Rearrest and Linkage to Mental Health Services Among Clients of the Clark County Mental Health Court Program

Regional Research Institute for Human Services, Portland State University, Oregon 97207, USA.
Psychiatric Services (Impact Factor: 2.41). 08/2005; 56(7):853-7. DOI: 10.1176/
Source: PubMed


This study examined rearrest and linkage to mental health services among 368 misdemeanants with severe and persistent mental illness who were served by the Clark County Mental Health Court (MHC). This court, established in April 2000, is based on the concepts of therapeutic jurisprudence. This study addressed the following questions about the effectiveness of the Clark County MHC: Did MHC clients receive more comprehensive mental health services? Did the MHC successfully reduce recidivism? Were there any client or program characteristics associated with recidivism?
A secondary analysis of use of mental health services and jail data for the MHC clients enrolled from April 2000 through April 2003 was conducted. The authors used a 12-month pre-post comparison design to determine whether MHC participants experienced reduced rearrest rates for new offenses, reduced probation violations, and increased mental health services 12 months postenrollment in the MHC compared with 12 months preenrollment.
The overall crime rate for MHC participants was reduced 4.0 times one year postenrollment in the MHC compared with one year preenrollment. One year postenrollment, 54 percent of participants had no arrests, and probation violations were reduced by 62 percent. The most significant factor in determining the success of MHC participants was graduation status from the MHC, with graduates 3.7 times less likely to reoffend compared with nongraduates.
The Clark County MHC successfully reduced rearrest rates for new criminal offenses and probation violations and provided the mental health support services to stabilize mental health consumers in the community.

Full-text preview

Available from:
    • "In addition to the impact on mental health and recidivism, studies have noted a " dose effect " of MHCs on recidivism outcomes . The impact of MHCs is maximized when participants receive the " full dose, " meaning that they successfully complete the program (i.e., graduate; Anestis & Carbonell, 2014; Herinckx et al., 2005; Hiday, Wales, & Ray, 2013; Hiday, Ray, & Wales, 2014; Moore & Hiday, 2006; Steadman et al., 2011). Relative to noncompleters who only receive a " partial dose " of MHC, reductions in recidivism among completers have been maintained for two years after leaving the program (Burns, Hiday, & Ray, 2013; Hiday & Ray, 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The current study examined the impact of a mental health court (MHC) on mental health recovery, criminogenic needs, and recidivism in a sample of 196 community-based offenders with mental illness. Using a pre-post design, mental health recovery and criminogenic needs were assessed at the time of MHC referral and discharge. File records were reviewed to score the Level of Service/Risk-Need-Responsivity instrument (Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2008) to capture criminogenic needs, and a coding guide was used to extract mental health recovery information at each time point. Only mental health recovery data were available at 12 months post-MHC involvement. Recidivism (i.e., charges) was recorded from police records over an average follow-up period of 40.67 months post-MHC discharge. Case management adherence to the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model of offender case management was also examined. Small but significant improvements were found for criminogenic needs and some indicators of mental health recovery for MHC completers relative to participants who were prematurely discharged or referred but not admitted to the program. MHC completers had a similar rate of general recidivism (28.6%) to cases not admitted to MHC and managed by the traditional criminal justice system (32.6%). However, MHC case plans only moderately adhered to the RNR model. Implications of these results suggest that the RNR model may be an effective case management approach for MHCs to assist with decision-making regarding admission, supervision intensity, and intervention targets, and that interventions in MHC contexts should attend to both criminogenic and mental health needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    Law and Human Behavior 05/2015; 39(5). DOI:10.1037/lhb0000135 · 2.16 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "e who have been neglected by the mental health system ( 2003 , p . 7 ) . No MHC study has focused specifically on the rela - tionship between target arrest type and outcomes . Many evaluations have examined MHCs that do not accept defendants with a felony charge ( Boothroyd et al . 2003 ; Christy et al . 2005 ; Dirks - Linhorst and Linhorst 2012 ; Herinckx et al . 2005 ; Hiday et al . 2013 ; Trupin and Richards 2003 ) , while others did not include target arrest as a covariate ( Cosden et al . 2003 , 2005 ; Frailing 2010 ) . 1 Only two studies have included a measure of target arrest charge type in predicting recidivism ( Burns et al . 2013 ; 1 Moore and Hiday ( 2006 ) used charge type to create a sev"
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Using a statewide database of mental health court (MHC) defendants, this study examines criminal justice outcomes by target arrest offense type. Findings suggest that defendants with a felony are less likely to complete MHC but those who do are at no greater risk of recidivism post-exit than those with a misdemeanor. In terms of jail days, both completers and noncompleters with a felony had reductions in jail days; however, misdemeanor defendants, especially those who did not complete MHC, had increases. We discuss why MHC supervision may sometimes have a negative effect and offer recommendations on how courts might modify supervision.
    Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research 06/2014; 42(3). DOI:10.1007/s10488-014-0572-2 · 3.44 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "h shorter duration of participants ' time in this study ' s MHC in comparison with other MHCs ( 4 – 6 months vs . 12 – 18 months ) , the proportion of participants who graduated , three - fifths , is in the middle of graduation rates reported in both misdemeanor and felony mental health courts ( 31% – 80% , see Dirks - Linhorst & Linhorst , 2012 ; Herinckx et al . , 2005 ; Hiday & Ray , 2010 ; McNiel & Binder , 2007 ; Moore & Hiday , 2006 ; Redlich et al . , 2010 ) . It indicates that misdemeanor MHCs can achieve the same results of setting participants on a new law - abiding path with a shorter time period if there are adequate structures , treatment , services , and supports . Locating an optimal dura"
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mental health courts (MHCs), nontraditional problem-solving courts designed to address underlying causes of offending rather than apportion guilt and punishment, have been reported to reduce offending among persons with mental illness and consequently have been spreading. Graduation from a MHC has been found to be a major predictor of reduced recidivism; yet few studies have examined factors affecting MHC graduation. This study examines what participants brought to MHC, their processing in MHC, and their behaviors during MHC. It found that noncompliant participant behaviors during MHC had the strongest impact on graduation, increasing the odds of failure to graduate and reducing, if not eliminating, the direct effects on completion of the risk factors participants brought into court. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
    Psychology Public Policy and Law 05/2014; 20(2-2):191-199. DOI:10.1037/law0000008 · 1.93 Impact Factor
Show more