Wraparound in Washington State: Coordinating Care and Why it Matters Skagit Results: Dawn Scott and Terrance Ellison Pilot Site Results: Ericka Wiggins.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Service Delivery Strategy for Colorados System of Care Draft July 11, 2012.
Advertisements

1 st National Conference on Substance Abuse, Child Welfare and the Dependency Court Developing and Implementing Services for Children within the Substance.
Treatment Alternatives to Prison A Health Impact Assessment Scope of research February 2012 Health Impact Assessment – a structured yet flexible research.
JUVENILE JUSTICE TREATMENT CONTINUUM Joining with Youth and Families in Equality, Respect, and Belief in the Potential to Change.
Improving The Lives of Maryland’s Dually Involved Girls June 11, 2014 A project generously funded by the Abell Foundation & the Jewish Women’s Giving.
Skagit Wraparound Data and Statistics. Client Demographics Total of 28 youth and their families. One (1) youth was a readmission which results in an actual.
MHSA Full Service Partnership (FSP) For YOUTH (Ages 0-15) and TAY (Transition-Age Youth) (Ages 16-25) Santa Clara County Mental Health Board System Planning.
Setting the Stage: The Current Landscape of Children’s Mental Illness in North Carolina E. Jane Costello, Ph.D. Duke University.
Relationship of asthma in children to homelessness Asthma was reported for 27.9% of homeless children in this sample, 3 times the national average. Children.
Race Matters: Synthesis of Research Findings Robert B. Hill, Ph. D. Disproportionality Teleconference May 24, 2005.
Se. Mission To increase the organized capacity of people to care for one another.
SERVICES AND RESOURCES. Total Unduplicated Youth Youth with Mental Health Diagnosis % % % % %
Alicia F. Lieberman Child Trauma Research Project University of California San Francisco San Francisco General Hospital Including and Serving Immigrant.
Childhood Violence Exposure and the Behavioral Health/Juvenile Justice Initiative Jeff Kretschmar, Ph.D. Begun Center for Violence Prevention Research.
How do Macon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Macon/Piatt Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement14833%
How do Coles County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Clark...Shelby Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement7136%
How do LaSalle County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? LaSalle County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement20755%
How do Morgan & Scott County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Morgan and Scott Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total.
Who lives in Rock Island County? Rock Island County Demographics by Race and/or Ethnic Group, 2009 estimate N = 148,826 White113, % Black or African.
How do McLean County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? McLean County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement23350%
How do Peoria County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Peoria County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement19235%
How do Champaign County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Champaign County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement22548%
How do Sangamon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Sangamon County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement21638%
How do Logan County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Logan, Mason and Menard Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total.
Wraparound – A Team Based Approach. What is Wraparound? Evidence-based model for youth involved in multiple systems Facilitation of child and family teams.
1 Behavioral Health/Juvenile Justice (BH/JJ) Evaluation Report ( ) Presented by Jeff Kretschmar, Ph.D. Project Director: Institute for the Study.
Behavioral Health/Juvenile Justice (BH/JJ) Part I Presented by: Dr. Mark Singer Leonard W. Mayo Professor of Family and Child Welfare Mandel School of.
Strengthening Communities-Youth (SCY) Presented by Dr. David Hussey Institute for the Study and Prevention of Violence at Kent State University.
1. 2 BEHAVIORAL HEALTH OF PARENTS/CAREGIVERS: IMPACT ON CHILDREN IN CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM Pamela S. Hyde, J.D. SAMHSA Administrator Regional Partnership.
