Child Abuse, Neglect, and Family Preservation

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.3.2 DYFS Evaluation

A DYFS evaluation of the New Jersey family preservation model was conducted in four counties (Feldman, 1991). Cases were randomly assigned and followed for one year after service. Data are available on 117 experimental and 97 control cases. Thirty-three families that were “turned back” from the experimental group were excluded from the analysi

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.3.1 State's Interest in FPS Evaluation

Changes in the FPS programs have resulted from the previous studies conducted by the state. DYFS administrators described them as important and necessary catalysts for some of the changes in the FPS service and delivery models that have occurred over its ten-year history. The following sections briefly describe DYFS's evaluation and the Targeting

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.3 Implementation of the Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Services

DYFS, as reflected in interviews with FPS administrators and in their manual materials, is interested in integrating ongoing evaluation into the development of its FPS program statewide. The FPS state legislation in 1993 also required monitoring of outcomes of the program. Before discussing the implementation of the evaluation in New Jersey, Sectio

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.2.4 Training

In FY1996 all Child Protective Service (CPS) workers, around 2,000 field staff statewide, participated in a full day of training on the philosophy and practice of family preservation services. The intent of the training was to encourage a conformity of type of cases referred to FPS around the state and to train new workers. The training emphasized

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.2.3 Reunification Component of the Program

In New Jersey, referrals can be made to family preservation services for both placement prevention and family reunification. As described in the DYFS family preservation standards manual, placement prevention applies to families where one or more children are at imminent risk being placed into foster care. Children in short term emergency placemen

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.2.2 Statewide FPS Case Characteristics

FPS programs are required by contract to collect and report social and demographic information on the families that they serve. Statistics are available through Fiscal Year 1997, as reported in the Family Preservation Annual Report. DYFS has placed an emphasis on having the families served by FPS programs reflect the composition of the DYFS genera

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.2.1 Referral Process

Although decisions to refer families are made by the worker and supervisor, workers do not directly refer cases to family preservation programs. Each county has an appointed DYFS screener. All referrals to FPS must be made through the DYFS screener in the designated county. The screener makes referrals to the FPS program when slots are available a

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.2 History of FPS Service in New Jersey

New Jersey has provided FPS services since 1987 using the Homebuilders Model. A Project Director was hired in September 1986 and program design and contracting enabled four programs to begin operations in June 1987. These initial four programs were in Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, and Hudson Counties. By the end of the following year, four addition

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 4.1 Introduction

The New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) is a state administered child welfare system with four regions, 21 counties, and a total of 35 field offices. There is a statewide family preservation program which during the study time frames was using the Homebuilders model, 1 with the service provided by contract with not-for-prof

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. Chapter 4: New Jersey

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.6 Summary

Kentucky has offered family preservation services since 1985, when it served as one of the original pilot projects funded by the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation. The state funded three sites in 1989, and by 1996 family preservation programs were available in all 120 Kentucky counties. Over the years state policy and procedures have remained consis

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.5.2 Welfare Reform Initiative

With the passage of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, the Cabinet for Families and Children was concerned about the impact that the new time limits and work requirements would have on the Kentucky welfare population. Questions to be answered included: Would there be adequate resources to train people within the five year limit and would homelessness an

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.5.1 Restructuring

In 1998 the Cabinet for Families and Children began a major restructuring. Two Departments, the Department for Social Insurance and the Department for Social Services were combined to form the Department for Community –Based Services. The separate regions of these two Departments were combined into common regions. According to Cabinet Secretary

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.5 Other initiatives

Near the end of the study period, the Department underwent a reorganization and welfare reform activities were implemented.

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.4.3 Workers' major concerns about the study

Throughout the course of data collection, meetings were held with supervisory and casework staff at the public agency and at the family preservation program. Initially group meetings were held to explain study procedures and identify staff concerns. Subsequent meetings were held to try to allay workers' worries and keep communication open. The stu

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.4.2 Lexington procedures

Based on Family Preservation yearly reports from Seven Counties, the number of referrals received from DCBS increased from 1996 – 1998. The number of referrals was 185 in 1996, 244 in FY 1997, and 294 in FY 1998. There was also a slight increase in the number of referrals accepted, 109 in FY 1996 as compared to 135 in FY 1998. For FY 1997 the re

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.4.1 Louisville study procedures

Preparation and training for the experiment were conducted in the winter and early spring of 1996. Training sessions were held with both DCBS screeners and FPP program coordinators. During the one-day training sessions study procedures were reviewed including use of study forms, the screening protocol, random assignment procedures, and the role of

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.4 Implementation of the Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification

Having a well-established statewide program, Kentucky was one of the original sites considered for study participation. This site was selected as it met all study selection criteria-a well-defined, mature program using a "relatively" pure version of the Homebuilders model that had more families to serve than slots available.

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.3.2 Family Preservation Services in Jefferson County

Jefferson County (Louisville) is the largest district of the Department. Jefferson County did not become part of the Department until 1989. Prior to that time the Department contracted with Jefferson County to provide child protective services. In Jefferson County reports of child abuse and neglect are made to a state hot line. These reports are t

Evaluation of Family Preservation and Reunification Programs: Interim Report. 3.3.1 Description of State Family Preservation Program Model

According to Kentucky policy, "Family Preservation and Program Responsibilities," 3 the Family Preservation Program (FPP) is a short-term, intensive, crisis-intervention resource intended to prevent the unnecessary placement of children at imminent risk of placement.

Content by Keyword: Child Abuse, Neglect, and Family Preservation