Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness

‘Keeping families and children in mind’: an evaluation of
a web-based workforce resourcecfs_731 192..200
Andrea Reupert*, Kim Foster†, Darryl Maybery‡, Kylie Eddy§
and Elizabeth Fudge¶
*Senior Lecturer, Department of Rural and Indigenous Health,
Monash University, Moe, Victoria, †Associate Professor,
Mental Health Nursing, University of Sydney, Camperdown,
NSW, ‡Associate Professor of Rural Mental Health,
Department of Rural and Indigenous Health, Monash University
& Gippsland Medical School, Moe, Victoria, and
§Workforce Development Officer, ¶Project Manager, Children
Of Parents with a Mental Illness (COPMI) national
initiative, North Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
A B S T R AC T
This study outlines pilot evaluation data of the web-based
training
resource ‘Keeping Families and Children in Mind’, designed for
clini-
cians who work with families where a parent has a mental
illness. The
resource was developed from scoping existing workforce
packages
and in consultation with consumers, carers, researchers and
mental-
health clinicians. Preliminary evaluation data were collected

from an
urban and a rural site in Australia via focus group interviews
and pre-
and post-training questionnaires to ascertain the experiences of
those
who participated in the training. Additionally, training
facilitators
were invited to maintain journals in order to identify planning
and
implementation issues when using the resource. Post-training,
partici-
pants emphasized the need to work collaboratively with others,
as
well as the importance of acknowledging and working with the
family
members of consumers, especially children. Also, participants
reported positive changes in knowledge, skill and confidence
when
working with families affected by parental mental illness.
Facilitators
highlighted technology issues and the need to work interactively
with
participants when using the resource. Recommendations
regarding
policy and future research conclude this paper.
Correspondence:
Andrea Reupert,
Department of Rural and Indigenous
Health,
Monash University,
PO BOX 973,
Moe, Victoria,
Australia
E-mail: [email protected]
Keywords: children, evaluation,

families, parental mental illness,
web-based workforce training
Accepted for publication: August 2010
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Mental illness is a family affair, particularly where a
parent, with dependent children, has a mental illness.
Several studies indicate that children where a parent
has a mental illness may be at twice the risk of devel-
oping a mental illness diagnosis compared to other
children (Black et al. 2003; Park et al. 2003; Cunning-
ham et al. 2004; Leschied et al. 2005; Edwards et al.
2006). Other studies highlight the range of behav-
ioural, interpersonal, academic and other difficulties
that children of parents with a mental illness might
face (Rutter & Quinton 1984; Farahati et al. 2003;
Maughan et al. 2007; Reupert & Maybery 2007). An
epidemiological study has estimated that between 21
and 23% of all families have, or have had, at least one
parent with a mental illness (Maybery et al. 2009).
Thus, given the prevalence of families affected by
parental mental illness and the potential difficulties
they face, it is important that the mental-health work-
force is appropriately skilled at identifying and subse-
quently intervening with children and their parents.
This paper describes a web-based training resource,
‘Keeping Families and Children in Mind’ designed for
the mental-health workforce, and the results of a pilot
evaluation of the resource.
While there is ample evidence highlighting the need
for early intervention, children living in families where

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2010.00731.x
192 Child and Family Social Work 2011, 16, pp 192–200 ©
2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
a parent has a mental illness have been described as
‘hidden’, because clinicians are often unaware that
consumers are parents with dependent children
(Fudge & Mason 2004). In the USA, it is suggested
that agencies take a categorical approach and focus on
either the child (e.g. in terms of child protection) or
the adult (e.g. for his or her mental-health needs)
(Nicholson et al. 2001). Maybery & Reupert (2006)
found that while many Australian adult mental-health
clinicians want to work with all family members, they
report clear skill and knowledge limitations, a finding
also confirmed in a Finnish study with psychiatric
nurses (Korhonen et al. 2008). Slack & Webber (2008)
found that even though many adult mental-health
workers favour supporting children of consumers,
they did not necessarily consider it their role to do so.
Maybery & Reupert (2009) summarize workforce
barriers in terms of (i) policy and management; (ii)
inter-agency collaboration; and (iii) clinician attitude,
skill and knowledge.
Notwithstanding these barriers, acknowledging and
working with family members has been shown to be
beneficial to the consumer, his or her children and
other family members (Glynn et al. 2006; Beardslee
et al. 2008). For example, it has been found that a
family-focused intervention was effective in reducing
the exacerbations in schizophrenia, improving medi-
cation compliance and reducing or eliminating sub-

stance abuse (Glynn et al. 2006). Family-sensitive
practice is beneficial to the consumer as well as other
family members, by reducing a family’s subjective
burden of care and increasing their level of self-care
and emotional functioning (Glynn et al. 2006). Fur-
thermore, acknowledging and working with children
of parent consumers improves family functioning and
children’s understanding of their parent’s disorder as
well as a reduction in children’s internalizing symp-
toms (Beardslee et al. 2008). Given the efficacy of a
family-sensitive approach, it is imperative that training
is designed and developed in ways that addresses
the current skill and knowledge gaps found in the
workforce.
In response to the training needs of the mental-
health workforce, a resource ‘Keeping Families and
Children in Mind’ was developed by the Australian
National COPMI (Children of Parents with a Mental
Illness) initiative through scoping existing workforce
packages and then identifying main themes and issues
across these packages (Reupert et al. 2009). Addition-
ally, the resource was developed using a Delphi
process (see Note 1) with 14 experts consisting
of consumers, carers, researchers and mental-health
clinicians (Whitman et al. 2009). These experts
responded to questions about curriculum content and
teaching processes in three Delphi ‘rounds’ until con-
sensus was reached. In this process, experts were
asked to summarize themes (generated from previous
Delphi rounds) that resulted in the final six core
modules of the resource (see Table 1).
The resulting Keeping Families and Children in Mind:
COPMI Mental HealthWorker Education Resource deliv-

ers an interactive, audio and video material using Web
2 technology. Clinicians might focus only on those
modules that are of interest and/or need or undertake
all six modules. The resource includes a variety of
educative web pages and links, and video and audio
inserts of families describing what it is like to live with
parental mental illness as well as clinicians reporting
Table 1 The six modules of ‘Keeping Families and Children in
Mind: COPMI Mental Health Worker Education
Resource’
1 Mental Health and Families – introduces a family where a
parent experiences mental illness. Information is also provided
by parents, children and workers about factors that contribute to
mental health and illness, stigma and mental illness and
family support.
2 The Parent – introduces a second family. Information is
provided about the impact of mental illness on parenting, the
impact of parenting on mental illness and the recovery process.
3 The Child – provides an opportunity to reflect on the
experiences of children in two families where a parent
experiences
mental illness. Information is provided on risk and protective
factors that influence child well-being, including the impact
of parental mental illness on child development. There are
demonstrations of how talking to children can assist in their
understanding of what is happening at home.
4 The Family – highlights the importance and influence of the
family unit in the recovery of a parent who experiences mental
illness, including influences on family functioning, family
resilience and working with families using a strengths-based
approach.

5 Carers – presents the perspective of family carers with a
particular emphasis on the issues faced by young carers and
grandparents who provide care for children of parents who
experience mental illness.
6 Putting it into Practice – provides opportunities for learners to
reflect on their work practice at an individual and systems
level in regards to supporting families where a parent
experiences mental illness. It provides practical examples of
what
workers are currently doing across Australia and an extensive
list of accessible resources.
‘Keeping families and children in mind’ A Reupert et al.
about their experiences working with such families.
The resource also provides scenarios about fictitious
families that encourage mental-health clinicians to
reflect on their clinical practice. Clinicians are able
to access the resource in a web-based, self-paced
mode, or alternatively, attend facilitator-led training
using the resource in a group format. The resource is
freely accessible at http://www.copmi.net.au/worked/
index.html
At the point of writing, several Australian state
mental-health services have indicated that they will
incorporate this resource as part of a large ‘roll out’
of training, with similar indications from overseas
researchers and trainers (personal correspondence to

the authors). Consequently, as there are likely to be
hundreds and perhaps thousands of clinicians who
will use this resource, it is essential to report initial
data about the utility of the resource. Currently, a
further evaluation of the large-scale roll out is
planned, although it will take some time to collect and
analyse a larger data set. Thus, this paper summarizes
preliminary efficacy data from the piloting of the
training resource.
M E T H O D
Training was conducted at a rural and an urban site,
in two Australian states (Victoria and Tasmania). The
workshops were each presented by two female facili-
tators with extensive backgrounds in mental health
and workforce training. The training for the rural site
took place over two half days with 23 participants,
while training in the urban site went for a full day
and included 14 participants. Training participants
came from a range of services including child and
adolescent and adult mental-health agencies, non-
government agencies and hospitals, and from disci-
plines including psychiatry, social work, education
and consumer and carer groups. The purpose of the
training, at both sites, was to introduce participants to
the broad issues related to families where a parent has
a mental illness, and to identify where to access infor-
mation about mental illnesses for families and clini-
cians. Participation in the training was not dependent
on participation in the evaluation, and ethics approval
was provided by the Monash University Standing
Committee on Ethics in Research Involving Humans.
Data were drawn from three sources. First, partici-
pants were invited to participate in focus group

interviews to gain their views on the resource
and, second, to complete anonymous pre- and
post-program questionnaires to quantify short-term
changes in learning. Finally, training facilitators
completed journals in order to identify planning and
implementation issues.
Focus group interviews
Across the two focus groups held at the two sites, there
were a total of 28 participants, eight men and 20
women. Focus group questions aimed to determine
potential changes in knowledge, attitude and practice,
for example:
• What did you learn, if anything, as a result of being
shown the resource?
• Has the resource changed any attitudes or ways of
looking at consumers you previously had, if at all?
• In what ways, if any, do you think the resource will
change the way you practice?
With permission, the focus groups were audiotaped
and subsequently transcribed. Data were then analy-
sed using an open coding system, attaching labels to
lines or paragraphs of data and then describing the
data at a concrete level, before moving to a more
conceptual level (Anfara et al. 2002), first within each
focus group transcript and then across the two tran-
scripts. This descriptive and iterative analytic process
aimed to meaningfully classify codes into themes.
Questionnaires