Trauma-Informed Care: Perspectives and Resources
Children’s Mental Health Crisis Response Services Presentation to the Allied Health Caucus, Virginia General Assembly February 24, 2012.
Trauma Informed Care and Motivational Interviewing
WRAPAROUND MILWAUKEE “Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it’s the only thing that ever does.” Margaret.
Hamilton County Mental Health and Recovery Services Board Provider Meeting Transforming the Hamilton County System of Care and Community for Transitional.
Cuyahoga County Strengthening Communities – Youth (SCY) Project: Findings & Implications for Juvenile Justice David L. Hussey, Ph.D. Associate Professor.
Crossover Youth: Research, Policy and Practice CYPM Overview
The Iowa Pediatric Integrated Health Home Program (PIHH) is for children and youth, 0 to 18 years old, who are Medicaid eligible and have a Severe Emotional.
Onondaga County DMC Final Report December 13, 2011 Center for Community Alternatives Emily NaPier Juanita Gamble Co-Coordinators.
OVERVIEW OF KATIE A. SETTLEMENT. WHO IS KATIE A?  year old Caucasian female  Placed in foster care at age 4  Mental health assessment at age.
FFT in California: Evaluation Outcomes Cricket Mitchell, PhD CIMH Consultant April 3, 2008.
Healthy People 2010 Focus Area 18 Mental Health and Mental Disorders Progress Review November 15, 2007.
LA County Cases: An Overview of Characteristics & Disposition Outcomes Denise C. Herz, Ph.D. California State University—Los Angeles School of Criminal.
KENTUCKY YOUTH FIRST Grant Period August July
Incarcerated Mothers: Their Histories of Victimization and the Consequences for Their Children Toni Johnson, Associate Professor
Focus Area 18: Mental Health and Mental Disorders Progress Review December 17, 2003.
Older Adult Intensive Program Full Service Partnership Bernice Zaborski, MHA Presented at the Integrated Services Conference April 5, 2006.
Sangamon County Action Team Sara Sanders Christy Cunningham Chrissy Gosteli.
One Community’s Partnership with Juvenile Justice Dawn Project 2004 Marion County, Indiana.
Youth Mental Health and Addiction Needs: One Community’s Answer Terry Johnson, MSW Senior Director of Services Senior Director of Services Deborah Ellison,
Background Wraparound Milwaukee was created in 1994 to provide a coordinated and comprehensive array of community-based services and supports to families.
Michigan’s Child Welfare System Why is Overrepresentation a Critical Issue?
A compassionate team based approach... to care for families who have complicated needs.
Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY15 1 st and 2 nd Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children,
Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children,
Edward F. Garrido, Ph.D. and Heather N. Taussig, Ph.D. University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine Kempe Center for the Prevention and Treatment of.
Systems of Care WISe. 3 Mental Health Overview During the Biennium, the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery (DBHR) provided mental.
Race and Child Welfare: Exits from the Child Welfare System Brenda Jones Harden, Ph.D. University of Maryland College Park Research Synthesis on Child.
BEYOND ACE OCTOBER 21, CHANGES MADE FOR THIS SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THE ACE SURVEY: Administration protocols developed by agencies Standardized.
NCADS Child Maltreatment 2000 Data about child abuse and neglect known to child protective Services (CPS) agencies in the United States in 2000.
Children’s Policy Conference Keeping Kids Closer to Home Peter Selby, PhD -- February 24, 2016.
First Steps System of Care Family Systems Collaborations Systems to Systems Nancy Gottlieb, MFT.
The Economic Effects of Interventions to Reduce Interpersonal Violence Hugh Waters May 29, 2007.
No Place Like HOME Texas Kick Off Meeting
Ken Larimore, Ph.D., LISW-S
Developing trust with adolescents
Addressing Strategies and Techniques to Reduce Violence and Aggression through Trauma Informed Practices Brian R. Sims, M.D.
Engagement Survey Results: Demographics
Wraparound Oregon Designing a coordinated service system for children, youth and their families.
outpatient drug or alcohol clinic, mental health or community health center, private mental health professional, in-home counseling or crisis services,
Arely M. Hurtado1,2, Phillip D. Akutsu2, & Deanna L. Stammer1
Presentation transcript:

Wraparound in Washington State: Coordinating Care and Why it Matters Skagit Results: Dawn Scott and Terrance Ellison Pilot Site Results: Ericka Wiggins

Skagit Wraparound Program Status From: July 08 – June 10

Client Demographics Total of 20 youth and their families One (1) youth was a readmission, resulting in an actual unduplicated count of 19 Six (6) were non-Medicaid clients

Racial Demographics

Age Range at Intake Boys from 6 – 18  Mean: 12  Median: 12 Girls from 7 – 17  Mean: 12  Median: 11

Living Situation at Intake Two Parents:630% Biological Mother Only630% Biological Father Only210% Home Of Relative210% Foster Care15% Adopted315%

Referral Source N = 20Percentage Mental Health Agency 1575% School Based Mental Health 315% Psychiatric Hospital 15% Self Referral 15%

14 IEP and One (1) 504 Services Six (6) Months Prior to Wraparound Police Involved CPSARISResidential Treatment MH HospitalOutpatient MH Outpatient Substance Abuse Inpatient Substance Abuse Specialized Education Services Boys Girls Total %15%45%20%N/A35%90%10%5%75%

Two (2) IEP and One (1) 504 New Services After Entering Wraparound Police Involved CPSARISResidential Treatment MH HospitalOutpatient MH Outpatient Substance Abuse Inpatient Substance Abuse Specialized Education Services Boys22N/A Girls01N/A Total23N/A %10%15%N/A15%30%N/A10% 15%

School Status Intake Six Months 12 Months YesNo% Enrolled in School or Child Care 18290% School Changes or Disruptions 11955% Suspended (N/A= 3, 3) 61135% Expelled (N/A= 2, 3) 21611% YesNo% CHG 19195%+5% 51525%-30% 31715%-20% 1195%-6% YesNo% CHG 16480%-15% 41620%-10% 1166%-9% 0170%-5%

Youth Risk Factors Intake Six Months12 Months YESNO% Police Involvement 31715% Suicidal Gestures (missing=1) 91047% Strike Another Person 16480% Damage Property15575% Take Property (missing= % Run Away51525% Act Worried or Fearful 18290% Problems Due to Drugs 1195% Receive Outpatient MH Counseling 18290% Receive Inpatient MH Treatment 71335% YESNO% CHG 1195%NC 51525%NC 81240%-5% 51525%-5% 51525%-17% 21810%-5% 81240%-15% 1195%-5% 14670%-10% 21810%-10% YESNO% CHG 1195%-10% 51525%-22% 91145%-35% 61430%-45% 81142%-18% 31715%-10% 11955%-35% 21810%+5% 16480%-10% 41620%-15%

Caregiver Risk Factors Intake Six Months 12 Months YESNO% Under Supported Chronic Physical Illness 31715% Untreated Mental Illness41620% Untreated Substance Abuse (missing=1) 0190% Psychiatric Hospitalization0200% Incarceration1195% Domestic Violence1195% Victim of Sexual Abuse31715% Poverty (missing=2)71139% Exposure to Substance Abuse In The Home 21810% YESNO% CHG 31715%NC 21810%-10% 0200%NC 0200%NC 0200%-5% 21810%+5% 0200%-15% 71335%-5% 0200%-10% YESNO% CHG 1195%-10% 0200%-10% 0200%NC 1195%+5% 0200%NC 1195%-5% 0200%NC 71335%NC 0200%NC

Loss of Personal Time

Not at All

Loss of Personal Time A Little

Loss of Personal Time Somewhat

Loss of Personal Time Quite a Bit

Loss of Personal Time Very Much

Missing Work or Neglecting Other Duties

Not at all

Missing Work or Neglecting Other Duties A little

Missing Work or Neglecting Other Duties Somewhat

Missing Work or Neglecting Other Duties Quite a Bit

Missing Work or Neglecting Other Duties Very Much

Family Members Having To Do Without Things

Not at all

Family Members Having To Do Without Things A Little

Family Members Having To Do Without Things Somewhat

Family Members Having To Do Without Things Quite a Bit

Family Members Having To Do Without Things Very Much

$$ COSTS BENEFITS $$ Therapeutic Foster Care (CHAP): 4, (50% From NSMHA & 50% From CA) Juvenile Detention: 3, (Detainees do not receive Mental Health Services) Psychiatric Hospitalization: 41, CLIP Facility: 9, Wraparound: 1,500.00

Program Growth

Wraparound Washington Pilot Sites Skagit County, Grays Harbor, and Cowlitz County Combined Results

Client Demographics at Intake N% Age % % % Gender -Male2265% -Female1235% Race -White2782% - African American26% -Native American26% -Biracial26% -Other13% Hispanic (missing=7) -Yes27% -No2593%

Referral Source N = 34Percentage Mental Health Agency2471% DSHS26% Parent/Family13% Juvenile Justice13% School13% Other515%

