Theoretical adherence to family centered practice: Are strengths-based principles illustrated in families' descriptions of child welfare services?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.12.012Get rights and content

Abstract

Family Centered Practice (FCP) represents a set of theoretical principles developed to guide child welfare services. Although extensive research exists regarding outcomes of such services, few studies have examined theoretical adherence or the degree to which services are implemented according to practice principles. The aim of this study was to examine theoretical adherence to FCP by analyzing families' perceptions of services. Specifically, qualitative secondary data analysis was conducted examining in-depth interviews with 44 service recipients to determine whether the principles of FCP were illustrated in families' descriptions of child welfare services. Findings suggest families' perceptions of services were inconsistently illustrative of FCP. These findings imply more attention may be needed to assess and improve implementation of child welfare services. Training and supervision may be needed to increase the adherence to theoretical principles. Finally, more research is needed that examines integrity and specifically, theoretical adherence to strengths-based practice principles.

Research Highlights

► Descriptions of services were analyzed for adherence to Family Centered Practice principles. ► Families' descriptions of services inconsistently demonstrated FCP. ► Findings indicated more attention is needed regarding theoretical adherence to FCP principles.

Introduction

Since its introduction (Weick et al., 1989, Saleebey, 1992), the strengths perspective has refocused social work's preoccupation with deficits and problems to one balanced by an emphasis on client strengths and a belief in the capacity for growth (Blundo, 2001, Saleebey, 2000, Saleebey, 2004). Operating from a strengths perspective represents a shift in social work as practitioners are expected to assess past successes, look for exceptions to problems and locate resources within clients and their communities (De Jong and Berg, 2008, Graybeal, 2001). Strengths-based practice is relational. It occurs in the context of partnerships formed between clients and social workers (Bertolino, 2010, Brun and Rapp, 2001, Early and GlenMaye, 2000). It also looks to natural occurring connections within social networks in families and communities for the support needed to help clients accomplish their goals (Kisthardt, 2009, Saleebey, 2004).

Strengths-based practice is hopeful about the possibilities that dwell within clients and their communities (Saleebey, 2000, Saleebey, 2004). It acknowledges the promise of resilience and the ability to rebound from adversity strengthened (Benard, 2006, Lietz, 2007, Thomas et al., 2005, Walsh, 2002). This practice perspective seeks to empower individuals, families and communities to identify their own goals and move forward in ways that honor cultural preferences (Green et al., 2005, Saleebey, 2000). Essentially, strengths-based practice is hopeful, empowering, relational and responsive.

Applications of strengths-based principles can be seen in family practice settings (Dunst and Trivette, 2009, Early and GlenMaye, 2000, Walsh, 2002) and in the development of some specific clinical models such as the Solution-Focused approach (De Jong & Berg, 2008). Principles of the strengths perspective are apparent in new approaches addressing chemical dependency (Moxley and Washington, 2001, van Wormer and Davis, 2003), and in case management within mental health (Rapp & Gosha, 2006). Similarly, Family Centered Practice (FCP) represents a strengths-based approach to practice within child welfare (Allen and Petr, 1996, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children's Bureau. (2007)).

There is little question that the strengths perspective has impacted the way social workers think about practice. However, what is unclear is whether this perspective has actually changed or impacted practice. Rapp, Saleebey, and Sullivan (2005) assert “since the strengths model gained currency, many people are claiming they are ‘doing strengths’” (p. 81). However, there remains a concern that practice claiming to be “strengths-based” often represents a cursory implementation of the idea of strength building rather than demonstrating a true understanding of and adherence to the core hallmarks to this approach (Rapp et al., 2005).

The purpose of this article is to describe a research project that examined whether social work practice demonstrates the guidelines established through the strengths perspective in one particular practice setting. Specifically, the project examined whether the principles of Family Centered Practice (FCP), a strengths-based approach to child welfare, were evident in families' descriptions of the in-home services they received.

