Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**files (4)**
– ## Stage2-SettingGoalsandObjectives.docx
– ## MentalHealthCrisisResponseTeamprogramthesisabstract.docx
– ## Stage1-Analyzingtheproblem.docx
– SettingGoalsandObjectives.pdf
**## Stage2-SettingGoalsandObjectives.docx**
This week you will create your goals and objectives, which set the stage for the remainder of your program or policy development. Goals represent the broad-based statement of what you seek to achieve; objectives are very specific and measurable statements of your intended outcome. Objectives must include:
· a time frame for measuring impact,
· a target population,
· a key result intended, and
· a specific criterion or measure of impact.
You should also indicate how you reached those four components of each objective.
Chapter 2 of Welsh and Harris text provides good examples of goals and objectives you should follow. The goal should be simple and structured as one sentence. Once you write your goals, then brainstorm for a bit and say:
"What needs to happen for me to accomplish this?"
Write out what needs to happen, and then 'tweak' them to include the four elements of an objective.
You should have fewer goals than objectives. One goal and multiple objectives is acceptable. If your program is multi-faceted, you will need to have at least one goal for each component of your program, and then objectives relating to each goal.
Please note: When you begin to develop your program design in the next phase, you will refer to your goals and objectives for guidance on what your program must include to achieve your objectives. In the later stages of program implementation and program monitoring, you will refer to your goals and objectives to measure whether the program has been implemented properly and whether it has successfully addressed the criminal justice problem that you initially identified. This is why the development of your goals and objectives is a critical component of your program development. Be sure to refer to the steps in Stage 2 included in the Appendix of Welsh and Harris text on page 255.
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
**## MentalHealthCrisisResponseTeamprogramthesisabstract.docx**
1
5
**Mental Health Crisis Response Team Program**
**Thesis Statement**
Police officers are often involved in mental health crisis response, even though they do not have specific training on how to respond to behavioral health crises. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) program in which trained police officers are engaged to work with mental health practitioners can result in better outcomes of the crisis, fewer unwarranted arrests, and provide people with mental health crises with proper care.
**Abstract**
The rising issue in the criminal justice system is the rising number of mental health crises that are being dealt with by law enforcement officers, as these officers do not have the specialized training to respond efficiently. With mental illness, such people often find themselves in the criminal justice system when there is a behavioral health crisis and can become victims of unwarranted activity in arrest, use-of-force, or imprisonment, instead of the needed treatment. It is a policy that puts pressure on law enforcement bodies, prisons, and community resources without having to address the underlying mental health requirements of individuals in crisis. This inevitably leads to the need to have a well-designed policy response, which will enhance the management of emergency cases related to mental health.
This paper suggests the introduction of the program of Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) to the local law enforcement agencies. The program would have specially designed response teams, which would be the trained police officers and licensed mental health practitioners who would serve jointly. Such teams would undergo further training on crisis intervention, de-escalation techniques, and mental evaluation. The program would also forge links with the local hospitals, mental health clinics, and providers of community services to make sure that those in the crisis get immediate support and long-term treatment facilities.
MHCRT is a criminal justice program in the sense that it creates a systematic operational framework in the law enforcement agencies to enhance the response to cases associated with mental health. The program encompasses the principles of planned change, namely identifying a particular systemic issue, introducing a systematic intervention, and measuring results in the area of fewer arrests, fewer incidences of use of force, and better access to mental health services. The program will help to attain safer relations between the police and community members, as well as enhance the efficiency and more humane crisis management by incorporating mental health expertise into the law enforcement responses.
**## Stage1-Analyzingtheproblem.docx**
1
5
**Analyzing The Problem**
**Mental Health Crisis Response in the Criminal Justice System**
Introduction and Thesis
There is a growing role of criminal justice in addressing a mental health crisis, where police officers have no specific training to respond to an act of behavioral intervention. Therefore, when individuals are undergoing a mental health crisis, they are typically criminalized and not treated. The necessary reform must be implemented at the level of the whole system that reveals the main causes of these results, analyzing the previous intervention, including the collaboration of stakeholders. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) model is a better, more humane, and evidence-based approach to better crisis outcomes and unnecessary arrests.
**Setting the Problem and Change Requirement**.
One of the primary problems in the criminal justice system is that the cases that require addressing by the police officers are increasing due to mental health-related cases. Instead, law enforcement has assumed the innate role of the first responder during an emergency involving someone with mental health issues, despite the officers being generally trained on the concept of community safety as opposed to clinical intervention (Welsh & Harris, 2016).
