Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
K. Broadhurst, Bachar Alrouh, Emily Yeend, J. Harwin, M. Shaw, M. Pilling, C. Mason, S. Kershaw (2015)
Connecting Events in Time to Identify a Hidden Population: Birth Mothers and Their Children in Recurrent Care Proceedings in EnglandBritish Journal of Social Work, 45
K. Budd, Erika Felix, Samuel Sweet, A. Saul, Russell Carleton (2006)
Evaluating Parents in Child Protection Decisions: An Innovative Court-Based Clinic ModelProfessional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37
(2018)
Statistics: children in need and child protection
C. Zeanah, N. Boris, S. Heller, Sarah Hinshaw-Fuselier, J. Larrieu, Marva Lewis, Rhonda Palomino, Michael Rovaris, Jean Valliere (1997)
Relationship assessment in infant mental healthTradition, 18
R.H.S.A. McFarlane (2018)
Keynote address ‘crisis: what crisis?Paper presented at Association of Lawyers for Children Conference
(2017)
Child abuse and neglect, NICE guideline [NG76]
C. Zeanah, J. Larrieu, S. Heller, Jean Valliere, Sarah Hinshaw-Fuselier, Yutaka Aoki, Michelle Drilling (2001)
Evaluation of a preventive intervention for maltreated infants and toddlers in foster care.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40 2
(2015)
Therapeutic interventions with birth parents and foster carers of maltreated children: a systematic review
S. Clayton, C. Bambra, R. Gosling, S. Povall, K. Misso, M. Whitehead (2011)
Assembling the evidence jigsaw: insights from a systematic review of UK studies of individual-focused return to work initiatives for disabled and long-term ill peopleBMC Public Health, 11
G. Moore, S. Audrey, M. Barker, L. Bond, C. Bonell, W. Hardeman, L. Moore, A. O’Cathain, T. Tinati, D. Wight, J. Baird (2015)
Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidanceThe BMJ, 350
(2018)
GIFT unwrapped: the New Orleans intervention in Glasgow: summary report, NSPCC Scotland
J. Masson (2016)
Reforming Care Proceedings in England and Wales: Speeding Up Justice and Welfare?
J. Masson, J. Dickens, K. Bader, L. Garside, Julie Young (2017)
Achieving positive change for children? Reducing the length of child protection proceedings: lessons from England and WalesAdoption & Fostering, 41
I. Berg, Margaret Consterdine, R. Hullin, R. McGuire, S. Tyrer (1978)
THE EFFECT OF TWO RANDOMLY ALLOCATED COURT PROCEDURES ON TRUANCYBritish Journal of Criminology, 18
The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss both the early implementation of a US mental health intervention for young children in the context of its introduction to a pilot site in a London borough and the progress made in establishing a randomised controlled trial (RCT).Design/methodology/approachThis paper describes an evaluation of a new intervention and the learning that followed in terms of its implementation and future evaluation. Qualitative data were collected from a range of stakeholders and practitioners through interviews and small group discussions. These interviews focussed on both of these issues, with particular reference to the proposal to conduct an RCT.FindingsThe findings of this evaluation add to the evidence on how best to support new initiatives that have been introduced from other settings and countries to embed in a receiving site and the optimal timing and feasibility of conducting an RCT. At the end of the feasibility study, which took place within the year of the service being introduced and which was only open to clients for six months of this year the conclusion was that an RCT at that point was neither possible nor desirable. Over the following years, the commitment of the judiciary to examine if there was a way to make an RCT study in respect of this intervention meant that a template was established that may well have broader application.Research limitations/implicationsAt a time when there is an increasing demand for evidence on effective interventions this paper makes a valuable contribution to the development of RCTs in general and specifically in the family court arena. It also recommends that attention must also be paid to the time, which is needed to implement and establish interventions and then to test them.Practical implicationsThis paper highlights the need to establish realistic timescales not only around the implementation of initiatives but also for their evaluation.Originality/valueThis study breaks new ground in considering implementation challenges in the court and children’s services’ context. It brings to the fore the important role of the judiciary in approving new processes.
Journal of Children s Services – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 15, 2020
Keywords: Evaluation; Randomized controlled trial
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.