The vast majority of child maltreatment in the United States is perpetrated by parents and over half of maltreated children placed in out-of-home care are reunified with the parents from which they were removed. Additional victimization of these children sometimes necessitates their reentry into out-of-home care. These realities emphasize the need to engage parents in assessment, planning, and services throughout the life of a child welfare case. Engagement is a key ingredient in social work practice and is widely accepted in the child protection arena as critical to successful service planning and participation. However, little research has focused on the relationship between engaging parents and child welfare case outcomes. Utilizing data systematically collected by the Florida Department of Children and Families as part of its quality assurance program, this study examined the relationship between case worker efforts to engage parents in case planning, decisions impacting the child, and services; and the length of a child's stay in out-of-home care related to being discharged within 12 months of entering out-of-home care, and a child's reentry into out-of-home care within 12 months of being reunified with his or her parents. Cox regression analyses revealed that Hispanic children were less likely to be discharged from out-of-home care within 12 months of entry and younger children were more likely to reenter out-of-home care within 12 months of being reunified with their parents. Multivariate models revealed that case worker efforts to engage fathers in case planning and decisions impacting the child were significant predictors of children being discharged from out-of-home care within 12 months of entry, though this did not hold true for efforts to engage mothers. No case worker efforts to engage parents were significant predictors of children reentering out-of-home care within 12 months of being reunified with their parents. Although this study took an important step in more fully understanding how engaging parents may influence case outcomes, the findings suggest considerations for social work practice and research. Additional training to enhance cultural awareness and cultural competency skills could aid case workers in tailoring their engagement efforts to the race/ethnicity of children and families with whom they work. Further research into the lack of association between engaging mothers and length of stay, and between engaging parents and reentry into out-of-home care is also warranted. Quantitatively measuring engagement from the parents' perspective should also advance the line of inquiry into the relationship between engagement and child welfare case outcomes.

This dissertation examines the mental health presentations of clinic-referred children in state ordered out-of-home care and compares these to the presentations of clinic-referred children from the general population. The results of this study will inform the design of a more comprehensive research project assessing the differences between the psychopathology of clinic-referred children in out-of-home care and children from the general population. The overall goal is for researchers and clinicians to be able to better understand the underlying determinisms of the psychopathology of children in out-of-home care. Three samples were used for the between-group comparisons. The Children in Care Study (CICS) sample consists of 213 clinic-referred children in out-of-home care between the ages of four and eleven years. Firstly, this group was compared to 800 clinic-referred children, between six and eleven years, from the general population. For this analysis, the CICS sample was adjusted to match this group’s age range. Secondly, the entire CICS sample was compared to 1201 clinic-referred children, between the ages of four and eleven, from the general population. Mental health presentations were measured using the Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL). A within-subject comparison was conducted comparing the CICS sample’s CBCL DSM-oriented scores to the children’s caregiver-reported diagnosis. Results indicated that clinic-referred children in care presented with significantly fewer internalising symptoms than clinic-referred children from the general population. Clinic-referred children in care displayed greater correlations among their CBCL subscale scores than other clinic-referred children, which may suggest greater symptom complexity. Additionally, there appeared to be poor concordance between caregiver-reported psychiatric diagnoses and CBCL DSM-oriented scores for clinic-referred children in out-of-home care. Overall, the mental health presentations measured by the CBCL indicated that the differences between the two populations were relatively small in terms of their severity. However, clinic-referred children in care presented with less severe internalising problems than other clinic-referred children. Further research is needed to explore the issues underlying diagnostic dis-concordance and the complexity of the mental health presentations of children in state ordered care.

Over the last decade out-of-home care in Australia has experienced a period of considerable turmoil as royal commissions, parliamentary inquiries, departmental audits, empirical research and industry reports have highlighted the dire straits of the care system. A constant theme throughout has been the failure of the sector to adequately meet the needs of children and young people in care. Within this context the purpose of this study was to examine the needs of children and young people in care in Australia, giving voice to the full range of stakeholders, whose views were expressed in multiple documentary types. Specifically, the aim was to develop an in-depth understanding of their needs and formulate this into a formal taxonomy of needs. Using document analysis and the constant comparative method within the constructivist paradigm of social inquiry, the study involved analysis of 580 non-traditional, naturalistic and secondary documents relating to out-of-home care in Australia. The document sample consisted of five data types: primary data (letters, submissions to inquiries, transcripts of interviews and public hearings, and personal accounts); secondary data (reports resulting from commissions of inquiries and departmental reviews, audits and investigations); empirical data (the published findings from empirical research); legislative and policy data (legislation, regulation and quality frameworks); and industry and practitioner data (reports by academics, peak bodies and advocacy groups, and writings by out-of-home care practitioners). Further, the document sample included stakeholders from five major groups: children and young people in care (and former wards ); their parents and extended family; carers, agency staff and practitioners; statutory workers; and academics, advocates, and representatives of state and national peak bodies. The findings include a series of prominent themes of care; salient findings that highlight the experiences and needs of children and young people in care; and the taxonomy of needs. The prominent themes include the importance of natural family connectedness, cultural identity and connectedness, and counselling and therapeutic support. Issues relating to placement stability and disruption, safety and protection and, transition from care also featured prominently. The salient findings include an exploration of the overwhelming emotions of care, emotional putdowns, vicarious trauma and the witnessing of violence and abuse in out-of-home care, characteristics of children and young people who survive and thrive in care and beyond, characteristics of quality carers, symptom intolerance, disenfranchised grief – the never-ending story, and the defensive behaviours of children and young people in care. The taxonomy of needs provides a comprehensive overview of the needs of children and young people in care across 89 attributes and 21 attribute sub-categories, within 21 dimensions, and across three domains (the personal, placement, and community-of-care domains). The dimensions in the personal domain include attachment, physical development and health, personal growth, education and vocational attainment, development of the inner-self, and hope in life and for the future. The placement domain includes basic needs, basic entitlements, caring relationships, positive-parenting-practices, activity programming, focused-support, peer-relations and positive group management, and preparation for and transition from care. The community-of-care domain includes clinical intervention, family connectedness and involvement in placement, friends and social outlets, significant others, cultural-religious-spiritual connectedness, departmental worker capacity and support, and after care support. The principal theoretical, practice, and methodological conclusions derived from this study are that children and young people in care in Australia have considerable needs, are largely unable to meet their own needs, and experience harm when their needs are not met. Consequently, the out-of-home care sector has an inescapable obligation to provide for these needs if children and young people in care are to avoid harm and experience personal wellbeing. Further, children and young people in care have experienced considerable need deprivation, and if their needs are not to be forgotten, then a shift to a ‘needs-based’, ‘needs-focused’ paradigm of care is needed to inform out-of-home care policy, service design, and day-to-day practice. And finally, document analysis using non-traditional, naturalistic, and secondary data (representing the full range of stakeholder perspectives) within a constructivist paradigm of inquiry, provides an effective, indeed powerful methodology for exploring the needs of children and young people in care, and for giving voice to the many stakeholders who voices may never have been heard again.