Such a mismatch tends to have adverse consequences doing things like arresting people who are not supposed to be arrested, use of force, and putting people in jail who need medical or psychological assistance. The high rate of incarceration of mentally ill people is indicative of an institutional failure. In a situation where people in crisis are subjected to criminal justice systems rather than being treated, the root causes of the crises are not changed, and this will lead to the recurrence of such crises.
The necessity of the change can be seen in the pressure on the law enforcement agencies, prisons, and communal resources. And unless it is reformed, the system will still give short-term control over long-term recovery, resulting in cycles of crisis and criminalization.
**Additional reasons for the issue**
The issue lies in a combination of several factors. It is partly because mental health services are hardly available and affordable in most communities. People facing a crisis normally do not get good intervention before situations deteriorate to emergency levels, where police are involved.
Also, law enforcers are generally given little training on how to address mental health crises. In the absence of effective de-escalation and behavioral assessment equipment, the officers can perceive the signs of mental illness, like confusion, agitation, or noncompliance, as a criminal act or danger to the public.
The fact that poverty, lack of homes, and substance use disorders are socioeconomic conditions further complicates the issue. Such circumstances raise the risk of a mental health crisis and contact with the police. Due to their relationship, focusing on one of the aspects, say policing, without considering the mental health infrastructure, is not effective.
**History of Interventions**
Traditionally, the criminal justice system has been based on punitive techniques to treat persons in crisis. Traditional policies on crime that were tough have a focus on arrest and incarceration, even in the case of mental illness (Welsh & Harris, 2016). Although they were aimed at keeping people safe, these strategies did not support the clinical requirements of the people, and they also added to the overcrowded prisons.
Later reforms have tried to fill this gap. Crisis Intervention Team training and other initiatives have been implemented to enhance the response of the officers to mental health crises. Also, certain jurisdictions have established diversion programs as well as mental health courts that take people out of jails and direct them toward treatment.
These interventions, although a step forward, in most cases are squandered. In the case of CIT training, officer awareness is enhanced, although mental health professionals are not well included in the response process. Consequently, there are still loopholes in the clinical support process in case of crisis.
**Systems Analysis**
A systems analysis shows that the problem is not limited to law enforcement, but it is a multi-faceted system, composed of various interrelated elements such as healthcare systems, community services, courts, and correctional institutions.
Poor coordination between these entities usually leads to breakdowns. As an example, during one of the crises, people can be arrested because of the unavailability of mental health specialists at the location. Once they are in the system, they can progress in the court and jails without proper treatment and end up in the community having another crisis.
This division reflects ineffectiveness in distributing the resources and communication. These gaps can be resolved through a more integrated approach, with the law enforcers working directly with mental health providers. The MHCRT model can be implemented into this system's framework as it establishes an interdisciplinary response that enhances immediate and long-term outcomes (Jr., 2019).
**Stakeholders and Barrier to Change.**
In this case, there are several stakeholders whose perspectives and interests vary. Law enforcement agencies have the responsibility for the safety of the people but might not have the resources or training to be able to handle mental health crises (Jr., 2019). Psychiatrists recommend interventions that are based on treatment but may have restricted funding and access.
The other stakeholders are the policymakers, community organizations, individuals who are mentally ill, and their families. Sometimes, advocacy groups can advocate reform, or some political actors/ citizens may oppose reform because of safety or cost reasons.
The impediments to rolling out such programs as MHCRT are financial constraints, institutional pressures, and logistical difficulties in organizing multiple agencies. Moreover, the reform can be supported by the lack of social acceptance of mental illness and its stigma. Nonetheless, despite these difficulties, the increased awareness of the concern and the evidence of the approaches to collaboration opens the prospects of meaningful change.
**Conclusion**
Analysis Stage 1 points to the necessity of the systemwide change in addressing mental health crises in the criminal justice system. The existing situation, under which law enforcement becomes the main responding organization without proper training and assistance, is ineffective and causes only negative results. Balancing the baseline issues, probing of the previous intervention, and analysis of inefficiencies throughout the system, one can realize that a more unified strategy is required. The Mental Health Crisis Response Team model is a different development in tackling these challenges, forcing a unified response that incorporates both the enforcement of law and mental health expertise.
**References**
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
Jr., F.P.R. B. (2019). Flawed Criminal Justice Policies: At the Intersection of the Media, Public Fear and Legislative Response (2nd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.
