The impact of system of care support in adherence to wraparound principles in Child and Family Teams in child welfare in North Carolina
AbstractNorth Carolina is one of a growing number of states to implement family meeting models in child welfare as a way to engage families, while simultaneously addressing complex familial needs and child safety issues. However, much is still unknown regarding how family meetings actually operate in child welfare, underscoring a clear need for further evaluation of this process. Utilizing direct observational data of Child and Family Team (CFT) meetings, collected as part of two separate evaluations of the North Carolina Division of Social Service's Multiple Response System (MRS) and System of Care (SOC) initiatives, the purpose of the current study was to examine whether the support provided by SOC improved fidelity to the CFT model in child welfare. The observations were conducted using the Team Observation Measure consisting of 78 indicators that measure adherence to ten domains associated with high quality family team meetings (e.g., collaborative, individualized, natural supports, outcomes based, strengths-based). Findings indicate that receiving SOC support in child welfare leads to a more collaborative and individualized decision-making process with families. Meeting facilitators in SOC counties were better prepared for CFTs, and had greater ability to lead a more robust and creative brainstorming process to develop a family-driven case plan. The current study also provides a much needed description of the CFT meeting process within child welfare using a direct observational measure.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Children and Youth Services Review.
Volume (Year): 34 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth
Child and Family Team meetings; System of care; Implementation; Observational measures;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Lawrence, C. Nicole & Rosanbalm, Katie D. & Dodge, Kenneth A., 2011. "Multiple Response System: Evaluation of Policy Change in North Carolina's Child Welfare System," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 2355-2365.
- Berzin, Stephanie Cosner, 2006. "Using sibling data to understand the impact of family group decision-making on child welfare outcomes," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 1449-1458, December.
- Pennell, Joan & Edwards, Myles & Burford, Gale, 2010. "Expedited family group engagement and child permanency," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1012-1019, July.
- Crea, Thomas M. & Crampton, David S. & Abramson-Madden, Anne & Usher, Charles L., 2008. "Variability in the implementation of Team Decisionmaking (TDM): Scope and compliance with the Family to Family practice model," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1221-1232, November.
- Crea, Thomas M. & Usher, Charles L. & Wildfire, Judith B., 2009. "Implementation fidelity of Team Decisionmaking," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 119-124, January.
- Wind, Leslie & Brooks, Devon, 2002. "Child Welfare Demonstration Projects: A Model for Implementation and Evaluation," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(6-7), pages 543-558.
- Rauktis, Mary E. & McCarthy, Sharon & Krackhardt, David & Cahalane, Helen, 2010. "Innovation in child welfare: The adoption and implementation of Family Group Decision Making in Pennsylvania," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 732-739, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wendy Shamier).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.