Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Therapeutic Courts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Snohomish County briefs committee on therapeutic courts, cites reduced recidivism and program expansion
Summary
Court staff told the Community Safety and Justice Committee on May 12 that Snohomish County’s therapeutic courts—adult recovery, family recovery, assisted outpatient treatment, community and mental health courts—show reduced recidivism, use a mix of county and contracted services, and face referral and housing barriers; staff highlighted program capacities, funding sources and next steps.
At the May 12 Community Safety and Justice Committee meeting, Jen Crosson, deputy court administrator for Snohomish County District Court, and Jamie Reed, program administrator for Superior Court therapeutic courts, presented an overview of the county’s therapeutic-court programs and performance data.
"My name is Jen Crosson. I am the deputy court administrator for Snohomish County District Court," Crosson said in opening remarks, introducing the court team and a slide packet summarizing program details, eligibility and evidence-based practices.
Jamie Reed cited Washington State Institute for Public Policy findings and local program outcomes to describe therapeutic courts as evidence-based alternatives that reduce recidivism. Reed said, "88% of the drug court participants have no new felonies after 36 months," and summarized other WSIPP measures showing returns on investment for drug and mental health courts.
Presenters described program specifics: Adult Recovery Court (established 1999) has a capacity of 125 participants (113 participants in 2025, 20 graduates in 2025) and reported that 85% of 2022 program admissions had no new felonies after five years. Family Recovery Court (since 2008) serves families with dependency orders, reported 41 parents of 27 children participating in 2025, and cited a study of 2020 admissions showing 88% had no refiling of dependency petitions.
Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT), operating under the Washington Involuntary Treatment Act, was piloted in 2024 and began accepting petitions in April 2025; staff reported 19 petitions filed with 15 people enrolled in the program as of the briefing. Presenters described AOT as a civil petition process that can provide court-mandated community-based treatment as an alternative to involuntary hospitalization.
Staff explained funding and staffing: the county dedicates a 1/10th of 1% sales tax (fund 21) to therapeutic courts, supplements with Criminal Justice Treatment Account (CJTA) funds and grants, and contracts with substance-use and mental-health providers for expedited services; some treatment (for example, Moral Recognition Therapy facilitation) is provided by county staff.
Presenters identified current operational priorities: increase and speed referrals (pandemic-related referral reductions persist), adopt a universal screening tool (EXPLORER) to identify program-eligible candidates earlier, strengthen cross-jurisdiction collaboration, and expand awareness among courts, law enforcement, providers and community partners. They also noted housing, employment and access to mental-health services as the leading unmet needs identified by recovery capital assessments.
Committee members asked about defense counsel declining participation, eligibility criteria, and whether the Blake decision affected referrals; presenters said they are working to educate defense attorneys, that Blake had limited impact compared with pandemic-related disruptions, and that the county has paused new mental-health-court referrals to reassess eligibility and service capacity while nine existing participants continue in the program.
Next steps: staff will continue outreach to defense counsel and treatment providers, refine referral and screening processes, provide requested eligibility criteria to the committee, and present recovery-capital implementation at a national All Rise conference.
