Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Journal of Child and Family Studies
Gepubliceerd in:

01-12-2011 | Original Paper

Connecting the Dots: Stages of Implementation, Wraparound Fidelity and Youth Outcomes

Auteurs: Vicki Sprague Effland, Betty A. Walton, Janet S. McIntyre

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Child and Family Studies | Uitgave 6/2011

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Several necessary system and organizational support conditions for wraparound have been identified (Walker et al. 2003). Yet, the relationship between these necessary system level conditions and wraparound fidelity has only recently begun to be examined. Similarly, few studies have included a measure of wraparound fidelity when examining the relationship between wraparound implementation and youth outcomes. The statewide implementation of a wraparound demonstration grant offers the opportunity to explore these relationships and to identify factors that predict improvement in functioning for youth receiving wraparound. Findings suggest that significant relationships exist between (1) the stage of development of necessary support conditions for wraparound and wraparound fidelity and (2) wraparound fidelity and improvement in youth outcomes. Specific elements of wraparound (i.e., outcomes based and community based) and baseline needs and strengths (e.g., high levels of anxiety and conduct issues, poor functioning at home and in school, judgment, and risks) were found to predict a reduction in youth needs. Other unexpected relationships between youth outcomes and the cultural competence element of wraparound and being multi-racial were also discovered. These findings reinforce the importance of supporting high fidelity wraparound for youth and their families in a recovery focused behavioral health system.
vorige artikel National Trends in Implementing Wraparound: Results from the State Wraparound Survey
volgende artikel The Community Supports for Wraparound Inventory: An Assessment of the Implementation Context for Wraparound
Literatuur
Anderson, R. L., Lyons, J. S., Giles, D. M., Price, J. A., & Estes, G. (2003). Examining the reliability of the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths-Mental Health (CANS-MH) Scale from two perspectives: A comparison of clinician and researcher ratings. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 12, 279–289.CrossRef
Bertram, R. M., Suter, J. C., Bruns, E. J., & O’Rourke, K. E. (2010). Implementation research and wraparound literature: Building a research agenda. Journal of Child and Family Studies. doi:10.​1007/​s10826-010-9430-3.
Bruns, E. J., Burchard, J. D., Suter, J. C., Leverentz-Brady, K., & Force, M. M. (2004). Assessing fidelity to a community-based treatment for youth: The Wraparound Fidelity Index. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12(2), 79–89.CrossRef
Bruns, E. J., Leverentz-Brady, K. M., & Suter, J. C. (2005). Is it wraparound yet? Determining fidelity standards for the wraparound fidelity index. In C. Newman, C. Liberton, K. Kutash, & R. M. Friedman (Eds.), The 18th annual proceedings, a system of care for children’s mental health: Expanding the research base (pp. 185–190). Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, The Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, Research and Training Center for Children’s Mental Health.
Bruns, E. J., Rast, J., Peterson, C., Walker, J., & Bosworth, J. (2006a). Spreadsheets, service providers, and the statehouse: Using data and the wraparound process to reform systems for children and families. America Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 201–212.CrossRef
Bruns, E. J., & Suter, J. C. (2010). Summary of the wraparound evidence base. In E. J. Bruns & J. S. Walker (Eds.), The resource guide to wraparound. Portland, OR: National Wraparound Initiative.
Bruns, E., Suter, J., Force, M., Sather, A., & Leverentz-Brady, K. (2007). Wraparound fidelity index 4.0: Manual for training, administration, and scoring of the WFI 4.0, August 13, 2007 version. Seattle, WA: Wraparound Evaluation and Research Team, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington.
Bruns, E. J., Suter, J. C., & Leverentz-Brady, K. M. (2006b). Relations between program and system variables and fidelity to the wraparound process for children and families. Psychiatric Services, 57, 1586–1593.PubMedCrossRef
Bruns, E. J., Walker, J. S., & The National Wraparound Initiative Advisory Group. (2008). Ten principles of the wraparound process. In E. J. Bruns & J. S. Walker (Eds.), The resource guide to wraparound. Portland, OR: National Wraparound Initiative, Research and Training Center for Family Support and Children’s Mental Health.
Bruns, E. J., Walker, J. S., Zabel, M., Matarese, M., Estep, K., Harburger, D., et al. (2010). Intervening in the lives of youth with complex behavioral health challenges and their families: The role of the wraparound process. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46, 314–331.PubMedCrossRef
Cox, K., Baker, D., & Wong, M. A. (2010). Wraparound retrospective: Factors predicting positive outcomes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 18, 3–13.CrossRef