Twenty-seven participants (20 females and seven
males) completed identical pre- and post-training
questionnaires that assessed change in participant
confidence, knowledge and skill when working with
the parents, children and families. A coding system
was employed to ensure anonymity but also to allow
matching of pre- and post-data for analysis. The
specifically designed ‘Workforce Questionnaire’ was
employed. The questionnaire was initially developed
in an adult mental-health clinician sample (see
Maybery & Reupert 2006) and is currently being
employed across five Victorian Health regions and by
researchers in British Columbia (Canada) in a large
Australia-Canada benchmarking questionnaire of
family-focused practice. A brief version of the ques-
tionnaire, with 27 items, was employed here. The
questionnaire has excellent content and construct
validity and unpublished data highlight good internal
reliability of subscales ranging from Cronbach alphas
of 0.87 to 0.72 for relevant subscales. Participants
responded on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree) for each item.
Facilitator journals
The four training facilitators were invited to complete
various pre-determined questions in a journal at two
time points, before the workshop, to capture planning

issues, and then after the workshop, to highlight imple-
mentation matters. Pre-training questions included:
• What issues did you encounter in planning the
training? How did you overcome them? Or what
was required to overcome them?
• How did you decide which aspects of the resource
to use/not use?
Post-training questions included:
• What worked well when using the resource? What
didn’t work so well and why?
• What, if anything, do you think needs to change
about the resource?
• What facilitation skills were particularly important
in using the resource in workshop format?
• What issues did you encounter when using the
resource?
Facilitators were instructed to not censure them-
selves, nor be concerned about spelling or grammar.
They were not required to include their name on the
journal. Journals were analysed using the same the-
matic analysis approach employed with the focus
group transcripts.
R E S U LT S
Focus groups
Three themes emerged of participants’ experiences of

the training in terms of (i) views on the resource; (ii)
impact of the training on attitude and practice; and
(iii) possibilities for implementation.
Views on the resource
Participants expressed very positive views on the
resource, identifying it as a quality production with
comprehensive content and as a valuable resource for
clinicians from a range of child and adult healthcare
settings, particularly in rural and remote settings. The
emphasis on working together with families, rather
than simply focusing on diagnosis and assessment,
was appreciated. A strength of the resource was its
interactivity and the life-like depiction of issues expe-
rienced by children and families:
I thought that the narratives and the case studies were excel-
lent around mental health and placing that in the context of
the family . . .
Participants particularly enjoyed the video clips,
which they considered very effective for learning, ‘. . .
it holds your attention much more than just reading
. . . it brings it to life’.
Some participants considered the resource to be
quite lengthy and that it took time to learn to navigate
and become familiar with it. They acknowledged that
working through the resource in addition to their
workload would require commitment, ‘. . . if you
don’t block out time, you’ll just be too busy’.
However, the flexibility and ability to choose which
modules and content to read were helpful, ‘. . . the

advantage is that you can go in and pick the bits you
need’.
In the workshops, the opportunity to interact and
discuss issues with others, including consumers and
carers, and listen to their insights and practices, added
to the experience.
. . . one of the things that I got the most out of was having a
consumer presence in the training session. It was actually him
and his carer . . . so you were able to get the carer’s perspec-
tive, the consumer’s perspective, and that was good.
The training facilitators’ ability to identify each
group’s needs and tailor the workshop accordingly
was an important aspect of training. Reliable internet
access was integral to its effectiveness, with broadband
access and slow running of computers, a frustration
for some participants.
Impact of the training on attitude and practice
The most prominent impact of the training was par-
ticipants’ heightened awareness of the need to care
for all family members and the importance of taking
time to sit and talk with families. For some, training
reaffirmed that they were on the right pathway in
what they were already practising, while for others,
the resource challenged their attitudes towards
families.
. . . it makes you aware of what you’re bringing to the inter-

action [with families]. Am I bringing pre-conceived ideas and
biases . . . which may or may not be an accurate view?
Training highlighted the need for clinicians from a
range of backgrounds and settings to collaborate in
care: ‘I think what’s come out of it, very much so, was
the importance of everyone who’s working with that
family, working together . . .’ On their return to work,
participants felt their raised awareness would encour-
age them to look further into a family’s needs, and
ensure that they scheduled appointments where they
could see the children as well as the consumer parent.
The training added to their knowledge about chil-
dren’s understandings of mental illness at different
developmental stages, and the need to tailor informa-
tion and address issues accordingly.
. . . because I have limited experience in working with young
carers . . . it really opened my mind to some of the issues for
young carers . . .
In addition to being more mindful of children and
families, participants identified the need to develop
policies around family-inclusive practice in their
service. They acknowledged that while the resource

might impact on individual practice, unless manage-
ment supported child and family-inclusive practice as
core business, the impacts could be limited.
. . . the practice will change the individual, and ideally if
they’re supported by the management structure . . . it spreads
through the organisation . . .
Possibilities for implementation
Participants saw a range of possibilities for imple-
menting the resource within their organization as well
as in other organizations and contexts. This included
using the resource in professional development ses-
sions for staff over a 12-month period, including it as
part of new staff inductions, and using it as a training
resource for students on clinical placement:
. . . I can see the potential for it to change practice within my
organisation.We have a carer support program . . . and I’d like
to deliver [a module] to the carer support team.
Participants made a number of suggestions for
improving the resource, such as adding further infor-
mation on mental illness and drug and alcohol use for
users who might not have a background in mental
health, and adding links to relevant local and/or
regional resources and services for clinicians and
family members. Finally, participants suggested that
the resource should include a section on collaborative
practice and possible protocols for how agencies can
work with each other with families.

Questionnaire
Table 2 presents participant mean scores, standard
deviations and paired sample t-statistics for pre- and
post-responses to items about clinicians’ confidence,
knowledge and skill concerning family issues. Almost
all participant responses to knowledge (see Note 2)
items moved in the expected direction (note that some
items are negatively worded) and just under half of the
26 items showed a significant change – again all in the
expected direction. Items shown in bold are signifi-
cant at 0.05 level and actual P-values are shown in the
right-hand column for each item.
Significantly different variables generally reflect
changes that occurred at both the rural and the urban
sites.
Program facilitator journals
Planning issues
The main planning issues for facilitators were related
to information technology and the knowledge to
appropriately download and save different aspects of
the resource. Working with others with technological
expertise was or would have been useful. Facilitators
indicated that having a thorough knowledge of par-
ticipants’ background (profession and organization)
was important in deciding which aspects of the
resource to employ.They also suggested that the work-
shop needed to incorporate interactive as well as
didactic components.

Implementation issues
According to facilitators, the family videos were a
powerful and effective way to encourage participant
discussion and reflection. Problems experienced with
the resource centred primarily on facilitators’ own
facilitation skills (time management, co-facilitating,
providing too much information, not outlining learn-
ing objectives) rather than the resource per se. All
agreed that the ability to work with groups and
manage group discussions were important facilitation
skills when using the resource. Facilitators employed
small and large group discussion groups to expand on
key learnings when using the resource. Handouts, case
notes, and, in particular, local and national services,
were used in conjunction with the resource. Overall,
modules were used in a theme-based way, related to
the needs of training participants and their particular
clientele.
D I S C U S S I O N
Overall, pilot evaluation data of the ‘Keeping Families
and Children in Mind’ resource demonstrated high
participant satisfaction and significant self-reported
changes in knowledge, skill and confidence. Thus,
results demonstrated the utility of the resource as a
training tool for clinicians working with families,

with both participants and training facilitators valuing
the interactivity and flexibility of a web-based
resource. Participants, including those from adult
mental health, highlighted the need, post-training,
to work with all family members including children.
This is an important finding given that previous
research has highlighted clinicians’ reluctance to work
with the children of parent consumers (Slack &
Webber 2008). Participants also stressed the necessity
to collaborate with other agencies when working with
families, another substantial result, due to the lack of
inter-agency and inter-sectoral collaboration in this
area (Darlington et al. 2005). While the resource was
not compared in terms of delivery (that is, self-paced
mode vs. a group setting), the focus group data high-
light the significance for clinicians in being trained
alongside others, including consumers and carers, in
order to share insights, experiences and practices.
The quantitative questionnaire data tentatively
shows an improvement in participants’ knowledge,
Table 2 Scores and paired sample t-statistics for pre- and post-
responses to items regarding clinicians’ confidence,
knowledge and skill when working on family issues
Questionnaire item
Pre Post M
t PM (SD) M (SD) diff
I am knowledgeable about how parental mental illness impacts
on children and
families.

5.65 (0.85) 6.04 (0.77) -0.39 -2.30 0.03
I am not confident working with families of consumer-parents.
3.00 (1.87) 2.32 (1.68) 0.68 1.71 0.10
I am not knowledgeable about the key parenting issues for
consumer-parents. 3.04 (1.68) 3.00 (2.04) 0.04 0.12 0.90
I am knowledgeable about the key things that consumer-parents
could do to
maintain the well-being (and resilience) of their children.
4.96 (1.28) 5.38 (1.65) -0.42 -1.15 0.26
I am knowledgeable about the role of family carers and their
influence on
recovery for consumers.
5.38 (1.06) 5.81 (1.17) -0.42 -1.23 0.23
I am not knowledgeable about the role of young carers in
families where parents
experience mental illness
3.27 (1.66) 2.23 (1.56) 1.04 2.78 0.01
I am not confident working with children of consumer-parents.
2.92 (1.77) 2.50 (1.84) 0.42 1.17 0.25
I am knowledgeable about how the role of parenting impacts
mental illness. 5.36 (1.04) 5.84 (0.80) -0.48 -2.39 0.03
I am not confident working with consumer-parents about their
parenting skills. 3.35 (1.79) 2.58 (1.79) 0.77 2.08 0.05
I do not have the skills to work with consumer-parents about
how parental mental
illness impacts on children and families.
3.23 (1.53) 2.31 (1.49) 0.92 3.27 0.00

I provide education sessions for adult family members (e.g.
about the illness,
treatment).
4.63 (2.09) 4.42 (2.01) 0.21 0.41 0.69
I am skilled in working with consumer-parents regarding their
parenting. 4.38 (1.84) 4.92 (1.77) -0.54 -2.01 0.06
I provide education sessions for children (e.g. about the illness,
treatment). 3.94 (2.30) 4.06 (2.25) -0.12 -0.32 0.76
I am skilled in providing psychosocial-education to adult family
members about
the mental illness.
4.00 (2.02) 4.86 (1.80) -0.86 -2.42 0.03
I regularly have family meetings (not therapy) with consumer-
parents and their
family.
4.26 (2.26) 4.74 (1.88) -0.47 -1.21 0.24
I consider information from the carer or family when diagnosing
and/or
treating the consumer-parents.
5.37 (1.50) 5.79 (1.47) -0.42 -2.04 0.06
I provide emotional support for family members and children.
5.48 (1.53) 6.09 (0.85) -0.61 -2.37 0.03
I do not refer children of consumer-parents to child-focused
(e.g. peer
support) programs (other than child and adolescent mental
health).
3.19 (1.78) 3.00 (2.05) 0.19 0.43 0.67

I do refer consumer-parents and their families for family
therapy or
counselling.
5.09 (1.50) 5.48 (1.34) -0.39 -1.20 0.24
I provide written material (e.g. education, information) about
parenting to
consumer-parents.
4.75 (1.59) 5.38 (1.47) -0.63 -3.72 0.00
I regularly provide information (including written materials)
about mental health
issues to the children of consumer-parents.
4.10 (2.19) 5.29 (1.76) -1.19 -4.23 0.00
I often consider if referral to parent support program (or
similar) is required by
consumer-parents.
5.09 (1.53) 5.65 (1.34) -0.57 -2.02 0.06
Rarely do I consider if referral to peer support program (or
similar) is required
by my consumer-parent’s children.
2.35 (1.47) 2.13 (1.52) 0.22 0.59 0.56
I don’t provide information to the carer and/or family about the
consumer-parent’s medication and/or treatment.
3.82 (2.15) 3.77 (2.09) 0.05 0.09 0.93

I am aware of locally based resources for consumers who are
parents. 4.96 (1.51) 5.76 (0.83) -0.80 -3.18 0.00
I am aware of locally based resources for families with a
mentally ill parent. 5.38 (1.33) 5.85 (0.78) -0.46 -2.13 0.04
I am aware of resources available to the public about mental
health and illness. 5.65 (1.13) 6.12 (0.71) -0.46 -2.07 0.05
skill and confidence when working with families and
children, post-exposure to the resource. Almost half of
the 26 items showed a significant change, in the
desired direction.
Overall, while promising, these data are primarily
composed of self-reported data obtained immediately
after training occurred. In addition, the quantitative
findings must be considered in light of a small and
limited data set. The nature of the analyses under-
taken in the questionnaires promoted the likelihood of
Type 1 errors. There was neither a control group nor
a long-term follow-up of participants to ascertain
long-term behaviour change. It might also be assumed
that there was a sample selection bias, as those who
attended the training were aware of and motivated to
undertake family-sensitive practice. Thus, it remains
to be seen whether and how behavioural changes are
implemented in the workforce following exposure to
the resource, and further evaluation of clinicians’
practices is required. Future studies with larger and
more diverse samples of professionals, as well as lon-

gitudinal collection points of data should rectify these
problems. As it has been demonstrated that clinicians
from different disciplines have varying training inter-
ests and needs when working with families affected by
parental mental illness (Whitman et al. 2009), future
training and subsequent evaluations need to be
mindful of these differences.
Facilitators’ journals as well as the focus group
data demonstrate the need for facilitators to be rea-
sonably proficient with technology when working
with a web-based resource or at least to have
access to others who are. Journals indicate that in a
group setting, the resource needs to be carefully tai-
lored to the needs and professions of participants.
The need for group facilitation and managing
group discussion also underlines the importance of
working in an interactive manner when employing
this resource.
Significantly, focus group participants highlighted
the time needed to complete the training as well as
actually engaging with family members, including the
children of consumers. Focus group participants also
stressed the need for systematic change in this area,
implying that it is not sufficient to merely provide a
resource without adequate time for training and
supervision and concurrent policy change and mana-
gerial support. Others have also stressed the need
for policies that acknowledge the families and chil-
dren of consumers, as important contributors to a
consumer’s treatment but also as individuals with
their own needs and strengths (Maybery & Reupert
2009). Such changes require family and child screen-
ing and assessment guidelines, appropriate resource

allocation, changes in role statements and inter-
agency guidelines and protocols. Indeed, the focus
groups suggest that the resource could be extended
to include more information on collaborative prac-
tice, with guidelines for inter-agency protocols, indi-
cating that this is an area for future training and
resourcing.
The provision of adequate time and appropriate
client workloads will do much to support the work-
force to work in a family-sensitive manner, alongside
targeted training being offered, such as provided by
the ‘Keeping Families and Children in Mind’
resource. Furthermore, the provision of time
required to engage family members of consumers is
not necessarily excessive. In Finland, Solantaus et al.
(2009) compared two interventions for families
where a parent has depression, one involving six ses-
sions that in a step-wise fashion involved working
with parents, children and the whole family, covering
family history and psycho-education about depres-
sion and resilience. In the comparison group, a
clinician conducted one to two sessions with a con-
sumer (and sometimes his or her spouse) focusing on
how they might best support their children. Both
interventions were found to be successful in enhanc-
ing parent’s understanding and confidence, although
the more time-intensive intervention rated signifi-
cantly more positively, particularly on various child
outcome measures. Notwithstanding such a result,
the economic and social benefits of promoting and
enhancing resilience for children living with parental
mental illness needs to be considered when prioritiz-
ing professional development activities and determin-
ing case loads.

In sum, the preliminary evaluation results of the
pilot ‘Keeping Families and Children in Mind’ from
the point of view of participants and training facilita-
tors is positive and tentatively demonstrates positive
attitudinal, knowledge and skill change. Further
evaluation is required to assess its long-term impact
on a broader range of clinicians, when working with
the family members of those living with parental
mental illness. As highlighted earlier, we plan on con-
ducting a broader evaluation of the resource, which
will involve pre-, post-and follow-up measurement
time points, for workers of different professions and
from different agencies. Recommendations arising
from further evaluation will be provided to the devel-
opers of the resource and to their funders to assist
with future modifications of the resource.
AC K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
The COPMI e-learning resource has been developed
by the Australian Infant Child Adolescent and Family
Mental Health Association with funding from the
Australian Government Department of Health and
Ageing under the COAG New Early Intervention Ser-
vices for Parents, Children andYoung People measure.
R E F E R E N C E S
Anfara, V.A., Brown, K.M. & Mangione, T.L. (2002)

Qualitative
analysis on stage: making the research process more public.
Educational Researcher, 31, 28–38.
Beardslee, W.R., Wright, E.J., Gladstone, T.R.G. & Forbes, P.
(2008) Long-term effects from a randomized trial of two
public health preventive interventions for parental depression.
Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 703–713.
Black, D.W., Gaffney, G.R., Schlosser, S. & Gabel, J. (2003)
Children of parents with obsessive-compulsive disorder: a
2-year follow-up study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 107,
305–313.
Cunningham, J., Harris, G., Vostanis, P., Oyebode, F. &
Blissett,
J. (2004) Children of mothers with mental illness: attachment,
emotional and behavioural problems. Early Child Development
and Care, 174, 639–650.
Darlington, Y., Feeney, J. & Rixon, K. (2005) Practice
challenges
at the intersection of child protection and mental health. Child
and Family Social Work, 10, 239–247.
De Villiers, M., De Villiers, P. & Kent, A. (2005) The Delphi
technique in health sciences education. Medical Teacher, 27,

639–645.
Edwards, E.P., Eiden, R.D. & Leonard, K.E. (2006) Behavior
problems in 18- to 36-month-old children of alcoholic fathers:
secure mother-infant attachment as a protective factor. Devel-
opment and Psychopathology, 18, 395–407.
Farahati, F., Marcotte, D.E. & Wilcox-Gök, V. (2003) The
effects
of parents’ psychiatric disorders on children’s high school
dropout. Economics of Education Review, 22, 167–178.
Fudge, E. & Mason, P. (2004) Consulting with young people
about service guidelines relating to parental mental illness.
Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 3,
50–58.
Glynn, S., Cohen, A., Dixon, L. & Niv, N. (2006) The potential
impact of the recovery movement on family interventions for
schizophrenia: opportunities and obstacles. Schizophrenia Bul-
letin, 32, 451–463.
Korhonen, T., Vehviläinen-Julkunen, K. & Pietilä, A. (2008)
Implementing child-focused family nursing into routine adult
psychiatric practice: hindering factors evaluated by nurses.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17, 499–508.

Leschied, A.W., Chiodo, D., Whitehead, P.C. & Hurley, D.
(2005) The relationship between maternal depression and
child outcomes in a child welfare sample: implications
for treatment and policy. Child & Family Social Work, 10,
281–291.
Maughan, A., Cicchetti, D., Toth, S. & Rogosch, F. (2007)
Early-occurring maternal depression and maternal negativity
in predicting young children’s emotion regulation and socioe-
motional difficulties. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,
35,
685–703.
Maybery, D.J. & Reupert, A.E. (2006) Workforce capacity to
respond to children whose parents have a mental illness.
The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40,
657–
664.
Maybery, D.J. & Reupert, A.E. (2009) Parental mental illness: a
review of barriers and issues for working with families and
children. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 16,
784–791.
Maybery, D., Reupert, A., Patrick, K., Goodyear, M. & Crase,
L.

(2009) Prevalence of children whose parents have a mental
illness. Psychiatric Bulletin, 33, 22–26.
Nicholson, J., Biebel, K., Hinden, B., Henry, A. & Stier, L.
(2001) Critical Issues for Parents with Mental Illness and Their
Families. Centre for Mental Health Services; Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration. Available at:
http://www.mental heath.Org/publications/all/pubs/ (accessed
4 September 2004).
Park, R.J., Senior, R. & Stein, A. (2003) The offspring of
mothers
with eating disorders. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
12, 110–119.
Reupert, A.E. & Maybery, D.J. (2007) Families affected by
parental mental illness: issues and intervention points for
stakeholders. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77, 362–
369.
Reupert, A., Goodyear, M., Eddy, K., Alliston, C., Mason, P.,
Maybery, D. et al. (2009) Australian programs and workforce
initiatives for children and their families where a parent has a
mental illness. Australian E-Journal for the Advancement of

Mental Health, 8, 277–285.
Rutter, M. & Quinton, D. (1984) Parental psychiatric disorder:
effects on children. Psychological Medicine, 14, 853–880.
Slack, K. & Webber, M. (2008) Do we care? Adult mental
health
professionals’ attitudes towards supporting service users’ chil-
dren. Child & Family Social Work, 13, 72–79.
Solantaus, T., Toikka, S., Alastuutari, M., Beardslee, W. &
Paavonen, E. (2009) Safety, feasibility and family experiences
of preventive interventions for children and families with
parental depression. International Journal of Mental Health Pro-
motion, 11, 15–24.
Whitman, J., Eddy, K., Maybery, D., Reupert, A. & Fudge, E.
(2009) Use of the web-based Delphi study in the development
of a training resource for workers supporting families where
parents experience mental illness. International Journal for
Mental Health Promotion, 11, 42–52.
N O T E S
1 The Delphi method is a systematic, interactive
process which relies on a panel of nominated ‘experts’
to answer a series of questions in two or more rounds.

After each round, the facilitator provides an anony-
mous summary of experts’ comments and asks further
questions. This process is repeated over a number of
‘rounds’ and concludes when consensus is reached
(De Villiers et al. 2005).
2 In the stem to these questions, participants were
asked to answer ‘. . . how you are able to work with
such families (if at all).’ This approach aimed to allow
participants to predict how they would work following
the training.
Copyright of Child & Family Social Work is the property of
Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

The School Success Program: Improving
Maltreated Children's Academic and
School-related Outcomes
Christopher A. Mallett
Many victims of chudhood maltreatment expedence difficulties
in school and with aca-
demic performance. This article reviews the evidence on the
connection between child-
hood maltreatment and school performance and presents an
evaluation of a unique
program established by Children's Services in Lorain County,
Ohio. Since 2001, the
School Success Program, in collaboration with 18 Ohio public
school distdcts, has pro-
vided individual tutodng and mentodng by certified teachers to
615 maltreated children
and youths, working closely with the whole family in an in-
home setting. Most children
and youths in the program have progressed to their appropdate
grade level whue improv-
ing overall grade point averages from 1.74 to 2.56 in core
academic subjects. Program par-
ticipants have shown one-year improvements that are significant
when compared with
those of their nonmaltreated peers: Basic reading and
comprehension skills improved 58
percent; math reasoning and comprehension skills improved 50
percent; basic wddng
skills improved 48 percent; and overall academic skills
improved 51 percent. These
improvements were seen across both gender and race, with
almost equal gains made by

minodty and nonminodty children and youths, but particularly
by boys. Implications for
school social work practice are set forth in light of these
promising results.
KEY WORDS; children; maltreatment; mentor; school; tutor
A
cademic success is vital for children and
youths to transition without difficulty to
adolescence and young adulthood
(Buehler, Orme, Post, & Pattenon, 2000). This
transition is markedly more difficult for many
children w h o have been vicdms of maltreatment.
Abuse and neglect may affect children's abüities to
learn, decrease cognitive and language capacities
(SmithgaU, Gladden, Howard, Goerge, &
Courtney, 2004), increase dsk for special educa-
tion disabüities, decrease standardized tesdng out-
comes (Egeland, 1997), and decrease overall
academic performance (Leiter, 2007). It is import-
ant to develop interventions and programs tar-
geted specifically to this population that has
expedenced abuse, neglect, or both to provide
these children and youths the opportunity to
achieve school-related success. These interventive
efforts may have long-lasting and important future
impacts (Veltman &L Browne, 2001).
This investigation provides descdptive and lon-
gitudinal findings for a program initiated in 2001
in one Ohio county's children's services agency
that is trying to address and improve the academic
and school-related outcomes for maltreated children

and youths. Finding evidence of what may work
to address this child welfare, school social work,
and public educadon situadon is important not
only because academic difficuldes are a common
problem for maltreatment victims, but also because
few programs have been designed specifically to
target this problem (Tolan, Henry, Schoeny, &
Bass, 2007; Wilson, Gottfi:edson, & Najaka, 2001).
BACKGROUND
Child Maltreatment
Child maltreatment includes neglect and physical,
sexual, and psychological abuse. Child protective
services agencies nationwide confirmed 903,000
children as maltreated in 2007 (approximately 1.2
percent of all children and youths in the United
States), an increase of 10 percent since 1990. A
majodty of these confirmed cases were for neglect
(63 percent), with fewer cases of physical abuse
(17 percent), psychological abuse (11.5 percent),
and sexual abuse (9.5 percent) (U.S. Department
doi: 10.1093/cs/cdr004 O 2012 National Association of Social
Workers 13
of Health and Human Services, 2009a).
Maltreatment affects many of these children and
youths in harmful ways, increasing risk for lower
school achievement, juvenile delinquency, sub-
stance abuse, mental health problems, and other
young adult difficulties (Hawkins et al., 2000;
TueU, 2002; U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 2003; Wiggins, Fenichel, &

Mann, 2007).
Impact of Maltreatment on School
Performance
There is strong evidence, though significant study
methodology variance, that maltreated children and
youths have poorer academic outcomes (Leiter,
2007). Most researchers have looked at maltreat-
ment as a distinct variable, whereas fewer research-
ers have investigated the impact that a specific type
of abuse or neglect had on school performance.
Generalization of this research knowledge is pos-
sible because many of the recent studies used
random samples, many designs were prospective
(though earlier designs were primarily cross-
sectional, identifying maltreatment and educational
outcomes retrospectively), and the designs con-
trolled for many other possible explanatory impacts
on school performance. Known influences on
school performance that were controlled for
included poverty, family characteristics, social and
peer influences, and neighborhoods. Use of com-
parison groups has also been consistent; studies
compared a maltreated cohort with a nonmal-
treated but demographicaUy similar cohort (Boden,
Horwood, & Fergusson, 2007; Staudt, 2001). A
review of the studied outcomes found a focus on
intellectual development (75 percent of studies),
language development (86 percent of studies), and
academic achievement (91 percent of studies), with
74 percent of studies using comparison group
designs (Veltman & Browne, 2001). Recent studies
have continued these methodology trends (Leiter,
2007).
Primary School. Maltreated children are more

likely to have poorer grades and be held back a
grade level (Brown, 2000; Eckenrode, Laird, &
Doris, 1993; Kelley, Thomberry, & Smith, 1997;
Shonk & Cicchetti, 2001), particularly in kinder-
garten and fint grade (Rowe & Eckenrode, 1999).
This result was also found for children in the
school year after they entered out-of-home care
(SmithgaU et al., 2004). It is not clear how child
welfare agenc)' and family involvement affect
these school delays and being held back, though
frequent moves and changes can create or exacer-
bate educational difficulties (Ayassee, 1995;
National Youth in Care Network, 2001). Many
of these maltreated children also experienced
poverty, an identified influence on poor academic
outcomes. However, even when poverty was
controlled for, maltreatment was found to have a
harmful impact on scholastic performance
(Bamett, Vondra, & Shonk, 1996).
Cognitive and language delays, apparent at the
school enrollment age, are greater for maltreated
children than for nonmaltreated children from
lower socioeconomic backgrounds and much
greater than for nonmaltreated children from
higher socioeconomic backgrounds (Wiggins
et al., 2007). On average, maltreated students
enter school one-half year behind on academic
performance (SmithgaU et al., 2004) and have
poorer academic performance and adaptive func-
tioning at ages six and eight than nonmaltreated
children (Kurtz, Gaudin, Wodanki, & Howing,
1993; Zolotor et al., 1999). These students also
have higher absenteeism rates than nonmaltreated
children (Lansford et al., 2002; Leiter, 2007; Leiter

& Johnsen, 1997).
It is less clear if specific types of abuse or
neglect have differential impacts. Physical abuse has
been found both to negatively affect academic
achievement, grades specifically (Hoffinan-Plotkin
& Twentyman, 1984; Leiter & Johnsen, 1994),
and to have no impact on academic achievement
(Eckenrode et al., 1993; Kurtz et al., 1993). The
impact of sexual abuse on academic outcomes is
unclear to date, though reviews are limited, with
contradictory findings on the effect of abuse on
intellectual abilities (Veltman & Browne, 2001).
However, the impact of neglect on children's aca-
demic outcomes has consistently been found to
be harmful, particularly to grades and overall aca-
demic skills (Alien & Oliver, 1982; Eckenrode
et al., 1993).
It should be noted, however, that many chil-
dren experience more than one type and one oc-
currence of maltreatment, and the cumulative and
interactive effects of these multiple experiences
comphcate research findings (Margolin & Gordis,
2000; U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, 2009a). Some researchers have identified
that the severity of abuse has a negative impact on
14 Children & Schools VOLUME 34, N U M B E R I
JANUARY 2012
verbal abilities and verbal IQ (Perez & Widom,
1994). The more serious or pervasive the mal-
treatment, the greater the risk for the child's

decline in school performance, including absen-
teeism and grades. Maltreatment at an earher age
may lead to behavior problems and increased
placement into special education programs (Leiter
& Johnsen, 1997).
Compared with nonmaltreated children, mal-
treated children are less inclined to engage in in-
dependent activities, require more external
motivations, and show less academic engagement
(Koenig, Cicchetti, 8i Rogosch, 2000; Shonk &
Cicchetti, 2001; Toth & Cichetti, 1996). They
also show less effective work habits and disciphne
and receive lower math and Enghsh grades during
elementary school (Rowe & Eckenrode, 1999).
However, improving academic engagement and
increased work with the maltreated children
improves school outcomes (Gray, Nielsen, Wood,
Andresen, & Dolce, 2000; Shonk & Cicchetti,
2001).
Maltreated children, and particularly children in
foster care, are more hkely than their nonmal-
treated peers to be diagnosed with a special edu-
cation disability during earlier school yean—
upward of 35 percent are diagnosed with such a
disabihty (Children's Law Center, 2003;
Frothingham et al., 2000; Goerge, VanVoorhis,
Grant, Casey, & Robinson, 1992; Leiter &
Johnsen, 1997; Scarborough & McCrae, 2010).
Children in foster care also have poorer academic
achievement than their peen (Burley & Halpem,
2001; Fanshel & Shin, 1978). In one review, these
children were 96 percent below their grade level
in reading comprehension and 95 percent below
in mathematics (Hyames & de Hames, 2000).

