ABSTRACT

Family engagement conferences are a commonly utilized strategy in child welfare to empower families to make decisions for the safety and well-being of their own children. However, there is mixed evidence about their effectiveness, in large part due to the lack of detail about what is actually occurring in those conferences. Using data from a Title IV-E waiver, the present study utilized a principles-focused evaluation approach to explore how well a set of different family engagement models employed across six county child welfare systems adhered to a common set of principles. Findings suggest that the specific name or branding of a family engagement model – and their model-specific practices, such as private family time – matters less than the general components of practice and fidelity with which they are carried out. Further, this study provides evidence for the ability to conduct an evaluation of similar – but not identical – conferencing models across multiple sites.

摘要

家庭参与会议是儿童福利中常用的一种策略，它使家庭能够为自己孩子的安全和福祉做出决定。然而，关于它们的有效性的证据参差不齐，这在很大程度上是由于缺乏关于这些会议中实际发生的事情的细节。本研究使用来自 Title IV-E 豁免的数据，利用以原则为中心的评估方法来探索在六个县儿童福利系统中采用的一组不同的家庭参与模型在多大程度上遵守了一组共同​​的原则。研究结果表明，家庭参与模式的具体名称或品牌——以及他们特定模式的实践，如私人家庭时间——比实践的一般组成部分和执行它们的忠诚度要低。更远，