Data derived from the project: 'Family Group Conferencing for Children and Families: Evaluation of Implementation, Context, and Effectiveness' (Family VOICE)'

Résumé fourni par la source

This dataset is from the Family View and Context Study which is part of the wider Family VOICE evaluation of family group conferences (FGCs). The Family Views and Context Study examined the processes and short‑ and medium‑term outcomes of FGCs in UK child welfare services. The study used questionnaires co‑designed with families and practitioners in an earlier work package. Data were collected from all family members aged 8+ who participated in an FGC at three time points: baseline (before the conference), a few weeks after the FGC, and six months later. Outcomes explored include empowerment, family communication, adult well-being, perceived child safety and child psychosocial health. Participating FGC services formed a prospective single‑arm study, with questionnaire data supplemented by semi‑structured interviews with a purposive sub‑sample of participants aged 16+. The dataset captures variation in family context, implementation factors, and FGC characteristics across different local authorities. The dataset supports analysis of change over time, contextual influences on outcomes, and mechanisms associated with FGC processes.All work packages have full ethical approval. The Family Views and Context Study (WP2) was approved by the UK Health Research Authority’s Social Care Ethics Committee (IRAS 325725). The study also has approval from the Association of Directors of Children’s Services Research Group for England and initial support from the Northern Ireland system for social care research approval. No equivalent national approval process exists in Wales or Scotland for research in social services. A Project Steering Committee provided independent oversight, meeting annually, and a Families’ Research Advisory Group ran alongside the study to ensure lived experience informed the study throughout.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.