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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

Family preservation programs began in Kentucky in 1985 with pilot projects funded by the Edna McConnell Clark foundation. These pilot studies, initiated through local efforts, were the impetus for three 1989 state grants to pilot family preservation programs in Louisville, Lexington, and western Kentucky. The pilot projects were replications of th

This section provides demographic statistics on Kentucky's children and families. Child welfare statistics are presented for Jefferson County (Louisville), which was the focus of the family preservation study in Kentucky. There are approximately 1,000,000 children under age 18 in Kentucky, with the majority being white (89 percent), and nearly t

In Kentucky the Family Preservation Program (FPP) is a resource within the state's Department of Community Based Services (DCBS), a division of the Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children. 1   The 120 Kentucky counties are grouped into 16 regions for purposes of FPP administration. There is a family services specialist in Frankfort who has re

It was through the site coordinator activities that many aspects of the study integrity were controlled. This was accomplished in a variety of ways. The site coordinators served as the points of contact between the home office and agency liaisons. They monitored performance by the participating agencies, alerted the home office to problems, and be

We attempted to gather administrative data on foster care placements and reports of maltreatment both before and after assignment into the study on all of the net study cases. This administrative data also contained other information such as case opening dates, types of maltreatment, and some demographic data. In Kentucky, of the 358 randomly assi

Table 2-7  shows lengths of time between random assignment and each interview--initial, post-treatment, and follow-up--as well as the length of time between the initial and post-treatment interviews.

Data collection began with a baseline interview as soon as possible after families were randomly assigned to either group. At that time, we attempted to interview the investigating worker handling the case (if the case originated from an investigator), the caretaker, and the caseworker assigned to the case. The caseworker was also asked to report

Random assignment.  Individual referral and random assignment procedures were developed for each site. These procedures built upon existing agency referral procedures to family preservation. In both Kentucky and New Jersey, the screener made random assignment referrals. Random assignment began in May 1996 in Kentucky and in November 1996 in New

Negotiations began during the initial site visits. Discussions with staff focused on obtaining information on the state program and system while providing information to the state about the study. Site visitors needed to determine, as quickly as possible, if states were not interested in participating. Also, we had to establish site flexibility in