Decatur Drug and Alcohol Evaluation Misdemeanor Diversion Program Review
- Study Protocol
- Open Access
- Published:
Pre-arrest diversion to addiction treatment past law enforcement: protocol for the customs-level policing initiative to reduce addiction-related harm, including law-breaking
Health & Justice volume 9, Article number:9 (2021) Cite this article
Abstract
Background
Despite evidence that treatment reduces habit-related harms, including law-breaking and overdose, only a minority of addiction-afflicted individuals receive it. Linking individuals who committed an habit-related crime to habit handling could improve outcomes.
Methods
The aim of this city-wide, pre-arrest diversion plan, Madison Addiction Recovery Initiative (MARI) is to reduce offense and ameliorate health (i.eastward., reduce the overdose deaths) among adults who committed a pocket-sized, non-violent, drug use-related crime past offering them a referral to treatment in lieu of arrest and prosecution of criminal charges. This manuscript outlines the protocol and methods for the MARI program development and implementation. MARI requires its participants to appoint in the recommended treatment, without reoffending, during the half dozen-month program, after which the initial criminal charges are "voided" by the law enforcement agency. The projection, implemented in a mid-size U.South. city, has involved numerous partners, including law enforcement, criminal justice, public health, and academia. It includes training of the police officer workforce and collaboration with clinical partners for treatment need assessment, treatment placement, and peer back up. Programme evaluation includes determinative, process, outcome (participant-level) and exploratory impact (community-level) assessments. For outcome evaluation, we will compare crime (primary consequence), overdose-related offenses, and incarceration-related data 12 months before and 12 months after the index criminal offence between participants who completed (Group 1), started but not completed (Group 2), and were offered but did not first (Group 3) the program, and adults who would take been eligible should MARI existed (Historical Comparison, Group 4). Clinical characteristics will be compared at baseline between Groups 1–two, and pre-post the program within Group 1. Participant baseline data will exist assessed as potential covariates. Surveys of police officers and program completers, and community-level indicators of crime and overdose pre- versus post-program will provide additional data on the program impact.
Discussion
By offering habit handling in lieu of arrest and prosecution of criminal charges, this pre-arrest diversion program has the potential to disrupt the wheel of crime, reduce the likelihood of future offenses, and promote public wellness and condom.
Background
Over the past two decades, the telescopic and touch on of fatal and non-fatal drug overdoses has grown to epidemic proportions in the U.Due south., with both prescription-based and illicit opioids driving this crunch (Hedegaard, Minino, & Warner, 2020). Betwixt 1999 and 2015, 568,699 Americans died due to overdose; in 2015, 63.ane% of 52,404 drug overdose deaths involved an opioid (Scholl, Seth, Kariisa, Wilson, & Baldwin, 2019; Seth, Scholl, Rudd, & Bacon, 2018). This crisis has been paralleled by the increased number of people affected by opioid employ disorder (OUD) (Edlund et al., 2014; Saha et al., 2016). Untreated OUD has been linked to increases in criminal justice involvement (Bukten et al., 2012). In 2013, the economic burden related to the opioid crisis was estimated at $78.5 billion, with a third of this amount owing to negative health consequences of OUD and wellness intendance costs, and a quarter related to the public sector cost, including criminal justice (Florence, Luo, Xu, & Zhou, 2016).
Although strong evidence demonstrates that addiction handling reduces the risk of overdose and other harms, including criminal behaviors, only a minority of people with addiction have accessed handling, and even a smaller proportion have received live-saving, testify-based treatment with medications for OUD (MOUD) (Han, Hedden, Lipari, Copello, & Kroutil, 2015; Jones, Campopiano, Baldwin, & McCance-Katz, 2015). Subpar treatment capacity (i.eastward., insufficient workforce of trained providers) likewise as stigma, misperceptions, and lack of knowledge about treatment options and availability among persons with habit take contributed to the treatment receipt gap (Jones et al., 2015; Robinson & Adinoff, 2018). With a strong relationship between 'active' addiction and criminal activeness (Bukten et al., 2012), constabulary enforcement are the first-responders who frequently run into individuals with addiction engaging in drug utilize-related crime (e.g., theft or drug possession with or without overdose). The 'traditional' law enforcement response to addiction-fueled crime has relied on a criminal justice-driven approach (due east.yard. arrest, prosecution, and/or incarceration).
