Who are we trying to reach?
Wayne and Holmes County youth and young adults (ages 8-24) who are MI/DD (co-occurring mental illness and developmental disability) or MI/DD borderline with aggressive, violent behaviors who are at risk of out-of-home placement.
What kinds of services can people receive? How many are getting services now?
16 youth and families served on an active caseload; 5 families in maintenance stage
Identify strengths and needs of the families and build resource networks for those dually diagnosed
Enlist families for Hi-Fidelity Wraparound process and then provide support to families/individuals.
Make observations and offer support at Ida Sue and Cornerstone, and offer assistance to schools and families.
Provide a bridge between services for clients of both the Board of Developmental Disabilities and the MHRB in order to streamline care and services for the families involved.
What recovery goals are in place for those in this program?
Provide Hi-Fidelity Wraparound services to individuals and families for reduction of aggressive behavior and familial disruptions, stabilization in the community and home, and success in school.
Are there any expected outcomes related to those goals?
- Increased natural community supports for families and children
- Informed involvement with natural community supports
- Family-directed/family-operated wraparound
Is there any proof that this program can help?
Hi-Fidelity Wraparound differs from traditional approaches by emphasizing a human environmental model, including consideration of the multiple systems in which the youth and family are involved, and the multiple community and informal supports that might be mobilized the successfully support the youth and family in their community and home (Bruns et. al, 2010).
Is there anything else we should know about Hi-Fidelity Wraparound?
The evidence base for Hi-Fidelity Wraparound is complicated by the small number of studies and methodological shortcomings. Results indicate that Wraparound is a promising practice that can potentially yield better outcomes for youth with serious emotional and behavioral problems when compared to youth receiving conventional services. The positive results found in this review of formal research studies are bolstered by additional findings from local and state evaluation studies pointing to significant shifts in the settings in which youth live as well as related costs (Kamradt et. al, 2008; Rauso et. al, 2009). The Wraparound model is moving toward being an “evidence-based process,” especially with respect to maintaining youth in their homes and communities.