How many assertive community treatment teams do we need?

How Young Adults with Serious Mental Health Diagnoses Navigate Poverty Post-emancipation: The Complex Roles of Community Mental Health Services & Informal Social Support

Serious mental health diagnoses are prevalent among youth who "age out" of foster care by reaching the maximum age for child welfare service eligibility. Post-emancipation, little is known about how youth engage in community mental health services, or leverage informal social networks, to navigate independence. Twenty emancipating youth completed three interviews over 16 months. All emancipated into poverty; most lived alone and initially connected to adult community mental health teams. Four service use and informal support profiles emerged from analysis: (1) Navigators (n = 2) actively used mental health services and provided limited informal support; Treaders (n = 9) passively used mental health services and heavily exchanged informal support; Survivors (n = 5) used mental health services when in crisis and heavily provided informal support; and Strugglers (n = 4) avoided mental health services and took resources from informal connections. Findings have implications for both child and adult mental health and social service providers.

A Qualitative Evaluation of an Adapted Assertive Community Treatment Program: Perspectives During COVID-19

The Pinellas County Empowerment Team (PCET) was an adapted assertive community treatment (ACT) program created to meet the needs of Pinellas County residents with serious behavioral health concerns and high frequency of hospitalization (medical and psychiatric) and incarceration. Recent research demonstrates that individuals participating in ACT programs can transition to lower-intensity services. To understand the needs and barriers in transitioning PCET clients to lower-intensity services and the unique experiences during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the researchers conducted a qualitative evaluation which includes a case record review and in-depth interviews with clients of PCET and staff members. Our findings indicated several barriers to transitioning PCET clients, including a lack of sufficient behavioral health support outside the ACT program and some clients' concerns regarding their abilities once out of the program.

Patterns of Service Use in Intensive Case Management: A Six Year Longitudinal Study

An Intensive Case Management (ICM) intervention has been developed in Lausanne, Switzerland. It aims to promote access to care for people with severe mental disorders who have difficulties to engage with mental health services because of the severity of their disorders and/or their marginality. ICM embrace components of assertive community treatment and critical time intervention. It is time limited and focused on critical phases of recovery. The goal of this study was to examine the heterogeneity of service use patterns of people who required ICM interventions and identify differences in patterns of duration and timing of the intervention. Records of 471 patients from the Department of Psychiatry of Lausanne University Hospital for whom the ICM team intervention was requested were analysed over a 6 year period with discrete sequential-state analysis. Trajectories could be split between six meaningful clusters including service light use and critical time intervention (58.0%), transition to long-term regular ambulatory-care (11.3%), partial transition to ambulatory care (14.4%), alternative to hospitalization (10.4%), continued ICM (4.9%) and long hospital stays (1.1%). Diagnoses of substance abuse were overrepresented among heavy users and diagnoses of schizophrenia were the most frequent diagnostic overall. Profiles of service use for ICM patients were very diverse. Long term interventions were frequently not necessary. A time-limited intervention was likely sufficient to stabilize the situation and/or engage the patient in care. A small number of situations required a sustained and long-term investment and did not always allowed for a reduction in the need for hospitalization. A general reflection on alternatives to hospitalization must be pursued, in particular for these patients.

Growth of IPS Supported Employment Programs in the United States: An Update

OBJECTIVE

Individual placement and support (IPS), an evidence-based supported employment practice, is a core service in community mental health in the United States. Several factors promote the growth of IPS, including a network of 24 states participating in a learning community devoted to expanding IPS services. This study examined growth of IPS in the United States from 2016 to 2019, comparing growth rates for states within and outside the learning community.

METHODS

This national survey included telephone interviews with 70 representatives from state mental health and vocational rehabilitation agencies in 50 states and the District of Columbia, replicating methods of a 2016 survey. The primary outcomes were the number of IPS programs and clients served. The survey inquired about four indicators of state-level support for IPS implementation and sustainment: collaboration between state agencies, independent fidelity reviews, technical assistance and training, and funding.

RESULTS

In 2019, 41 (80%) of 50 states and the District of Columbia had IPS services, with 857 IPS programs serving an estimated 43,209 clients. Between 2016 and 2019, the number of programs increased from 272 to 486 in 22 learning-community states and two learning-community counties, and from 251 to 371 in 18 states outside the learning community. State-level support for IPS was significantly greater in learning-community states, compared with non-learning-community states.

CONCLUSIONS

IPS services expanded substantially in the United States between 2016 and 2019. Learning-community states had more rapid growth and provided greater implementation support, facilitating implementation, expansion, and sustainment of high-fidelity IPS. Nevertheless, access to IPS remains limited.

