Seeing the Whole Person: Trauma-Informed Care in Pretrial Supervision

Guest Author • June 2, 2026

Share this article

How recognizing trauma improves court appearance, reduces new arrests, and strengthens the justice system legitimacy

Trauma-informed care is not a trend in pretrial services. It is a framework that recognizes a clear reality: many individuals entering the justice system have experienced significant trauma, instability, addiction, violence, poverty, mental illness, or systemic harm long before they ever enter a courtroom. For pretrial professionals, embracing trauma-informed supervision means balancing accountability with humanity — while still advancing the core mission of pretrial services: maximizing court appearance, maximizing release, and maximizing public safety.

INSTEAD OF ASKING . . .


"What is wrong with this person?"
Trauma-informed care asks:

"What happened to this person?"


That shift changes everything

Why this Question Matters for Pretrial Outcomes

Many justice-involved individuals operate in a constant state of survival. Trauma can affect memory,

emotional regulation, communication, trust, decision-making, and even an individual's ability to comply with expectations. A missed appointment, a defensive reaction, or difficulty engaging may not simply be "noncompliance." Sometimes it is the manifestation of unresolved trauma, fear, shame, or chronic instability.


This does not excuse behavior — but it should inform how we respond.


In pretrial supervision, our interactions either reinforce distrust and fear, or help create pathways

toward stability and engagement. Research consistently shows that people are more likely to comply with court obligations when they feel respected, heard, and treated fairly. Procedural justice and trauma-informed approaches work hand in hand.

Applying Trauma-Informed Principles in Pretrial Services

Safety

Individuals entering pretrial supervision often feel overwhelmed, uncertain, and fearful. Creating emotional and psychological safety starts with simple but meaningful practices:


  • Explaining the court process clearly and in plain language
  • Setting expectations without unnecessary intimidation
  • Maintaining professional consistency across all interactions
  • Using calm, respectful communication at every contact


Safety extends to physical environments as well. Waiting rooms, reporting spaces, and offices should avoid unnecessarily escalating stress or shame.

Trustworthiness and Transparency

Trust is often difficult for individuals with trauma histories. Pretrial professionals build trust by:


  • Being honest and consistent
  • Following through on commitments
  • Clearly explaining conditions and the reasoning behind decisions
  • Avoiding punitive responses that appear arbitrary


Transparency promotes buy-in and increases engagement — two factors directly linked to court appearance and compliance.

Peer Support and Human Connection

One of the most powerful tools in trauma-informed supervision is connection. Peer Recovery

Specialists and individuals with lived experience can bridge distrust in ways traditional systems

sometimes cannot. In Cass County, incorporating Peer Recovery Specialists into pretrial services has

strengthened connections to treatment, recovery support, and stabilization services — while

reinforcing accountability.


Programs that integrate peer support consistently see improved engagement because participants feel understood by someone who has navigated similar struggles.

Empowerment, Voice, and Choice

Trauma often involves a loss of power and control. Trauma-informed supervision restores appropriate autonomy wherever possible:


  • Allowing clients to participate in case planning
  • Offering options for service referrals
  • Using motivational interviewing techniques
  • Building on strengths rather than focusing exclusively on deficits
  • Recognizing progress, not just violations or instances of noncompliance


Pretrial supervision should not simply monitor risk — it should identify opportunities for success.

Collaboration and Mutuality

Trauma-informed systems understand that outcomes improve when agencies work collaboratively rather than in silos. Effective pretrial agencies partner with behavioral health providers, treatment agencies, peer supports, housing and transportation resources, veterans services, and community organizations.


No single agency can address the complex needs many individuals bring into the system. Collaboration is not optional — it is essential.

Cultural, Historical, and Gender Considerations

Trauma does not occur in a vacuum. Historical inequities, discrimination, poverty, and community violence all influence how individuals experience the justice system. Effective trauma-informed supervision requires awareness of:


  • Historical distrust of institutions and systems
  • Gender-responsive needs and responses
  • Cultural barriers to treatment and communication
  • The impact of adverse childhood experiences and generational trauma

ADDRESSING A COMMON MISCONCEPTION


Trauma-informed care does not mean "soft on crime." In reality, it can improve accountability — because it increases engagement, communication, and compliance.


Pretrial professionals still assess risk, monitor compliance, report violations, protect public safety, and uphold court orders. The difference is how those responsibilities are carried out. A trauma- informed approach avoids unnecessarily escalating situations and focuses on responses that are effective, proportional, and behavior-focused. Respectful supervision and public safety are not competing goals.

Side by Side: Conventional vs. Trauma-Informed Pretrial Supervision

The distinction between these two approaches is not one of leniency versus strictness — it is one of effectiveness. Both aim at the same goals. Only one is built to reliably reach them.

Conventional Supervision Trauma-Informed Pretrial Practice
Asks "What is wrong with this person?" Asks "What happened to this person?"
Treats noncompliance primarily as willful defiance Recognizes noncompliance may reflect trauma, fear, or unmet need
Focuses on violations and risk Identifies barriers and builds toward stabilty
Standardized responses regardless of individual history Individualized responses informed by context and circumstances
Sanctions as the primary compliance tool Proportional, behavior-focused responses that avoid unnecessary escalation
Supervision officer as enforcer Supervision officer as coach, advocate, and connector to services
Works in isolation from other service providers Collaborates with behavioral health, housing, treatment, and peer support
Power Imbalance reinforces distrust Transparency and consistency build trust and engagement
Compliance measured as presence or absence Compliance understood within the context of individual progress
Cultural and historical factors largely unacknowledged Gender, culture, and systemic history actively considered

What This Means for Court Appearance and New Arrests

The evidence is consistent: when individuals feel respected, seen, and supported, they are more likely to engage meaningfully in supervision — and more likely to achieve the outcomes the court requires.


Court appearance rates improve when supervision builds trust rather than fear. Where conventional supervision may interpret a missed appointment as defiance, trauma-informed practice asks what got in the way — and addresses it before a failure to appear becomes a warrant.


New criminal activity decreases when underlying drivers are addressed rather than ignored. Substance use disorders, mental health crises, housing instability, and unresolved trauma are among the most consistent predictors of new arrests. Conventional supervision monitors for those outcomes; trauma-informed supervision works to prevent the conditions that create them.


Engagement in services increases when individuals feel treated as human beings rather than case numbers. That voluntary engagement — in treatment, recovery, housing, transportation and employment — is itself a public safety outcome.


The legitimacy of the justice system is strengthened when individuals who are legally presumed innocent experience consistency, dignity, and fairness. Procedural justice is not separate from pretrial release's effectiveness— it is one of its foundations.


Long-term recidivism declines through the development of stability, connection, and personal agency — outcomes that surveillance and enforcement alone cannot produce.

"People respond better to systems that see them as human beings — not just case numbers. In pretrial services, that humanity matters."


- Stan Antonelli, Cass County Treatment Director, III, PhD, LCSW

The Broader Picture

Pretrial professionals are often the first point of contact individuals have with the courts inside the justice system. That interaction shapes how someone engages — with supervision, with supportive services, and with the court — moving forward.


When individuals feel dehumanized, unheard, or immediately judged, disengagement increases. When they experience consistency, empathy, dignity, and fairness, they are more likely to participate meaningfully in supervision and voluntary services.


As pretrial services continues to evolve nationally, trauma-informed supervision is becoming an essential component of evidence-based practice. It aligns with risk-needs-responsivity principles, procedural justice, and the broader mission of creating safer communities through smarter, more humane interventions.

The Bottom Line for Stakeholders


Trauma-informed supervision is not a departure from the pretrial mission — it is one of the most effective tools for achieving it.


  • Court appearance improves when people trust the system.
  • New arrests decrease when underlying needs are addressed.
  • Public safety is better served when supervision is built on engagement rather than fear.


The question is never whether to hold people accountable. The question is whether the way we hold them accountable actually works.


About the Author

Stan Antonelli III, PhD, LCSW, is a Licensed and Academy Certified Psychotherapist and Clinical Addiction Specialist. He specializes in the treatment of co-occurring disorders, anxiety, depression, complicated grief, and substance use disorders. With advanced training in CBT, TF-CBT, Adoption-Competent Therapy, and CISM, Stan brings extensive expertise to his practice. He combines his law enforcement background with his clinical skills as a former Special Deputy with the Cass County, Indiana Sheriff's Department. Stan holds degrees from Indiana University and Andrews University in psychology, sociology, and clinical social work. In November 2024, he partnered with Cass County Court & Pretrial Services to launch a new Therapeutic Services Division aimed at promoting equal access to voluntary supportive services and treatment in the pretrial field. This division is led by Mr. Antonelli as Treatment Director, along with the clinicians of Psychotherapy Associates of Kokomo, his private clinical practice. He regularly accompanies the Cass Court Services Director at national conferences, where he shares best practices in trauma-informed care and person-centered supervision strategies within the criminal justice system. His presentations focus on the application of evidence-based, trauma-responsive approaches to community supervision, with a particular emphasis on pretrial services. Through training and consultation, he helps justice professionals develop practices that enhance engagement, accountability, and positive outcomes for individuals involved in the criminal legal system.