Over the last decade out-of-home care in Australia has experienced a period of considerable turmoil as royal commissions, parliamentary inquiries, departmental audits, empirical research and industry reports have highlighted the dire straits of the care system. A constant theme throughout has been the failure of the sector to adequately meet the needs of children and young people in care. Within this context the purpose of this study was to examine the needs of children and young people in care in Australia, giving voice to the full range of stakeholders, whose views were expressed in multiple documentary types. Specifically, the aim was to develop an in-depth understanding of their needs and formulate this into a formal taxonomy of needs. Using document analysis and the constant comparative method within the constructivist paradigm of social inquiry, the study involved analysis of 580 non-traditional, naturalistic and secondary documents relating to out-of-home care in Australia. The document sample consisted of five data types: primary data (letters, submissions to inquiries, transcripts of interviews and public hearings, and personal accounts); secondary data (reports resulting from commissions of inquiries and departmental reviews, audits and investigations); empirical data (the published findings from empirical research); legislative and policy data (legislation, regulation and quality frameworks); and industry and practitioner data (reports by academics, peak bodies and advocacy groups, and writings by out-of-home care practitioners). Further, the document sample included stakeholders from five major groups: children and young people in care (and former wards ); their parents and extended family; carers, agency staff and practitioners; statutory workers; and academics, advocates, and representatives of state and national peak bodies. The findings include a series of prominent themes of care; salient findings that highlight the experiences and needs of children and young people in care; and the taxonomy of needs. The prominent themes include the importance of natural family connectedness, cultural identity and connectedness, and counselling and therapeutic support. Issues relating to placement stability and disruption, safety and protection and, transition from care also featured prominently. The salient findings include an exploration of the overwhelming emotions of care, emotional putdowns, vicarious trauma and the witnessing of violence and abuse in out-of-home care, characteristics of children and young people who survive and thrive in care and beyond, characteristics of quality carers, symptom intolerance, disenfranchised grief – the never-ending story, and the defensive behaviours of children and young people in care. The taxonomy of needs provides a comprehensive overview of the needs of children and young people in care across 89 attributes and 21 attribute sub-categories, within 21 dimensions, and across three domains (the personal, placement, and community-of-care domains). The dimensions in the personal domain include attachment, physical development and health, personal growth, education and vocational attainment, development of the inner-self, and hope in life and for the future. The placement domain includes basic needs, basic entitlements, caring relationships, positive-parenting-practices, activity programming, focused-support, peer-relations and positive group management, and preparation for and transition from care. The community-of-care domain includes clinical intervention, family connectedness and involvement in placement, friends and social outlets, significant others, cultural-religious-spiritual connectedness, departmental worker capacity and support, and after care support. The principal theoretical, practice, and methodological conclusions derived from this study are that children and young people in care in Australia have considerable needs, are largely unable to meet their own needs, and experience harm when their needs are not met. Consequently, the out-of-home care sector has an inescapable obligation to provide for these needs if children and young people in care are to avoid harm and experience personal wellbeing. Further, children and young people in care have experienced considerable need deprivation, and if their needs are not to be forgotten, then a shift to a ‘needs-based’, ‘needs-focused’ paradigm of care is needed to inform out-of-home care policy, service design, and day-to-day practice. And finally, document analysis using non-traditional, naturalistic, and secondary data (representing the full range of stakeholder perspectives) within a constructivist paradigm of inquiry, provides an effective, indeed powerful methodology for exploring the needs of children and young people in care, and for giving voice to the many stakeholders who voices may never have been heard again.

