Appendix 1 - Collaborative Change Framework

Anc hor

Engaging Fathers and Paternal Relatives in
Child Welfare: Change Framework for the
Breakthrough Series Collaborative

June 4, 2019

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Acknowledgments
The Fathers and Continuous Learning in Child Welfare Project would like to thank the following
individuals for their contributions to the Collaborative Change Framework.

Experts
Ryan Bennett, Parents in Partnership, Los
Angeles Department of Children and Family
Services

Jason Mahoney, Wake County Human
Services, Child Welfare Division

Matt Brega, Contra Costa County,
Department of Child Support Services

Angela Parks-Pyles, Los Angeles
Department of Children and Family Services

Reginald Carter, Los Angeles Department
of Children and Family Services

Armon Perry, University of Louisville,
Kent School of Social Work

Sacha M. Coupet, Loyola University
Chicago School of Law

Josephine 'Jo' Rutledge, Wake County
Human Services, Child Welfare Division

Tony Craddock, Wake County Human
Services, Child Welfare Division

Ken Sanders, Colorado Practitioners
Network for Fathers and
Families/Fatherhood Consultant

Ed Davies, Children’s Home & Aid
Power of Fathers

Stacey Shipe, Binghamton University

Kate Eller, Cook County Office of the
Public Guardian

Maureen Tabor, Formerly with Family
Connections Baltimore

Justin Harty, University of Chicago,
School of Social Service Administration

Elizabeth Thompson, Department of
Family and Community Interventions at
Kennedy Krieger Institute

Michael Huesca, Paternal
Opportunities Programs and Services
Yadira Ijeh, Connecticut Department of
Children and Families

Tyreasa Washington, University of North
Carolina at Greensboro, School of Health
and Human Services

Project Team
Jennifer Agosti
Jennifer Bellamy
Roseana Bess
Douglas Ortiz

Sarah Palmer
Jill Spielfogel
Matthew Stagner
Candice Talkington

This project is supported by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, in the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) under contract number HHSP233201500035I/HHSP23337025T. This information or content and
conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by
HHS or the U.S. Government.

ii

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

GLOBAL AIM
The Breakthrough Series Collaborative (BSC) is a unique opportunity to bring together the
expertise of key child welfare stakeholders using an established implementation and quality
improvement methodology to test, spread, and sustain practice improvements. The specific focus
of this BSC is to identify and engage fathers and paternal relatives to improve placement stability
and permanency outcomes for children in care.

PURPOSE OF COLLABORATIVE CHANGE FRAMEWORK
The first phase in the BSC approach is to develop a collaborative change framework (CCF). The
framework is developed from the existing evidence base and the experience of stakeholders at
different levels of the system. The CCF depicts a vision of a child welfare agency that effectively
engages fathers and paternal relatives along five key domains. Therefore, it is a visionary model
for what the BSC activities work towards. During the BSC, the CCF will serve as a guide for
understanding how complicated goals can be broken down into manageable strategies that can be
tested and adapted in short periods of time. The CCF describes the key areas in which sites will
make changes and serves as a conceptual map for conducting small tests of change and tracking
progress over time.
The BSC approach emphasizes knowledge and skill building, and supports collaborative, multilevel teams (child welfare researchers, administrators, frontline staff, and service users) to test
ideas using implementation science and improvement processes. “All teach, all learn” is phrase
used in the BSC to demonstrate group learning processes. In the spirit of “all teach, all learn”,
BSC teams will share information about uptake of activities to engage fathers and paternal
relatives at their respective sites, and use the CCF to guide their actions. Group learning in the
BSC helps enhance information sharing and support in order to make sustainable changes.
Information learned through the BSC process will provide important lessons learned to the larger
community of child welfare systems aiming to improve engagement of fathers and paternal
relatives.