Recent Posts

By Hilary Hartoin August 19, 2026
Why Communication Matters in Pretrial Justice
By Hilary Hartoin August 12, 2026
Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight
By Hilary Hartoin August 5, 2026
The decisions judges make during the pretrial phase are among the most significant in the criminal justice system. Every release or detention decision requires balancing constitutional rights, public safety, court appearance, victim considerations, and the unique circumstances of each individual before the court. As pretrial practices continue to evolve through research, legislation, and emerging technologies, judicial education has never been more important. Recognizing this need, the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) established the Judicial Education Workgroup to ensure judges have access to high-quality, evidence-based education developed specifically for the unique challenges of pretrial decision-making. Through collaboration with judicial leaders from across the country, the workgroup is helping strengthen courts by providing practical, relevant, and peer-driven educational opportunities. Why Judicial Education Matters Judges today face increasingly complex pretrial decisions in an environment of changing laws, evolving case law, heightened public attention, behavioral health challenges, and expanding pretrial services. While every jurisdiction is different, judges across the nation share many of the same questions: How can courts balance public safety with the presumption of innocence? What role should validated pretrial assessments play in judicial decision-making? How should courts respond to individuals experiencing behavioral health or substance use disorders? How can judges navigate public scrutiny while remaining impartial and grounded in evidence-based practices? These challenges require education that goes beyond statutes and case law. Judges benefit from opportunities to learn from one another, discuss emerging issues, and explore practical strategies that improve courtroom decision-making while maintaining judicial independence. A Workgroup Built by Judges, for Judges NAPSA's Judicial Education Workgroup was created to provide exactly that. Comprised of experienced judges and pretrial professionals from diverse jurisdictions, the workgroup brings together a wide range of perspectives to identify educational needs, develop relevant programming, and ensure judicial education reflects both current research and the realities of today's courtrooms. The group's mission is simple but significant: support judges with education that strengthens informed, fair, and evidence-based pretrial decision-making. As Judge Mark Spitzer of the Grant County Circuit Court in Indiana notes: "Despite being a critical stage of criminal procedure, our judicial education programs often neglect the pretrial phase. Pretrial impacts jail populations, recidivism, and criminal justice outcomes. Judges who have a criminal docket, and their communities, can greatly benefit from robust education on the evolving law and evidence-based practices that inform modern pretrial practice." By combining legal expertise with operational knowledge of pretrial systems, the workgroup helps bridge the gap between policy, research, and courtroom practice. Building the Judicial Track One of the Judicial Education Workgroup's most visible accomplishments has been the development of NAPSA's Judicial Track at the Annual Conference. Rather than adapting general conference sessions for judges, the workgroup designed an educational experience specifically for judicial officers. Every session is carefully developed to address issues judges encounter daily while providing practical tools that can be applied immediately upon returning to their courts. Topics are selected based on current legal developments, emerging research, judicial feedback, and real-world challenges facing courts across the country. Sessions are designed to encourage thoughtful discussion while respecting the unique role and responsibilities of the judiciary. This "judges teaching judges" model creates an environment where participants can openly discuss complex issues, exchange ideas, and learn from colleagues who understand the realities of presiding over pretrial proceedings. Addressing the Issues That Matter Most The Judicial Track explores many of today's most pressing issues in pretrial justice, including: Judicial leadership in pretrial release and detention decisions The appropriate use of validated pretrial assessments Behavioral health and substance use considerations Evidence-based pretrial supervision practices Balancing public safety, court appearance, and individual rights Each session emphasizes practical application while remaining grounded in constitutional principles and current research. Learning Through Judicial Collaboration One of the greatest strengths of the Judicial Education Workgroup is its emphasis on peer-to-peer learning. Judges often work independently within their jurisdictions, yet many confront remarkably similar challenges. The Judicial Track creates opportunities for meaningful conversations among judicial officers from across the country, allowing participants to share experiences, discuss successful approaches, and consider new perspectives. These conversations often continue long after conference sessions conclude, building professional relationships that strengthen courts well beyond the annual meeting. Judge Bo Zeerip of the Delta County Court in Colorado captures the importance of this shared commitment: "Judges are unique in the criminal justice system because we have the authority and duty to decide whether to release or detain presumptively innocent accused persons who come before us daily. It is an awesome power to be in a position to take away a person’s liberty prior to a guilty plea or verdict." He adds that judges are "duty bound to honor and protect the constitutional rights of both accused