Full-Service Schools

Full-Service Schools are designed to integrate social and mental health/health services with educational programs under one organizational system in order to promote the physical, emotional, social, and academic well-being of children. The Full-Service School (FSS) movement represents a new era in the quest to address the needs of children living in highrisk situations (McMahon, 2000). It is a contemporary response to the awareness that children in high-risk environments are often so overwhelmed with getting their basic needs met that their ability to learn is seriously affected. It is well documented that poverty, abuse, chronic safety concerns, family disruption, poor health, poor mental health, and learning and [Page 213]emotional disabilities can seriously disrupt children's learning processes, resulting in a lasting impact on achievement and development, and thus severely limiting opportunities for educational attainment and occupational success.

Values inherent to the FSS movement (McMahon, 2000) include:

• A recognition of the complex transaction of risk and protective factors in children's lives
• The difficulty disenfranchised families have accessing quality services
• The need to bring a full complement of health, mental health, and human services into the community in accessible ways (i.e., housed in schools)
• The need for interagency coordination and service integration
• The importance of community involvement

The FSS also represents an effort to make human service systems partner with school systems in the delivery of human services and education (Adelman & Taylor, 1999). FSSs are designed to promote the physical, emotional, social, and academic development of children (Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002; Kronick, 2000; McMahon, 2000).

There are many different components to the FSS, and they are generally offered à la carte, allowing schools and communities to choose which components are most needed (Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002). Despite the idiosyncrasies, Dryfoos and Maguire outline several commonalities, including case management (assigning an individual to help families qualify for and best utilize services), primary health clinics, youth development programs, family resource centers, early childhood development programs, referrals, and after-school programs. Deciding which components to include in a FSS is based on a needs assessment of the community where service practitioners work together with families to identify needed services for their community, such as after-school care or career services. Services typically reflect the entire continuum, from prevention, to early intervention, to systems of care for children with severe and/or chronic problems. Cultural competence in service delivery reflects the needs of each community.

FSSs provide many benefits to the community. By integrating many distinct services, families and children have easier access to services, increasing the likelihood of use. With the help of case managers, families are able to tap into the resources available to them. With easier access to services, children and families may benefit in numerous ways, such as increased physical and mental well-being, which may, in turn, enhance each child's ability to learn (Dryfoos & Maguire, 2000), as well as prevent or alleviate juvenile delinquency, school dropouts, and future unemployment (Kronick, 2000).

Challenges to implementation of FSSs are numerous, including issues with creating the model, working through the coordination, obtaining and sustaining funding, addressing complex legal and ethical concerns, and surviving political controversy. Deciding which services to offer and in what order can engender heated debate. It can be very difficult to achieve interagency collaboration and to secure and manage the funding needed in a FSS (Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002; Kronick, 2000). Legal and ethical issues can also arise regarding confidentiality (keeping information private), informed consent (making sure families understand the services offered and their rights before agreeing to them), and professional responsibility (McMahon, 2000). FSSs are not without political controversy, as some view them as eroding the primary mission of public education in the United States, namely, the teaching of academic skills. In addition, opinions can differ in terms of the array of health services that may be offered in FSSs, such as information on contraception.

...