 |
|
|
 |
|
ResourcesSearchable Annotated Differential Response BibliographyUpdated October 6, 2009
Anselmo, S., Pickford, R., & Goodman, P. (2003). Alberta response model: Transforming outcomes for children and youth. In N. Trocmé, D. Knoke, & C. Roy (Eds.), Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice (pp. 98-104). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Child Welfare League of Canada. The Alberta Response Model (ARM) is based on the principle that protecting children, preventing maltreatment and strengthening families form a service continuum. A fundamental objective of ARM is to provide protection to children at risk for future maltreatment. ARM is composed of four interrelated core strategies. First, a differential response system will ensure children and youth at high risk of physical or emotional harm are protected and those at lower risk, along with their families, are supported and strengthened through community and neighborhood networks. Families may be assigned to either child protection or family enhancement pathways based on assessment of risk and the family’s willingness to voluntarily engage with services. Second, strengthening the links between local community-based child and family services and the coordination of referral systems enables families to access a full range of services. Third, earlier permanency planning, developed in consultation with extended family members, clinical specialists and community partners, is emphasized to provide the opportunity for stable and permanent relationships for children in care. Finally, implementing processes that monitor outcomes, based on the national Child Welfare Indicator Matrix, is a central component of ARM. Keywords: aboriginal, Alberta Response Model, ARM, Canadian national outcome indicators, caseload, Child Welfare Indicator Matrix, community, differential response, family enhancement, neighborhood, outcomes, permanency; policy, prevention, protection, referral, risk, service, strengthening, voluntary Bagdasaryan, S., Furman, W., & Franke, T. (2008). Implementation of California’s differential response model in small counties. Protecting Children, 23(1 & 2), 40-56. Using qualitative data from site interviews and quantitative data from an annual prevention system inventory, this article examines three specific elements within the differential response model as it was being formulated or implemented in 11 rural California counties. These elements are case identification and risk assessment, components of differential response systems and referral methods, and system response and service delivery. The discussion regarding differential response systems and case referral methods focuses on methods used by small counties to refer clients to other agencies and partners, and the adequacy, accessibility, flexibility and information-sharing parameters of partnerships and community networks. Primary challenges identified by the counties include achieving adequate confidentiality protocols, changes in organizational culture and adequate staffing. Keywords: small county initiative, standardized assessment, case identification, recidivism, referrals, service delivery, system response, child welfare services redesign, public private partnership, administrative infrastructure, prevention system assessment inventory, organizational culture, community capacity, family resource centers, safe and healthy families, service accessibility Barber, J., & Knoke, D. (2003). Evaluating the implementation of assessment tools in the Australian child protection system. In N. Trocmé, D. Knoke, & C. Roy (Eds.), Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice (pp. 49-63). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Child Welfare League of Canada. This book chapter describes research that examines the reliability and validity of clinical judgment versus actuarial risk and safety assessment instruments in Australia’s child protection system. Recent policy changes support the implementation of assessment instruments that guide and inform workers in both their approach to children and families, and their decisions about the services that families need. Likewise, the use of empirically-based assessment tools was introduced in order to increase the consistency of assessments. It is hypothesized that the implementation of a more quantifiable risk and safety assessment process will also result in improved safety, more relevant services and decreased recurrence of maltreatment. The extent to which reliability and validity are preserved in practice depends on how these instruments are implemented. The authors describe the introduction of “tiered responding” based on actuarial assessment instruments in two Australian states. In South Australia, some training was provided prior to implementation, but there was no pilot testing of instruments, and provisions were not made to modify system practice. In contrast, the implementation of assessment instruments in Queensland was accompanied by efforts to train workers and monitor the new system’s effectiveness. Overall, proper training, monitoring and attention to the fidelity of instrument implementation are needed for more consistent, reliable and valid assessments and may ultimately lead to improved case prioritization. Keywords: actuarial; assessment; audit; Australia; case characteristics; consistency; decision making; differential response; evidence based; false negatives; false positives; fidelity; instrument; investigation; judgment; monitoring; outcomes; pilot testing, policy, prioritization, psychometric, quantitative, Queensland, rating, reliability, risk assessment, safety assessment, scenario, services, South Australia, tiered responding, tool, track, training, validity Berrick, J. D., Bryant, M., Conley, A., de Elizalde, L., Garcia, V., & Greer, A. (2008). Differential response and alternative response in diverse communities an empirically-based curriculum: CALSWEC. CA: University of California, Berkeley, Center for Child and Youth Policy. This recently developed curriculum on differential response (DR) was developed by the California Social Work Education Center at U.C. Berkeley. It is based on the authors’ evaluation of DR efforts in African American, Latino and Asian neighborhoods in Contra Costa and Alameda counties in the San Francisco Bay area of California. The curriculum includes a history of California’s child welfare system redesign, a