No abstract

This paper describes the use of a theory of change approach to community-based cross-agency service planning for children with serious emotional disturbance and their families. Public agency planners in Contra Costa County, California used the theory of change approach to organize service planning for a population of youth who had been arrested and involved with juvenile probation. The theory of change process described in this paper links community outcomes with planned activities with the assumptions or principles that underlie the community planning efforts. When complete, a theory of change logic model can serve as a guide for implementation, ensuring that community plans for service delivery remain true to their intent. The theory of change development process includes twelve stages and is based on a step-by-step approach. Theory of change logic models establish a context for articulating a community's shared beliefs and prompt local stakeholders to establish logical connections between the population to be served, expected results, and strategies intended to achieve those results.

The concept of systems of care for children with serious emotional disturbance and their families is described in this article as an explicit organizational philosophy that emphasizes services that are family focused, individualized, provided in the least restrictive environment, coordinated among multiple agencies, and culturally competent. This conceptualization is contrasted with the view of systems of care as discrete interventions causally related to improving child-level outcomes. Systems of care are presented as mutable strategies for improving organizational relationships that are best judged by outcomes focused at the organizational level. Rethinking and expanding the theory of change underlying systems of care are recommended in order to support development of the knowledge base for understanding what systems of care are, what they are not, and what they can be expected to accomplish.

No abstract

Communities that undertake systems change in accordance with the system of care philosophy commit to creating new systems entities for children and adolescents with serious emotional disturbance. These new entities are values-based, voluntary, and cross-agency alliances that include formal child-serving entities, youth, and families. Describing the scope and intent of one such implementation of systems of care, a mental health administrator commented, "If we're going to change things, it has to be systemic" (B. Baxter, personal communication, December 2, 2005). This paper explores the concept of "systemic" in the context of systems of care. Systems theory is used to understand strategies of purposeful systems change undertaken by stakeholders in established system of care communities. The paper presents a conceptual model of systems change for systems of care that is grounded in data from a national study of system of care implementation (Research and Training Center for Children's Mental Health in Case Studies of system implementation: Holistic approaches to studying community-based systems of care: Study 2, University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, Research and Training Center for Children's Mental Health, Tampa, FL, 2004). The model is based on Soft Systems Methodology, an application of systems theory developed to facilitate practical action around systems change in human systems (Checkland in Systems thinking, systems practice, Wiley, Chichester, 1999). The implications of these findings to real world actions associated with systems change in systems of care are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

This article provides a conceptual and practical framework called the Ecology of Outcomes. Based on this framework, agencies that serve children and families build and use outcome-oriented information systems to respond to their clients in a more flexible manner. The goal is to improve promising programs by involving stakeholders in outcome identification and in utilization of results. Problems addressed include the emphasis human services place on rules compliance, lack of feedback to program staff to allow for midcourse correction, and lack of input by key stakeholders in the identification of outcomes to be measured. The following components of the framework are described: principles of outcome accountability, prerequisites and building blocks, implementing an outcome information system, and utilizing the results. Key elements of the framework are the integration of outcome information into a service system's decision-making process and the inclusion of client, stakeholder, and provider satisfaction information.