Perceptions of incarcerated people: prison conditions, public health, and justice in the United States.

Carceral conditions in the United States may serve as a proxy for crises within justice and health systems. This study seeks to consider and measure prison climate from the perspective of incarcerated people. By examining within-facility differences in carceral experiences, results shed light on the complex nexus between the carceral context, health, and justice. We administered the Prison Climate Questionnaire (PCQ) to the complete population of incarcerated men in a correctional facility located in the Eastern United States. In this facility, housing units hold distinct populations, fulfill different functions, and can offer unique programming. We regress select items from the PCQ on a set of dummies corresponding to different residential units within the facility. Responses indicate low but relatively uniform perceptions of overall personal health, as well as access to, and satisfaction with, medical care. Between-unit differences emerge regarding staff relationships, experiences of discrimination, and levels of isolation. The perspectives of incarcerated people can, and should, play a role in understanding and conceptualizing the nature of the prison environment. Policy responses, especially those that impact the health and well-being of currently and formerly incarcerated people, can be informed by these perspectives.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in U.S. Prisons: Perspectives from a Statewide Survey of Incarcerated People.

Much of the American response to the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by a divergence between general public opinion and public health policy. With little attention paid to individuals incarcerated during this time, there is limited direct evidence regarding how incarcerated people perceived efforts to mediate the harms of COVID-19. Prisons operate as a microcosm of society in many ways but they also face unique public health challenges. This study examines vaccine hesitancy-and acceptance-among a sample of individuals incarcerated within adult prisons in Pennsylvania. Using administrative records as well as rich attitudinal data from a survey of the incarcerated population, this study identifies a variety of social and historical factors that are-and are not-associated with an incarcerated person's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings highlight vaccination challenges unique to the carceral context and offer policy recommendations to improve trust in credible health messengers and health service provision for this often overlooked but vulnerable population.

Public opinion on the expenditure of adult-use cannabis tax revenue: Evidence from New Jersey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe New Jersey residents' relative priorities for the allocation of tax revenue generated by recreational cannabis sales. We aim to assess preferences for public health initiatives, including drug treatment, compared to a range of alternatives, including traditional policing, especially within the social and demographic groupings of people generally most impacted by punitive drug enforcement policies. METHODS: We collected population-representative survey data four months post-implementation of recreational cannabis sales in New Jersey (N = 1,006). We gauge respondents' top preferences for the allocation of new revenue generated by the legal cannabis market. Using multinomial logistic regression, we assess how various demographic and political factors shape public support for devoting revenue toward public health initiatives. RESULTS: While priorities are mixed within the sample, we find more general support for funding community-based initiatives in public health, housing, and education than for funding police, courts, and prisons. Among Black residents, the largest proportion chose investments in affordable housing. Regression analysis reveals political orientation as having the most consistent association with expressed preferences, with Republicans favoring investments in traditional law enforcement priorities over other potential funding domains. CONCLUSIONS: Recreational cannabis legalization is occurring at a rapid pace, yet important context, including how the tax revenue could be invested in communities, remains unclear. Insight into current public opinion on funding priorities suggests a desire for investment in fundamental societal institutions, including education and public health, rather than the punitive enforcement mechanisms that have defined cannabis policy for many decades.

A Bayesian Analysis of a Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Intervention for High-Risk People on Probation.

This analysis employs a Bayesian framework to estimate the impact of a Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) intervention on the recidivism of high-risk people under community supervision. The study relies on the reanalysis of experimental datal using a Bayesian logistic regression model. In doing so, new estimates of programmatic impact were produced using weakly informative Cauchy priors and the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo method. The Bayesian analysis indicated that CBT reduced the prevalence of new charges for total, non-violent, property, and drug crimes. However, the effectiveness of the CBT program varied meaningfully depending on the participant's age. The probability of the successful reduction of drug offenses was high only for younger individuals (<26 years old), while there was an impact on property offenses only for older individuals (>26 years old). In general, the probability of the successful reduction of new charges was higher for the older group of people on probation. Generally, this study demonstrates that Bayesian analysis can complement the more commonplace Null Hypothesis Significance Test (NHST) analysis in experimental research by providing practically useful probability information. Additionally, the specific findings of the reestimation support the principles of risk-needs responsivity and risk-stratified community supervision and align with related findings, though important differences emerge. In this case, the Bayesian estimations suggest that the effect of the intervention may vary for different types of crime depending on the age of the participants. This is informative for the development of evidence-based correctional policy and effective community supervision programming.

COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal and Medical Distrust Held by Correctional Officers.

This study explores COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among prison security staff and the extent to which they trust varied sources of information about the vaccines. Cross-sectional survey data were obtained from a state-wide sample of corrections officers (COs, hereafter; n = 1208) in February 2021. Group differences, disaggregated by demographic characteristics, were examined using F-tests and t-tests. Despite the comparatively limited risk of contracting the virus, non-security staff reported they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine at no cost (74%), compared to their more vulnerable CO counterparts (49%). We observed vaccine refusal correlations between COs' reported gender, age, and length of time working as a CO, but none with their self-reported race. Vaccine refusal was more prevalent among womxn officers, younger officers, and those who had spent less time working as prison security staff. Our findings also suggest that the only trusted source of information about vaccines were family members and only for officers who would refuse the vaccine; the quality of trust placed in those sources, however, was not substantially positive and did not vary greatly across CO racial groups. By highlighting characteristics of the observed gaps in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance between COs and their non-security staff coworkers, as well as between corrections officers of varied demographic backgrounds, these findings can inform the development of responsive and accepted occupational health policies for communities both inside and intrinsically linked to prisons.

Leaving Their Drugs at the Gate? Exploring Changes in Drug Use From Before to During Incarceration in Norway.

As the number of incarcerated persons who use drugs increases in many countries, it is important to understand the nature of drug use in prison by exploring how substance use patterns change from before to during incarceration. In this study, we rely on cross-sectional, self-report data from The Norwegian Offender Mental Health and Addiction (NorMA) study to identify the nature of changes in drug use among incarcerated respondents who reported having used either narcotics, non-prescribed medications, or both, during the 6 months before their incarceration (n = 824). Results show that about 60% (n = 490) stop using drugs. Of the remaining 40% (n = 324), about 86% changed their use patterns. Most commonly, incarcerated people stopped using stimulants and started using opioids; switching from cannabis to stimulants was the least common change. Overall, the study illustrates that the prison context leads most individuals to change their use patterns, some in unanticipated ways.

Opioid-specific medication-assisted therapy and its impact on criminal justice and overdose outcomes.

Background: The overlap between justice system involvement and drug use is well-documented. Justice-involved people who misuse opioids are at high risk for relapse and criminal recidivism. Criminal justice policymakers consider opioid-specific medication-assisted therapies (MATs) one approach for improving outcomes for this population. More research is needed that explores the impacts of opioid-specific MATs for justice-involved people. Objectives: This study sought to assess the effects of opioid-specific MAT for reducing the frequency and likelihood of criminal justice and overdose outcomes for current or formerly justice-involved individuals. Search Methods: Records were searched between May 7, 2021 and June 23, 2021. We searched a total of sixteen proprietary and open access databases that included access to gray literature and conference proceedings. The bibliographies of included studies and relevant reviews were also searched. Selection Criteria: Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review if they: (a) assessed the effects of opioid-specific MATs on individual-level criminal justice or overdose outcomes; included (b) a current or formerly justice-involved sample; and (c) a randomized or strong quasi-experimental design; and c) were published in English between January 1, 1960 and October 31, 2020. Data Collection and Analysis: We used the standard methodological procedures as expected by The Campbell Collaboration. Main Results: Twenty studies were included, representing 30,119 participants. The overall risk of bias for the experimental studies ranged from "some" to "high" and for quasi-experimental studies ranged from "moderate" to "serious." As such, findings must be interpreted against the backdrop of less-than-ideal methodological contexts. Of the 20 included studies, 16 included outcomes that were meta-analyzed using mean log odds ratios (which were reported as mean odds ratios). Mean effects were nonsignificant for reincarceration (odds ratio [OR] = 0.93 [0.68, 1.26], SE = .16), rearrest (OR = 1.47 [0.70, 3.07], SE = 0.38), and fatal overdose (OR = 0.82 [0.56, 1.21], SE = 0.20). For nonfatal overdose, the average effect was significant (OR = 0.41 [0.18, 0.91], SE = 0.41, p < 0.05), suggesting that those receiving MAT had nearly 60% reduced odds of a nonfatal overdose. Implications for Policy Practice and Research: The current review supports some utility for adopting MAT for the treatment of justice-involved people with opioid addiction, however, more studies that employ rigorous methodologies are needed. Researchers should work with agencies to improve adherence to medication regimens, study design, and collect more detailed information on participants, their criminal and substance use histories, onset, and severity. This would help clarify whether treatment and control groups are indeed comparable and provide better insight into the potential reasons for participant dropout, treatment failure, and the occurrence of recidivism or overdose. Outcomes should be assessed in multiple ways, if possible (e.g., self-report and official record), as reliance on official data alone may undercount participants' degree of criminal involvement.

PROTOCOL: Opioid-specific medication-assisted therapy and its impact on criminal justice and overdose outcomes.

Background: The overlap between criminal justice system involvement and drug use is well-documented, and criminal justice agencies have been particularly overwhelmed by the recent opioid epidemic. Treating opioid (and other substance) addiction as a means to reduce risk for future criminality and improve public safety is inherently a responsibility for the criminal justice system. In turn, the criminal justice system has a responsibility to manage and treat addiction among the individuals under its purview.  Policy recommendations place emphasis on the use of medication-assisted treatments (MAT) as a front-line defense among correctional populations, because its efficacy and effectiveness has been well-established in other contexts.  Despite this, criminal justice agencies have been reluctant or slow to do so. Objectives: The current review will provide criminal justice and substance use treatment decision-makers with information regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of opioid-specific MAT on offending and overdose outcomes. Specifically, the authors will address the following research questions: Do opioid-specific MATs reduce the frequency or likelihood of criminal justice outcomes, as defined by official or self-reported indices of criminal reconviction or rearrest, revocation of community supervision, mandated treatment failure, and specialized court docket failure? Do opioid-specific MATs reduce the frequency of opioid overdose among individuals with current or prior self-reported or official record of criminal justice system involvement? Inclusion Criteria: Studies were required to use strong quasi-experimental or randomized experimental designs. All studies used individual level unit of analysis and examined adults and adolescents who are male, female, or nonbinary and racially/ethnically diverse, with current opioid use and who have current or prior criminal justice involvement. Studies had to prospectively test the effects of heroin and methadone maintenance, buprenorphine, or naltrexone on criminal conviction, arrest, revocation of community supervision, technical probation or parole violation, mandated treatment failure, and specialized court docket failure. Overdose outcomes were also examined for samples in criminal justice settings such as jails, prisons, probation, and parole. Search Strategy and Data Collection: This review builds upon a prior review conducted by Egli et al. (2009) and examined studies meeting the inclusion criteria above published between 1960 and October 31, 2020. The following platforms and databases (in parentheticals) were used: EBSCOhost (Criminal Justice Abstracts, SocINDEX with Full Text, Legal Collection, Wilson Omnifile, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Women's Studies International [includes grey literature]); ProQuest (Criminal Justice Database, PAIS [includes grey literature], Dissertations and Theses Global [includes grey literature]); Gale (Expanded Academic ASAP, Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center); FirstSearch (GPO Monthly Catalog, PapersFirst [includes grey literature]); ISI Web of Knowledge (Web of Science Core Collection); Office of Justice Programs (National Criminal Justice Reference Service); Summon; and Nexis Uni. The following open access platforms and databases will also be consulted: Elsevier (Scopus [includes grey literature]); Science.gov; ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal; and Google Scholar. Search terms were harvested according to their demonstrated success in drawing out relevant and complete results for studies regarding the effectiveness of opioid-specific medication-assisted therapies (MATs). From this process 5 core search strings were created, each one with the same general base terms, but unique outcome measure(s). Analysis: For binary offending outcomes (e.g., arrest, conviction, incarceration, specialty court failure, mandated treatment failure, or community supervision failure) and overdose outcomes, odds ratios were computed, and for continuous or quasi-continuous outcomes (e.g., total number of arrests), a standardized mean difference type effect size was computed and then transformed into an odds ratio. We used the χ 2 test that goes with the forest plot and computed the I 2 statistic to assess heterogeneity. Risk of bias was assessed with (1) the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials; and (2) the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions assessment tool.

Medication assisted treatment (MAT) in criminal justice settings as a double-edged sword: balancing novel addiction treatments and voluntary participation.

Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) provides an opportunity to address opioid addiction among justice-involved individuals, an often difficult to reach population. This potential has been increasingly recognized by agencies, policymakers and pharmaceutical companies. The result has been a marked increase in the number of drug courts, prisons and agencies in which MAT, notably with long-acting injectable medications, is offered. While this is a positive development, ensuring that vulnerable individuals are in a position voluntarily participation within the complex criminal justice environment is necessary. The unequal authority and agency inherent in the nature of these environments should be recognized. Therefore, rigorous protections, mirroring the goals of the consent processes required for medical or sociobehavorial research, should be employed when MAT is offered to protect individual autonomy.

The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE).

OBJECTIVES: This article provides a description and preliminary assessment of the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE), a randomized housing mobility program for former prisoners designed to test whether residential relocation far away from former neighborhoods, incentivized through the provision of a housing subsidy, can yield reductions in recidivism. METHODS: The MOVE program was implemented as a randomized controlled trial. Participants were recruited from four different Maryland prisons and randomly assigned to experimental groups. In the first iteration of the experiment, treatment group participants received 6 months of free housing away from their home jurisdiction and control group participants received free housing back in their home jurisdiction. In the second iteration of the experiment, the treatment group remained the same and the control condition was redesigned to represent the status quo and did not receive free housing. Analyses were conducted of one-year rearrest rates. RESULTS: With respect to reductions in recidivism, pilot results suggest that there is some benefit to moving and a benefit to receiving free housing. Rearrest was lower among the treatment group of movers than the non-movers, and was also lower for non-movers who received free housing versus non-movers who did not receive housing. CONCLUSIONS: To the extent that pilot results can be validated and replicated in a full-scale implementation of the MOVE program, policies that provide greater access to housing assistance for formerly incarcerated individuals may yield substantial public safety benefits, particularly housing opportunities located far away from former neighborhoods.

Effect of continuing care for people with cocaine dependence on criminal justice sentences.

While continuing care for substance use treatment has been associated with reduced involvement in the criminal justice system, much of this research lacks random assignment to continuing care and so is limited by self-selection bias. This study sought to determine the impact of adding telephone-based continuing care to intensive outpatient programs on criminal justice outcomes for people with cocaine dependence. In three continuing care studies, spanning 1998-2008, participants were randomly assigned to an intensive outpatient program or an intensive outpatient program plus a telephone-based continuing care intervention. Cocaine-dependent participants from these three studies were included in the analyses, with outcomes derived from a dataset of jurisdiction-wide criminal sentences from a state sentencing agency. Multiple logistic regression was employed to examine the odds of a criminal conviction occurring in the 4 years after enrollment in a continuing care study. The results showed that, controlling for a criminal sentence in the previous year, gender, age, and continuing care study, people with cocaine dependence randomized to an intensive outpatient program plus a telephone-based continuing care intervention had 54% lower odds (p = 0.05, odds ratio = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.20-1.02) of a criminal sentence in the 4 years after enrollment in the continuing care study, compared with those randomized to an intensive outpatient program alone. We can conclude that adding telephone monitoring and counseling to intensive outpatient programs is associated with fewer criminal convictions over a 4-year follow-up period compared with intensive outpatient programs alone.