Offering recovery rather than punishment: Implementation of a law enforcement-led pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program for adults with substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic has strained the US criminal justice system. Law enforcement frequently encounters persons with substance use disorder (SUD). Law enforcement-led, pre-arrest diversion programs linking individuals with SUD to addiction treatment instead of arrest and prosecution has the potential to reduce crime, overdoses, and other community harms. We implemented a pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program-the Madison Addiction Recovery Initiative (MARI)-from September 2017 to August 2020, and describe the key components of MARI's effective implementation. METHODS: Adults who committed an eligible, drug use-related crime were offered a 6-month MARI participation with referral to treatment in lieu of arrest; criminal charges for that crime were "voided" upon the successful MARI completion. Formative evaluation, with stakeholder feedback and team meeting minutes, assessed key factors influencing implementation. Process evaluation consisted of tracking participant referrals, enrollment, and engagement. Police officers, MARI participants, and treatment center staff members were surveyed about program experiences and attitudes. The study used descriptive statistics to describe quantitative survey responses; thematic qualitative analysis identified major themes in qualitative responses. RESULTS: Of 263 participants, 160 initiated program engagement, with 100 successfully completing MARI. Interim evaluations and community partner feedback informed program protocol adjustments to increase participant enrollment, retention and diversity, streamline the referral processes, and transition to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Rigorous evaluation and community partner feedback are essential components of effective implementation and sustainability of a law enforcement-led pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program, which has the potential to both reduce crime and overdose, and change the lives of people with SUD.

The relationship between police contacts for drug use-related crime and future arrests, incarceration, and overdoses: a retrospective observational study highlighting the need to break the vicious cycle.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with substance use disorder often encounter law enforcement due to drug use-related criminal activity. Traditional policing approaches may not be effective for reducing recidivism and improving outcomes in this population. Here, we describe the impact of traditional policing approach to drug use-related crime on future recidivism, incarceration, and overdoses. METHODS: Using a local Police Department (PD) database, we identified individuals with a police contact with probable cause to arrest for a drug use-related crime ("index contact"), including for an opioid-related overdose, between September 1, 2015, and August 31, 2016 (Group 1, N = 52). Data on police contacts, arrests, and incarceration 12 months before and after the index contact were extracted and compared using Fisher's exact or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. County-level data on fatal overdoses and estimates of time spent by PD officers in index contact-related responses were also collected. To determine whether crime-related outcomes changed over time, we identified a second group (Group 2, N = 263) whose index contact occurred between September 1, 2017, and August 31, 2020, and extracted data on police contacts, arrests, and incarceration during the 12 months prior to their index contact. Pre-index contact data between Groups 1 and 2 were compared with Fisher's exact or Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Comparison of data during 12 months before and 12 months after the index contact showed Group 1 increased their total number of overdose-related police contacts (6 versus 18; p = 0.024), incarceration rate (51.9% versus 84.6%; p = 0.001), and average incarceration duration per person (16.2 [SD = 38.6] to 50 days [SD = 72]; p < 0.001). In the six years following the index contact, 9.6% sustained a fatal opioid-related overdose. For Group 1, an average of 4.7 officers were involved, devoting an average total of 7.2 h per index contact. Comparison of pre-index contact data between Groups 1 and 2 showed similar rates of overdose-related police contacts and arrests. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that the traditional policing approach to drug use-related crime did not reduce arrests or incarceration and was associated with a risk of future overdose fatalities. Alternative law enforcement-led strategies, e.g., pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment programs, are urgently needed.

Pre-arrest diversion to addiction treatment by law enforcement: protocol for the community-level policing initiative to reduce addiction-related harm, including crime.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that treatment reduces addiction-related harms, including crime and overdose, only a minority of addiction-affected individuals receive it. Linking individuals who committed an addiction-related crime to addiction treatment could improve outcomes. METHODS: The aim of this city-wide, pre-arrest diversion program, Madison Addiction Recovery Initiative (MARI) is to reduce crime and improve health (i.e., reduce the overdose deaths) among adults who committed a minor, non-violent, drug use-related offense by 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 engage in the recommended treatment, without reoffending, during the six-month program, after which the initial criminal charges are "voided" by the law enforcement agency. The project, implemented in a mid-size U.S. 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 support. Program evaluation includes formative, process, outcome (participant-level) and exploratory impact (community-level) assessments. For outcome evaluation, we will compare crime (primary outcome), overdose-related offenses, and incarceration-related data 12 months before and 12 months after the index crime between participants who completed (Group 1), started but not completed (Group 2), and were offered but did not start (Group 3) the program, and adults who would have been eligible should MARI existed (Historical Comparison, Group 4). Clinical characteristics will be compared at baseline between Groups 1-2, and pre-post the program within Group 1. Participant baseline data will be 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 addiction treatment in lieu of arrest and prosecution of criminal charges, this pre-arrest diversion program has the potential to disrupt the cycle of crime, reduce the likelihood of future offenses, and promote public health and safety.