Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:24 am
Time: 2:24 am
Results for family drug courts
2 results foundAuthor: Young, Nancy K. Title: Needs Assessment Report Summary: The purpose of this Family Drug Court Needs Assessment (FDC-NA) is to identify the training and technical assistance (TTA) needs of Family Drug Courts (FDC). The Center for Children and Families Futures (CCFF) designed and developed methods to collect and analyze data from multiple sources to identify FDC TTA needs. Primary data collection and analyses were conducted in different formats: - FDC TTA online survey-which asked FDC practitioners to rate the extent they were experiencing barriers in implementing key FDC strategies and identify specific barriers and TTA needs of their FDC - In-depth stakeholder interview with State and Federal stakeholders-to gather their input on the TTA needs of FDCs and feedback on preliminary findings of the FDC-NA Secondary analysis was conducted from three data sources: 1) Technical Assistance (TA) Tracker-which is a web-based data system used by CCFF to manage and analyze the content of previously received TTA requests 2) Post-webinar online surveys-completed by attendees from the FDC Learning Academy regarding their feedback on priority content for future webinar presentations 3) FDC Self-Assessment Surveys-administered to 16 jurisdictions regarding their level of agreement in implementing key FDC recommendations. Through this design and process of the FDC-NA, CCFF was able to draw from its prior TTA work and garner input from FDC practitioners and stakeholders in determining the current TTA needs of FDCs. The findings showed widespread interest in and the need for TTA across a broad range of topics. A synthesis of the data revealed four priority content areas and specific topics for TTA: 1) Services to Parents-Respondents cited the challenges of meeting the complex and multiple needs of parents as a result of trauma, dual-diagnosis, domestic violence and the use of medication-assisted treatment (MAT). Specific content for TTA included engagement and retention strategies, recovery supports, and serving parents in MAT. 2) Funding and Sustainability-A lack of continued funding for staff positions, treatment and a broad service array were raised as barriers to sustaining FDCs. There is a need to engage sites in active sustainability planning by exploring barriers and working towards strategic activities including cost analyses, the use of baseline measures and outcome data, and exploring refinancing and redirection strategies. 3) Cross-Systems Knowledge-A need for ongoing cross-system training to bridge the divisions between professional disciplines, agency mandates, values and practice was cited frequently by respondents. These include training in gender-specific issues, trauma, co-occurring conditions, enhancing motivation and dynamics of addiction and recovery. Details: Lake Forest, CA: Center for Children and Family Futures, 2014. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 17, 2014 at: http://www.cffutures.com/files/publications/OJJDP_TTA_NAR_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.cffutures.com/files/publications/OJJDP_TTA_NAR_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 131940 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug OffendersFamily Drug CourtsProblem Solving Courts |
Author: Roberts, Ellie Title: Family Drug and Alcohol Court National Unit: independent evaluation Summary: The Family Drug and Alcohol Courts (FDAC) aim to improve outcomes for children and families by providing an alternative way of working with parents involved in care proceedings who are experiencing substance misuse. FDAC encourages parents to believe recovery and change are possible, alongside a realistic understanding of the challenges they face. Research published by Brunel University in 2014 indicated that the FDAC model was promising; showing that a higher proportion of parents whose case was heard in FDAC had ceased misusing substances by the end of proceedings, and more FDAC than comparison families were reunited with their children. Additionally, proportionately fewer children in FDAC families experienced new neglect or abuse in the first year following reunification (Harwin et al., 2014). Following the publication of the initial research by Brunel University, careful consideration was given to how best to scale-up FDAC in order to improve outcomes for more children and families. This resulted in a successful funding application to the Department of Education’s (DfE) Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme (hereafter the Innovation Programme) to create the FDAC 'National Unit'. The National Unit was originally commissioned to support 4 new sites to set-up FDACs. However, over the course of the first month, the number of sites increased to 9 due to the inclusion of 5 West Yorkshire local authorities, and Southampton joining the community of practice. Recent research, conducted by Brunel University London, Lancaster University and RyanTunnardBrown with methodological guidance from NatCen, has found evidence of the sustained benefits of FDAC. For example, the 'After FDAC: outcomes 5 years later' study, funded by the Innovation Programme, estimated that a higher proportion of FDAC than comparison reunification mothers abstained from drugs or alcohol over the 5 year follow-up (Harwin et al., 2016). Overview of evaluation In 2015 NatCen Social Research was commissioned by DfE to evaluate the FDAC National Unit. The evaluation aimed to gather an in-depth understanding of the work and contribution of the National Unit from the perspective of key stakeholders. The evaluation was underpinned by a theory of change and involved 32 in-depth qualitative interviews with individuals from new FDAC sites and 13 interviews with other stakeholders including members of the National Unit; individuals from sites who launched their FDAC before the National Unit was established; and key government stakeholders. NatCen was also commissioned to provide independent methodological advice and guidance on 2 further studies on FDAC: • NatCen acted as a critical friend on the methodology of the 2016 evaluation of FDAC, 'After FDAC: outcomes 5 years later', funded by the Innovation Programme and conducted by Brunel University London, Lancaster University and RyanTunnardBrown (Harwin et al., 2016) • NatCen provided methodological guidance to the Centre for Justice Innovation on their research assessing the value for money of FDAC, 'Better Courts: the financial impact of the London Family Drug and Alcohol Court' (Reeder et al., 2016). Details: London: UK Department of Education, 2017. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme Evaluation Report 12: Accessed January 30, 2017 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/585193/Family_drug_and_alcohol_court_national_unit_evaluation.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/585193/Family_drug_and_alcohol_court_national_unit_evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 144881 Keywords: AlcoholismDrug CourtFamily Drug CourtsProblem-Solving Courts |