EvidenceBased Practices and Promising Approaches in Child Welfare

1
Evidence-Based Practices and Promising Approaches
in Child Welfare

• The Service Array Process
• National Child Welfare Resource Center
• for Organizational Improvement
• A Service of the Childrens Bureau, U.S.D.H.H.S.
• Developed by Sheila Pires
• in partnership with Katherine J. Lazear and Lisa
  Conlan
• (see last slide for credits)
• April 28, 2008

2
Evidence-Based Practices And Promising Approaches

• Evidence-Based Practices
• Show evidence of effectiveness through carefully
  controlled scientific studies, including random
  clinical trials
• Practice-Based Evidence/Promising Approaches
• Show evidence of effectiveness through experience
  of key stakeholders (e.g., families, youth,
  providers, administrators) and outcomes data
• Pires, S. (2002). Building systems of care A
  primer. Washington, D.C. Human Service
  Collaborative.

3
Examples

• Examples of Evidence-Based Practices
• Multisystemic Therapy (MST)
• Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MDTFC)
• Functional Family Therapy (FFT)
• Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (various models)
• Intensive Case Management (various models)
• Examples of Promising Practices
• Family Support and Education
• Wraparound Service Approaches
• Mobile Response and Stabilization Services
• Family Group Decision Making
• Source Burns Hoagwood. (2002). Community
  treatment for youth Evidence-based
  interventions for severe emotional and behavioral
  disorders. Oxford University Press and State of
  New Jersey BH Partnership (www.njkidsoc.org)

4
Kauffman Foundation Best Practices Project/
National Child Traumatic Stress
NetworkEvidenced-Based Practicesfor Children in
Child Welfare

• Trauma Focused-Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
  (TF-CBT)
• Abuse Focused-Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
  (AF-CBT)
• Parent Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT)
• Contact www.kauffmanfoundation.org
• California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child
  Welfare
• Contact www.cachildwelfareclearinghouse.org
• Pires, S. (2006). Primer Hands On Child
  Welfare. Washington, D.C. Human Service
  Collaborative.

5
Effectiveness Research(Burns Hoagwood, 2002)

• Most evidence of efficacy Intensive case
  management, in-home services, therapeutic foster
  care
• Less evidence (because not much research done)
  Crisis services, respite, mentoring, family
  education and support
• Least evidence (and lots of research) Inpatient,
  residential treatment, therapeutic group home
• Burns Hoagwood. (2002). Community Treatment for
  Youth. New York Oxford University Press

6
Shared Characteristics of Evidence-Based (and
Promising) Interventions

• Function as service components within systems of
  care
• Provided in the community
• Utilize natural supports, partner with parents,
  with training and supervision provided by those
  with formal training
• Operate under the auspices of all child-serving
  systems, not just child welfare
• Studied in the field with real world children
  and families
• Less expensive than institutional care (e.g.,
  residential treatment, hospitals) (when the full
  continuum is in place)
• Burns, B. and Hoagwood, K.( 2002). Community
  treatment for youth. New York Oxford University
  Press.

7
Acknowledgement

• This mini-module is taken from Primer Hands
  OnChild Welfare, The Skill Building Curriculum.
  (Go to website www.nrcoi.org.)
• Developed by Sheila A. Pires, Human Service
  Collaborative, Washington, DC.
• In partnership with Katherine J. Lazear,
  Research and Training Center for Childrens
  Mental Health, University of South Florida,
  Tampa, FL., and Lisa Conlan, Federation of
  Families for Childrens Mental Health,
  Washington, DC.