Over the last decade out-of-home care in Australia has experienced a period of considerable turmoil as royal commissions, parliamentary inquiries, departmental audits, empirical research and industry reports have highlighted the dire straits of the care system. A constant theme throughout has been the failure of the sector to adequately meet the needs of children and young people in care. Within this context the purpose of this study was to examine the needs of children and young people in care in Australia, giving voice to the full range of stakeholders, whose views were expressed in multiple documentary types. Specifically, the aim was to develop an in-depth understanding of their needs and formulate this into a formal taxonomy of needs. Using document analysis and the constant comparative method within the constructivist paradigm of social inquiry, the study involved analysis of 580 non-traditional, naturalistic and secondary documents relating to out-of-home care in Australia. The document sample consisted of five data types: primary data (letters, submissions to inquiries, transcripts of interviews and public hearings, and personal accounts); secondary data (reports resulting from commissions of inquiries and departmental reviews, audits and investigations); empirical data (the published findings from empirical research); legislative and policy data (legislation, regulation and quality frameworks); and industry and practitioner data (reports by academics, peak bodies and advocacy groups, and writings by out-of-home care practitioners). Further, the document sample included stakeholders from five major groups: children and young people in care (and former wards ); their parents and extended family; carers, agency staff and practitioners; statutory workers; and academics, advocates, and representatives of state and national peak bodies. The findings include a series of prominent themes of care; salient findings that highlight the experiences and needs of children and young people in care; and the taxonomy of needs. The prominent themes include the importance of natural family connectedness, cultural identity and connectedness, and counselling and therapeutic support. Issues relating to placement stability and disruption, safety and protection and, transition from care also featured prominently. The salient findings include an exploration of the overwhelming emotions of care, emotional putdowns, vicarious trauma and the witnessing of violence and abuse in out-of-home care, characteristics of children and young people who survive and thrive in care and beyond, characteristics of quality carers, symptom intolerance, disenfranchised grief – the never-ending story, and the defensive behaviours of children and young people in care. The taxonomy of needs provides a comprehensive overview of the needs of children and young people in care across 89 attributes and 21 attribute sub-categories, within 21 dimensions, and across three domains (the personal, placement, and community-of-care domains). The dimensions in the personal domain include attachment, physical development and health, personal growth, education and vocational attainment, development of the inner-self, and hope in life and for the future. The placement domain includes basic needs, basic entitlements, caring relationships, positive-parenting-practices, activity programming, focused-support, peer-relations and positive group management, and preparation for and transition from care. The community-of-care domain includes clinical intervention, family connectedness and involvement in placement, friends and social outlets, significant others, cultural-religious-spiritual connectedness, departmental worker capacity and support, and after care support. The principal theoretical, practice, and methodological conclusions derived from this study are that children and young people in care in Australia have considerable needs, are largely unable to meet their own needs, and experience harm when their needs are not met. Consequently, the out-of-home care sector has an inescapable obligation to provide for these needs if children and young people in care are to avoid harm and experience personal wellbeing. Further, children and young people in care have experienced considerable need deprivation, and if their needs are not to be forgotten, then a shift to a ‘needs-based’, ‘needs-focused’ paradigm of care is needed to inform out-of-home care policy, service design, and day-to-day practice. And finally, document analysis using non-traditional, naturalistic, and secondary data (representing the full range of stakeholder perspectives) within a constructivist paradigm of inquiry, provides an effective, indeed powerful methodology for exploring the needs of children and young people in care, and for giving voice to the many stakeholders who voices may never have been heard again.

Over the last decade out-of-home care in Australia has experienced a period of considerable turmoil as royal commissions, parliamentary inquiries, departmental audits, empirical research and industry reports have highlighted the dire straits of the care system. A constant theme throughout has been the failure of the sector to adequately meet the needs of children and young people in care. Within this context the purpose of this study was to examine the needs of children and young people in care in Australia, giving voice to the full range of stakeholders, whose views were expressed in multiple documentary types. Specifically, the aim was to develop an in-depth understanding of their needs and formulate this into a formal taxonomy of needs. Using document analysis and the constant comparative method within the constructivist paradigm of social inquiry, the study involved analysis of 580 non-traditional, naturalistic and secondary documents relating to out-of-home care in Australia. The document sample consisted of five data types: primary data (letters, submissions to inquiries, transcripts of interviews and public hearings, and personal accounts); secondary data (reports resulting from commissions of inquiries and departmental reviews, audits and investigations); empirical data (the published findings from empirical research); legislative and policy data (legislation, regulation and quality frameworks); and industry and practitioner data (reports by academics, peak bodies and advocacy groups, and writings by out-of-home care practitioners). Further, the document sample included stakeholders from five major groups: children and young people in care (and former wards ); their parents and extended family; carers, agency staff and practitioners; statutory workers; and academics, advocates, and representatives of state and national peak bodies. The findings include a series of prominent themes of care; salient findings that highlight the experiences and needs of children and young people in care; and the taxonomy of needs. The prominent themes include the importance of natural family connectedness, cultural identity and connectedness, and counselling and therapeutic support. Issues relating to placement stability and disruption, safety and protection and, transition from care also featured prominently. The salient findings include an exploration of the overwhelming emotions of care, emotional putdowns, vicarious trauma and the witnessing of violence and abuse in out-of-home care, characteristics of children and young people who survive and thrive in care and beyond, characteristics of quality carers, symptom intolerance, disenfranchised grief – the never-ending story, and the defensive behaviours of children and young people in care. The taxonomy of needs provides a comprehensive overview of the needs of children and young people in care across 89 attributes and 21 attribute sub-categories, within 21 dimensions, and across three domains (the personal, placement, and community-of-care domains). The dimensions in the personal domain include attachment, physical development and health, personal growth, education and vocational attainment, development of the inner-self, and hope in life and for the future. The placement domain includes basic needs, basic entitlements, caring relationships, positive-parenting-practices, activity programming, focused-support, peer-relations and positive group management, and preparation for and transition from care. The community-of-care domain includes clinical intervention, family connectedness and involvement in placement, friends and social outlets, significant others, cultural-religious-spiritual connectedness, departmental worker capacity and support, and after care support. The principal theoretical, practice, and methodological conclusions derived from this study are that children and young people in care in Australia have considerable needs, are largely unable to meet their own needs, and experience harm when their needs are not met. Consequently, the out-of-home care sector has an inescapable obligation to provide for these needs if children and young people in care are to avoid harm and experience personal wellbeing. Further, children and young people in care have experienced considerable need deprivation, and if their needs are not to be forgotten, then a shift to a ‘needs-based’, ‘needs-focused’ paradigm of care is needed to inform out-of-home care policy, service design, and day-to-day practice. And finally, document analysis using non-traditional, naturalistic, and secondary data (representing the full range of stakeholder perspectives) within a constructivist paradigm of inquiry, provides an effective, indeed powerful methodology for exploring the needs of children and young people in care, and for giving voice to the many stakeholders who voices may never have been heard again.

Master of Social Work / This research is about evidence based practice, which is an area of increasing interest and emphasis in social work today. Initially apparent in medical and health care settings, evidence based practice now has widened applicability to a broad range of contexts and professional disciplines. The ways in which research evidence is translated into policy and practice is itself a topic area for social work research. The study investigates evidence based practice in child welfare, specifically the out-of-home care system. Out-of-home care provides alternative placements for children and young people who cannot live with their families because of abuse and neglect, and generally consists of placement with foster carers or in a residential/group care setting. This research is an exploratory study which investigates through individual interview how nineteen out-of-home care Senior Managers and Team Leaders in the states of New South Wales, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory interpret and understand evidence based practice, and the degree and depth of knowledge they transfer from research awareness into out-of-home care practice and policy development. The research has three main objectives. Firstly to investigate the understanding of out-of-home care managers of evidence based practice, secondly to determine the influence of relevant research on practice and policy in out-ofhome care, and thirdly to explore potential barriers to evidence based practice. Looking After Children, a social work case management system for children and young people in out-of-home care, provides the context for this research, in which evidence based practice is critically examined. A thematic analysis of the interview data identified five major themes. These included: the benefit of broadening definitions of evidence based practice to include a wide range of influences on practice; the value and importance of 2 considering a broad range of research approaches in connecting research with policy and practice AND the potential for influencing outcomes of social work intervention via research based and influenced guided practice systems and techniques; factors which constitute barriers and also those that enhance the implementation of evidence based practice; the potential for instigating and supporting new research via the use of evidence based practice for purposes such as data aggregation, in addition to practice development and enhancement of client outcomes. Implications and conclusions are drawn from this study in relation to out-ofhome care policy and practice, with particular reference to use of the Looking After Children case management system in the Australian context. These include the potential of a consistent system such as LAC to provide common language and assessment tools and procedures in a welfare sector that is fragmented by lack of national legislation, and the potential for development of national out-of-home care research projects as a result of cross agency LAC implementation resulting in data aggregation opportunities.

