2011-8-08_DesMoine_Community Conversations_Lilly_CriminalJustice revis

Slide 1: 

Improving Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes

Privacy and Ethics: 

Privacy and Ethics Lilly shares a great concern for individual patient privacy and wants to ensure that its participation in this Community Conversation does not create any real or perceived violations of individual patient privacy. Additionally, in an effort to avoid any real or perceived conflicts of interest or infractions of applicable policies, laws and regulations, Lilly would ask that conference discussions and notes not contain the following: -  Patient testimonial -  Patient identifiable information -  Comments about access to medications -  Pharmaceutical product names/information -  Off label information -  Side effects -  Investigator initiated trials (IITs) -  Grants from Eli Lilly and Company

Introductions: 

Introductions Please briefly state your: Name Role/organization Interest in mental health and criminal justice

Special thanks to all of the contributors to this program: 

Special thanks to all of the contributors to this program Lead Author: Dave Meyer, JD, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Law, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine Bill Anthony, PhD, Boston University Alan Axelson, MD, American Psychiatric Foundation and American Psychiatric Association Lea Ann Browning-McNee, MS, National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare Jon Burkhardt, MS, Senior Study Director, WESTAT Justin Carmody, National Association of Counties Suzanne Clifford, MBA, Inspiring Transformations, Inc. & Former State Mental Health & Addiction Director Leon Evans, National Association of County Behavioral Health Administrators Mike Fitzpatrick, National Alliance on Mental Illness Bob Glover, PhD, National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Ron Honberg, JD, National Alliance on Mental Illness Dave Meyer, JD, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine Joseph Rogers, National Mental Health Consumer’s Self-Help Clearinghouse Susan Rushing, MS, Mental Health Corporations of America David Shern, PhD, Mental Health America Sam Tsemberis, PhD, Pathways to Housing, NYU Department of Psychiatry Eli Lilly and Company

Purpose of Community Conversations: 

Purpose of Community Conversations To promote energetic discussions between individuals and organizations in the community focused on improving total outcomes for individuals with mental illness To coordinate actions to achieve these improved outcomes Why is Lilly interested in initiating these Community Conversations? The pharmaceutical industry must focus on partnering to maximize outcomes, not just on selling products. Lilly understands that innovative medicines alone are not enough to achieve optimal outcomes. Lilly is interested in being a catalyst that enables communities to focus on our shared goal of improving the lives of individuals with mental illness. This is an intellectual (not financial) partnership. There are no grants or research trials associated with Community Conversations.

Community Conversations Methodology: 

Community Conversations Methodology Kick-off conference: Agree on the goal, diagnose the issue & develop the plan to engage additional stakeholders Short-term action planning conference: Brainstorm improvement ideas after hearing from a technical expert & develop the short-term action plan Long-term action planning conference: Review short-term results & develop a long-term action plan We are here! Work on action items between the conferences Work on action items between the conferences Work on action items

Agenda for today’s conference — Short-term action planning: 

Agenda for today’s conference — Short-term action planning Status report about mental health and criminal justice Speaker program on Mental Health and Criminal Justice Discuss the ideas from the presentation and brainstorm additional ideas Develop a short-term action plan that will help the community make progress towards the goal within the next two months Identify a couple long-term action items that will significantly impact the goal Assign owners, supporters and due dates Remind the group about the next conference date, time & location Developed by Suzanne F. Clifford, President of Inspiring Transformations, Inc. and Former Director of Mental Health and Addiction for the State of Indiana

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next steps

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes: 

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes John’s symptoms of mental illness have caused him to alienate his family and friends. He has been in and out of jail and prison since he was 18 years old. Today he sits in county lock up waiting for his next trial… George stopped seeking treatment for his mental illness and barricaded himself in his mother’s home. After several hours, he yells out the window to his mother that he is going to kill himself. His frightened mother calls the police… Tina was evicted from her apartment and is banned from several homeless shelters due to her unpredictable behavior that is caused by her co-occurring mental illness and addiction to crack. On very cold winter nights, she purposely gets caught soliciting a police officer so that she can sleep in a warm jail cell…