literature review that incorporates evaluation findings for five states and an extensive bibliography. Detailed descriptions are provided of the Contra Costa and Alameda county adaptations of DR for their constituents, and practice issues including client engagement and service provision are discussed. A section is offered on applying assessment tools and protocols and determining child outcomes in ethnically diverse neighborhoods, including multiple case studies. Information regarding client experiences and outcomes is presented, and a final section of implications for policy and practice is included. The general conclusion of the study is that while research was not able to establish a definitive causal relationship between participation in DR and lack of re-reporting or recurrence, it was adequately demonstrated that child safety was not adversely affected and that other benefits accrued for children, families and communities where DR was in place. Keywords: child welfare redesign, client engagement, service provision, ethnic diversity, disproportionality, neighborhood context, culturally sensitive assessment, screening, referral process, voluntary services, community involvement Brubacher, M. D., & Narayan, J. (2003). Community based child welfare services in Guelph and Wellington County. In N. Trocmé, D. Knoke, & C. Roy (Eds.), Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice (pp. 89-97). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Child Welfare League of Canada. This book chapter describes the components of a successful community-based service model used by Family and Children’s Services (FCS) of Guelph and Wellington County in Ontario, Canada. Under FCS leadership, the Shelldale Centre brought together a network of 16 agencies and community organizations into one facility -- located in an area known to have the highest rates of poverty and family problems -- to meet the needs of high-risk children and families. FCS’ provision of services is based on the belief that child protection is a community responsibility. FCS uses child-centered interventions in which parents and service providers act as partners and provide outreach to families most in need. The program has resulted in positive outcomes for parents and children; significant improvements in neighborhood safety; and significant, positive impacts on child welfare services, including a reduction in the number of children needing placement outside the home. Keywords: child-centered, child-focused, child welfare, collaborative services, community based service model, community development, concrete supports, early identification, early intervention, family-centered, family support, foster care, immigrant families, neighborhood safety, partnership, placement, primary prevention, refugee families, safety, voluntary participation, youth crime Brunson, L., & Bouchard, C. (2003). Mobilizing communities to prevent child abuse and neglect: A cultural shift in child protection. In N. Trocmé, D. Knoke, & C. Roy (Eds.), Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice (pp. 75-88). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Child Welfare League of Canada. This book chapter provides an overview of recent attempts to maximize child protection in Canada, including the implementation of community mobilization and community collaboration strategies in child welfare practice. Rather than having children and families be exclusively served by Child Protective Services (CPS), the authors argue that traditional child protection efforts could be augmented with community-based approaches. Key elements of these approaches include multisector coalitions between family service providers, orientation toward local community data in order to shape appropriate action plans, evidence-based programming and family participation and input regarding services. Furthermore, this chapter states that community-based approaches require local civic leadership and shared accountability for child safety, which will ultimately expand resource and service networks and help alleviate the pressure placed on CPS workers. The authors note that these types of “cultural shifts” in practice are not without their dilemmas. Typical challenges in implementing community-based approaches include how to mobilize communities, how to determine the role of local community residents and how to facilitate the often difficult collaboration process. However, the authors also emphasize that community partnerships are integral to expanding needed resources and services for families, and to possibly preventing future incidents of child maltreatment. Keywords: building community partnerships for child protection, civic leadership, cliche report, community collaboration, community mobilization, crisis response, cultural shift, data orientation, deficiency mode, ecological framework, geo-mapping, maximal protection model, multisector coalition, neighborhood milieu, patch approach, prevention science approach, Project Beluga social capital, social cohesion, social inequities, socially toxic environments, strategic planning, tertiary care system, therapeutic response Cameron, G., Freymond, N., & Roy, C. (2003). Avenues for positive innovations in Canadian child welfare: Lessons from the Partnerships for Children and Families Project and international jurisdictions. In N. Trocmé, D. Knoke, & C. Roy (Eds.), Community collaboration and differential response: Canadian and international research and emerging models of practice (pp. 14-31). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Child Welfare League of Canada. This book chapter addresses the Canadian child welfare system. Research (i.e., interviews, focus groups and questionnaires) was conducted with parents, families and service providers as part of the Partnerships for Children and Families Project in Ontario. One research focus was to understand the daily lives and service experiences of children and families who were involved with child welfare and residential children’s mental health services. In addition, the research examined service providers’ views and experiences. One primary theme that emerged from the research was that it is often difficult to establish trusting and collaborative relationships between Child Protective Services workers and families. The authors propose several avenues for change in the Canadian welfare system, including flexible first responses tailored to the family’s individual needs and situation (i.e., differential response); an expanded range of “family-friendly” child placement options, including extended kin and family support network placements; and more interventions and time for consensual agreements during the period between supporting families and formally involving the legal system. These reforms would encourage strengths- and family-based practice, allow more time and flexibility for workers to help families, and provide families with a broader range of resources and supports. The authors also discuss the importance of developing collaborative partnerships among community service providers in order to serve families well. Keywords: Canadian child welfare, community partnerships, consensual, continuity, differential response, family friendly, first response, flexibility, focus group, interview, liability, mediation, mother, negotiation, Ontario, parent, Partnerships for Children and Families Project, placement, questionnaire, reform, research, residential mental health, resource, service provider, stereotype, trust, worker Carpenter, C. (2007, Spring). Alternative response. Children, Families, and the Courts: Ohio Bulletin, 3(3), 1-13. Retrieved October 2, 2009, from http://www.americanhumane.org/assets/docs/protecting-children/PC-AR-Ohio-child-law-bulletin.pdf This article raises key policy issues in the implementation and practice of alternative response in Ohio. Ohio alternative response began as a 10-county pilot program via legislative authorization enacted on June 21, 2006. The article opens with an overview of alternative response (differential response), including a general definition and core elements. It notes the states and countries that have implemented differential response in whole or in part. It also summarizes outcomes data from evaluative research conducted in Alaska, California, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina and Virginia. The Minnesota and Missouri evaluation reports address family and social worker responses, child safety and family well-being, and fiscal implications of differential response. The article includes a simple chart of differences between family assessment and traditional investigation. It summarizes the Supreme Court of Ohio Subcommittee on Child Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency’s recommendations for the pilot alternative response project in Ohio and concludes with the progress made and next steps in Ohio’s implementation of alternative response. Keywords: alternative response, assessment approach, child safety, child welfare policy, child welfare practice, cost-effectiveness, CPS involvement, differential response, family-centered, family engagement, intervention, investigation approach, outcomes, paths of response, prevention, service delivery, substantiation, Subcommittee on Child Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency, tracks of response Casey Family Programs. (2007). Implementing differential response in California: Promising practices and lessons learned. Seattle, WA: Author. Retrieved October 2, 2009, from http://www.casey.org/Resources/Publications/BreakthroughSeries_DifferentialResponse.htm This report chronicles the Breakthrough Series Collaborative (BSC) that was developed, tested and implemented by 43 California counties as part of the state’s child welfare redesign, including the three-tiered adaptation of differential response (DR) developed for the redesign efforts. Detailed background regarding DR, the BSC methodology and the state’s child welfare efforts are presented, and a series of elements regarding agency, community and family engagement are developed to support county implementation efforts. Measures to document DR implementation progress are then proposed, and promising practices for each element are described. County vignettes are included for each of the promising practices, and findings from collaborative-level qualitative data from focus groups and interviews are presented. The report sees the early results of the BSC work as promising and proposes next steps, including rigorous evaluation, training and technical assistance in the proposed elements to counties; increased investment in community-based services; and exploring policy changes needed to support the continued implementation of the collaborative’s work. Keywords: breakthrough series collaborative, BSC, child welfare redesign, family engagement, community partners, service array, outcome measures, re-referrals, timeliness of response, promising practices, strengths-focused, assessment tools, joint decision making, family advocates, child safety, community specialists, team decision making, co-location, joint trainings, universal release, multidisciplinary teams, resource identification teams, organizational culture, prevention and early intervention Child and Family Policy Institute of California. (2006). Child welfare services system improvements: 11 county pilot implementation evaluation: Initial assessment phase, July 2003 to June 2006. Sacramento: California Department of Social Services, Children and Family Services Division. Retrieved October 2, 2009, from http://www.cfpic.org/children/pdfs/11_County_Eval_Phase1.pdf This document reviews the initial, planning phase of California’s 2003 11-county project to pilot selected child welfare strategies. Differential response (DR) is one of the strategic areas to be addressed, in addition to standardized safety assessment and permanency and youth transition. The report outlines in detail the process and structure of the state’s three-path adaptation of DR. Successes, challenges and recommendations are also presented. Recommendations for expanding the pilot to other counties are outlined in the areas of community collaboration, culture shift and systems change, training, workload and evaluation. Appendices include instruments, and both state and county-level planning documents. The 11 participating counties were Contra Costa, Glenn, Humboldt, Los Angeles, Placer, Sacramento, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Stanislaus, Tehama and Trinity. Keywords: state-county workgroups, strategic planning, outcomes-based evaluation, safety assessment, Structured Decision Making, D+SDM, comprehensive assessment tool, CAT, legislature, breakthrough series collaborative, BSC, plan-do-study-act, PDSA method, community collaboration, system change, workload, training
|
| ||||