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW
Fathers and paternal relatives are important sources of support for youth involved in the child
welfare system (Bellamy 2009; Coakley 2013). Research suggests that high quality father
involvement is beneficial to children’s well-being and development (Lamb 2004), and helps
protect against child maltreatment (Bumpass and Lu 2000; Gaudin and Dubowitz 1997).
Research also suggests that involvement of nonresident fathers has important benefits for
children, including improving their cognitive ability and educational achievement, psychological
well-being and social behavior, and financial security (Adamsons 2018; Amato and Gilbreth
1999; Carlson 2006). Although families in the child welfare system often experience a range of
issues that impact their ability to care for children, evidence is mounting that father involvement
can improve children’s case outcomes. For example, father involvement provides additional
permanency options for children, and reduces length of stay for children in care (Burrus et al.
1

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

2012; Coakley 2013). Additionally, when fathers are not able to reunify with their children,
paternal relatives serve as important legal and emotional permanency options (Kinney and
Jenkins 2010).
Nonetheless, findings from Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs) reveal that child
welfare agencies struggle to engage fathers and paternal relatives (JBS International 2016).
Research from 2007–2010 revealed that no state agency had met federal standards related to
father assessment, engagement, visitation, or service provision (Primus 2017). The reviews
showed that agencies were less likely to make concerted efforts to involve fathers in case
planning than they were to involve mothers (52 versus 67 percent). Similarly, mothers were more
likely than fathers to receive encouragement to participate in their children’s school activities,
medical appointments, and after-school programs (45 versus 19 percent). Agencies were also less
likely to engage paternal relatives than maternal relatives. For instance, cases were more likely to
be in compliance regarding efforts to identify, locate, inform, and evaluate maternal relatives
versus paternal relatives (57 versus 48 percent).
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) contracted with Mathematica and the
University of Denver (DU) to conduct this project. The project aims to achieve three goals: (1)
learn more about how the BSC approach works in the child welfare setting, (2) test whether
using the BSC approach strengthens engagement of fathers and paternal relatives, and (3) build
the knowledge base for strategies to engage fathers and paternal relatives.
For the purposes of this BSC, fathers are defined as males who may be biological fathers,
putative fathers, or stepfathers. Fathers can either live with the child or be non-residential.
Paternal relatives are defined as individuals whose connection to the child is through the father.
They may be biological, legal, or fictive kin.
Additionally, we define engagement as a continuous process that involves valuing and actively
seeking father and paternal relative input and perspective into planning for involvement in their
children’s lives. Within the child welfare context, engagement can include actively identifying
and locating fathers; evaluating both maternal and paternal relatives as placement options; and
assessing family needs. Additionally, it includes ensuring frequent and quality contact between
children and their fathers, supporting positive relationships between children and their fathers
and paternal relatives, and including fathers and paternal relatives in case planning and all
decision making about their children’s lives (Administration for Children and Families 2018).
Finally, this project’s definition of engagement includes developing an organizational culture in
which fathers and paternal relatives are prioritized to the same extent as mothers. Cultivating
racial equity and actively valuing the role of fathers and paternal relatives in children’s lives is
necessary to engagement.

THE CHALLENGE
Child welfare agencies may struggle to engage fathers and paternal relatives in service planning
and as permanency options for several reasons, ranging from family dynamics, child welfare
structural barriers, implicit bias, and fathers’ own struggles that impact their ability to be
2

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

involved. From the very beginning of a family’s involvement with the child welfare system,
initial contact with mothers can affect practice with fathers. For example, staff tend to rely on
information about the father from the mother or child, but mothers are sometimes reluctant to
provide such information (Malm et al. 2006; O’Donnell et al. 2005. In particular, mothers could
be reluctant to divulge information to caseworkers because they might fear losing their children,
they might wish to exclude fathers when there is a history of abuse or conflict between the
parents, or they might be unwilling to involve fathers in what they perceive to be “their territory”
(parenting) (Ferguson and Hogan 2004).
Staff also face structural barriers to engaging fathers and paternal relatives, such as a lack of
standards and guidelines for engaging fathers and paternal relatives. They may also have large
caseloads that can limit the time available to caseworkers to guide and instruct fathers and
paternal relatives—even when the agency has clear guidelines for engaging nonresident fathers
(Malm et al. 2006; Smithgall et al. 2009). Additionally, some research suggests that staff might
have limiting beliefs about whether fathers want to be involved with their children and might
have preferences for working with mothers (Best Practice Next Practice 2002). Historically,
parenting has been considered the domain of mothers, and limiting attitudes and biases about
fathers might remain as child welfare systems attempt to improve parenting.
For fathers of color, barriers to engagement are reflective of both gender and racial disparities.
Children and families of color are overrepresented in the child welfare system and shoulder an
unequal burden—including higher rates of reports, investigations, and placement in care; longer
lengths of stay in care; and reduced exits to permanence (Martin and Connelly 2015). Although
there are multiple reasons for disproportionate representation and the disparities in outcomes,
studies over the past decade have identified systemic bias as a key factor (Estefan 2012; JonsonReid et al. 2009; Minoff 2018). There is growing recognition in the child welfare field that a
commitment to addressing these disparities requires a focus on and commitment to racial equity
(Miller and Esenstad 2015).1
Furthermore, fathers whose children are brought into care often face their own barriers to
involvement. Economic instability, poor mental health and substance abuse, and limited
transportation can prevent fathers from being involved with their children to the degree that they
desire. In some cases, fathers may want to avoid contact with the child welfare system. For
example, fathers might fear that involvement with the child welfare system will exacerbate their
problems with the criminal justice system. According to a study conducted by the National
Family Preservation Network (NFPN; 2010), caseworkers suggested that fathers might be
hesitant to establish paternity, fearing the imposition of child support obligations that they might