Lose-Lose: The Dilemma of Mentally Ill Offenders: 

Lose-Lose: The Dilemma of Mentally Ill Offenders Jails have become the default mental “institutions” Incarceration is the least effective and most costly intervention for mental illness Historically, neither the criminal justice nor mental health systems willingly take responsibility for offenders with mental illness The criminal justice system is overwhelmed by offenders with mental illness

Just the facts… : 

Just the facts… United States population >302,000,000 US Census Bureau, 2002

Just the facts…: 

Just the facts… Adjudicated offenders in the U.S.: Adult correctional populations, 1980–2005 U.S. Department of Justice - Office of Justice Program - Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006

Slide 25: 

16% of incarcerated people with a serious mental illness 1 >50% of incarcerated people with symptoms of mental illness within 12 mos. 2 75% of inmates & prisoners with mental illness also have an addiction 3 25% of inmates & prisoners with a mental illness had 3 or more prior incarcerations 2 Just the Facts… 1. Haimowitz, 2006 2. James and Glaze, 2006 3. Skeem and Louden, 2006

Slide 26: 

The incidence of mental illness is far greater in the criminal justice system than in the community. The criminal justice system is ill equipped to deal with problems and needs of mentally ill offenders. An overwhelming incidence of co-existing substance abuse problems compounds the problems of and with mentally ill offenders in custodial settings. A failure of treatment and preparation for discharge contributes to the high incidence of recidivism for mentally ill offenders.

Traditional Criminal Justice Interventions and Responses: 

Traditional Criminal Justice Interventions and Responses Incompetent to stand trial (IST) Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI) Guilty but Mentally Ill Mitigation of guilt (e.g., diminished capacity) Mitigation of sentence

“Interim” Solutions: 

“Interim” Solutions Deflection Diversion Custodial care Re-entry services and community mental health linkages

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next steps

Crisis Intervention Training (CIT): 

Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) Addresses adverse police interaction with mentally ill people Police Officer Training Academy training In-service training CIT combined with role-playing is most effective Model developed in 1988 in Memphis, TN Nationwide implementation Teller et al., 2006

Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) Objectives: 

Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) Objectives Train officers to identify symptoms of mental illness Train and educate officers in verbal de-escalation techniques Decrease arrests of and use of force with individuals with mental illness Reduce injuries to officers and to individuals with mental illness Increase officer involvement in the community Reduce “victimless” crime arrests Decreased liability for health care issues in the jail Cost savings for the criminal justice system Memphis Police Department website

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes: 

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes George stopped seeking treatment for his mental illness and barricaded himself in his mother’s home. After several hours, he yells out the window to his mother that he is going to kill himself. His frightened mother calls the police and requests that they send a Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) officer. The Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) officer uses his de-escalation training to calm George down and convince him to come out of the house. George is taken to mental health treatment.

Police/Mental Health Response Teams: 

Police/Mental Health Response Teams Interdisciplinary Evaluation Teams (Mental Evaluation Team/ Deputy Mobile Outreach Team) 1 Law enforcement officer and mental health clinician work together 1 Access to both criminal history and mental health treatment records 2 Immediate disposition of contact Primary or secondary responder 2 Support services for field law enforcement Specialized cross-training for officers and clinician-responder 2 1. Network of Care for Behavioral Health website 2. Lamb et al., 2002

Urgent Care/Crisis Care Partnerships: 

Urgent Care/Crisis Care Partnerships “Less than” emergency situations 1 Drop in/Drop off centers 1 Little law enforcement processing 2 “Temporary” care: 23 hour maximum Voluntary, consent-based services 1 1. Telecare Corp website 2. Evans, 2006

Urgent Care Services: 

Urgent Care Services Medication evaluation and services Nourishment, temporary respite Referral and follow-up to long-term care Referrals to other community resources Follow-up visits (varies) Telecare Corp website Evans, 2006

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next steps

Court Diversion (Traditional): 

Court Diversion (Traditional) Post-filing, pre-trial diversion Proceedings delayed by mutual consent and without prejudice to either party Referral to services Behavioral requirements and conditions Predetermined success measures Flexible rewards California Penal Code