With longitudinal information indicating substantial reductions in criminal justice involvement amidst persons engaged in addiction treatment (and lack of reductions outside of such treatment) (Bukten et al., 2012), new approaches to policing take emerged aimed at breaking the cycle of crime and addiction.
In 2015, the Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative (PAARI) in Gloucester, Massachusetts relied on police officers to assist individuals with a referral to addiction treatment (Schiff et al., 2017). In Seattle, Washington, the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (Pb) program, a community-based, harm-reduction intervention, offered case management, and linkages to supportive services and treatment in lieu of jail and prosecution, leading to reduced recidivism, as compared to the "usual" criminal justice processing (Collins, Lonczak, & Clifasefi, 2017).
The 'opioid epidemic' afflicted all U.South. states, including Wisconsin, where drug overdose-related deaths claimed lives of 878 people in 2015, and 1074 people in 2016 (Hedegaard et al., 2020). The increasing rates of fatal and non-fatal overdoses, and drug utilize-related criminal offense had stressed the state's local medical and outset-responder infrastructures. To address this escalating crunch, the state's Attorney General launched in 2015 a nationally recognized awareness and prevention campaign, titled Dose of Reality (Wisconsin Department of Justice, 2020). In 2016, the State of Wisconsin Section of Health Services' Epidemiological Profile on Booze and Other Drug Use (Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2016), and the Governor-convened Task Force on Opioids Abuse (Task Force on Opioid Abuse, 2016) farther underscored the land'south commitment to harm reduction and prevention efforts.
From this momentum, building upon existing research evidence on crime and other harm reduction with habit handling, and upon the PAARI and Lead programs' early successes, the Urban center of Madison Police Section joined forces with public health, clinical and bookish partners, and developed an innovative 'community policing' program, named the Madison Habit Recovery Initiative (MARI). MARI emphasized a collaborative, police-customs endeavor that creates linkages to addiction treatment from police officers as a style for reducing criminal offense and overdoses, and improving lives of individuals with addiction and the local community. In 2016, the MARI proposal was submitted for funding consideration to the U.Southward. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Strategies for Policing Innovation (SPI) grant plan, which has prioritized development and evaluation of innovative, evidence-based approaches to address 'chronic' crime (Bureau of Justice Assist, 2012). After a competitive peer-review procedure, a three-year grant was awarded to fund the implementation and evaluation of MARI. This article describes the SPI-approved MARI protocol. The MARI implementation and evaluation findings volition be published in subsequent manuscripts.
Methods
The project design was rooted in the SQUIRE 2.0 standards (Ogrinc et al., 2015), with input from the project's stakeholder-partners.
Design
The chief goal of the MARI program is to reduce crime and crime backsliding of addiction-affected adults, and meliorate health (i.due east., reduce the overdose deaths) past offering treatment to eligible individuals who committed a drug employ-related, modest crime in lieu of arrest and prosecution of criminal charges. MARI is a pre-arrest diversion program. Its participants are not initially arrested or charged. Therefore, the official charge is not documented and is held in cessation through the duration of the MARI program. For program completers, the criminal charges associated with bringing these individuals into MARI are voided (i.e., they do not appear during a criminal background check). Those who exercise not complete MARI have their formal abort charges referred to the Commune or City Attorney'due south Offices at the time they exit the program (Fig. one).The secondary goal is to reduce community-level damage related to untreated addiction, and improve customs well-beingness and safety by connecting eligible individuals to habit treatment to interrupt the cycle of addiction, overdose, and crime.
The MARI programme pattern
Written report timeline
The MARI grant award was announced in Oct 2016 (Fig. 2). The MARI protocol was peer-reviewed by the funding agency reviewers prior to its approving. Post-obit the award proclamation, the MARI team started to gear up the Operations (Ops) Squad and the projection implementation plan. The Ops Team is comprised of numerous stakeholder-partners who have been involved in the MARI program from its inception. In early on 2017, the Ops Squad engaged with additional partners and stakeholders to finalize the procedures for a community-tailored program implementation. The implementation development started by hiring of the MARI Project Coordinator (April 2017); developing grooming materials, and training of all deputed law enforcement officers in the MARI protocol and pre-arrest diversion strategy (Apr–June 2017); and identifying and contracting with the local clinical addiction care provider to serve as the MARI Assessment Hub (July 2017). The MARI Project Coordinator served every bit a liaison between the MPD, the MARI Cess Hub, and the evaluation partner. In August 2017, the BJA SPI Program and assigned Subject Matter Experts canonical the final projection protocol ("Action Plan") for implementing the MARI projection. In Baronial 2017, a "pilot" participant was enrolled to test the project procedures, followed by going "live" with a city-wide participant referral and enrollment on September i, 2017 (Fig. 2).
