Evaluating the Implementation and Impact of an Intervention Designed to Enhance Residential Treatment for Adolescents with Histories of Trauma

Jeanne C. Rivard, Ph.D.

 

Evaluating the Implementation and Impact of an Intervention Designed to Enhance Residential Treatment for Adolescents with Histories of Trauma is an evaluation study of the implementation of an intervention program (the Sanctuary Model, developed by Dr. Sandra Bloom) at several JBFCS residential treatment facilities for adolescents.  The program was originally developed for implementation in adult, short-term facilities.  An evaluation of its suitability for a long-term adolescent facility has potentially important consequences for adding to the treatment options for adolescents with a history of trauma.  This article describes the Sanctuary Model, the development of the intervention, and the challenges the intervention presents to the researcher.

 

            Despite the strong associations between child maltreatment and psychological disorders in childhood and adulthood, there is evidence that child victims of abuse and neglect do not routinely receive mental health treatment specifically targeted to prevent or ameliorate potential negative mental health outcomes.  Few empirical studies document outcomes of mental health interventions for abused and neglected children (Berliner, 1997; Cicchetti & Toth, 1995; Fantuzzo, 1990; Graziano & Mills, 1992; Malinowsky-Rummell & Hansen, 1993).

            This article describes an initiative being undertaken by the Jewish Board of Family and Children’s Services (JBFCS) to enhance residential treatment programming for emotionally disturbed children with histories of maltreatment and exposure to family and community violence.  Under the auspices of JBFCS and through the consultation of Dr. Sandra Bloom, the JBFCS Saul B. Cohen Chair of Mental Health for 1998-1999, the agency is piloting a model of trauma-based treatment for use in adolescent residential treatment centers. The intervention will be applied to existing therapeutic programs that are specialized in treating youth with conduct disorders and other serious emotional disturbances, but which have not traditionally utilized a trauma-based approach to directly treat the symptoms and consequences associated with child abuse, neglect, and exposure to family or community violence. The programs provide residential, therapeutic, and special educational services for children and adolescents referred by public child welfare, mental health, and juvenile justice agencies. 

            An evaluation component has been integrated into the planning and development of this multi-modal intervention.  Several challenges are presented in both implementing and evaluating the model.  First, the model was originally developed in a short-term, in-patient setting for adults suffering from traumatic experiences, so it must be adapted for adolescents in long-term residential settings.  Second, in addition to adding a trauma-based focus to an existing residential treatment program, the model involves diffusing a new philosophical approach and changing the therapeutic milieu of programs.

 

 The Sanctuary Model

            The intervention, referred to as the Sanctuary Model (Bloom, 1997), is composed of three basic components: (1) philosophical tenets guiding the creation and maintenance of a therapeutic community; (2) a treatment approach, based in trauma theories and cognitive-behavioral treatment theories, that posits four stages of recovery for trauma survivors; and (3) a range of therapeutic modalities including psychoeducational modules designed to provide skills for re-structuring thought processes, communication, and behavior to facilitate movement through the stages of recovery.

            A primary goal of the intervention is to enhance the therapeutic milieu with a philosophy of non-violence and democratic social action in which staff and clients share responsibility for creating the therapeutic community. The philosophy is based on tenets of a therapeutic milieu developed in the 1940s to 1960s in an effort to humanize treatment within institutions and has been extended to other forms of community-based treatment (Bloom, 1997; Grob, 1991).  The core values of a therapeutic community are: the community itself is the most influential factor on treatment; clients are responsible for their own treatment; the operation and management of the community should be more democratic than authoritarian; clients can facilitate each others’ treatment; treatment is voluntary and conducted in the least restrictive environment; and physical restraint is kept to a minimum.

            The Sanctuary Model adds to these values an emphasis on creating a “living-learning environment” which is physically, psychologically, socially, and morally safe for both clients and staff.  In this milieu, conscious problem-solving is encouraged on personal, interpersonal, and community levels.  Staff strive to create a non-hierarchical working atmosphere where decision-making is democratic and all members of the community are treated with high levels of respect and dignity.  The professional roles and boundaries of staff are clearly distinguished from those of clients, without setting up physical or psychological barriers, and while empowering clients as influential community members and problem-solvers (Bloom, 1997).

This therapeutic community milieu sets the stage for delivering the trauma-based treatment aimed at facilitating client growth through four stages of recovery, represented by the acronym, SAGE (Foderaro & Ryan, 1998).  Safety refers to creating a safe environment physically, psychologically, socially, and morally in which clients can engage in the recovery process within a non-threatening environment. Safety also refers to an individual’s personal commitment to create internal safety by learning how to stop cycles of re-enacting traumatic experiences through hurting themselves (i.e., self mutilation, addiction, setting up situations where they will be rejected by others, etc.). Attaining a feeling of safety is critical to the attainment of all other treatment goals. Affect modulation refers to the stage following safety in which individuals learn how to manage effectively their emotional responses.  Important tasks for the clients in this stage are learning how to: accurately identify their various emotional states; discriminate between positive and negative affect in self and others; use cognitive and language skills to articulate their emotional states; read the emotional cues of others; and appropriately “recalibrate” the intensity of their emotional responses according to different levels of stimuli.   Grieving is the stage of recovery in which individuals mourn losses they have experienced and practice managing the emotions that accompany such losses. Successfully reaching and getting beyond this stage of recovery allows individuals to re-focus--away from the past and toward the future.  It calls for new effort to be spent in creating a new sense of self.  Emancipation refers to the stage of recovery in which individuals are empowered to make choices to direct their lives toward more life-sustaining and growth-oriented goals.  It is “characterized by an on-going process of self discovery and self definition, accompanied by an evolving sense of mastery” (Foderaro & Ryan, 1999). 

