Running Head: SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1

Social Role Valorization Theory Implementation Plan: Assignment 4

Introduction to Inclusive Special Education: EDUA 5600

Erin Sawatsky

University of Manitoba
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2

Social Role Valorization Theory Implementation Plan

Goal Statement

I, Erin Sawatsky, will implement student and family led planning with a student

who is currently receiving multi-agency services within the Turtle Mountain School

Division by June 22, 2018.

The key issue that I wish to address in the Social Role Valorization (SRV) Theory

Implementation Plan is the function of multi-agency service meetings within the Turtle

Mountain School Division (TMSD). These meetings were implemented in the mid-

2000’s by the TMSD in order to reduce multiple community meetings and to increase

collaboration between the agencies. The current process involves the TMSD identifying

students who are involved with multiple agencies, obtaining consent from the student’s

parent and/or guardian, and then meeting monthly to share information about the

particular student. The student nor the parent and/or guardian are involved with the

process from that point forward. Although the multi-agency meetings allow for a timely

and easy flow of information, the process does not allow the student or family to direct

their own goals or plans.

Rationale

Most often, the students identified on the multi-agency list become the objects of

devaluation due to the labels placed on them (i.e. behaviourally and emotionally

disturbed, mentally unwell, juvenile delinquent, learning and/or cognitively impaired).

“Devalued persons are commonly (a) segregated away from valued society and models,

(b) congregated with (other) devalued people who very frequently have socially
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 3

devalued characteristics and exhibit socially devalued behaviors, and (c) served by less

competent workers than typically serve valued people” (Wolfensberger, 2013, p. 149).

The goal of this SRV Implementation Plan is to move beyond the labels, which distance

and segregate the student from the multi-agency meetings and to move toward

personal social integration. The SRV theme of Personal Social Integration and Valued

Social Participation, Especially for People at Risk of Social Devaluation will be used to

guide the proposed change. “This in turn would require (a) valued participation, (b) with

valued people (c) in valued activities that (d) take place in valued settings”

(Wolfensberger, 2013, p. 151). By implementing a student and family led plan using a

wraparound model, it is my hope that the multi-agency meetings become social role

valorizing for the student rather than devaluing.

Relevance

The SRV Theory Implementation Plan is relevant to the students and families of

the TMSD as the current process appears to be devaluing. The multi-agency meetings

also do not appear to follow best practice as suggested in the research regarding

student self-determination and self-advocacy. There are several research studies listed

in the materials and resource section of this assignment that I will use to guide the

proposed change.

Before I implement the proposed change, I will need to research the current

wraparound model by reviewing the Healthy Child Manitoba (2013) publication,

Wraparound Protocol for Children and Youth with Severe to Profound Emotional and

Behavioural Disorders. Within the document are several resources that I will use as a

guide for planning: consent form, engagement and team preparation, action plan
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4

development (My Life, My Strengths, My Needs), measurement (Goal Attainment

Scaling) and evaluation (Participant Satisfaction).

The first step required to implement the proposed change will be to identify a

student on the multi-agency list and approach them (and their parent/guardian) about

the idea of participating in a student and family led process. Once I receive informed

consent from the student and their parent/guardian, I will engage relevant team

members to participate in the process. This will involve explaining the purpose of the

wraparound model and providing a brief overview of what will be expected of them as

team members.

Next, I will meet with the student and their parent/guardian to facilitate a dialogue

regarding their vision, goals, strengths, and needs. The information will be complied as

a My Life, My Strengths, My Needs document to share with the student, family, and

larger group. Using this information, the student and family, along with the larger group

will develop goals based on the student’s strengths and needs. The group will initially

gather to meet the student and family, review the student’s strengths and goals,

brainstorm ideas, and develop an action plan to carry out the goals with indicators for

evaluation. During the second meeting, the team will review the action plan and

evaluate the goals using Goal Attainment Scaling (five point Likert scale used in the

wraparound process). The final step will be to see if the goals were achieved, to

develop further steps if more action is required, and to obtain feedback from the student

and parent/guardian (Participant Satisfaction form used in the wraparound process).

Personal Support Plan

The individuals who will provide me with support throughout the implementation

process are the current multi-agency team members as well as the student and their

parent/guardian. Since the multi-agency meetings already exist, I will use this platform

as an arena to carry out the proposed change. This will be helpful because I will not

need to secure team members or interest in the process. In addition, my TMSD

supervisor has already provided verbal consent and support for my proposed change in

order to implement the plan. However, I will need to explain the theory and process

required for the proposed change to the multi-agency team members, student and

parent/guardian. In addition, the student and family will act as the main support for the

proposed change as they will be the ones to come up with the information required for

the team to develop goals. Their initial consent and buy-in to the process will be key.

Finally, the research regarding self-determination and self-advocacy as well as the

wraparound protocol documents will support me as I can use the information to guide

my process.

Sharing of Learning

During the initial engagement with the student, parent/guardian, and team

members, I will share my knowledge of the research regarding student self-

determination and self-advocacy. I will also discuss the wraparound model and how

this will be used as a guide to implement a change in the function of multi-agency

meetings.

Following the engagement step, I will meet with the student and parent/guardian

to discuss their vision, goals, strengths, and needs. From the discussion, I will compile

the information into a My Life, My Strengths, My Needs document that will be shared
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 6

with the larger group during the first multi-agency team meeting. This information will

allow the student, parent/guardian, and team members to develop action plans based

on the student’s vision.

