ABSTRACT
Background: Sustained delivery of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) is essential to addressing the public health impacts of youth mental health problems, but is complicated by the limited and fragmented funding available to youth mental health service agencies. Supports are needed that can guide service agencies in accessing sustainable funding for EBTs. We conducted a pilot evaluation of the Fiscal Mapping Process, an Excel-based strategic planning tool that helps service agency leaders identify and coordinate financing strategies for their EBT programs. Method: Pilot testing of the Fiscal Mapping Process was completed with 10 youth mental health service agencies over a 12-month period, using trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy or parent-child interaction therapy programs. Service agency representatives received initial training and monthly coaching in using the tool. We used case study methods to synthesize all available data (surveys, focus groups, coaching notes, document review) and contrast agency experiences to identify key findings through explanation building. Results: Key evaluation findings related to the process and outcomes of using the Fiscal Mapping Process, as well as contextual influences. Process evaluation findings helped clarify the primary use case for the tool and identified the importance-and challenges-of engaging external collaborators. Outcome evaluation findings documented the impacts of the Fiscal Mapping Process on agency-reported sustainment capacities (strategic planning, funding stability), which fully explained reported improvements in outcomes (extent and likelihood)-although these impacts were incremental. Findings on contextual factors documented the influence of environmental and organizational capacities on engagement with the tool and concerns about equitable impacts, but also the view that the process could usefully generalize to other EBTs. Conclusions: Our pilot evaluation of the Fiscal Mapping Process was promising. In future work, we plan to integrate the tool into EBT implementation initiatives and test its impact on long-term sustainment outcomes across various EBTs, while increasing attention to equity considerations.
Pilot-Testing a Tool for Planning the Sustainable Financing of Youth Mental Health Treatments that Work Plain Language Summary Youth mental health treatments that work must be consistently available to improve youth mental health in our communities, but funding for these treatments is often limited and hard to access. Youth mental health service agencies need tools that can help guide them in accessing sustainable funding for evidence-based treatments. We developed the Fiscal Mapping Process, an Excel-based strategic planning tool for planning sustainable financing of youth mental health treatment programs, and conducted a 1-year pilot-testing evaluation with 10 youth mental health service agencies. We used case study methods to compare and contrast agency experiences with using the tool, related to the process, outcomes, and contextual influences on using the Fiscal Mapping Process. Key findings included clarification of the ideal characteristics of contributors and treatment programs for using the tool; initial confirmation that the tool can improve agency-reported capacities for sustaining treatments that work and long-term sustainment outlooks, although these impacts were incremental; and documentation of the influence of environmental and organizational capacities on engagement with the tool, concerns about equitable impacts, and user views that the process could be applied to a wide range of treatment models. In summary, our pilot evaluation of the Fiscal Mapping Process showed that this tool is promising for supporting the financial sustainment of treatments that work in youth mental health services. In future research, we plan to incorporate the tool into real-world training initiatives with mental health service agencies, test its impact on long-term sustainment across a variety of treatment models, and incorporate attention to equity considerations.
ABSTRACT
Learning and adaptation are essential for success. However, human effort is inherently finite, which creates a dilemma for employees. Is it better to prioritize capitalizing on existing knowledge structures to maximize immediate performance benefits (exploitation) or develop adaptive capabilities (exploration) at the expense of short-term productivity? Understanding how employees answer this question can inform the design of evidence-based interventions for optimizing and sustaining learning amidst workplace challenges. In this article, we attempt to unpack the composition of on-task effort during performance-based learning by testing the proposition that the information-knowledge gap-a regulatory discrepancy between unknown aspects of a task and a person's perceived competence in dealing with that task-is the psychological mechanism responsible for guiding effort-allocation decisions during performance-based learning. In Study 1, we found that larger information-knowledge gaps resulted in increased subsequent investments of on-task attention within a sample of adults learning to perform a complex task (N = 121). As participants learned, information-knowledge gaps systematically shrank, resulting in a reduced emphasis on learning-oriented effort (i.e., exploration) relative to achievement-oriented effort (i.e., exploitation) over time. In Study 2 (N = 176), a task-change paradigm revealed that introducing novel demands caused information-knowledge gaps to suddenly expand, which prompted participants to increase on-task effort and shift their focus away from achievement and back toward learning as an adaptive response. Collectively, these findings support the notion that information-knowledge gaps shape how (and when) on-task effort is spent and present a framework for understanding how learners strategically structure their limited attentional resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Attention , Learning , Adult , Humans , Attention/physiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based treatments (EBTs) are critical to effectively address mental health problems among children and adolescents, but costly for mental health service agencies to implement and sustain. Financing strategies help agencies overcome cost-related barriers by obtaining financial resources to support EBT implementation and/or sustainment. AIMS: We sought to (i) understand how youth mental health system decision-makers involved with EBT implementation and sustainment view key features (e.g., relevance, feasibility) that inform financing strategy selection and (ii) compare service agency, funding agency, and intermediary representative perspectives. METHOD: Two surveys were disseminated to 48 representatives across U.S. youth mental health service agencies, funding agencies, and intermediaries who were participating in a larger study of financing strategies. Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered on 23 financing strategies through quantitative ratings and open-ended responses. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and rapid content analysis. RESULTS: The financing strategies rated as most relevant include braided funding streams, contracts for EBTs, credentialing/rostering providers, fee-for-service reimbursement (regular and increased), and grant funding. All other strategies were unfamiliar to 1/3 to 1/2 of participants. The six strategies were rated between somewhat and quite available, feasible, and effective for EBT sustainment. For sustaining different EBT components (e.g., delivery, materials), the mix of financing strategies was rated as somewhat adequate. Qualitative analysis revealed challenges with strategies being non-recurring or unavailable in representatives' regions. Ratings were largely similar across participant roles, though funding agency representatives were the most familiar with financing strategies. DISCUSSION: Despite the breadth of innovative financing strategies, expert representatives within the youth mental health services ecosystem had limited knowledge of most options. Experts relied on strategies that were familiar but often did not adequately support EBT implementation or sustainment. These findings underscore more fundamental issues with under-resourced mental health systems in the U.S.; financing strategies can help agencies navigate EBT use but must be accompanied by larger-scale system reforms. Limitations include difficulties generalizing results due to using a small sample familiar with EBTs, high agreement as a potential function of snowball recruiting, and limited responses to the open-ended survey questions. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: Although EBTs have been found to effectively address mental health problems in children and adolescents, available strategies for financing their implementation and sustainment in mental health systems are insufficient. This constraint prevents many children and adolescents from receiving high-quality services. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Financing strategies alone cannot solve systematic issues that prevent youth mental health service agencies from providing EBTs. Policy changes may be required, such as increased financial investment from the U.S. government into mental health services to support basic infrastructure (e.g., facility operations, measuring outcomes). IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future work should examine expert perspectives on EBT financing strategies in different contexts (e.g., substance use services), gathering targeted feedback on financing strategies that are less well known, and exploring topics such as strategic planning, funding stability, and collaborative decision-making as they relate to EBT implementation and sustainment.
