70 Chapter 3 RESULTS The results show how prison staff and their facilitators experienced MCD, and we show if differences arise per professional discipline and if scores change over time. We included the data of 16 teams of prison staff from 3 locations with a total of 131 MCD sessions. The first questionnaire about single-MCD-evaluation forms had a response of n=871, which (with participants’ forms from 6 MCD sessions missing) showed a response rate of 95%. A response of n=122 by facilitators showed a response rate of 93%. The surveyafter-the-series shows a total response of n=167 of prison staff with experience of at least one MCD session. This second questionnaire had an overall response rate of over 70%. General evaluation after the series of MCD sessions In the survey-after-the-series, participants were asked: ‘All things considered, what grade would you give to the MCD sessions at DCIA, as you experienced them?’ Figure 1 shows the scores of all participants (n=149, 89%) with a mean score of 6.37/10. We asked participants (n=161, 96%) to evaluate the series on a scale from being 1) positive (n=70, 43%), 2) neutral (n=64, 40%), or 3) negative (n=27, 17%). Qualitative analyses (n=143; 89% of the 161 participants) showed that participants with a positive rating mentioned that MCD facilitated very different conversations from what they usually experienced at DCIA. Staff appreciated how MCD urged them to take time and explore topics more indepth. Some stated howMCD shed new light on dilemmas or fostered more constructive thinking. Participants mentioned how MCD positively influenced their communication style; it felt good to be heard, listen to each other and therefore, be more understood. One participant wrote: ‘I liked that there was mutual openness and respect; everything could be discussed’. Participants with negative ratings provided several reasons. Some mentioned that there was no need for this type of support since ‘we do not have moral dilemmas to discuss’. Some were critical of their MCD facilitator or complained about the conversation method, mentioning it was too rigid in its structure or unclear in its purpose. Some respondents stated that MCD is not the right tool for them: either they felt the team was doing fine and MCD was not needed, or they experienced their team culture as unsafe, so opening up in MCD felt challenging. Overall, negative experiences regarding MCD are linked to turbulent organizational circumstances. Participants mentioned challenges within DCIA, e.g., high work pressure, lack of basic skills or willingness to address issues constructively.