii. Chart of Nonpublic and Limited-Access Court Records.

iii. Michigan Supreme Court Administrative Order 2006-2

- Privacy

Policy and Access to Records.

k. Records of participants may be released to parties per a written consent in

compliance with 42 CFR § 2.31.

l. Any confidential information disclosed under a signed consent to release

information, shall be accompanied by a written Notice of Prohibition against

Redisclosure with the language required in 42 CFR § 2.32.

m. Confidential electronic data that may be disclosed under 42 CFR regulations

may be transmitted through DCCMIS, encrypted email, or through non-

encrypted email after the confidential information has been de-identified.

n. Confidential information may be disclosed to a Qualified Service

Organization (QSA) as necessary for the QSA to provide services to the

[name of problem-solving court program].

o. Confidential information may be released under specified circumstances, and

may include medical emergency, crimes on the premises, crimes against staff,

administration working with the [name of problem solving court], and

outside auditors, central registries, and researchers.

p. Confidential information relating to the abuse or neglect of a child, state child

abuse laws, court orders signed pursuant to 42 CFR part 2 for release of

specific information, state laws relating to cause of death and duty to protect

others, and to warn of serious imminent harm, is not protected by federal law

and may be disclosed without consent.

q. Staffing meetings may be observed by staff from other courts for the purpose

of planning their own problem-solving court program, and by SCAO staff.

All observers of the meeting shall sign a confidentiality agreement prior to the

start of the meeting, and all participants discussed at the meeting must sign a

[name of problem-solving court program] consent to release information,

with the observing parties listed, prior to the staffing meeting.

https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/standards/cf_stds.pdf.

https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/standards/cf_chart.pdf.

https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/rules/Documents/Administrative Orders.pdf page

208; FAQ for 2006-02 is located at

https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/

Administrative-Memoranda/2006-04.pdf.

2. Record Retention and Disposal Schedule

a. Records shall be retained as directed under General Schedules #13 - District

Courts

, #14 - Probate Courts

, and #15 – Circuit Courts

b. Records shall be removed, de-identified, transferred, and destroyed as directed

by the Michigan Trial Court Records Management Standards Data, Case, and

Other Court Records.

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/dtmb/RMS_GS13_573186_7.pdf.

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/dtmb/RMS_GS14_597247_7.pdf.

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/dtmb/RMS_GS15_597248_7.pdf.

https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/standards/cf_stds.pdf.

Appendix F

Model DCCMIS User Confidentiality Agreement

DCCMIS User Confidentiality Agreement

This Confidentiality Agreement applies to [name of problem-solving court program]’s

employees, members of the [name of problem-solving court program] team, and all other

professionals working with the [name of problem-solving court program] hereinafter referred

to as “users”, who have direct access to the Drug Court Case Management Information System

(DCCMIS).

User understands and agrees:

6. All network passwords are confidential and shall not be disclosed to any third party

including other authorized users of the DCCMIS.

7. The [name of problem-solving court program] DCCMIS administrator shall provide

user with the network password necessary to gain access to the DCCMIS network.

8. In the event that user reasonably suspects or becomes aware of any unauthorized use or

disclosure of user’s network password or other confidential user identification, user shall

immediately change the password, and shall immediately report the unauthorized use or

disclosure to [name of problem-solving court program]’s DCCMIS administrator.

9. [Name of problem-solving court program]’s DCCMIS administrator, The State Court

Administrative Office (SCAO), and Advanced Computer Technologies (ACT) shall have

the right to suspend or revoke user’s network access without notice in the event of any

breach or suspected breach of confidentiality.

10. To be accountable for all entries of client information, orders and data entered by user

into DCCMIS under user’s password.

11. To access client information and/or records only for the following purposes in accordance

with applicable state and federal laws and regulations:

a. coordinating services with ancillary and other treatment service providers;

b. reviewing client’s progress in program areas as needed per user’s role on the

team;

c. conducting statistical research, or audits;

d. conducting quality assurance, or review activities; and,

e. For DCCMIS administrators requirements involving verification and other

operational purposes.

12. To not disclose or re-disclose any client information and/or records to any other entity or

individual without the prior written authorization of the participant or the participant's

authorized representative.

13. SCAO and ACT may conduct unannounced audits of user’s access to its information

systems, software applications, network and data on a periodic basis to monitor

appropriate use of and compliance with the obligations stated above.

This model document is provided by SCAO as a resource, and for informational purposes only, to assist courts

with operating a problem-solving court and to comply with the problem-solving court statute. This model

document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

14. Any violation of participant confidentiality may result in termination of access to

DCCMIS.

15. Information may be disclosed in summary, statistical, or other form, which does not

directly or indirectly identify particular program participants or related parties.

I understand that alcohol and/or drug treatment records and mental health records are protected

under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42

CFR Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), 45

CFR Parts 160 & 164, and cannot be disclosed without the written consent of the [name of

program] participant or a person legally authorized to represent the participant unless otherwise

provided for by the regulations.

________________________________________ _________________

Signature of DCCMIS user Date

__________________________________

Printed name of DCCMIS user

Attached: Penalties under 42 CFR Part 2 and Penalties under HIPAA

Penalties Under 42CFR Part 2

§2.3 Purpose and effect.

(a) Purpose. Under the statutory provisions quoted in §§2.1 and 2.2, these regulations impose

restrictions upon the disclosure and use of alcohol and drug abuse patient records which are

maintained in connection with the performance of any federally assisted alcohol and drug abuse

program. The regulations specify:

(1) Definitions, applicability, and general restrictions in subpart B (definitions applicable

to §2.34 only appear in that section);

(2) Disclosures which may be made with written patient consent and the form of the

written consent in subpart C;

(3) Disclosures which may be made without written patient consent or an authorizing

court order in subpart D; and

(4) Disclosures and uses of patient records which may be made with an authorizing court

order and the procedures and criteria for the entry and scope of those orders in subpart E.

(b) Effect.

(1) These regulations prohibit the disclosure and use of patient records unless certain

circumstances exist. If any circumstances exists under which disclosure is permitted, that

circumstance acts to remove the prohibition on disclosure but it does not compel

disclosure. Thus, the regulations do not require disclosure under any circumstances.

(2) These regulations are not intended to direct the manner in which substantive functions

such as research, treatment, and evaluation are carried out. They are intended to insure

that an alcohol or drug abuse patient in a federally assisted alcohol or drug abuse program

is not made more vulnerable by reason of the availability of his or her patient record than

an individual who has an alcohol or drug problem and who does not seek treatment.

