|
Abstract
|
BACKGROUND: Family Treatment Courts have been linked to promising effects on key child welfare outcomes, though few rigorous program evaluations have been conducted.
OBJECTIVE: This study employs a robust quasi-experimental design to evaluate effects associated with Family Treatment Court participation on child permanency and safety. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The sample included 648 eligible adults who were referred to a Family Treatment Court in a Midwest metropolitan area, including 266 program participants and 382 non-participants.
METHODS: Propensity score weighting was applied to match program and comparison groups on demographic and case characteristics. Child welfare records yielded safety and permanency outcomes. Participants and non-participants were compared following an intent-to-treat principle, with logistic regressions used to test the odds of reunification and maltreatment recurrence, and Kaplan-Meier analyses used to explore time to reunification and permanency. Moderation tests were performed to analyze differences in program impact across racial/ethnic groups and substance use types.
RESULTS: Compared to non-participants, program participants were 81 % more likely to reunify. Group differences in time to reunification and permanency were mixed, and there was no evidence of program impact on maltreatment recurrence. Substance use type and race/ethnicity did not moderate associations between program participation and study outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Mounting evidence suggests that Family Treatment Courts are more effective than usual services in promoting family reunification, though it is unclear if these interventions hasten reunification or increase safety post-reunification. Rigorous evaluations are needed to explore moderating and mediating processes and identify implementation drivers and local conditions that contribute to heterogeneous results.
Language: en |