Doucette, A. (2007). Measurement properties: Child and adolescent needs and strengths (CANS). 4th annual CANS conference, Boston, October.
Effland, V. S. (2009). Monthly site assessment rating guide. Indianapolis, IN: Choices TA Center, Choices, Inc.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blasé, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).
George, E. R. (2010). Community-based alternatives to PRTF. Presentation at the 23rd annual children’s mental health research & policy conference, March 2010. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.
Glisson, C., & Schoenwald, S. K. (2005). The ARC organizational and community intervention strategy for implementing evidence-based children’s mental health treatments. Mental Health Service Research, 70(4), 243–259.CrossRef
Henggeler, S. W., Melton, G. B., Scherer, D. G., & Hanley, J. H. (1997). Multisystemic therapy with violent and chronic juvenile offenders and their families: The role of treatment fidelity in successful dissemination. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(5), 821–833.PubMedCrossRef
Lehman, W., Greener, J., & Simpson, D. (2002). Assessing organizational readiness for change. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 197–209.PubMedCrossRef
Lyons, J. S. (2009). Communimetrics: A communication theory of measurement in human service settings. New York: Springer.
McGrew, J. H., Bond, G. R., Dientzen, L., & Salyers, M. (1994). Measuring the fidelity of implementation of a mental health program model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62(4), 670–678.PubMedCrossRef
Metz, J. R., Blasé, K., & Bowie, L. (2007). Implementing evidence based practices: Six “drivers” of success. In Research-to-results, child trends. Publication 2007-29. The Atlantic Philanthropies.
Miles, P., Bruns, E. J., Osher, T. W., Walker, J. S., & the National Wraparound Initiative Advisory Group. (2006). The wraparound process user’s guide: A handbook for families. Portland, OR: National Wraparound Initiative, Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health, Portland State University.
Prochaska, J. O., Norcross, J. C., & DiClemente, C. C. (1994). Changing for good: A revolutionary six-stage program for overcoming bad habits and moving your life positively forward. New York: HarperCollins.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
SPSS. (2010). PASW statistics: Version 18.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
Stephens, R. L., Holden, E. W., & Hernandez, M. (2004). System-of-care practice review scores as predictors of behavioral symptomology and functional impairment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13(2), 179–191.CrossRef
Suter, J., & Bruns, E. (2009). Effectiveness of the wraparound process for children with emotional and behavioral disorders: A meta-analysis. Clinical Child Family Psychology Review, 12, 336–351.CrossRef
Walker, J. S. (2008). Supporting wraparound implementation: Overview. In E. J. Bruns & J. S. Walker (Eds.), The resource guide to wraparound. Portland, OR: National Wraparound Initiative, Research and Training Center for Family Support and Children’s Mental Health.
Walker, J. S., Koroloff, N., & Schutte, K. (2003). Implementing high-quality collaborative individualized service/support planning: Necessary conditions. Portland, OR: Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health, Portland State University.
Walker, J. S. & Sanders, B. (2010). The community supports for wraparound inventory: An assessment of the implementation context for wraparound. Journal of Child and Family Studies. doi:10.​1007/​s10826-010-9432-1.
Walton, B. A. (2006). Predictors of improvement for children served in developing systems of care. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. Proquest, 3242774.
Metagegevens
Titel
Connecting the Dots: Stages of Implementation, Wraparound Fidelity and Youth Outcomes
Auteurs
Vicki Sprague Effland
Betty A. Walton
Janet S. McIntyre
Publicatiedatum
01-12-2011
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Child and Family Studies / Uitgave 6/2011
Print ISSN: 1062-1024
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2843
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-011-9541-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2011

National Trends in Implementing Wraparound: Results from the State Wraparound Survey

  • Original Paper

Research on the Wraparound Process: Intervention Components and Implementation Supports

  • Editorial

Family Peer Advocates: A Pilot Study of the Content and Process of Service Provision

  • Original Paper

Maternal Depression, Locus of Control, and Emotion Regulatory Strategy as Predictors of Preschoolers’ Internalizing Problems

  • Original Paper

Is Maternal Fatigue Mediating the Relationship Between Maternal Depression and Child Outcomes?

  • Original Paper

Effectiveness of Group Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) in Changing Child Behavior, Parenting Style, and Parental Adjustment: An Intervention Study in Japan

  • Original Paper