Differences in self and independent ratings on an organisational dual diagnosis capacity measure.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: There are a number of tools to assist services to measure their capacity to respond to co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders. This study aimed to examine whether services could accurately self-rate their dual diagnosis capacity. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collected from 13 alcohol and drug services across Australia that participated in a comorbidity capacity building initiative. The organisations provided a range of services, including pharmacotherapy and counselling services, residential and outpatient services, youth and adult services and withdrawal. There was a mix of government and non-government services.
RESULTS: Services rated themselves substantially higher than the independent raters at both baseline and follow up. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that services may not accurately assess their own capacity. For organisations trying to make improvements in their services, independent assessment may be more helpful than self-assessment in accurately determining service gaps. Overestimation of capacity may lead to failure to address important service needs.