The MARI Development Timeline
Nosotros originally planned to complete the participant enrollment period in August 2019. Nonetheless, to extend recruitment and increase participant sample size, we requested 2 no-cost projection extensions, one in July 2019 (due to the slower than anticipated start of the projection rollout), and another in July 2020 (due to the coronavirus pandemic's impact). The funding bureau approved these requests, extending the participant enrollment menstruation through August 2020, and overall funding catamenia through Apr 2021. The participants enrolled in August 2020 will complete the project's six-month active follow-up stage in February 2021.
Setting
The program is supported and approved by numerous urban center- and county-level organizations, enabling the Metropolis of Madison Police Department (MPD) to curlicue it out across the city, involving all MPD districts. Madison is a medium size urban center in Wisconsin, USA. The MPD employs 483 commissioned police officers, with approximately 226 assigned to first-responder or patrol duties. Approximately 28% of the MPD officers identify every bit women, and 86% of the incoming officers completed at least 4 years of college education.
Because addiction is a multi-faceted problem, affecting multiple sectors, collaboration among a wide range of partners has been disquisitional. The MARI Ops Team, responsible for the blueprint, development, and implementation of the MARI program, is comprised of representatives from the MPD (recipient of BJA grant award), city/canton public health and human services, a community not-turn a profit injury prevention and advocacy system, the MARI Assessment Hub, treatment providers, and bookish partners.
The program has sought, and been supported by, numerous other local agencies, including the Mayor, Sheriff, Commune and City Attorney Offices, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Burn down Department, Wisconsin Department of Wellness Services, and other stakeholders, such as diverse community advancement groups, treatment providers/programs, and health plans. The perspectives of diverse collaborators and stakeholders have been included throughout the MARI projects. The broader stakeholder-partners and the public accept been invited to the quarterly MARI meetings for sharing information, and discussing ways to optimize MARI's implementation, progress, and sustainability.
Participant eligibility criteria
Individuals are eligible for MARI if they are adults (18 years sometime or older), reside in Dane County, and committed an "eligible" non-tearing, drug use-related criminal offence (Tabular array ane). The offense-related eligibility criteria were finalized during the program development stage by the MARI Ops Squad in collaboration with, and approval from, the County District Attorney's and the City Attorney'southward offices.
The same person could have been referred to MARI more than in one case. If this person did not engage despite repeated referrals, their initial criminal offence, which led to the offset MARI referral, was considered their 'index criminal offense.' If this person engaged during the subsequent referral, the law-breaking which led to MARI date was defined as their 'index crime.' One time they engaged in the program (i.eastward., completed the clinical assessment), they were not eligible to re-commencement it; should they re-offend, they could exist eligible for drug court or other treatment-oriented diversion programs run past the District Attorney Office, outside of the MARI program.
Participant timeline
The arresting officers are responsible for conducting an cess during their investigation to determine if the offending individual meets the MARI eligibility criteria. The MPD officers are trained to identify and assess individuals for MARI eligibility, including whether the committed criminal offense represented a MARI-eligible offense, and was related to addiction. For individuals who are accounted eligible, the arresting officers are directed by the MPD protocols to offer a referral to MARI in lieu of arrest and criminal charges. For individuals who take the offering and enroll in MARI, criminal charges are held in abeyance (i.e., non pressed or filed). Those who decline MARI are arrested or issued citations by the officeholder, and their criminal charges are referred to local prosecutorial offices (e.g., District or City Attorney).
After discussing the MARI program, officers review with eligible, interested individuals the MARI referral/consent form, which outlines the program, and provides the programme and the Assessment Hub contact data. The referral/consent course is filled out past the arresting officer and signed by the individual. The arresting officer bug and notes on the form all citations, then sends the form to the MPD MARI officeholder. The MPD MARI officer is then responsible for verifying each referred person'south eligibility. If the private is accounted ineligible, the MPD MARI officer reaches out to the individual to explicate it, rescind MARI participation, file charges, and offer data on existing addiction treatment resources. If a person is incapacitated (e.g., due to an overdose or intoxication), the arresting officer can send the filled out MARI class to the MPD MARI officer who then attempts to contact the eligible person within the next one-to-2 business days to discuss the program and offer MARI. The MPD's trained Sergeants and the MARI officer provide continued oversight and support to officers for MARI-related assessments, decisions, questions and refresher trainings as needed.
Eligible adults who concur to participate in MARI have their charges held in abeyance, and are referred to the MARI Assessment Hub for clinical cess toward substance utilize disorders (SUDs) and for peer support (e.g., recovery coaches). The MPD MARI officer deeply shares referral information with the MARI Project Coordinator and the Assessment Hub to facilitate the referral. MARI participants are requested to make it touch on with the Assessment Hub within three concern days to schedule their assessment visit.
The Assessment Hub, a local certified addiction handling programme, was selected through a competitive application procedure. The Hub provides clinical assessments, facilitates treatment referral and links MARI participants to the Hub's 'recovery coaches.' The Hub's certified substance abuse counselors complete clinical evaluation to determine the scope and severity of each MARI participant's SUD-related problems, and optimal level of intendance, in accord with the American Society of Habit Medicine (ASAM) Placement Criteria (Mee-Lee, Shulman, Fishman, Gastfriend, & Miller, 2013). The evaluating counselor then provides each participant with a handling plan, and helps connect the participant to peer support services, and the recommended handling services. Treatment program is tailored to each participant needs, preferences, and health plan coverage. The county Human Services assist with treatment funding for those without health plan coverage. MARI participants sign a 'release of medical information' grade allowing the Hub counselors to connect and stay in touch with each participant's treatment provider to track treatment progress during the half dozen-month MARI program. Individuals are deemed as progressing in, and adherent to, treatment ('yes/no') based on the handling provider decision. The MARI officer, Project Coordinator, the Assessment Hub counselors, and a representative from canton Human Services are meeting, on average, weekly, to review all "active" MARI participants' progress.
Participants who adhere to treatment and practise not re-offend during the six-calendar month MARI program are considered "Completers" who then receive a Letter of Completion from the Chief of Police and confirmation that their initial charges have been voided past the MPD. Those who do not complete the program (i.due east., have non engaged at all, or are discharged due to non-adherence) have their initial charges referred to the City or District Attorney'southward Offices at the time of their difference from the MARI program (Fig. i).
Evaluation and outcomes
The evaluation plan for the MARI program has focused on answering questions vital to the program itself, the stakeholders, and the long-term plan sustainability (Fawcett & Schultz, 2008), such as: A) Formative Evaluation: what factors or processes take been associated with promoting versus hindering the program development and implementation? B) Process Evaluation: what has the plan delivered; take participants been satisfied with MARI? C) Consequence Evaluation: how well has the program met its stated objectives, how much and what kind of difference did information technology make for the participants? D) Bear upon Evaluation: how much and what kind of departure did it make on the customs level? To answer these key questions, several evaluation approaches will appraise the MARI projection:
- A).
Determinative Evaluation: Information most the programme evolution and implementation will be nerveless throughout the project to place the facilitators, barriers, and steps taken to overcome identified barriers to program implementation. This noesis will enable learning from the project experiences toward optimizing of future implementation on a larger scale, or in different communities. Documentation of community and stakeholder support and appointment, media coverage, and community/system changes associated with progression of the project are indirect measures of the community-level involvement in MARI, and tin inform sustainability of the MARI approach beyond the grant funding.
- B).
Procedure Evaluation: Assessment of participant engagement in the program, the scope of program services, and participant and MPD officer experiences with the program will help ameliorate sympathize factors contributing to plan effectiveness, price, and, ultimately, sustainability and reproducibility.
The MARI Completers, at the fourth dimension of program go out, complete a survey assessing their satisfaction and experience with the MARI. Police officers completed bearding surveys in the first year and at the stop of the enrollment period of the plan. Both participant and officer surveys, adult by the project team specifically for the MARI programme, include quantitative questions, with Likert calibration responses, and open-ended questions to gather qualitative comments. Descriptive statistics will summarize quantitative data; qualitative analysis methods help analyze the open up-ended question comments and identify major qualitative themes.
