Friday, November 30, 2007

Research Study Demonstrates Effectiveness of IFPS

NFPN News Notes - November 2007

Research Study Demonstrates Effectiveness of IFPS
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

No comments: