DeSena Allen D, Murphy Robert A, Douglas-Palumberi Heather, Blau Gary, Kelly Blandina, Horwitz Sarah M, Kaufman Joan
Yale University, Department of Psychiatry, Child and Adolescent Research and Education (CARE) Program, University Towers, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
Child Abuse Negl. 2005 Jun;29(6):627-43. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.05.007.
To evaluate the SAFE Homes (SH) program, a short-term group care program for children between 3 and 12 years of age who enter care for the first time. The program aims to improve case outcomes by consolidating resources to facilitate assessment and treatment planning.
The 1-year outcomes of 342 children who received SAFE Home services and 342 matched foster care (FC) control children were compared. The 684 subjects used in this report were selected from a larger pool of 909 subjects using propensity score matching to control for hidden bias in treatment group assignment. We hypothesized that SAFE Homes would result in greater continuity of care for children (e.g., fewer placements, more placements with siblings and in towns of origin), identification of more relatives for substitute care when needed, reduced use of high-cost restrictive care settings (e.g., residential, inpatient), and reduced rates of re-abuse through earlier detection and provision of services to meet child and family treatment needs.
Prior to the initiation of the SAFE Homes program, 75% of the children who entered care in the State experienced three or more placements in the first year. The outcomes of both the SH and FC cases were significantly improved over pre-SAFE Home State statistics. The FC group, however, had comparable or better outcomes on most variables examined. In addition, the total cost for out-of-home care for the children in FC was significantly less, despite the fact that the two groups spent similar amounts of time in care (average time in care: 7 months). This finding held when the total placement cost was calculated using the State reimbursement rate of 206.00 US dollars per day for SAFE Home care (SH: 20,851 US dollars +/- 24,231 US dollars; FC: 8,441 US dollars +/- 21,126 US dollars, p < .001), and a conservative SAFE Home program fee of 85.00 US dollars per day that only considered the child care and custodial staffing costs uniquely associated with the program (SH: 13,314 US dollars +/- 21,718 US dollars; FC: 8,441 US dollars +/-21,126 US dollars, p < .001).
Improvements in outcomes related to continuity of care can be attained through staff training. The SAFE Home model of care is not cost-effective for first-time placements.
评估“安全之家”(SH)项目,这是一个针对首次进入寄养机构的3至12岁儿童的短期集体照料项目。该项目旨在通过整合资源以促进评估和治疗计划的制定,从而改善个案结果。
比较了342名接受“安全之家”服务的儿童和342名匹配的寄养照料(FC)对照儿童的1年结果。本报告中使用的684名受试者是从909名受试者的更大样本中通过倾向得分匹配选取的,以控制治疗组分配中的潜在偏差。我们假设“安全之家”项目将为儿童带来更高的照料连续性(例如,安置次数减少、更多与兄弟姐妹安置在一起以及安置在原籍城镇),在需要时识别更多可替代照料的亲属,减少对高成本限制性照料环境(如寄宿、住院)的使用,并通过更早发现和提供服务以满足儿童及家庭治疗需求来降低再次受虐率。
在“安全之家”项目启动之前,该州进入寄养机构的儿童中有75%在第一年经历了三次或更多次安置。与“安全之家”项目实施前该州的统计数据相比,SH组和FC组的结果均有显著改善。然而,在大多数所考察的变量上,FC组的结果相当或更好。此外,FC组儿童的家庭外照料总费用显著更低,尽管两组儿童接受照料的时间相似(平均照料时间:7个月)。当使用该州每天206.00美元的“安全之家”照料报销率计算总安置费用时(SH组:20,851美元±24,231美元;FC组:8,441美元±21,126美元,p <.001),以及当仅考虑与该项目独特相关的儿童照料和监护人员成本,采用每天85.00美元的保守“安全之家”项目费用计算时(SH组:13,314美元±21,718美元;FC组:8,441美元±21,126美元,p <.001),这一发现依然成立。
通过工作人员培训可以实现与照料连续性相关的结果改善。“安全之家”照料模式对于首次安置而言不具有成本效益。