and reach thousands of daily visitors
20 JULY 2009
NO 1463
Re-engineering group care
I told you I was optimistic. I didn't say we don't have a lot of work to do if group care is going to reclaim its place as the creative focal point in family centered, community enhancing systems of care. We will need to take the lead in re-engineering residential services, responding to six crucial challenges as we re-tool on a program by program basis:
First, we need to get serious about changing our programs to support and include families. This may mean taking a hard look at our practice theories as well as our day-today business practices, but it is an essential first step. (Ainsworth, Small, 1995)
Second, we must accept a big part of the responsibility for making and maintaining permanent family connections for all children we care for. "Stuck" children are stuck not only because the public child welfare agencies are struggling, but also because we on the private side have done too little to be part of the solution. This must change.
• Third, we need to continue to make new, structural partnerships with providers of foster care and post-adoption services; with public schools and educational collaboratives; and with inpatient and outpatient mental health providers, including managed care entities. This means new hybrid service delivery products if we are to be successful. They need us, we need them.
Fourth, on the high end, we need to come as close as resources and intervention models allow to "no reject — no eject" practices. This applies to our child clients, but also to families who don't fit the mold we're comfortable with.
• Fifth, we need to commit real resources to post-discharge continuity of care. We need to be in the mix of family supports for at least one year after children exit our group care programs. Resources here means a new look at staff resources, especially new professional opportunities for campus-based child care workers to learn how to be available to families in the community.
Sixth, and most important, we need to be flexible about methods of helping, where we deliver helping, and the duration of residential stays in our group care programs. Flexibly timed, intensive campus-based programs will always be important, but we can and should be much more a presence in family homes and community schools.
If we can be proactive rather than reactive to critics and bean-counters, I have no doubt that residential group care is poised for a new era of leadership service on behalf of all children and families. The next few years should be real interesting.
RICHARD SMALL
Small, R. from a conference paper substantially based on: Stuck, E.N., Small, R.W., and Ainsworth, F., (2000), Questioning the Continuum of Care: Toward a reconceptualization of child welfare services, Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 17(3), pp. 79-92}
