In February 2020, I was invited to present at a symposium in Vilnius, Lithuania. I presented on the subject of my doctoral research: the implementation of an adolescent risk assessment instrument in Dutch secure residential youth care.
Historical Setting
The symposium, titled ‘Predicting behavior of delinquent adolescents based on risk and protective factors’, was hosted in one of the oldest universities of Central and Eastern Europe: Vilniaus Universitetas (1579). The historical building was home to three faculties (History, Philology, and Philosophy), and had endless medieval corridors and up to 13 court yards. Exploring its arcades felt like participating in an escape game.
At the Faculty of Philosophy, a charming U-shaped auditorium was reserved for the event.
The auditorium was packed with practitioners, managers, directors, policy workers, and academics from the Lithuanian juvenile justice and welfare setting. Several influential delegates were present, such as the head of Lithuanian probation, executives of the prison system, the director of a residential youth care center, the head of child welfare units, etc.
The research project was a scientific response to the lack of evidence-based measures in the Lithuanian juvenile justice system
A Scientist-Practitioner Symposium
The symposium focused on the use of violence risk assessment instruments as well as other assessment measures when working with delinquent youth in Lithuanian juvenile detention and probation services. In particular, the adolescent risk assessment instrument Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV; Viljoen et al., 2014) was evaluated. Evaluating evidence-based assessment instruments for this population had been the main theme of a research project that was conducted between 2017 and 2020, under the supervision of associate professor Dr. Alfredas Laurinavicius. It was a scientific response to the lack of evidence-based measures in the Lithuanian juvenile justice system.
The aim of the symposium was to communicated the research results to all relevant stakeholders and promote the debate on the use of evidence-based (risk) assessment measures. A secondary goal of the event was to connect the various youth agencies, because, similar to the Netherlands, the juvenile justice and welfare agencies work separately from each other, although they largely serve the same youth population.
Evaluation and Implementation
The symposium kicked off with an overview of the project's timeline, followed by a discussion of the research findings. Results of several studies evaluating the psychometric properties of various assessment instruments were presented, highlighting the differences between youth probation and youth prison samples on the strengths and vulnerabilities of the START:AV and the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM) scales.
The key objective of the presentation was to underscore the importance of a solid implementation process.
After discussing the Lithuanian studies, I shared my experiences as the coordinator of a risk assessment implementation project. I first described the setting in which I worked (i.e., a secure residential youth care facility in the Netherlands) and continued by addressing our reasons for adopting evidence-based risk assessment, and more specifically, for choosing the START:AV.
The key objective of the presentation was to underscore the importance of investing in a solid implementation process, including continuous evaluation and monitoring. Even if an agency adopts the most scientifically sound risk assessment instrument available, it will fail to inform risk management and reduce recidivism when it is not properly implemented and not supported by staff (see also the commentary by Sarah Desmarais, 2017). Still, in practice, risk assessment implementation is oftentimes boiled down to providing training. A carefully considered implementation process is crucial to successfully apply risk assessment, therefore, the importance of using evidence-based implementation models and strategies cannot be stressed enough.
The importance of using evidence-based implementation models and strategies cannot be stressed enough.
Eager Audience
Since the Lithuanian audience seemed to be more reserved than the typical Dutch audience, few questions followed the presentation. Nevertheless, during the final discussion, attendees regularly mentioned ‘Nyderlanduose’ (‘in the Netherlands’) and were apparently impressed by the risk assessment practice within the Dutch youth care facility and its substantial investment in implementation. Afterwards, several attendees expressed a desire to connect and exchange knowledge and experiences. This was encouraging feedback for the Dutch colleagues and a recognition of their continuing efforts to deliver a good risk assessment practice.
The symposium’s organizing committee looked back on a successful event: they succeeded in bringing together key stakeholders of the juvenile justice system to discuss the issue and importance of evidence-based (risk) assessment and evaluation. Hopefully, this meeting marked the beginning of a collaboration between agencies on improving the care for this group of vulnerable adolescents.
This is an adjusted version of a blog published on the website of the Maastricht Forensic Psychology section on February 17, 2020.
コメント