Marit Skivenes, Jonathan Dickens, Tarja Poso, Jill Berrick

1. Assessing the Quality of DecisionAssessing the Quality of Decision
Making in Child Protection:Making in Child Protection:
A cross-country studyA cross-country study
Marit Skivenes, Jonathan Dickens, Tarja Pösö, Jill BerrickMarit Skivenes, Jonathan Dickens, Tarja Pösö, Jill Berrick
Edinburgh, ScotlandEdinburgh, Scotland
BASPCANBASPCAN
April, 2015April, 2015
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

2. Structure of the workshopStructure of the workshop
The research projectThe research project
Part 1:Part 1:
The key findings on social workers’The key findings on social workers’
perceptions of time and institutional supportperceptions of time and institutional support
for their decisionsfor their decisions
Part 2:Part 2:
International research: challenges andInternational research: challenges and
opportunitiesopportunities
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

3. The research projectThe research project
 Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child WelfareLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare
Services – A cross country study ofServices – A cross country study of
decision-makingdecision-making

Social workersSocial workers

CourtsCourts

Different child welfare systemsDifferent child welfare systems
 Funded by Norwegian Research CouncilFunded by Norwegian Research Council
in 2012-2016 with Marit Skivenes as PIin 2012-2016 with Marit Skivenes as PI
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

4. PART 1PART 1
 Research findings on time andResearch findings on time and
supportsupport

5. MethodsMethods
 On-line surveyOn-line survey
 Front-line child protection staff that haveFront-line child protection staff that have
experienceexperience withwith care order proceedingscare order proceedings
 N = 772N = 772

Norway = 367Norway = 367

Finland = 208Finland = 208

England = 102England = 102

California = 84California = 84
 Completed between February and June 2014.Completed between February and June 2014.
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

6. Questions and responsesQuestions and responses
The questions we are focusing on today:The questions we are focusing on today:
How long from time of informing parents until theHow long from time of informing parents until the
court application is made?court application is made?
Do workers have sufficient time for solid decisionDo workers have sufficient time for solid decision
making?making?
What authorization and assessment processesWhat authorization and assessment processes
review appropriateness of decisions?review appropriateness of decisions?
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

7. Departure from the sameDeparture from the same
situation: Case vignettesituation: Case vignette
You are working with a boy – Alex – who is 5 (11) years oldYou are working with a boy – Alex – who is 5 (11) years old
and whose family has received in-home services over aand whose family has received in-home services over a
period of time. The case includes parental substanceperiod of time. The case includes parental substance
abuse, previous domestic violence, and general neglect.abuse, previous domestic violence, and general neglect.
The circumstances of the case have deteriorated recentlyThe circumstances of the case have deteriorated recently
to such an extent that you are concerned that the boy’s riskto such an extent that you are concerned that the boy’s risk
of harm is high. You are starting preparations for care orderof harm is high. You are starting preparations for care order
proceedings with a view to removing Alex from his parents,proceedings with a view to removing Alex from his parents,
and you have an interview with the parents to inform themand you have an interview with the parents to inform them
about this. The parents are opposing a removal of Alex.about this. The parents are opposing a removal of Alex.
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

8. Time for Decision MakingTime for Decision Making
Would you have sufficient time to prepare a care order (the Alex case in theWould you have sufficient time to prepare a care order (the Alex case in the
vignette) to your satisfaction? (N=756)vignette) to your satisfaction? (N=756)
Finland Norway England California All
%
(N)
%
(N)
%
(N)
%
(N)
%
(N)
Yes 24 % 37 % 52 % 43 % 36 %
No 68 % 46 % 45 % 49 % 53 %
I don’t
know
8 % 17 % 3 % 8 % 12 %
Total %
N
100
(208)
100
(363)
100
(97)
100
(88)
100
(756)
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

9. Time workers spend on the Alex case (theTime workers spend on the Alex case (the
vignette)vignette)
MEDIAN. Highest n=653MEDIAN. Highest n=653
Country A. Time spent,
from informing
the parents of the
possibility until
decision is made.
B. Time spent,
from decision
about sending
application until
the application is
sent.
Finland 10 (4-6 weeks) 11 (7-9 weeks)
Norway 11 (7-9 weeks) 11 (7-9 weeks)
England 5 (5 days) 6 (6 days)
US 3 (72 hours) 3 (72 hours)
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

10. Time summaryTime summary
 Same case scenario – very different lengthSame case scenario – very different length
on the preparations for proceedingson the preparations for proceedings
 The time spent on care order decision makingThe time spent on care order decision making
follows the system expectationsfollows the system expectations
 Although Nordic countriesAlthough Nordic countries havehave more time,more time,
they feel the press of time more acutely.they feel the press of time more acutely.
 What can this tell us about the solidness ofWhat can this tell us about the solidness of
the decisions made?the decisions made?
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

11. How confident are you in……How confident are you in……on cases about
seeking care orders in court?
Mean responses. (1 = Highly confident, 5 = very skeptical). N=758Mean responses. (1 = Highly confident, 5 = very skeptical). N=758
Fin Nor Eng US
The decisions you
make… 1,76 1,68 2,47 1,61
The decisions your
colleagues
make…
1,96 1,86 2,69 2,38
The decisions your
managers make… 1,95 1,76 2,76 2,2
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

12. Who authorizes your decision?Who authorizes your decision?
 Supervisors & senior managers almostSupervisors & senior managers almost
always noted.always noted.
 Finns more often indicated “peers”,Finns more often indicated “peers”,
“parents”, and “children” than staff in other“parents”, and “children” than staff in other
countries.countries.
 England & CA more often noted the role ofEngland & CA more often noted the role of
attorneys.attorneys.
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

13. DiscussionDiscussion
 Frameworks for decision making are different acrossFrameworks for decision making are different across
countries. Tight timelines in CA and England; morecountries. Tight timelines in CA and England; more
flexible timeframes in Finland and Norway. Timeflexible timeframes in Finland and Norway. Time
follows system lines.follows system lines.
 Most staff feel the press of time; the Finns mostMost staff feel the press of time; the Finns most
acutely.acutely.
 Degree of confidence varies; the Norwegians standDegree of confidence varies; the Norwegians stand
out have high degree of confidenceout have high degree of confidence
 Child welfare decision making is weighty. No oneChild welfare decision making is weighty. No one
makes these decisions alone. But we wouldmakes these decisions alone. But we would
characterize the English and CA institutional supportscharacterize the English and CA institutional supports
as more vertical, and the Norwegian and Finnishas more vertical, and the Norwegian and Finnish
institutional supports as more horizontal.institutional supports as more horizontal.
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

14. PART 2PART 2
 International research: challengesInternational research: challenges
and opportunitiesand opportunities

15. Questions arising from aQuestions arising from a
cross-country approach:cross-country approach:
 The challenges of:The challenges of:

designing a cross-national vignettedesigning a cross-national vignette

Language, e.g. “who authorizes your decisions?”,Language, e.g. “who authorizes your decisions?”,
children’s participationchildren’s participation

system differences on for example what is consideredsystem differences on for example what is considered
a “care order”, “abuse”, “providing in-home services”,a “care order”, “abuse”, “providing in-home services”,

Defining a moment when a family separation occursDefining a moment when a family separation occurs

Separating the policy and practiceSeparating the policy and practice
 Interpretations of findingsInterpretations of findings

Often huge variations within country sampleOften huge variations within country sample

Explorative research designExplorative research design

InterdisciplinaryInterdisciplinary
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services

16. The bigger questions?The bigger questions?
 ““The whole object of travel is not to set foot onThe whole object of travel is not to set foot on
foreign land; it is at last to set foot on one’s ownforeign land; it is at last to set foot on one’s own
country as a foreign land.” (G. K. Chesterton)country as a foreign land.” (G. K. Chesterton)
 Do international comparative studies challengeDo international comparative studies challenge
our preconceptions or reinforce them?our preconceptions or reinforce them?
 What are the opportunities for learning acrossWhat are the opportunities for learning across
systems?systems?
 What are the similarities across countries andWhat are the similarities across countries and
across systems?across systems?
Legitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare ServicesLegitimacy and Fallibility in Child Welfare Services