No, they are technically two separate proceedings, but evidence presented and developed in the criminal case can be used in the forfeiture case.

Criminal cases are always required to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Suppose the charge is "possession with the intent to deliver." Proof of the intent to deliver, at the criminal case, would include the money. The prosecution would present evidence of the amount of drugs found in the defendant's possession (an amount over the amount for personal use) and presence of money (because drugs are sold for money). The standard used in the criminal case is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Suppose defendant is found guilty in the criminal case. The forfeiture of the money is a slam dunk, because all the evidence at the criminal trial could be used in the forfeiture proceeding, and since the criminal charge was proven at a higher burden of proof.

Suppose defendant, for some reason, was found not guilty the criminal trial. The forfeiture could still proceed, because keep in mind that if a defendant is found guilty, that doesn't mean he's innocent. It means the state didn't meet the burden of proof. The evidence might be enough to meet a lower burden, such as PotE, at the forfeiture.