Caseload Segregation/Integration and Service Delivery Outcomes for Children and Adolescents

In this article we explore the relationship between the degree to which local systems of care share responsibility for children and adolescents (measured by the Caseload Segregation/Integration Ratio) and four service delivery outcomes in one state over a 4-year period. Caseload segregation/integrat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of emotional and behavioral disorders 2001, Vol.9 (4), p.232-238
Main Authors: Pandiani, John A., Banks, Steven M., Schacht, Lucille M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescents
Agency Cooperation
Behavior
Behavior Disorders
Caseworker Approach
Child protection
Children
Children & youth
Collaborative case management
Community mental health services
Control Groups
Correctional Institutions
Delivery Systems
Emotional Disturbances
Incarcerated Youth
Integrated Services
Integration
Juvenile justice system
Mental Health Programs
Outcomes of Treatment
Residential Care
Segregation
Service delivery
Special education
Teenagers
USA
Vermont
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In this article we explore the relationship between the degree to which local systems of care share responsibility for children and adolescents (measured by the Caseload Segregation/Integration Ratio) and four service delivery outcomes in one state over a 4-year period. Caseload segregation/integration is measured for community mental health agencies, child protection and juvenile justice programs, and special education programs for emotional and behavioral disorders. Service outcomes under examination include referral for intensive residential treatment and hospitalization for behavioral health care (for all children), incarceration (for boys), and maternity (for girls). Results indicate that greater caseload integration is associated with less referral for residential treatment and higher rates of incarceration.The interpretation of these findings is discussed, and further research is suggested.
ISSN:1063-4266
1538-4799
DOI:10.1177/106342660100900403