Deferred Entry of Judgment (DEJ) “Diversion”: 

Deferred Entry of Judgment (DEJ) “Diversion” Post-filing, pre-trial diversion Plea of guilty required Referral to services Supervised or unsupervised probation with mandatory conditions related to care Time constrained Reward: Waiver of sentence or dismissal of DEJ charge California Penal Code

It Works: Costs Savings from DEJ Diversion in Allegheny County, PA: 

It Works: Costs Savings from DEJ Diversion in Allegheny County, PA In 2001, 20-25% of the population of Allegheny County Jail near Pittsburgh, PA, had a mental illness 1 Individuals stayed in jail longer than other inmates 1 Lost their housing Lost or were at risk of losing public assistance and health benefits Allegheny County Mental Health Court was formed 2 Available to offenders who have pled or been found guilty Consists of probation with close supervision and intensive treatment Recidivism rate is only 14% among those who complete the MHC program compared to 67% of the general population 1 Program saved 3.6 million taxpayer dollars over two years 3 1. Ridgely et al., 2007 2. Allegheny County Website 3. Kerlik, 2007

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes: 

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes Teresa was evicted from her apartment and is banned from several homeless shelters due to her unpredictable behavior that is caused by her co-occurring mental illness and addiction to crack. On very cold winter nights, she purposely gets caught soliciting a police officer so that she can sleep in a warm jail cell. Teresa is diverted to a program that engages her in treatment, supportive housing and employment services.

Post-Judgment Alternatives: 

Post-Judgment Alternatives Alternate services: Forensic services programs Linkages to Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and community care Referrals Alternate sentences: Inpatient and sub-acute custodial care

Mental Health Courts: 

Mental Health Courts Criminal Court calendar (Universally) voluntary programs Problem-Solving or Collaborative Courts, non-adversarial Protocols and participant roles differ from adversarial courts Derived from drug courts model Developed 1997 in Broward County Florida by Judge Ginger Lerner Wren Varying participant and treatment models, diversion, DEJ and alternate sentencing New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, 2004 Denckla and Berman, 2001 Ridgely et al., 2007

Features of Mental Health Courts: 

Features of Mental Health Courts Judge oversees, provides accountability Judge frequently, directly and intimately involved Dedicated court calendar Referrals from multiple sources Specially trained court personnel Dedicated clinical, resource and supervisory personnel Watson et al., 2001 Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2005 Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2000

Slide 60: 

In Bexar County Officials Tout Court-Ordered Outpatient Care for the Seriously Mentally Ill (August 21), Tanya Eiserer wrote that she was told Dallas County “doesn't make regular use of the outpatient procedure mainly because the law doesn't allow the judge to order people in such programs to take medications and there's no easy way to monitor them.” But she spelled out how Bexar County Associate Probate Judge Oscar Kazen in San Antonio is already doing – with great success – what Dallas County says can’t be done. “While many Texas jurisdictions don't make much use of a state law that allows civil courts to order outpatient treatment for the seriously mentally ill, in Bexar County it is part of the system,” Eiserer reported. She quoted the Treatment Advocacy Center’s Brian Stettin saying,"What we find is that the actual cases where someone under these orders goes off their treatment are exceedingly rare. We call it the black-robe effect. It matters to people that the court ordered them."

Features of Mental Health Courts: 

Features of Mental Health Courts Court-based treatment plan and supervision Intensive services, ACT services, wrap-around services: “whatever it takes” Frequent court appearances/reviews Graduation and rewards Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2005 Council of State Governments, 2002 Thompson et al., 2007 Ridgely et al., 2007

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes: 

The Human Cost of Poor Mental Health and Criminal Justice Outcomes John’s symptoms of mental illness have caused him to alienate his family and friends. He has been in and out of jail and prison since he was 18 years old. Today he sits in county lock up waiting for his next trial. The public defender, prosecutor and John’s mental health provider agree that he is eligible for the Mental Health Court. John agrees to participate in the Mental Health Court…

It Works: The San Francisco Behavioral Health Court: 

