Drug and Alcohol Court Assessment Programme (DACAP) - Pilot Project - (December 1979-December 1980) Final Report to the New South Wales Drug and Alcohol Authority

• NCJ Number: 93638
• Author(s): R J Williams
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 60 pages
• Corporate Author: New South Wales
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: Australia

Annotation

This Australian report examines the first 12 months' operation of the New South Wales Drug and Alcohol Court Assessment Program (DACAP), comments on the effect of the change from a previous drug diversion program that failed, and offers recommendations for future program development.

Abstract

The original New South Wales drug diversion program (DDP) began in 1977 and continued for a little over 2 years before being terminated, because the health and justice personnel responsible for its management could not agree on program aims. The DACAP superceded the DDP in December 1979. This program consists of a presentence assessment and possibly a referral recommendation to the court as an aid in sentencing. A treatment recommendation might also be included where the offender is in agreement. This report recommends that the DACAP program continue in its development, since this procedure has the potential to provide an objective baseline from which to evaluate the varieties of diversion and their eventual impact on the drug/crime careers of its clients. Attention must be given, however, to the content of the assessment and the level of professional competence among those expected to make important forensic judgments from such information. Scientific assessment should provide the means for matching individual offenders to the most suitable form of diversion, treatment, or social control strategy. A legislative review committee should be formed to consider the formal incorporation of diversion programs. Also, diversion strategies supplementary to presentence and postconviction schemes should be investigated empirically, and some form of diversion scheme for first/early offenders should be a priority. Finally, the policy on cannabis offense needs reviewing, since this has been a neglected topic. The appendix contains the stages of the assessment process, the interview schedule, and an example of comments from workers involved in DACAP. Tabular data and 21 references are provided.