This report from the Centre for Justice Innovation, 'Problem-solving courts: an evidence review', analyses the evidence on whether and why problem-solving courts work. The paper was written to inform development of government policy as well as to help shape practice within pilots in England and Wales.
The paper defines problem-solving courts and then considers the evidence on whether they work, why they work, and the problems with them. Chapters of particular interest to Barnardo's i-HOP members include 2.4 in which the authors consider the evidence around family drug treatment courts, and 3.1, which looks at a problem-solving court model for female offenders. On reviewing evidence from the US in Chapter 2.4, the report concludes that the evidence on family drug treatment courts is good and suggests they can be effective in reducing parental substance misuse and the number of children permanently removed from their families as a result. In Chapter 3.1, the context around female offending is outlined with recognition that the majority of female offenders are mothers.
The importance of trauma-informed practice and the potential for it to be integral to a problem-solving model is discussed. Current practice at three problem-solving courts in the UK is touched on, though sufficient evidence of outcomes is not yet available. Overall, the report concludes that the promising evidence available supports the application of a problem-solving court model to the often complex needs of female offenders. With a focus on reducing reoffending and improving outcomes, and through procedural fairness and a specialist focus on target groups, the report suggests the use of these courts can be effective in the rehabilitation of certain groups of offenders. The above instances in particular have significant implications both for children of female offenders and children of offenders with substance misuse issues.
Read the full report here:
