Trenna Valado, Jennifer Tracey, J. Goldfinger, R. Briggs
Summary:In this article, Trenna Valado, Jennifer Tracey, Jonathan Goldfinger, and Rahil Briggs highlight the potential to expand the promise of pediatric care to encompass the full array of child and family needs that can affect the long-term wellbeing of infants and toddlers.Pediatric care is not stigmatized, nearly universally accessed, and oriented toward prevention. The American Academy of Pediatrics already urges pediatricians to screen for adverse childhood experiences, maternal depression, behavioral and developmental risk, and even the effects of poverty on children. Most pediatricians would like to extend their narrow health care mandate to broader social-emotional and behavioral care and education, but they're often constrained by issues of time, training, and reimbursement.Valado and her colleagues offer a solution to those constraints: HealthySteps, a risk-stratified, population health model that integrates a skilled child development professional—called a HealthySteps specialist—into the pediatric care team. The model comprises eight core components that can be divided into three tiers of service, beginning with universal screening that allows practices to identify children and families at higher risk of negative outcomes. These families are then offered the more intensive service tiers, in which they receive customized support based on their needs.The evidence supporting HealthySteps comes from a large multi-site evaluation conducted by Johns Hopkins University, which included a randomized controlled trial component, as well as several site-level research studies. Results from this research indicate that HealthySteps had an array of positive impacts on practices that adopted the program and clients they served, including increased physician and caregiver satisfaction, improved continuity of care, greater adherence to recommended well-child visits and vaccinations, and increased rates of developmental screening and other services. There were also positive impacts on children and parents over time, though many of these impacts were modest. The HealthySteps National Office is continuing to evaluate implementation, training, impact, and cost as the program spreads across the nation. Questions that remain to be answered include how such a model should be financed and how health insurance could pay for it.
{"title":"HealthySteps: Transforming the Promise of Pediatric Care","authors":"Trenna Valado, Jennifer Tracey, J. Goldfinger, R. Briggs","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:In this article, Trenna Valado, Jennifer Tracey, Jonathan Goldfinger, and Rahil Briggs highlight the potential to expand the promise of pediatric care to encompass the full array of child and family needs that can affect the long-term wellbeing of infants and toddlers.Pediatric care is not stigmatized, nearly universally accessed, and oriented toward prevention. The American Academy of Pediatrics already urges pediatricians to screen for adverse childhood experiences, maternal depression, behavioral and developmental risk, and even the effects of poverty on children. Most pediatricians would like to extend their narrow health care mandate to broader social-emotional and behavioral care and education, but they're often constrained by issues of time, training, and reimbursement.Valado and her colleagues offer a solution to those constraints: HealthySteps, a risk-stratified, population health model that integrates a skilled child development professional—called a HealthySteps specialist—into the pediatric care team. The model comprises eight core components that can be divided into three tiers of service, beginning with universal screening that allows practices to identify children and families at higher risk of negative outcomes. These families are then offered the more intensive service tiers, in which they receive customized support based on their needs.The evidence supporting HealthySteps comes from a large multi-site evaluation conducted by Johns Hopkins University, which included a randomized controlled trial component, as well as several site-level research studies. Results from this research indicate that HealthySteps had an array of positive impacts on practices that adopted the program and clients they served, including increased physician and caregiver satisfaction, improved continuity of care, greater adherence to recommended well-child visits and vaccinations, and increased rates of developmental screening and other services. There were also positive impacts on children and parents over time, though many of these impacts were modest. The HealthySteps National Office is continuing to evaluate implementation, training, impact, and cost as the program spreads across the nation. Questions that remain to be answered include how such a model should be financed and how health insurance could pay for it.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"122 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43146995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:In this article, M. Rebecca Kilburn and Jill S. Cannon report on First Born, a targeted universal home visiting program operating in over half of New Mexico counties. Created in a small town in response to a lack of support for pregnant women and new parents, First Born adapts features of other home visiting programs, responding to conditions common to high-need, low-resource communities.As its name suggests, First Born enrolls first-time families. A team of home visitors, including a registered nurse or other licensed health care professional and a paraprofessional parent educator, offers 40 weekly home visits during the child's first year; the frequency of visits diminishes during the child's second and third year. The nurse visits the home both before and after the child's birth, and also when medical issues are the focus of visit. Because nurses are in short supply in many communities, however, most of the home visits are made by parent educators, who coordinate with the nurse visitor.To promote early childhood health and development, First Born educates parents and helps them access community resources, using a three-pronged approach: helping the family to develop life and social skills, such as decision-making, crisis intervention, and knowledge of child development; using screening tools to identify problems (for example, substance dependency or developmental delays) and referring families to the appropriate sources of help; and promoting effective coordination among community resources.Based on First Born's scale-up experience, Kilburn and Cannon outline several lessons for other universal programs, including the pros and cons of universal services, the expectation that universal programs will have population-level impact, and barriers to innovation.
