Search

Purpose: The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act requires child welfare agencies to have provisions in place to refer young children to early intervention services, yet the socioemotional health needs of children are often challenging to recognize and treat effectively. This study reviews the substantive and psychometric properties of screening instruments designed for children ages 10 and younger. Methods: Major social science databases, websites of national organizations, and the "Mental Measurements Yearbook" were used to identify instruments for review. Results: Twenty-four instruments met review criteria, and eight show above-average measurement properties and testing, tap children's strengths and concerns, and have evidence of validity with families similar to child welfare-involved families. Discussion: It is important to effectively screen for children showing concerns in early childhood, so that treatment and prevention can be prioritized. This study indicated several tools with adequate testing and with emerging evidence and applicability to child welfare. [This research was supported by a doctoral fellowship in child abuse and neglect awarded by the Children's Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children and Families.]

Head Start is a preschool program for families with low incomes and nearly 85% of child welfare-involved families are low-income, yet little is known about Head Start and child welfare collaboration. This study uses data from 28 Head Start directors to describe collaboration facilitators and barriers, and collaborative mechanisms in place. The mixed-methods study used data from a statewide survey and focus groups. Quantitative analysis used descriptive means and proportions. Qualitative analysis used a general inductive approach. Results show that nearly all Head Start programs prioritise enrollment for child welfare-involved children and know about foster care placement, but lack memoranda of understanding (50%), co-located staff (14%) and policies concerning joint service planning (9%). Directors report that Head Start staff need more support, including making referrals to child welfare. Cross-training, shared case planning, and streamlined processes could help move the organisations further along the developmental continuum of collaboration.

Introduction: Evidence is lacking about how to integrate family and community voice into systems of care. This is particularly relevant in public health crises when reducing barriers to health care and resources is critical for everyone, but especially community members who typically experience more barriers to care. Addressing this gap, this study investigated the voice strategies used by systems of care to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: We conducted semi-structured interviews in three U.S. counties with agency leaders representing healthcare, public health, and early childhood partners in local systems of care (n = 15) and resource navigators who worked with families (n = 4). Results: We found that systems of care were better able to identify and respond to family priorities when they used diverse voice strategies, implemented among multiple agencies involved and at multiple time points. Family and community voice helped uncover blind spots in the crisis response, facilitating reaching more individuals in need. Flexibility in safety net service policies and protocols was critical to each organization in the system of care. Discussion: Systems of care that develop a multi-dimensional approach to voice strategies that can be readily mobilized in a public health crisis will be more apt to meet emerging needs. Questions remain about whether power sharing that occurred in the context of crisis translates into reform that builds out from family priorities. Common issues to meeting family needs that could be addressed prior to a crisis included outdated resource lists, confusing application processes, poorly translated materials, and insufficient broadband access. Public Significance Statement: Connecting decision makers with family voices and experiences can significantly enhance the capacity of community systems of care to mobilize strategies to address evolving concrete and social needs in the context of public health crises. Establishing these collaborative activities that include families and community members prior to (rather than during) crises is critical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) contribute to public health concerns, as they have been linked to chronic diseases in adulthood. From the seminal ACEs study in the mid-1990s (Felitti et al., 1998) to today, the Centers for Disease Control (2016) reports well over 50 studies that link ACEs to adult health conditions such as cancer, heart disease, lung disease, and mental illness. This preponderance of evidence has prompted widespread attention to the possibility that preventing and successfully treating ACE-associated traumatic stress would greatly reduce our country's incidence of chronic disease and the associated public health burden and cost (Danese et al., 2009). To illustrate, one study suggests that child abuse and neglect alone costs the United States $124 billion annually, with individual lifetime costs that are higher than or equal to the economic burden of diabetes and stroke (Fang, Brown, Florence, & Mercy, 2012). That child maltreatment is just one category of 10 total ACEs suggests that the total financial impact of ACEs in the United States is likely much greater and that some populations, such as children involved in child welfare, may be disproportionately affected by the negative effects of adverse childhood experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]