Family foundations outcome evaluation

Abstract

[Executive Summary] The ACT Community Services Directorate (CSD) commissioned the ACU Institute of Child Protection Studies (ICPS) to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of Family Foundations. CSD, a government agency responsible for various human services functions in the ACT, funds the Belconnen Community Service to deliver Family Foundations. Family Foundations is an early intervention therapeutic program designed to promote strong, secure and healthy relationships between children aged 0-5 years and their parents/carers. ICPS evaluators finalised the process evaluation in February 2018. It assessed the extent to which Family Foundations had been implemented as intended (see Barker, Thorpe and McArthur, 2018). The outcome evaluation assessed the extent to which Family Foundations achieved intended outcomes. It involved a mixed methods approach. This approach involved collecting, analysing and interpreting qualitative and quantitative data to address the key evaluation questions. The available evidence suggested that Family Foundations enhanced parenting capacity and contributed to improved outcomes for children. Changes in parenting capacity were evident in the test scores for quantitative outcome tools and the qualitative accounts of parents, practitioners and stakeholders. Test scores typically showed small, but statistically significant, improvements post-program participation. Parents, practitioners and stakeholders provided rich descriptions of how participating in Family Foundations had developed parenting knowledge and skills and improved parents’ sense of self-confidence in their ability to meet their child’s needs. Most parents noted an improved ability to recognise and manage their emotions when caring for their child. Parents and practitioners reported improvements in the emotional regulation and behavioural outcomes of their children. Parental participation in Family Foundations also appeared to have enhanced the quality of the parent-child attachment. ICPS evaluators identified an unintended consequence for one parent who had participated in the program. This parent exited Family Foundations with lasting feelings of distress. While unfortunate, this experience appeared to be a consequence of the practitioner acting in the interests of the child. Available evidence suggested that program staff adopted process to keep the focus on the child and supported parents to understand the importance of this focus even in the event it may cause the parent discomfort. A significant implication of the evaluation relates to whether Family Foundations reached the ‘right’ parents. Many parents entered Family Foundations with pre-program test scores that fell in the moderate band. While these families experienced improvements, the change was small. Yet, when the program engaged parent who demonstrated high need at the point of entry, the change in test scores post-program participation was more substantial than for parents with low to moderate parenting need. The important message here is that Family Foundations appeared to produce the most significant result for parents in greater need. ICPS evaluators recommend further reflection on whether BCS is appropriately set up to deliver ‘blended prevention’ (Prinz, 2015) – combining universal and targeted parenting supports in an integrated strategy