Pub Date : 2019-03-05DOI: 10.1177/2516103219829479
Johnny S. Kim, Becci A. Akin, J. Brook
This study examined the effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) on child well-being and family functioning outcomes for child welfare involved parents. A randomized controlled trial design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of SFBT as compared to treatment-as-usual in an outpatient substance abuse treatment center. Mixed linear models tested within and between-group changes using intent-to-treat analysis (N = 180). Hedges’s g effect sizes examined the magnitude of treatment effects. Both conditions reported improvements on the child well-being measures (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [BRIEF]-Parent Report and Child Behavior Checklist-School Age Form [CBCL-SA]) and family functioning measures (Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory [AAPI-2] and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression [CES-D] Short Form) at posttest. While none of the between group analyses were statistically significant on either outcome domains, effect sizes did show improvements in the small to medium range for both groups. SFBT effect sizes for BRIEF subscales ranged from .024 to .267 and for control group ranged from .136 to .363. SFBT effect sizes on CBCL-SA subscales ranged from .059 to .321 and for control group ranged from .101 to .313. SFBT effect sizes on AAPI-2 subscales ranged from .006 to .620 and control group ranged from .023 to .624. SFBT effect sizes on CES-D measure were .428 and for control group were .317. Results show SFBT to be an effective intervention for helping parents around child well-being and family functioning outcomes similar to current empirically-supported therapies. SFBT provides a more strengths-based approach to help families improve family well-being and thus help improve their child’s well-being.
{"title":"Solution-focused brief therapy to improve child well-being and family functioning outcomes with substance using parents in the child welfare system","authors":"Johnny S. Kim, Becci A. Akin, J. Brook","doi":"10.1177/2516103219829479","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103219829479","url":null,"abstract":"This study examined the effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) on child well-being and family functioning outcomes for child welfare involved parents. A randomized controlled trial design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of SFBT as compared to treatment-as-usual in an outpatient substance abuse treatment center. Mixed linear models tested within and between-group changes using intent-to-treat analysis (N = 180). Hedges’s g effect sizes examined the magnitude of treatment effects. Both conditions reported improvements on the child well-being measures (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [BRIEF]-Parent Report and Child Behavior Checklist-School Age Form [CBCL-SA]) and family functioning measures (Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory [AAPI-2] and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression [CES-D] Short Form) at posttest. While none of the between group analyses were statistically significant on either outcome domains, effect sizes did show improvements in the small to medium range for both groups. SFBT effect sizes for BRIEF subscales ranged from .024 to .267 and for control group ranged from .136 to .363. SFBT effect sizes on CBCL-SA subscales ranged from .059 to .321 and for control group ranged from .101 to .313. SFBT effect sizes on AAPI-2 subscales ranged from .006 to .620 and control group ranged from .023 to .624. SFBT effect sizes on CES-D measure were .428 and for control group were .317. Results show SFBT to be an effective intervention for helping parents around child well-being and family functioning outcomes similar to current empirically-supported therapies. SFBT provides a more strengths-based approach to help families improve family well-being and thus help improve their child’s well-being.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"124 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103219829479","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42125679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-01Epub Date: 2019-01-10DOI: 10.1177/2516103218816707
Barry Coughlan, Tess Marshall-Andon, Julie Anderson, Sophie Reijman, Robbie Duschinsky
Distinguishing autism spectrum behaviors from behaviors relating to disorganized attachment can be challenging. There is, for instance, a notable overlap between both conditions in terms of behaviors deemed stereotypical. In addition, there are also similarities regarding some atypical social overtures. Responding to this overlap has been the subject for much debate in the literature. Disorganized attachment was first introduced and conceptualized by the attachment researcher, Mary Main. Main is considered the leading authority on coding this phenomenon. During the course of archival research, we obtained Main's notes on coding attachment in a group of 15 children with autism spectrum conditions (hereafter ASC). Drawing on these texts, this article explores Main's reasoning when making distinctions between ASC and attachment at the behavioral level. Our approach is informed by Chang's argument for the potential of "history as complementary science." Analysis indicates that, for Main, frequency and timing were important differential factors when attributing a behavior to either ASC or the child's attachment pattern.
{"title":"Attachment and autism spectrum conditions: Exploring Mary Main's coding notes.","authors":"Barry Coughlan, Tess Marshall-Andon, Julie Anderson, Sophie Reijman, Robbie Duschinsky","doi":"10.1177/2516103218816707","DOIUrl":"10.1177/2516103218816707","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Distinguishing autism spectrum behaviors from behaviors relating to disorganized attachment can be challenging. There is, for instance, a notable overlap between both conditions in terms of behaviors deemed stereotypical. In addition, there are also similarities regarding some atypical social overtures. Responding to this overlap has been the subject for much debate in the literature. Disorganized attachment was first introduced and conceptualized by the attachment researcher, Mary Main. Main is considered the leading authority on coding this phenomenon. During the course of archival research, we obtained Main's notes on coding attachment in a group of 15 children with autism spectrum conditions (hereafter ASC). Drawing on these texts, this article explores Main's reasoning when making distinctions between ASC and attachment at the behavioral level. Our approach is informed by Chang's argument for the potential of \"history as complementary science.\" Analysis indicates that, for Main, frequency and timing were important differential factors when attributing a behavior to either ASC or the child's attachment pattern.</p>","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"76-93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6726482/pdf/EMS84070.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41214946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-02-27DOI: 10.1177/2516103219829483
M. Tarren‐Sweeney
The present article reports findings of a narrative review of self- and carer-report mental health data that addressed the research question: Do adolescents who reside in statutory out-of-home care (OOHC) systematically underreport their mental health difficulties in population studies? A literature search was conducted to identify population studies of the mental health of older children and adolescents in OOHC that obtained self-report data. Studies were selected for review if mental health data were gathered in population studies (i.e., not clinical or treatment studies); data were collected while participants were in care; and participants were not selected on the basis of their clinical status. With few exceptions, adolescents in family-based (foster and kinship) care report less informant-standardized mental health difficulties than do their carers in population studies, with substantially lower rates of clinical-level scores. Conversely, self- and carer-report mean scores obtained for adolescents in residential care are more closely aligned. Foster carer-reported rates of clinical-level difficulties concord with rates estimated from clinician-administered semi-structured psychiatric interviews, suggesting carer-report data are accurate. The reviewed studies collectively suggest that adolescents in family-based care systematically underreport their mental health difficulties in population studies. Several hypotheses for why this phenomenon occurs are discussed in relation to available evidence and theory. Epidemiological investigations of this population’s mental health should not solely employ self-report measures. The findings have no relevance or implications for clinical assessments.
{"title":"Do adolescents in care systematically under-report their mental health difficulties in population studies? A narrative review","authors":"M. Tarren‐Sweeney","doi":"10.1177/2516103219829483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103219829483","url":null,"abstract":"The present article reports findings of a narrative review of self- and carer-report mental health data that addressed the research question: Do adolescents who reside in statutory out-of-home care (OOHC) systematically underreport their mental health difficulties in population studies? A literature search was conducted to identify population studies of the mental health of older children and adolescents in OOHC that obtained self-report data. Studies were selected for review if mental health data were gathered in population studies (i.e., not clinical or treatment studies); data were collected while participants were in care; and participants were not selected on the basis of their clinical status. With few exceptions, adolescents in family-based (foster and kinship) care report less informant-standardized mental health difficulties than do their carers in population studies, with substantially lower rates of clinical-level scores. Conversely, self- and carer-report mean scores obtained for adolescents in residential care are more closely aligned. Foster carer-reported rates of clinical-level difficulties concord with rates estimated from clinician-administered semi-structured psychiatric interviews, suggesting carer-report data are accurate. The reviewed studies collectively suggest that adolescents in family-based care systematically underreport their mental health difficulties in population studies. Several hypotheses for why this phenomenon occurs are discussed in relation to available evidence and theory. Epidemiological investigations of this population’s mental health should not solely employ self-report measures. The findings have no relevance or implications for clinical assessments.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"251 - 272"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103219829483","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47021501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-22DOI: 10.1177/2516103218817555
Hannah Wright, D. Wellsted, Jacqui Gratton, S. Besser, N. Midgley
Background: In England and Wales, the single-informant Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is used to assess and monitor looked-after children’s (LAC) mental health; and some targeted Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) include a minimum SDQ score in their acceptance criteria. However, its ability to identify LAC who need mental health treatment is insufficiently understood. Methods: One hundred and forty four LAC referrals to a Targeted CAMHS Team were screened as part of a larger study. To establish how well the SDQ identified children who required treatment, Total Difficulties Scores from single-informant SDQs submitted at referral were compared to treatment recommendations following routine CAMHS assessment in a real-world setting. To explain the results, clinicians (n = 9) from the team were interviewed and key themes identified using thematic analysis. Results: AUROC analysis found that the single-informant SDQ discriminated between children who were assessed as needing a mental health intervention and those who did not with low accuracy when SDQs were completed by carers or young people themselves, and moderate accuracy for teacher-completed SDQs. Optimal cutoff scores are calculated and are lower than advised in scoring guidance. Key themes from clinician interviews identified possible gaps and limitations: Developmental trauma and attachment difficulties, A different kind of patient?, Seeing the “bad” but neglecting the sad, and The importance of clinical judgment. Conclusions: Contrary to current UK Government policy, this study suggests that the single-report SDQ should not be relied upon as a sole means of identifying mental health difficulties in this vulnerable, high-risk population.
{"title":"Use of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire to identify treatment needs in looked-after children referred to CAMHS","authors":"Hannah Wright, D. Wellsted, Jacqui Gratton, S. Besser, N. Midgley","doi":"10.1177/2516103218817555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218817555","url":null,"abstract":"Background: In England and Wales, the single-informant Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is used to assess and monitor looked-after children’s (LAC) mental health; and some targeted Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) include a minimum SDQ score in their acceptance criteria. However, its ability to identify LAC who need mental health treatment is insufficiently understood. Methods: One hundred and forty four LAC referrals to a Targeted CAMHS Team were screened as part of a larger study. To establish how well the SDQ identified children who required treatment, Total Difficulties Scores from single-informant SDQs submitted at referral were compared to treatment recommendations following routine CAMHS assessment in a real-world setting. To explain the results, clinicians (n = 9) from the team were interviewed and key themes identified using thematic analysis. Results: AUROC analysis found that the single-informant SDQ discriminated between children who were assessed as needing a mental health intervention and those who did not with low accuracy when SDQs were completed by carers or young people themselves, and moderate accuracy for teacher-completed SDQs. Optimal cutoff scores are calculated and are lower than advised in scoring guidance. Key themes from clinician interviews identified possible gaps and limitations: Developmental trauma and attachment difficulties, A different kind of patient?, Seeing the “bad” but neglecting the sad, and The importance of clinical judgment. Conclusions: Contrary to current UK Government policy, this study suggests that the single-report SDQ should not be relied upon as a sole means of identifying mental health difficulties in this vulnerable, high-risk population.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"159 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218817555","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46930629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-17DOI: 10.1177/2516103218810938
Sandra H. Jee, D. Swanson, L. Sugarman, J. Couderc
In this article, we reflect on a pilot project implementing a mindfulness-based stress reduction program among traumatized youth in foster and kinship care. We adapted a mindfulness intervention to teach self-regulation skills in a supportive, interactive, social group setting environment. Our hypothesis was that teaching mindfulness skills would enhance youth competency in stress management by giving them tools for self-regulation. In response to youth request for social groups, we adapted a mindfulness intervention aimed at stress reduction to include supervised social activities. Our program was marked by two adverse events: raising considerations regarding safety and supervision when in group settings with youth who previously experienced adverse childhood experiences and are prone to extreme reactivity and escalating behaviors. We share our experiences and recommendations for future research and practice, including recruitment considerations, opinions of group versus individual therapy, intensity of supervision of high-risk youth, training and support for graduate student volunteers working with youth in the child welfare system, and expectations for foster and adoptive family support of these youth. Our collective goal is to promote the health and wellness of these young people, equipping them with self-efficacy skills for future success, which may include mindfulness training. We realize that there is no one best approach to reaching this goal, and we need to consider safety and practicality when designing programs for youth in foster and kinship care.
