The federal "Second Chance Act of 2005" calls for expanding reentry services for people leaving prison, yet existing policies restrict access to needed services for those with criminal records. We examined the interaction between individual-level characteristics and policy-level restrictions related to criminal conviction, and the likely effects on access to resources upon reentry, using a sample of prisoners with Axis I mental disorders (n=3073). We identified multiple challenges related to convictions, including restricted access to housing, public assistance, and other resources. Invisible punishments embedded within existing policies were inconsistent with the call for second chances. Without modification of federal and state policies, the ability of reentry services to foster behavioral health and community reintegration is limited.

How will we know if mental health courts are effective? The answers provided by future evaluation research will reflect the extent to which the social and procedural complexity of mental health courts drives the research design and plan. This article identifies the research challenges associated with studying the effectiveness of an intervention that is nonstandardized by nature and highly dependent on macro and local influences within the environment as well as personal preferences and relationship dynamics within the intervention itself. Explored are the research challenges related to isolating the independent effects associated with mental health courts. The article concludes with recommendations for how best to evaluate mental health courts to inform best practice and policy.

Two types of clustering were found: gender-specific clustering of disorders among inmates and spatial clustering of ex-offenders in impoverished communities. These findings suggest a need for gendered treatment strategies within correctional settings and need for successful reentry strategies.

No abstract