Making life better for families: do family support services help? Evaluation of Springboard Project in Loughlinstown, Dublin: summary report (original) (raw)
Related papers
Evaluating Springboard: impact of a family support programme in Ireland
Journal of Children's Services, 2006
The article reports results from an evaluation of Springboard, a family support programme introduced in Ireland during 1998. The evaluation is based on a non-experimental design involving a pre-post comparison of 319 children and 191 parents who participated in the programme. The two main outcomes reported here are children's psychological well-being (measured by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -SDQ), and the parent-child relationship (measured by the Parent-Child Relationship Inventory -PCRI). Results showed improvements in SDQ and PCRI scores, equivalent to an effect size in the range 0.2 to 0.3, which is similar to the effect sizes produced by other family support programmes. At the end of the intervention, there was still a substantial amount of unmet need among children. The evaluation has two limitations: first, the use of a non-experimental method means that we cannot be certain that all of the improved outcomes can be attributed to Springboard; second, the diverse interventions which constitute Springboard, and family support programmes generally, means that it is impossible to separate effective from ineffective interventions within the programme.
An evaluation of the Strengthening Families Programme in Co. Kildare, Ireland
2017
Staff' refers to service personnel involved in implementing the SFP, including Site Coordinator, facilitators, linkworkers, steering group, referral agents, funders and so forth Summary of reported benefits Better family communication and relationships Improved child behaviour and wellbeing Increased parental competencies and confidence Enhanced social life Greater school attendance Reduced service utilisation "I feel like a family now whereas before it was just like four people in a house" (parent) We would like to thank all of the families and staff who participated in this evaluation, for giving their time and speaking openly about their experiences of the SFP. We are also grateful to the Kildare Children and Young People's Services Committee for funding the study. We extend special thanks to Emma Berney, CYPSC, and Padraig O' Donovan, Foróige, for facilitating contact with families and staff, and for answering our many questions.
There is consensus within child welfare services that the provision of timely and effective support to families in the community is of critical importance in terms of protecting children. ''Family support'' is a term used to refer to a broad range of activities aimed at supporting the functioning of families. It is generally accepted that such service provision should be attractive and accessible to families and delivered in partnership with them, yet very often services are designed without the input of families and are guided by a professional view of what families need. This article outlines the findings of research undertaken to inform the development of a new family support service in an Irish town, which sought the opinions of both potential service users and service providers about what a family support service should offer. It focuses particularly on disparities of opinion between service providers and potential service users in terms of how families should access family support services, areas of perceived need for support, and around desirable attributes of the family support worker. The process used to reconcile divergent views is outlined, as is the impact of the findings on the family support practice in question. The research involved a structured survey of potential service users and service providers and a facilitated session to agree a shared vision for the service. The purpose of the article is to describe and critically analyse a process for agreeing a shared vision of family support between families and professionals.
2011
Both John and Chris have been a great support to me since I joined the Centre. Thank you also to Dr. Mark Brennan and Professor Brid Featherstone who kindly agreed to form a supervisory committee to support and guide the research process. Both Mark and Brid were a great help and support. The research is essentially about those who participated in it. It was a privilege and honour to meet and interview so many dedicated and enthusiastic academics and practitioners committed to the needs of children and their families. I cannot imagine more enjoyable fieldwork. Every interview inspired me and gave me confidence in the future of children and families services. Heartfelt thanks to all.
Winterberry Press, 2006
Publicreportingburdenforthiscollectionofinformationisestimatedtoaverageonehourperresponsejncludingthetimeforreviewinginstructions searchinq existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Outcomes and Effectiveness of Family Support Services: A Research Review. In Practice Issues
2016
report reviews the evidence for the effectiveness of different kinds of family support services, focusing on services in the United Kingdom, particularly for families who are disadvantaged or experiencing particular difficulties in their lives. The report also describes different evaluation methods and presents information on various" measures and scales used to evaluate family support services. Part 1 of the report presents the conceptual framework, defining family support services and examining issues involved in evaluating such services. Part 2 presents evidence for effectiveness of the following types of services: (1) day care and early education; (2) parenting education; (3) family centers; (4) pre-and postnatal home visiting; (5) befriending and support; (6) children's mental health intervention; (7) services for disabled children and their families; (8) short-term foster care; (9) social work support; and (10) family group conferences. Part 3 presents instruments us...