{"title":"Home Visiting for First-Time Parents: Community Innovation","authors":"M. Kilburn, Jill S. Cannon","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:In this article, M. Rebecca Kilburn and Jill S. Cannon report on First Born, a targeted universal home visiting program operating in over half of New Mexico counties. Created in a small town in response to a lack of support for pregnant women and new parents, First Born adapts features of other home visiting programs, responding to conditions common to high-need, low-resource communities.As its name suggests, First Born enrolls first-time families. A team of home visitors, including a registered nurse or other licensed health care professional and a paraprofessional parent educator, offers 40 weekly home visits during the child's first year; the frequency of visits diminishes during the child's second and third year. The nurse visits the home both before and after the child's birth, and also when medical issues are the focus of visit. Because nurses are in short supply in many communities, however, most of the home visits are made by parent educators, who coordinate with the nurse visitor.To promote early childhood health and development, First Born educates parents and helps them access community resources, using a three-pronged approach: helping the family to develop life and social skills, such as decision-making, crisis intervention, and knowledge of child development; using screening tools to identify problems (for example, substance dependency or developmental delays) and referring families to the appropriate sources of help; and promoting effective coordination among community resources.Based on First Born's scale-up experience, Kilburn and Cannon outline several lessons for other universal programs, including the pros and cons of universal services, the expectation that universal programs will have population-level impact, and barriers to innovation.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"81 - 97"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44638244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:Teachers are the engine that drives social and emotional learning (SEL) programs and practices in schools and classrooms, and their own social-emotional competence and wellbeing strongly influence their students. Classrooms with warm teacher-child relationships support deep learning and positive social and emotional development among students, writes Kimberly Schonert-Reichl. But when teachers poorly manage the social and emotional demands of teaching, students' academic achievement and behavior both suffer. If we don't accurately understand teachers' own social-emotional wellbeing and how teachers influence students' SEL, says Schonert-Reichl, we can never fully know how to promote SEL in the classroom.How can we boost teachers' social-emotional competence, and how can we help them create the kind of classroom environment that promotes students' SEL? Teachers are certainly at risk for poor social-emotional wellbeing. Research shows that teaching is one of the most stressful occupations; moreover, stress in the classroom is contagious—simply put, stressed-out teachers tend to have stressed-out students. In the past few years, several interventions have specifically sought to improve teachers' social-emotional competence and stress management in school, and Schonert-Reichly reviews the results, many of which are promising.She also shows how teachers' beliefs—about their own teaching efficacy, or about whether they receive adequate support, for example—influence the fidelity with which they implement SEL programs in the classroom. When fidelity is low, SEL programs are less successful. Finally, she examines the extent to which US teacher education programs prepare teacher candidates to promote their own and their students' social-emotional competence, and she argues that we can and should do much more.
