Best Practices in Wraparound: A Multidimensional View of the Evidence (Report‪)‬

Since its inception in the 1980s, the idea of "wraparound" services for youths who have, or are at risk of developing, severe emotional disorders (SEDs) has gained much support around the nation. Wraparound is of particular interest and relevance to the social work profession because of the congruence of the model's stated values and core elements with the values and practices of the profession. Although originally targeted at youths with SEDs and their families, the wraparound approach is attracting increasing attention in a number of fields in which social workers are employed, including child welfare (Clark, Prange, Stewart, McDonald, & Boyd, 1998) and juvenile justice (Carney & Buttell, 2003). Although wraparound has been suggested as a promising point of conversion for delivering evidence-based practices more effectively (Bruns, Suter, & Leverentz-Brady, 2006; Bruns, Walrath, & Sheehan, 2007), there is considerable variation in how wraparound is understood and implemented. The term "wraparound" is often used as shorthand for any program that sets out to deliver flexible, comprehensive services intended to help keep children or youths in the community (Malysiak, 1998;VanDenBerg, Bruns, & Burchard, 2003).This variability is in part a typical, and perhaps necessary, feature of a model implemented in highly different community settings; still, the existing literature offers insights into common best practices for wraparound that can be helpful to social work practitioners and administrators in a variety of child-serving agencies. Based on the multidimensional evidence-based practice inquiry process (Petr, 2009; Petr &Walter, 2005), this review reports knowledge obtained from the literature about current wraparound practices from three perspectives: the research perspective, as reflected in empirical studies on effectiveness; the professional perspective, reflecting the knowledge of practitioners who are involved in the practice or administration of wraparound; and the perspectives of various other consumers. Several databases (ERIC, Social Work Abstracts, PsycINFO, and PubMed) and the Internet were searched for reputable sources of information on the issue (published between 1998 and 2008).We performed a value-critical analysis assessing the evidence of current best practices with respect to the values that wraparound espouses and the values and principles held in social work and the field of child and family mental health. Results of the inquiry point to the need to further improve family centeredness, increase involvement of natural support systems, and add a clear commitment to enhancement of social justice through systems change.