Abstract
A description is offered of how colleagues in a variety of mental health disciplines were helped to implement a structured professional judgment (SPJ) risk assessment guide, the HCR-20 (Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997), in a maximum secure forensic psychiatric institution in Ontario, Canada. It is argued, in this descriptive study, that the implementation process in an institution can go awry in a variety of different ways at a number of important junctures. Yet it is possible, given encouraging consultation and support at the outset and continued technical assistance, to weave such a SPJ scheme into the fabric of routine clinical work and decision making. The point is made that such implementation efforts pay off by liberating creativity in the construction of post-release plans. In addition, they assist in ensuring reports prepared for formal boards are thorough, on point, and take full advantage of the information available from all team members. We identify and discuss eight factors that appeared to facilitate implementation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.