(3) Because there is a criminal penalty (a fine—see 42 U.S.C. 290dd-2, and 42 CFR 2.4)

for violating the regulations, they are to be construed strictly in favor of the potential

violator in the same manner as a criminal statute (see M. Kraus & Brothers v. United

States, 327 U.S. 614, 621–22, 66 S. Ct. 705, 707–08 (1946)).

§2.4 Criminal penalty for violation.

Under 42 U.S.C. 42 U.S.C. 290dd–2, any person who violates any provision of those statutes or

these regulations shall be fined not more than $500 in the case of a first offense, and not more

than $5,000 in the case of each subsequent offense.

§2.5 Reports of violations.

(a) The report of any violation of these regulations may be directed to the United States Attorney

for the judicial district in which the violation occurs.

(b) The report of any violation of these regulations by a methadone program may be directed to

the Regional Offices of the Food and Drug Administration.

Penalties Under HIPAA

42USC1320d-5 General penalty for failure to comply with requirements and standards

(a) General penalty

(1) In general

Except as provided in subsection (b), the Secretary shall impose on any person who

violates a provision of this part a penalty of not more than $100 for each such violation,

except that the total amount imposed on the person for all violations of an identical

requirement or prohibition during a calendar year may not exceed $25,000.

42USC1320d-6 Wrongful disclosure of individually identifiable health information

(a) Offense

A person who knowingly and in violation of this part-

(1) Uses or causes to be used a unique health identifier;

(2) Obtains individually identifiable health information relating to an individual; or

(3) Discloses individually identifiable health information to another person,

shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).

(b) Penalties

A person described in subsection (a) shall-

(1) Be fined not more than $50,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both;

(2) If the offense is committed under false pretenses, be fined not more than $100,000,

imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both; and

(3) If the offense is committed with intent to sell, transfer, or use individually identifiable

health information for commercial advantage, personal gain, or malicious harm, be fined

not more than $250,000, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

Appendix G

Model Confidentiality MOU

[Name of problem-solving court]

Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Confidentiality

I. Parties

This agreement facilitates the exchange of information, between parties of the agreement, in

order to effectively coordinate services and provide oversight to participants involved in the

criminal justice and treatment systems. It is made and entered into, as of the date set forth

below, by and between the following parties whose representatives have signed the agreement:

1. [Name of problem solving court]

2. [Name of county] MDOC

3. [Name of district court] probation department

4. [Name of county] prosecutor’s office

5. [Name of treatment agency]

6. [Name of law enforcement agency]

7. [Name of law firm/office, or name of defense attorney on team]

II. Purposes

To foster trust and cooperation, by ensuring that each component of the problem-solving court is

aware of how the other components will access, share, and use information.

To be used as a blueprint to explain how information will be distributed within the problem-

solving court.

To improve cooperation, integration, and collaboration at the service delivery, administrative,

and evaluative levels for the benefit of clients involved with both the criminal justice and

treatment systems

Now, therefore, the parties agree that this memorandum of understanding reflects their

understanding and agreement as to the permitted and prohibited sharing and uses of information

in the legal process.

III. Definitions

1. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the general and permanent rules and regulations

published by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government.

This model document is provided by State Court Administrator’s Office (SCAO) as a resource and is for

informational purposes only, to assist courts with operating a problem-solving court and to comply with the

problem-solving court statute. This model document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

2. Confidential information means any information, whether oral or recorded in any form or

medium, that:

a. Is created or received by a health care provider, health plan, public health

authority, employer, life insurer, school or university, or health care

clearinghouse; and relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health

or condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the

past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to an individual.

b. Would identify a patient as having or having had a substance use disorder either

directly, by reference to publicly available information, or through verification of

such identification by another person; and is drug abuse information obtained by a

federally assisted drug abuse program after March 20, 1972 (part 2 program), or is

alcohol abuse information obtained by a federally assisted alcohol abuse program

after May 13, 1974 (part 2 program); or if obtained before the pertinent date, is

maintained by a part 2 program after that date as part of an ongoing treatment

episode which extends past that date; for the purpose of treating a substance use

disorder, making a diagnosis for that treatment, or making a referral for that

treatment.

c. Is in the record of mental health services of a recipient, and other information

acquired in the course of providing mental health services to a recipient.

3. Disclose or disclosure means a communication of participant identifying information, the

affirmative verification or denial of another person’s communication of participant

identifying information, or the communication of any information from the record of a

participant who has been identified.

IV. Each of the Parties agrees:

1. That clients involved with both the criminal justice and treatment systems shall be

afforded appropriate levels of treatment, with the least burdensome delivery of services;

2. That improvements to the quality and effectiveness of services can be supported by the

sharing of relevant and necessary information;

3. That the privacy and confidentiality of information regarding clients involved with the

criminal justice and treatment systems is an important legal and ethical obligation;

4. That this agreement shall be interpreted in light of, and consistent with governing state

and federal laws;

5. To promote a mutual understanding of the allowances and limitations outlined in 42 CFR

Part 2, and 45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, and other applicable state and federal laws;

6. That information identifying the clients or any information regarding client treatment,

including information shared at team meetings, should only be shared pursuant to 42 CFR

part 2, 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, and Section 290dd-2, and only to the degree it is

necessary for the recipient of the information to perform his or her role;

7. To disclose confidential information to any party of this agreement who is designated on

a validly executed Consent for Release of Information in accordance with the terms and

limitations of the Consent for Release of Information form;

8. That they are bound by the redisclosure provisions of 42 CFR part 2, 45 CFR parts 160

and 164, and Section 290dd-2, and any disclosure of a participant’s confidential

information is accompanied by one of the following written statements:

a. This information has been disclosed to you from records protected by federal

confidentiality rules (42 CFR, Part 2). The federal rules prohibit you from making

any further disclosure of information in this record that identifies a patient as

having or having had a substance use disorder either directly, by reference to

publicly available information, or through verification of such identification by

another person unless further disclosure is expressly permitted by the written

consent of the individual whose information is being disclosed or as otherwise

permitted by 42 CFR, Part 2. A general authorization for the release of medical or

other information is NOT sufficient for this purpose (see § 2.31). The federal

rules restrict any use of the information to investigate or prosecute with regard to

a crime any patient with a substance use disorder, except as provided at §§

2.12(c)(5) and 2.65; or

b. 42 CFR, Part 2 prohibits unauthorized disclosure of these records.

