Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3846

Bill Overview

Title: Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Reauthorization Act of 2022

Description: This act expands the allowable use of grants under the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program. The program provides state, local, and tribal grants to improve the criminal justice system's response to people with mental health disorders. Among the provisions, the act allows funds for diversion and alternative prosecution and sentencing programs to be used for training for state and local prosecutors related to diversion programs; allows funds for multidisciplinary teams to be used to support police officers and mental health crisis workers responding together to mental health calls; and allows grants to be awarded for additional purposes such as suicide prevention programs and services, case management services, and state and local implementation of the 988 suicide hotline. Additionally, the act reauthorizes through FY2027 the requirement for the Department of Justice to examine and report on the prevalence of mentally ill offenders in prisons and jails.

Sponsors: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Target Audience

Population: People with mental health disorders and related criminal justice interactions

Estimated Size: 57000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Unemployed (Chicago, IL)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel like the system just doesn't understand people like me.
  • I've had run-ins with the law mostly because I wasn't getting the right treatment at the right time.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 5

School Counselor (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've seen firsthand how much of a difference a little support can make.
  • Anything that helps divert people away from a jail environment is a step in the right direction.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Correctional Officer (Rural West Virginia)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We need way more training and resources to deal with inmates with mental health issues.
  • The current system just cycles people in and out without solving root problems.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Graduate Student (New York City, NY)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Implementing training and collaboration is a logical step towards meaningful reform.
  • The policy might reduce the stigma associated with mental health in criminal justice settings.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Retired (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've been part of too many families seeing loved ones caught in this revolving door of jail and back.
  • This policy sounds like it could finally address the issue at its core.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Police Officer (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We need more support and training when dealing with mental health crises.
  • The policy could improve my job performance and personal stress.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Freelance Artist (Portland, OR)

Age: 34 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The police need to be more understanding during mental health episodes.
  • I feel like this policy is a big agreement toward humane treatment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Public Defender (Dallas, TX)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Diversion programs have been understaffed and underfunded for too long.
  • This policy might turn the tide in handling cases more efficiently.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Restaurant Manager (Detroit, MI)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any funding for mental health support in justice settings is essential.
  • I believe this would provide critical help to families like mine.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Mental Health Crisis Worker (Seattle, WA)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The collaboration between mental health workers and police is crucial but underutilized.
  • This policy could be a game changer for our operations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 2: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 3: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 10: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 100: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Key Considerations