{"title":"It takes a village: Reflections on a randomized controlled trial to teach mindfulness skills to teens in foster and kinship care","authors":"Sandra H. Jee, D. Swanson, L. Sugarman, J. Couderc","doi":"10.1177/2516103218810938","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218810938","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we reflect on a pilot project implementing a mindfulness-based stress reduction program among traumatized youth in foster and kinship care. We adapted a mindfulness intervention to teach self-regulation skills in a supportive, interactive, social group setting environment. Our hypothesis was that teaching mindfulness skills would enhance youth competency in stress management by giving them tools for self-regulation. In response to youth request for social groups, we adapted a mindfulness intervention aimed at stress reduction to include supervised social activities. Our program was marked by two adverse events: raising considerations regarding safety and supervision when in group settings with youth who previously experienced adverse childhood experiences and are prone to extreme reactivity and escalating behaviors. We share our experiences and recommendations for future research and practice, including recruitment considerations, opinions of group versus individual therapy, intensity of supervision of high-risk youth, training and support for graduate student volunteers working with youth in the child welfare system, and expectations for foster and adoptive family support of these youth. Our collective goal is to promote the health and wellness of these young people, equipping them with self-efficacy skills for future success, which may include mindfulness training. We realize that there is no one best approach to reaching this goal, and we need to consider safety and practicality when designing programs for youth in foster and kinship care.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"104 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218810938","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45987177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-10DOI: 10.1177/2516103218815702
A. Hjern, B. Vinnerljung, L. Brännström
Prior research has reported a positive impact of adoption on developmental outcomes for children with experience of foster care. To inform decisions about permanent care arrangements, we used Swedish national population registers to create a sibling population consisting of 194 children born 1973–1982 who had been in out-of-home care (OHC) at least 5 years before adolescence but were never adopted (50% boys) and their 177 maternal birth siblings who also had been in OHC at least 5 years before their teens but were adopted before adolescence (52.5% boys). We constructed 14 outcome variables spanning social, educational, and health outcomes in adult age with information from Swedish national registers. Based on multilevel logistic random effects and fixed effects regression models (supplemented with a sensitivity analysis assessing the potential impact of unobserved confounding), results showed that adopted siblings tended to have considerably better outcomes in adult age in educational achievement, income, criminality, disability, and suicidality. Outcomes related to mental health and substance abuse were more similar, but differences pointed in the same direction. Implications for child welfare policy and practice are discussed.
{"title":"Outcomes in adulthood of adoption after long-term foster care: A sibling study","authors":"A. Hjern, B. Vinnerljung, L. Brännström","doi":"10.1177/2516103218815702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218815702","url":null,"abstract":"Prior research has reported a positive impact of adoption on developmental outcomes for children with experience of foster care. To inform decisions about permanent care arrangements, we used Swedish national population registers to create a sibling population consisting of 194 children born 1973–1982 who had been in out-of-home care (OHC) at least 5 years before adolescence but were never adopted (50% boys) and their 177 maternal birth siblings who also had been in OHC at least 5 years before their teens but were adopted before adolescence (52.5% boys). We constructed 14 outcome variables spanning social, educational, and health outcomes in adult age with information from Swedish national registers. Based on multilevel logistic random effects and fixed effects regression models (supplemented with a sensitivity analysis assessing the potential impact of unobserved confounding), results showed that adopted siblings tended to have considerably better outcomes in adult age in educational achievement, income, criminality, disability, and suicidality. Outcomes related to mental health and substance abuse were more similar, but differences pointed in the same direction. Implications for child welfare policy and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"61 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218815702","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48312197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-10DOI: 10.1177/2516103218817550
N. Midgley, Antonella Cirasola, Chloe Austerberry, E. Ranzato, Grace West, Peter Martin, S. Redfern, Richard Cotmore, Theresa Park
This study presents the feasibility and pilot evaluation of the Reflective Fostering Programme (RFP), a recently developed, group-based program to support foster carers, based on the concept of “reflective parenting.” This innovative development follows calls by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and other organizations to help improve outcomes for children in care by providing better support to their carers. This study aimed to establish whether it is possible to implement the RFP and to gather preliminary data on the acceptability and effectiveness of the program. Twenty-eight foster carers took part in the study. Results indicate that training and delivery of the RFP were feasible; the program was felt to be relevant and meaningful to both foster carers and social care professionals delivering it. Preliminary pre-post evaluation showed a statistically significant improvement in foster carers’ stress, their achievement of self-defined goals and child’s emotion lability and overall strengths and difficulties. There were no statistically significant changes in carers’ reflective functioning, although some foster carers reported on changes in reflective capacity during focus groups. Preliminary findings about the feasibility of training and delivery of the RFP, as well as the acceptability and effectiveness of the program, are encouraging, but further impact evaluation is needed.
{"title":"Supporting foster carers to meet the needs of looked after children: A feasibility and pilot evaluation of the Reflective Fostering Programme","authors":"N. Midgley, Antonella Cirasola, Chloe Austerberry, E. Ranzato, Grace West, Peter Martin, S. Redfern, Richard Cotmore, Theresa Park","doi":"10.1177/2516103218817550","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218817550","url":null,"abstract":"This study presents the feasibility and pilot evaluation of the Reflective Fostering Programme (RFP), a recently developed, group-based program to support foster carers, based on the concept of “reflective parenting.” This innovative development follows calls by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and other organizations to help improve outcomes for children in care by providing better support to their carers. This study aimed to establish whether it is possible to implement the RFP and to gather preliminary data on the acceptability and effectiveness of the program. Twenty-eight foster carers took part in the study. Results indicate that training and delivery of the RFP were feasible; the program was felt to be relevant and meaningful to both foster carers and social care professionals delivering it. Preliminary pre-post evaluation showed a statistically significant improvement in foster carers’ stress, their achievement of self-defined goals and child’s emotion lability and overall strengths and difficulties. There were no statistically significant changes in carers’ reflective functioning, although some foster carers reported on changes in reflective capacity during focus groups. Preliminary findings about the feasibility of training and delivery of the RFP, as well as the acceptability and effectiveness of the program, are encouraging, but further impact evaluation is needed.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"41 - 60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218817550","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49303202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-10DOI: 10.1177/2516103218815701
D. Browne, Jacqueline Johnson, E. Beatty, M. Cameron, D. Durham, A. Shlonsky
The present study describes a community implementation of treatment foster care (TFC) for children and youth involved with child welfare in Ontario, Canada. There were two guiding research questions: (1) how are children and adolescents changing over the course of services and (2) how have the placements of children and adolescents changed over time? Clinical outcomes were tracked using the Assessment Checklist for Children (ACC) and Assessment Checklist for Adolescents (ACAs)—clinical tools that were specially designed to assess the functioning of young people in care. There were 1,068 ACCs on 518 children, and 559 ACAs on 222 adolescents. Each additional year of involvement with Therapeutic Family Care Program corresponded to additional improvement for both children, d = −.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) = −.25 to −.12, and adolescents, d = −.11; 95%CI = −.18 to −.03. Moderators and subdomains of clinical improvement were considered, though findings generally revealed significant improvement over time for most youngsters in most clinical areas. At the program level, there has been a significant increase in placement permanence across the last decade (i.e., greater prevalence of birth parent, adoption, and kinship care). In sum, this study illustrates an example of community implementation for TFC in a child welfare setting, which necessarily includes the systematic tracking of outcomes in the context of evidence-supported intervention.