9. To work together with the other agencies listed in this Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU) to facilitate information sharing and to ensure that confidential information is

disseminated only to the appropriate persons or agencies, as provided by law or otherwise

pursuant to a lawfully obtained consent form;

10. To train relevant staff in procedures for interagency collaboration and information

sharing;

11. To comply with relevant state and federal law, and other applicable local rules and ethical

standards, which relate to records use, dissemination, and retention/destruction as

specified in “[Name of problem-solving court program policies and procedures

regarding access to and use of confidential records]”;

12. To develop appropriate internal written policies to ensure that confidential information

concerning clients is disseminated only to appropriate personnel;

13. To acknowledge that members of the problem-solving court team may be subject to legal

and ethical restrictions on disclosure, which in some situations must be observed

notwithstanding either the participant’s consent to release information or the likelihood

that disclosure would benefit the court and the participant. It is not improper for

members of the team to withhold information when they are required to do so [specify

any information that specific team members cannot share];

14. To ensure that any statements made by an individual during evaluation and intake are

protected, pursuant to the individual’s privilege against self-incrimination and right to

counsel under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and

MCL 600.1064(4);

15. That defense attorneys of the problem-solving court program shall make it clear to

participants and other team members whether they will share participant communications

with the team.

16. To ensure that information obtained pursuant to the problem solving court agreement and

the program’s consent for release of information will not be used to initiate or

substantiate any criminal charges against a participant except as otherwise authorized by

42 CFR Part 2 Section 2.12(d)(1), with those exceptions including child neglect or abuse

and crimes committed on program premises or against program personnel.

V. Administration of the Memorandum of Understanding

1. Term of Agreement:

This agreement is effective for one year upon the date of the final signature and shall

renew automatically for subsequent one-year terms unless otherwise modified. Any

signatory to this agreement may terminate participation upon thirty days’ notice to all

other signatories to the agreement.

2. Modification of Agreement:

Modification of this Agreement shall be made by formal consent of all parties, pursuant

to the issuance of a written amendment, signed and dated by the parties, prior to any

changes.

3. Other Interagency Agreements:

This agreement does not preclude or preempt each of the agencies from individually

entering into an agreement with one or more parties to this agreement, nor does it

supplant any existing agreement between such parties.

4. Signatures of Parties to this Agreement:

In witness whereof, the parties hereto have entered into this agreement as evidenced by

their signatures below. A certified copy of the agreement shall be provided to each

signatory to the Agreement. The original Agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the

[court number and type] Court.

Honorable [name], Chief Judge, [court number and type] Court

_________________________________ ________________________

Requirement of certification

The confidentiality MOU should be signed by all team members and, if applicable, an authorizing agent for their

agency.

100

Signature Date

Honorable [name], [name of problem solving court] Judge, [court number and type] Court

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], Program Coordinator, [name of problem solving court]

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], team member, [name of county] prosecutor’s office

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], authorizing official on behalf of [name of county] prosecutor’s office

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name], defense attorney, team member, [name of law firm]

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], authorizing official on behalf of [name of law firm]

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name], MDOC agent, team member, MDOC

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], authorizing official on behalf of MDOC

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

101

[Name], district court probation officer, team member, [court number] district court

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], authorizing official on behalf of [court number] district court

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], team member, [name of law enforcement agency]

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], authorizing official on behalf of [name of law enforcement agency]

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [agency name], team member, Community Mental Health Services provider

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [agency name], authorizing official on behalf of Community Mental Health

Services provider

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [agency name], team member, [type of treatment/ancillary] services

provider

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

102

[Name and title], [agency name], authorizing official on behalf of [type of

treatment/ancillary] services provider

__________________________________ ______________________

Signature Date

Parts of this document were modified from Mark F Botts, L. B. (2015, April 7).

https://www.sog.unc.edu/publications/reports/north-carolina-juvenile-justice-%E2%80%93-

behavioral-health-information-sharing-guide. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from

https://www.sog.unc.edu:

https://www.sog.unc.edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/Information%20Sharing%20Guide%20FIN

AL%20PDF%20to%20authors%202015-06-25.pdf

103

Appendix H

Model Visitor Confidentiality and Consent for Release

of Information

This model document is provided by the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) as a resource

and is for informational purposes only to assist courts with operating a problem-solving court to

comply with the problem-solving court statute. This model document is not intended (and

cannot be construed) as legal advice.

A court can customize the sections that are in bold and highlighted in yellow. Once customized,

the court should remove the brackets, bold, and highlighting.

As a model document, it is generic in nature and should be modified to fit your program.

Before developing your confidentiality documents, please review the University of New

Hampshire’s School of Law/Institute for Health Policy & Practice’s “Substance Use Disorder

Treatment Confidentiality Boot Camp” guide located at

https://chhs.unh.edu/sites/default/files/substance-use-disorder-privacy-part-2-idn-workbook-unh-

1017.pdf.

If all participants do not sign the consent to release confidential information prior to the staffing

meeting, visitors should not be attending the portion of the staffing meetings where those

participants are discussed. Instead visitors may attend the portion of the staff meeting where

only participants with signed releases are discussed.

104

[Name of PSC] Program Visitor Confidentiality Form

I, ___________________________________________, as a guest of the [name of PSC]

Program, recognize my responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of the [name of PSC]

Program, and hereby agree that:

1. Any and all information discussed at the [name of PSC] staffing team meeting must remain

confidential and shall not be revealed to anyone.

2. If I receive a copy of case reports for a staffing team meeting, I will return all reports in their

entirety to a team member at the end of the staffing team meeting.

3. I shall abide by the [name of PSC] program’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

regarding confidentiality (attached).

4. I understand that alcohol and/or drug treatment records and mental health records are

protected under the federal regulations governing Confidentiality and Drug Abuse Patient

Records, 42 CFR, Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996

(HIPAA), 45 CFR, Parts 160 & 164, and I shall abide by the confidentiality provisions of the

law.

5. By signing this form, I confirm that I have read and agree to the above statements.

Signature of guest

Printed name of guest

Date

105

[Name of PSC program]

Consent for Release of Information

Observation of Staffing Meeting

Participant name:

DOB:

I authorize the following parties:

1. [Name of problem solving court],

2. [Name of county] MDOC probation/parole department

3. [Name of district court] probation department

4. [Name of county] prosecutor’s office

5. [Name of treatment agency]

6. [Name of law enforcement agency]

7. [Name of law firm/office]

To release information to the following parties:

1. Stakeholders of [name of PSC program observing meeting]

2. [Name of agency evaluating program]

To disclose information discussed at the staffing meeting, held on [date], which may include the

following information:

INFORMATION TO BE SHARED

1. Name, address, and other personal identifying information of the participant.

2. [Name of PSC program] assessments (GAIN, COMPAS, risk and needs, etc.).