It Works: The San Francisco Behavioral Health Court By 2003, the Criminal Courts in San Francisco were overwhelmed with mentally ill defendants Special criminal court docket was formed called the Behavioral Health Court Handles cases of mentally ill individuals charged with either misdemeanors or felonies Collaborative court, sometimes referred to as a Problem-Solving court Proceedings are cooperative and relatively non-adversarial Defendants who choose to participate are placed in court-supervised, community-based treatment in lieu of traditional case processing Participants appear regularly in court and may “graduate” after a year or two with success in treatment and the community Study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry reported a reduction in the occurrence of new charges among participants by 39% and the occurrence of new charges involving violence by 54% McNiel and Binder, 2007 Strickland, 2007 Lightman, 2006

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next Steps

Custodial Care: 

Custodial Care Constitutional and statutory right to prisoner and inmate mental health care Limited institutional hospitals and “outpatient” facilities Most care provided in general population facilities Court oversight in many institutions

Parole: Just the Facts…: 

Parole: Just the Facts… Annual State parole population and entries to State parole, 1980–2002 US Department of Justice

Parole: Just the Facts…: 

Parole: Just the Facts… At least 95% of all State prisoners will be released from prison at some point More than 650,000 Parolees Two-thirds of Parolees will be rearrested; 52% return to prison on revocations Parolees with mental illness are twice as likely as those without mental illness to have their parole suspended and are significantly more likely to have their parole revoked without committing a new offense. Langan and Levin, 2002 Hughes and Wilson, 2003 Skeem and Louden, 2006

Probation: Just the Facts: 

Probation: Just the Facts Probation is revoked for probationers with mental illness at a 54% higher rate than for those without mental illness. Re-arrests for probationers with mental illness are nearly double that of those without mental illness Skeem and Louden, 2006

Reentry: 

Reentry Techniques and programs targeted at promoting the effective reintegration of offenders back to communities upon release from prison and jail (cf. parole compliance and supervision) Develop an individualized plan to access and integrate the following services: Discharge planning Treatment Training Employment Housing Transportation Federal/State Prisoner Reentry Initiatives (PRI) Haimowitz, 2004

Reentry: The Assess, Plan, Identify, & Coordinate (APIC) Model: 

Reentry: The Assess, Plan, Identify, & Coordinate (APIC) Model APIC is a model for reentry services proposed by Fred Osher, MD, Henry Steadman, Ph.D. and Heather Barr, JD,MA. APIC proposes four distinct stages of re-entry and supporting services: Assess the prisoner’s clinical and social needs and his or her public safety risks Plan for the treatment and services needed for the prisoner’s successful re-entry Identify the required community and correctional programs responsible for services Coordinate the transition plan to assure implementation and avoid gaps in care with community-based services. APIC is a highly flexible approach to reentry, incorporating both correctional personnel and interventions and community-based care, housing and treatment. Early engagement of the process is essential, usually well before the prisoner’s release. Osher et al., 2002 Osher, 2007

It Works: APIC Reentry Services in Marin County’s STAR Program: 

It Works: APIC Reentry Services in Marin County’s STAR Program In 2006, as many as 19% of the jail population in Marin County, California were seriously mentally ill 75% of those had co-occurring substance abuse 34% of inmates were receiving psychiatric medication 88% of the jail system’s pharmacy budget was being consumed STAR (Support and Treatment After Release) Program Application of the APIC reentry model Combines the staff and resources of the mental health agency, law enforcement, probation agency, peer specialists, NAMI, the District Attorney, the Public Defender, and the court in a comprehensive plan starting with screening in the jail, to transitioning inmates to community mental health services A STAR Mental Health Court and specialized probation services supervise the inmate’s reentry while Mental Health Clinicians and Peer Support personnel provide Assertive Community Treatment In 2004-2005, 53% decrease in the number of new bookings for program participants in the first year and a 72% decrease over the course of two years STAR-Mental Health Court Annual Report, 2005 California Board of Corrections Legislative Report, 2004

It Works: The TAMAR Reentry Program: 

