Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20, Version 3 (HCR-20^V3): Development and Overview

Abstract

The HCR-20 Version 3 (HCR-20 V3 ) was published in 2013, after several years of development and revision work. It replaces Version 2, published in 1997, on which there have been more than 200 disseminations based on more than 33,000 cases across 25 countries. This article explains (1) why a revision was necessary, (2) the steps we took in the revision process, (3) key changes between Version 2 and Version 3, and (4) an overview of HCR-20 V3 's risk factors and administration steps. Recommendations for evaluating Version 3 are provided.

Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programs: A Proposal for Evidence-Based Standards in the United States

“…In response to the limitations of both actuarial and unstructured clinical judgment methods of risk assessment, the structured professional judgment model emerged. This approach combines the strengths of both approaches by using both statistical prediction and clinician interpretation and is gradually replacing unstructured approaches to risk assessment in BIPs (Douglas & Reeves, 2010). Structured judgment methods use actuarial approaches to yield a measure of predictive accuracy for violent outcomes (Heilbrun, Yasuhara, & Shah, 2010), but ultimately, the clinician has the power to interpret the information and to make practical decisions.…”

“…The first is unstructured clinical judgment, which is the most commonly used approach by clinicians (Douglas & Reeves, 2010), and in this approach, the clinician's professional opinion, intuition, and experience are used for gathering information and deciding what information is most related to future violence risk. Because these approaches do not yield a measurable metric of risk, they are impossible to empirically assess (Nicholls et al, 2013).…”

HCR-20 shows poor field validity in clinical forensic psychiatry settings

“…The most widely used SPJ tool in forensic psychiatry settings in the UK is the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 (HCR-20), which is currently in its third version (HCR-20 V3 ) 3. Both retrospective and prospective research has suggested that the HCR-20 is predictive of future violence, across a range of settings 3–5.…”

“…Although the HCR-20 has been repeatedly associated with moderate to good predictive power,3 this is largely based on assessments completed for research. In clinical settings, completion of an accurate and thorough HCR-20 is time-consuming (up to 14 hours on average) 14.…”

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Outcome Domains for use Within Forensic Services for People with Intellectual Disabilities

“…One study followed up reoffending at 1, 2 and 5 years post-discharge, 35 whereas another set of studies using the same data-set reported on whether there was reoffending behaviour within the 2 years following discharge from hospital. 78,79 Another, based in Australia, considered arrest data and 'any criminal justice involvement' following discharge. 80 A series of studies, based in the community, considered whether treatment within the context of a community-based forensic service led to a reduction in offending behaviours.…”