Program Development and Service Delivery

...

assessments, outcome evaluations are three important areas of program evaluation (Erford, 2014). These three facets measure effectiveness of the outlined activities for the dual diagnosed. The results of the outcome studies for effectiveness of activities are used to make substantive program improvements and modifications (Erford, 2014). According to Chandler (2011), outcome measures of six dual diagnosis outpatient clinics in California yielded inconsistency within programs, and as a result, a strategic initiative took place to foster greater use of demonstrably effective interventions.

Finance, administration, and accountability influence the access and quality of mental health services. It is imperative that states and communities have the resources and readiness to provide support of prevention programs and strategies identified for substance abuse and mental illness problems. Programs that are well supported are most likely to succeed. By increasing the availability of fiscal and human organizational resources, sustainability is ensured. Communities and other stakeholders should be able to assess the resources that are available to address the issues of the dual diagnosed. The financing of patient care is complicated and important. Ridgely, Goldman, & Willenbring (1990), discussed how financial barriers inhibit access to services. Staffing is equally important concerning delivery of services. Staff must have the appropriate credentials, training, experience, and expertise to be effective. According to Rao & Shanks (2011), training and ongoing supervision is provided to non- medical clinical staff during the development and implementation of a dual diagnose program for the elderly to hone their skills for screening of the presence of concurrent mental health difficulties and substance abuse misuse. Without properly trained personnel, there would not be access to any services. Lastly, accountability is expected to be demonstrated in the clients served. It has become a mainstay for facilities and organizations that offer public services in the United States. Accountability can help counselors and treatment centers promote their successes and garner stakeholders who buy-in for their services (Astramovich & Hoskins, 2013).

References

Astramovich, R. L., & Hoskins, W. J. (2013). Evaluating Addictions Counseling Programs: Promoting Best Practices, Accountability, and Advocacy. Journal Of Addictions & Offender Counseling, 34(2), 114-124. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1874.2013.00019.x

Calley, N. G. (2009). Comprehensive program development in mental health counseling: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 31(1), 9-21. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/198672063?accountid=27965

Chandler, D. W. (2011). Fidelity and outcomes in six integrated dual disorders treatment programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 47(1), 82-9. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10597-009-9245-0

Erford, B.T. (2014). Orientation to the Counseling Profession: Advocacy, Ethics, and Essential Professional Foundations. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Rao, R., & Shanks, A. (2011). Development and implementation of a dual diagnosis strategy for older people in south east london. Advances in Dual Diagnosis, 4(1), 28-35. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17570971111155595

Ridgely, M. S., Goldman, H. H., & Willenbring, M. (1990). Barriers to the Care of Persons With Dual Diagnoses: Organizational and Financing Issues. Schizophrenia Bulletin,16(1), 123-132.