Georgia Specific Publications
Process & Outcomes Report
The Council of Accountability Court Judges (CACJ), is pleased to share a publication prepared by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the University of Georgia. Both publications highlight the significant accomplishments of accountability courts across the state of Georgia.
The Processes and Outcomes publication is the result of many state and local partners’ collaborative efforts to showcase the benefits of accountability courts in criminal justice reform, and the impact the programs have achieved so far.
Results from recent recidivism studies are promising. More specifically, any amount of participation in an accountability court, regardless of completion, leads to lower recidivism. In addition to breaking the cycle of addiction and mental illness, thus lowering recidivism and prison costs, accountability courts save almost $5,000 per participant over traditional adjudication and incarceration.
Economic Impact Study
National studies have determined that accountability court programs reduce recidivism among non-violent offenders and reduce incarceration expenses to state and local governments. But what about Georgia’s accountability court programs?
To answer this question, the Council of Accountability Court Judges and the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council partnered with the Carl Vinson Institute of Government to conduct an analysis of the 1,592 adult accountability court graduates in fiscal year 2022. That analysis found that accountability courts were estimated to have generated $41.3 million in economic benefits to Georgia!
To see results from the first economic impact study conducted in fiscal year 2017, please
Painting the Current Picture: A National Report on Treatment Courts in the United States
The 2019 issue of the Painting the Current Picture: A National Report on Treatment Courts in the United States (hereafter referred to as PCP) represents the sixth time an in-depth analysis of treatment court programs across the United States has been conducted. The monograph has continued the long-standing tradition of providing a detailed snapshot of the treatment court field within the United States. Especially noteworthy is that these data provide the authors with the ability to monitor trends and to highlight similarities and differences in the findings obtained over time. The monograph also provides a synopsis of the most recent scholarly literature on treatment courts.