Re: family preservation

["Rick Barth" <rbarth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's true that the North Carolina design [for our intensive family preservation
program] doesn't prove anything ("proof is a pretty high standard, I think), but
they did have risk assessments at intake and after looking at those (and
controlling for risk levels) they did show a significant initial effect toward
reducing placements for the highest risk families--unfortunately, the effect was
not very long-lived.  The data do, then, suggest that there is reason to continue
to have positive expectations that we can develop an intensive intervention
program that--if delivered long enough--could make a difference for some of our
families.  

I certainly agree with other commentators, though, that I would not be running a
family preservation program unless it was, like the North Carolina program,
closely monitored and undergoing a process of continuous evidence-based
improvement.

Rick

Richard P. Barth, Ph.D.
Frank A Daniels Professor and
Chair of the Doctoral Program
School of Social Work
301 Pittsboro Rd
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC  27599-3550
(v) 919 962 6516
(f)        962 1486

-- Begin original message --

From: "Julia H. Littell" <jlittell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:59:54
Subject: Re: family preservation
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers   <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@xxxxxxxxxxx

A careful look at the research design used in North Carolina indicates that
it doesn't "prove" anything. The NC research is quasi-experimental in
nature, hence there are many competing explanations for the findings. 

At 12:41 PM 9/27/2001 -0400, Adolph.Simmons wrote:
>The key issue is that there are several open-ended models of family
>preservation that are not as effective as traditional services.  In
>North Carolina we have an Intensive Family Preservation program that has
>years of research that proves that this model, if properly legislated,
>funded, and supported, can prove effective in preventing placement.  Dr.
>Ray Kirk at the University of North Carolina (creator of the North
>Carolina Family Assessment Scale) has conducted numerous studies on
>Family Preservation.  Go to:
>
>http://childrensservices.dhhs.state.nc.us/resourcedevelopment/index.htm
>
>Then select the Retrospective Study.  This is a legislatively mandated
>report that proves Family Preservation can and does work as compared to
>traditional services.
>
>bill higgins wrote:
>
>> We are reading about in-home services as part of our
>> agency reading group.  Can anyone answer why states
>> still use family preservation programs when the
>> research concludes that they don't prevent placement
>> or child abuse?  At least when compared with
>> traditional programs.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
>> http://phone.yahoo.com
>
>Attachment Converted: "c:\progra~1\eudora\attach\Refamily.htm"
>



-- End original message --