3. [Name of PSC program] program assessments (GAIN, COMPAS, risk and needs, etc.).

4. [Name of PSC program] program behavior summaries and updates.

5. Treatment information, including assessments, attendance, progress and compliance reports,

treatment plans, and discharge summaries.

6. Drug and alcohol screening, testing, confirmation results, and payment information.

7. Health information.

8. Reportable communicable disease information, including HIV, sexually transmitted

infections, hepatitis, and tuberculosis.

9. Health plan or health benefits information.

10. Electronic monitoring information, including compliance and payment information.

11. Information required to obtain a restricted license through the ignition interlock program.

12. Other (specify, if any): ______________________________________________

Note: I authorize all of the foregoing information to be shared unless I indicate here, by

number, one or more categories of information not to be shared: ______________________

Choose the appropriate option

106

PURPOSE OF USE AND DISCLOSURE

The purposes for the disclosures authorized by this form are:

1. To assist [name of observing court/agency] in planning, implementation, or enhancement of

their problem-solving court.

2. For the evaluation or audit of [name of PSC program].

3. Other (please specify): ________________________________________________.

REDISCLOSURE AND CONFIDENTIALITY

Once health care information is disclosed pursuant to this signed authorization, I understand that the

federal health privacy law (45 CFR, Parts 160 and 164) protecting health information may not apply

to the recipient of the information and, therefore, may not prohibit the recipient from redisclosing

information to others. However, substance abuse treatment information protected by federal law (42

CFR., Part 2), shall remain confidential and must not be redisclosed by the recipient except as

authorized by those laws or this authorization. The federal rules restrict any use of this information

to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient.

CONSENT EXPIRATION

The date, event, or condition upon which consent expires must ensure that the consent will last no

longer than reasonably necessary to serve the purpose for which it is given.

This consent for release of information shall expire on [date of the day following observed

staffing].

REVOCATION

I understand that I may revoke this consent, orally or in writing, at any time except to the extent that

action has been taken in reliance on it. I also understand that I do not have to fill out this form. If I

do not fill it out I can still get health insurance, and treatment and other medical benefits from a

health care provider.

I also understand that if I refuse to consent to disclosure, or attempt to revoke my consent prior to the

expiration of this consent such action is grounds for immediate termination from the [Name of PSC

program] program.

SIGNATURE CONSENTING TO RELEASE OF INFORMATION

Participant signature

Staff witness signature

107

Date

Staff witness printed name

108

Appendix I

Model Program MOU

Memorandum of Understanding

43,44

[Name of veterans treatment court]

I. Parties

This agreement is made and entered into as of the date set forth below, by and between the following

parties whose representatives have signed the agreement:

1. [Name of veterans treatment court]

2. [Name of circuit court]

3. [Name of county] MDOC Probation/Parole department

4. [Name of district court]

5. [Name of district court] Probation Department

6. [Name of county] Prosecutor’s Office

7. [Name of treatment agency on team], Treatment Provider

8. [Name of substance use/abuse treatment agency], Substance Abuse Treatment

Provider

9. [Name of law enforcement agency on team]

10. [Name of law firm/office, or name of defense attorney on team], Defense Attorney

11. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

12. [Name of Veterans Service Organization on team]

II. Purpose

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to describe duties and allocate

responsibilities for members of the [name of veterans treatment court] team. The MOU also

establishes team member responsibilities and requirements for maintaining compliance with the

Michigan Veterans Court Statute (MCL 600.1200-600.1212).

III. Terms/Definitions

1. Ex parte communication: Any communication, relevant to a legal proceeding, between a

judge and a party to the proceeding or any other person about the case, outside of the

Per MCL 600.1201(2) the court may adopt or institute a veterans treatment court if it enters into a MOU.

This model MOU is provided by SCAO as a resource and for informational purposes only to facilitate the operation of

problem solving courts by local units of government and courts in compliance with statutory requirements. SCAO's

sharing this model agreement is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice - parties to the agreement should

consult with their attorneys before entering into any agreement or contract.

Your Veterans Affairs (VA) may prefer to enter into an individual MOU with the program. An individual MOU

would meet statutory requirements, and the VA would not need to be included on this MOU.

109

presence of the opposing party or the opposing party’s attorney, that is not on the record.

2. Participant: Any person referred to the [name of veterans treatment court], currently being

screened as a candidate for [name of veterans treatment court] (including those who are

ultimately denied entry to the program), currently participating in [name of veterans

treatment court], or someone who has been discharged from the [name of veterans

treatment court].

3. Policies and Procedures Manual: Policy and procedure manuals document policies and

procedures designed to influence and determine all major decisions and actions, and all

activities that take place within the boundaries set by them. Procedures are the specific

methods employed to express policies in action in day-to-day operations of the organization.

4. Staffing meetings: Team meetings where participants’ progress is discussed and options for

incentives & sanctions, treatment, and phase changes are evaluated.

5. Stakeholders: A person, group or organization that has interest or concern in an organization.

6. Treatment services: Any services provided by a licensed clinician or by an employee of any

agency providing therapeutic services for substance use disorder, mental health, or

developmental disabilities.

IV. Mission of the [name of veterans treatment court]

1. We agree that the mission of the [name of veterans treatment court] shall be to

successfully stabilize substance using and mentally ill individuals while maintaining public

safety.

2. We endorse the goals of the [name of veterans treatment court] in order for participants to

eliminate future criminal behavior and improve the quality of their lives. For this program to

be successful, cooperation must occur within a network of systems to facilitate and achieve

the mission, challenge, and vision of the [name of veterans treatment court].

V. Guiding Principles of the [name of veterans treatment court]

1. Veterans treatment court programs promote positive legal outcomes by well-defined terms of

participation that facilitate engagement in treatment that corresponds to the level of risk to the

community.

2. Veterans treatment court offers an opportunity for veterans, whose mental illness or

substance use disorder is related to their service and contributed to their crime, a program that

integrates alcohol, drug treatment, and mental health services with justice system case

processing.

3. Treatment intervention should occur early on upon entry to the criminal justice system to

achieve maximum treatment outcomes.

4. Thorough assessment and evaluation is a critical component of the veterans treatment court

program.

5. Participants with mental illness or substance use disorders cannot maximize their treatment

potential without appropriate treatment intervention that includes their families when

appropriate.

