This presentation offers a brief overview of the Stronger Together Program (STP), as well as a clinical-theoretical reflection on its interrelated key factors. Which are they, and how do they relate to theoretical notions on... [ view full abstract ]
This presentation offers a brief overview of the Stronger Together Program (STP), as well as a clinical-theoretical reflection on its interrelated key factors. Which are they, and how do they relate to theoretical notions on translational research and emerging strategies at the crossroads of science-informed practice and practice-inspired science, in particular Evidence Based Practice (EBP) decision-making, a common elements/factors approach, practice driven use of routine client feedback, and utilization focused evaluation?
Initiated by practitioners in 2011, the STP has developed into a structural translational collaboration between practitioners, practitioner-researchers, researchers and policy makers with a shared commitment to improving the quality of youth and family care services and its workers. The STP brought together practitioners from six child/youth and family care provision centers in the province of North Brabant and three Dutch universities.
This practice-research collaboration was inspired by the Key Factors in Youth Care model. This conceptual KFYC model involves a range of interrelated factors at three levels (mico/meso/macro), all impacting eachother and the quality and outcome of child and family care and welfare services. The KFYC model was introduced by Pijnenburg in his inaugural address as professor Key Factors in Youth Care at the HAN University of Applied Sciences (2010), and subsequently presented at EUSARF 2012.Two years later EUSARF 2014 featured a mini-symposium entitled ‘Effective bonding: the Stronger Together research program on working alliances and youth care outcome’. This mini-symposium highlighted empirical findings from the ST Program, reflecting data from residential care as well as community based parenting support programs.
In the STP, one important factor from the KFYC model has taken center stage: the working alliance (and moderating variables, and its association with care outcome). Inspired by practitioner' experience and expertise from all participating care centers and international research, the alliance concept was operationalized in three modalities: not only in terms of the ‘classical’ working relationship between professionals and clients (type 1), but also in terms of professional-client alliance with respect to social network approach (type 2), and in terms of professional-manager alliance (type 3). From day one, the program’s objectives and studies have been developed in close collaboration between professionals, service provision organisations, researchers and provincial policy makers Their collaboration has resulted in an inspirational community of practice and learning. Five years on, this community continues to thrive and innovate, in spite of the fact that provincial funding for the STP has meanwhile ceased as a result of a major shift in national youth care policy. Under the new Youth Law, funding and governance responsibilities have been transferred from a provincial to the local level. Each Dutch municipality is now responsible for developing, funding and monitoring its youth and family welfare and mental health policy, practice and governance.
In light of this political landslide, and the relevance of the lessons learned from the ST program for international dialogue on effective investment strategies for improving the outcome of child and family welfare and mental health, it is now time to reflect on central and more periferal factors within the ST program and their interrelations. How can we validate and share findings, and boost the network connectivity of key factors within this complex dynamic system? And how can we foster sustainable engagement of youth care practitioners, researchers, policy makers and teaching professionals in this collaborative process?
Historical and theoretical approaches , Program evaluation and quality in child welfare