            The SAGE framework is operationalized through a range of cognitive-behavioral oriented therapeutic modalities including individual therapy, group therapy, and expressive therapies.  Chief among these are group psychoeducational modules that are designed to teach the concepts inherent to the SAGE framework, and to teach and practice the cognitive, language, and behavioral skills necessary to move through the stages of recovery within the safety of the therapeutic community.

 

Intervention Development and Research Challenges

            Successful implementation of the Sanctuary Model in a treatment facility requires change at several levels--change in both the program philosophy and the milieu toward a non-violent and community-oriented paradigm, change in the organizational culture, change in the attitudes and behaviors of community members, and change in treatment protocols.  Establishing and maintaining a therapeutic community in line with the Sanctuary Model requires an active process of breaking down institutional, societal, professional, cultural, and communication barriers that isolate clients and staff.  Simultaneously, the re-building process involves consciously learning new ways to relate as interdependent community members, creating and modeling healthy and supportive relationships between individuals, and developing an atmosphere of hope and non-violence.  In the JBFCS implementation of the Sanctuary Model, the primary means for effecting such change will be through increasing communication among staff and clients and including all members of the community in planning, shaping, and implementing the intervention within each specific treatment unit involved in the pilot project. In this manner, the new philosophy will be absorbed into the implementation process itself. 

            Measuring such change in the therapeutic milieu will require qualitative analyses of key events and interactions within the community, such as how plans and decisions are made, how critical incidents and problems are handled, and how youth are empowered to participate in planning, decision-making, and problem-resolution.  Other areas of investigation related to implementation pertain to how individual, ethnic, and cultural differences among staff and clients affect the change process.  For example, how are aspects of the new philosophy, such as non-violence, flattened hierarchy for decision-making, and open communication, interpreted and accepted by different members of the community?  How do new feelings of interpersonal trust and safety emerge?  How do staff involved in direct child-care interpret trauma theories and integrate them into daily interactions with adolescents?

            Evaluating outcomes of this type of multi-level intervention presents many challenges.  The evaluation plan must consider questions such as: how can change in program philosophy and milieu be quantified and correlated with change in staff behavior/attitudes and client outcomes; how is the SAGE treatment approach distinguished from existing treatment protocols; and how can the effects of the Sanctuary Model be separated from those resulting from the existing intervention? To evaluate the effects of the intervention both intermediate and ultimate outcomes need to be considered. Diffusion of the therapeutic community philosophy should lead to changes in the therapeutic community (i.e., intermediate outcomes), such as: greater sense of community/cohesiveness; more democratic decision-making and shared responsibility in problem-solving; reduction in use of physical restraints; and reduction of violent critical incidents.  Diffusion of the therapeutic community philosophy and full implementation of the treatment approaches should result ultimately in gains for youth, such as: reducing trauma symptoms; increasing self-esteem; increasing self-control control; and utilizing social networks.

For long range planning, a quasi-experimental, comparison group cohort design with repeated measures has been proposed to evaluate the effects of the intervention on the therapeutic milieu, staff, and youth. The evaluability of the logic model is, however, highly contingent upon the successful diffusion of the therapeutic community philosophy.  This intervention development and research project has strong support within JBFCS.  Due to the democratic and somewhat revolutionary nature of the new intervention, the programs are carefully soliciting input and participation from all levels of the organization, and they are cautiously advancing in embracing the new philosophy.

           

The study's principal investigator is Jeanne C. Rivard, Ph.D.

 

References

 

Berliner, L. (1997). Intervention with children who experience trauma. In D. Cicchetti & S. Toth (Eds.), Rochester symposium on developmental psychopathology. Developmental perspectives on trauma: Theory, research, and intervention (Vol. 8, pp.491-514). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

 

Bloom, S. (1997). Creating sanctuary: Toward the evolution of sane societies. New York: Routledge.

           

Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1995). A developmental psychopathology perspective on child abuse and neglect. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(5), 541-565.

 

Fantuzzo, J. W. (1990). Behavioral treatment of the victims of child abuse and neglect. Behavior Modification, 14(3), 316-339.

 

Foderaro, J.  F., & Ryan, R. A. (1998). SAGE: Mapping the course of recovery. Unpublished manuscript.

 

Graziano, A. M., & Mills, J. R. (1992). Treatment for abused children: When is a partial solution acceptable? Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 217-228.

 

Grob, G. N. (1991). From asylum to community: Mental health policy in modern America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

 

Malinowsky-Rummell, R., & Hansen, D. J. (1993). Long-term consequences of childhood physical abuse. Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 68-79.