6. Participant accountability is foremost in the program, with written program agreements and

court monitoring of behavior on a regular basis. Court monitoring will include sanctioning or

treatment adjustment for negative behaviors and positive rewards for improved behaviors.

7. Veterans treatment court programs are established with written protocols, which are well-

defined and documented through the policies and procedures manual. The program manual

will be updated annually, to respond to the changes in the needs of the programs, participants,

110

families, agencies, and community.

8. Participant entry into the veterans treatment court program shall be governed by written

eligibility criteria as established by the veterans treatment court team.

9. Information about participant progress, participant family progress, and the functioning of the

veterans treatment court program shall be made available to all team members, in compliance

with federal and state confidentiality laws.

10. Effective evaluation of the veterans treatment court program shall be sought with appropriate

responses being made relative to these evaluations.

11. Forging of partnerships among veterans treatment court, veterans administration, public

agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances veteran

treatment court effectiveness.

VI. Roles of the Parties of the [name of veterans treatment court]

1. All parties shall:

i. Participate as a team member, operating in a non-adversarial manner.

ii. On an annual basis, attend current training events on legal and constitutional issues

in veterans treatment courts, judicial ethics, evidence-based substance abuse and

mental health treatment, behavior modification, and/or community supervision.

iii. Help to identify potential and eligible veterans treatment court participants.

iv. Provide feedback, suggestions, and ideas on the operation of the veterans treatment

court.

v. Attend staffing meetings, and provide input on incentives and sanctions for

participants.

vi. Share information as necessary, and in compliance with federal confidentiality laws,

to appraise participants’ progress in, and compliance with, the conditions of veterans

treatment court.

vii. The parties, including each party's employees and other agents, shall maintain the

confidentiality of all records generated during the term of this MOU in accordance

with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations, including, but not limited

to, 42 CFR Part 2.

2. Veterans treatment court judge shall:

i. Serve as the leader of the team.

ii. Preside over status review hearings.

iii. Engage the community to generate local support for the veterans treatment court.

iv. Communicate with the participants in a positive manner and make final decisions

regarding incentives and sanctions and program continuation.

v. Consider the perspective of all team members before making final decisions that

affect participants’ welfare or liberty interests, and explain the rationale for such

decisions to team members and participants.

vi. Rely on the expert input of duly trained treatment professionals when imposing

treatment related conditions on the participants.

vii. Provide program oversight and ensure communication and partnership with

treatment.

viii. Shall consider whether to terminate a participant's participation in the veterans

treatment court program if that participant is accused of a new crime. If a participant

Per MCL 600.1201(2) “The memorandum of understanding shall describe the role of each party…”

111

is convicted of a felony for an offense that occurred after being admitted to veterans

treatment court, the judge must terminate the participant from the program.

3. Prosecuting attorney shall:

i. Provide legal screening of eligible participants.

ii. Attend review hearings.

iii. Represent the interests of the prosecutor and law enforcement.

iv. Advocate for public safety.

v. Advocate for victim interest.

vi. Hold participants accountable for meeting their obligations.

vii. If a plea agreement is made based on completion of the program, complete

appropriate court documents for resultant modification(s) upon participant’s

successful completion of the program (reduced charge, nolle prosequi, etc.).

viii. May help resolve other pending legal cases that impact participants’ legal status or

eligibility.

4. Program coordinator shall:

i. Arrange for additional screenings of persons aside from the prosecutor’s legal

screening.

ii. Attend review hearings.

iii. Answer inquiries from defense attorneys on possible eligibility.

iv. Enter data into DCCMIS system.

v. Liaison with non-treatment agencies that are providing services to the participants.

vi. Ensure that new team members are provided with a formal training within three

months of joining the team on the topics of confidentiality, and his or her role on the

team, ensure that the new team member is provided with copies of all program policy

and procedure manuals, the participant handbook, and a copy of all current

memoranda of understanding.

5. Probation officer and court case manager shall:

i. Administer a validated criminogenic risk/needs assessment tool to participants during

the referral process to ensure the veterans treatment court is serving the appropriate

target population.

ii. Attend review hearings

iii. Work with the program coordinator in supervising and monitoring the individuals in

the program.

iv. Prepare presentence reports, and perform alcohol and drug tests as needed.

v. Schedule probation violations or show cause hearings for participants who have

violated the program rules and are subject to termination from the program or if a

liberty interest is at stake.

vi. Enter data into the DCCMIS system.

Per MCL 600.1208 “The veterans treatment court shall be notified if the veterans treatment court participant is accused

of a new crime, and the judge shall consider whether to terminate the participant's participation in the veterans treatment

court program in conformity with the memorandum of understanding…”

112

6. Defense counsel representative shall:

i. Ensure that a defense counsel representative is present at all staffing meetings to

avoid ex parte communication.

ii. Attend review hearings.

iii. Ensure that defendants' procedural and due process rights are followed.

iv. Ensure that the participant is treated fairly and that the veterans treatment court team

follows its own rules.

v. When appropriate, and without breaching attorney-client privilege, encourage clients

to be forthcoming and honest regarding their recovery process.

7. Veterans justice outreach specialist shall:

i. Arrange for clinical assessments to determine program eligibility, appropriate

treatment services, and progress in treatment.

ii. Ensure that a treatment representative is present at all staffing meetings to ensure

therapeutic input regarding any sanctions being considered.

iii. Liaison with any Veterans Affairs (VA) treatment providers that are providing

services to the participants, and keep the team updated on treatment attendance and

progress.

iv. Attend review hearings.

v. Manage delivery of treatment services.

vi. Administer, or ensure administration of, behavioral or cognitive-behavioral

treatments that are documented in manuals and have been demonstrated to improve

outcomes.

vii. Offer insights and suggestions on the treatment plans of individuals in the program.

viii. Connect veterans to VA treatment services and homeless programs.

ix. Enter data into the DCCMIS system.

8. Treatment provider shall:

i. Attend review hearings.

ii. Liaison with any non-VA treatment providers and/or treatment agencies that are

providing services to the participants, and keep the team updated on treatment

attendance and progress.

iii. Offer insights and suggestions on the treatment plans of individuals in the program.

iv. Enter data into the DCCMIS system.

9. Veterans Service Organization shall:

i. Meet with participants to discuss available veterans benefit programs for which they

may qualify.

ii. Facilitate a mentor pool.

iii. Coordinate veteran events with mentors and participants.

10. Law enforcement agency shall:

i. Provide officers to assist with home checks for participants (limited).

