Report on Veteran Identification in Community Supervision and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Critical Intersection of Justice, Health, and Sustainable Development

The identification of veterans within community supervision systems is a critical component for achieving key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). With approximately 3.7 million adults under probation or parole in the United States as of 2022, community supervision presents a significant opportunity for early intervention. However, systemic failures in identifying this population undermine efforts to build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions.

Systemic Gaps and Their Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Current practices within community supervision agencies are inconsistent, hindering the development of strong and effective justice institutions. This creates significant gaps in service delivery.

• Many agencies fail to systematically identify veterans at intake, leading to missed opportunities for crucial interventions that can reduce recidivism and enhance public safety.
• The inconsistent application of screening tools, such as intake assessments and federal verification systems (VRSS, SQUARES), means many veterans are not recognized.
• Over-reliance on self-reporting mechanisms allows individuals to fall through the cracks, preventing them from accessing justice and support systems tailored to their needs.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being & SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The failure to identify veterans exacerbates health challenges and perpetuates inequality within the justice system. Veterans often present with unique, service-related conditions that require specialized care.

• A significant number of justice-involved veterans live with conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury (TBI), and substance use disorders.
• When unidentified, these individuals are often placed on general caseloads, denying them access to targeted services that address the root causes of their justice involvement.
• This systemic oversight results in unequal access to care and support, undermining the goal of ensuring healthy lives and well-being for all and reducing inequalities for a vulnerable population group.

Recommendations for Institutional Reform and SDG Achievement

To address these challenges, a coordinated effort is required to reform identification practices, aligning with national guidance and fostering partnerships as envisioned in SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Adoption of National Standards and Best Practices

1. Implement Specialized Caseloads: In line with the American Probation and Parole Association’s 2024 National Standards, agencies should create specialized veteran caseloads to provide tailored support.
2. Standardize Definitions and Verification: Adopt a consistent definition of “military veteran” and mandate the use of federal verification tools like VRSS to improve the accuracy and reliability of identification efforts, as recommended by the Council’s Veterans Justice Commission.
3. Establish Veteran-Focused Roles: Jurisdictions should follow the example of pioneers like Multnomah County, Oregon, by creating dedicated roles within supervision agencies to oversee veteran identification and service connection.

A Call for State-Level Action and Inter-Agency Collaboration

A more actionable path forward involves systematic reviews and the establishment of standardized protocols at the state level.

1. Conduct System-Level Reviews: States must evaluate current identification practices across both state-run and locally controlled agencies to identify gaps and weaknesses.
2. Establish Standardized Protocols: Develop and implement clear, standardized protocols detailing how veteran status is identified, which agencies collect the data, and how this information is shared across judicial and correctional systems.
3. Strengthen Coordination: Foster robust collaboration between courts, counties, and state agencies. This partnership is essential to ensure veterans are recognized and supported, thereby maximizing resources and improving outcomes for veterans, their families, and their communities, directly contributing to stronger institutions and safer societies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article directly addresses health by focusing on veterans living with “service-related conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, or other mental health and substance use disorders.” The goal of identifying these veterans is to connect them with “targeted services” that “support recovery and reentry,” which is central to promoting health and well-being.
2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The entire context of the article is the justice system, specifically “community supervision,” “probation,” “parole,” and “pretrial supervision.” It critiques the current system’s inconsistencies and calls for strengthening institutions through “standardized protocols,” “improvements in the identification of justice-involved veterans,” and better “coordination among courts, counties, and state agencies.” This is a direct call to make justice institutions more effective, accountable, and accessible.
3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The article highlights how a specific group—veterans in the justice system—faces an inequality of outcome. Due to inconsistent identification, they “miss out on specialized services or referrals” that are available and for which they are eligible. This failure creates a disparity in access to care and support compared to veterans who are correctly identified, leading to an inequality that the proposed reforms aim to reduce.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being. The article’s emphasis on connecting veterans with services for PTSD, TBI, and other mental health disorders directly supports the goal of promoting mental health and well-being.
   • Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol. The text explicitly mentions the need to connect veterans with services for “substance use disorders” as a way to address the “root causes of their justice involvement.”
2. Under SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The failure to identify veterans prevents them from accessing specialized services and diversion programs, which constitutes a lack of equal access to the justice pathways designed to help them. The proposed reforms aim to rectify this.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The call for “system-level reviews,” “standardized protocols,” consistent use of verification tools, and better data sharing is a direct effort to make community supervision agencies more effective and accountable in their mandate.
3. Under SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard. The current inconsistent practices lead to an inequality of outcome. Implementing “standardized protocols” and “national guidance” is a policy action aimed at ensuring all justice-involved veterans have an equal opportunity to be identified and receive support.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):
   • Implied Indicator: The percentage of veterans under community supervision who are successfully connected to mental health and substance use treatment services. The article’s central argument is that identification is the crucial first step to connection with these services, making the rate of successful referral a key measure of progress.
2. For SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Mentioned Indicator: The number of jurisdictions that have established “specialized veteran caseloads” or “veteran-focused roles.” The article cites Multnomah County, Oregon, as an example, suggesting this is a measurable step toward institutional improvement.
   • Implied Indicator: The rate of adoption and use of federal verification tools like “VRSS or SQUARES” by community supervision agencies. The article recommends increasing the use of these tools, so tracking their implementation would measure progress.
   • Implied Indicator: The number of states that conduct “system-level reviews to evaluate current identification practices.” The article proposes this as an “actionable step,” making it a clear indicator of institutional commitment to reform.
3. For SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Implied Indicator: The rate of accurate veteran identification at intake and across all stages of community supervision. A higher and more consistent identification rate would directly measure the reduction in the inequality of opportunity for veterans to access specialized services.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: counciloncj.org