Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Strengths and Limitations of Case Record Reviews in Examining Family Preservation Outcome Formulation and Treatment Planning

  • Published:
Journal of Child and Family Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Much debate has centered on what are reasonable outcomes of the short-term intensive family preservation services (IFPS). However, little attention has been given to how therapists actually formulate outcomes in their practices. The files of 98 families who used IFPS were reviewed to determine how therapists formulated outcomes and whether formulated outcomes varied by service sector (child welfare or mental health) and child age. It was found that formulated outcomes in mental health were more likely than those in child welfare to have a child focus and an interpersonal locus. Variation in outcome formulation in child welfare by child age was found, with outcomes of younger children more likely to be parent-focused than were outcomes of older children. The issues pointed out by these findings are discussed. Since case records are a potential data source for researchers, the paper concludes with a discussion of the strengths and limitations of case record reviews for research purposes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Azar, S. T., Povilaitis, T. Y., Lauretti, A. F., & Pouquette, C. L. (1998). The current status of etiological theories in intrafamilial child maltreatment. In J. R Lutzker (Ed.), Handbook of child abuse and treatment (pp. 3–30). New York and London: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, R. P. (1990). Theories guiding home-based intensive family preservation services. In J. K. Whittaker, J. Kinney, E. M. Tracy, & C. Booth (Eds.), Reaching high-risk families: Intensive family preservation in human services (pp. 89–112). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bath, H. I. & Haapala, D. A. (1994). Family preservation services: What does the outcome research really tell us? Social Service Review, 68, 386–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bath, H. I., & Haapala, D. A. (1995). Evaluation outcomes of family preservation services and the way ahead: A reply to Littell. Social Service Review, 69, 351–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bath, H. I., Richey, C. A., & Haapala, D. A. (1992). Child age and outcome correlates in intensive family preservation services. Children and Youth Services Review, 14, 389–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blythe, B. J., Salley, M. P., & Jayaratne, S. (1994). A review of intensive family preservation services research. Social Work Research, 18, 213–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borduin, C. M., Mann, B. J., Cone, L. T., Henggeler, S. W., Fucci, B. R., Blaske, D. M., & Williams, R. A. (1995). Multisystemic treatment of serious juvenile offenders: Long-term prevention of criminality and violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 569–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burman, M. A. (1996). Measuring outcomes of care for substance use and mental disorders. In D. M. Steinwachs, L. M. Flynn, G. S. Norquist, & E. A. Skinner (Eds.), Using client outcomes information to improve mental health and substance treatment (pp. 3–17). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, B. J. (1991). Mental health service use by adolescents in the 1970's and 1980's. Journal American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 30, 144–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R., Parmelee, D. X., Irwin, L., Weisz, J. R., Howard, P., Purcell, P., & Best, A. M. (1990). Characteristics of children and adolescents in a psychiatric hospital and a corrections facility. Journal American Academy Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 909–913.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dore, M. M. (1991). Context and the structure of practice: Implications for research. In K. Wells and D. E. Biegel, (Eds.), Family preservation services: Research and evaluation (pp. 121–137). Newbury Park: CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, L. (1990). Evaluating the impact of family preservation services in New Jersey. Trenton: New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services, Bureau of Research, Evaluation, and Quality Assurance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsythe, P. (1992). Homebuilders and family preservation. Children and Youth Services Review, 14, 37–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, M. W., Pecora, P. J., & Haapala, D. A. (1991). Families in crisis: The impact of intensive family preservation services. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, A. F. & Besinger, B. A. (1997). Racial/ethnic differences in court referred pathways to mental health services for children in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 19, 651–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, J. T. (1990). Mental health issues of black adolescents: Implications for policy and practice. In A. R. Stiffman & L. E. Davis (Eds.), Ethnic issues in adolescent mental health (pp. 21–52). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grigsby, R. K. (1993). Theories that guide intensive family preservation services: A second look. In E. S. Morton & R. K. Grigsby, (Eds.), Advancing family preservation practice (pp. 16–27). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heneghan, A. M., Horwitz, S. M., & Leventhal, J. M. (1996). Evaluating intensive family preservation programs: A methodological review. Pediatrics, 97, 635–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henggeler, S. W., Melton, G. B., & Smith, L. A. (1992). Family preservation using multisystemic therapy: An effective alternative to incarcerating serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 953–961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoberman, H. M. (1992). Ethnic minority status and adolescent mental health services utilization. Journal of Mental Health Administration, 19, 246–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinney, J., Haapala, D., Booth, C., & Leavitt, S. (1990). The Homebuilders model. In J. K. Whittaker, J. Kinney, E. M. Tracy & C. Booth (Eds.), Reaching high-risk families: Intensive family preservation in human services (pp. 31–64). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littell, J. H. (1995). Evidence or assertions? The outcomes of family preservation services. Social Service Review, 69, 338–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K. E., Landsman, M. J., & Deutelbaum, W. (1990). Three models of family-centered placement prevention services. Child Welfare, LXIX, 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecora, P. (1991). Family-based and intensive family preservation services: A select literature review. In M. W. Fraser, P. J. Pecora, & D. A. Haapala (Eds.), Families in crisis: The impact of family preservation services (pp. 17–47). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecora, P. J., Fraser, M. W., Nelson, K. E., McCroskey, J., & Meezan, W. (1995). Evaluating family-based services. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, E. K. & Rosen, A. (1983). Problem formulation and its relation to treatment planning. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 19, 22–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. (1992). Facilitating clinical decision making and evaluation. Families in Society, 73, 522–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. (1993a). Correction of workers' personal versus environmental bias in formulation of client problems. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 29, 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. (1993b). Systematic planned practice. Social Service Review, 67, 84–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. & Proctor, E. K. (1978). Specifying the treatment process: The basis for effectiveness research. Journal of Social Service Research, 2, 25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. & Proctor, E. K. (1981). Distinctions between treatment outcomes and their implications for treatment evaluation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 418–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, P. H. (1992). Assessing family preservation programs. Children and Youth Services Review, 14, 77–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuerman, J. R., Rzepnicki, T. L., & Littell, J. H. (1994). Putting families first: An experiment in family preservation. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, I. M., AuClaire, P., & Harris, L. (1991). Family preservation services as an alternative to the out of home placement of adolescents: The Hennepin County experience. In K. Wells & D. E. Biegel (Eds.), Family preservation services: Research and evaluation (pp. 33–46). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiffman, A. R., Staudt, M., & Baker, P. (1996). Family preservation services: An example of the use of records to answer questions about outcome and client characteristics. Community Alternatives: International Journal of Family Care, 8, 56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. W., Rosenstein, M. J., Milazzo-Sayre, L. J., & MacAskill, R. L. (1986). Psychiatric services to adolescents: 1970–1980. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 37, 584–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trupin, E. W., Tarico, V. S., Low, B. P., Jemelka, R., & McClellan, J. (1993). Children of child protective service caseloads: Prevalence and nature of serious emotional disturbance. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17, 345–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahler, R. G. (1994). Child conduct problems: Disorders in conduct or social continuity? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 3, 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, K. & Whittington, D. (1993). Child and family functioning after intensive family preserrvation services. Social Service Review, 67, 55–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westendorp, F., Brink, K. L., Roberson, M. K., & Ortiz, I. E. (1986). Variables which differentiate placement of adolescents into juvenile justice or mental health systems. Adolescence, XXI, 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Social Work, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN

    Marlys Staudt (Assistant Professor)

Authors
  1. Marlys Staudt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Staudt, M. The Strengths and Limitations of Case Record Reviews in Examining Family Preservation Outcome Formulation and Treatment Planning. Journal of Child and Family Studies 8, 409–424 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021947619389

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021947619389

Search

Navigation