The Orange County Juvenile Substance Abuse Treatment Court (JSATC), in its design and operation, resembles other drug courts operating across the country. The program targets first-, second-, third-, and fourth-time juvenile offenders with no history of violent offense who are in need of substance abuse treatment and reside in Orange County, Fla. Individuals enter the program on a voluntary basis or by order of a judge. Participation is encouraged by offering diversion from prosecution or reduction of charges upon completion of treatment. While most participants receive outpatient treatment, a few receive inpatient services. Treatment services concentrate on breaking behavioral patterns of addiction, changing irrational thinking patterns to rational thinking patterns, enhancing motivation for treatment, and providing exposure and access to supportive influences, as well as meeting educational and vocational needs and developing life skills.

Florida started the drug court movement by creating the first treatment-based drug court in the nation in 1989. The drug court concept was developed in Dade County (Miami, Florida) stemming from a federal mandate to reduce the inmate population or suffer the loss of federal funding. The Supreme Court of Florida recognized the severity of the situation and directed Judge Herbert Klein to research the problem. Judge Klein determined that a large majority of criminal inmates had been incarcerated because of drug charges and were revolving back through the criminal justice system because of underlying problems of drug addiction. It was decided that the delivery of treatment services needed to be coupled with the criminal justice system and the need for strong judicial leadership and partnerships to bring treatment services and the criminal justice system together.

The JSATC evaluation demonstrated a 61 percent retention rate, comparable with the national average for adult drug courts. Of those released, 42 percent successfully completed the program.

Social and psychological functioning were compared, based on the results of the CGAS between entry and release. Fifty-seven percent of the participants experienced improved rates of social and psychological functioning. CGAS scores of 70 percent or more indicate normal functioning. In this case, at admission, 97 percent scored 70 or less, and the highest score was 78. At exit, nearly 38 percent scored above 70, and the highest score was 94, indicating significant improvement.

The overall recidivism rate of discharged clients was 15 percent, with a rate of 7 percent for program graduates and 21 percent for program failures.