Abstract
This study evaluates an exemplary system of care designed to provide comprehensive mental health services to children and adolescents. It was believed that the system would lead to more improvement in the functioning and symptoms of clients compared to those receiving care as usual. The project employed a randomized experimental five-wave longitudinal design with 350 families. While access to care, type of care, and the amount of care were better in the system of care, there were no differences in clinical outcomes compared to care received outside the system. In addition, children who did not receive any services, regardless of experimental condition, improved at the same rate as treated children. Similar to the Fort Bragg results, the effects of systems of care are primarily limited to system-level outcomes but do not appear to affect individual outcomes such as functioning and symptomatology.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behar L: An integrated state system of services for seriously disturbed children. In: Looney JG (Ed.):In Chronic Mental Illness in Children and Adolescents. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1988, pp. 131–158.
Stroul BA, Friedman RM: A System of Care for Severely Emotionally Disturbed Youth. Washington, DC: CASSP Technical Assistance Center, 1986.
Saxe L, Cross T, Silverman N, et al.:Children's Mental Health: Problems and Treatment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1987.
Friedman RM, Duchnowski AJ: Children's mental health services [Special issue].Journal of Mental Health Administration 1990; 17(1).
Behar L: The Fort Bragg Evaluation: A snapshot in time.American Psychologist 1997; 52:557–559.
Stroul BA:Children's mental health: Creating Systems of Care in a Changing Society. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes, 1996.
Bickman L, Summerfelt WT, Noser K: Comparative outcomes of emotionally disturbed children and adolescents in a system of services and usual care.Psychiatric Services 1997; 48:1543–1548.
Bickman L: A continuum of care: More is not always better. American Psychologist 1996; 51:689–701.
Bickman L, Guthrie P, Foster EM, et al.:Evaluating Managed Mental Health Services: The Fort Bragg Experiment. New York: Plenum, 1995.
Bickman L: Resolving issues raised by the Fort Bragg evaluation: New directions for mental health services.American Psychologist 1997; 52:562–565.
Bickman L, Heflinger CA, Lambert EW, et al.: The Fort Bragg managed care experiment: Short term impact on psychopathology.Journal of Child and Family Studies 1996; 5:137–160.
Bickman L, Summerfelt WT, Foster EM: Research on systems of care: Implications of the Fort Bragg Evaluation, in children's mental health. In: Stroul BA (Ed.):Creating Systems of Care in a Changing Society. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1996, pp. 337–355.
Friedman RM, Burns BJ: The evaluation of the Fort Bragg Demonstration Project: An alternative interpretation of the findings.Journal of Mental Health Administration 1996; 23:128–136.
Burchard JD: Evaluation of the Fort Bragg managed care experiment.Journal of Child and Family Studies 1996; 5:173–176.
Sechrest L, Walsh M: Dogma or data: Bragging rights.American Psychologist 1997; 52:536–540.
Weisz JR, Han SS, Valeri, SM: More of what? Issues raised by the Fort Bragg study.American Psychologist 1997; 52:541–545.
Hoagwood K: Interpreting nullity: The Fort Bragg experiment—A comparative success or failure?American Psychologist 1997; 52:546–550.
DeLeon PH, Williams JG: Evaluation research and public policy formation: Are psychologists collectively willing to accept unpopular findings?American Psychologist 1997; 52:551–552.
Henggeler SW, Schoenwald SK, Munger, RL: Families and therapists achieve clinical outcomes, systems of care mediate the process.Journal of Child and Family Studies 1996; 5:177–183.
Weisz JR, Han SS, Valeri SM: What can we learn from Fort Bragg?Journal of Child and Family Studies 1996; 5:185–190.
The National Comprehensive Community Mental Health for Child and Families Program Evaluation: Report from Year One, Stark County, OH. Atlanta, GA: Macro International, 1996.
Community-Based Mental Health Services for Children in the Child Welfare System. Final Report Contract No. HHS-100-91-0016-01. Atlanta, GA: Macro International, 1992.
Stroul BA, Goldman SK, Lourie IS, et al.:Profiles of Local Systems of Care for Children and Adolescents with Severe Emotional Disturbances. Rev. ed. Washington, DC: CASSP Technical Assistance Center, 1992.
Bickman L: Reinterpreting the Fort Bragg Evaluation findings: The message does not change.Journal of Mental Health Administration 1996; 23:137–145.
Bickman L, Summerfelt WT, Firth JM, et al.: The Stark County Evaluation Project: Baseline results of a randomized experiment. In Nixon CT, Northrup DA (Eds.):Evaluating Mental Health Services: How Do Programs “Work” in the Real World? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997, pp. 231–258.
Hodges K, Kline J, Stern L, et al.: The development of a child assessment interview for research and clinical use.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 1982; 10:173–189.
Summerfelt WT, Hodges, VK: Test-Retest Reliability of an Interactive Computerized Interview with Adolescents: The Computerized Child Assessment Schedule. Poster presented at the 5th annual research conference on a System of Care for Children's Mental Health Expanding the Research Base, Tampa, FL, March 2–4, 1992.
Hodges, K: Structured interviews for assessing children.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 1993; 34:49–68.
Achenbach TM:Manual for the Child and Behavior Checklist and 1991 Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 1991.
Achenbach TM:Manual for the Teacher Report Form and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 1991.
Bickman L, Lambert EW, Karver M, et al.: Two low-cost measures of child and adolescent functioning for services research.Evaluation & Program Planning 1998; 21:263–275.
Epstein NB, Baldwin LM, Bishop DS: The McMaster Family Assessment Device.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 1983; 9:171–180.
Miller IW, Epstein NB, Bishop DS, et al.: The McMaster Family Assessment Device: Reliability and validity.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 1985; 11:345–356.
Harter S:Manual for the Self-Perception Profile for Children. Denver, CO: University of Denver Press, 1985.
Bickman L, Earl E, Klindworth L: Vanderbilt Mental Health Service Efficacy Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 1991.
Kelker KA: Working together: The parent-professional partnership. Families as Allies Project Research and Training Center to Improve Services for Seriously Emotionally Handicapped Children and Their Families, Portland, OR, April 1987.
Dunst CJ, Leet HE: Measuring the adequacy of resources in households with young children.Child: Care Health and Development 1987; 13:111–125.
Achenbach TM:Manual for the Youth Self Report and 1991 Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 1991.
Brannan AM, Heflinger CA, Bickman L: The Caregiver Strain Questionnaire: Measuring the impact of living with a child with serious emotional disturbance.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 1997; 5:212–222.
Gibbons, RD, Hedeker DR, Davis JM: Estimation of effect size from a series of experiments involving paired comparisons.Journal of Educational Statistics 1993; 18:271–279.
Bryk AS, Raudenbush SW: Application of hierarchical linear models to assessing change.Psychological Bulletin 1987; 101:147–158.
Hedeker D, Gibbons RD, Flay BR: Random-effects regression models for clustered data with an example from smoking prevention research.Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 1994; 62:757–765.
Rogosa D: Myths about longitudinal research. In: Schaie W (Ed.):Methodological Issues in Aging Research. New York: Springer, 1988, pp. 171–209.
Rogosa D, Brandt D, Zimowski M: A growth curve approach to the measurement of change.Psychological Bulletin, 1982; 92:726–748.
Bryk AS, Raudenbush SW:Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992.
Bryk A, Raudenbush S, Congdon R:HLM Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling with the HLM/2L and HLM/3L Programs. Chicago: Scientific Software International, 1996.
Raudenbush SW: Random effects models. In Cooper H (Ed.):The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York: Russell Sage, 1994, pp. 301–321.
Little RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, et al.: SAS System for Mixed Models. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1996.
Diggle PJ, Liang, KY, Zeger SC:Analysis of Longitudinal Data. Oxford, UK: Clarendon, 1994.
Cohen J:Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
Foster EM, Bickman L: An evaluator's guide to detecting attrition problems.Evaluation Review 1996; 20:695–723.
Verbeek M, Nijman T: Testing for selectivity bias in panel data models.International Economic Review 1992; 33:681–703.
Service Activity Log and Manual. Canton, OH: Child and Adolescent Center, March 1997.
Friedman RM, Street S: Admission and discharge criteria for children's mental health services: A review of the issues and options.Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 1985; 14:229–235.
Bickman L, Karver MS, Schut LJA: Clinician reliability and accuracy in judging appropriate level of care.Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology 1997; 65:515–520.
Weisz JR, Doneberg GR, Han SS, et al.: Bridging the gap between lab and clinic in child and adolescent psychotherapy.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1995; 63:688–701.
Rivera VR, Kutash K:What Works in Children's Mental Health Services?: Uncovering Answers to Critical Questions. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes, 1996.
Bickman L, Noser K: Meeting the challenges in the delivery of child and adolescent mental health services in the next millennium: The continuous quality improvement approach.Applied and Preventive Psychology. In press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bickman, L., Noser, K. & Summerfelt, W.T. Long-term effects of a system of care on children and adolescents. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 26, 185–202 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287490
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287490