Collaborations Between Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems for Prisoner Reentry

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed reentry programs throughout the nation for people with mental illness who were leaving prisons or jails and developed a classification of service strategies based on practices that are emerging in the field in response to this need. METHODS: A national survey identified service strategies that assist people who are incarcerated in prisons or jail and have a mental illness reenter the community. Data were used to develop a typology of reentry service strategies. RESULTS: Fifty-eight reentry programs were identified. Program descriptions were developed for 50. Findings supported the use of a 2x2 typology of initiatives, with one factor being whether the criminal justice or mental health system initiated the program and the other being the degree of collaboration between the two systems. CONCLUSIONS: If the funding trend indicated by this survey continues, the criminal justice system will become a primary funder of treatment services for offenders with mental illness who are returning to the community. No one knows how this shift in funding will affect the provision of mental health services

How Police Officers Assess for Mental Illnesses

This study examined how police officers assess for mental illnesses and how those assessments vary by location. Researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 officers working in two police districts in one city. Findings from the study indicate that officers make assessments based on information from dispatch, collateral contacts and behavioral observations on the scene. The study also found that neighborhood context shaped the assessment process due to variations in types of information that were available to officers in different locations. The findings indicate that there is a need to improve the quality of all three sources of information

The Promise of Research to Advance Smart Decarceration

This paper describes the concept of "Smart Decarceration" and introduces the special issue of Criminal Justice and Behavior entitled Research to Advance Smart Decarceration Policies, Programs, and Interventions. The concept of Smart Decarceration originated nearly a decade ago as the United States reached a tipping point in mass incarceration, and it focuses on three interrelated outcomes: substantially reducing the use of incarceration and other forms of punishment; reversing racial disparities and other inequities in the criminal justice system; and promoting safety and well-being, particularly for communities that have been most impacted by mass incarceration. Ultimately, Smart Decarceration efforts should prioritize reducing the overall footprint of the criminal justice system, while building capacity outside of the system to support safety, health, and well-being. Research plays a critical role in advancing Smart Decarceration, as new forms of knowledge and evidence must be developed to replace ineffective and unjust policies and practices associated with mass incarceration. The paper discusses approaches to research that move beyond typical criminal justice outcomes and focus on the multifaceted goals of Smart Decarceration. The six articles in this special issue are introduced, highlighting their foci across ecological levels and the breadth of the criminal justice continuum, centering populations most impacted by incarceration, and identifying practice and policy innovations

Preventing and improving interactions between autistic individuals and the criminal justice system: A roadmap for research

Researchers have identified that autistic individuals are encountering the criminal justice system as victims, offenders, and witnesses at high rates. The prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is increasing and generating a comprehensive approach to addressing criminal justice system involvement among autistic individuals is a timely and urgent need. Revisions to an established framework generated for use among individuals with mental health diagnoses, the sequential Intercept Model (SIM), were produced by an international consortium of interdisciplinary stakeholders presenting a new opportunity to identify gaps in ASD research and generate preventive solutions across the criminal justice system. The revised SIM maps each criminal justice system component, or Intercept, and includes paths for the experiences of autistic individuals as victims or witnesses to crimes as well as offenders to catalyze new and interdisciplinary research, policy, and practice efforts. As the field of ASD research continues to grow, the revised SIM is a promising pathway to avoiding siloed research approaches, including diverse autistic voices, and contributing to international dialogue about criminal justice reform at a critical juncture. LAY SUMMARY: Autistic individuals are encountering the criminal justice system as victims, offenders, and witnesses at high rates. A revised version of the SIM generated by an international consortium provides a cohesive framework to ensure research focused on this topic extends across the criminal justice system. Preventing and improving interactions between autistic individuals and the criminal justice system is an urgent research, policy, and practice need

Meeting the Needs of Justice-Involved People With Serious Mental Illness: In Reply

IN REPLY: As admirers of their work, we thank Drs. Lamberti and Weisman for their comments on our article. We agree that the evolution of forensic assertive community treatment (FACT) they describe is exactly the type of community-based, multi-pronged, comprehensive service approach needed to address the high rates of justice involvement among people with serious mental illness. We also agree that the FACT service delivery model as described by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is one example of how our proposed vision can be put into action

Meeting the Needs of Justice-Involved People With Serious Mental Illness Within Community Behavioral Health Systems

The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system is a complex problem. A long-standing explanation for this phenomenon, the criminalization hypothesis, posits that policy changes that shifted the care of people with serious mental illness from psychiatric hospitals to an underfunded community treatment setting resulted in their overrepresentation within the criminal justice system. This framework has driven the development of interventions to connect people with serious mental illness to needed mental health and substance use treatment, a critical component for people in need. However, the criminalization hypothesis is a limited explanation of the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system because it downplays the social and economic forces that have contributed to justice system involvement in general and minimizes the complex clinical, criminogenic, substance use, and social services needs of people with serious mental illness. A new approach is needed that focuses on addressing the multiple factors that contribute to justice involvement for this population. Although the authors' proposed approach may be viewed as aspirational, they suggest that an integrated community-based behavioral health system-i.e., intercept 0-serve as the focal point for coordinating and integrating services for justice-involved people with serious mental illness

Balancing Accessibility and Selectivity in 21st Century Public Mental Health Services: Implications for Hard to Engage Clients

This research highlights the importance of expanding examinations of service accessibility for hard to engage client populations to include assessments of individuals’ ability to gain entrance to services and the system’s ability to meet the service needs of particular client populations. The results of this research provide a framework to support these examinations. The increasing levels of selectivity and targeting of mental health services to particular client populations found in this study raise fundamental questions about the goals of service accessibility in 21st century public mental health services generally, and for hard-to-engage clients particularly. These findings also point to the need for examinations of the eligibility criteria and gatekeeping mechanism that are used to target services to particular client populations to determine if they are working as intended and to assess what impact these mechanisms have on hard to engage clients’ ability to gain entrance to needed services

Conceptualizing Restorative Justice for People with Mental Illnesses Leaving Prison or Jail

Individuals with psychiatric disabilities who are involved in the criminal justice system face a number of challenges to community integration upon release. There is a critical need to develop and evaluate interventions for these individuals that connect them to the community by enhancing naturalistic social connections and helping them to participate meaningfully in valued roles. The purposes of this article are to describe, provide a theoretical rationale, and propose a conceptual model for the use of a particular restorative justice model, circles of support and accountability, to meet this need. We describe the principles of restorative justice (repairing harm, stakeholder involvement, and the transformation of community and governmental roles and relationships) and how these map on to elements of the circles intervention. These elements include a focus on community participation, positive social support, democratic decision making, collective ownership of crime problems, and connection to community-based resources. We then suggest how changes in identity transformation, moral development and motivation, and collective efficacy might mediate relationships between these intervention elements and community integration outcomes. Finally, we encourage the systematic evaluation of the circles intervention for people with mental health conditions leaving custody and provide recommendations for policy and practice

Interventions That Target Criminogenic Needs for Justice-Involved Persons With Serious Mental Illnesses: A Targeted Service Delivery Approach

This research describes the development of a targeted service delivery approach that tailors the delivery of interventions that target criminogenic needs to the specific learning and treatment needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illnesses (SMI). This targeted service delivery approach includes five service delivery strategies: repetition and summarizing, amplification, coaching, low-demand practice, and maximizing participation. Examples of how to apply each strategy in session are provided, as well as recommendations on when to use each strategy during the delivery of interventions that target criminogenic needs. This targeted service delivery approach makes an important contribution to the development of interventions for justice-involved people with SMI by increasing the chances that people with SMI can participate fully in and benefit from these interventions that target criminogenic needs. These developments come at a critical time in the field as the next generation of services for justice-involved people with SMI are being developed

A Systematic Review of Interventions Targeting Criminogenic Risk Factors Among Persons With Serious Mental Illness

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with serious mental illness are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Research has found that interventions targeting risk factors for recidivism (i.e., criminogenic risks) reduce justice involvement in the general correctional population. However, more needs to be learned regarding use of these interventions among individuals with serious mental illness. To this end, this systematic review synthesized research on interventions that target criminogenic risk factors and are delivered to justice-involved individuals with serious mental illness. METHODS: A systematic search of six computerized bibliographic databases from inception to 2021 yielded 8,360 potentially relevant studies. Title and abstract screening, full-text reviews, and data extraction were performed independently, and discrepancies were resolved through discussion. To identify additional articles meeting inclusion criteria, experts in the field were contacted, and reference-harvesting techniques were used. Study quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were identified that evaluated nine interventions delivered to justice-involved individuals with serious mental illness. All identified programs targeted criminogenic risk factors, were group based, and used cognitive-behavioral strategies. Study quality was moderate to high. Interventions were associated with improvements in recidivism, violence, and criminogenic risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: This review is the first to evaluate interventions targeting criminogenic risks among justice-involved individuals with serious mental illness. Findings suggest that outcomes associated with these interventions are promising. Given the overrepresentation of persons with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system, these findings provide an important step toward identifying services that curb justice involvement in this population