Abstract
With the rapid pace of policy and practice changes in children’s mental health, there is a need for research to examine, describe, and disseminate information about the translation of policy directives into practice innovations at the local level. National policy mandates for children’s mental health have placed expectations on local communities to involve families as partners in the development, implementation, and evaluation of systems of care with little guidance about how to implement program requirements locally. Consequently, there is a gap in the knowledge base regarding how innovations are actually implemented in local community contexts. This article reports on a qualitative study to gain understanding of family participation in evaluations of systems of care from the perspectives of evaluators and family members working together. Findings provided rich examples of the experiences and perceptions of evaluators and family members working on evaluation teams, the challenges they encountered, and effective strategies to meet those challenges.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
US Department of Health and Human Services. Cooperative Agreements for the Comprehensive Community Mental Health Services for Children and Their Families, Child Mental Health Initiative, Part I Programmatic Guidance, RFA No. SM-03-009. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2003.
Friesen BJ, Stephens B. Expanding family roles in the system of care: research and practice. In: Epstein MH, Kutash K, Duchnowski A, eds. Outcomes for Children and Youth with Behavioral and Emotional Disorders and Their Families, Vol. 2. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed; 1998:231–259.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Public Health Service; 1999.
US Public Health Service National Agenda. Report of the Surgeon General’s Conference on Children’s Mental Health: A National Action Agenda. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000.
New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Subcommittee on Consumer Issues Report of the Subcommittee on Consumer Issues: Shifting to a Recovery-Based Continuum of Care; 2003. http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/subcommittee/Consumer_022803 doc. Cited 13 March 2003.
Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health. Family Leadership in Systems of Care; 2005. http://www.ffcmh.org/systems_whatis.htm. Cited 14 August 2005.
Patton MQ. Utilization-focused Evaluation, Edition 3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1997.
Morris D. The inclusion of stakeholders in evaluation: benefits and drawbacks. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 2002;17:49–58.
Turnbull AP, Friesen BJ, Ramirez C. Participatory action research as a model for conducting family research. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps. 1998;23:178–188.
Burke B. Evaluating for change: reflections on participatory evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation. 1998;80:43–56.
Fetterman DM. Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2001.
Santelli B, Singer GHS, DiVenere N, et al. Participatory action research: reflections on critical incidents in a PAR project. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps. 1998;23:211–222.
Dugan MA. Participatory and empowerment evaluation: lessons learned in training and technical assistance. In: Fetterman DM, Kaftarian SK, Wandersman A, eds. Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-assessment And Accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995:277–303.
Mertens DM. Inclusive evaluation: implications of transformative theory for evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation. 1999; 20:1–14.
Osher T, Telesford M. Involving families to improve research. In: Hoagwood K, Jensen P, Fisher CB, eds. Ethical Issues in Mental Health Research with Children and Adolescents. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1996:29–39.
Brandon PR. Stakeholder participation for the purpose of helping insure evaluation validity: bridging the gap between collaborative and non-collaborative evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation. 1998;19:325–337.
Vander Stoep A, Williams M, Jones R, et al. Families as full research partners: what’s in it for us? Journal of Behavioral Health Services Research. 1999;26:329–344.
Wallerstein N. Power between evaluator and community: research relationships within New Mexico’s healthier communities. Social Science and Medicine. 1999;49:39–53.
Osher TW, van Kammen W, Zaro SM. Family participation in evaluating systems of care: family, research, and system perspectives. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 2001;9:63–70.
Rodwell MK. Social Work Constructivist Research. New York, NY: Garland Publishing; 1998.
Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine; 1967.
Gilgun JF. Hand into glove: the grounded theory approach and social work practice research. In: Sherman E, Reid WJ, eds. Qualitative Research in Social Work. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 1994:115–125.
Patton MQ. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1990.
Jivanjee P, Friesen BJ. Shared expertise: the role of families in professional training. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 1997;5:205–211.
Kemmis S, McTaggart R. Participatory action research: communicative action and the public sphere. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2005:559–603.
Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In: Denzin NK Lincoln YS, eds. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2005:191–215.
Morse JM. “Emerging from the data”: the cognitive processes of analysis in qualitative inquiry. In: Morse JM, ed. Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1993:23–43.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, US Department of Education, and the Center for Mental Health Services, SAMHSA, US Department of Health and Human Services (grant #H133B040038). The content does not necessarily represent the views or policies of the funding agencies. The authors wish to thank study participants for sharing their experiences and ideas and Kathryn Schutte, M.S.; Nancy Koroloff, Ph.D.; and Barbara Friesen, Ph.D., for their contributions to the project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jivanjee, P., Robinson, A. Studying Family Participation in System-of-care Evaluations: Using Qualitative Methods to Examine a National Mandate in Local Contexts. J Behav Health Serv Res 34, 369–381 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-007-9051-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-007-9051-9