Transcript FRIENDS Kick-Off Meeting October 28, 2004

CBCAP and OCAN Updates
CBCAP Cluster Meeting
Baltimore, Maryland
March 11, 2008
Melissa Lim Brodowski
Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
Children’s Bureau
1
Presentation Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Overview of OCAN prevention efforts
2008 CBCAP Program Instructions
OMB PART efforts
Promoting EBP/EIPs
Other CB/OCAN Updates
2
Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
Prevention Activities
Research and
Demonstration
Public
Awareness
CBCAP activities
Federal Interagency
partnerships
3
Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
Multi-level Prevention Strategies
– Supporting State and local prevention
activities through CBCAP
– Building the evidence base on effective
prevention programs through our research
and demonstration grant activities
– Providing education and awareness at the
national level
– Enhancing Federal Interagency partnerships
and collaboration
4
CBCAP CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK (revised 10-19-06)
The purposes of the CBCAP program are: (1) to support community-based efforts to develop, operate, expand, and enhance, and where appropriate to network,
initiatives aimed at the prevention of child abuse and neglect; (2) to support networks of coordinated resources and activities to better strengthen and support
families to reduce the likelihood of child abuse and neglect; and (3) to foster understanding, appreciation, and knowledge of diverse populations in order to
effectively prevent and treat child abuse and neglect.
INPUTS
Underlying
conditions:
All families have
inherent strengths
but they also
experience
circumstances that
impact their ability to
provide for children’s
basic physical and
socioemotional
needs. These risk
factors increase for
families experiencing
geographic or social
isolation, economic
challenges, limited
education or
employment,
inexperience with
positive parenting, or
physical or mental
health issues.
Target Population:
All families, especially
those at risk for abuse
or neglect.
Resources:
CAPTA, Title II
Federal CBCAP
funding, other
Federal funds and
State and local
matching funds to
support prevention
efforts
ACTIVITIES
DIRECT
Provide support
for parents
Promote the
development of
parenting skills
Improve access
to formal/in
formal resources
Support the
needs of
individuals with
disabilities
Commit to
parent
leadership and
engagement
INDIRECT
Support
networks of
coordinated
resources
Maximize and
leverage funding
for prevention
Conduct public
awareness and
education
Advocate for
systemic change
Ongoing
assessment and
evaluation
OUTPUTS
DIRECT
Numbers served
through the
continuum of
preventive, family
centered, culturally
competent services
(i.e. family resource
and support, parent
education, mutual
support, home
visiting, respite care,
information and
referral)
Number of parents
involved with
program planning
and evaluation
INDIRECT
A public-private
network of
prevention and family
support programs
Number of funding
mechanisms that
blend Federal, State,
local and private
funds
Numbers reached
through public
awareness and
education
Number of advocacy
activities
Number of selfassessment, peer
review, evaluation
and quality assurance
efforts
SHORT-TERM &
INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES
Individual and Family/ Relationships
Levels

Increase in the number of
families’ needs assessed and
connected to needed services
within their own communities

Increase in protective factors to
prevent abuse or neglect by
parents and caregivers related to:

bonding and attachment

parental resilience

knowledge of parenting and
child development

social connections

concrete support in times of
need

Decrease in risk factors associated
with reasons for service.
Community Level

Increase in the availability of
appropriate evidence-based and
evidence-informed programs

Increase in number of agencies
developing and implementing
action plans to address
meaningful parent involvement

Increase in coordination across
prevention, child welfare and
other child and family service
systems (i.e. substance abuse,
mental health, education, early
childhood, disability)

Increase and expansion of
Statewide networks of family
support and prevention programs

Increase in the use of a
continuum of evaluation
approaches implemented
Societal level

Increase in private, State and
Federal funding for prevention
and family support

Increase in public understanding
and engagement for the
prevention of child abuse and
neglect
LONG-TERM
OUTCOMES
SAFETY




Children are protected
from abuse and neglect.
Children are maintained
in their own homes.
Decrease in rate of first
time victims.
Decrease in rate of first
time perpetrators.
PERMANENCY


Children have
permanency and stability
in their living situation.
The continuity of family
relationships and
connections is preserved
for children.
WELL-BEING





Families have enhanced
capacity to provide for
their children’s needs.
Children’s educational,
physical and mental
health needs are met.
Children have
opportunities for healthy
social and emotional
development.
Youth make a successful,
self-sufficient transition
to adulthood.
Diversity of families is
embraced and supported.
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Development of a culture of
continuous improvement in
the strengthening of families
and the prevention of abuse
and neglect.
5
2008 CBCAP Program
Instructions
• No major programmatic changes from
FY2007
• Combined reporting due date for
application and annual report for FY2009
• Added language about early childhood
linkages to Maternal and Child Health
ECCS and Strengthening Families under
collaboration
6
Application requirements and areas
for special attention
• Needs assessment
• Criteria for funded programs (RFPs and
promoting EBP/EIPs)
• Parent Leadership
• Continuum of evaluation approaches and
continuous quality improvement
• Collaboration, coordination, and network
development
7
Background on CBCAP & PART
(*OMB Program Assessment Rating Tool)
•
•
•
•
CBCAP first PARTed in 2004
Score of 43 out of 100
Findings: Results Not Demonstrated
Follow-up Steps:
– Need to develop efficiency measures for
CBCAP
– Continue to monitor program and work with
ACF/HHS on follow-up recommendations
For more on OMB PART visit:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/ or
8
Approved CBCAP Outcome
Measure
• To reduce the rate of first time victims of child
maltreatment (reported in Child Maltreatment)
Measure under development
• To reduce the rate of first time perpetrators
9
Approved CBCAP Efficiency
Measure
– To increase the percentage of CBCAP total
funding that supports evidence-based and
evidence-informed child abuse prevention
programs and practices.
– For the purposes of this efficiency measure,
we are defining evidence-based and
evidence-informed programs and practices
along a continuum which includes four
categories.
– Each level is weighted based on strength of
the evidence.
10
Vision and Purpose
•
•
•
Promote more efficient use of CBCAP funding by
investing in programs and practices with
evidence that it produces positive outcomes for
children and families.
Promote critical thinking and analysis across
the CBCAP Lead Agencies and their funded
programs so that they can be more informed
funders, consumers, and community partners
to prevent child abuse and neglect.
Foster a culture of continuous quality
improvement by promoting ongoing evaluation
and quality assurance activities across the CBCAP
Lead Agencies and their funded programs.
11
Evidence-Informed
Evidence-Based
Programs and Practices
Shared Components:
Logic Model
Manual/Protocol
Not Harmful
Accepted Practice
Commitment to Continuous Quality Improvement and Ongoing Evaluation
EvidenceInformed
Emerging
•Ongoing
collection of
pre/post Data
•Peer Review
Promising
Supported
•All elements of
emerging, plus:
•All elements of
promising, plus:
•1 study, quasiexperimental
design with
control or
comparison group
•2 randomized
clinical trials or 2
between group
design studies (or
comparable
methodology)
•Document all
•model fidelity
implementation
activities
Evidence Informed
Well
Supported
•All elements of
supported, plus:
•Multiple site
replication
•one year
sustained effect
12
Evidence-Based
Key Messages to the States
about Promoting EIP/EBPs
13
• There are no easy answers.
• The needs of the children and
families must always be kept at the
forefront.
• We must have more informed and
inclusive decision making.
14
• It is all about continuous quality
improvement and learning from
experiences.
15
• Every program should articulate their
theory of change/ logic model and be
engaged in ongoing evaluation activities.
• We need to “demand scientific rigor but
redefine scientific rigor to include new
methods for measuring impact in complex,
dynamic systems.”
Rust, G. & Cooper, L. (2007). How Can Practice-based Research Contribute to the
Elimination of Health Disparities? The Journal of the American Board of Family
Medicine 20 (2): 105-114
16
• Take the next most informed step, analyze
then go again!
• This is a long-term process that needs to
be integrated with existing planning and
implementation efforts for CBCAP.
• PART efficiency measure targets are for
the national program and individual States
are NOT being assessed on their
performance.
17
The DATA…….
18
Types of CBCAP programs
funded 2006-2007
(draft 3/11/08 – 50 States reporting)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Indirect
Administrative
Unknown
Well-Supported
Supported
Promising
Emerging/
EIP
2006
2007
19
Data from
FY2006 data
CBCAP Annual
Reports
Unweighted total $18.5 million
for all EIP/EBP
or 55%
FY2007 data
Weighted total
for all EIP/EBP
$8 million or
27%
$9.5 million or
30.9%
baseline
one year
change
MET TARGET! 20
(data as of 3/11/08 from 50
States)
$19.9 million or
53.6%
*This number reported to
OMB.
Annual Target
3% increase
over prior year
Data collection and reporting
issues
• First year that States reported specific
infrastructure costs to implement EBP/
EIPs (but only 26 States reported)
• Data quality issues continue and need for
more technical assistance on this area
• The same program can be listed on
different categories for different States
21
Resource needs
– More information about “strength of evidence”
– A resource list which ranks CAP programs
into the different levels
– Proactive strategies/ tools to promote, select,
and assess appropriate EBPs and EIPs
– Tools to help conduct fidelity assessment
and collect process data on
implementation
22
Challenges and Barriers
– More knowledge needed about how to
assess, choose, and implement EBP/ EIP
approaches
– Concerns about lack of funding and capacity
– Limitations of EBPs as solutions and
reluctance of stakeholders
– Ability and resources to monitor quality
– Diversity among State and other Federal
agencies priorities, definitions, and philosophy
around EBPs
23
Training and Technical
Assistance
• Training on Guidelines on EBP/EIP
• Matrix of evidence-based child
maltreatment prevention programs
• Discussion tree tool
• More to come!
24
Other OCAN Updates
• Regional Partnership Grants (53 new
meth/SA grants)
• Discretionary grant announcements
– CBCAP Tribal and migrant programs
– Home visitation funding TBA
– Others TBA
25
National level: Public
awareness
• 2007-2008 Community Resource Packet
• Child Welfare Information Gateway –
Prevention Page
• National Prevention Partners
http://www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/
26
Federal level:
Interagency efforts
• Federal Interagency Workgroup on Child
Abuse and Neglect
– Interagency website or database of related
activities
• Prevention Subcommittee
– Informational conference calls
• Early Childhood Federal Partners
27
Next Steps
• Continue to support States and build a
learning community with grantees and
other partners
• Continue dialogue about definitions of
EBP and EIP with other Federal agencies
• Share lessons learned with the field
28
Questions and Answers
29
“People want answers but the
future is in the questions.”
Glenda H. Eoyang
Human Systems Dynamics
30
Contact Information
• Melissa Lim Brodowski
Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
Children’s Bureau
phone: 202-205-2629
email: [email protected]
31