Perceptions of Family Environment and Wraparound Processes: Associations with Age and Implications for Serving Transitioning Youth in Systems of Care

Abstract

Addressing the unique needs of youth transitioning to adulthood has long been viewed as a priority in implementation of systems of care (SOCs) and wraparound. Developmental research and "practice-based evidence" suggest that there are differences between transitioning youth and their younger peers in family environment and wraparound team processes. Although these differences are thought to have significant implications for wraparound practice, few studies have examined them empirically. The present research involves two studies examining differences across several age cohorts (i.e., 10–12, 13, 14, 15, 16–17 year-olds) ranging from early adolescent to transitioning youth in: (1) caregiver perceptions of role-related strain and family environment quality, and (2) facilitator, caregiver, and youth perceptions of wraparound processes. In Study #1, older age was associated with higher levels of caregiver strain. In Study #2, age was associated with differences between youth and other team members' perceptions of wraparound processes, such that older youth perceived teams as less cohesive than others on their teams. These findings suggest that transitioning youth and their families merit special consideration in wraparound implementation and underscore the importance of considering the perceptions of transitioning youth in system change and practice improvement efforts (192 words).

Holistic Representation: A Randomized Pilot Study of Wraparound Services for First‐Time Juvenile Offenders to Improve Functioning, Decrease Motions for Review, and Lower Recidivism

“…Similarly, Pullmann, et al (2006) concluded that youth enrolled in coordinated mental health treatment within a juvenile justice system are "less likely to recidivate at all, are less likely to recidivate with a felony offense, and will serve less detention time" (p. 394). Haber, Cook, and Kilmer (2012) noted that providing wraparound services is often more difficult for older youth than for younger children; however, providing youth with wraparound services may also produce "unique benefits" that can empower them to enact individual-and systemic-level changes (Haber et al, 2012, p. 464). Using case studies of adolescent boys, Myaard, Crawford, Jackson, and Alessi (2000) found that after receiving wraparound forensic social work services, youth showed improvements in compliance, peer interactions, physical aggression, alcohol/drug use, and extreme verbal abuse.…”

Systems of Care: New Partnerships for Community Psychology

“…Given the growing emphasis on the use of SOCs with diverse populations, several papers focus on the ways that SOCs need to modify operations and practices to address the needs of those populations. For example, the systemic issues involved in addressing the needs of youth in the juvenile justice system (Erickson 2012), young children (Finello and Paulson 2012), youth with co-occurring traumatic stress and substance use (Suarez et al 2012), and urban American Indian youth and families (West et al 2012) and older youth (Haber et al 2012) are described. Efforts growing out of the National Evaluation's System of Care Assessment (SOCA), which focuses on system change, describe the variability across federally funded sites (Brannan et al 2012) and the use of system change measures to predict individual-level change (Barksdale et al 2012).…”

“…The potential for such analyses, using data from the national evaluation, has only begun to be tapped. Of particular need is research that examines changes in children and families as a function of the quality of implementation of wraparound and work that examines the utility of wraparound for older (Haber et al 2012) and younger (Finello and Paulson 2012) youth, those involved in juvenile justice systems (Erickson 2012), and those experiencing traumatic stress and/or substance abuse (Suarez et al 2012). SOC-based work has identified gaps in system functioning and provided a springboard for policyoriented recommendations (e.g., Cook and Kilmer 2010a, b;Kilmer et al 2010a;b); however, overall, scant research has examined the broader context of SOCs (Burns et al 2006).…”

Sustaining and Expanding Systems of Care to Provide Mental Health Services for Children, Youth and Families Across America

“…Several of the articles in this issue highlighted the value of treating the whole family, rather than focusing on one individual or ''patient'' as the locus of care and intervention Finello and Poulsen 2012;Haber et al 2012;Suarez et al 2012). True family-driven care is when the focus of intervention is the whole family, and where the dichotomy between adult and child mental health systems is diminished.…”