Fidelity and Adaptation of a Sibling Relationship Intervention for the Prevention of Antisocial Behavior

Introduction: Despite longitudinal data indicating lasting mutual influence of siblings, little attention is paid to sibling relational processes or the potential of sibling intervention programs for promotion of general social development and prevention of antisocial behavior. Existing research on the relationships of siblings in foster care is limited even though 70% of children in foster care have one or more siblings also in care. RCT studies are nearly absent.  Supporting Siblings in Foster Care (SIBS) utilizes a universal recruitment strategy for siblings in foster care. Youth in foster care are at high risk of poor health, disability, and conduct issues. In a RCT evaluation of a program with the core components of positive engagement, social understanding, emotional regulation, and conflict management skills, we enrolled older siblings 11-15 years of age and younger siblings up to four years younger.

     Fidelity of implementation and program adaptation are essential to prevention program design. Fidelity is increasingly seen as involving the component of receipt of intervention or participant engagement. It is critical that investigators explore the process of adaptation and identify specific factors that influence effectiveness with particular populations. Review of research indicates a common adaptation made in the interest of engagement is not implementing all program components. Program adaptation may be required for cultural fit and ecological factors. This presentation documents implementation of the SIBS program in the context of foster children’s lives, the process of adaptation, and the tensions between fidelity, engagement, and ecological issues.

Findings: Focus group data from a group of intervention staff indicated that changes were made to session length, sequence, setting, and mode of delivery in order to engage diverse youth with attention, developmental, and behavioral issues living in the flux of an overtaxed Child Welfare system, foster placement changes, and custody and reunification struggles. Interventionists viewed emotional regulation, conflict management, and behavioral tracking as essential core components but differed in views of the “adult ally” component.  Recommendations for future implementation research include building flexibility into the curriculum and training staff in planned modification for the most common challenges.      

Conclusions: As research progresses on sibling relationship processes, the competencies essential to prosocial sibling relationships and the core components of intervention programs will be documented and manualized with best practices adaptations for implementation applications with common challenges.