The next piece of information to be shared will occur during the second team

meeting. We will examine the action plan and evaluate the goals. Dialogue will be

exchanged on the effectiveness of the goals as well as the student and

parent/guardian’s satisfaction of the process. Finally, feedback will be received from the

multi-agency team members themselves to determine if the process was beneficial as

compared to the current process. All of the information gathered in the SRV Theory

Implementation Plan will be summarized into a final paper, which will be submitted as

Assignment 6. The student, parent/guardian, and team members will be able to review

Assignments 4, 5, and 6.

Materials and Resources

Bruns, E., Pullmann, J., Sather, M., Brinson, D., & Ramey, A. (2015). Effectiveness of

wraparound versus case management for children and adolescents: Results of a

randomized study. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health

Services Research, 42(3), 309-322. https://doi-org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s

10488-014-0571-3

Carney, M., & Buttell, F. (2003). Reducing juvenile recidivism: Evaluating the

wraparound services model. Research on Social Work Practice, 13(5), 551-568.

https://doi-org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177%2F1049731503253364
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 7

Chou, Y., Palmer, S., Wehmeyer, M., & Skorupski, W. (2017). Comparison of self‐

determination of students with disabilities: Multivariate and discriminant function

analyses. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 61(2), 144-154. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/jir.12297

Clark, H., Prange, M., Lee, B., Boyd, L., McDonald, B., & Stewart, E. (1994). Improving

adjustment outcomes for foster children with emotional and behavioral

disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2(4), 207-218.

https://doi-org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/106342669400200403

Gaumer Erickson, A., Noonan, P., Zheng, C., & Brussow, J. (2015). The relationship

between self-determination and academic achievement for adolescents with

intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 36, 45-54.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.09.008

Halpern, A., Yovanoff, P., Doren, B., & Benz, M. (1995). Predicting participation in

postsecondary education for school leavers with disabilities. Exceptional

Children,62(2), 151-164. http://www.sagepub.com.uml.idm.oclc.org

Hammer, M. (2004). Using the self-advocacy strategy to increase student participation

in IEP conferences. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(5), 295-300. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/10534512040390050601

Healthy Child Manitoba (2013, May). Wraparound Protocol for Children and Youth with

Severe to Profound Emotional and Behavioural Disorders. https://www.gov.mb.ca/

healthychild/publications/index.html
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8

Karvonen, M., Test, D., Wood, W., Browder, D., & Algozzine, B. (2004). Putting self-

determination into practice. Exceptional Children, 71(1), 23-41. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/001440290407100102

Lachapelle, Y., Wehmeyer, M., Haelewyck, M., Courbois, Y., Keith, K., Schalock, R., et

al. (2005). The relationship between quality of life and self-determination: An

international study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 740-744.

https://doi-org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00743.x

McLean, Sara. (2012). Barriers to collaboration on behalf of children with challenging

behaviours: A large qualitative study of five constituent groups. Child & Family

Social Work, Child & Family Social Work, Nov 2012, p. (1).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2011.00805.x

Myaard, Michael J., Crawford, Connie, Jackson, Michell, & Alessi, Galen. (2000).

Applying behavior analysis within the wraparound process: A multiple baseline

study. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(4), 216-29. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/106342660000800402

Painter, K. (2012). Outcomes for youth with severe emotional disturbance: A repeated

measures longitudinal study of a wraparound approach of service delivery in

systems of care. Child & Youth Care Forum, 41(4), 407-425. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10566-011-9167-1

Painter, Kirstin, Allen, J. Sean, & Perry, Barbara. (2011). Families' experiences in

wraparound: A qualitative study conceived and conducted by families through a

professional-family collaboration. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,

19(3), 156-168. https://doi-org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1063426610364842

Powers, Laurie E., Turner, Alison, Westwood, Dean, Matuszewski, Jeanne, Wilson,

Roxanne, & Phillips, Amy. (2001). Take charge for the future: A controlled field-test

of a model to promote student involvement in transition planning. Career

Development for Exceptional Individuals, 24(1), 89-103. https://doi-

org.uml.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/088572880102400107

Race, David G. (1999). Social role valorization and the English experience. London,

England: Whiting & Birch.

Walker, P. M., Whittico, P., & Shoultz, B. (2007). Advocacy and systems change work.

In P. M. Walker & P. Rogan, Make the day matter! Promoting typical lifestyles for

adults with significant disabilities (pp. 91-104). Baltimore, MD USA: Paul H.

Brookes.

Wehmeyer, M., & Schwartz, M. (1997). Self-determination and positive adult outcomes:

a follow-up study of youth with mental retardation or learning disabilities.

Exceptional Children, 63(2), 245+.http://link.galegroup.com.uml.idm.oclc.org/

apps/doc/A19006244/HRCA?u=univmanitoba&sid=HRCA&xid=ce618f20
SRV IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 10

References

Healthy Child Manitoba. (2013). Wraparound Protocol for Children and Youth with

Severe to Profound Emotional and Behavioural Disorders. https://www.gov.mb.ca/

healthychild/publications/index.html

Wolfensberger, W. (2013). A brief introduction to Social Role Valorization: A higher

order concept for addressing the plight of societally devalued people, and for

structuring human services (4th expanded edition). Plantagenet, Ontario: Valor

Press.