Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 9:5:26334895241249394.
doi: 10.1177/26334895241249394. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.

Pilot evaluation of the Fiscal Mapping Process for sustainable financing of evidence-based youth mental health treatments: A comparative case study analysis

Alex R Dopp  1 , Maddison N North  2 , Marylou Gilbert  1 , Jeanne S Ringel  1 , Jane F Silovsky  3 , Mellicent Blythe  4   5 , Dan Edwards  6 , Susan Schmidt  3 , Beverly Funderburk  3
Affiliations

Pilot evaluation of the Fiscal Mapping Process for sustainable financing of evidence-based youth mental health treatments: A comparative case study analysis

Alex R Dopp et al. Implement Res Pract. .

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.

Keywords: evidence-based treatment; financing strategies; strategic planning; sustainment; tailored implementation strategies; youth mental health services.

Plain language summary

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustration of the Five Steps of the Fiscal Mapping Process
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Aarons G. A., Green A. E., Willging C. E., Ehrhart M. G., Roesch S. C., Hecht D. B., Chaffin M. J. (2014). Mixed-method study of a conceptual model of evidence-based intervention sustainment across multiple public-sector service settings. Implementation Science, 9, 183. 10.1186/s13012-014-0183-z - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alves-Bradford J. M., Trinh N. H., Bath E., Coombs A., Mangurian C. (2020). Mental health equity in the twenty-first century: Setting the stage. Psychiatric Clinics, 43(3), 415–428. 10.1016/j.psc.2020.05.001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bartlett L., Vavrus F. (2017). Comparative case studies: An innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1(1), 5–17. 10.7577/njcie.1929 - DOI
    1. Bauer M. S., Kirchner J. (2020). Implementation science: What is it and why should I care? Psychiatry Research, 283, 112376. 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.04.025 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baumann A. A., Cabassa L. J. (2020). Reframing implementation science to address inequities in healthcare delivery. BMC Health Services Research, 20, 190. 10.1186/s12913-020-4975-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources