![]() |
Treatment or Service Plan FamilyLightsm: Successor to Bridge to Understanding Shows best in Internet Explorer. May be distorted in Mozilla Firefox and other browsers. |
||||
|
A
key issue in services for people with special needs is an individual
plan guiding services. We are referring to services for mental
health, education, socialization, maturation, and for living. This
may be called a treatment plan, an educational plan, an individual
service plan, an "IEP" (Individual Education Plan), master treatment
plan, or something else. It is common for such plans to
focus on mental health and education. We wish these plans were
more comprehensive, but in depth plans covering education and mental
health are common.
(Article continues below box)
FamilyLight
sm
would welcome making comprehensive individual plans for every growing
child through young adulthood. Another way to describe it, would be that
every person of every age in the education, mental health, health care,
rehabilitation, or social service systems should have such a plan. Note
the inclusion of health care, which makes this pretty broad. But
we digress. Our attention here needs to be on therapeutic schools
and programs.
We
would like to see every school or program that focuses on change using
very carefully constructed plans for every student / client that state
exactly where that student / client is now (updated with some
regularity), where they (the school / program and the client
/ student) are trying to go, how they intend to get there, and who is
responsible for what. An initial plan needs to be in place
immediately upon entry, although that initial plan might be have great
similarity from one student /client to another and focus mostly upon
gathering information and assessing to get a longer term plan in place.
A very detailed plan based upon results of initial assessments needs to
be put in place as soon as practical.
We see no reason why that should ever take longer than six weeks,
and unless this is a very long term program, the time should be much
shorter. In a short term
program (three months or less), this should happen within ten days at
most, probably in less time.
These are areas that should be
covered:
•
Where the student / client is
now: This calls for not only thorough assessment and formulation,
but a clear explanation of the assumptions that are being made to fill
the gaps in what is actually known about the student / client.
If there is disagreement between people on the team providing services
that needs to be acknowledged. To the extent feasible, the student
/ client -- and for children and young adults dependent on their
families of origin, the parents, too -- should be part of the team
for purposes of the planning process. If there is an outside case
manager or referral source with case management responsibilities,
that person should also be part of the team.
•
Where they are trying to go?
The only way an organization or
even an individual therapist or teacher can stay focused on getting to
particular results, unless there is a specific definition of those
results is a very visible reference point that everyone on the team sees
regularly. This
needs to be divided into sections:
▪
What
should the client / student “look
like” when ready to return home or move to a lower level of structure or
care. More specifically,
what needs to change in order for the client/ resident to be ready to go
home or to a lesser level of
care or structure? We are
looking for measureable/ behavioral goals or objectives that, when met,
indicate readiness to move on.
We are looking for expected outcomes at point of discharge.
▪
What
should be different at home in order for the client/ resident to be
ready to return home? We are
looking for a great specificity as indicated in the bullet above.
▪
What
outcomes should be expected at the next time the plan is reviewed or
updated? Again these need to
be very specific behavioral goals and objectives.
•
How they intend to get there?
There needs to be a common strategy that is supported by the entire
team, that defines the resources to be needed, when and how they are to
be applied, and what is the division of labor.
•
Who is responsible for what?
There needs to be accountability placed on the whole team and then
individually, what each team member is responsible for. It also needs to
address how we will know if each person individually, and the whole team
collectively are delivering. It needs to show how to know whether
or not the plan, and strategy are succeeding, and what we must do to
revise and update the plan so we are applying what we learn as we go
along.
•
How frequently should there be
a comprehensive review of the progress of the client/ student?
For longer term programs this would typically occur once every
three months. Shorter term
programs may do this very frequently, perhaps weekly or even more
frequently.
Schools
and programs fall short on this in many ways. First there are
those who simply do not provide a written plan. One therapeutic
school in Massachusetts admits it does treatment plans and keeps them
"in the drawer" where they have no use except to be able to demonstrate
to the very naive licensing authorities of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts that they are in compliance with the licensing
regulations, even if they are otherwise meaningless documents. If
Massachusetts requires treatment plans should they not also require that
they be used?
Those
who write treatment plans, too often do not state where the student
/client is now. They don't tell us the starting point.
Others develop a treatment plan as soon as the person enters the
program, prior to careful assessment, and never update it.
Some
do not tell us how they plan to accomplish the goals. some do not define
responsibility. Altogether, too often the "plans" simply confuse
accountability.
Those
who do use plans too frequently write treatment plans that simply avoid
being specific about where they are trying to go. We frequently
see so-called "goals" that begin with the word "improve" as in "Improve
ability to control anger." That is not a goal; it is a process.
There is no indicator to re-direct the process when it becomes evident
that what was intended at planning time has not been achieved when
review time arrives -- or that it was achieved and it is time to think
about what is the next goal after that.
Football players do not get points for moving the ball down the field;
they get points for taking the ball over the goal line or between the
goal posts. When a "goal" begins with a word like "improve," there
is no way to know when the goal is reached, unless the intention is that
the slightest improvement indicates the goal has been achieved. We
expect plans in place that are specific to where they are trying to go.
To further clarify, it is completely acceptable to us to have goals that
do not meet this standard themselves, but are followed by a set of
behavioral objectives that define precisely where the goal line falls.
Some programs are set up with
well established procedures and steps all clients/ residents must follow
and assume that progress comes to all when those procedures are applied.
They describe a program that everyone follows that they indicate
effects change. While we agree that some programs that operate that way
might be very effective for some of their residents, we do not agree
that program design is ever an adequate substitute for meaningful
individual planning and focused execution of those plans.
We do not believe that there is any single approach that will be
effective for all except for establishing quality relationships between
staff and clients/ residents.
Some programs defend having
therapy be based solely upon what “comes up” in each therapy session.
We acknowledge that even with individualized goal oriented
treatment plans, there is a place for therapists to leave room in the
therapeutic process for some clients/ residents to guide therapy by what
they bring to the table in some sessions.
In other situations, therapeutic intervention needs to be more
goal oriented at all times. That varies with the situation and is an
issue for individual treatment plans to address.
But in all cases, it is important to define what change is
expected and to continue to monitor the degree to which progress is
being made toward the defined goals.
Therapeutic intervention that is not at every moment consciously
focused on the defined goals might serve an important purpose within the
implementation of a goal oriented treatment plan. But progress is
monitored by comparing actual events to the goals and objectives of the
plan. Feedback is invited. We will publish selected feedback. Email: FamilyLightResponse@yahoo.com Disclaimer: No program review, no matter how positive, is a blanket endorsement. No criticism is a blanket condemnation. When we express our level of confidence in a school or program, that is our subjective opinion with which others might reasonably disagree. When we assert something as fact, we have done our best to be accurate, but we cannot guarantee that all of our information is accurate and up to date. When we address compliance with our guidelines, you need to remember that these are only OUR guidelines -- not guidelines from an official source. We have also set the bar very high, and do not expect any school or program to be in total compliance. It is not appropriate to draw a conclusion of impropriety (or even failure to live up to conventional wisdom) from our lack of confidence in a school or program or from less than perfect conformity to our guidelines. Some will say we expect too much. Readers are responsible for verifying accuracy of information supplied here prior to acting upon it. We are not responsible for inaccuracies. Last updated March 17, 2010 |
||||
"Solutions, Not Just Referrals" |
For information regarding use of content of this website, click here |