Others have also found this impact to be strong,
with children in foster care half as hkely to
perform at grade level (Conger & Rebeck, 2001)
and upward of 50 percent held back one grade
(Children's Law Center, 2003). Children in
out-of-home care do not seem to fall further
behind in reading achievement while in care, but
the achievement gap remains (Smithgall et al.,
2004).
Secondary School. Maltreatment has been
found to affect older students' academic and
related outcomes (Courtney, Roderick, Smithgall,
Gladden, & Nagaoka, 2004; Wodarski, Kurtz,
Gaudin, & Howing, 1990). More intense or long-
lasting maltreatment was found to be associated
with low grade point averages and problems com-
pleting homework assignments, though the
impact was moderated by cognitive deficits (Slade
& Wissow, 2007). Courtney, Terao, and Bost
(2004) reported that older maltreated adolescents
were three or four grade levels behind in reading
abilities and that, compared with their
nonmaltreated peers, significantly more had
repeated at least one grade. In one survey of chil-
dren in out-of-home care, middle-school youths
were three times more hkely to be identified as in
need of special education services, with almost aU
youths in this study with learning disabilities
scoring below national reading norms (Smithgall
et al., 2004).
Many maltreated youths also scored significantly
lower on standardized and required proficiency
examinations (Egeland, 1997): In Chicago, one-

fourth of maltreated children scored in the bottom
quartüe on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (Smithgall
et al., 2004); in Ohio, only one-fourth of ninth-
grade students in foster care passed the mathemat-
ics and science tests, and only one-half passed the
reading proficiency tests (Coleman, 2004); and in
Washington, youths in care scored on average 15
to 20 points lower on the statewide achievement
tests than their nonmaltreated peers (Burley 8c
Halpem, 2001). These poor outcomes are also
found when other countries' maltreated youth
populations are studied (Colton & Heath, 1994;
Jones, Trudinger, & Crawford, 2004).
Some researchers have found that maltreated
(measured as one variable) students have signifi-
cantly lower high school graduation rates than
nonmaltreated students (Blome, 1994; Boden
et al., 2007; Buehler et al., 2000; McGloin &
Widom, 2001; Täte, 2000; Thomberry, Ireland, &
Smith, 2001). Children and youths in foster care
are particularly at risk, with 46 percent not com-
pleting high school (Children's Law Center,
2003). When further investigated, neglect was
found to have a strong negative impact on aca-
demic achievement and high school graduation
rates, physical abuse a shght impact, and sexual
abuse no impact (Eckenrode et al., 1993; Fang &
Tarui, 2009; Wodanki et al., 1990). However,
physical and sexual abuse have also been found
not to be associated with later high school gradu-
ation attainment, after controUing for socio-
economic status (Boden et al., 2007).
MALLETT / The School Success Program 15

Intervention Strategies
In-Class Programming. It is important to address
these school performance and academic deficien-
cies for all children and youths who have experi-
enced maltreatment. Underachievement in the
classroom and placement in remedial classrooms
are associated with school dropout, deviant peer
fHendships, and delinquency (Mears & Aron,
2003; Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989).
These potentially harmful outcomes for mal-
treated children and youths are not inevitable;
some youths succeed with little to no assistance
(Hamilton & Browne, 1998). However, many
maltreated children may benefit firom efforts to
improve their academic performance (Veltman &
Browne, 2001).
Strong evidence shows that school-based teach-
ing and programs help students who are behind in
academic performance or at risk of failing a grade.
One school-based area is the everyday classroom
setting and interactions between teachers and chil-
dren, with knowledge of how to be effective at
ameliorating these academic risks (National Institute
of Child Health and Human Development Early
Chud Care Research Network, 2003; Pianta,
LaParo, Payne, Cox, & Bradley, 2002). A second
school-based area is interventions designed to help
or address varying risk factors for these students
(Greenberg et al., 2003; Wüson et al., 2001).
Virtually no programs or school-based interventions
tailored to academic problems of maltreated stu-
dents exist, however.

Mentoring and Tutoring Programs. Significant
evidence shows that both mentoring and tutoring
as stand-alone interventions are effective for many
at-risk children and youths. Mentoring, particular-
ly programs based on the Big Brothers/Big Sisters
model, has been shown to be effective on a wide
range of child and youth difficulties. Program
participants (ages six to 18) show significant im-
provements compared with noninvolved at-risk
children and youths in academic behavior, atti-
tudes, and performance and in improved relation-
ships with parents and peers (McGill, Mihalic, &
Grotpeter, 1998; Novotney, Mertinko, Lange, &
Baker, 2000). More specifically, in a review of 39
mentoring programs (Tolan et al., 2007), although
most were found to effectively produce positive
outcomes for the children and youths, mentors
with a professional background were more effect-
ive than mentors without a professional
background. Although it is known that the rela-
tionship between a mentor and a chud is most im-
portant, the specific processes or program
structures beyond this still need to be identified if
we are to know which programs are more effect-
ive and why (Tolan et al., 2007).
Tutoring models and programs range from high
to low in structure and from using volunteer to
paraprofessional to professional tutors (Fashola,
2001). A review of 28 adult, nonprofessional vol-
unteer tutor programs (all studies used a compari-
son group with a one-month tutoring duration
minimum) for school-age children (kindergarten
through eighth grade) found positive impacts on
reading and language outcomes, specifically

overall reading, oral fluency, letter and word iden-
tification, and writing. No significant differences
were found between volunteer tutor type, grade
level, and program focus (Ritter, Denny, Albin,
Bamett, & Blankenship, 2007). Reviews of certi-
fied teachers (professional) as stand-alone tutoring
programs are limited in the literature. An early
review of five tutoring programs, including both
professional and nonprofessional tutors, found the
reading improvements for children to be signifi-
cant, very much justifing the programs costs
(Wasik & Slavin, 1990). A meta-analysis of 29
tutoring programs that included both adult
nonprofessional and adult trained-professional
volunteen also found that these programs were ef-
fective at improving reading abilities for elemen-
tary school children (Elbaum, Vaughn, Hughes, &
Moody, 2000). More recently, the Reading
Recovery tutoring model was found to be highly
effective in improving participants' alphabetic
skiUs and general reading achievement outcomes
in five separate studies (two conducted in Ohio).
This model uses certified teachers, takes place
during the school day, and is designed for the
lowest achieving (lowest 20 percent) first-grade
students, with tutoring discontinued when a
student consistently reads at the grade level
average—normally between 12 and 20 weeks (U.
S. Department of Education, 2007a).
Summary of the Literature
In summary, maltreated children and youths have
poorer academic outcomes than do their nonmal-
treated peers. Some of these outcomes include
poorer grades, retainment for grade repetition,
cognitive and language delays, poor work habits.

JANUARY 2012
increased prevalence of special education disabil-
ities, and lower standardized and proficiency test
scoring. In Lorain County, Ohio, these poorer
outcomes for maltreated children and youths were
identified by the children's services agency. To
address these deficiencies and concerns, Lorain
County Children's Services initiated and has con-
tinued the School Success Program. To evaluate
whether this program is having an impact, this
initial pilot study was completed and reported.
This evaluation asked this question: Does the
School Success Program have a positive impact on
the academic and school-related outcomes of
these maltreated chüdren and youths?
LORAIN COUNTY, OHIO, CHILDREN S SERVICES
SCHOOL SUCCESS PROGRAM
Program Design
The major focus of the School Success Program is
to provide a consistent adult, who is also a certi-
fied teacher, to tutor each child, individually and
in his or her home. The match between certified
tutor/mentor and child is based on the education-
al needs of the child, the tutor's abilities, and the
personahty styles of both. Often practice wisdom
and the program supervisors' long history and
work with the famihes are instructive as to
the tutor/mentor type that may work best with a
child or youth. (The program is run by the

county's children's service agency, so in
this smaller sized jurisdiction, there is often a well-
known famuy history.) Also, a very large majority
of the tutors/mentors have been with the
program for numerous years, allowing the
program to know and undentand their styles,
strengths, and weaknesses. Matches are monitored
by supervisors to ensure an ongoing best fit. This
best fit model is achieved through the assessment
of the work, relationship building, and outcomes/
progress of the tuton/menton, children, and the
children's famihes. The tutor/mentor works with
the child, family. Children's Services School
Success worker, and classroom teachers in a team
environment. Children and tuton/mentors meet
between one and four hours per week (or more if
necessary), depending on the child's needs, and
focus their individualized educational support
plans on Ohio benchmarks (the standard in aU
Ohio pubhc schools), local pubhc school system
skiUs sets, and other issues that may be impeding
success. Individual student program progress is
assessed throughout by the full team via weekly
progress reports and monthly review documents
and formally every five months for children and
youths with ongoing involvement with
Children's Services. (A program manual is avail-
able firom Christopher A. Mallet.)
This combination of tutoring and mentoring
by a certified teacher in an in-home setting was
designed to address these maltreated children's
academic deficits. In addition, as recommended
by the tutor/mentor, a penonal computer with
appropriate and necessary educational software is

also provided to the famüies on a library loan
basis. The program's goals for each child are to
instill the ability to understand school work and
experience school success; to teach study habits
and routines to follow in the home; to provide a
consistent, interested penon to the child and
family; and to advocate when additional, special
services (particularly special education) may be
necessary or available through the pubhc school
system.
METHOD
Design
This longitudinal design evaluation was of a
program using an open and rolling enrollment
process, based on the needs of the maltreated chil-
dren (and families) (Yegidis & Weinbach, 2009).
Different measures have been used over time and
modified to improve the evaluation. Program
completion and discharge criteria up through
2008 were based on individualized child (and
family) progress and goal attainment. However, in
2008, because of fiscal constraints, discharge cri-
teria for children and youths were set at the
24-month mark of program participation, regard-
less of individualized goal attainment.
Program Population
The School Success Program began in the 2001-
02 academic year with 15 children from foster
care home supervision and expanded to approxi-
mately 60 children firom both foster care and
relative supervision settings at the end of the
2003-04 academic year. The Children's Services
Agency set up the program in conjunction with

the Elyria, Ohio, school district to help the aca-
demic progress for these supervised children. In
MALLETT / The School Success Proff-am 17
the 2004-05 academic year, due to initial identi-
fied success of progression to an age-appropriate
academic level by each chud, the program was
expanded to all grade levels (kindergarten through
12th grade) and school systems in Lorain County
and in surrounding counties when a child was
placed there and to agency-supervised children in
a variety of home settings (adoptive, relative,
custody, and foster). In the 2005-06 academic
year, the program was significantly expanded and
offered to children and youths who were in their
own homes, as long as their families were, or had
been, involved with the Children's Services
Agency. Higher enrollments occurred in 2007
and 2008, but due to budget losses, the program
enrollment decreased to between 150 and 175
children during the 2008-09 academic year. In
total, 615 children and youths were enrolled in
the School Success Program from 2001 to 2009,
with an average program participation length of
21 months. These children and youths were in all
grades (kindergarten through 12th grade),
although a majority of them were in primary
school (kindergarten through sixth grade: 62
percent, n = 381; seventh grade through 12th
grade: 38 percent, n = 234). Of participants, 58
percent (« = 357) were Caucasian, 31 percent
(n=191) AfHcan American, and 11 percent
(n = 67) Hispanic; 55 percent (n = 338) were

male, and 45 percent were {n = 277) female; and
54 percent (n = 332) were placed by the
Children's Services Agency outside of their home.
Pilot Studies—Measures
The initial program pilot studies conducted in
2002 and 2003 used parent, teacher, and student
surveys and interview feedback along with school
grade point average tracking and found initial
improvements for the participants. Early pilot eva-
luations of the program and its expansion firom
2003 to 2005 continued to use student grade
point averages, student grade placement levels,
and stakeholder surveys.
Full Study—Measures and Data Analysis
This evaluation of the program included the fol-
lowing student measures: Woodcock Johnson III
Assessment scores (2006 through 2009), grade
point averages (2001 through 2007), and special
education disabUity identification and services
(2001 through 2009).
The standardized Woodcock Johnson Assess-
ment measures general intellectual ability, specific
cognitive abilities, scholastic aptitude, oral lan-
guage, and overall academic achievement and
reports these results as basic reading, reading com-
prehension, math calculations, math reasoning,
basic writing, and overall academic skills scores
(McGrew, Dailey, & Schrank, 2007). These mea-
sures were completed once per academic year for
participants beginning in the 2006-07 academic
year (Tl = first time measurement). The basic
reading cluster score is a combination of letter-

word identification and word attach skills and is
an aggregate measure of sight vocabulary, phonics,
and structural analysis. The reading comprehen-
sion cluster score is a combination of passage
comprehension and reading vocabulary skill. The
math calculation cluster score is a measure of
computational skills and automaticity with basic
math facts and provides a measure of basic math-
ematical skiUs. The math reasoning cluster score is
a combination of applied problems and quantita-
tive concepts and provides a measure of mathem-
atical knowledge and reasoning. The basic writing
skills cluster score is a combination of spelling and
editing and provides a measure of ability to spell
single-word responses and identify errors in speUing,
punctuation, capitalization, and word usage. The
academic skills cluster score is a measure of the
other skills combined into an overall score
(McGrew et al., 2007). These scores are measured as
grade equivalency. Tl score measurements com-
pared with later (time 2 [T2, 12 months later] and
time 3 [T3, 24 months later]) score measurements
were assessed for statistically significant differences
using a series of paired samples t tests (p < .05).
Grade point averages for the students were cal-
culated using only the core academic subject
areas: writing, math, and reading. Use of these
subject grades (converted to a 4.0 grade point
scale) matches the national measurement criteria
(U.S. Department of Education, 2007b). These
student grade reports for specific academic years
were aggregated and averaged to determine the
program populations' overall scores.
Special education disabilities were determined

by the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (2004) and had numerous diagnostic and
18 Children & Schoob VOLUME 34, N U M B E R I JANUARY
2012
academic categories. If the program was respon-
sible for initial identification and subsequent
access to special education services through the
school system, this was then measured and
counted toward one of the program's goals.
RESULTS
Woodcock Johnson Assessment
From 2006 to 2009, 206 program participants
were measured with the Woodcock Johnson
Assessment, with 109 of these same children and
youths measured a second time and 30 a third
time. Although measurements for later times were
not fuUy available for all participants, those pro-
vided were tracked longitudinally on the same
children and youths. The decrease in number of
follow-up measurements was due to program hm-
itations and fiinding decreases.
It is expected in school classrooms that each
child wUl progress one academic year per subject
for each grade level. In other words, a child in the
fifth grade should be reading, writing, and doing
math at the fifth grade level. As shown in
Figure 1, the grade level change for the program
participants from the first measurement (Tl) to
the second measurement (T2) was one-half year

(0.50); however, their math comprehension
improved more than one full grade level equiva-
lent (1.01). This means that, compared with the
expected norm for aU students at these grade levels,
the program participants improved more than
twice as quickly in math comprehension skills
during this time period (McGrew et al., 2007).
Before enrollment in the program, children and
youths were on average over one academic year
behind in their overall abilities and even further
behind in reading comprehension. In one year in
the program, these students («=109) improved
their academic skiU levels twice as quickly as the
national norm, per the Woodcock Johnson
Assessment (McGrew et al., 2007). At the end of
two years, students (n = 30) still in the program
had caught up to their peer norms in basic
reading, math reasoning, and overall academic
skills. The students measured a second and third
time were very similar to the overall program
population regards gender, race, primary/second-
ary school, and agency placement.
Examination of these improvements in academ-
ic abihties for gender, race, and location (whether
hving with a relative, in their own home, or
placed by the Children's Services Agency),
showed particularly strong gains made by boys
(minority and Caucasian) and aU children in an
agency-directed placement. Boys exhibited gains
between 66 percent and 72 percent in every core
subject measured during the first year, and the sig-
nificant gains during the second year were more

Figure 1: Woodcock Johnson Assessment Scores for School
Success Program Participants
3.00
2.S0
2.00
1.00
o.so
0.00
• Grade Level
• BRGE
• RCGE
• MCGE
• MRGE
• BWGE
• ASGE
T l to T2 (n = 109; 12.6 months)
0.50
1.24
1.20

1.01
1.25
0.98
1.06
T l to T3 (n = 30; 12.9 months)
1.8
2.S3
2.47
2.2
2.62
2.1
2.39
Notes: All score changes are significant at p < .05. Tl = time 1;
T2 = time 2; T3 = time 3; BR = basic reading; GE = grade
equivalency; RC = reading comprehension; MC = math
calcutattons; MR = math reasoning; BW = basic writing; AS =
overall academic skills.
attdbutable to the boys' improvements than the

gids' (see Table 1 and Figure 2). Although
improvements continued between the second and
third years, the rate of improvement declined,
more so for the gids, except in basic wddng skills.
There was ütde dispadty between minodty
(Afdcan Amedcan and Hispanic) and Caucasian
children's improvements except in reading com-
prehension and basic wdting skills, in which mi-
nodties advanced but at a slower pace than
Caucasians (see Table 1 and Figure 3). The most
significant academic progress was achieved by
those children and youths in placement (adopted,
in-custody, and foster care), in whom over 91
percent improvement across all academic areas was
found dudng the first year of program participa-
tion (see Table 1 and Figure 4).
On the basis of the standardized Woodcock
Johnson Assessment, these children and youths
have made significant progress. A second, albeit
nondirect, assessment is to see how these results
compare with those of their public school student
peers—in other words, their nonmaltreated class-
mates. The Ohio Department of Education tracks
reading, wdting, and math achievement for all
students across public school distdcts and measures
this progress with grade-level proficiency exami-
nations. The two school distdcts important to
review are the Lorain and Elyda City Public
School Distdcts, because 64.3 percent of the
School Success Programs' participants were
referred from these two distdcts.
In the Lorain City Public Schools, third, sixth,
and 10th graders' proficiency exam passage rates
decreased by 6 percent per year from 2006 to

2009; fourth graders were an exception, improv-
ing their passage rates by 8 percent. In the Elyda
City Pubhc Schools, the exam passage rate also
decreased dudng this time pedod, although by 2
percent on average per year. More poignandy, in
the Lorain schools, boys passed the proficiency
exam across all grades (third through 12th) at
lower rates than girls (with two-thirds of the
passage rate categodes having more girls pass than
boys), and minodty youths (Afdcan Amedcan and
Hispanic) had lower passage rates for almost every
grade and tested category. In Elyda schools, there
were no gender dispadties in proficiency test
passage rates across the grades; however, minodty
youths across nine different grades passed these
test sections at lower rates than nonminodty
CO o '-' CN
t: o
C C CN
»o vp en
00 '-H Ö
<r o en
00 VO CN —• VÛ Xf
NT NT oo
§ §
p oo •—
o 00 iñ
o i/N r^ h** o

en "^ CN i/N '^
en fs u^ —' en
CN t^ 00
Vf en vr [*>.
.-i —I CN eN VÓ
o o 00 en CN en
CN —' CN en
Ö K 00 --!
en in p
CN 00 Ö Ö
CQ C¿
U
2 S S Î3
3 s
JANUARY 2012
by Gender
4.00
3 50
3.00
4, 2.50

S 2.00
"« 1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
• Grade Level
• BRGE
• RCGE
• MCGE
• MRGE
• BWGE
• ASGE
Change T l to T2:
Girls (n = 54)
0.60
1.15
1.06
0.82
1.16
0.81

0.90
Change T l to T2:
Boys (n = 55)
0.38
1.33
1.33
1.37
1.38
1.14
1.21
pi
Change T l to T3:
Girls (n = 15)
1.54
1.89
2.07
1.87
1.91
1.87
1.89

Change T l to T3;
Boys [n = 15)
1.94
3.31
2.92
2.57
3.47
2.3
2.94
T2 = time 2; T3 = time 3; BR = basic reading; GE = grade
calculations; MR = math reasoning; BW = basic writing; AS =
by Race
1.80
1.60
1.40
a, 1.20
5 1.00
¿i 0.80

0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
• Grade Level
• BRGE
• RCGE
• MCGE
• MRGE
• BWGE
• ASGE
Change T l to T2:
Caucasian [n = 62)
0.40
1.00
1.00
0.70
1.00
0.97
0.89

• • __H
• m^M
Change T l to T2:
Minority (n = 47)
0.7
1.5S
0.82
1.37
1.63
1.14
1.26
T2 = time 2; T3 = time 3; BR =. basic reading; GE = grade
calculations; MR = math reasoning; BW = basic v f̂riting; AS =
youths, with only four exceptions (Ohio
Department of Education, 2009). The children
and youths' overall academic success, as measured
by state proficiency tests in these two pubhc
school districts, decreased. Although not a direct
comparison—not possible because of incomplete
N4ALLETT / The School Success Program 21

by Location
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
a, 1.20
S 100
" 0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
• Grade Level
• BRGE
• RCGE
• MCGE
• MRGE
• BWGE
• A5GE
Change T l to T2: Relative
(n = 32)

0.65
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.28
0.63
0.85
Change T l to T2: In-home
(n = 58)
0.46
1.33
1.11
0.95
1.16
1.08
1.1
_•
• •
Change T l to T2:

Placement (n = 19)
0.1
1.62
1.84
1.4
1.41
1.29
1.18
Notes: All score changes are significant at p < .05 except BW T
l to T2. Tl = time t; T2 = time 2; T3 = time 3; BR = basic
reading; GE = grade equivalency; RC = reading comprehension;
MC = math calculations; MR = math reasoning; BW = basic
writing; AS = overall academic skills.
Figure 5: Grade Point Averages of School Success Program
Participants
2001 2002 2003 2004 2007
program participants' proficiency exam data—the
children and youths in the program made signifi-
cant progress across these same tested areas over
the last three years studied, as measured with the
Woodcock Johnson Assessment. Most interesting,
it looks like boys in the program made gains at a
quicker pace than girls, and both minority and
nonminority children and youths made gains at

almost an identical pace, something that did not
happen for their nonmaltreated peers in these
pubhc school districts.
Grade Point Averages
Program participants' grade point averages in
core subjects (writing, math, and reading)
improved nearly one fiiU point, equal to more
than one fiiU letter grade, over seven years of
programming (see Figure 5). The most recent
grade point calculations (2.56) placed these stu-
dents nearly on par with the national average
for public school students in these same core
academic subjects (2.73) (U.S. Department of
Education, 2007b).
JANUARY 2012
Special Education Disabilities
As a result of the program's advocacy efforts, over
19 percent of participants were identified as
having a special education disability. This percent-
age of participants identified as in need of disabil-
ity services is much higher than the public school
norm of between 4 percent and 9 percent of stu-
dents (Mears & Aron, 2003).
DISCUSSION
In answer to the research question of whether the
School Success Program has a positive impact on
the academic and school-related outcomes of mal-
treated children and youths, the results look
promising. These program results are potentially

important in light of the uniqueness of the inter-
vention—using certified professional teachers as
tutors, and mentors who worked in the child's
home and were available as needed to improve
academic habits, focus, and outcomes. Because of
the across-the-board difficulties many maltreated
children and youths experience with their school
work and performance, efforts to bridge and
improve these outcomes are important. The
improvements that were found here are arguably
remarkable in light of the many other challenges
these children and families were dealing with, in-
cluding involvement with the Children's Services
Agency because of identified abuse or neglect
issues. These chñdren were experiencing difficul-
ties most children never face: Almost half (54
percent) were Uving in out-of-home care and
going through other related transitions, and
almost 19 percent were identified with special
education disabilities.
Evaluation Limitations
Although the program looks to be a strong pos-
sible explanation for these participants' improved
academic abilities, evaluation limitations narrow
this claim. The evaluation design followed only
the program participants and did not include a
comparison group of similarly maltreated children
who did not receive the intervention. This limita-
tion is important to note and to include in future
program evaluation planning to improve the eva-
luation's internal validity. It was also not possible
to compare the potential differing levels of the
intervention (whereby one participant may have
received the service for two hours per week,
compared with four hours per week for a different

participant and over different lengths of time).
This dose comparison would also be important to
incorporate in fijture evaluations to further expH-
cate the intervention impact. In addition, because
the evaluation plan evolved along with the
program expansion, there are data limitations. The
Woodcock Johnson Assessment scores were not
available for all participants, and long-term mea-
sures were not available for all participants because
of service termination. Last, it is recommended
that program participants be measured and fol-
lowed after termination to see if the program
effects and academic gains hold over time.
Implications for Practice
Although we recognize the need for more rigor-
ous evaluation, the potential impact of the School
Success Program, or similar interventions, could
be significant because of the population being
served. Abused and neglected children who are
under children's services' supervision are at high
risk for many related and difficult problems that
school social workers, school system personnel,
substance abuse agencies, and juvenile (and crim-
inal) courts may have to address in fiature years
with these youths and families. It has been clearly
established across many professional fields that
early identification and prevention, one thing that
this program clearly intends to provide, minimizes
more difficult problems later and is extremely
cost-effective (Benda & Toilet, 1999; Holman &
Ziedenberg, 2006; Mean & Aron, 2003).
This makes some of the present findings par-
ticularly intriguing. Maltreated children and

youths who were in need of home removal and
placement by the Children's Services Agency
made the most significant progress in their first
year of program enrollment. Also, minority chil-
dren and youths (African American and Hispanic)
made equal improvements, something not often
found when working with and researching at-risk
populations.
Wanting children and youths to perform at
their academic school grade levels is common
sense—something parents, teachen, and school
personnel would be more than satisfied with most
of the time. The School Success Program simply
sets as its outcome goal that these norm school
achievements—grades; reading, writing, and math
abilities; and if needed, disability access—be
met for children who have been victims of
maltreatment. Recently, these efforts have been
recognized by the Administration on Family and
Children of the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, which named the School
Success Program a 2009 Promising Program (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services,
2009b). S
REFERENCES
Allen, R. E., & Oliver, J. M. (1982). The effects of child
maltreatment on language development. Child Abuse
& Neglect, 6,299-305.

Ayassee, R. H. (1995). Addressing the needs of foster chil-
dren: The foster youth services program. Social Work
in Education, Í7, 207-216.
Bamett, D., Vondra, J. I., & Shonk, S. M. (1996).
Self-perceptions, motivation, and school functioning
of low-income maltreated and comparison children.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 20, 397-410.
Benda, B. B., & Toilet, C. L. (1999). A study of recidivism
of serious and persistent offenders among adolescents.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 21, 111—126.
Blome, W. W. (1994). A comparative study of high school and
post-high school experiences of foster care and non-foster care
youths: A secondary analysis of a national longitudinal
study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Catholic
University, Washington, DC.
Boden, J. M., Horwood, L.J., & Fergusson, D. M. (2007).
Exposure to childhood sexual and physical abuse and
subsequent educational achievement outcomes. Child
Abuse & Neglect, 10, 1101-1114.
Brown, B. S. (2000). Meeting tiie educational needs of children
in foster care, kinship care, and children with disabilities.
Cincinnati: Beech Acres.
Buehler, C , Orme, J. G., Post, J., & Patterson, D. A.
(2000). The long-term correlates offamily foster care.
Children and Youth Services Review, 22, 595-625.
Burley, M., & Halpem, M. (2001). Educational attainment of
foster youths: Achievement and graduation outcomes for chil-
dren in state care. (Document N o . 01-11-3901).

Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public
Policy.
Children's Law Center. (2003). Los Angeles education summit
on needs and challenges fadngfoster youth: "Indentifying
obstacles and forging solutions. " Retrieved from http://
www.abanet.org/child/rclji/education/ed_
summitrec.pdf
Coleman, M. S. (2004). Children left behind: Tlie educational
status and needs of youth living in foster care in Ohio.
Retrieved from http://inpathways.net/
childrenleftbehind.pdf
Cokon, M., & Heath, A. (1994). Attainment and behavior
of children in care and at home. Oxford Review of
Education, 20, 317-327.
Conger, D., & Rebeck, A. (2001). How children's foster care
experiences affect their education. New York: Vera
Institute for Justice.
Courtney, M. E., Roderick, M., Smithgall, C , Gladden,
R. M., & Nagaoka, J. (2004). The educational status of
foster children. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for
Children. Retrieved from http://www.chapinhall.
org/research/brief/educational-status-foster-children
Courtney, M. E., Terao, S., & Bost, N . (2004). Midwest
evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth:
Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care. Chicago:
Chapin Hall Center for Children.
Eckenrode, J., Laird, M., & Doris, J. (1993). School per-
formance and disciplinary problems among abused

and neglected chñdren. Developmental Psychology, 29,
53-62.
Egeland, B. (1997). Mediators of the effects of child mal-
treatment on developmental adaptation in adoles-
cence. In D. Cicchetti, & S. L. Toth (Eds.), Rochester
symposium on developmental psychopathology, volume 8,
developmental perspectives on trauma: Theory, research, and
intervention (pp. 403-434). Rochester, NY:
University of Rochester Press.
Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Moody, S. W.
(2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring pro-
grams in reading for elementary students at risk for
reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervenrion
research. Jotima/ of Educational Psychology, 92,
605-619.
Fang, X., & Tarui, N . (2009, April 19). Child maltreatment,
family characteristics, and educational attainment: Evidence
from AddHealth data. Unpublished manuscript.
Fanshel, D., & Shin, E.B. (1978). Children in foster care: A
longitudinal investigation. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Fashola, O. S. (2001). Building effective afterschoolprograms.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Frothingham, T. E., Hobbs, C. J., Wynne, J. M.,
Yee, L., Goyal, A., & Wadsworth, D. J. (2000).
Follow up study eight years after diagnosis of sexual
abuse. Archives of the Disabled Child, 83, 132-134.
Goerge, R. M., VanVoorhis, J., Grant, S., Casey, K., &
Robinson, M. (1992). Special education experiences

of foster children: An empirical study. Child Welfare,
71, 419-437.
Gray, J., Nielsen, D., Wood, L., Andresen, M., & Dolce,
K. (2000). Academic progress of children who
attended a preschool for abused children: A follow-up
of the keepsafe project. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24,
25-32.
Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O'Brien, M. U.,
Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., et al. (2003).
Enhancing school-based prevention and youth de-
velopment through coordinated social, emotional,
and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58,
466-474.
Hamilton, C. E., & Browne, K. D. (1998). The repeat vic-
timization of children: Should the concept be
revised? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 3, 47-60.
Hawkins, J., Herrenkohl, T., Farrington, D., Brewer, D.,
Catalano, R. F., Hamchi, T., & Cothem, L. (2000).
Predictors of youth violence. Retrieved from https://
www.ncjrs.gov/pdffilesl/ojydp/179065.pdf
Hoffinan-Plotkin, D., & Twentyman, C. T. (1984). A
multimodal assessment of behavioral and cognitive
deficits in abused and neglected preschoolers. Child
Development, 55, 794-802.
Holman, B., & Ziedenberg, J. (2006). The dangers of deten-
tion: The impact of incarcerating youth in detention and
other secure congregate facilities. Baltimore: Annie
E. Casey Foundation.
Hyames, S., & de Hames, M. V. (2000). Educational experi-

ences and achievement of children and youth in the care of
the department receiving services fiom Chicago public
schooh. Urbana-Champaign: Children and Family
Resource Center, University of Illinois.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004). 20
U.S.C. 1400 et seq., revised and amended by
P. L. 108-466, Stat. 34. Retrieved from http://www.
ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2006-3/
081406a.pdf
Jones, D. A., Trudinger, P., & Crawford, M. (2004).
Intelligence and achievement of children referred fol-
lowing sexual abuse. Joumfli of Pediatrics and Child
Health, 40, 455-460.
24 Children & Schoob VOLUME 34, NUMBER I JANUARY
2012
KeUey, B. T., Thomberry, T. P., & Smith, C. A., (1997).
In the wake of childhood maltreatment. Washington, DC:
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.
Koenig, A. L., Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2000).
Child compliance/noncompliance and maternal con-
tributors to intemalization in maltreating and non-
maltreating dyads. Child Development, 71, 1018-1032.
Kurtz, P. D., Gaudin, J. M., Wodarski,J. S., & Howing, P.
T. (1993). Maltreatment and the school-aged child:
School performance consequences. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 17, 581-589.

Lansford, J., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E.,
Crozier, J., & Kaplow, J. (2002). A 12-year prospect-
ive of the long-term effects of early child physical
maltreatment on psychological, behavioral, and aca-
demic problems in adolescence. Archives of Pédiatrie
and Adolescent Medicine, 156, 824-830.
Leiter, J. (2007). School performance trajectories after the
advent of reported maltreatment. Children and Youth
Services Review, 29, 363-382.
Leiter, J., &Johnsen, M. C. (1994). Child maltreatment
and school performance. American Journal of Education,
201, 154-189.
Leiter, J., &Johnsen, M. C. (1997). Child maltreatment and
school performance declines: An event-history analysis.
American Educational Research Journal, 34, 563-589.
Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family
and community violence on children. Annual Review
of Psychology, 51, 445-479.
McGül, D. E., Mihaüc, S. F., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1998).
Big Brothers Big Sisters of America: Blueprints for violence
prevention, book two. Boulder: University of Colorado
Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence,
Institute of Behavioral Science.
McGloin, J. M., & Widom, C. S. (2001). Resilience
among abused and neglected children grown up.
Development and Psychopathology, 13, 1021-1038.
McGrew, K., DaiJey, D., & Schrank, F. (2007). Woodcock
Johnson III normative update: Score differences, what the
user can expect and why (assessment service bulletin number

time).Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
Mears, D., & Aron, L. (2003). Addressing the needs of youth
with disabilities in the juvenile justice system: The current
state of knowledge. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Retrieved £k)m http://www.urban.org/publications/
410885.html
National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development Early Child Care Research Network.
(2003). Social functioning in first grade: Prediction
from home, child care and concurrent school experi-
ence. Child Development, 74, 1639-1662.
National Youths in Care NetWork. (2001). Who will teach
me to leam: Creating positive experiences for youths in care.
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: National Youth in Care
Network.
Novotney, L. C , Mertinko, J. L., Lange, J. L., & Baker,
T. K. (2000). JufemVe mentoring program: A progress
review. Washington, DC: JuverJle Justice Bulletin,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, U.S. Department ofjustice.
Ohio Department of Education. (2009). Ohio report card.
Retrieved from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/
Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=279
Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (1989).
A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior.
American Psychologist, 44, 329-335.
Perez, C , & Widom, C. S. (1994). Chudhood victimiza-
tion and long term intellectual and academic out-
comes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18, 617-633.

Pianta, R. C , LaParo, K. M., Payne, C , Cox, M. J., &
Bradley, R. (2002). The relation of kindergarten
classroom environment to teacher, family, and school
characteristics and child outcomes. Elementary School
Journal, 201, 225-238.
Ritter, G., Denny, G., Albin, G., Bamett, J., &
Blankenship, V. (2007). The effectiveness of volunteer
tutoring programs: A systematic review. Retrieved from
http://givewell.org/frles/unitedstates/
campbell_acadeinic%20achievement_tu toring.PDF
Rowe, E., & Eckenrode, J. (1999). The timing of academic
difficulties among maltreated and nonmaltreated chil-
dren. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23, 813-818.
Scarborough, A., & McCrae, J. (2010). School-age special
education outcomes of infants and toddlers investi-
gated for maltreatment. Children and Youth Services
Review,32, 80-88.
Shonk, S. M., & Cicchetti, D. (2001). Maltreatment,
competency deficits, and risk for academic and be-
havioral maladjustment. Developmental Psychology, 31,
Slade, E. P., & Wissow, L. S. (2007). The influence of
childhood maltreatment on adolescents' academic
performance. Economics of Education Review, 26,
604-614.
SmithgaU, C , Gladden, R. M., Howard, E., Goerge, R.,
& Courtney, M. E. (2004). Education experiences of chil-
dren in out-of-home care. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center
for Children.

Staudt, M. (2001). Psychopathology, peer relations, and
school fiincdoning of maltreated children: A literature
review. Children & Schools, 23, 85-100.
Täte, S. C. (2000). Impediments to academic achievement for
African American males in an urban Midwest foster care
system (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kansas
State University, Manhattan, KS.
Thomberry, T. P., Ireland, T. O., & Smith, C.A. (2001).
The importance of timing: The varying impact of
childhood and adolescent maltreatment on multiple
problem outcomes. Development and Psychopathology,
13, 957-979.
Tolan, P., Henry, D., Schoeny, M., & Bass, A. (2007).
Mentoring interventions to affect juvenile delinquency and
associated problems. Retrieved from http://www.
campbeUcoUaboradon.org/Ubrary.php
Toth, S. L., & Cicchetti, D. (1996). The impact of related-
ness with mothers on school functioning in mal-
treated youngsters. Jouma/ of School Psychology, 3,
247-266.
Tuell, J. (2002). Child maltreatment and juvenile delinquency:
Raising the level of awareness. Retrieved from
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.
aspx?ID=199834
U.S. Department of Education. (2007a). National Center for
Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.
gov/
U.S. Department of Education. (2007b). Reading recovery.
Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences,

What Works Clearinghouse.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003).
A coordinated response io child abuse and neglect: The foun-
dation for practice. Retrieved from http://www.
childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/foundation/
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2009a).
Child and family services reviews: Promising approaches in
child welfare. Retrieved from http://www.acfhhs.gov/
programs/cb/cwmonitoring/promise/states.htm
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2009b).
Child maltreatment 2007. Retrieved from http://www.
acfhhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/
Veltman, M. W., & Browne, K. D. (2001). Three decades
of child maltreatment research: Implications for the
school years. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2, 215—239.
Wasik, B., & Slavin, R. (1990). One-to-one tutoring produces
early reading success; large gains justify cost. Baltimore:
Center for Research on Effective Schoohng for
Disadvantaged Students.
Wiggins, C , Fenichel, E., & Mann, T. (2007).
Developmental problems of maltreatment children and early
intervention options for maltreated children. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Child Protective Services Project.
Wilson, D. B., Gottfredson, D. C , & Najaka, S.S. (2001).

School-based prevention of problem behaviors: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17,
247-272.
Wodarski, J., Kurtz, D., Gaudin, j . , & Howing, P. (1990).
Maltreatment and the school-age child: Major aca-
demic, socioemotional, and adaptive outcomes. Social
Work, 35, 506-513.
Yegidis, B., & Weinbach, R. (2009). Research methods for
social workers. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Zolotor, A., Kotch, J., Dufort, V., Winsor, j . , CateUier, C ,
& Bou-Saada, I. (1999). School performance in a
longitudinal cohort of children at risk of maltreat-
ment. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 3(1), 19-27.
Christopher A. Mallett, PhD, JD, USW, is associate
professor. School of Social Work, Cleveland State University,
Cleveland State University, 2121 Euclid Avenue, #CB324,
Cleveland, OH 44115-2214; e-mail: [email protected]
edu.
Original manuscript received October 9, 2009
Finai revision received February 2. 2010
Accepted April 15,2010
Advance Access Publication May 23, 2012
TRENDS & RESOURCES
Trends & Resources presents currentpractice trend information
accom-
panied by highlights of relevant books,
curriculums, films, and other practice

aids for school social workers and their
colleagues. The column is co-edited by
an academic researcher and a practitioner
to help bridge the gap between the latest
well-researched tools, current policy and
practice issues, and the field. The journal
does not accept unsolicited reviews for
this column.
SKINNY
REVISITED^
and Its Treatrfréi
Maria Baratta
our society's unhealthy obsession with thinness can iead to
serious consequences. The pressure to conform to society's
standard of beauty ieaves many women feeiing dissatisfied
with their shape and body weight. The extreme reaction to
this obsession is anorexia nervosa—a psychiatric disorder
characterized by a wiiifui determination to controi the intake
of food to the point of starvation—and is precipitated by a
myriad of causative factors.
, Sldnny Revisited: Rethinking Anorexia Nenvsa and Its
•JKâfment offers a thorough overview and etioiogical
•.explanation of ¿norexia as an eating disorder. Writing from
I," a feminist sociojehavioral perspective, Maria Baratta forges
* ' ' Tful argijment about the role that our culture at large i
•;;|jays'iO. creating the environment for disordered eating
i'âgiôhg Women, Wbinen are constantly bombarded with
'•'mièisages from the media to value "skinny" and to strive for
í!íhiñriéso,:nó ñríaíter howg-eat the c'angers.

^̂ Despite its seriousness, anorexia can be treated, and Baratta '
presents a successful treatment model that teaches how to ;
engage an anorexic in such a way as to encourage eating. On
the basis of 28 years of dîiical practice, the author provides |
clinical cases that demonstrate the use of the "language of j
the anorexic", as a treatment intervention, finally, the book
explains how to create an individucdized, heallhy eating plan
as opposed to following a diet designed to be applicable to |
anyone sfruggling with an eating disorder, for anyone with
;î a.professional, academic, or personal interest in anorexia
^^Skinny Revisited is a tremendous resource.
ISBN: 978-0-87101 -4078.. 201 1.,
Item #4078. 120 pages. $26.99
1-800-227-3590 • www.naswpress.org
#NASW
NASW PRESS
CODE: APSRl 1
26 Children & Schools . VOLUME 34, NUMBER I JANUARY
2012
Copyright of Children & Schools is the property of National
Association of Social Workers and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.

Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness

Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness

Similar to Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness (20)

More from odiliagilby

More from odiliagilby (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Evaluating a web-based workforce resource for families with mental illness