Rethinking Behavioral Health and Justice

For those of us in the recovery community, the intersection of the criminal justice system and behavioral health is an all-too-familiar reality. Too often, jails become default holding centers for individuals experiencing mental health crises or substance use disorders.

Here at Friends of Recovery Utah, our mission is built on the belief that compassionate care should be guaranteed and that every Utahn affected by mental health and substance use conditions should have the resources to recover and thrive. That is why we are closely following the ongoing efforts in Salt Lake County to reform this intersection.

In late 2025, Salt Lake County leaders engaged the Leifman Group—led by Judge Steve Leifman, renowned for his transformative work in Miami-Dade County—to evaluate local systems and provide actionable recommendations. The resulting report, outlines a roadmap for how Salt Lake County can improve public safety, reduce recidivism, and enhance outcomes for those with behavioral health needs.

A key framework guiding these recommendations is the Sequential Intercept Model.

What is the Sequential Intercept Model?

Developed in the early 2000s and widely promoted by SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration), the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM) is a conceptual tool used to map how individuals with mental and substance use disorders flow through the criminal justice system.

The goal of the SIM is to identify specific “intercepts”—points where an individual’s trajectory can be interrupted, diverting them away from the justice system and into community-based treatment and support.

The SIM identifies six main intercepts:

  • Intercept 0: Community Services. Crisis care resources available before law enforcement involvement is necessary (e.g., crisis lines, mobile outreach).
  • Intercept 1: Law Enforcement. Diversion by first responders who encounter individuals in crisis.
  • Intercept 2: Initial Detention/Court Hearings. Diversion during jail intake, booking, or initial court appearances.
  • Intercept 3: Jails/Courts. Treatment courts and specialized programming for individuals already booked into jail.
  • Intercept 4: Reentry. Supported transition back into the community after jail or prison.
  • Intercept 5: Community Corrections. Specialized supervision and support for individuals on probation or parole.

By mapping resources against these intercepts, communities can spot the gaps where people are falling through the cracks.

Key Justice Reform Recommendations for Salt Lake County

The Leifman Group’s report highlights that Salt Lake County is actually quite resource-rich across these intercepts, boasting strong coordination, existing treatment courts, and a robust crisis system. However, the system is hampered by fragmented coordination, a lack of data sharing, and critical housing shortages.

Here is how some of the top recommendations align with the SIM to create a more effective, humane system:

Intercepts 0-1: Enhancing the Front Door

The report emphasizes “upstream” prevention and strengthening crisis responses to avoid arrest altogether. Key recommendations include:

  • Updating 911 Scripts: Adding an option for callers to identify a “mental health emergency” to ensure the right responders are dispatched.
  • Expanding Mobile Crisis Outreach Teams (MCOT) and Co-responders: Increasing 24/7 access to these teams across the valley.
  • Prioritizing Receiving Centers over Jail: A concerted effort to increase law enforcement’s use of crisis receiving centers (and the potential creation of a South Valley facility) for triage and stabilization, rather than defaulting to emergency rooms or jail bookings.

Intercepts 2-3: Structured Diversion and Better Screening

If an individual is arrested, the focus must shift to identifying their needs immediately and finding appropriate diversion pathways.

  • Universal Jail Screening: Implementing universal screening for mental health, substance use, trauma, and criminogenic risk at jail intake. This is crucial for early triage and identifying candidates for diversion.
  • Structured Post-Arrest Diversion: Creating a systematized diversion process that embeds prosecutors and public defenders at the jail to divert appropriate cases before formal booking, based on objective risk and needs assessments rather than just the charge type.
  • Integrating Justice Courts: Ensuring the Justice Courts (which handle the highest volume of cases involving individuals with behavioral health needs) are fully integrated into system-wide diversion strategies, including better access to treatment resource information.

Intercepts 4-5: Reentry and Community Corrections

The transition back into the community is a period of heightened vulnerability. The report identifies significant gaps in continuity of care during these critical intercepts and recommends:

  • Coordinated Jail Discharge: Jail releases often occur without a plan, leading to a high risk of overdose, relapse, or crisis. The Leifman Group recommends planned discharge times, transportation to day treatment centers, medication continuity, and warm handoffs to community providers.
  • Wraparound Case Management: The County should implement robust case management that follows individuals through transitions (e.g., from jail to shelters or treatment) to ensure they do not fall through the cracks. This includes utilizing peer support specialists to help sustain engagement.
  • Expanding Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT): For individuals on probation or parole (Intercept 5) who struggle with compliance due to behavioral health issues, expanding AOT can provide needed structure and treatment engagement as an alternative to incarceration.

Cross-Cutting Critical Needs: Housing and Data

Perhaps the most vital recommendations span across all intercepts:

  • Solving the Housing Shortage: The report bluntly states that diversion and treatment are undermined when fundamental needs are unmet. A full continuum of housing from deeply affordable to permanent supportive housing is essential. The report also warns against “risk-mixing” in large congregate settings and advocates for data-driven facility planning.
  • A Unified Data Hub: To solve the fragmentation of care, the Leifman Group strongly recommends creating a cross-system “data hub.” This would allow agencies to securely share information, coordinate case management, track outcomes, and stop the cycle of disjointed transitions that leave vulnerable people stranded.

Why This Matters for the Recovery Community

“Nothing About Us Without Us” is our guiding principle at FOR Utah. The policies and practices at these various intercepts determine whether a person in crisis is met with handcuffs and a criminal record, or with a case manager and a treatment plan.

The Leifman Group recommendations provide a comprehensive blueprint. The challenge now is implementation. It will require sustained political will, collaborative funding, and a commitment to data-driven decision-making over the coming years.

As an advocacy organization, Friends of Recovery Utah will continue to monitor these developments and be your voice in the room during these discussions. We must ensure that the voices of lived experience are central as the County establishes its implementation task forces and builds out these crucial interventions.

When we divert individuals away from the justice system and into proper care, we don’t just reduce jail populations. We save lives, restore families, and make recovery a reality for more Utahns.

Similar Posts