1 / 83

Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT “ACT + __________”: Forensic Assertive Community Treatment

Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT “ACT + __________”: Forensic Assertive Community Treatment . Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT InterAct for Change 3805 Edwards Road, Suite 500 Cincinnati, Ohio 45209 513-458-6733 jramos@ohioactcenter.org. Welcome. Thanks Introductions Outline:

Patman
Télécharger la présentation

Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT “ACT + __________”: Forensic Assertive Community Treatment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT “ACT + __________”: Forensic Assertive Community Treatment

  2. Ohio Coordinating Center for ACT InterAct for Change 3805 Edwards Road, Suite 500 Cincinnati, Ohio 45209 513-458-6733 jramos@ohioactcenter.org

  3. Welcome Thanks Introductions Outline: What is the problem? What are the solutions? (FACT is one…) What is FACT? How do I start a FACT Team? What are existing FACT Teams doing?

  4. Do you know the lingo? (GAME)

  5. Why focus on Reentry/Diversion? High numbers incarcerated People with mental illness and co-occurring disorders are significantly over-represented in the criminal justice system

  6. National statistics: correctional population (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003)

  7. National statistics: correctional population (Gains 2002) • 11,400,000/ yr. booked into jails • 12,500,000/yr. booked into jails (Karberg 2004) • 621,000 any given day (jail) • 1920-1980:100/100,000, since 1980: 400/100,00 • Combined rate of prison and jail: 700/100,000

  8. National statistics: MI in CJ (Council of State Governments 2002) • 700,000: the number of adults entering jail with active symptoms of an SMI • 3-5 times: statistical likelihood that a person with an SMI will be incarcerated relative to individual without a SMI. • 15-16%:percent of individuals in prison and jail with a SMI • 2.8-5%: Rate of SMI in general population

  9. National statistics: MI in CJ (Cuddeback et al 2005) • Individual with SMI (in a given year): • 1.5 times more likely to be jailed than hospitalized (psychiatric) • 8 times more likely to be incarcerated than hospitalized in state psychiatric hospital

  10. National statistics: reentry • 4,916,480: the number of people on probation or parole in 2004. (Bureau of Justice) • Over 7,000,000 people are released annually from local correctional facilities (Re-entry policy council)

  11. National: "Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates" BJS(2006) • Local jail inmates • 54 percent of symptoms of mania, • 30 percent major depression and • 24 percent psychotic disorder, such as delusions or hallucinations. • State prisoners • 43 percent of had symptoms of mania, • 23 percent major depression and • 15 percent psychotic disorder. • Federal prisoners • 35 percent of had symptoms of mania, • 16 percent major depression and • 10 percent psychotic disorder.

  12. National statistics:

  13. National Statistics: Prison Recidivism (BJS) (re-arrest) • Mirror the national

  14. National Statistics: prison recidivism: 1994 (BJS) Rearrest within 3 years • 67.5% of prisoners released in 1994 were re-arrested within 3 years • The re-arrest rate for property offenders, drug offenders, and public-order offenders • 73.8% for property offenders • 66.7% for drug offenders • 62.2% for public-order offenders • The re-arrest rate for violent offenders • 61.7%

  15. National Statistics: prison recidivism (BJS) Reconviction within 3 years • Overall 46.9% • - violent offenders 39.9%, • - property offenders 53.4% • - public-order offenders 42.0% • - drug offenders 47.0% Returned to prison within 3 years • The 1994 recidivism study: 51.8%

  16. Ohio statistics: Prison • Mirror the national • 52%: the recidivism rate for the SMI population (Parole). • 20% of SMD population develop new charges • 32% return to prison on technical violations SOURCE= ODRC

  17. What is creating the problem? Q: Is the problem lack of access to MH TX and/or poor efficacy? • Prisons have become hospitals • Inpt. commitment hard to get • Not engaged/engaged well • Criminalization of Behavior • Fisher at al (2002): • 2 groups of SMI: • 47% had no previous hospitalization • 53% had HX of hospitalizations: (1-40) • 41% had contact with CJ in past 12 months A: Appears to be: both access and efficacy

  18. The Challenge • What can criminal justice do differently? • What can the MH/SA/Housing/Health treatment systems do differently? • What can legislators/ funders/ policy folks do? • How can they work together differently? Reponses: Federal/ State/ Local

  19. Addressing the Problem:Federal Responses The President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health “The Commission recommends widely adopting adult criminal justice and juvenile justice diversion and re-entry strategies to avoid the unnecessary criminalization and extended incarceration on non-violent adult and juvenile offenders with mental illnesses.”