School Status at Intake, 6 Months, and 12 Months (n=34) Baseline YesNo% Enrolled in School or Child Care 31391% School Changes or Disruptions (missing=1) % Suspended (missing=5) % Expelled (missing=8) 32312% 6 MonthsYesNo% Change Enrolled in School or Child Care (missing=1) 30391%No Change School Changes or Disruptions (missing=1) %-19% Suspended (missing=3) 42713%-25% Expelled (missing=3) 1303%-9% 12 MonthsYesNo% Change Enrolled in School or Child Care (missing=1) 26779%-12% School Changes or Disruptions (missing=3) 92229%-4% Suspended (missing=8) 2248%-5% Expelled (missing=8) 0260%-3%

Youth Risk Factors at Intake, 6 Months, and 12 Months Baseline6 Months12 Months YesNo%YesNo% ChangeYesNo%Change Police Involvement (missing=3) 62817%3319%-8%2297%-2% Suicidal Gestures (missing=1, 2, 3 ) %72525%-14%62519%-6% Strike Another Person (missing=1, 1, 2) %151846%-24%141843%-3% Damage Property (missing=2, 2) %112134%-34%92328%-6% Take Property (missing=2, 4, 2) %131743%-16%82425%-18% Run Away (missing=1, 2, 3) 72621%72522%+1%42713%-9% Act Worried or Fearful (missing=2, 2, 2) 27584%201263%-21%131941%-22% Problems Due to Drugs (missing=1, 2, 3) 1323%2306%+3%1303%-3% Receive Outpatient MH Counseling (missing= 1, 1) 31391%28585%-6%24973%-12% Receive Inpatient MH Treatment (missing=1, 2) 92527%52815%-12%3299%-6%

Caregiver Risk Factors at Baseline, 6 Months, and 12 Months Baseline6 Months12 Months YesNo%YesNo% ChangeYesNo%Change Under Supported Chronic Physical Illness (missing=5, 3, 2) 52417%62519%+2%3299%-10% Untreated Mental Illness (missing=4, 2, 2) 82227%3299%-18%2306%-3% Untreated Substance Abuse (missing=5, 2, 3) 0290%0320%No Change0310%No Change Psychiatric Hospitalization (missing=4, 2, 3) 32710%1313%-7%1303%No Change Incarceration (missing=4, 2, 3) 32710%2306%-4%0310%-6% Domestic Violence (missing=5, 3, 5) 62321%72423%+2%1283%-20% Victim of Sexual Abuse (missing=5, 3, 5) 52417%1303%-14%0290%-3% Poverty (missing=7, 1, 4)111641%141942%+1%121840%-2% Exposure to Substance Abuse In The Home (missing=4, 3, 4) 32710%0310%-10%0300%No Change

Community Supports for Wraparound Inventory (CSWI) Skagit County

Community Supports for Wraparound Inventory (CSWI) A tool that assesses the level of development of a particular community’s system-level support for wraparound. Data collected December-January items grouped into 6 themes 1. Community Partnership 2. Collaborative Action 3. Fiscal Policies and Sustainability 4. Access to Needed Supports & Services 5. Human Resource Development & Support 6. Accountability

Skagit County CSWI 39 invited to take the CSWI 30 of the 39 invitees responded = 76.9%

CSWI Overall and Theme Means- Skagit County

Theme Means: Pilot Sites and Comparison Total Score Cowlitz County66.3 Grays Harbor81.2 Skagit County79.2 National79.4

Wraparound Fidelity Index Wraparound Washington Total Fidelity Scores

Youth Information Number of Youth Assessed56 Interviews completed (total) -Caregiver31 -Facilitator55 -Youth14 Gender (missing=1) -Male34 -Female21 Race (missing=2) -White44 -American Indian/Alaskan Native3 -Mixed Race3 -Black or African American1 -Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander1 -Other2

Overall Fidelity for All Sites WFCGYouth Pilot Sites National Mean837573

Fidelity Scores by Phase for All Sites Phase 1: Engagement Phase 2: Plan Development Phase 3: Implementation Phase 4: Transition Pilot Sites National Mean

Fidelity Scores by Principle for All Sites Family Voice and Choice (FVC)Team Based (TB)Natural Supports (NS)Collaboration (CO)Community Based (CB) Pilot Sites National Mean Culturally Competent (CC)Individualized (IN)Strengths Based (SB)Persistence (PE)Outcome Based (OB) Pilot Sites National Mean