Section snippets

Background

A mixed methods study was completed in 2008 to examine the impact of Intensive Family Preservation Services (IFPS) from the perspective of service recipients (Lietz, 2009). Years of research exploring family preservation have produced inconsistent findings with some studies demonstrating effectiveness while others fail to indicate positive outcomes (Bagdasaryan, 2005, Cash and Berry, 2003, Fraser et al., 1997, Littell and Schuerman, 2002, Nelson et al., 2009). Similar to previous research

Findings

This research sought to examine whether the principles of FCP were illustrated in the in-depth qualitative descriptions of services provided by parents who participated in IFPS. Essentially, the findings were inconsistent. In some cases, parent perceptions of services were suggestive of FCP. In other cases, contrasting perceptions were evident. Specifically, 14 cases contained meaning units suggesting these families perceived the principles of FCP were illustrated in their intensive in-home

Discussion

These findings suggest that for this sample, families' descriptions of intensive in-home services offered mixed illustrations of the principles of FCP. Many families described services as respectful, empowering, responsive and relational. In these cases, parents expressed their gratitude for the services and specifically to the service providers who were instrumental to their ability to regain stability within their families. It was not uncommon for these families to name their workers, wanting

Implications

Despite these limitations, these preliminary findings offer important implications for social work practice. Understanding that the perceptions of parents were inconsistent with FCP principles may suggest that state agencies consider being more deliberate in their communication with contract providers of IFPS regarding practice principles. Once expectations regarding practice principles are clear, efforts should be made to evaluate both procedural and theoretical adherence to these principles.

Conclusion

This study involved a secondary data analysis of in-depth qualitative interviews conducted with parents to discuss their impressions of IFPS. The research sought to examine the theoretical adherence to FCP principles, a strengths-based approach to child welfare practice. Findings suggest that while some families did perceive an illustration of these important practice principles, almost half the families' descriptions of services were not indicative of theoretical adherence. Despite

Acknowledgement

This project was supported by Arizona's Division of Children, Youth and Families.

References (43)

  • C. Black

    Translating principles into practice: Implementing the feminist and strengths perspective in work with battered women

    Affilia

    (2003)
  • R. Blundo

    Learning strengths-based practice: Challenging our personal and professional frames

    Families in Society

    (2001)
  • C. Brun et al.

    Strengths-based case management: Individuals' perspectives on strengths and the case manager relationship

    Social Work

    (2001)
  • E.J. Bruns et al.

    Adherence to wraparound principles and association with outcomes

    Journal of Child and Family Studies

    (2005)
  • S. Cash et al.

    The impact of family preservation services on child and family well-being

    Journal of Social Service Research

    (2003)
  • H. Coleman et al.

    The voices of parents: A qualitative study of a family preservation program

    Child & Youth Care Forum

    (1997)
  • H. Coleman et al.

    Analyzing qualitative data

  • P. De Jong et al.

    Interviewing for solutions

    (2008)
  • C. Dunst et al.

    Capacity-building family-systems intervention practices

    Journal of Family Social Work

    (2009)
  • T. Early et al.

    Valuing families: Social work practice with families from a strengths perspective

    Social Work

    (2000)
  • M.W. Fraser et al.

    Effectiveness of family preservation services

    Social Work Research

    (1997)
  • Cited by (55)

    • How early interventionists support families experiencing vulnerable circumstances: A closer look at family-centered practice

      2023, Children and Youth Services Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      FCPs may also be beneficial to the community, given the potential cost savings to the state (Hajizadeh et al., 2017). Despite the consensus of the importance of family-centered early intervention for all families (Bruder & Dunst, 2005), EI services have been described in ways that were theoretically incongruent with the tenets of family centeredness (Fleming et al., 2011; Lietz, 2011) and limited research exists about the FCPs used in Part C EI. The purpose of this study was to explore the FCPs reported by EI providers when working with families experiencing vulnerability in one northeastern state.

    • Racial disparities in the proportion of needed services maltreated children received

      2018, Children and Youth Services Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      One study showed above 30% of parents to have experienced this (D'Andrade & Chambers, 2012). Such a finding supports the argument that many parents working with the child welfare system lack a collaborative working relationship with a caseworker (Lietz, 2011; Staudt, Scheuler-Whitaker, & Hinterlong, 2001). Collaborative parent–caseworker relationships are built on positive, responsive interactions with families in the effort to address identified needs (Jolles & Wells, 2017; Lietz, 2011).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text