Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
community advisory groups (Benefits of an advisory group (What…
community advisory groups
Other DWI court models
National Centre for DWI courts (U.S)
Victorian Drug Court (VIC)
NZ AODT court pilot
Jurisdictional authority
Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1970
(Tas)*
Vehicle and Traffic Act 1999
(Tas)*
Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas)
Magistrates Court
Benefits of an advisory group
What stakeholders should be considered - diversity
Is there a current best practice model for community advisory groups and what is included (guiding principles??)
Is there any review of benefits from a community advisory group
How are they evaluated?
Are they self funded or do they rely on public purse?
How do they serve as an intermediary?
What positive outcomes have come from establishing community advisory groups?
Challenges of establishing a community advisory group
Sustainable commitment
Are they taken seriously?
Will it be a funding burden and take funds away from the program?
Will opposing views hinder process?
Will the group have any powers? How will they have any impact on process without power?
Will a breakdown in commitment from agencies cause delay?
Identifying stakeholders
consider current models. Who are participate in the groups and why?
NZ AODT court pilot representatives
Data from the Paper to establish characteristics of offenders and support services needed
Who can contribute positively to rehabilitation
what community leaders can contribute effectively to communicating the work of community advisory groups
What research methodology should I employ
Evidence based
Primary and Secondary sources
CQU Law Library
Google Scholar
Foundation for advancing alcohol responsibility: DWI courts 2016
National Centre for DWI courts (U.S)
Ministry of Justice, New Zealand, Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment (AODT) court pilot
Reference papers and websites noted in issues paper on pages 73-79