The Psychometric Properties of the Assertive Community Treatment Transition Readiness Scale (ATR)

Assertive community treatment (ACT) is an evidence-based practice for individuals living with severe mental illnesses. Originally conceptualized as a lifetime service, there is a need for standardized measures to help ACT teams identify clients who are potentially ready for a transition to less intensive services. Here, to address this gap in the literature, the psychometric properties of the Assertive Community Treatment Transition Readiness Scale (ATR) were examined. Data on the ATR were collected from ACT staff from across the country who had experience transitioning ACT clients to less intensive services. Results from an exploratory factor analysis suggested a one-factor solution and that items on the ATR demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability as well as predictive criterion validity and known-groups validity. The ATR is an easy-to-use, 18-item measure that has the potential, in combination with clinical judgment and practice wisdom, to be a useful tool for identifying ACT clients who could transition to a less intensive level of care.

Innovation and Its Discontents: Pathways and Barriers in the Diffusion of Assertive Community Treatment

Policy Points Widespread diffusion of policy innovation is the exception rather than the rule, depending as it does on the convergence of a variety of intellectual, political, economic, and organizational forces. The history of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) provides a compelling case study of this process while also showing how conditions may shift over time, altering the scenarios for continued program expansion. Diffusion of a program like ACT challenges government to play a nuanced role in which public endorsement and resources are used to strengthen a worthwhile service, but without suppressing flexibility and ongoing experimentation as core program values. Acceptance as a proven form of "evidence-based practice" is a critical element in the validation of ACT and other community mental health interventions that combine clinical and social features in novel ways. However, the use of conventional evidence-based research as a singular gold standard of program value narrows the range of stakeholder input, as well as the evaluation methodologies and forms of data deemed worthy of attention.

CONTEXT

Originating at the county level in Wisconsin in the early 1970s, Assertive Community Treatment is one of the most influential mental health programs ever developed. The subject of hundreds of research studies and recipient of enthusiastic backing from private advocacy organizations and government agencies, the program has spread widely across the United States and internationally as a package of resources and management techniques for supporting individuals with severe and chronic mental illness in the community. Today, however, ACT is associated with a rising tide of criticism challenging the program's practices and philosophy while alternative service models are advancing.

METHODS

To trace the history of the Assertive Community Treatment movement, a diffusion-of-innovation framework was applied based on relevant concepts from public policy analysis, organizational behavior, implementation science, and other fields. In-depth review of the literature on ACT design, management, and performance also provided insight into the program's creation and subsequent evolution across different settings.

FINDINGS

A number of factors have functioned to fuel and to constrain ACT diffusion. The former category includes policy learning through research; the role of policy entrepreneurs; ACT's acceptance as a normative standard; and a thriving international epistemic community. The latter category includes cost concerns, fidelity demands, shifting norms, research contradictions and gaps, and a multifactorial context affecting program adoption. Currently, the program stands at a crossroads, strained by the principle of adherence to a long-standing operational framework, on the one hand, and calls to adjust to an environment of changing demands and opportunities, on the other.

CONCLUSIONS

For nearly 50 years, Assertive Community Treatment has been a mainstay of community mental health programming in the United States and other parts of the world. This presence will continue, but not in any static sense. A growing number of hybrid and competing versions of the program are likely to develop to serve specialized clientele groups and to respond to consumer demands and the recovery paradigm in behavioral health care.

Receipt and targeting of evidence-based psychosocial interventions for people living with psychoses: findings from the second Australian national survey of psychosis

AIMS.

Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) recommend evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs) to improve consumer recovery; however, availability appears limited. We describe receipt of six EBPIs, reported by people with psychoses, and associations with service and consumer characteristics, including indicators of need (eligibility) and benefit (suitability).

METHODS.

Participants in the 2010 Australian national survey of psychosis (n = 1825) were interviewed to assess demographic, functional, mental and physical health characteristics and service use in the previous year. Six EBPIs (Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for psychosis; Family Psycho-Education (FPE); Relapse Prevention Planning (RPP); Skills Training; Supported Employment; and Assertive Community Treatment) were chosen, based on the strength and consistency of CPG recommendations. Associations between receipt of interventions and eligibility and suitability indicators were examined via correlations and χ2. Logistic regression was used to predict receipt of one or more EBPIs and to identify predictors of each individual EBPI.

RESULTS.

Less than one-quarter of the sample reported receipt of an evidence-based level of any intervention: rates ranged from 3.4% (FPE) to 21.1% (RPP). The model predicting receipt of one or more EBPIs was statistically significant (χ2 (20, n = 1746) = 216.12, p < 0.01) and marginally useful. Nine variables contributed uniquely, of which six were service characteristics. The strongest predictors of receipt were being assigned a psychologist as a case manager (p < 0.01, OR(CI) = 2.36(1.50-3.72)) and accessing a non-clinical mental health support service in the past year (p < 0.01, OR(CI) = 2.01(1.60-2.51)).

CONCLUSIONS.

Prior reports of limited receipt of EBPIs are reinforced. There is patchy evidence for targeting of EBPIs to those who might benefit most. Service characteristics contribute more to the prediction of receipt than clinical characteristics. Greater implementation effort and better targeting are required to bridge evidence-practice gaps, including improved evidence-based practice literacy among professionals and needs-based service re-design to improve provision and optimise consumer outcomes.

Distribution and Correlates of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and ACT-Like Programs: Results From the 2015 N-MHSS

OBJECTIVE

The study examined the availability and characteristics of assertive community treatment (ACT) programs across mental health treatment facilities in the United States.

METHODS

Prevalence and correlates of facilities that reported offering ACT, broadly defined as intensive community services for serious mental illness provided by multidisciplinary teams in the clients' natural settings and including both ACT and "ACT-like" programs, were examined by using data from the National Mental Health Services Survey. Availability of services essential to the ACT model in these facilities was also examined.

RESULTS

Of the 12,826 surveyed facilities, 13.4% reported offering ACT, with significant variability among states. Of the facilities with ACT, 19.2% reported offering all core ACT services. Few facilities offered peer support, employment, and housing services. Compared with programs at facilities that did not offer all core ACT services, facilities with ACT programs that offered these services had higher odds of being publicly owned (odds ratio [OR]=2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.64-2.74) and of receiving federal (OR=3.60, CI=2.17-5.98) or grant funding (OR=1.87, CI=1.45-2.41). Facilities with ACT that offered all core services also had higher odds of offering other services important to individuals with serious mental disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial differences existed in availability of ACT and ACT-like programs among states, with evidence of a large unmet need overall, even when a very broad and inclusive definition of ACT was used. Few ACT programs offered all core services. Legislative, administrative, and funding differences may explain some of the variability.

Transitions from Assertive Community Treatment Among Urban and Rural Teams: Identifying Barriers, Service Options, and Strategies

An emerging focus of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams is the transition of clients to less intensive services, which creates space for individuals in need of ACT and is consistent with a recovery orientation of treatment. However, there is limited research on team transition rates, post-ACT services, and strategies to overcome transition barriers. In addition, few studies have examined differences in these factors among urban and rural ACT teams. To address these knowledge gaps, we interviewed eight ACT teams in urban and rural areas of eastern Ontario regarding their transition rates, processes of transitioning ACT clients to less intensive services, transition barriers, and solutions to overcoming these barriers. On average, teams transitioned about 6% of their clients over our 3-year study period. Urban and rural teams described both similar and distinct clinical and systemic barriers, such as client reluctance to transition and finding psychiatric follow-up outside of ACT. Implications for ACT practice and policy are discussed.

Program planning and staff competencies for forensic assertive community treatment: ACT-eligible versus FACT-eligible consumers

PURPOSE

Forensic assertive community treatment (FACT) is a recent adaptation of the assertive community treatment (ACT) model; however, more information is needed about how FACT and ACT consumers differ and how FACT should be modified to accommodate these differences.

METHOD

Linked, multisystem administrative data from King County, Washington, were used to compare the demographic, clinical, and criminal justice characteristics of ACT- and FACT-eligible consumers.

RESULTS

FACT consumers were more likely to be male, persons of color, and had more complex clinical profiles. Also, some FACT consumers were incarcerated for sex offenses, and more than half had violent offenses.

CONCLUSIONS

Traditionally, ACT teams avoid serving consumers with personality disorders, violent consumers, and sex offenders; however, given increased use of mandated outpatient treatment and mental health courts, FACT teams may have less discretion to choose whom they serve. The addition of clinical interventions and other modifications may be particularly important for FACT teams.

How many forensic assertive community treatment teams do we need?

Despite the growing interest in forensic assertive community treatment (FACT), there is no standardized definition of FACT eligibility and no guidelines for how many FACT teams communities may need. In this brief report a definition for FACT eligibility is proposed-severe and persistent mental illness and three jail detentions in a one-year period-and modeled by using 5.5 years of administrative data (July 1, 1993, through December 31, 1998) from a large, urban county in the western United States. Findings suggest that large, urban communities should develop enough FACT teams to serve approximately 44% of their populations of persons with severe mental illness, or roughly .05% of their adult populations. Developing standardized eligibility criteria for FACT is an important first step toward developing its evidence base.