The Efficacy of the Rio Hondo DUI Court

A 2-Year Field Experiment

Published in: Evaluation Review, v. 31, no. 1, Feb. 2007, p. 4-23

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2007

by John MacDonald, Andrew R. Morral, Barbara Raymond, Christine Eibner

Read More

Access further information on this document at erx.sagepub.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

This study reports results from an evaluation of the experimental Rio Hondo driving under the influence (DUI) court of Los Angeles County, California. Interviews and official record checks with 284 research participants who were randomly assigned to a DUI court or a traditional criminal court were assessed at baseline and at 24-month follow-up. The interviews assessed the impact of the DUI court on self-reported drunk driving behavior, the completion of treatment, time spent in jail, alcohol use, and stressful life events. Official record checks assessed the impact of the DUI court on subsequent arrests for driving under the influence and other drinking-related behaviors. Few differences on any outcomes were observed between participants in the experimental DUI court and those assigned to the traditional court. The results suggest that the DUI court model had little additional therapeutic or public safety benefit over the traditional court process. The implication of these findings for the popularity of specialized courts for treating social problems is discussed.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.