SE Fidelity Over Time in Chicago Study

Transcript

Implementation does not always go smoothly. In this example, there were staffing problems in a new program as illustrated in this slide. A Chicago agency implemented a brand new supported employment program and hired two new SE teams. Four employment specialists were hired for two sites. The supported employment team leader was inexperienced and uncomfortable with the supported employment model. Moreover, all of his staff were newly hired and inexperienced.

SE Fidelity was tracked over time in the two programs. The two programs were initiated in August 1999. Initial ratings in February 2000 suggested that neither site was fully implemented. In March 2000, both employment specialists at the north program resigned, along with the program leader. In the next fidelity assessment, fidelity improved at south, but not at north. Staff replacements at north and a change in the supervisory system led to good to excellent implementation at both sites over the next year. This example illustrates several advantages in using the SE Fidelity Scale for monitoring the team’s performance. These included

1.) The SE Fidelity Scale offered a way to document implementation.
2.) The feedback provided to the team was objective and specific.
3.) The SE Fidelity Scale ratings documented the initial implementation problems, and
4.) The ongoing ratings also documented improvement.

Use of the Fidelity Scale provided the program with objective information at every step along the way. It documented both initial problems at one site and subsequent progress. Not coincidentally, both programs were still receiving excellent fidelity ratings as of June, 2002, with high staff morale and no further staff resignations from the supported employment teams.