[https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376](https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376)
**SettingGoalsandObjectives.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/settinggoalsandobjectives-pdf)
**SettingGoalsandObjectives.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/settinggoalsandobjectives-pdf)
**## Stage2-SettingGoalsandObjectives.docx**
This week you will create your goals and objectives, which set the stage for the remainder of your program or policy development. Goals represent the broad-based statement of what you seek to achieve; objectives are very specific and measurable statements of your intended outcome. Objectives must include:
· a time frame for measuring impact,
· a target population,
· a key result intended, and
· a specific criterion or measure of impact.
You should also indicate how you reached those four components of each objective.
Chapter 2 of Welsh and Harris text provides good examples of goals and objectives you should follow. The goal should be simple and structured as one sentence. Once you write your goals, then brainstorm for a bit and say:
"What needs to happen for me to accomplish this?"
Write out what needs to happen, and then 'tweak' them to include the four elements of an objective.
You should have fewer goals than objectives. One goal and multiple objectives is acceptable. If your program is multi-faceted, you will need to have at least one goal for each component of your program, and then objectives relating to each goal.
Please note: When you begin to develop your program design in the next phase, you will refer to your goals and objectives for guidance on what your program must include to achieve your objectives. In the later stages of program implementation and program monitoring, you will refer to your goals and objectives to measure whether the program has been implemented properly and whether it has successfully addressed the criminal justice problem that you initially identified. This is why the development of your goals and objectives is a critical component of your program development. Be sure to refer to the steps in Stage 2 included in the Appendix of Welsh and Harris text on page 255.
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
**## MentalHealthCrisisResponseTeamprogramthesisabstract.docx**
1
5
**Mental Health Crisis Response Team Program**
**Thesis Statement**
Police officers are often involved in mental health crisis response, even though they do not have specific training on how to respond to behavioral health crises. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) program in which trained police officers are engaged to work with mental health practitioners can result in better outcomes of the crisis, fewer unwarranted arrests, and provide people with mental health crises with proper care.
**Abstract**
The rising issue in the criminal justice system is the rising number of mental health crises that are being dealt with by law enforcement officers, as these officers do not have the specialized training to respond efficiently. With mental illness, such people often find themselves in the criminal justice system when there is a behavioral health crisis and can become victims of unwarranted activity in arrest, use-of-force, or imprisonment, instead of the needed treatment. It is a policy that puts pressure on law enforcement bodies, prisons, and community resources without having to address the underlying mental health requirements of individuals in crisis. This inevitably leads to the need to have a well-designed policy response, which will enhance the management of emergency cases related to mental health.
This paper suggests the introduction of the program of Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) to the local law enforcement agencies. The program would have specially designed response teams, which would be the trained police officers and licensed mental health practitioners who would serve jointly. Such teams would undergo further training on crisis intervention, de-escalation techniques, and mental evaluation. The program would also forge links with the local hospitals, mental health clinics, and providers of community services to make sure that those in the crisis get immediate support and long-term treatment facilities.
MHCRT is a criminal justice program in the sense that it creates a systematic operational framework in the law enforcement agencies to enhance the response to cases associated with mental health. The program encompasses the principles of planned change, namely identifying a particular systemic issue, introducing a systematic intervention, and measuring results in the area of fewer arrests, fewer incidences of use of force, and better access to mental health services. The program will help to attain safer relations between the police and community members, as well as enhance the efficiency and more humane crisis management by incorporating mental health expertise into the law enforcement responses.
**## Stage1-Analyzingtheproblem.docx**
1
5
**Analyzing The Problem**
**Mental Health Crisis Response in the Criminal Justice System**
Introduction and Thesis
There is a growing role of criminal justice in addressing a mental health crisis, where police officers have no specific training to respond to an act of behavioral intervention. Therefore, when individuals are undergoing a mental health crisis, they are typically criminalized and not treated. The necessary reform must be implemented at the level of the whole system that reveals the main causes of these results, analyzing the previous intervention, including the collaboration of stakeholders. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) model is a better, more humane, and evidence-based approach to better crisis outcomes and unnecessary arrests.
**Setting the Problem and Change Requirement**.
One of the primary problems in the criminal justice system is that the cases that require addressing by the police officers are increasing due to mental health-related cases. Instead, law enforcement has assumed the innate role of the first responder during an emergency involving someone with mental health issues, despite the officers being generally trained on the concept of community safety as opposed to clinical intervention (Welsh & Harris, 2016).
