the crisis residential center’s

The Crisis Residential Center’s

Direction ProgramEffectiveness Study

To Those Who Made This All PossibleResearch Fellows• Jennifer Boisen• Jacob Campbell• Shireen Wheeler

Supportive FiguresEastern Washington University-Dr. Ed Byrnes-Katie Clemons-Handy-Dr. Sarah Keller-Dr. Kim StansburyCrisis Residential Center-Brandon Livingston-Teresa Wright

Presentation Roadmap• What it’s all about• What we did• What it means• What to take away

Literature ReviewWhat it’s all about

Working with At-risk Youth• Reasons for Runaway and Homeless Youth– Support and nurturing– Single parent homes– Abuse and neglect– Substance use / abuse

• Common Problems– Academic– Positive social networks– Mental & physical health issues

Programs & At-risk Youth• Milieu environment• Individual• Group• Family • Referrals

About the CRC• YFA Connections• Safety-net for Spokane• General population• Three programs

MethodologyWhat we did

MethodologyThe Plan:• Archive data from files.– Demographics, programmatic info, hx & GAIN-SS

• Parent surveys– Quantitative & Qualitative.

• Client surveys– Post GAIN-SS

• In-depth interviews

Reality:• Archive data from files.– Demographics, programmatic info. & hx.

• Parent surveys– Qualitative only.

Data Analysis• Data from files– Descriptive Analyses

• Demographic variables• Programmatic variables• Client history & issues

– Cross tabulation– Chi Square

• Qualitative info– Look for commonalities and use to support/discuss

findings/recommendations.

}{ Findings }{}{ Limitations}{}{}{ Implications

What it means

AGEAge Frequency Percentage13 19 14.8414 31 24.2215 25 19.5316 28 21.8817 25 19.53

The majority of the youth, 31, were 14 years old. This is followed by 16 year olds, 17 and 15 year olds 28, 25, and 25 respectively. Thirteen year olds constituted the least at 19.

Length of StayThe average stay or mean for the youth was 190.30. In addition, there was the same number youth who spent more than 187 hours and spent less than 187 hours. The most frequent length of stay was 1.5 hours.

Mean Median Mode (n)190.30 hours

187 hours

1.5 126

Gender Gender Frequency PercentageMale 58 46.03Female 67 53.17Transgender F to M

0

Transgender M to F

1 0.79

Other 0Not known/determined

0

The majority of the youth were female at 67 and the next was highest was male at 58. There was 1 individual who said that they felt that they were a woman instead of a man.

Limitations• Time• Response rate• Outdated information• Biases-social bias• Not being able to support our hypotheses • Only sent surveys to legal guardian addresses• Instrumentation not tested and no control

group

Implications for Social Work• Further research• Begins to determine the effectiveness of the

program

}{ Correlative data}{}{ Recommendations }{}{}{ Future research}{}{}{}{ Conclusions

What to take away

Correlative dataHomelessness & School Status• n = 21 yes homeless• Problems: Irregular, dropped out, suspended,

and expelled• Total: 33.4%• Pearson Chi-Square: 0.351

Correlative dataHomelessness & Mental Health Issues• n = 21 yes homeless• n = 35 yes mental health issues• Problems: Issues related to the mental health

status of youth or family members• Total: 23.8%• Pearson Chi-Square: 0.000 (a. 5 cells (55.6%) have

expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .13.)

Correlative dataFamily Sessions & Household Dynamics• n = 120 yes household dynamics• Problems: issues related to interactions and

interrelationships within the household (for example, frequent arguments between household members

• By the numbers: 0 hours → 26.7% || 0.01-2 hours → 26.7% || 2.01-4 hours → 24.2% || 4.01- 6 hours → 21.7% || Over 6.01 hours → 0.8% ||

• Pearson Chi-Square: 0.758

Correlative dataFamily Sessions & Drug Use and Abuse• n = 31 yes Drug Use and Abuse• Pearson Chi-Square: 0.907

Recommendations• File / data collection• Aftercare• Follow-up• More training regarding therapy• More individual time• Substance use / abuse

Future Research• In-depth interviews• More surveys• Secondary paper

Conclusion• New questions• Poor and dynamic data• Expected data continuation

Questions

?’s