{"title":"The Therapeutic Family Care Program: A 10-year community implementation of Treatment Foster Care in Ontario, Canada","authors":"D. Browne, Jacqueline Johnson, E. Beatty, M. Cameron, D. Durham, A. Shlonsky","doi":"10.1177/2516103218815701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218815701","url":null,"abstract":"The present study describes a community implementation of treatment foster care (TFC) for children and youth involved with child welfare in Ontario, Canada. There were two guiding research questions: (1) how are children and adolescents changing over the course of services and (2) how have the placements of children and adolescents changed over time? Clinical outcomes were tracked using the Assessment Checklist for Children (ACC) and Assessment Checklist for Adolescents (ACAs)—clinical tools that were specially designed to assess the functioning of young people in care. There were 1,068 ACCs on 518 children, and 559 ACAs on 222 adolescents. Each additional year of involvement with Therapeutic Family Care Program corresponded to additional improvement for both children, d = −.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) = −.25 to −.12, and adolescents, d = −.11; 95%CI = −.18 to −.03. Moderators and subdomains of clinical improvement were considered, though findings generally revealed significant improvement over time for most youngsters in most clinical areas. At the program level, there has been a significant increase in placement permanence across the last decade (i.e., greater prevalence of birth parent, adoption, and kinship care). In sum, this study illustrates an example of community implementation for TFC in a child welfare setting, which necessarily includes the systematic tracking of outcomes in the context of evidence-supported intervention.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"95 1","pages":"22 - 40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218815701","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41311897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-08DOI: 10.1177/2516103218812092
J. Price, S. Roesch, C. M. Burce
Children in foster care are at risk for externalizing and internalizing behavior problems. The KEEP foster parent training intervention has been found to effectively reduce parental reports of daily child behavior problems. The aims of this investigation were to (a) examine the effectiveness of the KEEP intervention at reducing behavior problems among children in foster care, as assessed by the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), during implementation of the intervention by a community agency using a randomized design and (b) determine whether the intervention is effective at reducing internalizing forms of behavior problems. Foster and kinship families were randomly assigned to either the KEEP intervention or usual services. The KEEP intervention was delivered by a community agency. Child behavior problems were assessed via the CBCL at baseline and at the end of the intervention (4 months after baseline). Data from 310 foster and kinship families with children aged between 5 and 12 years were analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling. The KEEP intervention was effective at reducing the proportion of children in the borderline group for rule-breaking between baseline and follow-up. The intervention was also effective at reducing internalizing problems, as indicated by reductions in internalizing raw scores and the proportion of children in the borderline group over the course of the intervention. These findings suggest the KEEP intervention can provide foster parents with the tools to manage a broad range of behavior problems even as the intervention was delivered by a community agency.
{"title":"The effects of the KEEP foster parent training intervention on child externalizing and internalizing problems","authors":"J. Price, S. Roesch, C. M. Burce","doi":"10.1177/2516103218812092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103218812092","url":null,"abstract":"Children in foster care are at risk for externalizing and internalizing behavior problems. The KEEP foster parent training intervention has been found to effectively reduce parental reports of daily child behavior problems. The aims of this investigation were to (a) examine the effectiveness of the KEEP intervention at reducing behavior problems among children in foster care, as assessed by the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), during implementation of the intervention by a community agency using a randomized design and (b) determine whether the intervention is effective at reducing internalizing forms of behavior problems. Foster and kinship families were randomly assigned to either the KEEP intervention or usual services. The KEEP intervention was delivered by a community agency. Child behavior problems were assessed via the CBCL at baseline and at the end of the intervention (4 months after baseline). Data from 310 foster and kinship families with children aged between 5 and 12 years were analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling. The KEEP intervention was effective at reducing the proportion of children in the borderline group for rule-breaking between baseline and follow-up. The intervention was also effective at reducing internalizing problems, as indicated by reductions in internalizing raw scores and the proportion of children in the borderline group over the course of the intervention. These findings suggest the KEEP intervention can provide foster parents with the tools to manage a broad range of behavior problems even as the intervention was delivered by a community agency.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":"21 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103218812092","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45338844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：