Search

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to share anecdotally how the pandemic is affecting children, families and some of the frontline local services that support them across three continents. Design/methodology/approach: Three members of Family for Every Child across three continents detail some of the day-to-day challenges they are facing in their work with children and families as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. Findings: Social distancing and fear of the virus are hampering front line organisations in Africa, Europe and South America, bringing additional challenges to keeping children safe. Originality/value: These three case studies give a snapshot of the issues faced by three non-governmental children's organisations over three continents during July 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose - In 2010, 'The Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behaviour' published a major report. This paper critically assesses the report by placing it within a context of juvenile/youth justice policy reform extending over the last 50 years.Design/methodology/approach - The paper is based upon national and international policy analysis and comparative research.Findings - In recent years the persistent politicisation of youth crime and an obsession with 'tough' responses to child offenders in England and Wales have produced one of the most problematic youth justice regimes in the Western world. Against this backdrop the report of the Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behaviour is designed to influence policy reform. By drawing on an international evidence base, this paper assesses the merits of the Commission's proposals and the extent to which they signify a 'fresh start' or a 'false dawn'.Originality/value - The paper argues that international evidence, alongside the provisions of both global and pan-European human rights standards, provides a compelling case for raising the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales, for developing youth justice policy and practice in accordance with the principle of minimum necessary intervention and for abolishing prison service and private sector penal custody for children and young people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Signs of Safety (SoS) is a strengths-based approach to child protection casework that has been widely adopted in countries across the world. The purpose of this paper is to report on a study that aimed to synthesise the many evaluations of SoS that have been conducted to assess their strengths and limitations. The intention is to identify the aspects which should be explored further and those that remain unexamined to inform future evaluations. Design/methodology/approach: The study collated and then examined many of the evaluations that are in the public domain as well as some of those that were conducted within agencies and have not been made publicly available. Findings: At the present time (early 2019), the evidence base for SoS is limited. Independent, robust research needs to be undertaken over time to build on the studies that have been conducted. New research must be designed to fill gaps and be capable of producing the evidence required and it must address its own limitations. Originality/value: This study is the most comprehensive contemporary review of the evaluations of SoS that have been conducted to the best of the authors' knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into the potential of technology transfer in prevention interventions. It argues that contextual factors are more identifiable and more malleable than the cliché of “culture” as a barrier to implementation might suggest. The key question is how various contextual factors impact on programme implementation and effectiveness in the different cultures of a multifaceted continent such as Europe, and how successful programmes adapt to various contexts. Design/methodology/approach – Using a questionnaire survey, input was collected from people involved in the adaptation and implementation of the Strengthening Families Programme (SFP) in several European countries. Findings – The publications and experiences of the SFP implementers and evaluators in most of the European countries where it was introduced suggest that the programme is both feasible and effective (where outcomes are available). To achieve this, however, the implementers spent a considerable amount of time and effort to prepare, pre-test and consult with their target populations in order to adjust SFP to culture and context. This paper suggests restricting the use of “culture” to a set of norms and values, and to distinguish this from “context” which describes social and political organisation. Even though both condition each other, it is helpful to address culture and context separately when adapting prevention programmes. Research limitations/implications – Outcome data were not available for all implementations of SFP and some very recent ones in Austria, France and Italy could not be included in the questionnaire survey. Practical implications – An examination of social capital might help implementers to anticipate resistance from the target population that seems to emanate from history, culture and context. The level of trust of others and institutions and the willingness to co-operate with them can heavily influence the readiness of drug prevention service planners, commissioners and providers, as well as the target population, to adopt interventions and other behaviours. Programmes seem to have key principles that make them effective and that should not be modified in an adaptation: a particular example is the programme protocol. Other aspects, such as wording, pictures and the content of examples used to illustrate some issues do have to be modified and are essential for an intervention to be well-accepted and understood. In some programmes, the effective principles – so-called “kernels” – are identifiable although, overall, prevention research still strives to identify them. Social implications – Implementing complex programmes that require the cooperation of many stakeholders might increase social capital in the communities involved. Originality/value – The paper examines the common belief among many European prevention professionals that programmes from abroad, particularly from North America, cannot be implemented in Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – This paper is about the implementation of the evidence-based practice paradigm in child welfare in Europe. Our main question is whether there is a pan-European perspective on evidence-based working in this area, and if so, how it can be characterised. Design/methodology/approach – We try to answer this question by means of a theoretical analysis, which is focusing on three issues: the construct "Europe", recent evolutions in child welfare on the continent and the implementation of the evidence-based practice paradigm in child welfare. Findings – Europe is a patchwork of regions, cultures and laws. This impacts practice. Since more than a decade now, the evidence-based practice paradigm conquered child welfare. This evolution was preceded by a movement towards children's rights and quality of care. The way the paradigm is interpreted and put into practice in Europe is largely influenced by regional policies and local view points, which means there is no pan-European perspective on evidence-based working in child welfare. Originality/value – The lack of a pan-European perspective may be a strength, because it helps to blend evidence-based working with the need for an inclusive and culturally sensitive child welfare practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Child impact statements are a tool for assessing the potential impact of policy, provision, legislation etc on children. Although now predominantly based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the concept preceded this Convention. This article is based on a literature review and a series of face-toface and telephone interviews with relevant Irish civil and public servants and NGOs. It sets out the rationale for child impact statements and the experience of using them in Sweden, the UK, Flanders and Ireland, before highlighting the strengths and weaknesses in existing models. It then presents a number of difficulties with the approach as a means of improving children's well-being and argues that there is insufficient evidence to support their widespread introduction as a primary means of achieving positive policy outcomes for children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European Union (EU) indicators on poverty and social exclusion employ only two child breakdowns: the proportion of children living in households with incomes below 60% of the national median using the modified OECD equivalence scale and the proportion of children living in workless households. The UK also uses these indicators in the Opportunities for All series. This article first develops a new indicator of child poverty based on income, subjective and deprivation indicators which may be more reliable than income alone. It then explores the extent to which income poverty and worklessness represent international variation in child well-being using an index that we have developed. The conclusions are that: (1) relative income poverty and worklessness are poor indicators of child well-being, especially for some of the new EU countries; (2) deprivation has a stronger association with overall well-being than relative income poverty or worklessness; (3) there are a number of other single indicators of child well-being that could be used as proxies for overall child well-being; and (4) The EU (and the UK) could easily develop its own index of child well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]