| dc.description.abstract | Research on the EQUIP program shows that this cognitive behavioral intervention is more effective in the United States than it is in the Netherlands (Leeman, Gibbs & Füller, 1993; Nas, 2005). This difference in effectiveness could possibly be explained by the quality of implementation of EQUIP in the Netherlands (Dane & Schneider, 1998; Durlak & DuPre, 2008). The aim of this pilot study is to examine the integrity of the implementation of EQUIP during the meetings for anger management and cognitive distortions at facilities in the Netherlands. An observation instrument, two questionnaires and an evaluation list have been developed. A total of eight selectively chosen EQUIP meetings were observed at the Forensic Centrum Teylingereind (N=7) and De Waag (N=1). The quality of implementation can be
determined by different aspects of program integrity like content, purpose, conditions, target
group, intensity and structure.
Results show that the Dutch version of the EQUIP handbook (FC Teylingereind, 2006) contains an average of 79.64 % of the total original implementation guidelines of the American handbooks (Gibbs, Potter & Goldstein, 1995; Potter, Gibbs & Goldstein, 2001). On average 39.98 % of the implementation criteria were present per observed meeting. Observers rated
also how these criteria were applied during the EQUIP meetings on a 3-point Likert scale (1=weak, 2= moderate, 3= well). Observers’ average appraisal was 1.93. The average appraisal per meeting of the EQUIP trainer who also evaluated the meeting on a 3-point Likert scale was 2.30. In addition, evaluation findings showed that the content and quality of the intervention
showed shortcomings on nearly all aspects of program integrity.
Limitations of the present study are the relatively small and self-selected sample.
Recommendations are given concerning the improvement of the implementation of EQUIP in the Netherlands and concerning the further development of the observation-instrument. Follow-up studies should examine the influence of program integrity on the effects of EQUIP. | |
