Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bailey et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: