Background: Intellectually disabled persons are over-represented in forensic and criminal justice systems, but there is a lack of consistency in assessing and addressing forensic models of care. The dependence on institutional services that appear to be safe and the lack of neurodevelopment-specific adjustments of the risk assessment frameworks is a cause of concern about the equity and effectiveness of the services provided. Purpose: This PRISMA-ScR scoping review identified structural typologies, risk management strategies, and evaluative gaps of forensic models of care provided to individuals with intellectual disability by mapping and synthesizing existing forensic models of care. Procedure: A total of 1,285 records were found by electronically searching PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (20002025). Duplicates were removed and screened after which 52 studies were included. The data were plotted in a systematic framework that included model type, integration of risk assessment, diversion mechanism, multidisciplinary involvement and outcome evaluation. Findings: The percentage of identified systems which were secure forensic service models (46.2) was followed by diversion-oriented pathways (28.8) and community-integrated models (17.3). Scheduled risk evaluation models were documented in 63.5 % of the models; though less than 10 %utilized neurodevelopment-modified instruments. Even though 73.1% utilized multidisciplinary teams, 17.3% stated formal outcome evaluation. Conclusion: Forensic intellectual disability services are institutionally set-up and under-proven. Monopoly of secure model and low evaluative monitoring and a low degree of neurodevelopment-specific adaptation defines the importance of standardized outcome frameworks, longitudinal assessment and combined diversion pathways to increase equity and accountability of systems.