Goodhue County treatment court reports participant outcomes and a roughly $12,000 county-funded gap

Goodhue County judges and treatment court staff told the county's committee of the whole in Red Wing that the court has referred 213 people since 2019, produced 29 graduates and faces roughly $12,042 in program costs the county is expected to cover for the most recent state fiscal year.

The presentation on the county's treatment court emphasized participant outcomes, community activities and the program's finances. "Once people have been in the treatment court and hopefully graduated, they stop coming into court so often," said Judge Doug Bailey, one of the judges at the Goodhue County courthouse, who opened the presentation. "If they graduate from programs like this and they are in stable housing, they have a driver's license to go back and forth to work and they're working and they're paying taxes, then you flipped that paradigm."

The nut graf: Treatment courts aim to reduce recidivism and reliance on incarceration by combining court oversight with treatment, testing and community supports. Presenters said Goodhue County's program produces measurable gains for many participants but continues to rely on a mix of state awards, judicial-branch support, county funds and volunteer time.

Program size and outcomes Jessica Schumacher, the treatment court coordinator, provided updated participant counts and outcome measures. She said 213 clients have been referred to the program since it began in February 2019; not all referrals enter the program because candidates must meet eligibility criteria and be Goodhue County residents. Schumacher said 29 participants have graduated and 18 have been terminated. Among the 29 graduates, presenters reported 11 known relapses; Schumacher added that people who relapse commonly recontact the treatment court team for help.

Schumacher described specific outcome measures for subsets of participants tracked for particular indicators. "Among 56 participants tracked for licensing status, 20 who entered without a license gained one, three are still in the process and eight had a license on entry," she said. Schumacher also said every participant who graduated either had employment at graduation or received other sources of income such as Social Security. She added that 16 graduates worked with family services to regain child custody or contact, and that graduates secured supportive housing while they were in the program.

Team, partners and alumni Presenters described a largely volunteer team supplemented by a paid coordinator and two paid drug testers who conduct field testing. Schumacher said the team recently added a treatment professional from the Prairie Island Indian Community and a treatment provider from Cannon Falls to help accelerate placement into inpatient treatment. Chloe (from the jail) helps set up assessments, and the county's alumni group — run by a former graduate now nearly six years sober — has seven members and participates in community activities. Sheriff Kelly was noted as volunteering at the program's annual picnic.

Community activities Schumacher described community-building activities that involve current and former participants, including an Adopt-a-Highway cleanup on County Road 51, an annual picnic and volunteer work at the county fair. Schumacher said those events help build pro-social connections and keep terminated or formerly incarcerated participants connected to the program's supports.

Finances and state award Steve O'Keefe, Goodhue County attorney, summarized the program's finances for the state fiscal year. He said the treatment court invoiced $124,201 as the program's actual costs for the year; the Minnesota Judicial Branch award reimburses up to $110,000. Under the agreement with the state, the program must provide a match up to 30 percent of the award (a minimum match of $33,000). O'Keefe said the program reported $19,480 in nonmonetary (in-kind) match for the year, and the county will cover approximately $12,042 in expenses beyond the state reimbursement. He also said $2,159 in expenses that the grant does not allow (incentives such as graduation celebrations and cookouts) are included in the amount the county covers.

Judge Bailey noted the program began with a roughly $500,000 federal grant that funded initial operations and said the judicial branch provides the majority of ongoing funding for operations; he described the court's funding mix as primarily judicial-branch support supplemented by county funds.

Board discussion and questions Board members asked about tracking outcomes for people who qualify for drug court but decline participation. Schumacher acknowledged that comparison data would strengthen claims about the program's effectiveness and said staff are working to gather such figures. One board member noted that a few people referred but who declined had subsequently overdosed.

Board members also pressed presenters on housing. Schumacher and Judge Bailey said supportive housing options in Goodhue County are limited; presenters identified Common Ground's GRH-funded sober house as one local resource and said some participants have needed to relocate outside the county to sustain recovery. Presenters and board members discussed regional models and opioid-settlement funding used elsewhere to develop sober housing, but no specific local housing solution was proposed during the meeting.

Context and costs compared to incarceration Board members and presenters contrasted program costs with the expense of incarceration. One board member said county costs for keeping a person in jail for a year could be roughly $35,000 per person; presenters argued treatment court is more cost-effective and produces broader social benefits when participants succeed.

Forward-looking notes Presenters said training and national conferences are part of program development; travel and training costs may increase some program expenses in future years. Schumacher said the team intends to continue alumni activities and to expand partnerships that speed access to inpatient treatment.

Ending: The presentation closed with the board's appreciation for the treatment court team's work and a request for continued county support to cover the identified budget gap and non-grant-eligible expenses.