Abstracts
Abstract
The project described here aimed to assist the Residential Placement Unit of the Ministry of Welfare and Social Affairs in developing tools for planning interventions for children in their care, monitoring activities and practices, and assessing outcomes. A major requirement was to ensure that the data produced would be relevant to field workers and support their daily therapeutic work with the children. The tools also facilitate ongoing follow-up on the children’s characteristics, needs, strengths, and prior interventions, including evaluating their effectiveness. This information is organized and can be presented in outputs tailored to the needs of field workers, supervisors, and policymakers. Key principles that guided the project were: collaboration among a multitiered team; involvement of service recipients and care leavers (“experts by experience”); balancing the needs of policymakers, staff and field workers; use of standardized and accepted terminology; reliance on a shared measurement framework; and use of outcome-based thinking to structure the system and its components. The implementation of such a computerized system often raises apprehension or resistance among both managers and staff. To address this, a lengthy and in-depth process of building trust took place, including training sessions that communicated the rationale behind the system’s development and the principles underlying its design, and the establishment of a structured feedback mechanism to assess the staff’s acceptance of the system. The system was successfully assimilated and is in routine use in all the residential care facilities of the Ministry of Welfare. Several factors were identified to explain this success: the commitment of the administration of the Residential Placement Unit to this project; the availability of an existing computerized system upon which to develop the project; and the involvement of the research team in the characterization of the system, training the staff, and refining and modifying the system based on the feedback received.
Keywords:
- out-of-home care,
- residential care,
- outcome thinking,
- computerized systems,
- shared measurement
Appendices
Bibliography
- Almog, Y., & Habib, J. (2013). Shared measurement of outcomes in the social sector [RR-646-13; Hebrew]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute. https://brookdale.jdc.org.il/en/publication/shared-measurement-outcomes-social-sector/
- Almog, Y., & Habib, J. (2014). A handbook for implementing shared measurement [S-142-14; Hebrew]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute.
- Alster, S., Habib, J, & Sabah, K. (2010). Developing the concept and practice of ongoing outcome measurement in service systems: Lessons and guidelines from relevant literature [Research report S-129-10]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute. https://brookdale-web.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2018/01/129-10-OutcomeMeasurement-WEB-ENG.pdf
- Arazi, T., & Namer-Furstenberg, R. (2020). The integrative guide to outcome-based thinking [Hebrew]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute.
- Beresford, P. (2007). The role of service user research in generating knowledge-based health and social care: From conflict to contribution. Evidence & Policy, 3(3), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426407781738074
- Borkman, T. (1976). Experiential knowledge: A new concept for the analysis of self-help groups. Social Service Review, 50(3), 445–456.
- Budde, S., Mayer, S., Zinn, A., Lippold, M. A., Avrushin, A., Bromberg, A., Goerge, R., & Courtney, M. E. (2004). Residential care in Illinois: Trends and alternatives [Final report]. Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
- Carrilio, T. E. (2008). Accountability, evidence, and the use of information systems in social service programs. Journal of Social Work 8(2), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017307088495
- Centre for Regional Development and McCaughey Centre. (2007). Community indicators Victoria: A resource guide using CIV as a tool for council planning. Swinburne University.
- Dale, N., Baker, A. J., Anastasio, E., & Purcell, J. (2007). Characteristics of children in residential treatment in New York State. Child Welfare, 86(1), 5-27.
- Dearman, P. (2005). Computerized social casework recording: Autonomy and control in Australia’s income support agency. Labor Studies Journal 30(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160449X0503000104
- Dolev, T., Ben-Rabi, D., & Zemach-Marom, T. (2009). Residential care for children at risk in Israel. In M. E. Courtney & D. Iwaniec (Eds.), Residential care of children: Comparative perspectives (pp. 72–88). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309188.003.0005
- Horgan, A., Manning, F., Donovan, M. O., Doody, R., Savage, E., Bradley, S. K., Dorrity, C., O’Sullivan, H., Goodwin, J., Greaney, S., Biering, P., Bjornsson, E., Bocking, J., Russell, S., MacGabhann, L., Griffin, M., van der Vaart, K. J., Allon, J., Granerud, A., … & Happell, B. (2020). Expert by experience involvement in mental health nursing education: The co‐production of standards between experts by experience and academics in mental health nursing. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 27(5), 553–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12605
- Huuskonen, S., & Vakkari, P. (2010). Client information system as an everyday information tool in child protection work. IIiX ’10: Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Information Interaction in Context, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/1840784.1840788
- Jones, M., & Pietilä, I. (2020). Personal perspectives on patient and public involvement: Stories about becoming and being an expert by experience. Sociology of Health & Illness, 42(4), 809–824. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13064
- Kania, J. & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review 9(1), 36–41. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/collective_impact
- Kramer, M., Parkhurst, M., & Vaidyanathan, L. (2009). Breakthroughs in shared measurement and social impact. FSG Social Impact Advisors.
- Liedgren, P., Elvhage, G., Ehrenberg, A., & Kullberg, C. (2016). The use of decision support systems in social work: A scoping study literature review. Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2014.914992
- Martin, G. P. (2008). Representativeness, legitimacy and power in public involvement in health-service management. Social Science & Medicine, 67(11), 1757–1765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.024
- Ministry of Labor, Social Affairs and Social Services. (2017). Annual Report 67B: Children and youth at risk in the Ministry of Welfare’s boarding schools (pp. 719–761; Hebrew).
- Ógáin, E. N., Svistak, M., & de Las Casas, L. (2013). Blueprint for shared measurement: Developing, designing and implementing shared approaches to impact measurement. Inspiring Impact & NPC.
- Oldfield, P., Hall, H., Rawson, J., & Harvey, M. (2015). Case management systems for social service sector organisations. New Zealand Ministry of Social Development & Infoxchange.
- Rodin, J., & MacPherson, N. (2012). Shared outcomes: How the Rockefeller Foundation is approaching evaluation with developing country partners. Stanford Social Innovation Review Summer 2012, 12–15.
- Schmid, H. (2006). Report of the Public Committee to Examine the Situation of Children and Teenagers at Risk and in Distress [Hebrew]. The State of Israel.
- Sher, N., & Arazi, T. (2016). “Outcome-Based Thinking” at the Organizational Level [Hebrew]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute.
- Sher, N., & Arazi, T. (2017). Information management systems in social services: Insights and guidelines for the development of systems supporting outcome oriented management & practice [RR-745-17; Hebrew]. Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute. https://brookdale.jdc.org.il/en/publication/information-management-systems-social-services/
- United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, November 20, 1989. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child
- Walker, K. E., Farley, C., & Polin, M. (2012). Using data in multi-agency collaborations: Guiding performance to ensure accountability and improve programs. Public/Private Ventures. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/using-data-multi-agency-collaborations-guiding-performance-ensure
- White, S., Wastell, D., Broadhurst, K., & Hall, C. (2010). When policy o’erleaps itself: The ‘tragic tale’ of the Integrated Children’s System. Critical Social Policy, 30(3), 405–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018310367675