INTELLECTUAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES VOLUME 47, NUMBER 1: 13–23 FEBRUARY 2009 13 American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Are We There Yet? Screening Processes for Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Jail Settings Anna Scheyett, Jennie Vaughn, Melissa Taylor, and Susan Parish Abstract Early identification of intellectual and developmental disabilities in persons in the criminal justice system is essential to protect their rights during arrest and trial, ensure safety when incarcerated, and maximize the opportunities to receive services while incarcerated and postrelease. Using tele- phone interviews of jail administrators (N = 80) in 1 state, this study examined how people with intellectual and developmental disabilities were identified in jails. Findings indicated that admin- istrators varied widely in awareness of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in their jails. Few jails (6%) used formal screening instruments for intellectual and developmental disabilities, others relied on officer observation and self-report (53%), and some provided no screen- ing at all; in addition, officers received little training in this regard. Findings suggest that few jails are operationalizing best-practice screening processes for intellectual and developmental disabilities. DOI: 10.1352/2009.47:13–23 People with intellectual and developmental disabilities who come in contact with the crimi- nal justice system face significant difficulties. Al- though evidence demonstrating that the presence of intellectual and developmental disabilities may predispose individuals to criminal behavior is mixed and marred by methodological flaws (A. Holland, 1991; Lindsay & Taylor, 2005), there is strong evidence suggesting that these individuals may struggle and be at a disadvantage throughout the criminal justice process. In addition, the de- institutionalization movement has resulted in a dramatic decrease in the population of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities living in institutions, from a high of 194,650 in 1967 to 41,653 in 2004 (Prouty, Smith, & Lakin, 2005), probably increasing their exposure to the criminal justice system in the community. As a result, individuals with intellectual and develop- mental disabilities are overrepresented in jails and prisons (Lindsay, 2002). Research has demonstrated that individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities face a number of risks during early interactions with the criminal justice system. As summarized in Table 1, limited understanding of legal terms and processes, combined with difficulties processing information, may result in their giving up rights without under- standing the consequences and put them at risk of wrongful conviction. The situation is complicated by the fact that these individuals often have height- ened suggestibility and are motivated by a desire to please, increasing their risk of confessing to a crime they did not actually commit (Brodsky & Bennett, 2005). Because of these risks to the rights of individ- uals with intellectual and developmental disabili- ties, it is important that they be identified early in their interactions with the criminal justice system; however, this is a challenging task. There is long- standing recognition that people with disabilities are often anxious to fit in and, as a result, are skilled at disguising their disabilities. This phenomenon led Edgerton (1967) to coin the term ‘‘cloak of competence’’ to describe these individuals’ attempts to pass as normal. They rarely inform police of their limitations and may try to hide them (Perske, 2000). This may be even more likely if police in-