1 / 10

Real-world evaluations: The case of a respite program

Real-world evaluations: The case of a respite program. Dr. John D. McLennan, University of Calgary Dr. Liana Urichuk, Capital Health & University of Alberta. The Many Faces of Childhood Well-Being: The Early Years (Two to Six) Nov 30, 2007 Edmonton. ACCFCR-funded study.

alisa-obrien
Télécharger la présentation

Real-world evaluations: The case of a respite program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Real-world evaluations: The case of a respite program Dr. John D. McLennan, University of Calgary Dr. Liana Urichuk, Capital Health & University of Alberta The Many Faces of Childhood Well-Being: The Early Years (Two to Six) Nov 30, 2007 Edmonton

  2. ACCFCR-funded study • Title: The impact of therapeutic respite care on young children with special needs and their caregivers • Partners: • Kids Kottage (Lori Reiter) • Elves Special Needs Society

  3. Acknowledgements • ACCFCR • McDaniel Foundation • Minerva Foundation • Personnel funding (McLennan) • AHFMR • CIHR • Research Staff & Students • Kristen Welker, CASA • Maddalena Genovese, CASA • Jenna Doig, University of Toronto • Susan Huculak, University of Calgary

  4. Respite • What is respite? • A group of support services designed to provide “the feeling of a break” from the habitual demands of caring for a dependent who has a disability (Neufeld et al., 2001, Cohen 1982, Warren & Cohen, 1985) • Why would you need to evaluate it?

  5. Real-world evaluation • Determine if our intervention efforts are effective • Potential impact of intervention efforts: • (i) More harm than good • (ii) Ineffective • No effect • Opportunity cost • (iii) Effective • Can’t make assumptions from efficacious studies • Priorities for expansion/dissemination

  6. The Intervention • Centre-based respite • 6 hours/week • “School-year” • “therapeutic” • E.g., Social skills building

  7. Study design • Pre-post design quantitative study • Baseline information • Mid-point (5 months) • End-point (10 months) • Follow-up (18 months) • Quasi-experimental design component • Respite seeking comparison group • Qualitative inquiry component

  8. Baseline characteristics of participating children • The children • n=63/82 (77%) • 2/3rd boys • 1/3rd Caucasians, 2/3rd Minorities • 2-1/2 to 9 years of age (mean: 5 years) • 1/3rd “confirmed FASD” • Strengths & Difficulty Questionnaire • 89% rated their child’s difficulties in the high (“abnormal”) range • 92% indicate these difficulties have a substantial impact on the child’s life and environment

  9. Baseline characteristics of participating caregivers • Caregivers (n=50) • 76% mothers (39% biological) • 24% fathers (33% biological) • Parent Stress Index (SF) • 2/3rds scored in the high range on total stress measure

  10. Anticipated outcomes • Fall 2008 – preliminary outcome data • Understanding of the impact of this type of respite program • A preliminary understanding • Possible benchmark • Clues to what direction to take to improve the respite intervention • Contribute to a continuous quality improvement loop

More Related