{"title":"Social and Emotional Learning and Teachers","authors":"K. Schonert-Reichl","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2017.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2017.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:Teachers are the engine that drives social and emotional learning (SEL) programs and practices in schools and classrooms, and their own social-emotional competence and wellbeing strongly influence their students. Classrooms with warm teacher-child relationships support deep learning and positive social and emotional development among students, writes Kimberly Schonert-Reichl. But when teachers poorly manage the social and emotional demands of teaching, students' academic achievement and behavior both suffer. If we don't accurately understand teachers' own social-emotional wellbeing and how teachers influence students' SEL, says Schonert-Reichl, we can never fully know how to promote SEL in the classroom.How can we boost teachers' social-emotional competence, and how can we help them create the kind of classroom environment that promotes students' SEL? Teachers are certainly at risk for poor social-emotional wellbeing. Research shows that teaching is one of the most stressful occupations; moreover, stress in the classroom is contagious—simply put, stressed-out teachers tend to have stressed-out students. In the past few years, several interventions have specifically sought to improve teachers' social-emotional competence and stress management in school, and Schonert-Reichly reviews the results, many of which are promising.She also shows how teachers' beliefs—about their own teaching efficacy, or about whether they receive adequate support, for example—influence the fidelity with which they implement SEL programs in the classroom. When fidelity is low, SEL programs are less successful. Finally, she examines the extent to which US teacher education programs prepare teacher candidates to promote their own and their students' social-emotional competence, and she argues that we can and should do much more.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"27 1","pages":"137 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2017.0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44807330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:Beginning as early as preschool, race and gender are intertwined with the way US schools mete out discipline. In particular, black students and male students are much more likely than others to be suspended or expelled—punishments that we know can hold them back academically. These disparities, and the damage they can cause, have driven recent reforms, including some that incorporate social and emotional learning (SEL) practices.Anne Gregory and Edward Fergus review federal and state mandates to cut down on punishments that remove students from school, and they show how some districts are embracing SEL in their efforts to do so. Yet even in these districts, large disparities in discipline persist. The authors suggest two reasons current discipline reforms that embrace SEL practices may hold limited promise for reducing discipline disparities.The first is that prevailing "colorblind" notions of SEL don't consider power, privilege, and cultural difference—thus ignoring how individual beliefs and structural biases can lead educators to react harshly to behaviors that fall outside a white cultural frame of reference. The second is that most SEL models are centered on students, but not on the adults who interact with them. Yet research shows that educators' own social and emotional competencies strongly influence students' motivation to learn and the school climate in general.Gregory and Fergus describe how one school district is striving to orient its discipline policies around a conception of SEL that stresses equity and promotes both adults' and students' SEL competencies. Although such reforms hold promise, they are still in the early stages, and the authors call for rigorous empirical work to test whether such efforts can substantially reduce or eradicate racial and gender disparities in discipline.
{"title":"Social and Emotional Learning and Equity in School Discipline","authors":"A. Gregory, Edward Fergus","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2017.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2017.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:Beginning as early as preschool, race and gender are intertwined with the way US schools mete out discipline. In particular, black students and male students are much more likely than others to be suspended or expelled—punishments that we know can hold them back academically. These disparities, and the damage they can cause, have driven recent reforms, including some that incorporate social and emotional learning (SEL) practices.Anne Gregory and Edward Fergus review federal and state mandates to cut down on punishments that remove students from school, and they show how some districts are embracing SEL in their efforts to do so. Yet even in these districts, large disparities in discipline persist. The authors suggest two reasons current discipline reforms that embrace SEL practices may hold limited promise for reducing discipline disparities.The first is that prevailing \"colorblind\" notions of SEL don't consider power, privilege, and cultural difference—thus ignoring how individual beliefs and structural biases can lead educators to react harshly to behaviors that fall outside a white cultural frame of reference. The second is that most SEL models are centered on students, but not on the adults who interact with them. Yet research shows that educators' own social and emotional competencies strongly influence students' motivation to learn and the school climate in general.Gregory and Fergus describe how one school district is striving to orient its discipline policies around a conception of SEL that stresses equity and promotes both adults' and students' SEL competencies. Although such reforms hold promise, they are still in the early stages, and the authors call for rigorous empirical work to test whether such efforts can substantially reduce or eradicate racial and gender disparities in discipline.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"27 1","pages":"117 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2017.0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41658085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:On average, charter schools perform at about the same level as traditional public schools. But an overall estimate disguises considerable variation in charter school impacts. Urban charter schools and those serving low-income and minority students, a number of which share a no excuses philosophy, tend to produce the largest gains. Expanding these highly effective charters and their practices may be a way to close achievement gaps. Research shows that charters can expand successfully and that traditional public schools that adopt charter practices (or are taken over by charter operators) can also make large academic gains. But to have a meaningful impact on nationwide achievement gaps, charter school approaches would need to be adopted beyond the charter sector itself. Any interventions that are built around using charter schools to close achievement gaps should focus not on the type of school but on the practices that work in the most effective charter schools.
