Ten Principles Of The Wraparound Process
Ten Principles of theWraparoundProcesstsl y v o i ce a n d c h o i ce imaFnatu ralsuppor teamtyith s b a s e d gntr epesrs dzeco l l a b o r a ti o n ced omb asmuniso u tc o m e b a esencedtl l y co m p e te n t tu r aindicu lvidud aselib a
FundersThe work of the National Wraparound Initiative hasreceived support from several sources, including ORCMacro, Inc.; the Child, Adolescent, and Family Branchof the Center for Mental Health Services, SubstanceAbuse and Mental Health Services Administration; theCenter for Medical and Medicaid Services (award no.11-P-92001/3-01); the Maryland Department of JuvenileServices and Governor’s Office of Crime Controland Prevention; and the NationalTechnical Assistance Partnership forChild and Family Mental Health. Thecontents of this publication are solelythe responsibility of the authors anddo not necessarily represent theofficial views of SAMHSA.Suggested CitationBruns, E.J., Walker, J.S., Adams, J., Miles,P., Osher, T.W., Rast, J., VanDenBerg,J.D. & National Wraparound InitiativeAdvisory Group (2004). Ten principlesof the wraparound process. Portland, OR: NationalWraparound Initiative, Research and TrainingCenter on Family Support and Children’s MentalHealth, Portland State University.2
AcknowledgmentsWe would like to thank the following Advisory Groupmembers for contributing materials to this product and forparticipating in interviews and the Delphi process throughwhich we received feedback on initial drafts:A. Michael BoothBeth Larson-StecklerBill ReayCarl SchickCarol SchneiderChristina BreaultChristine S. DavisCollette LueckConstance BurgessConstance ConklinDavid OsherDawn HensleyDon KoenigEleanor D. CastilloFrank RiderGayle WilerHolly Echo-Hawk SolieJane AdamsJane KallalJennifer CrawfordJennifer TaubJim RastJohn BurchardJohn FranzJohn VanDenBergJosie BejaranoJulie BeckerJulie RadlauerKelly PipkinsKnute RottoKristen Leverentz-BradyLucille EberLyn FarrMarcia HilleMarcus SmallMareasa IsaacsMaria Elena VillarMarlene MatareseMary GrealishMary Jo MeyersMary Stone SmithMichael EpsteinMichael TaylorNeil BrownNorma HoltPat MilesPatti DerrRobin El-AminRosalyn BertramRuth A. GammonRuth AlmenTheresa ReaTrina W. OsherVera Pina3
This document was produced through the full NWI consensus process.Ten Principles of theWraparound ProcessIntroductionThe philosophical principles of wraparound have long providedthe basis for understanding this innovative and widely-practiced service delivery model. This value base for working incollaboration and partnership with families extends from wraparound’s roots in programs such as Kaleidoscope in Chicago, theAlaska Youth Initiative, and Project Wraparound in Vermont. In 1999,a monograph on wraparound was published that presented 10core elements of wraparound, as well as 10 practice principles,from the perspective of wraparound innovators.1 These elementsand practice principles spanned activity at the team, organization,and system levels; in other words, some elements were intendedto guide direct work that happens with the youth, family andhands-on support people (team level); some referred to workby the agency or organization housing the wraparound initiative(program level); and some guided the funding and communitycontext around the wraparound activities (system level). Formany, these original elements and principles became the bestmeans available for understanding the wraparound process. Theyalso provided an important basis for initial efforts at measuringwraparound fidelity.Many have expressed a need to move beyond a value base forwraparound in order to facilitate program development and replicate positive outcomes. However, wraparound’s philosophicalprinciples will always remain the starting point for understanding1. Goldman, S.K. (1999). The Conceptual Framework for Wraparound. In Burns, B. J. & Goldman, K. (Eds.),Systems of care: Promising practices in children’s mental health, 1998 series, Vol. IV: Promising practices in wraparound for children with severe emotional disorders and their families. Washington DC:Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice.
Ten Principles of the Wraparound Processthe model. The current document attempts to makethe wraparound principles even more useful as aframework and guide for high-quality practice foryouth and families. It describes wraparound’s principles exclusively at the youth/family/team level. Indoing so, we hope the organizational and system supports necessary to achieve high-quality wraparoundpractice2 will always be grounded in the fundamentalneed to achieve the wraparound principles for familiesand their teams. By revisiting the original elements ofwraparound, we also capitalized on an opportunityto break complex principles (e.g., “individualized andstrengths-based”) into independent ones, and makesure the principles aligned with other aspects of theeffort to operationalize the wraparound process.The current document is the result of a small teamof wraparound innovators, family advocates, andresearchers working together over several months.This team revised the original elements and practiceprinciples and provided them to a much larger nationalgroup of family members, program administrators,trainers, and researchers familiar with wraparound.Through several stages of work, these individuals voted on the principles presented, provided feedback onphraseology, and participated in a consensus-buildingprocess.Though far from complete, consensus on the principles as presented here was strong. Nonetheless, youwill see as you read descriptions of these 10 principlesthat there are several key areas where the complexityof wraparound itself hindered realization of a clearconsensus among our advisory group. Commentaryprovided with each principle highlights such tensionsand goes into much greater depth about the intentionsand implications of each principle.Considered along with its accompanying materials,we hope that this document helps achieve the maingoal expressed by members of the National Wraparound Initiative at its outset: To provide clarity on thespecific characteristics of the wraparound processmodel for the sake of communities, programs, andfamilies. Just as important, we hope that this documentis viewed as a work in progress, and that it remainsa living document that can be updated as neededbased on feedback from an even broader audience ofreviewers.AcknowledgmentsTen Principles of theWraparound Process1. Family voice and choice. Family and youth/child perspectives are intentionally elicitedand prioritized during all phases of the wraparound process. Planning is grounded in familymembers’ perspectives, and the team strivesto provide options and choices such that theplan reflects family values and preferences.The wraparound process recognizes the importance of long-term connections between people,particularly the bonds between family members. Theprinciple of family voice and choice in wraparoundstems from this recognition and acknowledges thatthe people who have a long-term, ongoing relationship with a child or youth have a unique stake in andcommitment to the wraparound process and its outcomes. This principle further recognizes that a youngperson who is receiving wraparound also has a uniquestake in the process and its outcomes. The principleof family voice and choice affirms that these are thepeople who should have the greatest influence overthe wraparound process as it unfolds.This principle also recognizes that the likelihoodof successful outcomes and youth/child and familyownership of the wraparound plan are increased whenthe wraparound process reflects family members’ priorities and perspectives. The principle thus explicitlycalls for family voice—the provision of opportunitiesfor family members to fully explore and express theirperspectives during wraparound activities—and family choice—the structuring of decision making suchthat family members can select, from among variousoptions, the one(s) that are most consistent with their2. Another component of the National Wraparound initiative, originally described in detail in Walker, J.S., Koroloff, N., & Schutte, K. (2003). Implementing high-quality collaborativeindividualized service/support planning: Necessary conditions. Portland, OR: Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health5
own perceptions of how things are, how things shouldbe, and what needs to happen to help the familyachieve its vision of well-being. Wraparound is a collaborative process (principle 3); however within thatcollaboration, family members’ perspectives must bethe most influential.The principle of voice and choice explicitly recognizes that the perspectives of family members arenot likely to have sufficient impact during wraparoundunless intentional activity occurs to ensure their voiceand choice drives the process. Families of childrenwith emotional and behavioral disorders are oftenstigmatized and blamed for their children’s difficulties.This and other factors—including possible differencesin social and educational status between family members and professionals, and the idea of professionalsas experts whose role is to “fix” the family—canlead teams to discount, rather than prioritize, familymembers’ perspectives during group discussions anddecision making. These same factors also decrease theprobability that youth perspectives will have impactin groups when adults and professionals are present.Furthermore, prior experiences of stigma and shamecan leave family members reluctant to express theirperspectives at all. Putting the principle of youth andfamily voice and choice into action thus requires intentional activity that supports family members as theyexplore their perspectives and as they express theirperspectives during the various activities of wraparound. Further intentional activity must take place toensure that this perspective has sufficient impact within the collaborative process, so that it exerts primaryinfluence during decision making. Team procedures,interactions, and products—including the wraparoundplan—should provide evidence that the team is indeed engaging in intentional activity to prioritize thefamily perspectives.While the principle speaks of family voice andchoice, the wraparound process recognizes that thefamilies who participate in wraparound, like Americanfamilies generally, come in many forms. In many families, it is the biological parents who are the primarycaregivers and who have the deepest and most enduring commitment to a youth or child. In other families,this role is filled by adoptive parents, step-parents, extended family members, or even non-family caregivers.In many cases, there will not be a single, unified “family” perspective expressed during the various activities6of the wraparound process. Disagreements can occurbetween adult family members/ caregivers or betweenparents/caregivers and extended family. What is more,as a young person matures and becomes more independent, it becomes necessary to balance the collaboration in ways that allow the youth to have growing influence within the wraparound process. Wraparound isintended to be inclusive and to manage disagreementby facilitating collaboration and creativity; however,throughout the process, the goal is always to prioritizethe influence of the people who have the deepest andmost persistent connection to the young person andcommitment to his or her well-being.Special attention to the balancing of influenceand perspectives within wraparound is also necessarywhen legal considerations restrict the extent to whichfamily members are free to make choices. This is thecase, for example, when a youth is on probation, orwhen a child is in protective custody. In these instances,an adult acting for the agency may take on caregivingand/or decision making responsibilities vis-à-vis thechild, and may exercise considerable influence withinwraparound. In conducting our review of opinions ofwraparound experts about the principles, this hasbeen one of several points of contention; specifically,how best to balance the priorities of youth and familyagainst those of these individuals. Regardless, thereis strong consensus in the field that the principle offamily voice and choice is a constant reminder that thewraparound process must place special emphasis onthe perspectives of the people who will still be connected to the young person after agency involvementhas ended.2. Team based. The wraparound team consists of individuals agreed upon by the familyand committed to them through informal,formal, and community support and servicerelationships.Wraparound is a collaborative process (see principle 3), undertaken by a team. The wraparound teamshould be composed of people who have a strongcommitment to the family’s well-being. In accordancewith principle 1, choices about who is invited tojoin the team should be driven by family members’perspectives.
Ten Principles of the Wraparound ProcessAt times, family members’ choices about teammembership may be shaped or limited by practical orlegal considerations. For example, one or more familymembers may be reluctant to invite a particular person— e.g., a teacher, a therapist, a probation officer,or a non-custodial ex-spouse—to join the team. At thesame time, not inviting that person may mean that theteam will not have access to resources and/or interpersonal support thatwould otherwise beavailable. Not inviting aparticular person to jointhe team can also meanthat the activities orUniversally, familiessupport that he or sheand youth wereoffers will not be coormore positive anddinated with the team’sefforts. It can alsohopeful when theymean that the familyfelt in charge ofloses the opportunitytheir lives and wereto have the team innot dependent onfluence that person sothat he or she becomesthe system to meetbetter able to act suptheir needs.portively. If that personis a professional, theteam may also lose theopportunity to accessservices or funds thatare available throughthat person’s organization or agency. Not inviting aparticular professional to join the team may also bringundesired consequences; for example, if participationof the probation officer on the wraparound team isrequired as a condition of probation. Family membersshould be provided with support for making informeddecisions about whom they invite to join the team, aswell as support for dealing with any conflicts or negative emotions that may arise from working with suchteam members. Or, when relevant and possible, thefamily should be supported to explore options such asinviting a different representative from an agency ororganization. Ultimately, the family may also choosenot to participate in wraparound.When a state agency has legal custody of a child oryouth, the caregiver in the permanency setting and/oranother person designated by that agency may havea great deal of influence over who should be on theteam; however, in accordance with principle 1, effortsshould be made to include participation of family members and others who have a long-term commitment tothe young person and who will remain connected tohim or her after formal agency involvement has ended.3. Natural supports. The team activelyseeks out and encourages the full participationof team members