Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sr196 Veterans Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission releases summary of SR196 veterans study; recommends earlier identification and cross‑system data sharing
Summary
A 15‑month Commission study under SR196 examined veterans in the criminal justice system and recommended early identification, standardized veteran definitions, records-based veteran detection (RSS/SQUARES), cross‑system data collection, program evaluations, and expanded training to improve linkage to care and outcomes.
Commission research staff summarized findings and recommendations from a 15‑month study conducted in response to Senate Resolution 196 examining veterans involved in the criminal justice system.
Staff described a mixed‑methods effort that combined a Department of Defense veteran identifier merged with criminal justice data across the Commonwealth, surveys of president judges and county jail wardens, site visits to veteran‑serving programs and Department of Corrections facilities, and more than 50 stakeholder interviews. Staff called the resulting product the most expansive study of veterans in the criminal justice system in the Commonwealth to date and said a stand‑alone executive summary and the full report would be posted for public access.
Key recommendations included: (1) identify veterans as early as possible in the justice process, using consistent, standardized definitions; (2) where feasible supplement self‑report by using independent, records‑based identifiers such as Veterans Reentry Search Services (RSS) or SQUARES and make the veteran identifier travel with the case through courts and corrections; (3) collect and share expanded data about veterans' needs (behavioral health screening, treatments, housing and employment outcomes) to measure gaps in the cascade of care; (4) evaluate veteran‑specific programs (for example, veterans treatment courts and corrections veteran service units) for fidelity to best practices, outcomes including recidivism and social determinants, and cost effectiveness; (5) expand training and awareness among criminal justice stakeholders about available resources and about cultural sensitivity when working with veterans; and (6) pursue additional study into earlier intercepts (emergency services, police deflection programs) and reentry processes specific to veterans.
Staff said approximately 5 percent of people involved in the criminal justice system are veterans (staff characterized this as the percent identified in their merged data), and they urged standardized identification to avoid undercounts driven by stigma or self‑report limits. Staff recommended that any veteran identifier collected be preserved across filings, detention, court processing and, if applicable, into the Department of Corrections to improve referrals to veterans services.
Ending: Staff said they will disseminate snapshots of the report findings, present at national venues, and work with legislative and executive partners on implementation and technical assistance for counties that want to improve veteran identification and care coordination.
