1. Putting an End to the Mass Incarceration of People Living with Mental Illness

2. My Story My story demonstrates that formerly incarcerated people cannot only change but can become key leaders of social movements and organizations. I have suffered from paranoid schizophrenia since I was a teenager. Wisconsin officials incarcerated me several times for behavior associated with this disabling mental condition. I spent 20 months in Wisconsin prisons in 1999 and 2000.

3. My Story I completely turned my life around over the last 16 years. During this period, I earned two master’s degrees and worked for several nonprofit organizations. I am currently a PhD candidate at UW-Milwaukee. Numerous mental health professionals helped me to reach the level of functioning that I am at today.

4. My Efforts to Reform the Justice System and Help Formerly Incarcerated People WISDOM: 11x15/ROC Wisconsin Campaign Milwaukee Inner-city Congregations Allied for Hope (MICAH): 11x15/ ROC Wisconsin Task Force EX-Prisoners Organizing (EXPO) Project RETURN

5. My Experience with Crimeless Revocation In 2007, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections forced me to spend six months in the Milwaukee Secure Detention Facility for allegedly violating a rule of supervison that did not involve a new crime. Milwaukee police officers arrested me for disorderly conduct while I was experiencing symptoms of my mental illness. Court officials all agreed that my behavior was not criminal. The judge dismissed the case, but I did not get to go home.

6. My Experience with Crimeless Revocation My probation officer, who had no training in mental health issues, moved forward with the revocation process. My former probation officer, a mental health specialist in Madison, disagreed with the decision of my probation officer in Milwaukee. He thought that a treatment alternative to incarceration would have been a better option. I faced a maximum of 12 years in prison, but the sentencing judge decided to let me go home.

7. The Growth of Imprisonment in Wisconsin

8. What Is Revocation?  A revocation occurs when Department of Corrections (DOC) officials reincarcerate an individual who is on probation, parole, or extended supervision for...  committing a new crime OR  violating a rule of supervision that does NOT involve a new crime.  What we call crimeless revocations, the DOC calls “revocation only”: both terms refer to re-incarceration of a person who has not been convicted of a crime.

9. Crimeless Revocations Play a Central Role in Maintaining Mass Incarceration in Wisconsin

10. Rules of Supervision  The majority of people released from prison have 25-55 Rules of Supervision to follow.  If they violate a rule, DOC officials can re-imprison people for acts like:  accepting a job offer without prior agent approval  unauthorized computer or cell phone use  crossing the county line  missing an appointment  failing an alcohol or drug test  entering a bar  borrowing money  malfunctioning of DOC’s GPS system

11. Costs of Crimeless Revocations Incarcerating individuals for crimeless revocations...  destroys lives (people often lose jobs, housing, and the opportunity to support their families),  contributes to overcrowding in jails,  adds nothing to public safety in the vast majority of cases, and  is fiscally irresponsible (imprisoning people for technical rule violations regularly costs taxpayers over $150 million dollars per year).

12. Revocation Policy Reforms In Other States  Hawaii, North Carolina, Washington, and other states have implemented a new strategy called “quick dips” in which agents send probationers and parolees who violate technical conditions of supervision to jail for 2 or 3 days instead of immediately sending them to prison for years.  Evaluations of this approach suggest that it can decrease imprisonment, save taxpayers money, and reduce crime.  In 2011, California ended the practice of sending people to prison for crimeless revocations.  This reform prevented the incarceration of 20,000 individuals over the last four years.  Evaluations of the policy show that it had no effect on violent crime in California.

13. Some Potential Solutions: Changing Laws 1. Enact Assembly Bill 309. This bill would place a cap of 3,000 per year on the number of individuals who can be imprisoned for crimeless revocations in Wisconsin.  This bill would have three huge benefits.  It would reduce the number of people being sent back to prison each year by 1,000.  It would force the DOC to refine its priorities.  It would save taxpayers more than $35 million dollars per year. 2. Develop Community Revocation Panels. 3. Place a cap of 30 days on the amount of time that parolees and probationers can be imprisoned for the most common types of rule violations. 4. Count good time served on supervision as time served.