It Works: The TAMAR Reentry Program 1. Gillece, 2006 2. Gillece, 2002 A study of women offenders in Maryland found: 1 Approx. 68% of the women offenders in Maryland grew up in families in which one or both parents had active alcohol or substance abuse problems About 24% grew up in families where one or both parents had a serious mental illness Approx. 51% experienced childhood sexual abuse prior to age 14 About 43% experienced physical abuse by a family member prior to age 14 By age 14, 59% reported using alcohol and 44% had begun using marijuana By age 17, 57% had become pregnant & by 18, 27% had been arrested at least once By age 18, 74% had experienced their first indications of serious mental illness & 34% had made at least 1 suicide attempt The TAMAR (Trauma, Addictions, Mental Health, and Recovery) Program and TAMAR’s Children Program provides Integrated services for women held in local jails who have interrelated trauma, victimization, substance abuse, and mental illness issues Treatment, training and reentry planning services to mothers and to pregnant and post-partum women who are incarcerated Only 3% of TAMAR participants recidivate 2

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next steps

Long Term Solutions: 

Long Term Solutions Integrated advocacy Integrated strategies Incentives for collaboration Champions

Integrated Advocacy: Partners in Crisis: 

Integrated Advocacy: Partners in Crisis Florida http://www.floridapartnersincrisis.org/ South Carolina http://www.scpartnersincrisis.org/ Washington http://www.wapic.org/

Partners in Crisis: 

Partners in Crisis Education and awareness of problems and solutions Advocacy Legislative Governmental Private Assurance of accountability Consistency of actions

Partners in Crisis: 

Partners in Crisis Unique to Partners in Crisis: Greater breadth of stakeholders Equal partnerships of stakeholders Participation of judges and law enforcement Specific objectives

Integrated Approach: Sequential Intercept Model: 

Integrated Approach: Sequential Intercept Model Developed by Mark R. Munetz, MD and Patricia A. Griffin, PhD based on technical assistance from Henry Steadman, PhD at the GAINS Center Summit County Ohio Framework for systemic approach to mental illness in the criminal justice system “Filters” staged to prevent or remove mentally ill people from involvement in the criminal justice system Munetz and Griffin, 2006

Sequential Intercept “Filters”: 

Sequential Intercept “Filters” Law enforcement and emergency services at initial detention and initial hearings Jail, courts, forensic evaluations, and forensic commitments Reentry from jails, state prisons, and forensic hospitalization Community corrections and community support services Munetz and Griffin, 2006

It Works: The Bexar County Jail Diversion Program: 

It Works: The Bexar County Jail Diversion Program Bexar (pronounced “Bear”) County, Texas and others joined together to form a comprehensive, coordinated approach to mentally ill offenders in three phases during the criminal justice process Crisis Intervention Trained police officers and a law enforcement/mental health “DMOT” team can respond to mental health crises in the field, avoiding unnecessary arrests A Crisis Care Center providing 24/7 evaluation and disposition services is available to law enforcement in lieu of emergency rooms or arrest Study of the Bexar County Jail Diversion Program authored by Dr. Michael Johnsrud showed over 1,700 diversions from jail incarcerations during state Fiscal Year 2004, potentially resulting in an estimated range of $3.8 million - $5 million in avoided costs Johnsrud, 2004 Evans, 2006 Gonzales and Dayak, 2006

Incentives: Fundable, Effective Approaches: 

Incentives: Fundable, Effective Approaches Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act of 2004, Public Law 108-41 (MIOTCRA) SAMHSA/BJA Mental Health Courts grants California Mentally Ill Offenders Crime Reduction Act California Board of Corrections Legislative Report, 2004

It Works: Locally Conceived and Implemented Solutions: 

It Works: Locally Conceived and Implemented Solutions Like politics, all solutions to the crisis of mentally ill offenders need to be local No two communities have identical mixes of issues and there are no universal solutions to problems In California, public policy makers provided financial incentives to county Sheriffs and Mental Health Departments in the form of five year competitive grants to test locally tailored programs for “what works” in reducing recidivism among mentally ill offenders The California Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Act grants funded 30 collaborative demonstration projects Involved more than 8,000 mentally ill individuals in 26 of California’s 58 counties Results were spectacular for enhanced treatment and support services offered by local programs More comprehensively diagnosed and evaluated More quickly and reliably provided with services Provided with more complete after-jail systems of care Monitored more closely to ensure that additional illegal behavior, decompensation, and other areas of concern were quickly addressed California Board of Corrections Legislative Report, 2004

