Turning away from the public sector in children's out-of-home care: An English experiment
This paper reports on the evaluation of an English experiment which, for the first time, moved statutory social work support for children and young people in out-of-home care from the public to the private or independent sector. Five social work practices (SWPs), independent or semi-independent of local government, were established and evaluated using a matched control design with integrated process evaluation. Social work teams in the public sector, selected to correspond to key characteristics of the SWP sites, provided control sites.
If 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.
Volume (Year): 35 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- McBeath, Bowen & Meezan, William, 2009. "Interorganizational disparities in foster care service provision," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 513-525, May.
- Steen, Julie A. & Smith, Sarahlin, 2012. "An organizational view of privatization: Is the private foster care agency superior to the public foster care agency?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 851-858.
- Collins-Camargo, Crystal & Sullivan, Dana & Murphy, April, 2011. "Use of data to assess performance and promote outcome achievement by public and private child welfare agency staff," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 330-339, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:35:y:2013:i:1:p:33-39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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.