BetaGovThe Marron Institute of Urban Management

New York University60 Fifth Avenue, 2nd Fl.

New York, NY 10011betagov.org

We are fast. We are free. And we focus on research that matters to you. BetaGov focuses on practitioner­ledresearch that tests locally generated advances in education, criminal justice, health, and human services.We support more than 200 randomized controlled trials across a dozen states. One trial at a time, we arechanging the way knowledge is created in the public sector.

Why BetaGov?

*BetaGov trains agency personnel tobecome research­savvy “Pracademics”who lead trials.

The benefits of CIT-trained staff for reducing behavioralchallenges in prison residents with mental health issues

Agency: PennsylvaniaDepartment of Corrections StateCorrectional Institution (SCI)Greene

Pilot Duration:08/31/16–11/30/16

Pracademic*: Tina Staley

ContextCrisis Intervention Training (CIT)teaches corrections staff torespond appropriately tosituations involving incarceratedindividuals with mental healthdisorders, but not all staff havebeen trained.

Key FindingA mental health unit structuredwith only CIT­trained staffexperienced fewer informal(lower­level) misconducts than asimilar unit without CIT­trainedstaff.

BackgroundMore than half of prison residents have adiagnosed mental health disorder. Somecorrectional institutions have establishedtraining programs to prepare staff forinteractions with persons diagnosed withmental health conditions. Efforts arefocused on resolving crisis and reducingdisruptive behaviors. Crisis InterventionTraining (CIT) is an intensive four­dayprogram to teach corrections officers skillsand methods for interacting with thispopulation.

Pilot DesignIn a small feasibility pilot, SCI Greenerandomly assigned two pods ina Residential Treatment Unit (RTU),housing persons with mental healthdiagnoses. All staff in the interventioncondition pod were CIT trained, whereasstaff in the control condition pod were not.All other procedures remained identical.

ResultsThe table shows baseline characteristicsand outcomes. The groups differed incustody/risk level, which may haveinfluenced the outcomes because highercustody levels indicate a greater potentialfor problem behavior. Outcome analysisrevealed no differences between the groups’

rates of higher level misconducts thatrequired a formal hearing, whereas theintervention group had a lower percentageof informally resolved misconducts. Thecontrol group also reported moregrievances. Of specific interest is that alower number of the intervention group weretransferred to specialized units due toproblem behavior or for psychiatricobservation. These results indicate a benefitof CIT for correctional staff and providejustification for a randomized controlled trial.

Baseline Characteristicsand Outcome Results

Crisis Intervention Training(CIT)