Getting it Done: 

Getting it Done Champions: California Senator Darrell Steinberg Focus: Short agendas “Low hanging” issues first One message Stamina

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline: 

Criminal Justice and Mental Health Presentation Outline Trends and Criminal Justice Challenges for Persons with Mental Illness Crisis Response - Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT) - Police/Mental Health Response Teams - Urgent Care Pre- and Post-Judgment Alternatives - Diversion - Post-Judgment Alternatives - Mental Health Courts Post-Sentencing - Constitutional Requirements for Institutions - Parole - Probation - Re-entry Long-Term Solutions & Partners in Crisis Next Steps

Next Steps Agenda for the rest of the day — Short-term action planning: 

Next Steps Agenda for the rest of the day — Short-term action planning Developed by Suzanne F. Clifford, President of Inspiring Transformations, Inc. and Former Director of Mental Health and Addiction for the State of Indiana Discuss the ideas from the presentation and brainstorm additional ideas Develop a short-term action plan that will help the community make progress towards the goal within the next two months Identify a few long-term action items that will significantly impact the goal Assign owners, supporters and due dates Remind the group about the next conference date, time & location

Keys to Success: 

Keys to Success Developed by Suzanne F. Clifford, President of Inspiring Transformations, Inc. and Former Director of Mental Health and Addiction for the State of Indiana Inspirational leadership that mobilizes diverse individuals & organizations Passionate focus on a specific, consumer-oriented goal A diverse group that includes both leaders and implementers Involvement of people outside of the traditional mental health system Active inquiry and listening while discussing diverse perspectives Systems thinking and creative problem solving Willingness to build authentic, collaborative relationships “Do what it takes” mindset Focus on both short- and long-term successes Clear metrics for tracking progress

Slide 113: 

Action Owner Supporters Due Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Goal: Action Plan Goal:

Agenda for the third conference — Long-term action planning: 

Agenda for the third conference — Long-term action planning Developed by Suzanne F. Clifford, President of Inspiring Transformations, Inc. and Former Director of Mental Health and Addiction for the State of Indiana Introductions Review the progress of the action plan Identify additional action items that will significantly impact the goal Assign owners, supporters and due dates Discuss next steps and plans for sustainability

Resources: 

Allegheny County website . Mental Health Court Makes Sense. 2007. Available at http://www.alleghenycounty.us/uploaded Files/DHS/Individual_and_Community_Health/Mental_Health_Services_and_Support/Forensic_Services/MentalHealthCourtMakesSense.pdf. Accessed September 22, 2007. Baltimore County, Maryland website. Trauma, Addictions, Mental Health And Recovery Department of Corrections and Department of Health. Available at http://www.co.ba.md.us/News/nacoawards/tamar.html. Accessed September 22, 2007. California Board of Corrections Legislative Report . Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Grant Program, 2004; 1-13. California Penal Code . Section 1000-1000.8. Available at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/1000-1000.8.html. Accessed September 22, 2007. California Penal Code . Section 1001-1001.9. Available at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/1001-1001.9.html. Accessed September 22, 2007. Council of State Governments . Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project, 2002. Denkla D and Berman G. Rethinking the Revolving Door: A Look at Mental Illness in the Courts. Center for Court Innovation, 2001; 1-32. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance . A Guide to Mental Health Court Design and Implementation, 2005; 1-98. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Emerging Judicial Strategies For The Mentally Ill In The Criminal Caseload, 2000. Available at http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/bja/mentalhealth/contents.html. Accessed September 22, 2007. Evans L. Providing Jail Diversion for People With Mental Illness. Psychiatric Services 2006; 1521-1523. Gillece J. Leaving Jail: Service Linkage & Community Re-entry for Mothers with Co-occurring Disorders. The National Gains Center Series on Women with Mental Illness and Co-Occurring Disorders, 2002. Gillece J. Providing Trauma Informed Services to Women in the Justice System, 2006. Available at: http://www.ncaddmaryland.org/ht/d/sp/a/GetDocumentAction/i/337?PHPSESSID=bd79181f05a8420b1f1fa7197ac34cef. Accessed September 29, 2007. Gilbert G and Dayak M. Out of Jail and Into Treatment. Behavioral Healthcare, 2006. Resources

