Fostering Community-Engaged Research on Criminal Legal Innovations with Logic Models.

There is a persistent disconnect between research and practice, both in the social work profession as well as in the criminal legal system. Community-engaged research has been suggested as an approach to bridge this divide, but specific tools are needed to integrate research and practice efforts. This article presents three distinct logic model development processes that occurred in collaborative research and practice efforts in the context of criminal legal programming, including prosecutor-led diversion programs, a high-intensity drug court, and a multiagency justice and mental health collaborative. Logic model development incorporated multiple forms of program information using collaborative reflexivity, an approach focused on understanding the relationship between knowledge and power in the research process. For each program, the authors describe the context and process of logic model development, and how the logic models were used by both practitioners and researchers. The authors discuss how collaborative logic model development can facilitate community-engaged research, strengthen the research-practice connection, and advance applied social work scholarship.

"You feed and water a rose bush and eventually it blossoms": Constructions of self-transformation among mental health court defendants.

This study qualitatively examined adaptive responses to mental health court mandates through individual interviews with defendants in a mental health court (n = 31). Thematic analysis of interview data revealed that defendants engaged in meaning-making to comprehend and adapt to the perceived programmatic demands of mental health court. Programmatic burdens, court-enforced accountability, and intrinsic rewards were themes that converged to form a distinct adaptive response: construction of self-transformation narratives. Defendants in this study tended to interpret the intense burdens of participation as intrinsically rewarding and meaningful, leading them to see the expectations of mental health court as an opportunity to better themselves. The findings help to differentiate between compliance versus full treatment engagement among defendants with serious mental illness (SMI). This study's findings have important implications for how individuals with serious mental illness engage with court diversion programs and mandated treatment, and how these defendants may be best served in specialized mental health court programs.

Building a therapeutic relationship between probation officers and probationers with serious mental illnesses.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to engage in a collaborative process with a variety of stakeholders to develop the Brief Intervention to Promote Service Engagement (BIPSE), which aims to enhance the therapeutic relationship between probation officers and probationers with serious mental illnesses (SMI). METHODS: The BIPSE intervention was developed through a multistage "design for implementation" process, including a series of stakeholder meetings, observations of probation supervision sessions, incorporating existing intervention approaches, and workshopping initial BIPSE components with three randomly selected officers from a specialized mental health probation unit. Acceptability and feasibility of BIPSE components were assessed through focus groups with probation officers, additional observations of probation sessions, and qualitative interviews with probationers with SMI. RESULTS: Two foundational components of the BIPSE intervention were identified during the stakeholder meetings and observations: (1) engagement and (2) shared decision-making. These two components inform and undergird the intervention's third component, strategic case management. During focus groups, probation officers expressed interest in using the modified tools they were given and also saw the benefit of structuring their sessions. Probationers expressed their appreciation for the caring and collaborative nature with which their probation officers approached their sessions. CONCLUSION: Building a therapeutic relationship between probation officers and probationers with SMI is an essential task toward improving mental health and criminal justice outcomes. The BIPSE development and refinement process demonstrates that interventions targeting the therapeutic relationship are acceptable to officers and clients, and can be tailored and feasibly structured into standard probation practices.