Section 6. Certification Procedures
Effective April 7, 2021
(a) Provisional Certification Procedures
(1) A court that proposes to establish a problem-solving court pursuant to these rules shall do the following to become provisionally certified.
(A) Submit a completed application for provisional certification to the Indiana Office of Court Services.
(B) Submit a copy of the problem-solving court’s policy and procedure manual and supporting materials outlining the court’s plan for operation in accordance with IC 33-23-16 and these rules.
(2) The Indiana Office of Court Services shall review the court’s application and policy and procedure manual and conduct a site visit to determine whether the proposed court practices are in compliance with these rules, applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations and the court’s policy and procedure manual. The Indiana Office of Court Services may offer recommendations as appropriate to assist the court gain compliance with applicable laws, rules and evidence-based practices.
(3) The Indiana Office of Court Services must approve or deny the court’s application for problem-solving court provisional certification.
(A) The Indiana Office of Court Services must approve the application for provisional certification if the court has submitted an application and policy and procedure manual that complies with IC 33-23-16, related laws, rules and regulations, these rules and evidence-based practices, and identified appropriate resources to provide the services proposed.
(B) If the Indiana Office of Court Services denies the court’s application for provisional certification, the Indiana Office of Court Services must follow the procedures outlined in section 7 of these rules.
(4) After a problem-solving court receives provisional certification from the Indiana Office of Court Services the problem-solving court may:
(A) assess and collect fees authorized by IC 33-23-16-23 and IC 33-23-16-24; and
(B) begin the delivery of services authorized by IC 33-23-16 in accordance with these rules.
(5) A problem-solving court provisional certificate is valid for up to six (6) months. The provisional certificate must be displayed in a prominent place in the problem-solving court office and a copy shall be kept on file in the office of the Indiana Office of Court Services.
(b) Certification Procedures
(1) Prior to the expiration date of the problem-solving court certificate, the coordinator must initiate certification in accordance with the following procedures:
(A) notify the Indiana Office of Court Services that the problem-solving court intends to apply for certification and request an application for certification;
(B) schedule a review date; and
(C) submit an application for certification and all supporting materials to the Indiana Office of Court Services no later than thirty (30) days prior to the review date.
(2) The certification review shall include evaluation of each of the following:
(A) Compliance with IC 33-23-16 and related federal and state laws, rules and regulations, including all applicable Indiana Supreme Court Rules.
(B) Compliance with these rules.
(C) Compliance with All Rise Adult Treatment Court Best Practice Standards; Center for Children and Family Futures and All Rise, Family Treatment Court Best Practice Standards; the problem-solving court principles; and the 10 key components of drug courts, as applicable.
(D) Implementation of the principles of effective interventions, as applicable.
(E) Compliance with current research on evidence-based practices and programs.
(F) Judicial involvement with participants.
(G) The operation of the case compliance hearings and other related court proceedings.
(H) The number, qualifications, and abilities of problem-solving court staff.
(I) The participation by and interaction between the problem-solving court team members.
(J) The qualifications and abilities of any contractor that provides services to the problem-solving court or its participants, and the contractor’s compliance with the terms of the contract with the problem-solving court.
(K) The qualifications and services of any treatment provider that provides treatment services to problem-solving court participants, and the treatment provider’s compliance with the terms of the provider referral agreement with the problem-solving court.
(L) Investigations of complaints pertaining to the problem-solving court’s compliance with IC 33-23-16, these rules and related federal and state laws, rules and regulations.
(M) Any other issues or subjects that the Indiana Office of Court Services determines are relevant to the review.
(3) The Indiana Office of Court Services shall approve or deny the problem-solving court’s application for certification.
(A) If the Indiana Office of Court Services approves the problem-solving court’s application for certification, the Indiana Office of Court Services shall issue a certificate authorizing the court to operate as a problem-solving court for a period not to exceed three (3) years. The certificate must be displayed in a prominent place in the problem-solving court office and a copy shall be kept on file at the Indiana Office of Court Services. Not later than sixty (60) days after completion of the certification review, the Indiana Office of Court Services shall send a final report to the supervising judge, problem-solving court judge and coordinator.
(B) If the Indiana Office of Court Services denies the problem-solving court’s application for certification, the Indiana Office of Court Services must follow the procedures outlined in section 7 of these rules.
