Evaluation of the Offender Liaison and Diversion Trial Schemes

BackgroundPrearrest diversion strategies are being adopted across the Western world, enabling the police to identify and divert people suspected of having mental disorder towards health and community services rather than the criminal justice system.AimsTo quantify longer‐term criminal justice and mental health outcomes after prearrest diversion of people with suspected mental disorder and consider economic correlates.MethodsA systematic review of published literature on longer term outcomes after prearrest diversion.ResultsOnly two quasi‐experimental studies, with four independent samples, could be included. Findings for criminal and mental health outcomes were inconclusive, but potential for adverse outcomes was identified. Ten studies with cost data suggested that prearrest diversion can lead to overall cost savings.ConclusionsThere is still inadequate evidence on which to base prearrest diversion programmes. Although some benefits have been identified by the review, so have possible harms. Future research and funding strategies must build in high‐quality, systematic evaluation of outcomes before implementing a theoretically attractive strategy more widely.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The crime, mental health, and economic impacts of prearrest diversion of people with mental health problems: A systematic review

Bird¹,

Shemilt²

2019

“…The Bradley Review (Bradley, ) looked at the provision of services for people with MH problems and learning disabilities in the criminal justice system and recommended that a national L&D model be created. Between 2011 and 2013, the Department of Health developed this national model (Disley et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Police interactions and interventions with suspects flagged as experiencing mental health problems

Kane

Evans

Mitsch

et al. 2018

“…Whilst our research does not allow a direct causal relationship to be established in either area, the results are significant and go beyond other impact assessments of L&D. Previous evaluations of the impact of the national L&D model have been limited in the scope of their findings by lack of quantitative data, especially police data (e.g. Disley et al, 2016). Others were able to access offence data (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Are Liaison and Diversion interventions in policing delivering the planned impact: A longitudinal evaluation in two constabularies?

Kane

Evans

Mitsch

et al. 2020

Liaison and Diversion (L&D) has twin objectives: improving mental health outcomes and reducing re-offending. Early diversion from police custody seems promising, but evidence of benefit is required to sustain such programmes. To test the hypothesis that contact with L&D services while in police custody would lead to improved mental health outcomes and a reduction in type and level of offending, we used a pre-post service use design. National Health Service (NHS) records in two counties were searched for evidence that patients had been involved with L&D services while in police custody during the period July 2009-December 2017. We defined January 2009-July 2014 as the pre-intervention period and any time after contact as the post-intervention period. Data from the Police National Computer were gathered for each period for these individuals, to assess their pre-post L&D contact offending histories. NHS Trust data were similarly gathered to assess their pre-post use of mental health legislation. 4,462 individuals were identified who had used L&D services in police custody. There were statistically significant reductions in the amount of offending following contact with the L&D service (whether one or two contacts), regardless of offence type. Statistically significant reductions were also observed in use of the four most commonly used legislative powers for detaining patients in hospital on mental disorder