1

Racial Equity Tools (https://www.racialequitytools.org/glossary#racial-equity) defines racial equity as “The
condition that would be achieved if one's racial identity no longer predicted, in a statistical sense, how one fares.” It
states, “When we use the term, we are thinking about racial equity as one part of racial justice, and thus we also
include work to address root causes of inequities, not just their manifestation. This includes elimination of policies,
practices, attitudes and cultural messages that reinforce differential outcomes by race or fail to eliminate them.”
Racial Equity Tools defines racial justice as “the proactive reinforcement of policies, practices, attitudes and actions
that produce equitable power, access, opportunities, treatment, impacts and outcomes for all.”
3

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

not be able to fulfill. Other fathers may be reluctant to participate in court proceedings regarding
visitation when they cannot pay child support (NFPN 2010).
In response to these barriers, agencies have implemented strategies that include caseworker
training in engaging fathers and paternal relatives, targeted collaborative practice with parents,
and links to community resources (Kendall and Pilnik 2007). For example, some agencies have
implemented engagement programs for incarcerated fathers in child welfare–involved families
that focus on developing relationships between fathers and children after prison (Kendall and
Pilnik 2007). Other agencies have attempted to engage extended family members, including
paternal relatives, by implementing family group decision making (FGDM). FGDM is a
promising practice for bringing immediate and extended family together to make decisions about
how to care for their children and develop a plan for services. It has taken various forms and
names (for example, family team meetings, family group conferences), but it aims to promote
family involvement in child welfare decision-making processes. Agencies have also
implemented other evidence-informed engagement strategies including motivational
interviewing and solution-based casework. Agencies have used motivational interviewing to
counsel families and inspire lifestyle change (Hohman 2012). Other agencies used solution-based
casework to support families through challenges and safety concerns. Caseworkers implementing
solution-based casework help families develop plans to gain the skills necessary to address
challenges (van Zyl et al. 2014).
Despite efforts to improve caseworkers’ engagement of fathers and paternal relatives, uptake of
these practices has been slow. Evidence suggests that caseworkers’ time constraints limit the
time they spend engaging fathers and paternal relatives (Malm et al. 2006; Smithgall et al. 2009).
Moreover, when fathers and paternal relatives are identified and located, neither parents nor
caseworkers describe service plans as documents created collaboratively or reflecting mutual
influence (Smith 2008). For these reasons, child welfare agencies still struggle to engage fathers
and paternal relatives. Even today, relatively little is known about what works to engage fathers
and paternal relatives that can guide child welfare. Thus, the need to identify and test practices
that help improve father engagement is critical (Campbell et al. 2015).

