Project Activities
The researchers carried out their study in three phases. In the first phase, they engaged experts and school staff to review and iteratively adapt existing Wraparound materials for use in elementary schools. In the second phase, they tested the feasibility of the revised Wraparound in Schools (WIS) intervention in elementary schools. In the third phase, they completed a small-scale randomized pilot test to evaluate feasibility, fidelity, outcomes, and costs of WIS.
Structured Abstract
Setting
This study took place in six elementary schools located in four school districts in Mason County, Washington.
Sample
Six elementary schools and their teachers, students, and parents participated in this study. Participating students were those identified as experiencing academic problems due to SEBC. A total of 13 elementary school students and their families participated in the initial feasibility test of the adapted Wraparound model. A total of 41 students and their primary teacher (n=36) participated in the small-scale randomized trial.
The researchers developed Wraparound in Schools (WIS) model, which integrated an adapted version of a research-based Wraparound model with adapted protocols and tools from PBIS. As part of developing WIS, the researchers first adapted a research-based Wraparound model typically used in community settings and its package of implementation supports for use in authentic elementary school settings. Researchers adapted field-tested and research-based materials used by the National Wraparound Implementation Center (NWIC), including manuals, training curricula, staff and supervisor certification procedures, coaching platform, fidelity and outcome measures, and program and system checklists. They adapted protocols and tools from PBIS for developing district- and school-level readiness for implementation of intensive Tier 3 supports. These protocols and tools supported the implementation of a full fidelity Wraparound in Schools (WIS) model and research on its feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness on students’ emotional, behavioral, and academic outcomes.
Research design and methods
In phase 1, the researchers facilitated an expert review and revision of existing Wraparound tools and protocols, which were designed to support the implementation of Wraparound in Schools (WIS) model in schools. They also tested feasibility of WIS implementation protocols and worked with six elementary schools to prepare them to implement WIS. In phase 2, the team conducted an initial feasibility test using two WIS facilitators affiliated with the research team to implement a first version of the adapted school-based Wraparound model. In phase 3, the project team tested the potential for positive impact on student mental health and academic outcomes via a small, randomized study that assigned 41 students in need of extra support due to their SEBC to receive either the final WIS protocol (n=21) or services as usual (n=20).
Control condition
Students in the control condition received services as usual.
Key measures
The researchers collected measures focused on WIS feasibility and acceptability, WIS implementation success, WIS fidelity, teacher/student/parent report of mental health symptoms and functioning, such as self-efficacy, internalizing and externalizing behaviors, family-identified top problems, parent perceived competence, and family strengths and difficulties, and student academic outcomes, including attendance, disciplinary actions, math, and English language arts.
Data analytic strategy
The team used a variety of analytic strategies including qualitative analysis; mixed-methods single-subject case study design; and repeated measures analyses of variance to examine differences in outcomes between groups in the small-scale randomized study.
Cost analysis strategy
The researchers determined total costs of WIS per student and mean costs per student. The team also analyzed costs of education staff time to provide services to students in both the WIS and SAU groups. Costs of the WIS program were calculated to be approximately $4,200 per student, as calculated by dividing the total program costs by the number of students/families served by WIS. However, school administrators reported significantly more school staff time was spent serving students in the SAU group (e.g., in individual parent meetings, school intervention team or SIT meetings) than students in the WIS group, indicating a potential offset to costs of the WIS program.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Products and publications
Project website:
Publications:
ERIC Citations: Find available citations in ERIC for this award here.
Additional project information
Additional Online Resources and Information: The Wraparound practice model that was adapted and implemented in schools for this study is called FOCUS. A summary of FOCUS can be found here: https://www.nwic.org/focus
Related projects
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
