Every Child Deserves a Permanent Home: The Permanency Innovations Initiative

4区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
Mark R. Testa, Kristen Woodruff, Roseana Bess, Jerry Milner, Maria Woolverton
{"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":null,"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":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2019.0006","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future of Children","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2019.0006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

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?
每个孩子都应该有一个永久的家:永久创新倡议
摘要:在因虐待或忽视而被调查的儿童中,约有五分之一被寄养。尽管有些人很快就回到了家庭,但另一些人可能会在没有永久家庭关系的情况下被寄养多年。在这篇文章中,Mark Testa、Kristen Woodruff、Roseana Bess、Jerry Milner和Maria Woolverton研究了永久性创新倡议(PII),这是一项由联邦政府资助的努力,旨在测试创新计划,旨在防止儿童在寄养中长时间停留,并为可在儿童福利中大规模实施的策略提供证据。PII旨在遵循四阶段模式来选择、实施和测试干预措施,包括探索和安装、初步实施和形成性评估、全面实施和总结性评估以及复制和适应。这项倡议的结果并不令人鼓舞。有些网站始终无法进入全面实施阶段。其他人在参与率方面遇到了重大问题。两个能够对完全实施的干预进行实验评估的站点发现,治疗组和对照组在为儿童建立稳定和永久的家园方面没有显著差异,第三个站点发现,实验结果实际上有利于对照组。作者的“主要发现”是,“在这项倡议中测试的有希望的创新都没有在……经过严格评估后,在稳定的持久性方面取得有意义的改善。”在讨论对儿童福利计划的总体影响时,他们提出了一个根本问题:此类计划是否应该只在虐待发生后才主要处理虐待?或者,他们是否也应该通过早期、普遍的干预措施,加强家庭内部的保护因素,从一开始就努力防止虐待的发生?
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
Future of Children
Future of Children Multiple-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Future of Children is a collaboration of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. The mission of The Future of Children is to translate the best social science research about children and youth into information that is useful to policymakers, practitioners, grant-makers, advocates, the media, and students of public policy. The project publishes two journals and policy briefs each year, and provides various short summaries of our work. Topics range widely -- from income policy to family issues to education and health – with children’s policy as the unifying element. The senior editorial team is diverse, representing two institutions and multiple disciplines.
×
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