A Case Study of an Agency's Three Family Preservation Contracts

This article presents a case study of a nonprofit child welfare agency that delivered family preservation services under three different purchase-of-service (POS) contracts. The research specifically focuses on how certain POS contract provisions and reimbursement rates influence the delivery of family preservation services. The three contacts examined differed on criteria, such as reimbursement mechanism, service volume, definition of clientele, and reimbursement rate. The study found that as reimbursement rates decline and as administrative costs increase, the service provider struggled with cash flow, staffing, fundraising, and service provision, among other things. It is concluded that contract-related resources, policies, and procedures impact provider agencies in multiple, significant ways that are critical to the provision of services and the accomplishment of positive client outcomes.

Idiographic Self-Monitoring Instruments to Empower Client Participation and Evaluate Outcome in Intensive Family Preservation Services

Intensive Family Preservation Services seek to reflect the values of focusing on client strengths and viewing clients as colleagues. To promote those values, Intensive Family Preservation Programs should include a systematic form of client self monitoring in their packages of outcome measures. This paper presents a model of idiographic self-monitoring used in time series, single system research design developed for Family Partners, a family preservation program of the School for Contemporary Education in Annandale, Virginia. The evaluation model provides a means of empowering client families to utilize their strengths and promote their status as colleague in determining their own goals, participating in the change process, and measuring their own progress.

Client Home or Agency Office? How Do We Decide Where to See Our Clients?

Decisions about location of services sometimes appear to be made more on the basis of agency preference than assessment of need. Today the profession has enough experience with service locations that it is possible to develop more clear guidelines for the decision about where work with clients should take place, in the client’s home or nearby community or in the practitioner’s office. This study was conducted with two purposes; 1) to identify at a higher level of evidence the various reasons for seeing clients in their own homes and nearby community setting; and 2) to demonstrate how readily available information can be used to gradually increase the level of evidence by which practice decisions are made.