No abstract

This paper critically reviews two diverse intellectual traditions concerned with community-based interventions: the literature on dissemination of community interventions and the critical psychology literature that is concerned with systemic power inequalities and structural injustice. The dominant dissemination-of-innovations framework has shifted toward an emphasis on community, yet it does not generally take into account issues of power and inequality within the diverse community spheres into which interventions are disseminated. On the other hand, critical psychologists, who have concerned themselves with both understanding and addressing issues of power and structural injustice, have tended to eschew the possibility of standardizing and making transferable practices, programs, and even processes that address these issues in particular settings. This paper traces and critiques both sides of this divide within community psychology, positing a framework to bring these diverse intellectual resources together so that community interventions might fruitfully be examined in terms of their community-based practices, or practices that bear on structural injustice. This framework is illustrated with a case study of the community-based practices of a widely disseminated evidence-based community intervention.

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeWithout some flexibility, replications of manualised evidence‐based programmes (EBP) may not achieve predictable outcomes due to differences in cultural priorities. In this case study, Families and Schools Together (FAST) was co‐produced with elders from a community of Hmong political refugees in the US Mid‐West. The paper aims to describe and evaluate the process of culturally adapting and implementing this universal parenting programme.Design/methodology/approachObservations of FAST groups to monitor programme integrity and notes on adaptation discussions were undertaken. Quantitative evaluations of parents in the first cohort (2 FAST groups) used a wait‐list control, randomised strategy, using three standardised instruments completed by the parents three different times. Data from five matched pairs of parent graduates (10) randomly assigned to “FAST now” or “FAST later” were analysed using one‐tailed, paired t‐tests.FindingsHmong parents and elders reported satisfaction on the cultural fit of FAST across the four groups, which graduated on average seven families each. Of 38 low‐income families who attended FAST once, 78 percent attended six or more sessions, in other words 22 percent dropped out. Parents reported statistically significant improvements in child anxiety (CBCL internalizing), child social skills (SSRS) and family adaptability (FACES II), with no changes in CBCL externalizing or family cohesion.Originality/valueThe paper provides a detailed study and evaluation of how an EBP can be successfully implemented with a highly socially marginalized group of immigrants in a Western society.