  20. Addressing the Problem:Federal Responses • Legislative Activity – The Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (S.B. 1194) • SAMHSA • Targeted capacity expansion grants • GAINS/TAPA technical assistance center • 1 800 311- 4246 • http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov

  21. Addressing the Problem:State Responses • Council of State Governments Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project • www.consensusproject.org • State Flexibility with Federal Programs – Bazelon Center Reports (benefits/housing/ accessing services) • Prisons • Ohio- RTUs • New York-Inmate Observation Program • Oregon-DOC Co-occurring Disorders Program • Indiana – Therapeutic Communities

  22. Addressing the Problem: Local Response • Jails • CBT work • Forensic PATH Partnerships • Post-Booking Diversion Programs • Community Reentry • APIC Model • Jails – Brad H. Settlement in NY • Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Teams

  23. Addressing the problem: Local Responses • Law Enforcement • Police Dispatcher Training • Police-Based Specialized Responses • Police Response – CIT • Police-Mental Health Partnership Response • Courts • Mental Health Courts • Drug Courts • MH systems • FACT • Forensic PATH • Specialized clinical interventions: CBT

  24. Addressing the Problem:Ohio Responses • Services: • ODRC Prison: RTU/ Staff Training • Community: CIT/ MH Courts/ FACT • Collaborative: • Kitchen Cabinet • Justice Stratton: ACMIC • ODRC

  25. Addressing the Problem: OhioODRC • ODRC structure: • Who is MI? (C1) • Prison TX: RTU/MH TX • Reentry: com link/TX team (flowchart) • Packet (flowchart) • Process • Content

  26. Addressing the Problem:ODRC :Community efforts Citizen circles CORE ACMIC: benefits/housing/accessing services/ collaboration/ employment Benefits pilot Employment FACT

  27. One solution is (“FACT”):Forensic Assertive Community Treatment ACT FOR “FORENSIC POPULATIONS” • Evidenced- based for MH (Access and efficacy) • Hospital/ engagement/ housing/ communication • Emerging Best Practice • 2 themes: • Comprehensive and Collaborative • Goals and Roles

  28. One solution is (“FACT”):Forensic Assertive Community Treatment • ACT+ Forensic/CJ specific: • Personnel/ Collaboration • Skills/Knowledge/Competencies • Resources (& Services) • Clear Goals/Roles • Population(s)

  29. What is ACT? ACT +____________ Resource: ACT Training Binder/ OCCA/ ACT Training Brochure/ 5122-29-29

  30. ACT (Assertive Community Treatment) is: • Multidisciplinary team, working together, who • strive to meet all psychosocial TX needs, of • clients not engaged in traditional CM; in order to • maximize opportunities for recovery.

  31. What is ACT? Who is the multidisciplinary TX Team? • Psychiatrist • Team Leader • Nurse • Substance Abuse Team Member • Employment Specialist • Independently Licensed Therapist • Mental Health Professionals • Peer Specialist

  32. What is ACT? • How does the team work together? ACT teamwork elements: • Individual (Shared Caseload approach) • Specialist/Generalist Model • Critical for teamwork= “everyone is a CM” • Structural (Meetings): • Team Meetings • Daily/ TX Planning /Clinical Supervision Group • Clinical (Core Processes): • Continuous collaboration: • Assess—Plan—Serve—Eval

  33. What is ACT? • How does ACT strive to provide all needed services? • Intensive/frequent contacts • Assertive outreach/engagement • Focus on symptom management and everyday problems in living • Ready access in times of crisis • Essential other engagement • Comprehensive: Team is the single point of clinical responsibility

  34. What is ACT? • Who are the clients not engaged? • Top 10% • Co-occurring disorders • DX: top 4 • Engaged by other systems/institutions • Revolving door/Hospital/Crisis • Not engaged but demonstrate high service need: • Functional impairment

  35. What is ACT? • How is ACT recovery focused? • Holistic approach • Incorporates client as active part of treatment team • Addresses fragmentation of MH system • Provides choice • It is effective: • An Evidenced- Based Practice: • Evidence from 25+ years of research establishing the model’s effectiveness • Uniformity of model and practice ensures consistent positive outcomes

  36. What is the evidence for effectiveness of ACT?(Why should we do it?)

  37. ACT: The Most Widely Researched Model of Case Management • Bedell, J. R., Cohen, N. L., & Sullivan, A. (2000). Case management: The current best practices and the next generation of innovation. Community Mental Health Journal, 36, 179-194. • Latimer, E. (1999). Economic impacts of assertive community treatment: A review of the literature. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 44, 443-454. • Bond, G. R., Drake, R. E., Mueser, K. T., & Latimer, E. (2001). Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental illness: Critical ingredients and impact on patients. Disease Management & Health Outcomes, 9, 141-159. • Bond, G. R., McGrew, J. H., & Fekete, D. M. (1995). Assertive outreach for frequent users of psychiatric hospitals: A meta-analysis. Journal of Mental Health Administration, 22, 4-16. • Bond, G. R., Pensec, M., Dietzen, L., McCafferty, D., Giemza, R., & Sipple, H. W. (1991). Intensive case management for frequent users of psychiatric hospitals in a large city: A comparison of team and individual caseloads. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 15(1), 90-98. • Boyer, S. L., & Bond, G. R. (1999). Does assertive community treatment reduce burnout? A comparison with traditional case management. Mental Health Services Research, 1, 31-45.

  38. Summary of ACT Outcomes (Bond et al. meta-analysis: 25 controlled studies) • Lower use of inpatient services • Better quality of life • More independent living/stability • Better substance abuse outcomes (when a substance abuse component is included) • Higher rates of competitive employment (when supported employment component is included) • Greater consumer and family member satisfaction • Higher rates of treatment retention

  39. The Evidence: ACT • An EBP: • Model/ Positive, Predictable Results/ Reproducible/ Fidelity Scale • The ACT Literature shows that: • A high fidelity team, as measured by DACTS, produce predictable, positive results. • These are the 4 parts of an EBP!

  40. The Evidence: FACT • If ACT is good then FACT should help: • Housing/ hospital/ engagement/ satisfaction/ coordination/work/SA TX • Elements which appear to help recidivism (Clark1999; Steadman 2005; SAMHSA 2004; Veysey 1997) • Emerging Best Practice • The evidence is being collected (sort of) to: • Clearly articulate model • ID the predictable positive results • Develop the fidelity tool Resources: FACT Bibliography/ Misc. Forensic Articles/OCCA

  41. What is Forensic ACT? • Literature/Emerging Expert Consensus: • Divergent Models • Essential Elements • 2 themes: • Goals and Roles • Comprehensive and Collaborative • ACT + CJ SPECIFIC__

  42. What is Forensic ACT? • ACT + __________ • Keep the EBP Model of ACT • Some ACT Model questions for FACT: • LOS • Outside resource use • General Adaptations: • Intercept point/Population: • Reentry or Diversion • Adaptations: • With/without CJ team member • Resource options: • With/Without residential

  43. The Evidence: FACT • Lambertti, J. (2004). New approaches to preventing incarceration of severely mentally ill adults. Psychiatric Times, 21(3). • Lambertti, J. S., Weisman, R., & Faden, D. I. (2004). Forensic Assertive Community Treatment: preventing incarceration of adults with severe mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 55, 1285-1293. • Lurigio, A. J., Fallon, J. R., & Dincin, J. (2000). Helping the mentally ill in jails adjust to community life: a description of a post release ACT program and its clients. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(5), 532-548. • McCoy, M., Roberts, D., Hanrahan, P., Clay, R. & Luchins, D. (2004). Jail linkage assertive community treatment services for individuals with mental illness. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 27(3), 243-250.

  44. The Evidence: FACT: Cost Effectiveness and Capacity Cuddeback, Morrissey and Cusack (in press 2007) • Cost effectiveness: MH and CJ $ • Recidivism (hosp/crisis/CJ) • Argue that up to 60% of their SMI population have access to ACT (relative to about 20% without CJ) (this is higher than in OH- where we believe up to 10%) • AT least 3 x (up to 5x) as many ACT Teams when CJ involvement considered as additional eligibility criterion

  45. What is Forensic ACT?Emerging Literature/Consensus • FACT indicators of success (Lamberti, 2004) • Outcomes goals include specific CJ goals • Specific forensic population • Clear roles for MH and CJ • Strive for Treatment and support vs. coercive extension of supervision 2 themes: • Goals and Roles • Comprehensive and Collaborative • Essential Elements

  46. What is Forensic ACT? Essential elements ACT + __________ • ACT: • MH services • + Forensic/CJ specific: • 1. Team Personnel/ Collaboration • 2. Skills/Knowledge/Competencies • 3. Resources (& Services) • 4. Goals (& Roles) • 5. Population

  47. What is Forensic ACT? Essential elements- Discussion ACT Fidelity ACT + __________ • ACT Model/Fidelity Questions: • LOS • Outside Resources

  48. What is Forensic ACT? Comprehensive and Collaborative • 1. ACT + Team Personnel/ Collaboration: • CJ on team • CJ linked • Designated • Communication plan Resources: FACT Articles/Select Resource List/ FACT Presentations/Example Contact List

  49. What is Forensic ACT? Comprehensive and Collaborative • 2. ACT + Skills/ Knowledge/Competencies What are the CJ specific clinical skills/knowledge? Examples: • CJ knowledge of system/process • Stages of change/ Motivational interviewing • CBT/ Thinking errors • Cultural competency • Integrated treatment • Staff safety Resources: Massaro/ Rotter/ OCCA Lists: SO info and Misc. Resources/ OCCA

  50. What is Forensic ACT? Comprehensive and Collaborative 3. ACT + Resources ( &Services)which appear to help reduce recidivism through engagement (Lamberti 1997&2004; Clark1999; Steadman 2005; SAMHSA 2004; Veysey 1997) • ACT Services • Housing • Work • Benefits • Money • Transitional Resources • Rep Payee Outside resources? Resources: ACT Model/ Personnel on team/OCCA

More Related