Katie Bailey1, Evan M Lowder1, Eric Grommon1, Staci Rising1, Bradley R Ray1. 1. Center for Behavioral Health and Justice, School of Social Work, Wayne State University, Detroit (Bailey, Ray); Department of Criminology, Law and Society, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (Lowder); School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis (Grommon); Center for Health and Justice Research, Public Policy Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis (Rising).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Criminal justice and emergency medical service (EMS) outcomes were compared for individuals experiencing a behavioral health crisis who received a response from a co-response team (CRT) or a usual response from the police after a 911 call. METHODS: A prospective, quasi-experimental design was used to examine outcomes of a CRT pilot tested in Indianapolis (August-December 2017). Weighted multivariable models examined effects of study condition (CRT group, N=313; usual-response group, N=315) on immediate booking, emergency detention, and subsequent jail bookings and EMS encounters. Sensitivity of outcomes to follow-up by a behavioral health unit (BHU) was also examined. RESULTS: Individuals in the CRT group were less likely than those in the usual-police-response group to be arrested immediately following the 911 incident (odds ratio [OR]=0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.25-0.92) and were more likely to experience any EMS encounter at 6- and 12-month follow-up (OR range=1.71-1.85, p≤0.015 for all). Response type was not associated with jail bookings at 6 or 12 months. Follow-up BHU services did not reduce bookings or EMS encounters. CRT recipients with BHU follow-up were more likely than those without BHU follow-up to have a subsequent EMS contact (OR range=2.35-3.12, p≤0.001 for all). These findings differed by racial group. CONCLUSIONS: CRT responses may reduce short-term incarceration risk but not long-term EMS demand or risk of justice involvement. Future research should consider the extent to which CRT and follow-up services improve engagement with stabilizing treatment services, which may reduce the likelihood of future crises.
OBJECTIVE: Criminal justice and emergency medical service (EMS) outcomes were compared for individuals experiencing a behavioral health crisis who received a response from a co-response team (CRT) or a usual response from the police after a 911 call. METHODS: A prospective, quasi-experimental design was used to examine outcomes of a CRT pilot tested in Indianapolis (August-December 2017). Weighted multivariable models examined effects of study condition (CRT group, N=313; usual-response group, N=315) on immediate booking, emergency detention, and subsequent jail bookings and EMS encounters. Sensitivity of outcomes to follow-up by a behavioral health unit (BHU) was also examined. RESULTS: Individuals in the CRT group were less likely than those in the usual-police-response group to be arrested immediately following the 911 incident (odds ratio [OR]=0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.25-0.92) and were more likely to experience any EMS encounter at 6- and 12-month follow-up (OR range=1.71-1.85, p≤0.015 for all). Response type was not associated with jail bookings at 6 or 12 months. Follow-up BHU services did not reduce bookings or EMS encounters. CRT recipients with BHU follow-up were more likely than those without BHU follow-up to have a subsequent EMS contact (OR range=2.35-3.12, p≤0.001 for all). These findings differed by racial group. CONCLUSIONS: CRT responses may reduce short-term incarceration risk but not long-term EMS demand or risk of justice involvement. Future research should consider the extent to which CRT and follow-up services improve engagement with stabilizing treatment services, which may reduce the likelihood of future crises.
Entities:
Keywords:
Co-response team; Community mental health services; Crisis intervention