Abstract
Within the past decade, the wraparound approach has gained significant popularity in providing services to children with challenging social and family needs. While a plethora of wraparound programs have been developed and studies have been conducted to assess their effectiveness, the need to develop instruments that measure the implementation of wraparound services is clear. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of a scale that measures wraparound services. In this study, the Wraparound Observation Form (WOF), was developed to evaluate the implementation of the wraparound process in treatment planning meetings. The WOF includes 34 closed-ended items that requires the respondent to note the occurrence or non-occurrence of specific events or behaviors at treatment planning meetings. In the present study, two data collectors attended planning meetings and independently completed the WOF. The inter-rater reliability was 95%. The WOF appears to be a reliable instrument and be appropriate in evaluating wraparound services.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Clark, H. B. & Clarke, R. T. (1996). Research on the wraparound process and individualized services for children with multi-system needs. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 1-6.
Clark, H. B., Lee, B., Prange, M. E., & McDonald, B. A. (1996). Children lost within the foster care system: Can wraparound service strategies improve placement outcomes? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 39-54.
Eber, L., Osuch, R., & Redditt, C. A. (1996). School-based applications of the wraparound process: Early results on service provision and student outcomes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 83-100.
Rosenblatt, A. (1996). Bows and ribbons, tape and twine: Wrapping the wraparound process for children with multi-system needs. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 101-116.
Roizner, M. (1996). A practical guide for the assessment of cultural competence in children's mental health organizations. Boston, MA: Judge Baker Children's Center.
Scannapieco, M. (1994). Home-based services program: Effectiveness with at risk families. Children and Youth Services Review, 16, 363-377.
Singh, N. N., Curtis, W. J., & Wechsler, H. A. (1995). Family Assessment and Planning Team Observation Form: Manual. Richmond, VA: Commonwealth Institute for Child and Family Studies, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University.
Singh, N. N., Curtis, W. J., Wechsler, H. A., Ellis, C. R., & Cohen, R. (1997). Family friendliness of community-based services for children and adolescents with emotional and behavioral disorders and their families: An observational study. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 5, 82-92.
Stroul, B. A, & Friedman, R. A. (1986). A system of care for children and youth with severe emotional disturbances. (Revised edition). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Child Development Center, CASSP Technical Assistance Center.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1993). Foster care: Services to prevent out-of-home placement are limited by funding patterns. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office, GAP/HRD-93-76.
VanDenBerg, J. E., & Grealish, E. M. (1996). Individualized services and supports through the wraparound process: Philosophy and procedures. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 7-21.
Yoe, J. T., Santarcangelo, S., Atkins, M., & Burchard, J. D. (1996). Wraparound care in Vermont: Program development, implementation, and evaluation of a statewide system of individualized services. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 23-38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Epstein, M.H., Jayanthi, M., McKelvey, J. et al. Reliability of the Wraparound Observation Form: An Instrument to Measure the Wraparound Process. Journal of Child and Family Studies 7, 161–170 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022939115411
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022939115411