Caring Dads: Safer Children Evaluation findings Nicola McConnell NSPCC Evaluation Department Working with Fathers: Research Evidence for Practice Manchester – 31st March 2015 1
Background and rationale for CDSC Interventions with fathers who perpetrate domestic abuse – hold fathers accountable for their children’s wellbeing – places the responsibility for the fathers abusive behaviour with him – contribute to ending violence against women and child abuse – enable the monitoring and assessment of risks posed by the father – promote positive change in men and in the father-child relationship. Previous evaluation of Caring Dads – Promising findings about effectiveness – Involve relatively small samples within the UK – Few studies examine whether outcomes for children improve CDSC is the result of a partnership between the NSPCC, the Canadian originators and the London Probation Service (RISE). 2
About Caring Dads Caring Dads is devoted to ensuring the safety and wellbeing of children through working with fathers who have abused and neglected their children or exposed them to abuse of their mothers http://caringdads.org/ • Originated from Canada: • Katreena Scott (University of Toronto) • Tim Kelly (Changing Ways, Ontario) 3
The programme model • Group work programme • Fathers attend for 17 weeks • Weekly 2 hour sessions • Two group facilitators • Partners and children contact • Co-ordinated case management 4
Since October 2010: 5 NSPCC service centres 50+ groups delivered 300+ fathers started CDSC 190+ completed programme 500+ evaluation participants 5
Overview of CDSC evaluation Mixed method evaluation : – standardised measures before and after intervention – face to face surveys and qualitative interviews – analysis of case records Three time points for data collection: T1 - Before entry to the programme T2 - End of programme T3 - Follow up 6 to 12 months after end of programme Ethics: Research Ethics Committee, guidance, training, and ethics review Limitations: Small comparison and child samples, fathers’ self reports. 6
Theory of change Father’s parenting stress reduces Awareness of child Fathers centred fathering successfully Children and Father’s Relationships completing the behaviour partners report within the CDSC towards improvements in child’s family programme the father’s Awareness and children and improve partners behaviour and responsibility for improves their own abusive and wellbeing. neglectful fathering Adapted from Abidin 1995 7
Evaluation measures Participant Evaluation measures or tools Fathers Parenting Stress Index Controlling Behaviour Inventory (behaviour towards partner) Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire (behaviour towards child) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (his views about child) Children Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Adolescent Wellbeing Scale Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire Qualitative interviews and surveys Partners & Adult Wellbeing Scale, Controlling Behaviour Inventory for partners, Mothers Strengths and difficulties questionnaire (younger children) Qualitative interviews and surveys Staff Interviews with practitioners, administrators and managers 8
Programme attrition: Referred fathers: 95% invited for assessment 61% assessed 50% assessed as suitable for CDSC 43% started group work Fathers completing the programme: 51% of fathers who started group 22% of fathers referred Source: Closing summaries of case notes October 2010 to October 2014
Quantitative findings Fathers reported statistically significant improvements in: – his stress experienced as a parent – his perceptions of his child’s strengths and behavioural difficulties – his behaviour towards his child or children Children reported improvements in his behaviour toward them. Partners and fathers reported statistically significant improvements in: – his behaviour towards her Partners reported statistically significant improvements in – her depression, anxiety and inward directed irritability Child wellbeing results suggest improvement but not statistically significant 10
Fathers’ parenting stress Average scores for Parenting Stress Index, comparing pre- and post-programme scores 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 T1 T2 10.00 5.00 0.00 Parental distress** Parental-Child Dysfunctional Difficult Child** Interaction** ** p<0.01 Source: CDSC teams October 2010 – October 2014 11
Fathers’ parenting stress Number of fathers moving between the normal and clinical ranges of the Parenting Stress Index when comparing pre- and post-programme scores Remained within normal range, n=125 Deteriorated, moving from normal to clinical range, n=6 Recovered, moving from clinical to normal range n=21 Remained within clinical range, n=6 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Source: CDSC teams October 2010 – October 2014 12
Comparison group Change in mean scores for parenting stress index, comparing fathers in Belfast who completed programme with fathers who were waiting to start. Difficult child Total stress -7 -0.86 -2.23 1 Dysfunctional Parent-Child Interaction -2.85 0 Parental distress -3.46 -1.34 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 Intervention N=26 Waiting for intervention N=15 Source: CDSC teams October 2010- February 2015 13
Sustaining change: follow up results Fathers PSI subscale scores at each time point, N=52 30 25 Mean PSI subscale score 20 Parental distress 15 Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction Difficult Child 10 5 0 T1 T2 T3 Source: CDSC teams October 2010 – February 2015 14
Controlling behaviour towards partner Average number of incidents reported by partners via the Controlling Behaviour Inventory, comparing pre- and post-programme scores 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Pre-programme 0.2 Post-programme 0 **p=<0.01 Source: CDSC teams October 2010 – October 2014 15
Mothers’ wellbeing Average scores for responses to Adult Wellbeing Questionnaire, comparing pre- and post-programme scores 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 Depression* Anxiety* Outward directed Invward directed irritability irritability* Pre-programme Post-programme *p=<0.05 Source: CDSC teams October 2010 – October 2014 16
Qualitative themes: Families Differing experiences, views and needs Children’s understanding, sense of guilt Observed change or partial change Partners appreciated involvement Views on evaluation process Change to service involvement
Qualitative themes: Practitioners Described evidence of change Facilitators and barriers to change Importance of partner engagement Relationships with referrers Service centre differences Areas for improvement
Recent publications: McConnell N, Barnard M, Holdsworth T and Taylor J. (2014) Caring dads: safer children: interim evaluation report . London: NSPCC http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/findings/evaluatio n/caring-dads-pdf_wdf101264.pdf McConnell N. and Taylor J. (2014), Evaluating Programmes for Violent Fathers: Challenges and Ethical Review , Child Abuse Rev., doi: 10.1002/car.2342 Children and Young People Now (2014) Improving the behaviour of dads makes families feel safer . Children and young people now, 4-17 March, pp 34-5 Final report will be available during 2015. 19
Further information : Di Jerwood Development Manager for Looked After Children and High Risk Families NSPCC 07717881735 diane.jerwood@nspcc.org.uk Nicola McConnell Senior Evaluation Officer NSPCC Evaluation Department NSPCC, Weston House, 42 Curtain Road, London EC2A 3NH 020 3772 9161 nmcconnell@nspcc.org.uk 20
Recommend
More recommend