Such a mismatch tends to have adverse consequences doing things like arresting people who are not supposed to be arrested, use of force, and putting people in jail who need medical or psychological assistance. The high rate of incarceration of mentally ill people is indicative of an institutional failure. In a situation where people in crisis are subjected to criminal justice systems rather than being treated, the root causes of the crises are not changed, and this will lead to the recurrence of such crises.
The necessity of the change can be seen in the pressure on the law enforcement agencies, prisons, and communal resources. And unless it is reformed, the system will still give short-term control over long-term recovery, resulting in cycles of crisis and criminalization.
**Additional reasons for the issue**
The issue lies in a combination of several factors. It is partly because mental health services are hardly available and affordable in most communities. People facing a crisis normally do not get good intervention before situations deteriorate to emergency levels, where police are involved.
Also, law enforcers are generally given little training on how to address mental health crises. In the absence of effective de-escalation and behavioral assessment equipment, the officers can perceive the signs of mental illness, like confusion, agitation, or noncompliance, as a criminal act or danger to the public.
The fact that poverty, lack of homes, and substance use disorders are socioeconomic conditions further complicates the issue. Such circumstances raise the risk of a mental health crisis and contact with the police. Due to their relationship, focusing on one of the aspects, say policing, without considering the mental health infrastructure, is not effective.
**History of Interventions**
Traditionally, the criminal justice system has been based on punitive techniques to treat persons in crisis. Traditional policies on crime that were tough have a focus on arrest and incarceration, even in the case of mental illness (Welsh & Harris, 2016). Although they were aimed at keeping people safe, these strategies did not support the clinical requirements of the people, and they also added to the overcrowded prisons.
Later reforms have tried to fill this gap. Crisis Intervention Team training and other initiatives have been implemented to enhance the response of the officers to mental health crises. Also, certain jurisdictions have established diversion programs as well as mental health courts that take people out of jails and direct them toward treatment.
These interventions, although a step forward, in most cases are squandered. In the case of CIT training, officer awareness is enhanced, although mental health professionals are not well included in the response process. Consequently, there are still loopholes in the clinical support process in case of crisis.
**Systems Analysis**
A systems analysis shows that the problem is not limited to law enforcement, but it is a multi-faceted system, composed of various interrelated elements such as healthcare systems, community services, courts, and correctional institutions.
Poor coordination between these entities usually leads to breakdowns. As an example, during one of the crises, people can be arrested because of the unavailability of mental health specialists at the location. Once they are in the system, they can progress in the court and jails without proper treatment and end up in the community having another crisis.
This division reflects ineffectiveness in distributing the resources and communication. These gaps can be resolved through a more integrated approach, with the law enforcers working directly with mental health providers. The MHCRT model can be implemented into this system's framework as it establishes an interdisciplinary response that enhances immediate and long-term outcomes (Jr., 2019).
**Stakeholders and Barrier to Change.**
In this case, there are several stakeholders whose perspectives and interests vary. Law enforcement agencies have the responsibility for the safety of the people but might not have the resources or training to be able to handle mental health crises (Jr., 2019). Psychiatrists recommend interventions that are based on treatment but may have restricted funding and access.
The other stakeholders are the policymakers, community organizations, individuals who are mentally ill, and their families. Sometimes, advocacy groups can advocate reform, or some political actors/ citizens may oppose reform because of safety or cost reasons.
The impediments to rolling out such programs as MHCRT are financial constraints, institutional pressures, and logistical difficulties in organizing multiple agencies. Moreover, the reform can be supported by the lack of social acceptance of mental illness and its stigma. Nonetheless, despite these difficulties, the increased awareness of the concern and the evidence of the approaches to collaboration opens the prospects of meaningful change.
**Conclusion**
Analysis Stage 1 points to the necessity of the systemwide change in addressing mental health crises in the criminal justice system. The existing situation, under which law enforcement becomes the main responding organization without proper training and assistance, is ineffective and causes only negative results. Balancing the baseline issues, probing of the previous intervention, and analysis of inefficiencies throughout the system, one can realize that a more unified strategy is required. The Mental Health Crisis Response Team model is a different development in tackling these challenges, forcing a unified response that incorporates both the enforcement of law and mental health expertise.
**References**
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
Jr., F.P.R. B. (2019). Flawed Criminal Justice Policies: At the Intersection of the Media, Public Fear and Legislative Response (2nd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.
[https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376](https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376)
**SettingGoalsandObjectives.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/settinggoalsandobjectives-pdf)
**## Stage2-SettingGoalsandObjectives.docx**
This week you will create your goals and objectives, which set the stage for the remainder of your program or policy development. Goals represent the broad-based statement of what you seek to achieve; objectives are very specific and measurable statements of your intended outcome. Objectives must include:
· a time frame for measuring impact,
· a target population,
· a key result intended, and
· a specific criterion or measure of impact.
You should also indicate how you reached those four components of each objective.
Chapter 2 of Welsh and Harris text provides good examples of goals and objectives you should follow. The goal should be simple and structured as one sentence. Once you write your goals, then brainstorm for a bit and say:
"What needs to happen for me to accomplish this?"
Write out what needs to happen, and then 'tweak' them to include the four elements of an objective.
You should have fewer goals than objectives. One goal and multiple objectives is acceptable. If your program is multi-faceted, you will need to have at least one goal for each component of your program, and then objectives relating to each goal.
Please note: When you begin to develop your program design in the next phase, you will refer to your goals and objectives for guidance on what your program must include to achieve your objectives. In the later stages of program implementation and program monitoring, you will refer to your goals and objectives to measure whether the program has been implemented properly and whether it has successfully addressed the criminal justice problem that you initially identified. This is why the development of your goals and objectives is a critical component of your program development. Be sure to refer to the steps in Stage 2 included in the Appendix of Welsh and Harris text on page 255.
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
**## MentalHealthCrisisResponseTeamprogramthesisabstract.docx**
1
5
**Mental Health Crisis Response Team Program**
**Thesis Statement**
Police officers are often involved in mental health crisis response, even though they do not have specific training on how to respond to behavioral health crises. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) program in which trained police officers are engaged to work with mental health practitioners can result in better outcomes of the crisis, fewer unwarranted arrests, and provide people with mental health crises with proper care.
**Abstract**
The rising issue in the criminal justice system is the rising number of mental health crises that are being dealt with by law enforcement officers, as these officers do not have the specialized training to respond efficiently. With mental illness, such people often find themselves in the criminal justice system when there is a behavioral health crisis and can become victims of unwarranted activity in arrest, use-of-force, or imprisonment, instead of the needed treatment. It is a policy that puts pressure on law enforcement bodies, prisons, and community resources without having to address the underlying mental health requirements of individuals in crisis. This inevitably leads to the need to have a well-designed policy response, which will enhance the management of emergency cases related to mental health.
This paper suggests the introduction of the program of Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) to the local law enforcement agencies. The program would have specially designed response teams, which would be the trained police officers and licensed mental health practitioners who would serve jointly. Such teams would undergo further training on crisis intervention, de-escalation techniques, and mental evaluation. The program would also forge links with the local hospitals, mental health clinics, and providers of community services to make sure that those in the crisis get immediate support and long-term treatment facilities.
MHCRT is a criminal justice program in the sense that it creates a systematic operational framework in the law enforcement agencies to enhance the response to cases associated with mental health. The program encompasses the principles of planned change, namely identifying a particular systemic issue, introducing a systematic intervention, and measuring results in the area of fewer arrests, fewer incidences of use of force, and better access to mental health services. The program will help to attain safer relations between the police and community members, as well as enhance the efficiency and more humane crisis management by incorporating mental health expertise into the law enforcement responses.
**## Stage1-Analyzingtheproblem.docx**
1
5
**Analyzing The Problem**
**Mental Health Crisis Response in the Criminal Justice System**
Introduction and Thesis
There is a growing role of criminal justice in addressing a mental health crisis, where police officers have no specific training to respond to an act of behavioral intervention. Therefore, when individuals are undergoing a mental health crisis, they are typically criminalized and not treated. The necessary reform must be implemented at the level of the whole system that reveals the main causes of these results, analyzing the previous intervention, including the collaboration of stakeholders. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) model is a better, more humane, and evidence-based approach to better crisis outcomes and unnecessary arrests.
**Setting the Problem and Change Requirement**.
One of the primary problems in the criminal justice system is that the cases that require addressing by the police officers are increasing due to mental health-related cases. Instead, law enforcement has assumed the innate role of the first responder during an emergency involving someone with mental health issues, despite the officers being generally trained on the concept of community safety as opposed to clinical intervention (Welsh & Harris, 2016).
Such a mismatch tends to have adverse consequences doing things like arresting people who are not supposed to be arrested, use of force, and putting people in jail who need medical or psychological assistance. The high rate of incarceration of mentally ill people is indicative of an institutional failure. In a situation where people in crisis are subjected to criminal justice systems rather than being treated, the root causes of the crises are not changed, and this will lead to the recurrence of such crises.
The necessity of the change can be seen in the pressure on the law enforcement agencies, prisons, and communal resources. And unless it is reformed, the system will still give short-term control over long-term recovery, resulting in cycles of crisis and criminalization.
**Additional reasons for the issue**
The issue lies in a combination of several factors. It is partly because mental health services are hardly available and affordable in most communities. People facing a crisis normally do not get good intervention before situations deteriorate to emergency levels, where police are involved.
Also, law enforcers are generally given little training on how to address mental health crises. In the absence of effective de-escalation and behavioral assessment equipment, the officers can perceive the signs of mental illness, like confusion, agitation, or noncompliance, as a criminal act or danger to the public.
The fact that poverty, lack of homes, and substance use disorders are socioeconomic conditions further complicates the issue. Such circumstances raise the risk of a mental health crisis and contact with the police. Due to their relationship, focusing on one of the aspects, say policing, without considering the mental health infrastructure, is not effective.
**History of Interventions**
Traditionally, the criminal justice system has been based on punitive techniques to treat persons in crisis. Traditional policies on crime that were tough have a focus on arrest and incarceration, even in the case of mental illness (Welsh & Harris, 2016). Although they were aimed at keeping people safe, these strategies did not support the clinical requirements of the people, and they also added to the overcrowded prisons.
Later reforms have tried to fill this gap. Crisis Intervention Team training and other initiatives have been implemented to enhance the response of the officers to mental health crises. Also, certain jurisdictions have established diversion programs as well as mental health courts that take people out of jails and direct them toward treatment.
These interventions, although a step forward, in most cases are squandered. In the case of CIT training, officer awareness is enhanced, although mental health professionals are not well included in the response process. Consequently, there are still loopholes in the clinical support process in case of crisis.
**Systems Analysis**
A systems analysis shows that the problem is not limited to law enforcement, but it is a multi-faceted system, composed of various interrelated elements such as healthcare systems, community services, courts, and correctional institutions.
Poor coordination between these entities usually leads to breakdowns. As an example, during one of the crises, people can be arrested because of the unavailability of mental health specialists at the location. Once they are in the system, they can progress in the court and jails without proper treatment and end up in the community having another crisis.
This division reflects ineffectiveness in distributing the resources and communication. These gaps can be resolved through a more integrated approach, with the law enforcers working directly with mental health providers. The MHCRT model can be implemented into this system's framework as it establishes an interdisciplinary response that enhances immediate and long-term outcomes (Jr., 2019).
**Stakeholders and Barrier to Change.**
In this case, there are several stakeholders whose perspectives and interests vary. Law enforcement agencies have the responsibility for the safety of the people but might not have the resources or training to be able to handle mental health crises (Jr., 2019). Psychiatrists recommend interventions that are based on treatment but may have restricted funding and access.
The other stakeholders are the policymakers, community organizations, individuals who are mentally ill, and their families. Sometimes, advocacy groups can advocate reform, or some political actors/ citizens may oppose reform because of safety or cost reasons.
The impediments to rolling out such programs as MHCRT are financial constraints, institutional pressures, and logistical difficulties in organizing multiple agencies. Moreover, the reform can be supported by the lack of social acceptance of mental illness and its stigma. Nonetheless, despite these difficulties, the increased awareness of the concern and the evidence of the approaches to collaboration opens the prospects of meaningful change.
**Conclusion**
Analysis Stage 1 points to the necessity of the systemwide change in addressing mental health crises in the criminal justice system. The existing situation, under which law enforcement becomes the main responding organization without proper training and assistance, is ineffective and causes only negative results. Balancing the baseline issues, probing of the previous intervention, and analysis of inefficiencies throughout the system, one can realize that a more unified strategy is required. The Mental Health Crisis Response Team model is a different development in tackling these challenges, forcing a unified response that incorporates both the enforcement of law and mental health expertise.
**References**
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis. https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781317271550
Jr., F.P.R. B. (2019). Flawed Criminal Justice Policies: At the Intersection of the Media, Public Fear and Legislative Response (2nd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.
[https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376](https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376)
**SettingGoalsandObjectives.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/settinggoalsandobjectives-pdf)