Qualitative process evaluation of the Fostering Changes program for foster carers as part of the Confidence in Care randomized controlled trial.

Confidence in Care Foster care Foster care training Fostering Changes Logic model Process evaluation

Journal

Child abuse & neglect
ISSN: 1873-7757
Titre abrégé: Child Abuse Negl
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7801702

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
received: 19 03 2020
revised: 14 09 2020
accepted: 30 09 2020
pubmed: 17 10 2020
medline: 8 7 2021
entrez: 16 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Fostering Changes is an in-service training program for foster carers designed to enhance carer skills, coping strategies and carer-child relationships. The training program has been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial comparing Fostering Changes to usual care. To conduct a qualitative process evaluation drawing on stakeholder perspectives to describe the logic model of Fostering Changes, identify potential mechanisms of impact of the program and enhance understanding of the trial results. Participants were stakeholders in the Fostering Changes program delivered in Wales, UK including foster carers invited to attend the program (18 attendees, eight non-attendees), two program developers, five trainers, 12 social workers who attended or recruited to the program. Total population sampling with qualitative data collection methods. Qualitative data were subject to thematic analysis. A logic model summarising the program resources, activities and anticipated outcomes was generated. Implementation themes were quality of training, setting and group composition. Mechanisms of impact were identified with themes falling into two categories, group process and skills development. Potential barriers to effectiveness included a poor fit between the carer needs and the program in relation to levels of challenge being faced, age-appropriate content and responsiveness. Contextual factors were also relevant, including the existing relationship between foster carers and the agency and the perceived value of training. Although the group aspects of the program were well received, the program itself did not help foster carers deal with more complex challenges and needed to be more targeted in terms of carers needs and circumstances.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Fostering Changes is an in-service training program for foster carers designed to enhance carer skills, coping strategies and carer-child relationships. The training program has been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial comparing Fostering Changes to usual care.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a qualitative process evaluation drawing on stakeholder perspectives to describe the logic model of Fostering Changes, identify potential mechanisms of impact of the program and enhance understanding of the trial results.
PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING
Participants were stakeholders in the Fostering Changes program delivered in Wales, UK including foster carers invited to attend the program (18 attendees, eight non-attendees), two program developers, five trainers, 12 social workers who attended or recruited to the program.
METHODS
Total population sampling with qualitative data collection methods. Qualitative data were subject to thematic analysis.
RESULTS
A logic model summarising the program resources, activities and anticipated outcomes was generated. Implementation themes were quality of training, setting and group composition. Mechanisms of impact were identified with themes falling into two categories, group process and skills development. Potential barriers to effectiveness included a poor fit between the carer needs and the program in relation to levels of challenge being faced, age-appropriate content and responsiveness. Contextual factors were also relevant, including the existing relationship between foster carers and the agency and the perceived value of training.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the group aspects of the program were well received, the program itself did not help foster carers deal with more complex challenges and needed to be more targeted in terms of carers needs and circumstances.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33065358
pii: S0145-2134(20)30423-3
doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104768
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

104768

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Susan Channon (S)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ChannonS2@cardiff.ac.uk.

Elinor Coulman (E)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: JohnE1@cardiff.ac.uk.

Gwenllian Moody (G)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: MoodyG@cardiff.ac.uk.

Lucy Brookes-Howell (L)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: Brookes-HowellLC@cardiff.ac.uk.

Rebecca Cannings-John (R)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: CanningsRL@cardiff.ac.uk.

Mandy Lau (M)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Electronic address: LauTM@cardiff.ac.uk.

Alyson Rees (A)

Children's Social Care Research and Development Centre (CASCADE), School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ReesA1@cardiff.ac.uk.

Jeremy Segrott (J)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom; Centre for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Public Health Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), Cardiff University, United Kingdom. Electronic address: SegrottJ@cardiff.ac.uk.

Jonathan Scourfield (J)

Children's Social Care Research and Development Centre (CASCADE), School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, United Kingdom; Centre for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Public Health Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), Cardiff University, United Kingdom. Electronic address: Scourfield@cardiff.ac.uk.

Michael Robling (M)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom; Centre for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Public Health Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), Cardiff University, United Kingdom. Electronic address: RoblingMR@cardiff.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH