Programme dintervention diffrentielle en partenariat (IDP)

1) Category:
Specific program

2) Issues Behind the Program:

Negligence is the number one cause of referrals to youth services for children age 5 to 12, a good many of whom also present with behavioral problems. Many adaptation problems stem from both. Negligence and behavioral problems often develop gradually as the result of a combination of individual and contextual risk factors such as a family situation, poverty, inadequate parental supervision and psychological or health problems. Most interventions treat these problems separately, even when they occur simultaneously. Family and youth organizations (youth centers, schools, CSSSs) usually work unilaterally rather than together.

3) Objectives:
The main objective of IDP is to offer differential intervention in partnership that meets the specific needs of young people. IDP also has a number of specific objectives: o o o Reduce the childs behavioral problems; Mitigate risk within the family; Offer integrated intervention within the framework of a partnership between the family, the youth center, the CSSS and the school.

4) Environment:
Primary and secondary schools Families Community (youth centers and CSSSs)

5) Target Group:
Children aged 5 to 12 with serious behavioral problems at school or at home in a situation of suspected family negligence. o Under the Youth Protection Act, the children can receive psychosocial services from youth centers or be referred by the CSSS under the Act respecting health services and social services. Children can also be singled out for the program by the school if they have serious behavioral problems. However, in order for the children to be eligible, it must be shown that the parents have trouble meeting the childs needs and supervising his/her behavior, which could ultimately compromise the childs safety and development. The child must be living in his/her family environment and be attending school.

This factsheet was taken from the following website: http://rire.ctreq.qc.ca/.

Page 1 of 4

6) Key Words:
Programme dintervention diffrentielle en partenariat, coeuraction, school-familycommunity partnership, specific program, collaboration, social services, behavioral problems, adaptation difficulties, differentiel intervention, negligence

7) Description:
Programme Intervention Diffrentielle en Partenariat (IDP), a model for collaboration and joint action between the family, the school, social service agencies and the community, supports the action deployed to assist children age 6 to 12 with behavioral problems in a situation of suspected family negligence. The centrepiece of IDP is an individualized intervention plan for more effective intervention practices and services to young people and their families. There are three core components, namely, systematic co-evaluation, differential intervention and genuine partnership. 1. Systematic co-evaluation: o The purpose of this component is to facilitate a common understanding of the childs situation, to establish a common vocabulary, to pinpoint the risk and protection factors involved, and to properly steer the intervention. Evaluation tools: o o Negligence index List of the childs behaviors (teacher and parents) Inventory of social and family resources Family dynamics (program worker and parents) Decision tree

2. Differential intervention: Intervention is based on the model of differential intervention and profiles of development of behavioral disorders created by Gagn and Desbiens (2003). An intervention plan is produced based on an etiological understanding of the behaviors in relation to the childs developmental arc (based on the Gagn and Desbiens typology). Collaboration makes it possible to offer services that dovetail, to act consistently, and to facilitate monitoring of the situation in response to the various needs of the child and of the family. Regular co-supervision and exchange of information occurs.

3. Co-intervention (partnership): CSSS-YC-SB collaboration o

8. Steps:
I. II. III. IV. V. VI. Work with all the partners to draft the project (youth centers, CSSS, school boards) Create a partnership: dynamic process that requires day-to-day involvement Form an advisory committee (essential) Choose the program workers (crucial) Recruit the participants Establish a timeline

This factsheet was taken from the following website: http://rire.ctreq.qc.ca/.

Page 2 of 4

9) Activities/Actions:
The project hinges on a structured process consisting of: o o o o o o o Forming a joint-action team consisting of the people who work with the children concerned and representing each group involved (youth center, school and CSSS); Creating alliances and consensus-making around the philosophy of the program, its objectives and the proposed process; Sharing of information and common definition and prioritization of problems; Identifying the resources available within the community and the means for supporting the young people; Consensus on the tools and the process adopted for the intervention plan; Establishing the means selected and involvement of the partners; Ongoing monitoring and adjustment as needed.

10) Resources Required:

Human resources: o o o CSSS, youth center and school board workers (commitments by the three instances) Program evaluators and monitors (training required) Researcher who carries out regular clinical supervision to ensure compliance with the philosophy of the program and intervention that takes into account clinical aims and objectives based on Gagn and Desbiens typology. Advisory Committee/Project Coordinator

11) Roles of the Participants:

CSSS, youth centre and school board workers: o o o o o o o are part of the various meetings and interventions; participate in file reviews; co-supervise; offer complementary services; follow-up with the student and his/her family. provides support for the program evaluators. conducts clinical supervision.

Advisory Committee/Project Coordinator: Researcher:

12) Scientific Basis or Validity:

Some of the results of the program (based on the research report: 19 families (24 children); 24 PSI meetings: 22 reviews and 3 discussions during the year): o Generally, the common consensus was that the program was relevant, especially in terms of the joint action and collaboration that occurred. The report clearly indicates that collaboration was a highly positive element that benefited the children, the program workers and the organizations, i.e. improved relationship between the parents and the school, better collaboration and communication

This factsheet was taken from the following website: http://rire.ctreq.qc.ca/.

Page 3 of 4

between the parents and school staff, more positive perception of the families by school staff and improved communication among the partners. o Joint action and task and responsibility-sharing among those involved in the program are considered elements that facilitate the coherence and continuity of the services required to better meet the needs of the young people and their families. The typology-based approach is a very positive asset of the program, as are the underlying profile-based differential intervention methods. Program workers felt that tailoring the intervention to the young persons daily life and profile enhances the program and enables higher-quality intervention. However, implementation of a program of this kind requires major investments and effective partnership among the various stakeholders. Parents noted a decrease in the incidence of the following in their children: anxiety, depression, difficulty with social relationships, obsessions, delinquency and aggressiveness. Teachers noted a significant decrease in attention problems in the students.

o o

13) Program Material:

Training on the philosophy of the program and on family situation-based differential intervention with children with behavioral problems.

14) Additional Information:

The information contained in this factsheet was taken from: o o o o http://innovons.qc.ca/documents/M-2-03_Desb-Lave.pdf ; http://www.cqjdc.org/fra/pdf/3_01.pdf . Implementation should be carried out over a period of 3 to 36 months. A presentation of the program and basic training should be offered to all program workers directly or indirectly involved (e.g. principal, teachers, special education technicians and psychologists). It is crucial that there not be high turnover in terms of the leaders, that they be given release time from their regular duties, and that they be assigned to this program only. Regular meetings must be held between the leader, the educators and the technicians directly involved in the intervention.

Recommendations:

15) Contacts:
Nadia Desbiens, Professor/Scholar, Faculty of Education Universit de Montral Pavillon Marie-Victorin Tel.: (514) 343-7436 Email: nadia.desbiens@umontreal.ca

This factsheet was taken from the following website: http://rire.ctreq.qc.ca/.

Page 4 of 4