Programme engagement (completion of the clinical assessments, completion of the vi-month program among the MARI participants) volition aid evaluate the willingness to participate and interest among the target population in the MARI program. The Assessment Hub counselor tracks each participant treatment adherence ('yes/no') during the program. The MARI MPD Officer monitors each participant's criminal record for whatever new offenses; should a new criminal offence occur, the MPD determines if information technology breeches the MARI program requirements and warrants a participant belch from the MARI program. Descriptive statistics will describe participant engagement in MARI.
- C).
Event Evaluation (participant level): This evaluation will appraise MARI'due south bear on on individuals. The main goal of the MARI projection is to test the hypothesis that facilitating habit treatment, instead of pressing criminal charges, will pb to reduced crime (main outcome) and overdose (secondary outcome) amidst eligible adults who committed small, eligible crime. The outcome evaluation will be completed by comparing offense-related data of the MARI participants 12 months before and 12 months afterward their 'index crime' date (program enrollment), and past contrasting outcomes between dissimilar subgroups of the MARI participants (Non-Engaged: referred only did non engage; Non-Completers: started simply did not complete the program; Completers: successfully completed the programme), and those in a Historical Comparison group, comprised of adults who would have been eligible for MARI, should this plan had existed (Fig. three). In add-on, clinical data, when bachelor, will help evaluate and contrast the baseline clinical characteristics of Not-Completers and Completers, and appraise program impact on clinical features of Completers (Fig. 3).
MARI program outcome evaluation design: three subgroups of the MARI participants and a Historical Comparison group
Crime-related data are available for all MARI participants and those in the Historical Comparison group for the 12 months before, and 12 months after the 'alphabetize offense' (Fig. 3). They are retrieved by the MPD MARI officer from the law enforcement databases, and include data on the number and type of police force contacts and arrests, including data on the overdose-related events, and the number of days of incarceration during a given assessment period. Clinical data are available for participants who completed the clinical assessment (Fig. 3), and include ASAM Placement Criteria-based (Mee-Lee et al., 2013), SUD-relevant information nerveless past the Assessment Hub counselors during the initial clinical assessment (baseline information: both Completers and Non-Completers) and during the terminal clinical assessment (six-calendar month follow-upwards data: Completers only). Both offense and clinical datasets include basic demographic information.
MPD MARI officeholder and the MARI Assessment Hub'due south clinical staff deeply share the information with the MARI Project Coordinator who links the criminal offence and clinical datasets on a participant level, using the unique identification number, assigned to each participant upon the program entry. The Project Coordinator enters the de-identified information into a countersign-protected Excel database prior to sharing this de-identified dataset with the bookish partners for analyses.
Descriptive statistics will summarize outcome data. A Wilcoxon or paired samples t-test volition allow for a comparing of pre-post outcomes within the aforementioned group, and a Mann-Whitney or contained samples t-test will compare between-group outcomes for continuous variables. Chi-square or Fisher's f tests will compare categorical variable-based outcomes. Baseline demographic and, when available, clinical data will be assessed every bit potential covariates in the analyses.
- D).
Bear upon Evaluation (community level): Through improved access to addiction care, the MARI approach, over a longer period of time, has the potential to improve community health and condom, every bit assessed by the community-level reduced rates of crime, overdose, and overdose-related death, and to reduce related cost. Inside the limitations of the MARI project (lack of a comparing community; express project scope, e.g., due to the restricted MARI eligibility criteria; lack of a sufficient mail service-MARI follow-upwards period), the touch of MARI on the community-level indices of safety and health volition exist of an exploratory nature. Amass community-level data will be obtained from the project collaborators who collect such data every bit a part of their routine duties (e.g., city/county-level data on overdose deaths from Vital Statistics (Wisconsin Department of Wellness Services, 2020) or naloxone administration for overdose reversal by the first responders, such as MPD or Ems). Pre- and during-MARI community-level information will be contrasted using a similar approach to that described for event evaluation.
Sample size estimates
Based on the MPD's pre-MARI preliminary data, we estimated that upwards to 160 adults are apprehended annually for drug use-related small-scale crimes and could exist eligible for MARI.
Institutional review board
The University of Wisconsin-Madison Institutional Review Board deemed the project "quality improvement," implementation initiative, and not constituting human being subjects research, as defined nether 45 CFR 46.102(d).
