Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study is to identify consistent elements of a treatment program of a residential treatment facility for male youths by comparing outcome groups to treatment factors implemented. Method. A retrospective case-control design was used to identify associations between treatment factors implemented and outcome comparison groups. Archival data was utilized to review treatment documentation of ten cases, with five cases in each of the successful and unsuccessful group. Data were organized and presented as individual cases studies. Results. Analysis showed that, overall, documentation of planned goals and interventions implemented were not consistent, regardless of outcome. Planned goals and interventions, and their implementation throughout treatment, were not consistent for all five cases in the unsuccessful group and three cases from the successful group. Elements not part of their treatment plans were documented more consistently, but never incorporated in any treatment quarter. Discussion. The findings indicate discrepancies in the provision of treatment. Documentation, or rather the lack of, indicates treatment implemented deviated from the individualized treatment plans developed to address specific needs. The potential for treatment effectiveness is unrealized as treatment was not implemented according to its design. The discrepancy of the treatment implemented precludes factors associated with outcomes related to the success of treatment. Examination of process implementation may provide more valuable data and enable more appropriate programmatic changes that are theoretically more effective than examination of outcomes alone to assess effectiveness. Causal inference between outcomes and implementation cannot be made in this study because of limited sample size. The importance of process evaluation research in mental health continues to grow due to changing aspects of service delivery. Research on consistency of implementation across settings should be explored further.