Evaluation of Family Help Trust - New Zealand Family Violence ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Andy McGregor• Elizabeth Chesterman• Rae Ewing• Judge Noel WalshThis report was prepared with the help and guidance of Libby Robins(Director, Family Help Trust) and the clinical input of Bill Pringle (ClinicalServices Manager). The database was developed by Ric Hyden. Dr JeremyRobertson (Roy McKenzie Centre for the Study of Families) providedmethodological advice and valuable input. Proof reading was done byKathryn Bates. However, any mistakes, and opinions expressed, in this reportare those of the author.vii
Executive SummaryFamily Help Trust is a long-term home-based early intervention childprotection programme designed for pregnant women and their families whoare considered ultra high-risk for child abuse and family dysfunction. Thisevaluation provides an account of the twelve month outcomes of 55 FamilyHelp Trust families. The design, major outcomes and conclusions of thisevaluation are summarised below.Chapter 1 sets the background for the evaluation of the Family Help Trustprogramme and provides a brief overview of home visiting. Examination ofthe literature shows that many home visiting services are not effective inpreventing child abuse. The key features of successful services include:• A strongly theory-based approach using evidence-based best practice• The use of professionally-trained staff• Support from community and governmental stakeholders• Emerging evidence and opinions of key researchers suggest thatservices should be re-tooled to focus on families most at-risk of childabuse.The present evaluation examines a crucial gap in the current understanding ofhome visitation services by studying the twelve month outcomes of a group ofultra high-risk clients.Chapter 2 describes the evaluation design and the limitations of thismethodology. When using prospective longitudinal research designs withouta control group, the results must be treated with caution as it is not possible tosay that any improvements wouldn’t have occurred without Family Help Trustinput. Nevertheless it is possible, and extremely informative, to examine anychanges in this challenging population.1
Page 1 and 2: "Programs may need to reconsider 'u
Page 3 and 4: ForewordIt gives me pleasure to pro
Page 5 and 6: Table of ContentsForeword..........
Page 7: AcknowledgementsMany people and org
Page 12: The wellbeing of children matters t
Page 20 and 21: (Bilukha et al., 2005). “The Task
Page 22 and 23: suggests that the most effective pa
Page 24 and 25: eflected in fewer subsequent pregna
Page 26 and 27: experiences by saying: “One of th
Page 28 and 29: In summary, despite increased inter
Page 30 and 31: enefits in the areas of maternal he
Page 32 and 33: families that consented have been g
Page 34 and 35: In 1995, Family Help Trust, as part
Page 36 and 37: families have multiple risk factors
Page 38 and 39: iii)Outcome evaluation, discussed b
Page 40 and 41: their resources and exploit any eva
Page 42 and 43: In summary, an evaluation of the ef
Page 44 and 45: two data collection periods. In all
Page 46 and 47: Type I errorWith such a large numbe
Page 48 and 49: Along with the problem of low numbe
Page 50 and 51: iii)‘social desirability’ and
Page 52 and 53: to ensure the results of this evalu
Page 54 and 55: history of offending. An outline of
Page 56 and 57: Examination of Table 3.2 shows that
Page 58 and 59:
Table 3.4 shows that the majority o
Page 60 and 61:
From Table 3.6, it is apparent that
Page 62 and 63:
partners, should this variable be o
Page 64 and 65:
An examination of Table 3.10 indica
Page 66 and 67:
CHAPTER 4OUTCOMES AT TWELVE MONTHSW
Page 68 and 69:
• “do you have a washing machin
Page 70 and 71:
• In the past six months, has you
Page 72 and 73:
aseline had CYFS involvement at twe
Page 74 and 75:
at least to some extent, due to inp
Page 76 and 77:
From Table 4.4 it can be seen that
Page 78 and 79:
From Table 4.6 it can be seen that
Page 80 and 81:
target families may be due to a rep
Page 82 and 83:
4.3 SummaryChapter 4 has provided a
Page 84 and 85:
CHAPTER 5DISCUSSIONThe purpose of t
Page 86 and 87:
services, Table 5.1 shows a compari
Page 88 and 89:
5.4 Comments on Selected Areas of P
Page 90 and 91:
dental services are currently not a
Page 92 and 93:
Case 2Referral from obstetric socia
Page 94 and 95:
Perry (2004) emphasised that a key
Page 96 and 97:
eported cigarette smoking by others
Page 98 and 99:
ecause a) mothers would be busy wit
Page 100 and 101:
ehaviours such as criminality and s
Page 102:
Appendix I Risk Factors for Referra
Page 106 and 107:
Chaffin, M. (2004). Is it time to r
Page 108 and 109:
Evaluation Unit Ministry of Social
Page 110 and 111:
Ministry of Health. (1994). Report
Page 112:
Shirley, I., V., Adair, & Anderson,
show all

Evaluation of Family Help Trust - New Zealand Family Violence ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?