113

VII. Deferrals, Delays, and Deviation from Sentencing Guidelines

Under MCL 600.1205(2), the prosecutor must approve an individual’s admission into the [name of

veterans treatment court] if the individual will be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an

offense, delayed sentence, or deviation from the sentencing guidelines.

VIII. Program Fee

The program charges a fee of [amount of fee] to each participant, to be paid in [specify due date or

payment parameters]. In accordance with MCL 600.1206(4) the clerk of the veterans treatment

court shall transmit the fees collected to the treasurer of the local funding unit at the end of each

month. The fee must be reasonable and calculated based on costs reasonably related to

administering the program that are not covered by other funding such as insurance, block grants, PA

511, or another agency. These costs include [list cost of program personnel, treatment, drug

testing, supplies, travel costs, training, and any other costs incurred by the veterans treatment

court to administer the program].

IX. Term of Agreement

This agreement is effective for one year upon the date of the final signature and shall renew

automatically for subsequent one-year terms unless otherwise modified. Any signatory to this

agreement may terminate participation upon thirty days’ notice to all other signatories.

X. Agency Representatives

This MOU will be administered by the [name of veterans treatment court] local team, which

consists of the following stakeholder agency representation:

1. [Name of veterans treatment court], Veterans Court Program Coordinator, [name of

coordinator]

2. [Name of veterans treatment court], Veterans Court Judge, [name of judge]

3. [Number of circuit court] Circuit Court, [title], [name of circuit court

representative]

4. [Name of county] MDOC, Probation/Parole Agent, [name of agent]

5. [Number of district court] District Court, [title], [name of district court

representative]

6. [Number of district court] District Court Probation Department, Probation Officer,

[name of probation officer]

7. [Name of county] Prosecuting Attorney, [name of prosecutor representative]

8. [Name of treatment agency on team], Treatment Provider, [name of treatment

Per MCL 600.1205(2) “An individual who may be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an offense, delayed sentence,

deferred entry of judgment, or deviation from the sentencing guidelines shall not be admitted to a veterans treatment

court unless the prosecutor first approves the admission of the individual into the veterans treatment court in conformity

with the memorandum of understanding under section 1201(2).”

Per MCL 600.1209(4) “…the court, with the agreement of the prosecutor and in conformity with the terms and

conditions of the memorandum of understanding under section 1201(2), may discharge and dismiss the proceedings

against an individual who meets…” the criteria of MCL 600.1209(4) (a) through 600.1209(4)(e).

Per MCL 600.1206(4) “The veterans treatment court may require an individual admitted into the court to pay a

veterans treatment court fee that is reasonably related to the cost to the court for administering the veterans treatment

court program as provided in the memorandum of understanding under section 1201(2).”

Per MCL 600.1201(2) “The memorandum of understanding shall describe the role of each party, and the conditions for

which the memorandum of understanding must be renewed and amended.”

114

provider]

9. [Name of law enforcement agency on team], [title], [name of law enforcement

representative]

10. [Name of law firm/office], Defense Attorney, [name of attorney]

11. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

, [title], [name of representative]

12. [Name of Veterans Service Organization], [title], [name of representative]

XI. Modification of Agreement

Modification of this agreement shall be made by formal consent of all parties, pursuant to the

issuance of a written amendment, signed and dated by the parties, prior to any changes.

XII. Other Interagency Agreements

This agreement does not preclude or preempt each of the agencies individually entering into an

agreement with one or more parties to this agreement, nor does it supplant any existing agreement

between such parties.

XIII. Signatures of Parties to this Agreement

The parties have entered into this agreement as evidenced by their signatures below. A certified

copy of the agreement shall be provided to each signatory to the agreement. The original agreement

shall be filed with the clerk of [court number] [court type] Court.

Honorable [name], Chief Judge, [court number and type] Court

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

Honorable [name], [name of veterans treatment court] Judge, [court number and type] Court

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

Your VA may prefer to enter into an individual MOU with the program. That would meet statutory requirements.

Per MCL 600.1201(2) “The memorandum of understanding shall describe the role of each party, and the conditions for

which the memorandum of understanding must be renewed and amended.”

Per MCL 600.1201(2) The court may adopt or institute a veterans treatment court if it enters into a memorandum of

understanding with “…a representative of the criminal defense bar, a representative or representatives of community

treatment providers, a representative or representatives of veterans service organizations in the circuit or district court

district, and a representative or representatives of the United States department of veterans affairs.” The memorandum of

understanding must also include the prosecuting attorney “…if the veterans treatment court will include in its program

individuals who may be eligible for discharge and dismissal of an offense, a delayed sentence, deferred entry of

judgment, or a sentence involving deviation from the sentencing guidelines.”

115

[Name], Chief Prosecuting Attorney, [name of county] County Prosecutor’s Office

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], [title], U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [agency name], provider of [type of treatment services] treatment services

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [agency name], provider of substance abuse treatment services

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [name of veterans service organization in the circuit/district], provider of

veterans services

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], [title], [name of law enforcement agency]

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], [title], Michigan Department of Corrections, [name of county] County

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], Defense Attorney, [name of firm/agency]

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name], [title], [court number] Circuit Court

__________________________________ _________________________

116

Signature Date

[Name], [title], [court number] District Court

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature

Date

[Name], Program Coordinator, [name of veterans treatment court]

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

[Name and title], [title], [court number] District Court Probation Department

__________________________________ ________________________

Signature Date

XIV. Attachments

Attachment 1:

Insert here a list of forms or other pertinent documents referenced in the MOU or needed to implement the MOU.

Delete this section if there are no attachments.

117

Appendix J

Model Veterans Treatment Court Agreement to

Participate and Waiver

AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE

[Name of veterans treatment court program]

I, [name of participant], agree to participate in the [name of veterans treatment court] Program.

I agree to follow all terms and conditions of the veterans treatment court program as established by

the court and the veterans treatment court team.

I agree to:

1. Complete any evaluations or assessments as directed by the veterans treatment court, and

follow the recommendations thereof. The treatment recommendations will be shared with the

veterans treatment court team.

2. Work with treatment staff to develop a treatment plan and follow the plan accordingly,

including aftercare and continuing care recommendations.

3. Meet with a member of a veteran service organization or a county veteran counselor, as

directed by the veterans treatment court, to discuss available veterans benefit programs for

which I may qualify

4. Not use, possess, or consume alcohol and/or other illegal or controlled substances, nor be in

the presence of any person using, possessing, or consuming said substances; nor enter

premises where alcohol is the primary source of revenue. I understand if I am found to be

under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication not prescribed to me that I may be

sanctioned and/or terminated from the program.

5. Submit to PBT's, electronic alcohol monitoring, and/or drug and alcohol screenings as

directed.

6. Be employed or enrolled in an educational program, or participate in another positive activity

as directed.

7. Notify the veterans treatment court of any changes in phone number within 24 hours.

8. Not change my place of residence without first notifying the veterans treatment court.

9. Notify the veterans treatment court of any police contact, arrest or criminal charge within 24

hours of event or of release from jail.

10. Make full and truthful reports to the veterans treatment court as directed by any team

member.

11. Not engage in any antisocial, assaultive, threatening, or aggressive behavior.

12. Not leave the state without the prior consent of the veterans treatment court.

13. Maintain the confidentiality of other veterans treatment court participants.

14. Pay all court ordered fines and costs, including minimum state costs, the veterans treatment

court fee, crime victims rights assessments, and restitution resulting from my conviction, in

order to successfully complete the program. I will also pay all, or make substantial

contributions toward payment of, the costs of the treatment and the veterans treatment court

program services provided to me, including, but not limited to, the costs of urinalysis and

Required under MCL 600.1208(1)(f).

118

such testing or any counseling provided. However, if the court determines that the payment

of fines, the fee, or costs of treatment would be a substantial hardship for me or would

interfere with my treatment, the court may waive all or part of those fines, the fee, or costs of

treatment

15. Appear in court on all scheduled court dates and to attend all appointments with my

probation officer, case manager, mentor, and/or treatment provider.

16. Comply with the program’s policies and conditions discussed within the [name of veterans

treatment court program] Participant Handbook.

I waive the following rights

1. The right to a speedy trial.

2. The right to representation by an attorney at the review hearings. I still maintain the right to

an attorney for any program violation or probation violation where the facts are contested and

a liberty interest is at stake, or if I may be terminated from the veterans treatment court

program.

3. With the agreement of the prosecutor, the right to a preliminary hearing.

4. To be present at the team staffing meetings.

I understand that:

1. The veterans treatment court program has a duration of [minimum to maximum] months.

2. If I am convicted of a felony for an offense that occurred after I am admitted to veterans

treatment court, the judge must terminate my participation in the program per MCL

600.1208.

3. I understand I am required to attend all appointments for court, treatment, ancillary services,

and all drug and alcohol testing as scheduled.

4. I understand that veterans treatment court staff may make unscheduled home visits, and I

will allow veterans treatment court team members, together with law enforcement officials

if accompanied, into my home at any time for supervision or compliance reasons.

5. Review hearings are held in open and public courtrooms, and although the court attempts to

minimize confidential information in court, it is possible that an observer could connect a

participant’s identity with the fact that he or she is in treatment as a condition of

participation in the veterans treatment court or that confidential information may be

revealed.

6. Staffing meetings, which are held before review hearings, are typically closed to the public.

Confidential information may be discussed by the veterans treatment court team members at

a staffing meeting. I understand that if a non-team member is invited to participate in a

staffing meeting, they must sign a confidentiality agreement and receive my consent prior to

observation. I understand that participants will not be present at staffing meetings.

7. The data in my public and confidential file may be used for research, data analysis and

program evaluation by the veterans treatment court, court staff, or individuals or others

independent of the veterans treatment court. Any data used in this way will be de-identified

prior to distribution.

8. Failure to fully comply with all the terms and conditions of the program listed above may

result in the following:

Required under MCL 600.1208(1) and (3).

Conditions 1, 2, and 3 are required under MCL 600.1205(1)(c).

119

1. Notification to the judge that I am in violation of the program.

2. If I admit guilt to or am found guilty of a program violation; then sanctions, up to

and including jail, may be imposed or additional conditions may be added as

determined by the judge with input from the veterans treatment court team.

3. Termination from the program.

9. I understand that the veterans treatment court may amend these conditions and/or add new

conditions, notice of which will be provided to me in writing. I understand that I must

comply with the amended or added conditions.

The veterans treatment court coordinator agrees to:

1. Meet with the program participant as needed to help assure successful completion in the

program.

2. Report the participant’s progress and test results to the court.

3. Refer the participant to any community agency at the veterans treatment court’s disposal

which may assist in the participant's recovery.

I have discussed the above listed conditions with my attorney or the veterans treatment court

coordinator and received a copy of this form and a copy of the [name of veterans treatment court

program] Participant Handbook.

____________________________________________ ________________________

Participant Signature

Date

I have discussed the above listed conditions with the participant and have provided a copy of the

agreement and the [name of veterans treatment court program] Participant Handbook to the

participant.

___________________________________________ _______________________

Attorney/Coordinator Signature Date

_______________________________________________

Printed Name of Attorney/Coordinator

Under MCL 600.1205(1)(d) the individual must sign a written agreement to participate in the veterans treatment court.

120

Appendix L

Veterans Treatment Court Admission Conditions

VTC Admission Conditions

Defendant name:

Defendant DOB:

Defendant case #:

The above named defendant has been referred to the [County or Court] VTC program.

Per MCL 600.1204 the court finds the following conditions to be true, prior to the defendant’s

admission to the [County or Court] VTC program:

(1) The individual is a veteran.

(2) The individual has been assessed and has been shown to meet clinical eligibility

criteria under MCL 600.1204b.

(3) The individual understands the consequences of entering the VTC program and agrees

to comply with all court orders and requirements of the program and treatment

providers.

(4) The individual is not an unwarranted or substantial risk to the safety of the public or

any individual, based upon the screening or assessment and other information

presented to the court.

(5) The individual is not a violent offender.

(6) The individual has completed a preadmission screening and evaluation assessment that

includes the following:

• A complete review of the individual's criminal history and whether the individual

has been admitted to, has participated in, or is currently participating in a VTC,

DTC, or specialty court, and the results of the individual’s participation

• An assessment of the risk of danger or harm to the individual, others, or the

community

• A review of the individual's history regarding SUD and an assessment of whether

the individual has a current SUD disorder

• A review of the individual's mental health history

• A review of any special needs or circumstances of the individual that may

potentially affect the individual's ability to receive treatment and follow the court's

orders.

and has agreed to cooperate with any future evaluation assessment as directed by the

VTC.

(7) The following deferral condition applies:

 The individual has been assigned the status of youthful trainee under section 11 of

chapter II of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 762.11

This model document is provided by SCAO as a resource and for informational purposes only to facilitate the

operation of problem solving courts by local units of government and courts in compliance with statutory requirements.

SCAO's sharing this model document is not intended (and cannot be construed) as legal advice.