{"title":"Charter Schools and the Achievement Gap","authors":"Sarah R. Cohodes","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2018.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2018.0008","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:On average, charter schools perform at about the same level as traditional public schools. But an overall estimate disguises considerable variation in charter school impacts. Urban charter schools and those serving low-income and minority students, a number of which share a no excuses philosophy, tend to produce the largest gains. Expanding these highly effective charters and their practices may be a way to close achievement gaps. Research shows that charters can expand successfully and that traditional public schools that adopt charter practices (or are taken over by charter operators) can also make large academic gains. But to have a meaningful impact on nationwide achievement gaps, charter school approaches would need to be adopted beyond the charter sector itself. Any interventions that are built around using charter schools to close achievement gaps should focus not on the type of school but on the practices that work in the most effective charter schools.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"1000 1","pages":"1 - 16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2018.0008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46426521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mark R. Testa, Kristen Woodruff, Roseana Bess, Jerry Milner, Maria Woolverton
Summary:About one-fifth of children involved in investigations for abuse or neglect are placed in foster care. Although some return to their families quickly, others may remain in foster care for years without permanent family relationships. In this article, Mark Testa, Kristen Woodruff, Roseana Bess, Jerry Milner, and Maria Woolverton examine the Permanency Innovations Initiative (PII), a federally funded effort that tested innovative programs designed to prevent children from experiencing long stays in foster care and to build evidence for strategies that can be brought to scale in child welfare.PII aimed to follow a four-phase model for selecting, implementing, and testing interventions, including exploration and installation, initial implementation and formative evaluation, full implementation and summative evaluation, and replication and adaptation. The results of the initiative weren't encouraging. Some sites were never able to move to the full implementation phase. Others had significant trouble with participation rates. Two sites that were able to experimentally evaluate a fully implemented intervention found no significant differences between the treatment and comparison groups in achieving stable and permanent homes for children, and a third site found that the experimental results actually favored the comparison group.The authors "principal finding" is that "none of the promising innovations tested in this initiative yielded meaningful improvements in … stable permanence when rigorously evaluated." Discussing the implications for child welfare programs in general, they raise a fundamental issue: Should such programs primarily deal with maltreatment only after it has occurred? Or should they also work to prevent maltreatment from happening in the first place through early, universal interventions that strengthen protective factors within families?
{"title":"Every Child Deserves a Permanent Home: The Permanency Innovations Initiative","authors":"Mark R. Testa, Kristen Woodruff, Roseana Bess, Jerry Milner, Maria Woolverton","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:About one-fifth of children involved in investigations for abuse or neglect are placed in foster care. Although some return to their families quickly, others may remain in foster care for years without permanent family relationships. In this article, Mark Testa, Kristen Woodruff, Roseana Bess, Jerry Milner, and Maria Woolverton examine the Permanency Innovations Initiative (PII), a federally funded effort that tested innovative programs designed to prevent children from experiencing long stays in foster care and to build evidence for strategies that can be brought to scale in child welfare.PII aimed to follow a four-phase model for selecting, implementing, and testing interventions, including exploration and installation, initial implementation and formative evaluation, full implementation and summative evaluation, and replication and adaptation. The results of the initiative weren't encouraging. Some sites were never able to move to the full implementation phase. Others had significant trouble with participation rates. Two sites that were able to experimentally evaluate a fully implemented intervention found no significant differences between the treatment and comparison groups in achieving stable and permanent homes for children, and a third site found that the experimental results actually favored the comparison group.The authors \"principal finding\" is that \"none of the promising innovations tested in this initiative yielded meaningful improvements in … stable permanence when rigorously evaluated.\" Discussing the implications for child welfare programs in general, they raise a fundamental issue: Should such programs primarily deal with maltreatment only after it has occurred? Or should they also work to prevent maltreatment from happening in the first place through early, universal interventions that strengthen protective factors within families?","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"145 - 162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42990043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
VOL. 29 / NO. 1 / SPRING 2019 3 Deborah Daro is a senior research fellow at Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. Kenneth A. Dodge is the Pritzker Professor of Public Policy and a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University. Ron Haskins is the Cabot Family Chair in economic studies and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution. Universal Approaches to Promoting Healthy Development: Introducing the Issue
