The past ten years have seen a rapid increase in the development of evidence-based interventions for youth; however, many challenges remain. These factors include the challenges associated with service delivery, the importance of initial engagement, and the complex nature of the problem (Wasserman et al., 2000). On the other hand, treatment research in this area (and the more global child and adolescent treatment research) has moved considerably toward recognizing the need for “empirically supported” treatment. In 1995, the American Psychological Association Division 12 Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures was charged with the task of identifying treatment approaches with demonstrated “efficacy.” Efficacy refers to the ability to bring about the desired change under ideal conditions, and an efficacious program is one with scientific evidence demonstrating positive changes among those who receive the treatment. This term is contrasted with the word “effective,” which refers to the likelihood that a person will comply with a given treatment. An effective program has the ability to produce positive change in the general population. In a comprehensive review of the literature, the APA's Task Force (Levant, 1995) established the validity of numerous treatment approaches. They applied the terms “empirically validated” or “empirically supported” and “probably efficacious” to represent therapeutic approaches with varying degrees of scientific evidence.

The list of therapies deemed valid or “well-established” and probably efficacious was updated in 1998 (Chambless et al., 1998) and again in 2001 (Chambless & Ollendick, 2001).