drawn from family members’networks of interpersonal and communityrelationships. The wraparound plan reflects activities and interventions that draw on sourcesof natural support.This principle recognizes the central importanceof the support that a youth/child, parents/caregivers,and other family members receive “naturally,” i.e., fromthe individuals and organizations whose connection tothe family is independent of the formal service systemand its resources. These sources of natural supportare sustainable and thus most likely to be available forthe youth/child and family after wraparound and otherformal services have ended. People who representsources of natural support often have a high degree ofimportance and influence within family members’ lives.These relationships bring value to the wraparoundprocess by broadening the diversity of support, knowledge, skills, perspectives, and strategies available tothe team. Such individuals and organizations also maybe able to provide certain types of support that moreformal or professional providers find hard to provide.The primary source of natural support is thefamily’s network of interpersonal relationships,which includes friends, extended family, neighbors,co-workers, church members, and so on. Natural support is also available to the family through communityinstitutions, organizations, and associations such aschurches, clubs, libraries, or sports leagues. Professionals and paraprofessionals who interact with thefamily primarily offer paid support; however, they canalso be connected to family members through caringrelationships that exceed the boundaries and expectations of their formal roles. When they act in this way,professionals and paraprofessionals too can becomesources of natural support.Practical experience with wraparound has shownthat formal service providers often have great difficulty accessing or engaging potential team members7
from the family’s community and informal support networks. Thus, there is a tendency that these importantrelationships will be underrepresented on wraparoundteams. This principle emphasizes the need for the teamto act intentionally to encourage the full participationof team members representing sources of naturalsupport.4. Collaboration. Team members workcooperatively and share responsibility fordeveloping, implementing, monitoring, andevaluating a single wraparound plan. The planreflects a blending of team members’ perspectives, mandates, and resources. The planguides and coordinates each team member’swork towards meeting the team’s goals.Wraparound is a collaborative activity—teammembers must reach collective agreement on numerous decisions throughout the wraparound process. Forexample, the team must reach decisions about whatgoals to pursue, what sorts of strategies to use toreach the goals, and how to evaluate whether or notprogress is actually being made in reaching the goals.The principle of collaboration recognizes that the teamis more likely to accomplish its work when team members approach decisions in an open-minded manner,prepared to listen to and be influenced by other teammembers’ ideas and opinions. Team members mustalso be willing to provide their own perspectives, andthe whole team will need to work to ensure that eachmember has opportunities to provide input and feels8safe in doing so. As they work to reach agreement,team members will need to remain focused on theteam’s overarching goals and how best to achievethese goals in a manner that reflects all of the principles of wraparound.The principle of collaboration emphasizes thateach team member must be committed to the team,the team’s goals, and the wraparound plan. For professional team members, this means that the workthey do with family members is governed by the goalsin the plan and the decisions reached by the team.Similarly, the use of resources available to the team—including those controlled by individual professionalson the team—should be governed by team decisionsand team goals.This principle recognizes that there are certainconstraints that operate on team decision making, andthat collaboration must operate within these boundaries. In particular, legal mandates or other requirementsoften constrain decisions. Team members must bewilling to work creatively and flexibly to find ways tosatisfy these mandates and requirements while alsoworking towards team goals.Finally, it should be noted that, as for principles 1(family voice and choice) and 2 (team-based), definingwraparound’s principle of collaboration raises legitimate concern about how best to strike a balancebetween wraparound being youth- and family-drivenas well as team-drive
Ten Principles of the Wraparound Process the model. The current document attempts to make the wraparound principles even more useful as a framework and guide for high-quality practice for youth and families. It describes wraparound’s prin-ciples exclusively at the youth/family/team level
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Wraparound Bibliography Monographs and Reports Bruns, E.J. & Walker, J.S. (Eds.) (2008). A resource guide to wraparound. Portland, OR: Na-tional Wraparound Initiative, Researc
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
governing America’s indigent defense services has made people of color second class citizens in the American criminal justice system, and constitutes a violation of the U.S. Government's obligation under Article 2 and Article 5 of the Convention to guarantee “equal treatment” before the courts. 8. Lastly, mandatory minimum sentencing .
