A Family-Centered, Community-Based System of Services for Children and Youth With Special Health Care Needs

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.73). 11/2007; 161(10):933-6. DOI: 10.1001/archpedi.161.10.933
Source: PubMed


To present a conceptual definition of a family-centered system of services for children and youth with special health care needs (CYSHCN). Previous work by the Maternal and Child Health Bureau to define CYSHCN has had widespread program effects. This article similarly seeks to provide a definition of a system of services.
Comprehensive literature review of systems of services and consensus panel organized to review and refine the definition.
Policy research group and advisors at multiple sites.
Policy researchers, content experts on CYSHCN, family representatives, and state program directors.
Definition of a system of services for CYSHCN.
This article defines a system of services for CYSHCN as a family-centered network of community-based services designed to promote the healthy development and well-being of these children and their families. The definition can guide discussion among policy makers, practitioners, state programs, researchers, and families for implementing the "community-based systems of services" contained in Title V of the Social Security Act. Critical characteristics of a system include coordination of child and family services, effective communication among providers and the family, family partnership in care provision, and flexibility.
This definition provides a conceptual model that can help measurement development and assessment of how well systems work and achieve their goals. Currently available performance objectives for the provision of care for CYSHCN and national surveys of child health could be modified to assess systems of services in general.

Download full-text


Available from: William Carl Cooley, Jun 25, 2014
  • Source
    • "One is the school/district system for comprehensive learning supports (Adelman & Taylor, 2006). The other is health and social service system design for comprehensive, community-based systems of care—with family support as a second pillar (e.g., Perrin, et al., 2007). In view of personnel and funding shortages for both systems, " parent power " can be a most welcome and timely enhancement. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dramatic changes involving rural parents and family systems are impacting schools, communities, and entire provinces and states. The out-migration of individual parents and entire family systems worldwide is especially noteworthy becaUSeit contributes to incipient urbanization at the same time that it UShers in consequential demographic changes—with economic development ramifications. For example, as parents migrate in search of jobs and better educational opportunities for their children, vulnerable families may replace them. Meanwhile, more mothers are in the work force.Mother-headed, single parent families are commonplace, and an unspecified number face employment challenges. Comparatively more, culturally diverse families are not fluent in their new nation's dominant language. Where rural schools are concerned, a conventional parent involvementmodel (PI) founded on the idea that stay-at-home mothers will volunteer no longer will yield desired benefits at scale.Additional parent and family innovations are needed, and they mUSt be founded on intervention logic. Two such innovations are a collective parent engagement intervention and family support interventions. With PI, they form an intervention triad with the potential to strengthen connections among rural families, schools, community organizations, and faith-based institutions. These new connections in support of parents and family systems will help advance comprehensive planning for rural education and human development.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2014 · Journal of Education and Human Development
  • Source
    • "Community-based therapeutic recreation initiatives are on the increase because of a shift from institutional to community-based care, growing awareness of the importance of promoting health and wellness, a broadened view of health, and recognition of the importance of involving community members in community development efforts (Rachlis & Kushner 1994; Wilhite et al. 1999; McPherson et al. 2004). These changes to the health-care system have led to an emphasis on family-centred, community-based care for children with disabilities (Perrin et al. 2007). With reduced resources for direct services, innovative community-based service delivery models are needed to support the capacity of communities to meet the recreation and social participation needs of these children (Stricklin 1997; Rosenberg 2000; McPherson et al. 2004). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: This article presents a four-part model of community-focused therapeutic recreation and life skills services for children's rehabilitation centres. Method and results: The model is based on 15 years of clinical and management practice in a Canadian context combined with evidence from the literature on community-focused service delivery. The model incorporates an ecological approach and principles from models of therapeutic recreation, community capacity building, and health promotion, as well as client/family-centred care. The four pillars of the model reflect a set of integrated services and principles designed to support the participation of children and youth with disabilities in community activities. The pillars involve providing community outreach services, providing community development services, sharing physical and educational resources with community partners, and promoting the organization as a community facility that provides adapted physical space and specialized instruction. The lessons learned in implementing the model are discussed, including the importance of ensuring the sustainability of community recreation programmes. Conclusions: The model will be of use to managers and service organizations seeking to develop an integrated programme of community-focused therapeutic recreation and life skills services based on a collaborative capacity-building approach.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2012 · Child Care Health and Development
  • Source
    • "From a philosophical perspective, family-centered principles and practices enjoy wide support and have been adopted as recommended practice by various professional and scientific groups and in a variety of settings, including the Institute of Medicine (2001), pediatrics (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2003), hospitals (American Hospital Association, 2009; Muething et al., 2007; O'Malley, Brown, & Krug, 2008), early intervention and early childhood special education (Sandall, Hemmeter, Smith, & McLean, 2005), and allied health professions (e.g., American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2008). Most reviews, however, suggest that, despite the almost universal recommendation for a familycentered approach, implementation has been a challenge due to factors such as leadership, training, attitudes, and lack of resources (Gooding et al., 2011; Kuo, Houtrow, et al., 2011; Perrin et al., 2007; Piper, 2011). For example, recent largescale studies based on the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (Raphael, Mei, Brousseau, & Giordano, 2011) and the National Survey of Children With Special Health Care Needs (Coker, Rodriguez, & Flores, 2010; Kuo, Bird, & Tilford, 2011) found that only about two thirds of families of children with special health care needs reported experiencing family-centered care. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The central role of family support in programs serving young children with disabilities was emphasized in Public Law 99-457. In the ensuing 25 years, much work has been done to describe the principles and practices that characterize effective family support. Less clear is whether and how programs serving infants, toddlers, and preschoolers promote family outcomes. This article describes the components of family-centered practice and summarizes the data in support of the use of such practices. The authors show that early intervention and preschool programs are not held accountable for family outcomes; instead, they are limited only to showing that families are satisfied with services. The authors predict that family outcomes will not be part of any national accountability effort in the near future until research clearly shows that such outcomes ultimately will benefit children, and they suggest several lines of work needed to advance the field toward making an informed policy decision about documenting family benefit.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2012 · Topics in Early Childhood Special Education
Show more