Shortly after the suit was filed, the court assembled a team of correctional mental health experts to study mental health services in Ohio's prisons. Team members spent some 8 months visiting all but two of Ohio's 22 prisons. A final report issued in August 1994 concluded that Ohio's prison mental health system was systemically deficient and suggested that it would likely be found unconstitutional should the matter be litigated. In the course of its investigation the team made every effort to keep both plaintiffs and defendants informed about their procedures and findings. Parties' input into the investigation was also sought. This cooperative process avoided the adversarial formal discovery process, as all parties sought a fair and thorough assessment of Ohio's inmate mental health services. The final report faulted the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) in three major categories related to mental health services: human resources, physical resources, and access. The investigative team leader was asked by both parties in the lawsuit to be a facilitator in the decree formulation process. The decree commits Ohio's DRC to such important principles as using the least restrictive environment available for care and the least intrusive measures of treatment. The decree adopts a series of definitions of basic mental health care concepts, with the most important being the definition of "serious mental illness." This article also describes the monitoring of the decree; the selection of monitoring staff; the cost of the process; and the significance of the cooperative, nonadversarial process of addressing the problem.