To evaluate whether the addition of a wraparound facilitator to regular child protection services improved child and family functioning over 20 months.
Method:
A single blind randomized controlled trial with concealment and stratification across three sites (N = 135 eligible families with substantiated maltreatment).
Results:
Based on 2 × 2 mixed analysis of variance and intention to treat, both groups improved in child impairments, d = −.60 [−.81, −.39], caregiver psychological distress, d = −.33 [−.52, −.13], and family resources, d = .44 [.27, .62]. No measurable benefit was associated with the intervention (e.g., child impairments, d = .14 [−.12, .52]). However, treatment fidelity analysis revealed that many components of wraparound were either missing or present in both groups.
Conclusions:
The presence of a facilitator alone did not appear to improve child or family functioning if the various components of wraparound were not adequately implemented.
AltmanJ. C. (2008). A study of engagement in neighborhood based child welfare services. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 555–564.
2.
BelskyJ. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: A developmental-ecological analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 413–434.
3.
BerryJ. T.JonesW. H. (1995). The Parental Stress Scale: Initial psychometric evidence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 463–472.
4.
BickmanL.SmithC. M.LambertE. W.AndradeA. R. (2003). Evaluation of a congressionally mandated Wraparound demonstration. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 12, 135–156.
5.
BrickerD.SquiresJ.MountsL.PotterL.NickelR.TwomblyE.. (1999). The ages & stages questionnaires: A parent-completed, child-monitoring system. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
6.
BrickerD.SquiresJ.MountsL.PotterL.NickelR.TwomblyE.FarrellJ. (1999). Ages and stages questionnaires. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
7.
BronfenbrennerU.MorrisP. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In LernerR. M.DamonW. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
8.
BrowneG.RobertsJ.ByrneC.GafniA.WeirR.MajumdarB. (2001). The costs and effects of addressing the needs of vulnerable populations: Results of 10 years of research. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 33, 65–76.
9.
BrowneD. T.VerticchioD.ShlonskyA.ThabaneL.HochJ.ByrneC. (2010). The correlates and costs of parental stress in families receiving child welfare. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 29, 131–154.
10.
BrunsE. J.BurchardJ. D.SuterJ. C.Leverentz-BradyK.ForceM. M. (2004). Assessing fidelity to a community-based treatment for youth: The Wraparound Fidelity Index. Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Disorders, 12, 79–89.
11.
BrunsE. J.SuterJ.ForceM.BurchardJ. (2005). Adherence to wraparound principles and association with outcomes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14, 521–534.
12.
BrunsE. J.SuterJ. C.Leverentz-BradyK. (2008). Is it wraparound yet? Setting quality standards for implementation of the wraparound process. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 35, 242–255.
13.
BrunsE. J.WalkerJ. S.AdamsJ.MilesP.OsherT. W.RastJ.VanDenBergJ. (2004). Ten principles of the wraparound process. Portland, OR: National Wraparound Initiative, Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health, Portland State University.
14.
BrunsE. J.WalkerJ. S.BernsteinA.DaleidenE.PullmannM. D.ChorpitaB. F. (2014). Family voice with informed choice: Coordinating wraparound with research-based treatment for children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43, 256–269.
15.
BrunsE. J.WeathersE. S.SuterJ. C.HensleyS.PullmannM. D.SatherA. (2014). Psychometrics, reliability, and validity of a wraparound team observation measure. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 1–13. Retrieved fromhttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10826-014-9908-5#page-1
16.
BurchardJ. D.BrunsE. J.BurchardS. N. (2002). The wraparound approach: An overview of the wraparound process. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
17.
ByrneC.BrowneG.RobertsJ.GafniA.BellB.ChalklinL.WallikD. (2004). Adolescent emotional/behavioral problems and risk behavior in Ontario primary care: Comorbidities and costs. Clinical Excellence for Nurse Practitioners, 8, 135–144.
18.
CheungC.GoodmanD.LeckieG.JenkinsJ. M. (2011). Understanding contextual effects on externalizing behaviors in children in out-of-home care: Influence of workers and foster families. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 2050–2060.
19.
ClarkH. B.LeeB.PrangeM. E.McDonaldB. B. (1996). Children lost within the foster care system: Can wraparound service strategies improve placement outcomes?Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 39–54.
20.
ClarkH. B.PrangeM. E.LeeB.StewartE. S.McDonaldB. B.BoydL. A. (1998). An individualized wraparound process for children in foster care with emotional/behavioral disturbances: Follow-up findings and implications from a controlled study. In EpsteinM. H.KutashK.DuchnowskiA. (Eds.), Outcomes for children and youth with emotional and behavioral disorders and their families: Programs and evaluation best practices (pp. 513–542). Austin, TX: Pro-ED, Inc.
21.
ClarkeJ. (2011). The challenges of child welfare involvement for Afro-Caribbean families in Toronto. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 274–283.
22.
CongerR. D.CongerK. J. (2002). Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 361–373.
23.
CoxK.BakerD.WongM. A. (2010). Wraparound retrospective: Factors predicting positive outcomes. Journal of Emotional& Behavioral Disorders, 18, 3–13.
24.
DebickiA. (2012). An overview of the Canadian wraparound model and certification system. Hamilton, Canada: National Development Director, Wrap Canada.
25.
DuncanG. J.Brooks-GunnJ. (2000). Family poverty, welfare reform, and child development. Child Development, 71, 188–196.
26.
DunstC. J.LeetH. E. (1987). Measuring the adequacy of resources in households with young children. Child: care, health and development, 13, 111–125.
27.
EpsteinM. H. (2004). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A strengths based approach to assessment (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
28.
EpsteinM. H.RyserG.PearsonN. (2002). Standardization of the behavioral and emotional rating scale: Factor structure, reliability, and criterion validity. Journal of Behavioural Health Services & Research, 29, 208–216.
29.
GladstoneJ.DumbrillG.LeslieB.KosterA.YoungM.IsmailaA. (2012). Looking at engagement and outcome from the perspectives of child protection workers and parents. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 112–118.
30.
GoldmanS.FawL. (1998). Three wraparound models as promising approaches: LaGrange, IL. In BurnB. J.GoldmanS. K. (Eds.), Systems of care, promising practices in children’s mental health: Promising practices in wraparound for children with serious emotional disturbance and their families (pp. 34–60). Washington, DC: American Institute for Research, Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice.
31.
HodgesK. (1998). Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). Ann Arbor, MI: Functional Assessment Systems.
32.
HodgesK.WongM. M.LatessaM. (1998). Use of the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS) as an outcome measure in clinical settings. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 25, 325–336.
33.
HodgesK.YangeX.WotringJ. (2004). Outcomes for children with problematic behavior in school and at home served by public mental health. The Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12, 109–119.
34.
KesslerR. C.AndrewsG.ColpeL. J.HiripiE.MroczekD. K.NormandS. L.WaltersE. E.ZaslavskyA. M. (2002). Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in nonspecific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine, 32, 959–976.
35.
LittellJ. H. (2005). Lessons from a systematic review of effects of multisystemic therapy. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 445–463.
36.
LyonsJ. S. (2004). Redressing the emperor: Improving our children’s public mental health system. Wesport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
PullmannM. D.BrunsE. J.SatherA. K. (2013). Evaluating fidelity to the wraparound service model for youth: Application of item response theory to the Wraparound Fidelity Index. Psychological Assessment, 25, 583.
43.
RubinD. B. (1987). Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York, NY: Wiley.
44.
SainiM.BlackT.LwinK.MarshallA.FallonB.GoodmanD. (2012). Child protection workers’ experiences of working with high-conflict separate families. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1309–1316.
45.
SuterJ. C.BrunsE. J. (2009). Effectiveness of the wraparound process for children with emotional and behavioral disorders: A meta-analysis. Clinical Care and Family Psychology Review, 12, 336–351.
46.
TrocméN.KnokeD.RoyC. (2003). Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice. Child Welfare League of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
47.
WalkerJ. S.BrunsE. J. (2003). Quality and fidelity in wraparound. Focal point: A national bulletin on family support and children’s mental health. Quality and Fidelity in Wraparound, 17, 1–32.
48.
WalterU. M.PetrC. G. (2011). Best practices in wraparound: A multidimensional view of the evidence. Social Work, 56, 73–80.