persons and victims, while also promoting community safety and efficient court procedures," emphasizing that continued education helps courts maximize safe pretrial release, court appearance, and public safety. Strengthening Courts and Communities Judicial education extends far beyond professional development. When judges understand evidence-based pretrial practices, local resources, behavioral health considerations, and effective supervision strategies, courts are better positioned to make informed decisions that promote fairness, enhance public safety, and improve court appearance rates. Strong judicial leadership also fosters collaboration among courts, pretrial agencies, prosecutors, defense counsel, behavioral health providers, and community partners. These relationships help create more effective and responsive local justice systems while maintaining public confidence in the courts. Advancing NAPSA's Mission The work of the Judicial Education Workgroup directly supports NAPSA's mission to advance fair, effective, and evidence-based pretrial justice. By developing specialized education for judicial officers, the workgroup strengthens collaboration between courts and pretrial professionals while encouraging consistent application of research-informed practices. The result is a stronger national network of judicial leaders committed to improving pretrial systems and serving their communities. Looking Ahead As pretrial justice continues to evolve, so too will judicial education. Emerging technologies, advances in artificial intelligence, changing legislation, behavioral health initiatives, and increasing public expectations will continue shaping the future of court operations. The Judicial Education Workgroup remains committed to preparing judges to navigate these developments with confidence while preserving the integrity and independence of judicial decision-making. Future educational opportunities will continue to expand as NAPSA explores additional ways to support judges throughout the year. Join the Conversation  Whether you are new to the bench or have decades of judicial experience, the NAPSA Judicial Track offers an opportunity to learn from respected judicial colleagues, engage in meaningful discussions, and return home with practical strategies that can strengthen your court. The challenges facing pretrial justice are complex, but they are not faced alone. Through collaboration, education, and shared experience, judges across the country are helping shape the future of pretrial practice—one informed decision at a time. The response to NAPSA's Judicial Track has been tremendous. Due to strong interest from judges across the country, this year's Judicial Track has reached capacity. If you are interested in participating, we encourage you to reach out to the NAPSA team. While attendance for this year's program is currently full, we would be happy to discuss opportunities, answer questions, and add interested judges to our contact list should additional space become available or as we plan future educational offerings. The continued enthusiasm for the Judicial Track reflects the growing recognition that specialized judicial education plays a critical role in strengthening pretrial decision-making and supporting courts nationwide. Although the Judicial Track is currently at capacity for this year's conference, we encourage interested judges to reach out to the NAPSA team. We'd love to connect with you, discuss future opportunities, and keep you informed as the Judicial Education Workgroup continues to expand educational programming throughout the year. We invite you to join us at future NAPSA educational events and experience the Judicial Track firsthand. Together, we can continue building stronger courts, advancing evidence-based practices, and supporting judicial leadership in pretrial justice.
By Guest Author July 29, 2026
Tina Turner and the Courage to Say Yes to Love I gave a keynote at NAPSA last year — Leading from the Emerging Future of Pretrial — so I felt both honored and challenged when the program committee asked me to build on it with another plenary this year. My new title — Leadership, Love, and Implementation Science in Pretrial — picks up where we left off, but it adds two notions that seem, on their face, paradoxical, unrelated, or even contradictory: Love and Implementation Science . When I think about a life of courage, love, and getting things done, Tina Turner comes to mind. Her gutsy comeback at the age of 44, after surviving abuse, arrived with her hit What’s Love Got to Do with It. Her voice resonates within us, ‘isn’t love just a secondhand emotion, and who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?’ Yet in the song she lets herself be drawn into the scary undertow of life, the tug of love she experiences that is pulling her forward. Loving and living fully are fearful, yet she says yes to life anyway. What Does Love Have to Do with Pretrial? You may be asking what love has to do with leadership and maximizing pretrial release, court appearance, and public safety. It’s a fair question. Some skepticism is well earned in a field that deals directly with the horrible consequences of crime, seeks justice, and runs on law, evidence, risk, and data. We work hard to be rigorous, fair, and effective. In contrast, love can sound soft, sentimental, and out of place — a nice feeling but secondary to the real work, precisely the kind of thing you keep out of serious professional decisions. But what is love? Perhaps it’s best to start with our own concrete experience — recall and allow yourself to re-experience when you ‘fell in love’ for the first time, the birth of your child, or the love you have for a parent, a friend, nature, or a country. These are not fleeting feelings, they are enduring states of being and indicators of value that create a context, and give us the motivation and strength to face life’s challenges. We Are Loved Into Being When our daughter was born, it was love at first sight. Then came the fears, the tensions, the hard work, and the need for help from others. Leaving the hospital carrying her in the baby carrier was joyful — and terrifying. Can we do this? How can we do this? Who can help us? Twenty-five years later, new challenges keep emerging, but these only strengthen and deepen our love. As best they can, parents create a context in which their children can grow and flourish. As newborns we have no language or understanding of what the world is, and no ability to function in it. What babies and young children can do, with incredible capacity, is receive and instantly respond to the love of their parents and wider family. We are, quite literally, loved into being. Love Creates the Conditions for Flourishing A loving context creates a sense of safety which unleashes our inner unrestricted and infinite desire to question, understand, know, value, choose, act, love in return, and flourish. Love is not self-protective. It is self-giving, risky, tremendously difficult to achieve and even harder to sustain. Of course, none of us are loved perfectly and we live in a deeply imperfect world. The absence of love is always wounding — it introduces elements of illegitimate coercion and leaves us anxious, constricted, fearful, self-protective, and insecure. The mixture of loving and the non-loving is real; it gives rise to our potential for good but also to many of the problems which pretrial justice agencies seek to address. Love as Leadership, Creating a Context Where Everyone Can Flourish To be present to love we must transcend ourselves in response to that terrifying tug in our lives. It is not about us; it is about responding to something of value and importance greater than us. To the extent that we intentionally act in this way, we constitute ourselves and reality, making a unique contribution to the flow of history and the arc of justice. Leaders, both formal and informal, have an important role. Their job is to create a context in which their agency and fellow staff — and the systems and institutions of justice — can flourish and meet their true ends. A loving context preserves, carries forward, and goes beyond what is fair or required, allowing this fully human flourishing to take place. The discipline of doing all the hard work to remain loving while building that context, despite the fears, challenges, and forces that constantly threaten to take us off course into what is non-loving, is what it means to be in love with our work. The Leaders Who Love and Inspire Us To me, the luminaries in our field have fallen and stayed in love with pretrial, grounding their extraordinarily intelligent, diligent, painstaking, and value driven work. I think of Chief Justice Rehnquist who asserted, “In our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception,” ( U.S. v. Salerno ), and so many colleagues like Lori Eville, Spurgeon Kennedy, Tim Schnacke, Barb Hankey ... So, What's Science Got to Do with It? Everything — and, again, not in the way you think. Our field has done a remarkable job of naming what legal and evidence-based pretrial practices should look like. The National Institute of Corrections (NIC), the American Bar Association, and NAPSA have painstakingly traced the history of pretrial jurisprudence and practice, to discern and hand us the essential elements, the outcomes, and the shared standards of excellence we hold ourselves to. We know, in broad strokes, what to do. What most jurisdictions have not yet solved is how to get all the way there, and how to stay there when the training grant ends, the champion retires, or the first hard case hits the news. Implementation science gives us a reliable, repeatable method for exactly that. Its six active implementation frameworks help us foster the competency, organization, and leadership drivers that make change stick and evolve. This includes installing usable practices through defined stages and ongoing coaching rather than one-time trainings as well as running short improvement cycles to self-correct and keep on course. The scientific method is demanding — it must be applied rigorously and systematically, and it requires new learning — but if leaders establish a loving context within an organization, it becomes possible to collectively implement and sustain these implementation frameworks. Context conditions our consciousness and the actions we take. It turns out that love and science walk hand in hand. An Invitation to Reno to Put Love and Science into Practice I’ve spent more than a decade helping agencies use both love and science, as part of the NIC pretrial faculty and, most recently, as an implementation coach to New Mexico’s remarkable Administrative Office of the Court’s statewide pretrial team that has helped all thirteen judicial districts and thirty-three counties of the state to successfully implement legal and evidence-based pretrial justice programs and outcomes. As you prepare for Reno, ask yourself: What’s love — and implementation science — got to do with it, with you and your work in pretrial? Come to the keynote for the fuller story, followed by a two-hour workshop where we will apply these ideas directly to your team, your jurisdiction, and the place you’re most stuck or challenged right now. Bring your hardest case, the place of discord you would rather not face — that is the point. It is the place where you will meet the tension and the scary tug that is calling you to transcend where you are now and get to where you want to be.  About the Author:
By Wendy Venvertloh July 20, 2026
During Pretrial, Probation, and Parole Supervision Week
By Hilary Hartoin July 16, 2026
Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight
By Hilary Hartoin July 1, 2026
Building Leaders, Sharing Innovation, and Strengthening Pretrial Justice Across New Mexico When people talk about successful pretrial reform, they often focus on legislation, policies, or data. Those elements matter—but lasting change begins with people. It begins with leaders who are willing to learn together, challenge one another, and build a professional community committed to improving justice. That spirit was on full display at the 2026 New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network (NM PEN) Summit, held June 23–24, where pretrial leaders from across New Mexico and around the country gathered for two days of collaboration, leadership development, and innovation. A Network Built on Community The New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network was established in 2020 by Kelly Bradford, Director of the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), with a vision of creating for New Mexico what the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Pretrial Executive Network had long provided nationally—a trusted community where pretrial leaders could connect, learn, solve problems together, and support one another through the complex work of system change. The NIC Pretrial Executive Network, championed for many years by Lori Eville, demonstrated the value of executive-level collaboration. Lori understood that pretrial leadership requires more than technical expertise. It requires navigating adaptive challenges, leading organizational change, and continuously moving systems forward. Just as importantly, she recognized that the work can sometimes feel isolating. For many of us, the NIC PEN became far more than a professional network. It became a place to test ideas, seek advice, celebrate successes, and rely on colleagues who truly understood the unique challenges of pretrial leadership. Nearly all of the national speakers and facilitators who have participated in NM PEN over the years are current or former members of the NIC PEN. They appreciate the importance of maintaining a professional community created by—and for—pretrial practitioners. When New Mexico began implementing statewide pretrial reforms, leaders recognized that lasting success would require more than policy changes. It would require an ongoing investment in the people responsible for implementing those reforms every day. Today, that vision has become reality. NM PEN has grown into a vibrant statewide community representing all 13 Judicial Districts, Administrative Office of the Courts Pretrial Management, and justice system partners who meet monthly to share ideas, address emerging challenges, and strengthen evidence-based practice across New Mexico. Continuing the Work Through the Annual Summit The annual NM PEN Summit extends those monthly conversations by providing dedicated time for strategic planning, leadership development, and peer learning. This year's summit welcomed 27 pretrial executives and justice system partners from New Mexico, Arizona, Indiana, Washington, D.C., and Maine, along with representatives from the Center for Effective Public Policy. The summit also reflected the strong partnership between state and national leadership. Among those participating were NAPSA Board members Domingo Corona, Hillary Hartoin, and Mike Kainu, as well as Tanya Anderson, APPR, Elizabeth Simoni, Kelly Bradford, Gilbert Jaramillo, and pretrial leaders representing every New Mexico judicial district. Justice Vigil also joined the summit to recognize the remarkable progress New Mexico has made over the past several years. Having witnessed many of the state's early conversations surrounding pretrial reform, he reflected on how those once-ambitious ideas have grown into meaningful statewide improvements supported by a dedicated community of practitioners. Leadership Beyond Management Throughout the summit, participants explored topics essential to modern pretrial leadership, including organizational culture, motivational interviewing as a leadership tool, stakeholder engagement, evidence-based decision-making, and using data to improve both supervision practices and system outcomes. Sessions emphasized that effective leadership extends well beyond managing operations. It requires building healthy organizational culture, investing in staff, fostering innovation, and creating environments where evidence-based practices can thrive. Rather than focusing solely on presentations, the summit encouraged discussion among peers facing similar challenges in jurisdictions across the state. Participants shared practical solutions, exchanged experiences, and explored how successful local practices might be adapted elsewhere. Celebrating Innovation Across New Mexico One of the summit's highlights was hearing directly from each judicial district about the accomplishments, innovations, and progress made during the past year. These presentations showcased the creativity and dedication of New Mexico's pretrial professionals while providing opportunities for agencies to learn from one another's successes. Whether implementing new programs, strengthening partnerships, improving data collection, or refining supervision practices, each district demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement. Participants also took part in an interactive leadership exercise in which they developed and presented mock NAPSA conference workshops. The activity encouraged attendees to think beyond their local jurisdictions and consider how their experiences could contribute to the national conversation surrounding pretrial justice. The exercise reinforced an important message: every agency has knowledge worth sharing, and leadership includes helping others grow.
By Guest Author June 24, 2026
Pretrial supervision serves a clear mandate: ensure individuals appear in court, prevent new criminal activity, and administer justice equitably for people who are legally presumed innocent. High functioning pretrial agencies take that mandate seriously — and the evidence compels us to ask not just what we are trying to achieve, but how we can most effectively get there.
By Hilary Hartoin June 18, 2026
Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight
Show More