Family Group Decision Making

Titcomb, A., & LeCroy, C. (2003). Evaluation of Arizona’s family group decision making program, Protecting Children, 18(1 & 2), 58-64.

This article provides a brief overview of the interim results from a three-year process-and-outcomes evaluation for the family group decision making program in Arizona. The evaluation found an increased percentage of family placements and a decreased percentage in foster placements subsequent to family group decision making meetings. The evaluation also found high rates of completion of plans, satisfaction among families who participated, families feeling that they played the main role in decision making and families feeling listened to and confident in their children’s safety. Preliminary results suggested that 87 percent of children did not have a substantiated report of abuse or neglect following the meeting.

Keywords: Arizona, United States, U.S., process evaluation, outcome evaluation, child placement, child welfare, child safety

Titcomb, A., & LeCroy, C. (2005). Outcomes of Arizona’s family group decision making program. Protecting Children, 19(4), 47-53. 

This article provides a very brief overview of a three-year process-and-outcomes evaluation for the family group decision making program in Arizona. The evaluation found more positive outcomes for children and families who were involved in the program than those in the comparison group during the six-month following period. Although a similar trend was found after one year, it was not statistically significant.

The evaluation found children whose families had been involved in family group decision making had decreased rates of resubstantiation (in the six months following the meeting) and families were more actively involved in decision making. Families involved in the program expressed high rates of satisfaction in the process and those involved in the meetings expressed high levels of confidence in the child’s safety subsequent to the meeting.

Keywords: Arizona, United States, U.S., process evaluation, outcome evaluation, child placement, child welfare, child safety

Walker, L. (2005). A cohort study of ‘ohana conferencing in child abuse and neglect cases. Protecting Children, 19(4), 36-46.

This study reports on the outcomes for 33 families who participated in ‘ohana conferencing and 27 families who did not. In Hawaiian, ‘ohana means family. ‘Ohana conferencing refers to family group conferencing within native Hawaiian traditions. This study included child protection cases in which parents voluntarily agreed to foster care. Originally, a social worker selected families to participate in the process, but in August 2004, Department of Human Services policy began to allow families to request conferencing. The family works with service providers to construct a plan when there is a report of child abuse and neglect. After being accepted by the social worker, the plan is agreed on by the family and the state. This study reviewed department case files and conducted interviews to gain information on the experiences of families who participated in ‘ohana conferencing and those who did not. Findings show families who participated in ‘ohana conferencing report higher satisfaction with government process and child protective services, as well as fewer court appearances and out-of-home placements.

Keywords: United States, U.S., Hawaii, child welfare, child placement, implementation stage, program evaluation, quasi-experimental design, qualitative and quantitative data

Walton, E., McKenzie, M., & Connolly, M. (2005). Private family time: The heart of family group conferencing. Protecting Children, 19(4), 17-24. 

This article briefly discusses family group conferencing with particular reference to private family time. It reports on a study that merges data from four care-and-protection coordinator focus groups in New Zealand (N = 29), and a questionnaire that was administered to all coordinators (74 percent response rate, n = 37). The study examined current family group conferencing practices relating to private family time. Findings indicate that coordinators were generally positive about private family time, seeing it as providing an important opportunity for the family to self-regulate and self-monitor. There are also indications that even when the participants in a family group conference cannot reach agreement, it nevertheless can provide healing within a family system. Although family group conferences in New Zealand require that families be provided with private family time, this research indicates that it is not always provided consistently and that there are signs of professional discretion.

Keywords: New Zealand, role of coordinator, child welfare, qualitative data

Weigensberg, E. C., Barth, R. P., & Guo, S. (in press). Family group decision making: A propensity score analysis to evaluate child and family services at baseline and after 36-months. Children and Youth Services Review. 

This study draws on data from a national survey in the United States (National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being) to evaluate the impact of family meetings on services for children and their families. The survey does not differentiate between meeting types, and accordingly, uses family group decision making as a generic term to encompass various models of family involvement. The database consisted of 36 months of data, representing 3,220 children referred because of child maltreatment and living at home during the initial interview. Within this sample, a subgroup of 325 children had received a family meeting during the initial placement or planning assessment process. To construct a comparison group of non-family-group-decision-making cases, the authors used propensity score matching to mitigate the influence of possible selection bias. The analysis reveals that a significantly higher percentage of cases which had experienced a family group decision making meeting were initially connected with some services, in particular, parenting services, children’s counseling services and mental health treatment for parents. After 36 months, the differences between the comparison groups had faded and were no longer statistically significant. While the authors acknowledge what appears to be a positive “boost” on the front end, they caution interpretation of the findings at 36 months as there is no indication in the database about whether the family meeting was a one-time event or if professionals remained engaged with families.

Keywords: United States, U.S., child welfare, family participation, delivery system, child well-being, developmental stage, outcome evaluation, quasi-experimental design, quantitative data

Wheeler, C. E., & Johnson, S. (2003). Evaluating family group decision making: The Santa Clara example. Protecting Children, 18(1 & 2), 65-69.

This brief summary of a comprehensive evaluation of the Santa Clara County family group conference and family unity meetings provides evidence that children who had family group conferences had better outcomes than children who did not. The study was based on a process, outcome and cost-benefit-analysis evaluation conducted in 1999. Children who had family group conferences had better stability of placement in kinship care and shorter periods in care. The conference participants also rated their experience highly, stating they believed it helped promote positive and effective solutions. The authors also found that family group conferences were cost-neutral.

Keywords: United States, U.S., California, process evaluation, outcome study, child welfare, child permanency, child placement, quasi-experimental design, cost evaluation