A Pilot Study of the Adoption and Guardianship Enhanced Support (AGES) Program: Preventing Discontinuity by Walking Alongside Adoptive and Guardianship Families Who are Struggling.

Kerrie Ocasio, Nancy Rolock, Joan Blakey, Roni Diamant-Wilson, Frances Bass, Jonelle Brom, Allison Budzinski, Ronald Hermes, Danielle Karnopp, Katie Sepnieski, Lixia Zhang, Rowena Fong, Monica Faulkner, Laura Marra
{"title":"A Pilot Study of the Adoption and Guardianship Enhanced Support (AGES) Program: Preventing Discontinuity by Walking Alongside Adoptive and Guardianship Families Who are Struggling.","authors":"Kerrie Ocasio, Nancy Rolock, Joan Blakey, Roni Diamant-Wilson, Frances Bass, Jonelle Brom, Allison Budzinski, Ronald Hermes, Danielle Karnopp, Katie Sepnieski, Lixia Zhang, Rowena Fong, Monica Faulkner, Laura Marra","doi":"10.1080/26408066.2023.2259905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>There is a strong preference for evidence-based child welfare services, however, there are few well-researched programs for families that struggle post-permanence. Following adoption or guardianship, some families experience significant challenges, struggle to find effective programs, and run the risk of family instability. This study described the process used to develop the Adoption and Guardianship Enhanced Support (AGES) intervention and explored: 1) the needs of families participating in the program and 2) how AGES worked with families to address those challenges.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive study utilized quantitative structured assessment data and qualitative data from case records to explore the needs of families and provide context for qualitative, in-depth interviews with families regarding their experiences with the AGES program, presented using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-service structured assessments indicated multiple dimensions of parenting strain, with case record reviews and interviews with families providing a nuanced picture of multiple sources of strain, suggesting the project was reaching the intended audience. Record review and interviews demonstrated strong alignment between needs of families and the support provided by AGES workers. Intended analysis of quantitative post-assessment data was not possible, due to lower enrollment and higher staff turnover than expected, as well as study timeframes.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>The approach utilized by AGES workers, one that walked alongside families and provided flexible responses to identified needs, showed promise for adoptive and guardianship families. Replication and additional research are needed to assess the program with a larger sample and more rigorous methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":73742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","volume":" ","pages":"50-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2259905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: There is a strong preference for evidence-based child welfare services, however, there are few well-researched programs for families that struggle post-permanence. Following adoption or guardianship, some families experience significant challenges, struggle to find effective programs, and run the risk of family instability. This study described the process used to develop the Adoption and Guardianship Enhanced Support (AGES) intervention and explored: 1) the needs of families participating in the program and 2) how AGES worked with families to address those challenges.

Methods: This descriptive study utilized quantitative structured assessment data and qualitative data from case records to explore the needs of families and provide context for qualitative, in-depth interviews with families regarding their experiences with the AGES program, presented using thematic analysis.

Results: Pre-service structured assessments indicated multiple dimensions of parenting strain, with case record reviews and interviews with families providing a nuanced picture of multiple sources of strain, suggesting the project was reaching the intended audience. Record review and interviews demonstrated strong alignment between needs of families and the support provided by AGES workers. Intended analysis of quantitative post-assessment data was not possible, due to lower enrollment and higher staff turnover than expected, as well as study timeframes.

Discussion and conclusion: The approach utilized by AGES workers, one that walked alongside families and provided flexible responses to identified needs, showed promise for adoptive and guardianship families. Replication and additional research are needed to assess the program with a larger sample and more rigorous methods.

收养和监护强化支持(AGES)计划的试点研究:通过与正在挣扎的收养和监护家庭同行来防止中断。
目的:人们强烈倾向于以证据为基础的儿童福利服务,然而,很少有经过充分研究的针对后永久性家庭的项目。在被收养或监护后,一些家庭面临重大挑战,难以找到有效的方案,并面临家庭不稳定的风险。本研究描述了用于制定收养和监护强化支持(AGES)干预措施的过程,并探讨了:1)参与该计划的家庭的需求;2)AGES如何与家庭合作应对这些挑战。方法:这项描述性研究利用定量、结构化的评估数据和病例记录中的定性数据来探索家庭的需求,并为对家庭进行定性、深入的访谈提供背景,以了解他们在AGES项目中的经历,并使用主题分析进行呈现。结果:服务前结构化评估显示了养育压力的多个方面,病例记录审查和对家庭的采访提供了多种压力来源的微妙画面,表明该项目正在接触到预期的受众。记录审查和访谈表明,家庭需求与老年痴呆症护理工作者提供的支持之间存在着强烈的一致性。由于入学人数低于预期,员工流动率高于预期,以及研究时间框架,无法对评估后的定量数据进行预期分析。讨论和结论:AGES工作人员采用的方法,与家庭同行,并对确定的需求提供灵活的回应,对收养和监护家庭显示出了希望。需要复制和额外的研究来用更大的样本和更严格的方法评估该计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信