{"title":"Universal Approaches to Promoting Healthy Development: Introducing the Issue","authors":"D. Daro, K. Dodge, Ron Haskins","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0001","url":null,"abstract":"VOL. 29 / NO. 1 / SPRING 2019 3 Deborah Daro is a senior research fellow at Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. Kenneth A. Dodge is the Pritzker Professor of Public Policy and a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University. Ron Haskins is the Cabot Family Chair in economic studies and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution. Universal Approaches to Promoting Healthy Development: Introducing the Issue","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"16 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41950335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:Los Angeles County's experience, write Christina Altmayer and Barbara Andrade DuBransky, shows how a universal offer of assistance can establish a foundation on which public and private agencies can plan meaningful systemic reform—and spark incentives for greater, more effective investments in services directed to vulnerable families. The county's vision for a universal, voluntary, integrated system of home visiting offered in 14 targeted communities builds on Welcome Baby, a universal home visiting program that provides as many as nine contacts to pregnant women and new parents until a child's ninth month. Piloted in one hospital in 2009, Welcome Baby is now available to new parents delivering in 14 hospitals throughout the county, reaching approximately one-third of all births in the county annually. As of June 2018, the program had reached more than 59,000 families.Welcome Baby and other related investments are part of a broader story unfolding in LA County. The authors describe an important policy shift that's moving both public and private providers toward an integrated system of universal and targeted home visiting. The county's action plan calls for significant investments in new parent support and responsiveness from multiple county-level agencies, as well as the development and expansion of multiple home visiting models to meet the needs of the county's diverse population.As the initiative continues to grow, Altmayer and Andrade DuBransky write, the county is aiming to streamline referral pathways to ensure maximum participation; fill service gaps for high-risk populations; increase access to voluntary home visiting for families at high risk for involvement in the child welfare system; create a common data collection system to improve outcome reporting; maximize the use of current resources while generating new revenue; and ensure that the home visiting system is deeply embedded in larger systems serving children and families.
{"title":"Strengthening Home Visiting: Partnership and Innovation in Los Angeles County","authors":"C. Altmayer, Barbara Andrade DuBransky","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0000","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:Los Angeles County's experience, write Christina Altmayer and Barbara Andrade DuBransky, shows how a universal offer of assistance can establish a foundation on which public and private agencies can plan meaningful systemic reform—and spark incentives for greater, more effective investments in services directed to vulnerable families. The county's vision for a universal, voluntary, integrated system of home visiting offered in 14 targeted communities builds on Welcome Baby, a universal home visiting program that provides as many as nine contacts to pregnant women and new parents until a child's ninth month. Piloted in one hospital in 2009, Welcome Baby is now available to new parents delivering in 14 hospitals throughout the county, reaching approximately one-third of all births in the county annually. As of June 2018, the program had reached more than 59,000 families.Welcome Baby and other related investments are part of a broader story unfolding in LA County. The authors describe an important policy shift that's moving both public and private providers toward an integrated system of universal and targeted home visiting. The county's action plan calls for significant investments in new parent support and responsiveness from multiple county-level agencies, as well as the development and expansion of multiple home visiting models to meet the needs of the county's diverse population.As the initiative continues to grow, Altmayer and Andrade DuBransky write, the county is aiming to streamline referral pathways to ensure maximum participation; fill service gaps for high-risk populations; increase access to voluntary home visiting for families at high risk for involvement in the child welfare system; create a common data collection system to improve outcome reporting; maximize the use of current resources while generating new revenue; and ensure that the home visiting system is deeply embedded in larger systems serving children and families.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"61 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0000","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47868101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:In the United States, two approaches have developed to exercise collective influence on how parents raise their children. One is mandatory public intervention in families who have placed their children at risk, exemplified by the child welfare system. The other is voluntary offers of assistance, for example, child abuse prevention services that place responsibility on parents to determine whether they'll accept the advice they receive and change their behavior.In this article, Deborah Daro traces a shift in emphasis from a Progressive-Era policy that offered common supports to all new parents to a more bifurcated prevention system that emphasizes public investments primarily for those parents and children at highest risk. Moreover, she writes, for the past 50 years, voluntary and mandatory parental assistance have operated independently, with minimal shared agenda setting and planning. She contrasts this to the health care system, where early assessment and diagnosis mean that people receive a continuum of care, based on their level of need. Early medical treatment isn't viewed as intrusive; it's seen as an important first step in protecting health and avoiding more complex and costly therapy.Unfortunately, Daro argues, the policy response to parental shortcomings isn't comparable. There's no adequate early assessment when people become parents, and child welfare agencies typically offer assistance only after a child is harmed. She suggests that the time is right for a universal approach that reaches out to all new parents, offering each family a level of assistance commensurate with their needs. Ideally, she writes, "Seeking out and accepting formal public services to help meet parenting demands should be as acceptable as using preventive health care."
{"title":"A Shift in Perspective: A Universal Approach to Child Protection","authors":"D. Daro","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2019.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:In the United States, two approaches have developed to exercise collective influence on how parents raise their children. One is mandatory public intervention in families who have placed their children at risk, exemplified by the child welfare system. The other is voluntary offers of assistance, for example, child abuse prevention services that place responsibility on parents to determine whether they'll accept the advice they receive and change their behavior.In this article, Deborah Daro traces a shift in emphasis from a Progressive-Era policy that offered common supports to all new parents to a more bifurcated prevention system that emphasizes public investments primarily for those parents and children at highest risk. Moreover, she writes, for the past 50 years, voluntary and mandatory parental assistance have operated independently, with minimal shared agenda setting and planning. She contrasts this to the health care system, where early assessment and diagnosis mean that people receive a continuum of care, based on their level of need. Early medical treatment isn't viewed as intrusive; it's seen as an important first step in protecting health and avoiding more complex and costly therapy.Unfortunately, Daro argues, the policy response to parental shortcomings isn't comparable. There's no adequate early assessment when people become parents, and child welfare agencies typically offer assistance only after a child is harmed. She suggests that the time is right for a universal approach that reaches out to all new parents, offering each family a level of assistance commensurate with their needs. Ideally, she writes, \"Seeking out and accepting formal public services to help meet parenting demands should be as acceptable as using preventive health care.\"","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"29 1","pages":"17 - 40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44066275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary:Over the past three decades, the number of people housed in local jails has more than tripled. Yet when it comes to reforming the nation's incarceration policies, write Jennifer Copp and William Bales, researchers, policymakers, and the public alike have focused almost exclusively on state and federal prisons.If you took a snapshot on a single day, the prison population would far exceed the population of local jails. But, the authors show, compared to prisons, roughly 18 times more people are admitted to and released from jails every year. Furthermore, about two-thirds of jail inmates have yet to be convicted of a crime, and they often languish behind bars only because they can't afford to pay bail. And although jails are intended for adults, on any given day roughly 4,000 young people under age 18 are confined in local jails.In this article, Copp and Bales provide a broad overview of US jails, including facilities and operations, characteristics of inmates, and the conditions of confinement, and they make a number of suggestions for policy and practice. In particular, they argue that the justice system should slash the use of money bail, which disproportionately harms the poor and minorities. Specifically, they recommend that jurisdictions adopt validated risk assessment tools to help make decisions about who should and shouldn't be detained before trial; expand pretrial services that can, among other things, monitor compliance with release conditions; divert more people away from the criminal justice system; consider alternatives to jail, such as probation, for convicted offenders; and expedite case processing to decrease the time to trial and thus the overall length of jail stays.
{"title":"Jails and Local Justice System Reform: Overview and Recommendations","authors":"Jennifer E. Copp, William D. Bales","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2018.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2018.0005","url":null,"abstract":"Summary:Over the past three decades, the number of people housed in local jails has more than tripled. Yet when it comes to reforming the nation's incarceration policies, write Jennifer Copp and William Bales, researchers, policymakers, and the public alike have focused almost exclusively on state and federal prisons.If you took a snapshot on a single day, the prison population would far exceed the population of local jails. But, the authors show, compared to prisons, roughly 18 times more people are admitted to and released from jails every year. Furthermore, about two-thirds of jail inmates have yet to be convicted of a crime, and they often languish behind bars only because they can't afford to pay bail. And although jails are intended for adults, on any given day roughly 4,000 young people under age 18 are confined in local jails.In this article, Copp and Bales provide a broad overview of US jails, including facilities and operations, characteristics of inmates, and the conditions of confinement, and they make a number of suggestions for policy and practice. In particular, they argue that the justice system should slash the use of money bail, which disproportionately harms the poor and minorities. Specifically, they recommend that jurisdictions adopt validated risk assessment tools to help make decisions about who should and shouldn't be detained before trial; expand pretrial services that can, among other things, monitor compliance with release conditions; divert more people away from the criminal justice system; consider alternatives to jail, such as probation, for convicted offenders; and expedite case processing to decrease the time to trial and thus the overall length of jail stays.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"28 1","pages":"103 - 124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2018.0005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49427446","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","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：