The social work profession, which traditionally relied on face-to-face interactions with clients, has been increasingly using digital communication. Though research has directed its attention to this phenomenon in a post Covid-19 era, very little data is available from professionals’ perspectives, particularly those working with children and families. Thus, this study aimed to explore how social workers from the Swedish Child Welfare Services have adapted to the new era of digital communication with children and youth placed in out-of-home care. We interviewed four social workers working in three different municipalities. A thematic analysis was used to interpret the results through the lens of Goffman’s interaction order theory. The findings show that digital communication has become part of the social workers’ daily routine. However, its application has both opportunities and challenges, and the participants’ responses indicate that a hybrid and reflective practice tailored to the children’s individual needs would be beneficial.

The Swedish child welfare system is, in an international comparison, distinguished bya family service orientation. Which means that there's a focus on understanding childrenand families in their community context (Lundström, Shanks, Pålsson & Sallnäs 2021).When a child is in a situation where their health or development is at risk or is harmed,social services have a responsibility to remove the child from that situation. In somecases, the child is then placed at an out of home care facility which is called HVB,where care or treatment is conducted (Kunskapsguiden 2022).In the beginning of the 21st century Sweden has had a rise of private out of home carefacilities (Sallnäs 2005). Which made us interested as to how different factors affect theway that decisions are being made when it comes to placement at HVB and furthermorehow these factors might lead to different dilemmas. Therefore will this paper study whatfactors might exist and how they affect the social workers.The result of the study shows that the child's needs and participation, location of thehome and how the organization is built are all factors that affect the way decisions aremade. The result also shows that there are some dilemmas that might occur. One is thefact that HVB might not actually be a good treatment, another is risks within placementand co-morbidity, another is economics versus the child's best interests and lastlywhether or not the placement should be close to home. Through the study we’ve cometo the conclusion that more research on the field is needed to make sure that Sweden asa society is providing the best possible care for children and adolescents.

O bem-estar subjetivo e eventos de vida estressores foram investigados transversalmente (Estudo I), longitudinalmente (Estudo II) e como grupo de Attrition (Estudo III) com 1080 participantes de ambos os sexos, 7-16 anos, em situação de vulnerabilidade, que viviam com a família ou em instituições de acolhimento. Foram utilizados: entrevista estruturada, Inventário de Eventos Estressores, Escala de Afeto e Escala Multidimensional de Satisfação de Vida. Os resultados mostraram que os participantes das famílias vivenciaram menos eventos estressores, estavam mais satisfeitos com a família e com o self, vivenciaram menos afeto negativo e mais positivo, quando comparados aos institucionalizados. No entanto, o grupo do acolhimento preservou a satisfação com a escola e com as amizades e, ao mesmo tempo, aumentou a satisfação com o self e self comparado ao longo do tempo, possivelmente devido aos cuidados recebidos no acolhimento e ao afastamento das situações adversas na família. Subsídios para intervenções são discutidos. / The subjective well-being and stressful life events were investigated transversally (Study I), longitudinally (Study II), and as a group of Attrition (Study III) in a total sample of 1080 participants of both sexes, 7-16 years in a situation of vulnerability, separated in two groups: living with family or out-of-home care institutions. A structured interview, a Stressful Events Inventory, an Affect Scale and a Multidimensional Scale of Life Satisfaction were used. The results showed that living with family group experienced fewer stressful events, were more satisfied with family and their selves, experienced less negative affect, and had more positive, comparing to the institutionalized. However, that group kept the school and friendship satisfaction, and increased satisfaction with self over time. The institutionalization and removal from adverse situations at home may be an explanation for those results. Support interventions are discussed.