Cargando…

THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Serious case reviews and research studies have indicated weaknesses in risk assessments conducted by child protection social workers. Social workers are adept at gathering information but struggle with analysis and assessment of risk. The Department for Education wants to know if the use...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Macdonald, Geraldine, Lewis, Jane, Macdonald, Kenneth, Gardner, Evie, Murphy, Lynn, Adams, Catherine, Ghate, Deborah, Cotmore, Richard, Green, Jonathan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4258936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25413974
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-453
_version_ 1782347936320978944
author Macdonald, Geraldine
Lewis, Jane
Macdonald, Kenneth
Gardner, Evie
Murphy, Lynn
Adams, Catherine
Ghate, Deborah
Cotmore, Richard
Green, Jonathan
author_facet Macdonald, Geraldine
Lewis, Jane
Macdonald, Kenneth
Gardner, Evie
Murphy, Lynn
Adams, Catherine
Ghate, Deborah
Cotmore, Richard
Green, Jonathan
author_sort Macdonald, Geraldine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Serious case reviews and research studies have indicated weaknesses in risk assessments conducted by child protection social workers. Social workers are adept at gathering information but struggle with analysis and assessment of risk. The Department for Education wants to know if the use of a structured decision-making tool can improve child protection assessments of risk. METHODS/DESIGN: This multi-site, cluster-randomised trial will assess the effectiveness of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF). This structured decision-making tool aims to improve social workers’ assessments of harm, of future risk and parents’ capacity to change. The comparison is management as usual. Inclusion criteria: Children’s Services Departments (CSDs) in England willing to make relevant teams available to be randomised, and willing to meet the trial’s training and data collection requirements. Exclusion criteria: CSDs where there were concerns about performance; where a major organisational restructuring was planned or under way; or where other risk assessment tools were in use. Six CSDs are participating in this study. Social workers in the experimental arm will receive 2 days training in SAAF together with a range of support materials, and access to limited telephone consultation post-training. The primary outcome is child maltreatment. This will be assessed using data collected nationally on two key performance indicators: the first is the number of children in a year who have been subject to a second Child Protection Plan (CPP); the second is the number of re-referrals of children because of related concerns about maltreatment. Secondary outcomes are: i) the quality of assessments judged against a schedule of quality criteria and ii) the relationship between the three assessments required by the structured decision-making tool (level of harm, risk of (re)abuse and prospects for successful intervention). DISCUSSION: This is the first study to examine the effectiveness of SAAF. It will contribute to a very limited literature on the contribution that structured decision-making tools can make to improving risk assessment and case planning in child protection and on what is involved in their effective implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 45137562 15 July 2014.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4258936
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42589362014-12-09 THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial Macdonald, Geraldine Lewis, Jane Macdonald, Kenneth Gardner, Evie Murphy, Lynn Adams, Catherine Ghate, Deborah Cotmore, Richard Green, Jonathan Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Serious case reviews and research studies have indicated weaknesses in risk assessments conducted by child protection social workers. Social workers are adept at gathering information but struggle with analysis and assessment of risk. The Department for Education wants to know if the use of a structured decision-making tool can improve child protection assessments of risk. METHODS/DESIGN: This multi-site, cluster-randomised trial will assess the effectiveness of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF). This structured decision-making tool aims to improve social workers’ assessments of harm, of future risk and parents’ capacity to change. The comparison is management as usual. Inclusion criteria: Children’s Services Departments (CSDs) in England willing to make relevant teams available to be randomised, and willing to meet the trial’s training and data collection requirements. Exclusion criteria: CSDs where there were concerns about performance; where a major organisational restructuring was planned or under way; or where other risk assessment tools were in use. Six CSDs are participating in this study. Social workers in the experimental arm will receive 2 days training in SAAF together with a range of support materials, and access to limited telephone consultation post-training. The primary outcome is child maltreatment. This will be assessed using data collected nationally on two key performance indicators: the first is the number of children in a year who have been subject to a second Child Protection Plan (CPP); the second is the number of re-referrals of children because of related concerns about maltreatment. Secondary outcomes are: i) the quality of assessments judged against a schedule of quality criteria and ii) the relationship between the three assessments required by the structured decision-making tool (level of harm, risk of (re)abuse and prospects for successful intervention). DISCUSSION: This is the first study to examine the effectiveness of SAAF. It will contribute to a very limited literature on the contribution that structured decision-making tools can make to improving risk assessment and case planning in child protection and on what is involved in their effective implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 45137562 15 July 2014. BioMed Central 2014-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4258936/ /pubmed/25413974 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-453 Text en © Macdonald et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Macdonald, Geraldine
Lewis, Jane
Macdonald, Kenneth
Gardner, Evie
Murphy, Lynn
Adams, Catherine
Ghate, Deborah
Cotmore, Richard
Green, Jonathan
THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title_full THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title_short THE SAAF STUDY: evaluation of the Safeguarding Children Assessment and Analysis Framework (SAAF), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
title_sort saaf study: evaluation of the safeguarding children assessment and analysis framework (saaf), compared with management as usual, for improving outcomes for children and young people who have experienced, or are at risk of, maltreatment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4258936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25413974
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-453
work_keys_str_mv AT macdonaldgeraldine thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lewisjane thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT macdonaldkenneth thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gardnerevie thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT murphylynn thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT adamscatherine thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ghatedeborah thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT cotmorerichard thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT greenjonathan thesaafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT macdonaldgeraldine saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lewisjane saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT macdonaldkenneth saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gardnerevie saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT murphylynn saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT adamscatherine saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ghatedeborah saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT cotmorerichard saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT greenjonathan saafstudyevaluationofthesafeguardingchildrenassessmentandanalysisframeworksaafcomparedwithmanagementasusualforimprovingoutcomesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedorareatriskofmaltreatmentstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial