Strategies for supervising people with mental illnesses on probation caseloads: results from a nationwide study

Tonya B Van Deinse; Mariah Cowell Mercier; Allison K Waters; Mackensie Disbennett; Gary S Cuddeback; Tracy Velázquez; Andrea Murray Lichtman; Faye Taxman

doi:10.1186/s40352-023-00241-w

Strategies for supervising people with mental illnesses on probation caseloads: results from a nationwide study

Health Justice. 2023 Oct 12;11(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s40352-023-00241-w.

Authors

Tonya B Van Deinse¹, Mariah Cowell Mercier², Allison K Waters³, Mackensie Disbennett³, Gary S Cuddeback⁴, Tracy Velázquez⁵, Andrea Murray Lichtman³, Faye Taxman⁶

Affiliations

¹ School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street, CB#3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. tbv@email.unc.edu.
² Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah, 395 S 1500 E, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
³ School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street, CB#3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
⁴ School of Social Work, Virginia Commonwealth University, Academic Learning Commons, 3rd Floor, 1000 Floyd Avenue, P.O. Box 842027, Richmond, VA, 23284, USA.
⁵ Safety & Justice Research, The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2005 Market Street, Suite 1700, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, USA.
⁶ Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, 3351 Fairfax Drive Van Metre Hall, Arlington, VA, 22201, USA.

Abstract

Probation officers are tasked with supervising the largest number of people living with mental illnesses in the criminal legal system, with an estimated 16-27% of individuals on probation identified as having a mental health condition. While academic research has recently focused on building the evidence base around the prototypical model of specialty mental health probation, less focus has been directed to the individual components of specialized mental health caseloads and other strategies agencies use to supervise people with mental illnesses. More specific information about these strategies would benefit probation agencies looking to implement or enhance supervision protocols for people with mental illnesses. This article describes the results from a nationwide study examining (1) probation agencies' mental health screening and identification methods; (2) characteristics of mental health caseloads, including eligibility criteria, officer selection, required training, and interfacing with service providers; and (3) other strategies agencies use to supervise people with mental illnesses beyond mental health caseloads. Strategies for identifying mental illnesses varied, with most agencies using risk needs assessments, self-report items asked during the intake process, or information from pre-sentencing reports. Less than a third of respondents reported using screening and assessment tools specific to mental health or having a system that tracks or "flags" mental illnesses. Results also showed wide variation in mental health training requirements for probation officers, as well as variation in the strategies used for supervising people with mental illnesses (e.g., mental health caseloads, embedded mental health services within probation, modified cognitive behavioral interventions). The wide variation in implementation of supervision strategies presents (1) an opportunity for agencies to select from a variety of strategies and tailor them to fit the needs of their local context and (2) a challenge in building the evidence base for a single strategy or set of strategies.

Keywords: Mental illness; Prevalence; Probation; Screening; Supervision strategies.

Abstract

Grants and funding