The National Family Preservation Network (NFPN) has completed its
research study on Intensive Family Preservation Services (IFPS) with
very satisfactory findings. The study focused on factors of great
urgency for the child welfare system in terms of identifying effective
services for families. These factors include race (disproportionality),
substance abuse, type of referring problem (abuse vs. neglect),
differences between intact and reunifying families, and follow-up
services.
NFPN recruited seven sites in seven states to submit data on their IFPS
programs. State child welfare agencies or private providers included in
the study were from the states of Colorado, Indiana, Maryland,
Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Washington.
All of the sites have strong IFPS models with well-defined programs.
Six of the seven sites also offer Intensive Family Reunification
Services (IFRS) programs. Maryland provided only IFPS data and the
Missouri site provided only IFRS data. All of the sites use the NCFAS
and the NCFAS-R, where applicable, as family functioning assessment
tools and for data collection. The reliability of both tools was
confirmed in this study.
The findings for IFPS are extremely positive. Data were submitted on a
total of nearly 1,200 families, although not all data items were
available for all families. IFPS services achieved the same success
rate (placement prevention) with families of color, substance abusing
families, and families with referring issue of neglect (as opposed to
abuse) as it did with all other types of families. These findings are
highly significant for the child welfare system as it grapples with the
issues of reducing disproportionality, dealing with a high number of
substance-abusing families, and addressing families involved in chronic
neglect. The findings strongly suggest that IFPS can be used
effectively with these types of families.
The findings were mixed for families receiving reunification services
(IFRS). There was a substantially smaller number of families in this
category (332) and 22% dropped out prior to the close of services
(twice the number of IFPS families that dropped out). Just over
two-thirds of the children were reunited with their families at case
closure. The domains of the NCFAS-R that measure parental/child
ambivalence towards reunification and readiness for reunification had
more negative changes than other scale items and were highly predictive
of success or failure in reunifying families.
In terms of the factors looked at in this study, black families had
lower rates of reunification with mixed race families having higher
rates and white families in between. Substance abusing families showed
substantial progress after receiving IFRS services and had no
difference in placement rates from other families. IFRS services showed
more success with families involved in physical abuse than with those
involved in neglect.
Five of the seven sites provide step-down or follow-up services that
were available to 83% of IFPS families and 71% of IFRS families in the
study. However, very little is known about the type of services offered
and who provides them.
In summary, this multi-state study demonstrates that strong IFPS
programs are effective with a variety of families and presenting
problems. The study definitely provides support for developing,
strengthening, and expanding IFPS programs nationwide.
The study also shows that both IFPS and IFRS programs need to improve
data collection, track families and outcomes over a longer period of
time, and identify and track the services provided. More work is needed
with IFRS in terms of model development. NFPN intends to focus more on
IFRS in the future.
NFPN expresses its gratitude to the seven sites that participated in
the study and to the Annie E. Casey Foundation for funding the project.
To view the entire research report, visit:
http://www.nfpn.org/tools--training/articles/ifps-research-report.html
|