(c) Extension of the Certification Period
(1) Prior to the expiration date of the problem-solving court’s certificate, a problem- solving court may submit a written request to the Indiana Office of Court Services for an extension of time to continue operating pursuant to the court’s certificate. The court’s request shall contain the reason(s) for the request and specify the length of the extension requested. The Indiana Office of Court Services has the sole discretion to approve or deny a request for an extension of time to continue operating a problem-solving court and to determine the length of the extension authorizing continued problem-solving court operations.
(2) The Indiana Office of Court Services may issue a written extension of a court’s provisional certificate for a period not to exceed one (1) year.
(3) The Indiana Office of Court Services may authorize an extension of time to continue operating a problem-solving court in order to complete the certification process under this section or as otherwise appropriate.
(d) A problem-solving court certified pursuant to this section shall maintain compliance with IC 33-23-16, these rules and related federal and state laws, rules and regulations or the court’s certificate is subject to revocation pursuant to section 8 of these rules.
(e) A problem-solving court certificate obtained under this section expires on the date specified on the certificate unless the court has been granted an extension pursuant to subdivision (c) of this subsection or the certificate has been revoked in accordance with section 8 of these rules. A court with an expired or revoked certificate may no longer operate a problem-solving court as authorized by IC 33-23-16 and these rules. A court seeking certification following the expiration of a problem-solving court certificate shall follow the procedures in this section as directed by the Indiana Office of Court Services.
Commentary on Section 6(b)(2)(c).
Adult Treatment Court Best Practice Standards Vol. I 2nd Ed. as published by All Rise:
I. Target Population: Eligibility and exclusion criteria for treatment court are predicated on empirical evidence indicating which individuals can be served safely and effectively. Candidates are evaluated expeditiously for admission using valid and culturally equitable assessment tools and procedures.
II. Equity and Inclusion: All persons meeting evidence-based eligibility criteria for treatment court receive the same opportunity to participate and succeed in the program regardless of their sociodemographic characteristics or sociocultural identity, including but not limited to their race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, national origin, native language, religion, cultural practices, and physical, medical, or other conditions. The treatment court team continually monitors program operations for evidence of cultural disparities in program access, service provision, or outcomes, takes corrective measures to eliminate identified disparities, and evaluates the effects of the corrective measures.
III. Roles and Responsibilities of the Judge: The treatment court judge stays abreast of current law and research on best practices in treatment courts and carefully considers the professional observations and recommendations of other team members when developing and implementing program policies and procedures. The judge develops a collaborative working alliance with participants to support their recovery while holding them accountable for abiding by program conditions and attending treatment and other indicated services.
IV. Incentives, Sanctions, and Service Adjustments: The treatment court applies evidence- based and procedurally fair behavior modification practices that are proven to be safe and effective for high-risk and high-need persons. Incentives and sanctions are delivered to enhance adherence to program goals and conditions that participants can achieve and sustain for a reasonable time, whereas service adjustments are delivered to help participants achieve goals that are too difficult for them to accomplish currently. Decisions relating to setting program goals and choosing safe and effective responses are based on input from qualified treatment professionals, social service providers, supervision officers, and other team members with pertinent knowledge and experience.
V. Substance Use, Mental Health, and Trauma Treatment and Recovery Management: Participants receive evidence-based treatment for substance use, mental health, trauma, and co-occurring disorders from qualified treatment professionals that is acceptable to the participants and sufficient to meet their validly assessed treatment needs. Recovery management interventions that connect participants with recovery support services and peer recovery networks in their community are core components of the treatment court regimen and are delivered when participants are motivated for and prepared to benefit from the interventions.
VI. Complementary Services and Recovery Capital: Participants receive desired evidence- based services from qualified treatment, public health, social service, or rehabilitation professionals that safeguard their health and welfare, help them to achieve their chosen life goals, sustain indefinite recovery, and enhance their quality of life. Trained evaluators assess participants’ skills, resources, and other recovery capital, and work collaboratively with them in deciding what complementary services are needed to help them remain safe and healthy, reach their achievable goals, and optimize their long-term adaptive functioning.
Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards Vol. II as published by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals:
VII. Drug and Alcohol Testing: Drug and alcohol testing provides an accurate, timely, and comprehensive assessment of unauthorized substance use throughout participants’ enrollment in the Drug Court.
VIII. Multidisciplinary Team: A dedicated multidisciplinary team of professionals manages the day-to-day operations of the Drug Court, including reviewing participant progress during pre-court staff meetings and status hearings, contributing observations and recommendations within team members’ respective areas of expertise, and delivering or overseeing the delivery of legal, treatment and supervision services.
IX. Census and Caseloads: The Drug Court serves as many eligible individuals as practicable while maintaining continuous fidelity to best practice standards.
X. Monitoring and Evaluation: The Drug Court routinely monitors its adherence to best practice standards and employs scientifically valid and reliable procedures to evaluate its effectiveness.
Center for Children and Family Futures and All Rise, Family Treatment Court Best Practice Standards:
1. Organization and Structure-The family treatment court has agreed upon structural and organizational principles that are supported by research and based on evidence-informed policies, programs, and practices.
2. Role of the Judge-Judicial leadership is critical to effective planning, implementation, and operation of the family treatment court.
3. Equity and Inclusion-The family treatment court examines whether harmful disproportionality (unequal access) or disparities (unequal outcomes) exist within the program and, if so, implements reasonable corrective measures to eliminate them.
4. Early Identification and Assessment-Early identification and assessment of eligible families provides the greatest opportunity to fully meet the needs of children and parents in family treatment court.
5. Timely, Quality, and appropriate substance use disorder treatment-Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is provided to meet the individual and unique substance- related clinical and supportive needs of persons with substance use disorders.
6. Comprehensive Case Management, Services, and Supports for Families-The family treatment court ensures that children, parents, and families receive comprehensive services that meet their assessed needs and promotes sustained family safety, permanency, recovery, and well-being.
7. Therapeutic Responses to Behavior-The family treatment court’s operational team applies therapeutic responses (e.g., child safety interventions, treatment adjustments, complementary service modifications, incentives, and sanctions) to improve child, parent, and family functioning, ensure children’s safety and well-being, support participant behavior change, and promote participant accountability.
8. Monitoring and Evaluation-The family treatment court collects and reviews data to monitor participant progress, engages in a process of continuous quality improvement, monitors adherence to best practice standards, and evaluates outcomes using scientifically valid and reliable procedures.
The common problem-solving court principles as published by the Center for Court Innovation are:
1. Enhanced Information: Better staff training (about complex issues like domestic violence and drug addiction) combined with better information (about litigants, victims and the community context of crime) can help improve the decision making of judges, attorneys, and other justice officials.
2. Community Engagement: Citizens and neighborhood groups have an important role to play in helping the justice system identify, prioritize, and solve local problems. Actively engaging citizens helps improve public trust in justice. Greater trust, in turn, helps people feel safer, fosters law-abiding behavior, and makes members of the public more willing to cooperate in the pursuit of justice (as witnesses, jury members, etc.).
3. Collaboration: Justice system leaders are uniquely positioned to engage a diverse range of people, government agencies, and community organizations in collaborative efforts to improve public safety. By bringing together justice players (e.g., judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers, court managers) and reaching out to potential stakeholders beyond the courthouse (e.g., social service providers, victims groups, schools) justice agencies can improve inter-agency communication, encourage greater trust between citizens and government, and foster new responses—including new diversion and sentencing options, when appropriate—to problems.
4. Individualized Justice: Using valid evidence-based risk and needs assessment instruments, the justice system can link offenders to individually tailored community- based services (e.g., job training, drug treatment, safety planning, mental health counseling) where appropriate. In doing so (and by treating defendants with dignity and respect), the justice system can help reduce recidivism, improve community safety, and enhance confidence in justice. Links to services can also aid victims, improving their safety and helping restore their lives.
5. Accountability: The justice system can send the message that all criminal behavior, even low-level quality-of-life crime, has an impact on community safety. By insisting on regular and rigorous compliance monitoring—and clear consequences for non- compliance—the justice system can improve the accountability of offenders. It can also improve the accountability of service providers by requiring regular reports on their work with participants.
6. Outcomes: The active and ongoing collection and analysis of data—measuring outcomes and process, costs and benefits—are crucial tools for evaluating the effectiveness of operations and encouraging continuous improvement. Public dissemination of this information can be a valuable symbol of public accountability.
The ten (10) key components of drug courts published by the Drug Court Program Office of the United States Department of Justice are:
1. Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing.
2. Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights.
3. Eligible participants are identified early and placed promptly in the drug court program.
4. Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and other related treatment and rehabilitation services.
5. Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing.
6. A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participant compliance.
7. Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential.
8. Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness.
9. Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation and operations.
10. Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court effectiveness.
The eight (8) principles of effective interventions as published by the National Institute of Corrections are:
1. Assess actuarial risk/needs
2. Enhance intrinsic motivation
3. Target interventions
4. Skill train with directed practice
5. Increase positive reinforcement
6. Engage ongoing support in natural communities
7. Measure relevant processes/practices
8. Provide measurement feedback