Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Final Report - Volume Two. 4.4.4 Summary of Followup Services.

09/01/2002

When caretakers were interviewed a year after random assignment, they were asked some of the same questions about services received, this time since the last interview (since the end of family preservation services for the experimental group and during a comparable period for the control group). Tables 4-13, 4-14, and 4-15 show analyses of these questions.

Table 4-12
Summary of Services for Philadelphia, Post-treatment Interview
Caseworker Activities:
Proportion of affirmative answers by caretakers to yes/no questions Control
%
Experimental
%
p
Caseworker helped with money for other things 5 22 .001
Caseworker provided transportation 35 50 .03
Caseworker talked with you about discipline 32 53 .002
Caseworker advised how to get medical care 10 23 .02
Caseworker discussed with you how to get a better place 25 38 .05
Caseworker advised on job training programs 23 36 .04
Caseworker talked about how to get paying job 19 33 .02
Caseworker advised on how to continue school 21 34 .03
Caseworker helped you see good qualities 68 82 .01
Caseworker talked about how to get paying job 19 33 .02
  Control
Mean
Experimental
Mean
p
Caretaker report of number of caseworker activities 2.9 4.6 .0001
Caretaker report of number of "helpful" caseworker activities 1.5 2.2 .02
Services Provided:
Proportion of affirmative answers by caretakers to yes/no questions Control
%
Experimental
%
p
Childcare or baby sitting 6 16 .02
Parent training 34 62 .001
Other housing services 10 21 .02
Emergency financial assistance 23 54 .001
Recreational services 26 38 .05
Household management 21 38 .004
  Control
Mean
Experimental
Mean
p
Caseworker report of number of services provided 3.4 4.9 .0004
Note: This table only includes items with a primary p-value less than or equal to .05 Items in bold indicate significant findings in favor of the experimental group.
Table 4-13
Philadelphia Caretaker Reports of Caseworker Activities, Followup Interview
  Control % Experimental % p
Caseworker helped with money for rent/electricity/phone 4 4  
Caseworker helped with money for other things 18 16  
Caseworker provided transportation 29 32  
Caseworker discussed proper feeding of child 16 13  
Caseworker talked with you about discipline 32 24  
Caseworker talked with you on relations with spouse 16 8 .08
Caseworker helped you clean house 3 6  
Caseworker helped with painting/house repairs 2 1  
Caseworker discussed how to get child care 14 17  
Caseworker helped with welfare/food Stamps 9 10  
Caseworker advised how to get medical care 10 14  
Caseworker talked with you how to handle anger 28 19 .10
Caseworker advised you on substance abuse 18 19  
Caseworker discussed with you how to get a better place 24 18  
Caseworker advised on job training programs 22 21  
Caseworker talked about how to get a paying job 23 16  
Caseworker advised on how to continue school 29 18 .05
Caseworker arranged for some child care 2 6  
Caseworker told you about other agencies 33 29  
Table 4-14
Philadelphia Participation in Social Programs, Followup Interview
Program C % E % p
Food stamps 79 75  
Job training 21 31 .09
WIC 38 40  
AFDC 64 68  
Housing vouchers 12 10  
Social security disability 33 22 .07
Alcoholism program 10 04  
Drug treatment program 17 13  
Marriage counseling 1 2  
Community mental health program 9 14  
Head Start/pre-school 57 52  
Note: C = Control Group, E = Experimental Group
Table 4-15
Philadelphia Caretaker Report of Services, Followup Interview
  Control
%
Experimental
%
p
Day care 17 25  
Help in finding a place to live 11 10  
Staying at an emergency shelter 4 6  
Medical or dental care 36 38  
Transportation 23 28  
Education services/GED 9 16  
Parent education/ training classes 17 29 .03
Legal services 7 10  
Counseling 23 29  
Respite care 1 1  
Homemaker services 0 1  
A parent aide to help you 2 3  

Caseworker Activities. Caretaker reports of caseworker activities since the post-treatment interview are shown in Table 4-13. Only one item showed significant differences between experimental and control groups in the primary analysis. Compared to caretakers in the experimental group, a significantly greater proportion of caretakers in the control group reported that their caseworkers advised them on how to continue school (29% vs. 18%; p = .05). (69)

Participation in Social Programs. As indicated in Table 4-14, there were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups with respect to involvement in social programs during the post-treatment period. (70)

Caretaker Report of Services. Table 4-15 indicates that there was only one service in which there is a significant difference between experimental and control groups in reported receipt of services during the post-treatment period. A greater proportion of experimental group respondents reported receiving parent education/training classes (29% vs. 17%; p = .03). (71)

4.4.4 Summary of Followup Services.

There were few significant differences between experimental and control groups on report of service as shown in Table 4-16. A significantly greater proportion of caretakers in the control group reported that, in the period of time since the post-treatment interview, their caseworker advised them on how to continue school. On the other hand, a significantly greater proportion of caretakers from the experimental group reported receiving parent education/training classes since the time of the post-treatment interview.

Table 4-16
Summary of Services in Philadelphia, Followup Interview
Caseworker Activities: (Proportion of affirmative answers to yes/no questions) Control % Experimental % p
Caseworker advised on how to continue school 29 18 .05
Services Provided: (Proportion of affirmative answers to yes/no questions) Control % Experimental % p
Parent education/training classes 17 29 .03
Note: Table only includes items with a primary p-value of .05 or less. Items in bold indicate significant findings in favor of the experimental group whereas italicized items indicate significant findings in favor of the control group.

View full report

Preview
Download

"report2.pdf" (pdf, 978.24Kb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®