14. Some Potential Solutions: Administrative Changes (Cont.) 1. Require more agents to obtain training in how to work with people who suffer from mental illness. 2. Hire more social workers to work as agents. 3. Develop more alternative to incarceration programs. 4. Increase the use of “quick dips” (the strategy of sending people who violate technical conditions of supervision to jail for two or three days instead of immediately sending them to prison for years). 5. Create a system of incentives that rewards agents for the success of individuals under their supervision.

15. Some Potential Solutions: Due Process Changes (Cont.) 1. Do not hold people in county jails while awaiting the hearing before the administrative law judge. 2. During the revocation process, release on bail all people on supervision who get picked up for rule violations that do not involve new crimes. 3. Enable a person who gets revoked to see a circuit court judge for sentencing.

16. Some Potential Solutions (Cont.) End the practice of incarcerating people for crimeless revocations!

17. The Criminalization of People with Mental Illnesses People living with mental illness are much more likely to experience incarceration than the general population. Each year, more than 2 million people with serious mental illnesses are admitted to jails across the country. There are now three times more mentally ill persons in prisons and jails than in hospitals. About one out of two people with severe mental illnesses has been arrested.

18. The Criminalization of People with Mental Illnesses 56 percent of state prisoners, 45 percent of federal prisoners, and 64 percent of people incarcerated in jails have a mental health problem. Less than 20 percent of these people receive professional mental health treatment. Although media accounts often portray these people as violent and dangerous, they normally get arrested for minor misdemeanors.

19. Barriers to Successful Reentry for People Living with Mental Illness Approximately 75 percent of people with disabling mental illnesses are not employed. Around half of all homeless people have suffered from mental illness at some point in their lives. People with mental illnesses who have arrest and conviction histories face even greater obstacles to finding employment and housing.

20. Potential Solutions: Expanding Wisconsin’s Treatment Alternatives and Diversion (TAD) Program The TAD program reduces imprisonment, reduces recidivism, and saves taxpayers money. Wisconsin policymakers should increase funding for TAD. Unfortunately, TAD currently only serves people with mental illnesses if they have a co-occurring substance abuse issue. Wisconsin policymakers should enable people with mental illnesses who do not have a co-occurring substance abuse issue to participate in the TAD program.

21. Mental Health Courts Mental health courts are alternative courts that focus on linking people living mental illness to treatment and support in communities. There are over 300 mental health courts in the United States. Elements included in mental health courts vary by location. Eligibility requirements (types of charges, types of mental illnesses) Admission before or after a conviction Use of sanctions and incentives

22. Potential Benefits of Mental Health Courts Studies demonstrate that mental health courts have the potential to reduce recidivism rates among program participants, increase participants’ involvement with treatment programs, improve the mental health of participants, and save taxpayers money.

23. How Mental Health Courts Could be Improved People should not be required to plead guilty in order to participate in mental health courts. Long-term incarceration and termination from the program should not be used as sanctions for failing to comply with program requirements. People who have been charged with minor, non-violent misdemeanors should not be forced to participate in mental health courts.

24. Mental Health Courts in Wisconsin Most counties in Wisconsin do not have mental health courts. In 2008, Eau Claire County implemented the first mental health court in Wisconsin. This court has saved the county money and diverted people from jail.

25. The Stepping Up Initiative This is a national initiative to reduce the number of people with mental illnesses in jails. This initiative will challenge counties and local communities to work together to find solutions. Six counties in Wisconsin have passed resolutions in support of the initiative.

26. Conclusion: Steps to Reduce the Unnecessary Incarceration of People with Mental Illnesses End the Practice of Crimeless Revocation Expand the Use of Treatment Alternatives to Incarceration Create and Implement More Mental Health Courts