Discussion
This article describes the protocol for an innovative, law enforcement-led, city-broad pre-abort diversion-to-handling project, which aims to reduce crime and criminal justice involvement, and improve treatment engagement and outcomes among adults with habit who committed an "eligible" modest, drug-employ related crime. Those who enter the program accept their charges held in cessation; afterward they successfully complete the half dozen-month program by complying with its requirements (staying engaged in habit treatment, and not re-offending), their initial criminal charges are voided (i.eastward., not nowadays in any criminal justice databases). The protocol described here offers details on the program structure, so it tin can exist considered past others and improved upon, and serve as a model for implementing similar pre-arrest diversion programs.
MPD has incorporated the MARI diversion protocol city-wide into its standard operating procedures, making information technology a permanent part of its MPD services, and arresting the cost to do so. Engaging throughout the project of "primal players" and diverse stakeholders who are routinely involved in the prosecution also as treatment and social services for adult offenders with addiction has been a deliberate footstep viewed past the projection team every bit essential for the program's success and long-term sustainability. If effective, the MARI program model could be expanded beyond the city limits, and extended to other individuals who are currently not eligible for MARI but whose untreated habit might be fueling their criminal activity. For example, MARI focuses on individuals with drug addiction, particularly when it involves opioids, which have driven the overdose epidemic. Equally such, those who committed an alcohol (but not other drug) related criminal offense are non currently eligible for MARI. Similarly, those who are on probation or parole are currently not eligible to enter the MARI plan; this may unintentionally negatively bear upon individuals of colour and other groups, which have been disproportionately involved with criminal justice (Williams, Schiraldi, & Bradner, 2019).
Traditional constabulary enforcement, criminal justice-based approaches have been largely ineffective in dealing with criminal offenses committed by individuals who suffer from the disease of habit (Chandler, Fletcher, & Volkow, 2009). While most law enforcement agencies have bones grooming in the area of mental wellness, few constabulary enforcement agencies in the U.s.a. accept received preparation specific to addiction, or created and implemented protocols to directly facilitate and connect individuals suffering from mental health disorders and/or addiction to clinical assessment and treatment. Protocols like MARI can help advance a greater understanding and appreciation around the disease of habit. Although the MARI program'southward educational content for police force officers has not focused on the 'science of addiction,' it has strived to humanize habit and its treatment, stressed habit every bit a chronic brain disease, for which effective, evidence-based treatments are bachelor, and addressed the deleterious impact on treatment date of addiction-related stigma. To that extent, the in-service grooming for all police officers includes both some didactic cloth, focused on the to a higher place themes, also as testimonies by, and interaction with, individuals in recovery who volunteered for this task. Thousands of officers have been trained in how respond to an overdose incident and relieve a life by administering naloxone (Due north Carolina Harm Reduction Coalition, 2020). The MARI approach can offering law enforcement officers the opportunity to modify a life past creating a pre-arrest diversion pathway to assessment and treatment in lieu of arrest and criminal charges. Pre-arrest diversion protocols like MARI tin can potentially divert countless arrests and referrals for prosecution in the courts for minor offenses, thereby allowing the criminal justice resources to be amend focused, and more than efficient and timely in regards to individuals who commit higher-risk offenses. In addition, moving away from criminal justice centered arroyo, which emphasizes castigating charges, toward community policing approach, which is rooted in scientific evidence (i.eastward., addiction handling saves lives and improves health), can benefit the communities and their trust in, and relationship with, police enforcement officers.
Conclusions
The described pre-arrest diversion plan, which relies on law enforcement to help link adults who committed small-scale, drug use-related crimes to habit handling, has the potential to improve the health and safety of individuals affected by habit, and their communities.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- European monetary system:
-
Emergency Medical Service
- Lead:
-
Police force Enforcement Assisted Diversion
- MARI:
-
Madison Addiction Recovery initiative
- MPD:
-
Madison Constabulary Department
- PAARI:
-
Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative
- SUD:
-
Substance Use Disorder
References
-
Bukten, A., Skurtveit, Due south., Gossop, Thou., Waal, H., Stangeland, P., Havnes, I., & Clausen, T. (2012). Engagement with opioid maintenance handling and reductions in crime: A longitudinal national accomplice study. Habit, 107(2), 393–399.
