In chapter 6, Mears(2010) defined implementation evaluation as the examination of activities associated with the specific policies and practices and the extent to which the amount and quality of implementation coordinated with the ideas set forth in policy description (Mears, pg132). The beneficial measures of using implementation evaluation are 1) to improve policy designs , 2) facilitate performance monitoring effects by holding organizations accountable and (3) help inform the interpretation of impact evaluations and any identified (null) effects (Mears, pg145). Mears suggested if more programs utilized implementation evaluations there would be less policies and procedures complications and more agencies would be held accountable
…show more content…
With the increasing of arrests jails and prisons were becoming crowded which creates a high levels of security measures. Rectifying the exsisting problems ,drug courts and sentencings law have flourished throughout the criminal justice systems. Drug courts are a systems occupied by treatment professionals and justices systems actors that combined their effort to provide more rapid sentencings , supervisions, drug treatments and ancillary services( Mears,pg 196). The intention was soley aimed to decrease crimes and hope to provide services that would possible help offenders become productive law abiding citizens(Mears,pg194). The idea of implementing drug courts seems very simple, however, it created more problems for the criminal justice systems i.e ineffective. According to the 2006 meta-analysis, drug courts evaluation did not have an impact of drug behaviors nor did courts reduce recidivism because of suffering from poor implementations(Mears, pg198). Another ineffective implementations with reducing drug-related activities is the drug sentencing laws. Drug sentencing laws were intended to target and disrupt creators and distributors of drugs. The assumption of creating “ get tough” laws were to decrease crimes by targeting those drug dealers who were considered as “Kingpins” . Instead, critics argued drug sentencing laws did not have an effect on crimes, substance abuse nor did it effect the mid to high-level sellers or prison time(Sevigny & Caulkins, 2004,
With the increasing of arrests jails and prisons were becoming crowded which creates a high levels of security measures. Rectifying the exsisting problems ,drug courts and sentencings law have flourished throughout the criminal justice systems. Drug courts are a systems occupied by treatment professionals and justices systems actors that combined their effort to provide more rapid sentencings , supervisions, drug treatments and ancillary services( Mears,pg 196). The intention was soley aimed to decrease crimes and hope to provide services that would possible help offenders become productive law abiding citizens(Mears,pg194). The idea of implementing drug courts seems very simple, however, it created more problems for the criminal justice systems i.e ineffective. According to the 2006 meta-analysis, drug courts evaluation did not have an impact of drug behaviors nor did courts reduce recidivism because of suffering from poor implementations(Mears, pg198). Another ineffective implementations with reducing drug-related activities is the drug sentencing laws. Drug sentencing laws were intended to target and disrupt creators and distributors of drugs. The assumption of creating “ get tough” laws were to decrease crimes by targeting those drug dealers who were considered as “Kingpins” . Instead, critics argued drug sentencing laws did not have an effect on crimes, substance abuse nor did it effect the mid to high-level sellers or prison time(Sevigny & Caulkins, 2004,