THE OPPORTUNITY
The BSC provides a unique opportunity to bring together research evidence with the expertise of
child welfare stakeholders through an established implementation and quality improvement
methodology to address the current challenges in engaging fathers and paternal relatives. The
BSC quality improvement and implementation method (Institute for Healthcare Improvement
2003) has been used to implement and spread promising and evidence-based practices in child
welfare (Casey Family Programs 2009, 2011; Conradi et al. 2011).
The BSC provides coaching and support to encourage learning and information sharing across
teams (Agosti et al. 2013). Given that states are likely already making some efforts toward
improving father and paternal relative engagement, the BSC aims to build upon existing efforts
and best practices, and create community and system partnerships to move toward a system-wide
change in practice. The BSC approach strives to complement and align with other priorities and
4

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

efforts, recognizing that integration and alignment are essential for sustainable development. The
specific focus on father engagement will help make child welfare practice more inclusive of the
needs of the whole family, offering the potential to achieve better outcomes for children and
families.

Collaborative Change Framework
The CCF was developed through a group process. Scientific and gray literature were used to
determine key themes for engaging fathers and paternal relatives in child welfare. Input from
researchers with child welfare knowledge was also included in an original version of the CCF.
The CCF was then shared with a group of experts working in child welfare and other related
communities who were working with fathers and paternal relatives to promote their involvement
in child welfare services. The group spent a day refining the change framework in order to
develop the final framework included in this document.
The CCF comprises five domains. Although these domains are inter-related, they are described
as distinct conceptual areas for the purpose of the BSC in order to organize implementation
teams’ efforts toward practice changes. Taken together, the five domains describe what is needed
to create a system that fully engages fathers and paternal relatives in every aspect of child
welfare service delivery that can impact permanency and placement stability. The work that
teams complete will address all five domains, and will do so in ways that model and uphold the
mission and values embedded in the framework. Each team will engage in a data collection
planning process to determine how they will collect data at their sites to monitor progress over
time, with the goals of the CCF as targets for practice improvement. These metrics reflect the
domain and change concepts listed in the change framework.
As shown in the Change Framework Table below,
each domain has targeted goals, which are broken
down by more detailed change concepts. Teams
will come up with specific strategies to address the
change concept. A strategy may address multiple
domains, although some strategies will relate to
only one domain. Additionally, change will occur
in incremental steps and will likely occur over
time, eventually affecting all five domains.
The strategies that teams ultimately test,
implement, and sustain will be the concrete
strategies derived from these overarching goals.
For every change concept, teams should ask
themselves: what changes can we make in this area
that will increase father and paternal relative
engagement?

5

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Change Framework for Engaging Fathers and Paternal Relatives in Child Welfare
Domain 1. Support community, system, and agency environments that value and respect all fathers and
paternal relatives
Goal
Change concept
1. Create an organizational
environment and climate that
places strong emphasis on the
value of fathers and paternal
relatives in children’s lives.

Support a physical office environment that feels welcoming to fathers and
paternal relatives
Demonstrate the value of actively engaging fathers and paternal relatives in
placement and reunification decisions and activities by clearly articulating the
agency’s mission, policies, and materials
Provide ongoing education to staff about the value of engaging fathers and
paternal relatives in children’s lives
Provide ongoing supervision to staff to enhance their ability to effectively
engage fathers and paternal relatives

2. Develop an atmosphere
where the voice and active
engagement of fathers and
paternal relatives influences an
inclusive environment.

Offer peer mentorship and support to fathers and paternal relatives
Solicit, respect, and affirm the varied perspectives of fathers and paternal
relatives
Invite fathers and paternal relatives to provide feedback to the agency to guide
system improvement
Develop and foster leadership and advocacy programs for fathers and paternal
relatives

3. Actively promote and
integrate inclusive practice and
value of fathers and paternal
relatives within the community.

Provide education and coaching to system partners that promotes the values of
father and paternal relative involvement in children’s lives
Partner with other agencies and providers to promote and support father
involvement

Domain 2. Cultivate racial equity for men of color in the child welfare system
Goal
Change concept
1. Promote personal awareness Engage staff in regular conversations, education, and coaching about implicit
among staff to acknowledge
bias and cultural humility
implicit bias and implement
Provide opportunities for staff to discuss issues related to cultural differences
practices that improve father
during group and individual supervision to address bias in case decision
and family outcomes.
making
2. Acknowledge the impacts of
historical, institutional, cultural,
and structural racism on policy,
practice, and decision making.

Engage staff in regular conversations, education, and coaching about historical,
institutional, cultural, and structural racism
Demonstrate the understanding of the impact of historical, institutional, cultural,
and structural racism and trauma on how fathers are engaged through clearly
articulating the agency’s mission, policies, and materials
Provide opportunities for staff to discuss issues related to racial equity in group
and individual supervision

3. Identify and nurture the
cultural beliefs, values, and
practices of fathers and paternal
relatives, communities, and
tribes to drive child welfare
decision-making processes.

Establish an organizational environment and climate that is humble and
responsive to the communities being served
Recognize and honor the strengths inherent in the different cultures being
served
Use culturally appropriate assessments, decision-making practices, and antiracist tools to capitalize on the strengths and needs of fathers and paternal
relatives at every decision point in the child welfare service continuum

6

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Change Framework for Engaging Fathers and Paternal Relatives in Child Welfare
Domain 2. Cultivate racial equity for men of color in the child welfare system
Goal
Change concept
4. Collaborate with related systems to
Provide conversations, education, and coaching to system and
identify, address, and change
community partners about institutionally racist policies and practices,
institutionally racist policies and
including how to identify them and the impact they have on fathers and
practices.
paternal relatives
Partner with experts conducting racial equity work in child welfare and
in other related fields to receive guidance on how to address and
change these policies and practices
Actively include fathers and paternal relatives of color in identifying,
addressing, and changing these policies and practices
Domain 3. Identify and locate fathers and paternal relatives from the first point of contact with the family
Goal
Change concept
1. Identify fathers and paternal
Encourage and engage mothers, children, and other relatives to identify
relatives.
fathers and paternal relatives from the first point of contact with the
family
Educate community members and other agencies on the importance of
identifying fathers and paternal relatives
Partner with community members and other agencies to identify fathers
and paternal relatives on an ongoing basis
Develop and use available technology to facilitate the identification of
fathers and paternal relatives
2. Actively locate fathers and paternal
relatives.

Develop information-sharing agreements with community partners and
agencies that allow for data sharing while honoring family confidentiality
issues
Collaborate with other agencies to locate fathers and paternal relatives
Develop and use available technology to facilitate the location of fathers
and paternal relatives

Domain 4. Assess and address the strengths and needs of, and barriers for, fathers and paternal relatives
Goal
Change concept
1. Assess fathers and paternal
Ensure staff understand the unique strengths and needs of fathers and
relatives’ strengths and needs.
paternal relatives and use assessment to build upon strengths
Explicitly include strengths, needs, and supports in the initial and
ongoing assessment of fathers and paternal relatives
Integrate the assessment of fathers and paternal relatives’ strengths
and needs into the overall and continuous assessment of the child and
family
2. Identify and address barriers to
engaging fathers and paternal relatives.

Ensure staff understand and can appropriately respond to the various
situations fathers and paternal relatives may present or experience
Identify and address multi-system involvement for fathers and paternal
relatives
Collaborate with community partners and other agencies to address
barriers to engaging fathers and paternal relatives

7

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Change Framework for Engaging Fathers and Paternal Relatives in Child Welfare
Domain 4. Assess and address the strengths and needs of, and barriers for, fathers and paternal relatives
Goal
Change concept
3. Provide specialized plans that meet
Identify and continuously revisit the various roles fathers and
unique needs of families and include
paternal relatives may play in the lives of their children
fathers and paternal relatives.
Ensure that family plans reflect the various strengths, needs, and
roles of fathers and paternal relatives
Include fathers and paternal relatives’ own language and goals in the
individualized plans for their children
Domain 5. Continuously involve fathers and paternal relatives throughout the lives of their children
Goal
Change concept
1. Facilitate fathers and paternal relatives’
preparation for attending and participating
in meetings, activities, and decisions

Use team-meeting practices, such as family group conferences or
family group decision making
Engage fathers and paternal relatives in permanency planning
meetings and decisions
Prepare for fathers and paternal relatives to ensure they can be
active participants in meetings, activities, and decisions related to
their children

2. Engage and continuously assess
fathers and paternal relatives as
placement options

Assess fathers and paternal relatives as viable placement options as
soon as placement is a consideration
Be transparent with fathers and paternal relatives about why they are
or are not viable placement options
Reconsider fathers and paternal relatives as placement options
periodically

3. Support healthy and productive
relationships with fathers and other
caregivers

Facilitate ongoing communication between fathers and paternal
relatives, foster families, and other alternate caregivers

4. Support relationships between fathers
and paternal relatives and their children by
maximizing the types and opportunities for
involvement.

Use supportive visitation practices that nurture relationships between
fathers, paternal relatives, and children

Support various roles that fathers and paternal relatives may play in
partnership with alternate caregivers while the children are in out-ofhome care

Ensure visits occur in settings that are comfortable for fathers and
paternal relatives
Create and nurture opportunities for fathers and paternal relatives to
connect with children outside of agency visitation
Communicate regularly with fathers and paternal relatives about
case progress and how their children are doing. Provide updates to
fathers and paternal relatives and continuously ask for their input
about parenting decisions whenever possible.

8

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

REFERENCES
Adamsons, Kari. "Quantity Versus Quality of Nonresident Father Involvement: Deconstructing
the Argument That Quantity Doesn’t Matter." Journal of Child Custody, vol. 15, no. 1,
2018, pp. 26–34.
Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. “Findings from Round 3 Child and
Family Services Review.” Available at
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cfsr_round3_findings_2015_2016.pdf
Agosti, J., L. Conradi, J. Halladay Goldman, and H. Langan. Using Trauma-Informed Child
Welfare Practice to Improve Placement Stability Breakthrough Series Collaborative:
Promising Practices and Lessons Learned. Los Angeles, CA, and Durham, NC: National
Center for Child Traumatic Stress, 2013.
Amato, Paul R., and Joan G. Gilbreth. "Nonresident Fathers and Children's Well-Being: A MetaAnalysis." Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 61, no. 3, 1999, pp. 557–573.
Bellamy, J. L. “A National Study of Male Involvement among Families in Contact with the
Child Welfare System.” Child Maltreatment, vol. 14, no. 3, 2009, pp. 255–262.
Best Practice/Next Practice. (2002, Winter). Children, families, and workers: Facing trauma in
child welfare. Washington, DC: National Child Welfare Resource Center for FamilyCentered Practice.
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/downloads/newsletter/BPNPWinter0 2.pdf
Bumpass, L., and H.-H. Lu. “Trends in Cohabitation and Implications for Children’s Family
Contexts in the United States.” Population Studies, vol. 54, no. 1, 2000, pp. 29–41.
Burrus, Scott W. M., Beth L. Green, Sonia Worcel, Michael Finigan, and Carrie Furrer. "Do
Dads Matter? Child Welfare Outcomes for Father-Identified Families." Journal of Child
Custody, vol. 9, no. 3, 2012, pp. 201–216.
Campbell, Christina A., Douglas Howard, Brett S. Rayford, and Derrick M. Gordon. “Fathers
Matter: Involving and Engaging Fathers in the Child Welfare System Process.” Children &
Youth Services Review, vol. 53, 2015, pp. 84–91.
Carlson, Marcia J. "Family Structure, Father Involvement, and Adolescent Behavioral
Outcomes." Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 68, no. 1, 2006, pp. 137–154.
Casey Family Programs. “Breakthrough Series on Timely Permanency through Reunification.”
2011. Available at https://www.casey.org/media/TimelyPermanency.pdf
Casey Family Programs. “Breakthrough Series Collaborative: Reducing Disproportionality and
Disparate Outcomes for Children and Families of Color in the Child Welfare System.” 2009.
Available at
http://centerforchildwelfare.fmhi.usf.edu/kb/dispr/Reducing%20Disproportionality%20Casey.pdf
Coakley, Tanya M. “The Influence of Father Involvement on Child Welfare Permanency
Outcomes: A Secondary Data Analysis.” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 35, no.
1, 2013, pp. 174–182.

