Evaluation Findings - SAMHSA Store - Substance Abuse and Mental ...
Evaluation Findings - SAMHSA Store - Substance Abuse and Mental ...
Evaluation Findings - SAMHSA Store - Substance Abuse and Mental ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
National <strong>Evaluation</strong> Study Components<br />
Measures<br />
Domain Instrument Phases Used<br />
Services Received Multi-Sector Service Contacts Form II–V<br />
Service Experience &<br />
Satisfaction<br />
Family Satisfaction Questionnaire (FSQ); Youth<br />
Satisfaction Questionnaire (YSQ) (Brunk, Santiago,<br />
Ewell, & Watts, 1997)<br />
Youth Services Survey (YSS), Youth Services Survey–<br />
Family (YSS–F) (Brunk, Koch, & McCall, 2000)<br />
I–III<br />
IV–V<br />
Cultural Competence Culturally Competent Service Provision (CCSP) IV–V<br />
Services <strong>and</strong> Costs Study<br />
Using existing cost data in agency management information systems [MIS] <strong>and</strong> budgets, this study<br />
describes the types of services used by children <strong>and</strong> families, their utilization patterns, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
associated costs. Changes were made to this study after 2005 to provide communities with st<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
templates for data about flexible fund expenditures, <strong>and</strong> to further st<strong>and</strong>ardize the delivery of crossagency<br />
service <strong>and</strong> cost data. Because access to service <strong>and</strong> cost data varies among communities,<br />
this study has used a tiered approach which accommodates availability of information from a single<br />
child-serving system <strong>and</strong> multiple child-serving systems is employed.<br />
Sustainability Study<br />
Added in 2000 to assess communities 5 years post-funding, this study obtains information about (a)<br />
availability of specific services in the system of care, (b) implementation of system of care principles,<br />
(c) achievement of objectives related to system of care implementation, (d) role <strong>and</strong> impact of various<br />
factors on the development or maintenance of the system of care, <strong>and</strong> (e) effectiveness of various<br />
general <strong>and</strong> financing strategies for sustaining systems of care. Phase I communities were assessed 5<br />
years post-funding <strong>and</strong> communities funded in 1997 were assessed in their final year of funding with a<br />
Web survey <strong>and</strong> telephone interviews with key individuals in the communities <strong>and</strong> at the State level.<br />
Communities funded in 1998–2000 were assessed with the Web survey in their final year of funding;<br />
communities funded from 2002 to 2006 are assessed during the fiscal years in which the Federal–local<br />
funding match requirements change (Years 3 <strong>and</strong> 4), <strong>and</strong> in their final year.<br />
Comparison Studies<br />
Comparison studies using quasi-experimental designs were conducted in three funded communities in<br />
Phase I (Stephens et al., 2005) <strong>and</strong> two in Phase II (CMHS, 2001, 2003), <strong>and</strong> matched communities.<br />
Non-funded communities were chosen by similar geographic <strong>and</strong> population characteristics, <strong>and</strong> their<br />
willingness to participate in the project. The design called for enrollment of the same number of children<br />
in the funded community <strong>and</strong> in the corresponding community, matched on age, gender, severity of<br />
behavioral <strong>and</strong> emotional problems <strong>and</strong> functional impairment. Measures used in the descriptive <strong>and</strong><br />
outcome studies were used in the comparison studies, with some additions. The Phase II comparison<br />
study included substudies of service experiences <strong>and</strong> provider characteristics.<br />
The Comprehensive Community <strong>Mental</strong> Health Services for Children <strong>and</strong> Their Families Program <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>Findings</strong><br />
2006–2008 Annual Report to Congress ● Appendix D ● Page 3