-
Bureau of Justice Assistance. Strategies for policing innovation. U. S. Department of Justice Part of Justice Programs. Retrieved October two, 2020 from https://bja.ojp.gov/programme/strategies-policing-innovation-spi/overview
-
Chandler, R. M., Fletcher, B. Westward., & Volkow, N. D. (2009). Treating drug abuse and habit in the criminal justice organization: Improving public health and safety. Jama, 301(2), 183–190.
-
Collins, South. Eastward., Lonczak, H. S., & Clifasefi, Southward. L. (2017). Seattle'southward law enforcement assisted diversion (LEAD): Program effects on recidivism outcomes. Evaluation and Programme Planning, 64, 49–56.
-
Edlund, K. J., Martin, B. C., Russo, J. Due east., DeVries, A., Braden, J. B., & Sullivan, M. D. (2014). The role of opioid prescription in incident opioid corruption and dependence among individuals with chronic non-cancer pain: The office of opioid prescription. The Clinical Journal of Hurting, thirty(7), 557.
-
Fawcett, S. B., & Schultz, J. A. (2008). Supporting participatory evaluation using the community tool box online documentation system. In Customs-based participatory research for health, (pp. 419–423). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
-
Florence, C., Luo, F., Xu, Fifty., & Zhou, C. (2016). The economical burden of prescription opioid overdose, abuse and dependence in the U.s., 2013. Medical Care, 54(x), 901.
-
Han, B., Hedden, S., Lipari, R., Copello, Due east., & Kroutil, L. (2015). Receipt of services for behavioral wellness issues amidst adults: Results from the 2014 National Survey on drug employ and wellness. NSDUH Information Review. Retrieved October two, 2020 from https://www.samhsa.gov/information/sites/default/files/NSDUH-DR-FRR3-2014/NSDUH-DR-FRR3-2014/NSDUH-DR-FRR3-2014.pdf
-
Hedegaard, H., Minino, A. M., & Warner, M. (2020). Drug overdose deaths in the The states, 1999-2018. NCHS Data Brief, (356), one–8 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32487285.
-
Jones, C. M., Campopiano, Grand., Baldwin, K., & McCance-Katz, E. (2015). National and state treatment demand and capacity for opioid agonist medication-assisted handling. American Journal of Public Health, 105(8), e55–e63.
-
Mee-Lee, D., Shulman, G., Fishman, Thou. J., Gastfriend, D., & Miller, E. (2013). The ASAM criteria: Treatment criteria for addictive, substance-related and co-occurring conditions, (3rd ed., ) The Alter Companies.
-
North Carolina Harm Reduction Coalition. NCHRC Law Enforcement. Retrieved October 2, 2020 from http://www.nchrc.org/law-enforcement/us-law-enforcement-who-carry-naloxone/
-
Ogrinc, G., Davies, L., Goodman, D., Batalden, P., Davidoff, F., & Stevens, D. (2015). SQUIRE 2.0 (standards for QUality improvement reporting excellence): Revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. American Journal of Critical Care, 24(6), 466–473.
-
Robinson, Southward. M., & Adinoff, B. (2018). The mixed message behind "medication-assisted treatment" for substance apply disorder. The American Periodical of Drug and Booze Abuse, 44(ii), 147–150.
-
Saha, T. D., Kerridge, B. T., Goldstein, R. B., Chou, S. P., Zhang, H., Jung, J., … Huang, B. (2016). Nonmedical prescription opioid utilise and DSM-5 nonmedical prescription opioid use disorder in the United States. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 77(6), 772.
-
Schiff, D. M., Drainoni, M.-L., Weinstein, Z. Thou., Chan, L., Bair-Merritt, Thou., & Rosenbloom, D. (2017). A police force-led habit treatment referral program in Gloucester, MA: Implementation and participants' experiences. Periodical of Substance Corruption Treatment, 82, 41–47.
-
Scholl, L., Seth, P., Kariisa, M., Wilson, N., & Baldwin, Thousand. (2019). Drug and opioid-involved overdose deaths—Us, 2013–2017. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(51–52), 1419.
-
Seth, P., Scholl, 50., Rudd, R. A., & Bacon, South. (2018). Overdose deaths involving opioids, cocaine, and psychostimulants—United states of america, 2015–2016. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(12), 349.
-
Chore Force on Opioid Abuse. (2016). Combating Opioid Abuse 2016. State of Wisconsin. Retrieved October ii, 2020 from https://promise.wi.gov/Documents/ReportOnCombatingOpioidAbuse.pdf
-
Williams, J., Schiraldi, 5. N., & Bradner, 1000. (2019). The Wisconsin customs corrections story. Columbia University Justice Lab. Retrieved October 2, 2020 from https://justicelab.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/Wisconsin%20Community%20Corrections%20Story%20final%20online%20copy.pdf
-
Wisconsin Department of Wellness Services (2016). Wisconsin epidemiological profile on booze and other drugs (P-45718-xvi). Division of Care and Treatment Services and Division of Public Health and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute Retrieved October ii, 2020 from https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/publications/p4/p45718-16.pdf.
-
Wisconsin Department of Health Services (2020). Substance use: Drug overdose deaths dashboard Retrieved October 2, 2020 from https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/aoda/drug-overdose-deaths.htm.
-
Wisconsin Department of Justice. (2020). Dose of Reality. Retrieved October half-dozen, 2020 from https://doseofrealitywi.gov/virtually/
Acknowledgements
The MARI squad has been supported and received technical assistance from the project-assigned subject affair experts, Stacy Ward and Scott Decker, and staff from the SPI projection Training and Technical Aid provider through the Center for Naval Analysis, and had an opportunity to learn from the experiences of other projects, funded through the Strategies for Policing Innovation (SPI) machinery, during the SPI briefing, which took identify in Washington, DC in 2017. The MARI team would also like to give thanks Jim Powell from the Metropolis of Madison Police force Department for his aid throughout the projection.
Funding
This projection was supported past Grant No. 2016-WY-BX-0004 awarded past the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). The BJA is a component of the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Role for Victims of Law-breaking, and the SMART Role. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The funding agency had no involvement in the conceptualization of the project design; it canonical the project protocol prior to the honor initiation.
Writer information
Affiliations
Contributions
AEZ: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing (original typhoon), Supervision, Funding Acquisition. VMW: Investigation, Writing (reviewing and editing). JB: Investigation, Project Assistants, Writing (reviewing and editing). CN: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing (reviewing and editing), Supervision, Funding Conquering. JF: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing (reviewing and editing), Supervision, Funding Acquisition. TN: Investigation, Writing (reviewing and editing). SJ: Methodology, Investigation, Writing (reviewing and editing), Supervision. All authors read and approved the concluding manuscript.
Authors' information
AEZ is a family medicine and addiction medicine medico, tenured professor, and a Vice Chair of Research at the Department of Family unit and Community Medicine at Penn State College of Medicine. VMW is a doctoral student in Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. JB is a retired captain of the City of Madison Police Section (MPD), and a project coordinator at Safe Communities Madison-Dane County, Inc., a local non-profit focused on promoting customs health and safety. CN and JF are captains at the MPD. THN is a medical educatee at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Schoolhouse of Medicine and Public Health. SCJ is a Wellness Teaching Specialist at the Public Health Madison & Dane Canton.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The University of Wisconsin-Madison Institutional Review Board deemed the project (reference #2017–0919) a "quality improvement," implementation project, non constituting homo subjects research, as defined nether 45 CFR 46.102(d).
Consent for publication
Non applicative.
Competing interests
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
Boosted information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open up Access This commodity is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution four.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in whatever medium or format, as long as yous give advisable credit to the original writer(south) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party cloth in this article are included in the commodity'south Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the cloth. If material is non included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, yous will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/past/four.0/. The Creative Eatables Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/nix/one.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and Permissions
About this commodity
Cite this article
Zgierska, A.E., White, V.M., Balles, J. et al. Pre-arrest diversion to addiction treatment by police force enforcement: protocol for the community-level policing initiative to reduce habit-related harm, including law-breaking. Health Justice 9, 9 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-021-00134-due west
-
Received:
-
Accepted:
-
Published:
-
DOI : https://doi.org/ten.1186/s40352-021-00134-w
Keywords
- Substance use disorder
- Addiction
- Opioid
- Community policing
- Crime
- Pre-abort diversion
Source: https://healthandjusticejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40352-021-00134-w
0 Response to "Decatur Drug and Alcohol Evaluation Misdemeanor Diversion Program Review"
Post a Comment