Does risk formulation help independent review board decisions on release of prisoners? A qualitative study with parole board members in England and Wales

Background: The Parole Board for England & Wales makes decisions on the release or continued detention of people in prison. Psychological risk assessments (PRAs) assist in decision making and it is crucial that they are of good quality, including coherent and useful case formulations.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to examine Parole Board members’ views on the accessibility, quality and usefulness of case formulations in PRAs.
Method: Interviews were conducted with 8 psychologist/psychiatrist members and 11 independent/judicial members.
Results: Respondents valued formulations in identifying idiosyncratic risk factors and linking these to risk management
strategies. Nevertheless, they identified challenges to their validity, with concerns about facts versus hypotheses. Particular
problems were seen in the assessment of those denying their offending and in collaborative case formulation. Integrating in
formation and hypothesising under what conditions a risk factor might be activated was seen as important. Ignoring ethnic and cultural factors was seen as commonplace.
Conclusion: The opinions of Parole Board users of PRAs provide information that could be used to improve the validity and usefulness of risk formulations, including adding to existing practice guidelines. A broader study of users’ perceptions of PRAs as a whole, not just formulations, would be useful and research on impacts is desirable