Overview
If you’re not familiar with the Recovery Alliance Initiative (RAI), you could have a look at this post on its history, methods and purpose. In short, it’s an effort that has been underway from 2013 to the present. Here’s the RAI website.
What we try to do in RAI is build awareness, collaboration, advocacy (both between/among sectors in our field and also outward from our field into the world), and action.
What kind of action? In short, building solutions at the community level. Overall, it’s our impression that specialized services and programs should remain. But they need to be more aware of each other, and collaborate for the sake of the person served.
It’s also our impression that collaboration efforts will reveal needs and gaps, and RAI endeavors to facilitate community-level effort to overcome those gaps.
Current wish list
Here’s what on my mind right now. I consider it a personal wish list. As you review it, you’ll have to keep in mind that “wonder” and “innovation” come rather naturally for me. And that making some dreams real and practical, or effective at actually helping a person is a whole other matter.
My current ideas are as follows. Imagine building a model of activities within RAI derived from the following:
Alfgeir Kristjansson, PhD
Dr. Kristjansson’s work includes a methodology for development and guidance of indigenously-sourced identification of local problems and local resources to meet community goals in a sustainable way. His work mainly focuses on primary prevention. In RAI we could initially use his methodology for project management of tertiary prevention.
David Best, PhD
Dr. Best’s work includes a focus on establishment of recovery community infrastructure and recovery capital at the community level – across and among various sectors. RAI could use his methodology for the same aims in the local areas where RAI is currently active.
John Kelly, PhD
Dr. Kelly’s work includes empirical research of long term recovery in the local community and mechanisms of change at the level of the individual person. RAI could use his knowledge to inform project management and implementation. In what way, you might ask. To ensure RAI’s projects don’t lose their focus in the big-picture and actually do support recovery-related mechanisms of change that are evidence-based. RAI could use his knowledge to help determine what to measure and how. And to add measurement activities in projects were are involved in that would otherwise lack what he is aware of and could/should be measured.
Kurt Lebeck, MSW
Mr. Lebeck is currently a PhD student and NIAAA Training Fellow. His current research focus includes determining if his content and methods for training peer support workers are effective in helping those receiving peer support from the people he trains in being successful at building their own recovery capital. RAI could have him present his project for areas we serve. And we could implement his peer support training methods as well as his measures.
William White, MA
Bill White established Recovery Management (RM) for individuals, Recovery Oriented Systems of Care (ROSC) for community collaboration, and the Behavioral Health Recovery Management (BHRM) Principles for movement toward evidence-based and promising practices. We could prepare a summary of that work, written with a practical focus and is ready to use for people both inside and outside of the field, and are involved in RAI projects at the community level.
Consulting
Any or all of these resources could be developed into train-the-trainer material or consulting-level content for RAI leadership, and those involved at the local level in leadership of RAI projects.
