Polly Phipps, Bill Luchansky - December 2003

The 1999 Legislature directed the Institute to evaluate DOSA, a drug treatment alternative for felony drug and property offenders who receive a prison sentence. In this presentation to the Sentencing Guidelines Commission, we examine how DOSA has been implemented. Are DOSA offenders: (1) receiving and completing treatment?, and (2) held accountable for behavior that violates DOSA sentence conditions through sanctions and revocations? The final DOSA report, due to the Legislature in December 2004, focuses on criminal recidivism and cost-effectiveness, using a pre-post study design with a treatment and comparison group.

Steve Aos - December 2003

The 2003 Washington State Legislature directed the Institute to undertake a cost-benefit analysis of prevention and early intervention programs for at-risk youth. This interim report describes the scope of the project.

Annie Pennucci, Jim Mayfield - August 2003

The interim report on branch campuses concluded that Washington's five upper division branch campuses are operating as intended by the 1989 Legislature. There are, however, internal and external pressures for branch campuses to evolve into more traditional, four-year research universities. This final report describes those pressures and identifies potential courses of action to guide the campuses' future development. Costs associated with Washington's branch campuses are also analyzed.

Roxanne Lieb - July 2003

Washington State's law for sexually violent predators was enacted in 1990; since then, 14 other states have passed similar laws authorizing civil commitment for dangerous sexual offenders following their prison terms. Although the law has survived constitutional challenges at both the state and in the U.S. Supreme Court, a related set of court actions has addressed whether the treatment program is adequate. In 1994, the federal district court placed Washington's program under injunction and appointed a special master to ensure that the state improve deficiencies in the program. As of 2003, the federal court continues to oversee the state's program, with a threat of fines totaling several million dollars if the injunction terms are not met. Over an eight-year period, the special master delivered 19 reports to the court, documenting the program's deficiencies as well as its successes in meeting the court's orders. This article reviews these reports and court orders, detailing the court's requirements for an adequate treatment program.

Steve Lerch - June 2003

The ability to identify Medicaid recipients who will have high health care expenses in the future is important for targeting cost containment efforts such as coordination of medical care, patient education, and other “case management” techniques.  This report examines two approaches to identifying future high-cost clients among Medicaid recipients with severe disabilities.  The results indicate that over 60 percent of next year’s high-cost clients can be accurately identified from current year data.

Polly Phipps, Gregg Gagliardi - May 2003

In 1999, the Washington State Legislature enacted Substitute Senate Bill 5011, which mandates improving the process of identifying and providing additional mental health treatment for mentally ill offenders being released from the Department of Corrections (DOC) who pose a threat to public safety. This interim report describes the ongoing process of identifying and selecting “dangerous mentally ill offenders” (DMIOs); provides a profile of DMIOs; and documents the type of pre- and post-release services, treatment, and supervision received by DMIOs. Finally, it focuses on program improvements that have been accomplished and summarizes continuing program challenges.

Robert Barnoski - April 2003

The 1996 Washington State Legislature appropriated $2.35 million for a program called the juvenile court “Early Intervention Program” (EIP). The program’s goal was to prevent high-risk, first-time juvenile offenders from becoming further entrenched in the court system. Funds were awarded to 12 juvenile courts for the 1996 biennium on a competitive basis. At the request of the Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (Institute) conducted a study to determine if the EIP resulted in reduced recidivism. In early 1998, the Institute examined six-month outcomes and found that EIP produced no significant difference in recidivism rates. In the 1998 session, the Legislature discontinued funding the EIP, shifting the funds to research-based programs in Washington’s newly enacted Community Juvenile Accountability Act. This report confirms the Institute’s earlier findings that the Early Intervention Program did not show a statistically significant reduction in recidivism.

Robert Barnoski, Steve Aos - March 2003

The 2002 Washington State Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to “report on the cost-effectiveness of existing drug courts in Washington and their impacts on reducing recidivism.” Developed during the 1990s, drug courts use frequent courtroom activity and drug treatment resources in an attempt to modify the criminal behavior of certain drug-involved defendants. The questions for this evaluation are whether drug courts—when compared with regular criminal courts—reduce recidivism and produce more benefits than costs. We found that five of the six adult drug courts we evaluated appear to be cost-beneficial additions to Washington’s criminal justice system. The Institute’s report is contained in two documents: a 12-page report and a technical appendix. A separate executive summary is also provided.

Steve Lerch - March 2003

Although persons with severe disabilities comprise about 15 percent of individuals receiving Medicaid services in Washington, they account for about 27 percent of all Medicaid expenditures. A major component of these expenditures is for outpatient services, such as prescription drugs and physician office visits. In this report, we focus on three key factors: i) change in price; ii) change in utilization; and iii) change in caseload size, to explain why expenditures on outpatient services provided to Medicaid recipients with severe disabilities have increased between 1999 and 2001.