Promoting Evidence-informed Practice in Child Welfare in Ontario: Progress, Challenges and Future Directions.

Paper explores the findings from a province-wide program evaluation of Practice and Research Together (PART: www. partcanada.org); The paper is a unique evaluation of a knowledge exchange program and provides interesting analysis of how front-line practitioners, supervisors and senior leaders engage, utilize and contribute to evidence-informed practice.

Moving Beyond the Administrative: Supervisors' Perspectives on Clinical Supervision in Child Welfare

This study contributes to the emerging knowledge base of child welfare supervision. An exploratory study examined the beliefs, practices, and experiences of 51 child welfare supervisors in Ontario, Canada. Eight focus groups were held with supervisors from a range of settings cross the province. The study identified a number of interwoven factors at the organizational, supervisory, and practice level that affect the nature of supervision offered. Implications are drawn for child welfare practice, models of supervision which integrate administrative, clinical and educational features, organizational culture, and training new supervisors.

Walking the Tightrope: Using Power and Authority in Child Welfare Supervision

Recognizing the importance of understanding the way in which supervisors in child welfare perceive their administrative responsibilities and use of power and authority, an exploratory study was conducted. Supervisors in child welfare agencies in urban and rural settings participated in focus groups and discussed the impact of macro and micro factors on their performance. Policy changes, including using new approaches to child welfare, and organizational culture had a major affect on the way they offered supervision. At the micro level, their use of power was related to elements in their relationships with frontline workers and their own professional development. Implications for child welfare practice and for new and experienced supervisors are presented.

Meta-Theoretical Paradigms Underpinning Risk in Child Welfare: Towards a Position of Methodological Pragmatism

The aim of this paper is to explore the ‘natural attitude’ underpinning risk practices in child welfare. This refers to various taken-for-granted approaches to risk that social workers and other human service professionals draw upon in their everyday practice. The approach proceeds by identifying and critically examining three key, meta-theoretical paradigms on risk which typically shape the natural attitude. They are labelled ‘objectivist’, ‘subjectivist’ and ‘critical’. The ontological, epistemological, axiological and methodological premises supporting each paradigm, and how they shape risk practices, are then reviewed leading to a composite, meta-theoretical position on risk termed ‘methodological pragmatism’. This position draws on the strengths of each paradigm and is formulated into ten propositions which consider how risk should be approached in child welfare. Within this corpus of thought salient themes are endorsed such as the need for method triangulation, an examination of ‘deep causality’, and the promotion of emancipatory perspectives. By critically reflecting on meta-theory, the paper contributes to the development of substantive theories of risk assessment and management in child welfare.

Assessing parenting capacity in child protection: towards a knowledge-based model

The assessment of parenting capacity continues to engender public concern in cases of suspected harm to children. This paper outlines a model for approaching this task based on the application of three key domains of knowledge in social work relating to facts, theory and practice wisdom. The McMaster Model of Family Assessment is identified out of this process and reworked to give it a sharper focus on parenting roles and responsibilities. Seven formative dimensions of parenting are then elicited and combined with an analytical process of identifying strengths, concerns, prospects for growth and impact on child outcomes. The resulting assessment framework, it is argued, adds rigour to professional judgements about parenting capacity and enhances formulations on risk in child protection.