9

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Conradi, Lisa, Jen Agosti, Erika Tullberg, Lisa Richardson, Heather Langan, Susan Ko, and
Charles Wilson. “Promising Practices and Strategies for Using Trauma-Informed Child
Welfare Practice to Improve Foster Care Placement Stability: A Breakthrough Series
Collaborative.” Child Welfare, vol. 90, no. 6, 2011, pp. 207–225.
Estefan, F., M. Coulter, C. VandeWeerd, M. Armstrong, and P. Gorski. “Receiving Mandated
Therapeutic Services: Experiences of Parents Involved in the Child Welfare
System.” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 34, no. 12, 2012, pp. 2353–2360.
Ferguson, Harry, and Fergus Hogan. “Strengthening Families Through Fathers: Developing
Policy and Practice in Relation to Vulnerable Fathers and Their Families.” Project Report.
Dublin, Ireland: Irish Government, Department of Family and Social Affairs, 2004.
Gaudin, J. M., and H. Dubowitz. “Family Functioning in Neglectful Families: Recent Research.”
In Child Welfare Research Review, edited by J. D. Berrick, R. P. Barth, and N. Gilbert. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1997.
Hohman, M. “Motivational Interviewing in Social Work Practice.” In Applications of
Motivational Interviewing, edited by S. Rollnick, W. R. Miller, and T. B. Moyers. New
York: Guilford Press, 2012.
Institute for Healthcare Improvement. “The Breakthrough Series: IHI’s Collaborative Model for
Achieving Breakthrough Improvement.” IHI Innovation Series White Paper. Boston, MA:
Institute for Healthcare Improvement, 2003.
JBS International. “Child and Family Services Aggregate Report.” Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families,
Children’s Bureau, 2016.
Jonson-Reid, M., B. Drake, and P. Kohl. “Is the Overrepresentation of the Poor in Child Welfare
Caseloads Due to Bias or Need?” Children & Youth Services Review, vol. 31, 2009, pp.
422–427.
Kendall, J. R., and L. Pilnik. “Engaging Nonresident Fathers in Child Welfare Cases: A Guide
for Court Appointed Special Advocates.” Washington, DC: American Humane, American
Bar Association, and National Quality Improvement Center on Non-Resident Fathers and
the Child Welfare System, 2007.
Kinney, Ellen, and Molly Jenkins. “Dads and Paternal Relatives: Using Family Group Decision
Making to Refocus the Child Welfare System on the Entire Family Constellation.” 2009.
Available at http://centerforchildwelfare.org/kb/FamilyCenteredPractice/PC-FGDM-dadspaternal-relatives.pdf
Lamb, Michael E. (ed). The Role of the Father in Child Development. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley,
2004.
Malm, K., J. Murray, and R. Geen. “What About the Dads? Child Welfare Agencies’ Efforts to
Identify, Locate and Involve Nonresident Fathers.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation,
2006.
Martin, M., and D. D. Connelly. “Achieving Racial Equity: Child Welfare Policy Strategies to
Improve Outcomes for Children of Color.” Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Social
Policy, 2015.
10

Change Framework for the Breakthrough Series Collaborative

Mathematica

Miller, O., and A. Esenstad. “Strategies to Reduce Racially Disparate Outcomes in Child
Welfare.” Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Social Policy, 2015.
Minoff, E. “Entangled Roots: The Role of Race in Policies that Separate Families.” Washington,
DC: Center for the Study of Social Policy, 2018.
National Family Preservation Network.Father involvement, Using CFSR standards, 2010.
Accessed from https://www.nfpn.org/father-involvement/meeting-cfsr-standards
O'Donnell, John M., Waldo E. Johnson Jr, Lisa Easley D'Aunno, and Helen L. Thornton.
“Fathers in Child Welfare: Caseworkers’ Perspectives.” Child Welfare, vol. 84, no. 3, 2005,
pp. 387–414.
Primus, L. “Changing Systems and Practices to Improve Outcomes for Young Fathers, Their
Children and Their Families.” Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Social Policy, 2017.
Smith, Brenda. "Child Welfare Service Plan Compliance: Perceptions of Parents and
Caseworkers." Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, vol. 89,
no. 4, 2008, pp. 521–532.
Smithgall, Cheryl, Elizabeth Jarpe-Ratner, Duck-Hye Yang, Jan DeCoursey, LaShaun Brooks,
and Robert Goerge. "Family Assessment in Child Welfare: The Illinois DCFS Integrated
Assessment Program in Policy and Practice." Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall at the University of
Chicago, 2009.
Van Zyl, M., A. Barbee, M. Cunningham, B. Antle, D. Christensen, and D. Boamah.
“Components of the Solution-Base Casework Child Welfare Practice Model That Predict
Positive Child Outcomes.” Journal of Public Child Welfare, vol. 8, no. 4, 2014, pp. 433–
465.

11