The selection of specific objectives and related outcome indicators is not a neutral technical exercise, but reflects fundamental views about the objectives of child welfare (Fallon and Trocme, 1998)
New Directions
• Follow-on from Mick Brown report• 3 key goals
– to become a joined-up agency that is outcomes-focused, strengths-based and client-centred
– build allicances with communities– take a regional approach to the delivery
of services• 8 projects which have outcomes-related
thinking included within them
The Children Young Persons and their Families Act 1989• To advance the well-being of
families and the well-being of children and young people as members of families, whanau, hapu, iwi and family groups
Key principles
• that families and whanau should participate in decisions regarding their CYP, and that their views should be taken into account
• that the relationship between a CYP and their family/whanau should be maintained and strengthened
• that decisions should take into account the welfare of the CYP and the stability of their family/whanau
CYF overview
• Information to promote public awareness of and prevent child abuse and neglect
• Statutory care and protection and youth justice services to children, young people and their families
• The development and funding of community services
• Adoption services
Activity Overview
• 26,000 notifications of abuse and neglect
• 22,000 investigations• provide (post-Court and post-FGC)
social work services to more than 6,000 C&P and 1,200 YJ clients
• work with more than 900 community service providers
International research
• Research literature from 1970s, drawing on a range of disciplines
• Associated with change in social work practice
Complexity
• Long-term vs short-term outcomes• Tensions between:
– supporting families and ensuring child safety
– child protection and emotional well-being
– supporting families and ensuring community safety
– restorative justice vs accountability for offending
“The greatest challenge in developing an outcomes framework in child welfare is finding a framework that integrates and balances the principles of child protection, child well-being and child and family support” (Trocme, MacLaurin and Fallon, 1998)
Outcome domains
• Wellbeing• Safety• Family Functioning• Cultural and Spiritual identity• Permanence and stability• Client satisfaction
International comparisons
• Canada - Federal Client Outcomes in Child Welfare Project– Child safety– Child Functioning– Permanence and continuity of
care– Family and Community support
International comparisons
• Britain - (Farmer, 1997)– Child Protection– Child physical, emotional and
intellectual development– Family functioning
International comparisons
• Kansas State Government– Protection (safety)– Permanency– Child well-being– Client satisfaction
International comparisons
• US - American Humane Association– Safety– Permanence– Improvements in functioning and
well-being
Child, Youth and Family Youth Justice Strategy Goal
Reduce the Rate and Severity of Child and Youth Re-offending
Reduce the Rate and Severity of Child and Youth Re-offending (low risk)
• Child and youth offenders are held accountable for their offending
• Victims are satisfied that a restorative justice process has occurred
• Child and youth offenders do not progress to the more formal part of the youth justice system
• Families/whanau are able to deal with offending by their own children and young people
Success Criteria (low risk)
• Child and youth offenders do not re-offend
• Plans reflects the level of offending, and tasks are completed in a timely manner
• Victims express their satisfaction with the process
• Families/whanau are able to identify how they will manage their children and young people
Performance Measures
• Plans clearly identify sanctions for offending
• No referrals are received by Child, Youth and Family for a youth justice FGC
• Families/whanau are advised of the supports that are available to assist them
• Regular surveys of victims are carried out
Reduce the Rate and Severity of Child and Youth Re-offending (med
risk)
• Child and youth offenders are held accountable for their offending
• Victims are satisfied that a restorative justice process has occurred
• Child and youth offenders do not appear in the Youth Court
• Families/whanau are able to deal with offending by their own children and young people
Success Criteria (med risk)
• The rate and severity of re-offending ceases or is reduced
• Plans reflect the level of offending, and tasks are completed in a timely manner
• Plan content reflects rehabilitation aspects as required
• Victims express their satisfaction with the process• Families/whanau are able to identify how they will
manage their children and young people
Performance Measures (med risk)
• Plans clearly identify sanctions for offending
• Referral for other FGCs are for offences of a less serious nature or repeat offending is less regular
• No referrals for a Court Directed FGC are received by Child, Youth and Family
• Families/whanau are advised of the supports that are available to assist them
• Regular surveys of victims are carried out