Information sharing between the National Health Service and criminal justice system in the United Kingdom

“Dare to Share”: Improving Information Sharing and Risk Assessment in Multiteam Systems Managing Offender Probation

Managing offenders released from prison requires a multiteam system (MTS) approach, with teams from across police, probation, and other criminal justice agencies. However, public inquiries highlight current approaches are impaired by poor information sharing that compromises risk assessment and recall decisions, which can allow serious further offences to occur. Little research has focused on the causes of these information sharing difficulties. The current study draws on the perspectives and experiences of probation and police officers to improve understanding of causes of information sharing difficulties. The research is conducted within the context of a new enhanced information sharing ‘Direct Access’ initiative implemented in one region of the UK (Devon and Cornwall) that permits probation to directly access police information technology systems. This provides a novel opportunity to cross validate MTS theory to the real-world context of offender management and considers what works in practise to overcome information sharing challenges. Eleven semi-structured interviews were conducted with police (N = 4) and probation (N = 7) officers. Thematic analysis revealed six themes: i) information sharing difficulties and impact; ii) causes of information sharing difficulties; iii) impact of ‘Direct Access’ on information sharing practices; iv) workload inequality; v) training; and vi) evolution of ‘Direct Access’. Overall, findings highlight that information sharing difficulties are causes by not knowing what information to request or share, limited resources, lack of clarity about General Data Protection Regulation and concern about consequences of breaching this. These barriers can result in delays and failures to share information, which hinders the accuracy of risk assessments and ability to safeguard. Findings also highlight that providing statutory partners with ‘Direct Access’ to I.T systems can improve the relevance and timeliness of information. However, ‘daring to share’ is not enough to address trust issues without also clarifying expectations regarding information use and perceived workload inequalities.

Information sharing across mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders: Perspectives of people with serious mental illnesses and their family members

OBJECTIVE

The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illnesses in the criminal legal system has spurred information-sharing initiatives to transmit information between mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders with the goal of improving resources and streamlining access to care. However, no research to date has examined the perspectives of people with mental illnesses who have their information shared across these systems or the perspectives of their family members. This study examined the perspectives on mental health-criminal legal system information sharing among people with serious mental illnesses and a history of arrest, as well as their family members.

METHODS

Researchers interviewed 24 clients with serious mental illnesses and a history of arrest who are enrolled in a randomized, controlled trial of a police-mental health Linkage System as well as 11 of their family members. Participants were recruited and interviewed between November 2020 and February 2021. A thematic analysis was used to code and analyze all interview transcripts.

RESULTS

Study participants articulated perceived benefits and concerns around cross-system information sharing. There was strong support for information sharing in both directions, with the anticipation that such information sharing can prevent unnecessary arrest and/or incarceration, promote positive and safe interactions with criminal legal system professionals, and foster greater understanding and access to treatment. Concerns were more limited and largely related to perceived stigma around mental illnesses and the potential consequences of such stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

While concerns about information sharing should be considered, study participants overwhelmingly perceived the sharing of information between mental health providers and criminal legal stakeholders as a positive intervention. Such perspectives can be understood as a pragmatic choice in the face of criminal legal system contact and additional research could guide programmatic and policy changes.

Using multiple case studies of health and justice services to inform the development of a new complex intervention for prison-leavers with common mental health problems (Engager)

BACKGROUND

People in the criminal justice system have complex needs but often do not make use of services outside of prison, in many cases due to poorly joined up working between health and criminal justice services. The 'Engager' programme aimed to develop a complex collaborative care intervention for people leaving prison with common mental health problems that could support their transition into the community and facilitate joined up working between health, justice and social services. To augment our core intervention theory, we wanted to learn from innovative and forward-thinking services providing interagency support and/or treatment for people experiencing common mental health problems within the criminal justice system. We wanted to identify key elements of interagency practice to understand what was and was not effective in engaging people, maintaining their contact and improving mental health and other aspects of their lives.

METHOD

We used a multiple case study design with a focused ethnographic approach in four study sites. Data came from three sources (documents, field notes and semi-structured interviews) underwent a framework analysis.

RESULTS

We identified seven main themes, namely: collaboration, client engagement, client motivation, supervision, therapeutic approach, peers and preparations for ending. Engaging and motivating clients was dependent on the relationship built with the professional. This relationship was developed through building trust and rapport, which required time and respectful, open and honest communication. Professionals were often unable to build this relationship effectively if they did not work in effective interagency collaborations, particularly those which included shared practices and were supported by effective supervision.

CONCLUSIONS

The multiple case study design contributed insights as to how health and justice services work together. The main themes identified are well known factors in health and justice co-working. However, the novel insights were gleaned examining interdependence and interactions in complex, multifactorial phenomena and practice, in particular the importance of shared practice and supervision models. The approach of selecting a small number of cases representing identified knowledge gaps contributed a valuable addition to the program theory and delivery for an innovative complex intervention.

Interagency collaboration models for people with mental ill health in contact with the police: a systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify existing evidence on interagency collaboration between law enforcement, emergency services, statutory services and third sector agencies regarding people with mental ill health.

DESIGN

Systematic scoping review. Scoping reviews map particular research areas to identify research gaps.

DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY

ASSIA, CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library databases, Criminal Justice Abstracts, ERIC, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PROSPERO and Social Care Online and Social Sciences Citation Index were searched up to 2017, as were grey literature and hand searches. Eligible articles were empirical evaluations or descriptions of models of interagency collaboration between the police and other agencies.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

Screening and data extraction were undertaken independently by two researchers. Arksey's framework was used to collate and map included studies.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five studies were included. The majority of articles were of descriptions of models (28%), mixed methods evaluations of models (18%) and single service evaluations (14%). The most frequently reported outcomes (52%) were 'organisational or service level outcomes' (eg, arrest rates). Most articles (53%) focused on adults with mental ill health, whereas others focused on adult offenders with mental ill health (17.4%). Thirteen models of interagency collaboration were described, each involving between 2 and 13 agencies. Frequently reported models were 'prearrest diversion' of people with mental ill health (34%), 'coresponse' involving joint response by police officers paired with mental health professionals (28.6%) and 'jail diversion' following arrest (23.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 13 different interagency collaboration models catering for a range of mental health-related interactions. All but one of these models involved the police and mental health services or professionals. Several models have sufficient literature to warrant full systematic reviews of their effectiveness, whereas others need robust evaluation, by randomised controlled trial where appropriate. Future evaluations should focus on health-related outcomes and the impact on key stakeholders.