Resources: 

Haimowitz, S. Slowing the Revolving Door: Community Reentry of Offenders With Mental Illness. Psychiatric Services, 2004; 373-375. James D and Glaze L. Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates. US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report 2006; 1-12. Johnsrud M. The Bexar County Jail Diversion Program: Measuring the Potential Economic and Societal Benefits Policy Report, 2004. Kerlik B . Allegheny County Mental Health Court Lauded. Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 2007 Lamb H, Weinberger L, DeCuir W . The Police and Mental Health. Psychiatric Services 2002; 1266-1271. Langan P and Levin D . Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994. US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, 2002; 1-16. Lightman, L . San Francisco Behavioral Health Court, 2006. Available at www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/courts/BHCFactSheet_Final.pdf. Accessed September 22, 2007. McNiel D and Binder R . Effectiveness of a Mental Health Court in Reducing Criminal Recidivism and Violence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 2007. Memphis Police Department website . 2007. Available at: http://www.memphispolice.org/communit.htm. Accessed September 22, 2007. Munetz M and Griffin P. Use of the Sequential Intercept Model as an Approach to Decriminalization of People With Serious Mental Illness. Psychiatric Services, 2006; 544-549. Network of Care website . 2007. Available at: http://losangeles.networkofcare.org/mh/emergency.cfm. Accessed September 22, 2007. New Freedom Commission on Mental Health . Subcommittee on Criminal Justice: Background Paper, 2004. DHHS Pub. No. SMA-04-3880; Osher F. Short-term Strategies to Improve Reentry of Jail Populations: Expanding and Implementing the APIC Model. American Jails, 2007; 9-18. Resources

Resources: 

Osher F, Steadman H, Barr H. A Best Practice Approach to Community Re-entry from Jails for Inmates with Co-occurring Disorders: The APIC Model. The National Gains Center, 2002; 1-19. Ridgely M, Engberg J, Greenbert M, Turner S, DeMartini C, Dembosky J. Justice, Treatment and Cost: An Evaluation of the Fiscal Impact of Allegheny County Mental Health Court, RAND Corporation, 2007. Available at http://www.rand.org. Accessed September 22, 2007. Skeem J and Louden J. Toward Evidence-Based Practice for Probationers and Parolees Mandated to Mental Health Treatment. Psychiatric Services, 2006; 333-342. STAR-Mental Health Court Annual Report . July 1, 2004-June 30, 2005; 1-8. Strickland, E . Breaking the Cycle. San Francisco Weekly, 2007. Available at http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-08-08/news/breaking-the-cycle/print. Accessed September 22, 2007. Telecare Corporation website. 2007. Available at: http://www.telecarecorp.com/programs/display.sd?iid=26. Accessed September 22, 2007. Teller J, Munetz M, Gil K, Ritter C. Crisis Intervention Team Training for Police Officers Responding to Mental Disturbance Calls. Psychiatric Services 2006; 232-237. Thompson M, Osher F, Tomasini-Joshi D . Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses: The Essential Elements of a Mental Health Court. A report prepared by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2007; 1-12. US Census Bureau. Measuring America: The Decennial Censuses From 1790 to 2000. US Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration 2002. US Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics website. 2003. Available at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/reentry.htm. Accessed September 22, 2007. US Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics website. 2006. Available at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/corr2.htm. Accessed September 22, 2007. Watson A, Hanrahan P, Luchins D, Lurigio A. Mental Health Courts and the Complex Issue of Mentally Ill Offenders. Psychiatric Services, 2001; 477-481. Wilson A and Draine J. Collaborations Between Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems for Prisoner Reentry. Psychiatric Services, 2006; 875-878. Resources