The Crossover Youth Practice Model: Multiple Perspectives on Family Engagement in the First Year of Implementation
Overall, maltreated youth are at a 47% greater risk for becoming involved in delinquency (“crossing over”) than youth from the general population (Ryan & Testa, 2005). Crossover youth are at high risk for mental health, education and vocational problems (Dworsky & Courtney, 2010). Poor outcomes experienced early in life have been linked to decreased longevity (Ho, 2013). The Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) is a conceptual model and guide to systems change. The goal of the CYPM is to minimize maltreated youths’ involvement in the juvenile justice system and improve positive outcomes through strengthened collaborations between systems, earlier and more appropriate intervention and increased family engagement (Lutz, Steward, Legters, & Herz, 2009; Herz, 2010). The purpose of the current study was to explore the process of family engagement during the first year of CYPM implementation from multiple perspectives (professionals, youth and caregivers) and to describe the impact of engagement on model implementation.
Methods
This qualitative study is part of a larger mixed-methods evaluation. We purposively sampled CYPM professionals including implementation leaders (n= 32), and front line workers (n=52), as well as CYPM youth (n=15) and their caregivers (n=20). Each of the 119 participants took part in an in-depth, semi-structured, audiotaped interview. Interviews explored aspects of family engagement with the CYPM. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Emic codes were induced (Shwandt, 2007) through repeated readings of interview transcripts by two independent coders. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. Credibility was further enhanced through member checks and peer audit (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Results
Results indicate that there are multiple aspects of family engagement that impact system change and service delivery under the CYPM. Interviews with CYPM implementation leaders focused mostly on logistics of when and how to engage families. Front line workers, on the other hand, discussed many relational aspects of engagement including trepidations around cross-system sharing of information. Interviews with families themselves elaborated on this theme. For youth and caregivers, it was the relational context that was essential to their experience of cross-system collaborations. Youth and caregivers indicated that their experience of collaboration was moderated by relationships established with each worker individually. Findings indicate, however, that for African American families, there was more distrust experienced at the system level than for Caucasian families. This was largely captured in detailed accounts of physical altercations with staff in the correctional system. Distrust at the system level, for African American families, created an additional barrier in forming individual relationships, which, in turn had an impact upon family engagement in the CYPM.
Conclusions and Implications
Results suggest that the CYPM provides a comprehensive framework for cross-system collaboration. However, family engagement (a central component of the CYPM) seems to be moderated by individual relationships with workers in both systems as well as systemic violations of trust experienced by African American families. These findings have implications for implementation, as family engagement is a central component of the CYPM and relational challenges between professionals and families will have an impact on youth outcomes.