IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v172y2025ics0190740925000891.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing equality and equity in decision-making practice: Using standardised tools in child welfare services

Author

Listed:
  • Sletten, Marina Snipsøyr
  • Ellingsen, Ingunn Tollisen
  • Bjørkquist, Catharina
  • López, Mónica López

Abstract

There has been an increased use of standardised assessment tools in child welfare services, aiming to enhance the quality of decision-making and to ensure equality of practice. At the same time, standardisation has been criticised as undermining professional expertise and being unable to meet families’ individual needs. By focusing on the relationship between standardisation and professional practice, this paper examines how child welfare professionals balance principles of equity and equality in their assessments guided by a standardised tool. A qualitative design was chosen to explore these professionals’ knowledge perspectives and reflective practice when using a common standardised assessment tool in Norway. We used several qualitative data sources, including interviews, fieldwork and case documents from two local authorities. We interviewed 28 child welfare professionals, 22 case workers and six managers. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The findings show that professionals adhere to the standardised tool to ensure objective and equal practice but also exercise professional expertise and discretion to ensure a tailored and equitable practice. Finally, facilitating a “sharing culture” to exchange views on the content of the tool is considered important when adopting the standardised assessment tool into practice. We conclude that standardisation alone does not guarantee equal and equitable practices. The use of standardised tools must be combined with discretionary practices. This calls for a flexible practice with a broadened knowledge base and a sharing culture that fosters critical reflection among professionals.

Suggested Citation

  • Sletten, Marina Snipsøyr & Ellingsen, Ingunn Tollisen & Bjørkquist, Catharina & López, Mónica López, 2025. "Balancing equality and equity in decision-making practice: Using standardised tools in child welfare services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:172:y:2025:i:c:s0190740925000891
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2025.108206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740925000891
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2025.108206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baird, Christopher & Wagner, Dennis, 2000. "The relative validity of actuarial- and consensus-based risk assessment systems," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(11-12), pages 839-871.
    2. Antwi-Boasiako, Kofi & Fallon, Barbara & King, Bryn & Trocmé, Nico & Fluke, John, 2021. "Examining decision-making tools and child welfare involvement among Black families in Ontario, Canada," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schwartz, Ira M. & York, Peter & Nowakowski-Sims, Eva & Ramos-Hernandez, Ana, 2017. "Predictive and prescriptive analytics, machine learning and child welfare risk assessment: The Broward County experience," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 309-320.
    2. Emily Keddell, 2022. "Mechanisms of Inequity: The Impact of Instrumental Biases in the Child Protection System," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Geimer, Jennifer L. & Leach, Desmond J. & DeSimone, Justin A. & Rogelberg, Steven G. & Warr, Peter B., 2015. "Meetings at work: Perceived effectiveness and recommended improvements," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 2015-2026.
    4. Allan, Heather & Hollinshead, Dana & Rockwell, Kayla & Ender, Kaitlyn & Antwi-Boasiako, Kofi & O’Leary, Donna & Middel, Floor & Fluke, John, 2025. "Illuminating the complexity of decision making in child welfare using the decision making ecology: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. Herring, David J., 2009. "Fathers and child maltreatment: A research agenda based on evolutionary theory and behavioral biology research," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 935-945, August.
    6. Johnson, Will & Clancy, Thomas & Bastian, Pascal, 2015. "Child abuse/neglect risk assessment under field practice conditions: Tests of external and temporal validity and comparison with heart disease prediction," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 76-85.
    7. Skrypek, Margaret & Woodmass, Kyler & Rockymore, Maxie & Johnson, Geoff & Wells, Susan J., 2017. "Examining the potential for racial disparity in out-of-home placement decisions: A qualitative matched-pair study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 127-137.
    8. Gintova, Maria & Goodell Ugalde, Elliot & Jaimes Zelaya, Abigail, 2025. "Examining the potential of a coordinated service delivery model in child welfare in Ontario, Canada: Critical role of Black voices," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    9. Schwalbe, Craig, 2004. "Re-visioning risk assessment for human service decision making," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 561-576, June.
    10. van der Put, Claudia E. & Assink, Mark & Stams, Geert Jan J.M., 2016. "Predicting relapse of problematic child-rearing situations," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 288-295.
    11. Gambrill, Eileen & Shlonsky, Aron, 2000. "Risk assessment in context," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(11-12), pages 813-837.
    12. Shlonsky, Aron & Wagner, Dennis, 2005. "The next step: Integrating actuarial risk assessment and clinical judgment into an evidence-based practice framework in CPS case management," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 409-427, April.
    13. Jent, Jason F. & Eaton, Cyd K. & Knickerbocker, Lauren & Lambert, Walter F. & Merrick, Melissa T. & Dandes, Susan K., 2011. "Multidisciplinary child protection decision making about physical abuse: Determining substantiation thresholds and biases," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1673-1682, September.
    14. Schwartz, David R. & Kaufman, Adam B. & Schwartz, Ira M., 2004. "Computational intelligence techniques for risk assessment and decision support," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 1081-1095, November.
    15. Lee, Shawna J. & Sobeck, Joanne L. & Djelaj, Valentina & Agius, Elizabeth, 2013. "When practice and policy collide: Child welfare workers' perceptions of investigation processes," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 634-641.
    16. Keddell, Emily, 2023. "Recognising the embedded child in child protection: Children’s participation, inequalities and cultural capital," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. Ryan, Scott & Wiles, Debra & Cash, Scottye & Siebert, Carl, 2005. "Risk assessments: empirically supported or values driven?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 213-225, February.
    18. Danielle Bader & Kristyn Frank & Dafna Kohen, 2023. "Taking Stock of Canadian Population-Based Data Sources to Study Child Maltreatment: What’s Available, What Should Researchers Know, and What are the Gaps?," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 16(6), pages 2511-2544, December.
    19. Raghavan, Ramesh, 2010. "Using risk adjustment approaches in child welfare performance measurement: Applications and insights from health and mental health settings," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 103-112, January.
    20. Beth Coulthard & John Mallett & Brian Taylor, 2020. "Better Decisions for Children with “Big Data”: Can Algorithms Promote Fairness, Transparency and Parental Engagement?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:172:y:2025:i:c:s0190740925000891. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.