121



The individual has had criminal proceedings against him or her deferred and has

been placed on probation under the following:

 Section 7411 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL

333.7411(controlled substance), or a local ordinance or another law of this

state, another state, or the United States that is substantially similar to that

section.

 Section 4a of chapter IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175,

MCL 769.4a (domestic violence), or a local ordinance or another law of this

state, another state, or the United States that is substantially similar to that

section.

 Section 350a (parental kidnapping) or 430 (health care professional practicing

under the influence) of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, or a local

ordinance or another law of this state, another state, or the United States that

is substantially similar to that section.

 MCL 600.1206 (VTC Deferral)

 No deferral applies

(8)

 Upon successful completion of the program [specify details of the agreement].

 Upon failure to successfully complete the program [specify details of the

agreement].

 With the agreement of the prosecutor sentencing is delayed in this matter as

provided in section 1 of chapter XI of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA

175, MCL 771.1. At the end of the delay period [specify details of the

agreement].

 Other: _____________________________________________________________

 No offer has been made that is contingent upon participation in or completion of

this program.

____________________________________________P______ ____________

Honorable [name], DTC program Judge, [court number and type] Court Date

Under MCL 600.1204(h) the admission findings or statement must include, “The terms, conditions, and duration of the

agreement between the parties, and the outcome for the participant of the [VTC] upon successful completion by the

participant or termination of participation.” This will vary by program and should be tailored to each VTC participant.

122

Appendix N

Ten Principles of a Good Testing Program

1. Design an effective drug detection program, place the policies and procedures of that

program into written form (drug court manual), and communicate the details of the drug

detection program to the court staff and clients alike.

2. Develop a client contract that clearly enumerates the responsibilities and expectations

associated with of the court’s drug detection program.

3. Select a drug-testing specimen and testing methodology that provide results that are

scientifically valid, forensically defensible, and therapeutically beneficial.

4. Ensure that the sample-collection process supports effective abstinence monitoring practices

including random, unannounced selection of clients for sample collection and the use of

witnessed/direct observation sample-collection procedures.

5. Confirm all positive screening results using alternative testing methods unless participant

acknowledges use.

6. Determine the creatinine concentrations of all urine samples and sanction for creatinine levels

that indicate tampering.

7. Eliminate the use of urine levels for the interpretation of client drug-use behavior.

8. Establish drug-testing result interpretation guidelines that have a sound scientific foundation

and that meet a strong evidentiary standard.

9. In response to drug-testing results, develop therapeutic intervention strategies that promote

behavioral change and support recovery.

10. Understand that drug detection represents only a single supervision strategy in an overall

abstinence-monitoring program.

National Drug Court Institute. (2011). The Fundamentals of Drug Testing. In P. Cary, The Drug Court Judicial

Benchbook (p. 137). Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute.

123

Appendix O

Veterans Treatment Court Minimum Standard Data

Veterans Treatment Court Minimum Data Standards

MCL 600.1210 states that each veterans treatment court shall collect and provide data on each

individual applicant and participant and the entire program as required by the State Court

Administrative Office. The information collected must include a minimum data standard set developed

and specified by the State Court Administrative Office. In accordance with this act, the State Court

Administrative Office has prepared the following minimum data standard sets. The sets include the

minimum data that must be reported to the State Court Administrative Office on an annual basis.

Data must be collected and reported for all applicants screened for veterans treatment court, even if the

applicant was not accepted into the veterans treatment court program. Therefore, minimum data

standards that follow are broken into three sets; one set for screening, one set for case management

data and one set for program discharge data relevant to accepted participants. This document provides

descriptions and valid values for each of the variables in the minimum data standard sets. This

information should be entered into the Drug Court Case Management Information System (DCCMIS),

or in the SCAO excel spreadsheet template.

Set 1: Screening

Minimum Data Standard set for participants screened for veterans treatment court.

Variable

Description

Valid Values

DCCMIS

Initial

Eligibility

Screening

Page

Court Name

Name of the problem solving

court

Alphanumeric

NA-populated

by DCCMIS

Court Type

Type of problem solving court

program

Type of problem solving

treatment court

NA-populated

by DCCMIS

Referral Source

Party that referred candidate

to the problem solving court

Title of person making

referral

Referral Date

date that candidate was

referred to the program

mm/dd/yyyy

124

Screening Date

Date candidate was screened

for admission

mm/dd/yyyy

First Name

Candidate's legal first name

Alpha

Middle Name

Candidate's legal middle name

Alpha

Last Name

Candidate's legal last name

Alpha

Address

Candidate's street address at

screening

Alpha

City

City associated with

candidate's street address

Alpha

State

State associated with

candidate's street address

Two-letter abbreviation

Zip Code

Zip code associated with

candidate's street address

Five-number postal zip

code

Race

Race of the candidate

Alpha

Gender

Gender of the candidate

Gender

DOB

Date the candidate was born

mm/dd/yyyy

Marital Status

Marital status of the candidate

at screening

Marital status

SSN last 4 digits

Last four digits of candidate's

Social Security number

Numeric (4 numbers and

it must be accurate)

SID

State ID# from MSP.

(Number assigned when

candidate was fingerprinted)

Alphanumeric

1234567A (7 numbers

and 1 letter and it must

be accurate.)

Lead Charge

Charge that made candidate

eligible for the problem

solving court

Charge code and title

Case/Docket Number

Candidate's case or docket

number

Alphanumeric

Offense Category

Offense category of the lead

eligible charge

Offense category

125

Charge Type

Level of the lead charge (i.e.

felony, misdemeanor, etc.)

Charge type

If charge type is felony,

cell type is required

Cell type recommended from

the sentencing guidelines

Cell type per MDOC

guidelines

If charge type is felony,

prior record variable

(PRV) is required

Variable associated with

previous offenses used to

identify sentencing guidelines

Numeric

Incident Offense

Program eligible offense type

- New criminal offense

- Probation/parole

violation

Offense Date

Date that the program eligible

offense occurred

mm/dd/yyyy

Drug Court/Court

Program Approach

Approach to sentencing that

the program takes (i.e.

deferred, delayed, formal,

consent, etc.)

Alpha

Prior

adjudications/convictions

Any adjudications or

convictions the candidate had

previous to screening

- Yes (enter number of

felonies and

misdemeanors)

- No

COMPAS violence risk

category (if applicable)

The violence risk assessment

value from the COMPAS

Violence risk assessment

value category

COMPAS recidivism risk

category (if applicable)

The recidivism risk

assessment value from the

COMPAS

Recidivism risk

assessment value