Search

Peer recovery support services (PRSS) in child welfare are being provided by peer mentors in sustained recovery from substance use disorders (SUD) to parents with acute SUD. Previous retrospective interviews demonstrate that peer mentors engage parents in family-centered systems of care through relationships and empowerment. However, the specific profile of services provided is unknown. Personnel challenges and opportunities for persons in recovery serving as peer mentors are described in the literature without understanding the frequency of both. As enthusiasm for hiring peer mentors grows, it is important to understand the specific services provided, the risks and opportunities associated with hiring individuals in recovery, and the impact of mentor services on outcomes. This knowledge can assist in developing training, implementation guides, policies, job expectations, and program evaluation strategies. This is a prospective study of 28 family mentors providing PRSS services to 783 families with child maltreatment and parental SUD over 8 years in a family-centered integrated program with SUD treatment providers. We describe mentor services overall, during the early engagement period, in rural and urban settings, and test the association between services and child/parent unification status at case closure; we identify the proportion of peer mentors that experienced employment challenges and career advancement opportunities. Results demonstrate the complexity of service provision overall and in differing contexts. Face to face visits with children were associated with greater likelihood of parent/child unification at case closure and 64.3% of peer mentors experienced career advancement opportunities. The implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of child welfare programs have incorporated peer mentors – individuals in long-term recovery from substance use disorders – into their service delivery models. Whereas existing literature suggests the collaboration between peer mentors and child protective service workers brings both opportunities and challenges, few studies have described these experiences from the perspectives of mentors, caseworkers, and supervisors. Understanding how these team members experience partnership is critical for the further evaluation and development of mentor models in child welfare. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of mentors, caseworkers, and supervisors working through an integrated team model in Kentucky. A qualitative approach was used, combining a phenomenological lens with constructivist grounded theory analysis techniques. Our results indicate that successful partnerships between mentors, caseworkers, and supervisors involve four processes: sharing a common vision, developing working relationships, learning with open-mindedness, and identifying the benefits of partnership. These findings have implications for practitioners in a variety of child welfare settings, particularly those interested in developing and training teams for peer mentor integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• This study focused on families with substance use and child maltreatment. • Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams (START) is an intervention for these families. • START outcomes were compared with a propensity score matched comparison group. • Children in START were removed from home less often than comparison families. • However, children in START experienced higher rates of subsequent maltreatment. The U.S. has seen increased prevalence of substance use, child maltreatment, and child entry into out-of-home care (OOHC). This study tested whether Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams (START) were superior to usual child welfare services with regard to: (1) OOHC placements within 12 months of the index maltreatment event; (2) reunification for children who were placed in out-of-home care; and (3) subsequent maltreatment within 12 months of the index maltreatment event. Administrative data from families involved with Child Protective Services in Kentucky between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to match the youngest child in families receiving START to children in families receiving usual services (N = 1042). Between-subjects statistical tests were used to estimate treatment effects in the 12 months following initial maltreatment. Children in families receiving START were less likely to be placed in OOHC than children in families receiving usual services (20.7% vs. 34.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = −17.6%, −9.2%); p < 0.001). Of children who were placed in OOHC, a higher percentage of those receiving START were reunified with their caregivers, though differences were not statistically significant (50.0% vs. 41.6%; 95% CI = −7.1%, 24.0%; p = 0.32). Rates of subsequent maltreatment were higher among children in families receiving START than those in families receiving usual services (12.3% vs. 6.1%; 95% CI = 3.0%, 9.3%; p < 0.001). With regard to preventing OOHC placements, START outperformed usual services. Of children placed in OOHC, half of those served by START were successfully reunified in spite of notable risk factors. Finally, recurrent maltreatment was higher among children in families receiving START, perhaps due to increased surveillance relative to usual services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]