E N D
1. Integrating Criminogenic Risk into Mental Health/Criminal Justice Dialogue Robert Kingman
Director of Correctional Services, Kennebec County, Maine Comprehensive Jail Diversion Project (2008 JMHCP grantee)
Lars Olsen
Director of Treatment and Intervention Programs, Maine Department of Corrections (2008 JMHCP grantee)
Dr. Fred Osher
Director of Health Systems and Services Policy, Council of State Governments Justice Center
Dr. Jennifer Skeem
Associate Professor, University of California, Irvine
2. Overview Statement of the problem and research that can inform solutions
The Maine Experience
The Maine Experience: The Mental Health Perspective
3. Statement of the problem and research that can inform solutions
4. Burgeoning corrections population is now over 7.3 million
6. Most have co-occurring substance abuse disorders
7. Most are supervised in the community
8. Many “fail” community supervision Vidal, Manchak, et al. (2009)
Screened 2,934 probationers for mental illness; 13% screened in
Followed for average of two years
No more likely to be arrested…
But 1.38 times more likely to be revoked
9. The perceived root of the problem “People on the front lines every day believe too many people with mental illness become involved in the criminal justice system because the mental health system has somehow failed. They believe that if many of the people with mental illness received the services they needed, they would not end up under arrest, in jail, or facing charges in court”
10. Research suggests the root of the problem is more complex Increased mental health services often do not translate into reduced recidivism, even for “state of the art” services
Caslyn et al., 2005; Clark, Ricketts, & McHugo, 1999; Skeem & Eno Louden, 2006; Steadman & Naples, 2005
Untreated mental illness is a criminogenic need for only a small proportion of offenders with serious mental illness
Junginger et al. (2006), Peterson et al. (2009), Skeem, Manchak, & Peterson (2009)
Strongest criminogenic needs are shared by those with- and without- mental illness
Bonta et al., (1998); Skeem et al. (2009)
11. The “Central Eight”
12. Evidence-based corrections- Target: recidivism Focus resources on high RISK cases
Target criminogenic NEEDS like anger, substance abuse, antisocial attitudes, and criminogenic peers (Andrews et al., 1990)
RESPONSIVITY - use cognitive behavioral techniques like relapse prevention (Pearson, Lipton, Cleland, & Yee, 2002)
Ensure implementation (Gendreau, Goggin, & Smith, 2001)
13. Evidence-based mental health services - Target: symptoms & functioning http://mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/cmhs/CommunitySupport/toolkits/about.asp
Assertive community treatment (ACT)
Integrated dual diagnosis treatment
Supported employment
Illness management and recovery
Family psycho-education
http://consensusproject.org/updates/features/GAINS-EBP-factsheets
Supported housing
Trauma interventions
15. What to do… Identify offenders with mental illnesses, using a validated tool like the K-6 or BJMHS
http://www.hcp.med.harvard.edu/ncs/k6_scales.php
http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/HTML/resources/MHscreen.asp
Or MAYSI, for youth http://www.maysiware.com/MAYSI2Research.htm
Assess risk of recidivism, using a validated tool like the LS/CMI (includes youth version)
16. What to do… Particularly for high risk, high need cases
But…target RISK Avoid bad practices
Low thresholds for revocation
Threats
Authoritarian relationships
17. Overview Statement of the problem and research that can inform solutions
The Maine Experience
The Maine Experience: The Mental Health Perspective
18. 2. The Maine Experience
19. 2004 National Institute of Corrections Technical Assistance Grant to Implement Effective Correctional Management of Offenders in the Community
20. 2005 Legislative Commission to Improve Sentencing, Supervision, Management and Incarceration of Prisoners
Development of Joint Plan of Action between Department of Corrections and Department of Health and Human Services
Annual Mental Health and Criminal Justice Summit
Assignment of Intensive Case Managers to all correctional facilities and community corrections regions
Monthly “Grand Rounds” training
Established MOU with DHHS, DOC and all jails
21. 2006 Legislative Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee Recommendation on Implementing Evidence Based Practices to Manage Offenders by Risk and Need
Recommendation on Integrating Risk and Needs Assessments into Criminal Justice Processing
Recommendation that Department of Corrections and Department of Health and Human Services Develop Strategies to Improve programming for Offender Population
22. 2006 Implemented Correctional Program Assessment Inventory 2000 Assessed programs providing services to corrections clients to determine fidelity to evidence based practices
Programs developed performance improvement plans
Programs assessed include:
Multi-Systemic Therapy
Functional Family Therapy
Day Reporting Programs
Risk Reduction Programs
Domestic Violence Programs
Residential Substance Abuse Programs
Residential Sex Offender Programs
Drug Court
Reentry Center
Outpatient Sex Offender Programs
Community Corrections Regions
23. 2007 Awarded Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program Grant
Planning
Develop common database and measurement tools
Collect data
Use GIS mapping to coordinate needs and resource
Implementation
Share data with criminal justice agencies, courts, providers and stakeholders
Use GIS to manage resources
Provide public awareness
24. 2009 Implementation of Criminal Justice and Mental Health Advisory Committee Joint appointments by Commissioners of Department of Corrections and Department of health and Human Services
Broad representation including mental health, corrections, substance abuse treatment, law enforcement, prosecution, pretrial services, victim services,
Provide guidance and feedback to both departments on needs, interventions and services to people with mental health issues involved in the criminal justice system
25. Lessons Learned Develop common vision
Provide Evidence Based Practices and programs
Maintain fidelity
Define your intervention strategies and desired outcomes
Develop atmosphere of mutual respect and trust
Cross and co-train staff
Reach an understanding of function and language
26. Lessons Learned Co-locate staff whenever possible
Provide leadership and accountability from the very top and all the way down
Data needs to work for everybody
Develop protocols for co-supervision of staff
Understand the unique problems and challenges of systems that are at times in competition
Must see the issues as shared responsibilities-no finger pointing
27. Overview
28. 3. The Maine Experience: The Mental Health Perspective
29. Brief History of Treatment Approaches Mental Health = major mental illness(personality disorders not addressed/substance abuse is separate issue)
Mental illness/substance abuse-which is primary?(personality disorders are problematic/trauma is a separate issue)
Dual-diagnosis assessment and treatment(trauma=complicating factor/criminogenic element=separate issue)
Co-occurring assessment and treatment(trauma=gender responsive treatment/criminogenic issues = a complicating factor)
Criminogenic Co-occurrence Treatment(assessment and intervention with criminogenic factors for sustainable pro-social change)
30. Screening and Assessment Admission to county jails
-Brief Jail Mental Health Screen
-UNCOPE
-Intake screening for risk of harm to self
-Follow-up with comprehensive risk assessment
(as needed)
Admission to Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment Programs
Depression Rating Scale
Patient Health Questionaire(PHQ-9)
TCU Screening Tools
32. Assessment Shapes the Intervention Traditional Psycho-Social Approach
Presenting Concern
Current Mental Status
Risk of Harm to Self/Others
Family/Household Information
Employment
Social/Recreational History
Developmental History
Education/Military Service
Medical Health/Medications
Legal History
Treatment History (mental health and substance abuse)
Treatment Planning and Intervention
33. Recidivistic Risk FactorsAndrews and Bonta,
34. Expand the View/Sharpen the Focus Shift psycho-social perspective to:
Include recidivistic risk factors
Evaluate history of disengagement
Understand value of criminal behavior
as a coping skill(s)
Train Clinicians
Develop screening/evaluation tools to:
Identify inmates/clients for follow-up
Utilize responses in treatment interventions
35. Training Examples Developed for
outpatient clinicians
outreach/transition staff
clinicians in correctional facilities
correctional care workers
36. Anti-social behavior has developmental roots
Early delinquency can predict adult crime
Age desistance
Weakened social bonding
Adult social bonds
Tri-effect variables
Family process
Child effect
Contextual
39. Pro-social change Key Assessment/Treatment Planning Domains Tri-Effect Variables
Individual Effects
History of disengagement
Emotional, cognitive and behavioral regulation
Attitudes, perceptions and expectations
Significant Other effects
Abuse/neglect (past and current)
Relationship skills
Anti-social associates
Community Effects
Stigmatization
Social rejection
Anti-social inclusion
40. Shift from traditional pathology based to pro-social based interventions
Common language of pro-social accountability and skill development
Maximize resources through Stage of Change matched, research based treatment targets
Connections of prevention, juvenile justice and adult criminogenic programming
Policies and procedures that attend to perpetuating stigmatizing shame and exclusion
41. Lessons Learned Change is gradual and challenging
Utilization of ‘transparent’ process enhances
therapeutic relationship
Expanded treatment team has potential to
be more effective
42. Thank you
For further information & conference presentations
please visit
www.consensusproject.org