Skip to main content
Log in

Keeping children's needs paramount: A new era of accountability and opportunity for group residential services

  • Articles
  • Published:
Child and Youth Care Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Historically, public demand for group residential services for children has been marked by competition among special interests and by sometimes contradictory accountability standards that have placed these services in a “no win” position as they struggle to respond to a growing array of needs in the face of proliferating controls and diminishing resources. A new era is now emerging, however, one marked by a clear and unified public demand for services capable of preparing children in the behavioral competencies needed for acceptable community living. Four benchmarks suggested for assessing an agency's current state of readiness to meet emerging demand include Accountability Standards, Service Ideology, Task Orientation, and Technical Strategies. For those who are prepared, the prospects are for an era of unparalleled opportunity for service and attendant public support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldgate, J. (1987). Residential care: A reevaluation of a threatened resource.Child & Youth Care Quarterly, 16, 48–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besharov, D. (1985).The vulnerable social worker. Silver Springs, MD.: National Association of Social Workers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byles, J. A. (1980). Adolescent girls in need of protection.Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 50, 264–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doris, J. (1982). Social science and advocacy: A case study.American Behavioral Scientist, 26, 199–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaylin, W. (1982, April). The competence of children: No longer all or none.The Hastings Center Report, 33–38.

  • Hamburg, D. (1986). Preparing for life: The critical transition of adolescence. Paper reprinted from,The Carnegie Corporation of New York 1986 Annual Report, 3–13.

  • Hawkes, G. R. (1978). Who will raise our children?The Family Coordinator, 27 (2), 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith-Lucas, A. (1980). Issues in the residential group care of young people.New Designs for Youth Development, 3 (3/4), 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linton, T. & Forster, M. (1987). Eclecticism in child care work.Child Care Work, 5 (2), 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. & Burt, R. (1982). Children's rights on entering therapeutic institutions. In R. Hanson (ed.)Institutional Abuse of Children and Youth. New York: Haworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. G. (1981). Thoughts on institutional abuse.Legal Response: Child Advocacy & Protection, 2 (3).

  • Nutter, R., Gripton, J., & Murphy, M. A. (1986). Results of a survey of English-speaking professional Canadian social workers.Computer Uses in Social Services, 6 (3), 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neal, L. (1985). Privatization and liability.KEYS Institute for Children's Response, 1 (2), 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panneton, J. P. (1977). Children, commitment and consent: A constitutional crisis.Family Law Quarterly, 10 (4), 295–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polier, J. W. (1979). Professional abuse of children: Responsibility for the delivery of services. In D. G. Gil (ed.).Child Abuse and Violence. New York: AMS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redl, F. (1958). The meaning of “therapeutic milieu.” InSymposium on preventative and social Psychiatry, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, April 15–17, 1957. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindfleisch, N. (1984). Factors which influence the severity of adverse events in residential facilities. Paper presented at the International Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect, Montreal, September 19.

  • Rose, C. A. (1978).Some emerging issues in legal liability in children's agencies. New York: Child Welfare League of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhan, D. L. (1969). On being sane in insane places.Science, 179 (1), 250–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskind, A. B. (1986). Issues in institutional child sexual abuse: The abused, the abuser, and the system.Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 4 (2), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, G. (1975).A community-oriented evaluation of the effectiveness of child caring institutions. Athens, GA: The Regional Institute of Social Welfare Research, University of Georgia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, G. (in press). The Making of COBRS 2.0: The Competency-Oriented Behavior Rating System for Children and Youth Services. In T. Hanna & R. Renoehl (eds.).Computers in human services New York: Haworth.

  • Wolins, M. (1974).Successful group care: Explorations in the powerful environment. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youth 2000: A National Campaign in Support of America's Youth From Now to the Year 2000. (1987). Campaign Booklet of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Labor, August. Pp. 1–24.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This is a slightly modified version of a paper that was presented as the closing address at the Kentucky Association of Homes for Children Fall Workshop, Louisville, October 22, 1987.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thomas, G. Keeping children's needs paramount: A new era of accountability and opportunity for group residential services. Child Youth Care Forum 18, 81–92 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01184756

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01184756

Keywords

Navigation