Table 1 Description of variables and measures

Intervention Characteristics: Relative Advantage

The advantages of family-driven care compared to current family engagement initiatives.

1. Family-driven care would be more effective than our current family engagement practices.

N/A

Kegler et al., 2018

Intervention Characteristics: Complexity

Perceived difficulty of implementing family-driven care.

1. Implementing family-driven care seems easy to do.*

N/A

Sales et al., 2021 and Kegler et al., 2018

Intervention Characteristics: Cost

Costs associated with implementing family-driven care.

1. Family-driven care would be too expensive to implement at my agency.

N/A

Sales et al. 2021

Individual Characteristics: Negative Attitudes

Staff’s negative and stigmatizing attitudes about families and family engagement.

1. Families want to be involved in their child’s care.*

2. Staff are too busy to involve families in the care process.

3. Working with families makes my job harder.

4. Engaging with families can be stressful.

5. Families are the cause of their child’s delinquent behavior.

6. Families are difficult to work with.

7. Families do not listen to staff recommendations.

0.81

Self-developed. Based on a review of the literature on stigmatizing and negative attitudes about family engagement.

Inner Setting: Culture

Norms, values, and basic assumptions of the juvenile justice agency.

1. Staff at all levels openly talk about what is and isn’t working.

2. Most staff in my agency are willing to change how they do things in response to feedback from others.

3. It is hard to get things to change in our agency.*

4. I can rely on the other people to do their jobs well.

5. Most of the people who work in our agency seem to enjoy their work.

6. Difficult problems are solved through face-to-face discussions.

7. Staff regularly take time to reflect on how we do things.

8. After trying something new, we take time to think about how it worked.

9. People in this agency operate as a real team.

0.88

Fernandez et al., 2018

Inner Setting: Implementation Climate

The extent to which family-driven care will be supported and expected within their juvenile justice agency.

1. Individuals at my agency would approve of family-driven care.

2. Individuals at my agency value new types of family engagement practices.

3. Individuals at my agency are open to new types of family engagement practices.

4. Individuals working at my agency are flexible enough to integrate new family engagement practices.

0.89

Fernandez et al., 2018

Inner Setting: Compatibility

How family-driven care fits with existing workflows

1. The juvenile justice system should only provide care to youth (not families).*

2. Family-driven care is well-suited to the juvenile justice system.

3. Family-driven care is compatible with the needs of families and youth at my agency.

0.73

Sales et al., 2021 and Kegler et al., 2018

Inner Setting: Relative Priority

Staff’s shared perception of the importance of the family engagement.

1. Family engagement is a top priority at my agency.

N/A

Fernandez et al., 2018

Inner Setting: Access to Knowledge/Information

Access to information and knowledge about family engagement at the juvenile justice agency.

1. Individuals in my agency have received sufficient training on family engagement practices.

N/A

Sales et al., 2021

Inner Setting: Leadership Engagement

Commitment, involvement, and accountability of leaders and managers to family engagement.

1. Management at my agency would be supportive of family-driven care.

N/A

Sales et al., 2021

Inner Setting: Available Resources

The level of resources that can be dedicated to family-driven care in the agency.

1. We have enough staffing to make family-driven care work.

2. We have sufficient financial resources to make family-driven care work.

3. We have enough physical space to make family-driven care work.

4. We have sufficient training to make family-driven care work.

0.73

Fernandez et al., 2018

Outer Setting: External Partnerships

The degree to which the agency is networked with other external organizations that support family engagement.

1. Individuals in my agency are connected with external organizations that provide family services and supports.

N/A

Sales et al., 2021

Outer Setting: Peer Pressure

Competitive or mimetic pressure to implement family engagement initiatives.

1. Other juvenile justice agencies will be adopting new family engagement practices in the next year.

2. Agencies that promote family engagement practices are seen as leaders in juvenile justice.

3. Agencies that promote family engagement practices are seen are held in high esteem.

0.75

Sales et al., 2021

Outcomes

Outcome 1: Adoption of Family-Driven Principles

Staff’s perception of their facility’s alignment with the 10 family-driven principles.

In my agency, we …

1. Families and staff embrace the concept of sharing decision-making and responsibility for outcomes.

2. Families are given accurate, understandable, and complete information necessary to set goals and make informed decisions about the right services and supports for their children.

3. All youth have a biological, adoptive, foster, or surrogate family voice advocating on their behalf.

4. Families are provided opportunities to engage in peer support activities and connect with other parents/guardians of justice-involved youth.

5. Staff advocate for the needs and preferences of families and youth.

6. Families provide

direction on funding,

policies, and service options.

7. Management allocates staff, training, support and resources to promote family engagement practices.

8. Staff work to remove family barriers to engagement and participation.

9. Staff embrace, value, and celebrate the diverse cultures of their youth and families.

10. Staff continually advance their own cultural and linguistic responsiveness, so that the needs of all families are appropriately addressed.

0.89

National Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health, principles of family-driven care

Outcome 2: Adoption of Family-Driven Strategies

Staff’s perception of their facility’s current level of implementation of family engagement strategies.

In my agency, we …

1. Systematically identify members of each youths family unit.

2. Involve families in treatment planning (e.g., family-group decision making or family-group conferencing).

3. Encourage families to provide formal feedback on system processes (e.g., through family surveys and/or family town halls).

4. Invite family representatives to serve on advisory boards or policy-making committees.

5. Provide opportunities for family members to participate in support groups.

6. Educate family members on the procedures and policies of the juvenile justice system.

7. Provide parenting skills programs.

8. Refer to parenting skills programs.

9. Provide family-based mental health services (e.g., family counseling, therapy, mental health treatment).

10. Refer to family-based mental health services (e.g., family counseling, therapy, mental health treatment).

11. Provide family-based substance use services (e.g., family substance use prevention or treatment).

12. Refer to family-based substance use services (e.g., family substance use prevention or treatment).

13. Provide family-based HIV/STI services (e.g., family-based HIV/STI prevention or treatment).

14. Refer to family-based HIV/STI services (e.g., family-based HIV/STI prevention or treatment).

15. Receive formal training on diversity and inclusion (e.g., cultural humility training, racial sensitivity training, and/or unconscious bias training).

16. Provide flexible scheduling to accommodate families.

17. Assist families with transportation needs.

18. Assist families with childcare needs.

0.92

Adapted from Family System Engagement Index (Robertson et al., 2019)