A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing in Child Welfare: Effectiveness, Moderators, and Level of FGC Completion.

The present study examined the effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing (FGC) in child welfare. Effects were operationalized in terms of child safety (child maltreatment, supervision order, and out-of-home placement), number of professional services used, parental empowerment, and social support in a 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Furthermore, the influence of family characteristics and the level of FGC completion were examined. A total of 328 families were included, randomly assigned to an experimental group ( n = 229) and a care as usual (CAU) group ( n = 99). FGC was equally effective as CAU in improving child safety but resulted in more out-of-home placements. Furthermore, FGC resulted in a longer duration of child welfare involvement, a marginally higher number of professional services used, and increased parental empowerment and social support. Family characteristics did not moderate the results. Level of FGC completion was in general low. Higher levels of completion were related to a larger social network, a higher number of professional services used, and, marginally, less parental empowerment. In conclusion, although some beneficial results marginally support the use of FGC, it is the question whether these effects outweigh FGC costs, a longer duration of child welfare involvement and a higher number of professional services used.

Cost-effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing in child welfare: a controlled study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to examine the short- and long term (cost-) effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing (FGC) compared to care as usual (CAU) in terms of improved child safety, empowerment and social support. METHODS: A subgroup of a larger randomized controlled trial, comprising 69 families in child welfare (experimental group: n = 46; control group: n = 23), was included. RESULTS: No additional effects of FGC on child safety, social support and only short-term positive effects on empowerment were found. There were no differences in costs between FGC and CAU. The chance for FGC to be cost-effective was small. For families who refused FGC, the FGC approach was more cost-effective than CAU, whereas it was less cost-effective for families that prepared or completed FGC. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, FGC is not (cost-)effective in improving child safety, empowerment and social support, but cost-effectiveness varies at different levels of FGC-completion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register number NTR4320 . Registered 17 December 2013.

The effectiveness of family group conferencing in youth care: A meta-analysis.

A meta-analytic study, involving 14 controlled studies (N=88495 participants), was conducted to examine the effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing (FGC) in youth care. Child safety (in terms of reports of child maltreatment and out-of-home placement) and involvement of youth care were included as outcome variables; study, sample and intervention characteristics were included as moderators. Overall, FGC did not significantly reduce child maltreatment, out-of-home placements, and involvement of youth care. Study and sample characteristics moderated the effectiveness of FGC. Retrospective studies found FGC to be more effective than regular care in reducing the recurrence of maltreatment and decreasing the number and length of out-of-home placements, whereas prospective studies found FGC to be not more effective than regular care. Moreover, FGC was found to increase the number and length of out-of-home placements for families with older children and minority groups. The findings of this study showed that robust research proving effectiveness of FGC is limited. It is, therefore, crucial for the safety and protection of children in youth care that, before broadly implementing this decision making model in youth care, more robust studies examining the effectiveness of FGC be conducted.

Family group conferencing in youth care: characteristics of the decision making model, implementation and effectiveness of the Family Group (FG) plans.

BACKGROUND: The model of Family group-conferencing (FG-c) for decision making in child welfare has rapidly spread over the world during the past decades. Its popularity is likely to be caused by its philosophy, emphasizing participation and autonomy of families, rather than based on positive research outcomes. Conclusive evidence regarding the (cost) effectiveness of FG-c is not yet available. The aim of this protocol is to describe the design of a study to evaluate the (cost) effectiveness of FG-c as compared to Treatment as Usual. METHOD/DESIGN: The effectiveness of FG-c will be examined by means of a Randomized Controlled Trial. A multi-informant approach will be used to assess child safety as the primary outcome, and commitment of the social network, perceived control/ empowerment; family functioning and use of professional care as secondary outcomes. Implementation of FG-c, characteristics of family manager and family will be examined as moderators of effectiveness. DISCUSSION: Studying the effectiveness of Fg-c is crucial now the method is being implemented all over the world as a decision making model in child and youth care. Policy makers should be informed whether the ideals of participation in society and the right for self-determination indeed result in more effective care plans, and the money spent on FG-c is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register number NTR4320. The design of this study is approved by the independent Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences of The University of Amsterdam (approval number: 2013-POWL-3308). This study is financially supported by a grant from ZonMw, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, grant number: 70-72900-98-13158.