The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare
The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare

This document was printed from the website of the California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare (CEBC), which you can access at http://www.cachildwelfareclearinghouse.org/

SafeCare - Detailed Report

Scientific Rating:
3
Promising Research Evidence
See scale of 1-6
Scientific Rating:
3 - Promising Research Evidence

Relevance to Child Welfare Rating:
1
Relevance to Child Welfare Rating:
1 - High

Child Welfare Outcomes: Safety.

Type of Maltreatment: Physical abuse and Physical neglect

Target Population: Parents at-risk for child neglect and/or abuse and parents with a history of child neglect and/or abuse

Brief Description:

SafeCare has been rated by the CEBC in the areas of Interventions for Neglect, Parent Training, and Prevention (Secondary). SafeCare is an in-home parenting model program that provides direct skill training to parents in child behavior management and planned activities training, home safety training, and child health care skills to prevent child maltreatment.

Please fill out this form to send us feedback on the rating of SafeCare. Starred fields are required.

Provisional feedback form not available in printout. Please access the website to use the form.


Essential Components

Show Essential Components

Planned Activities assessment and training:

  • Teach parent time management
  • Explain rules to child
  • Reinforcement/rewards
  • Incidental teaching
  • Activity preparation
  • Outcome discussions with child
  • Explain expectations to child

Home Safety assessment and training:

  • Assess accessible home hazards with the Home Accident Prevention Inventory-Revised to assess accessible home hazards
  • Provide parents with door and cabinet latches
  • Use graduated plan to have parents remove identified hazards and to child proof doors and cabinets
  • Perform healthy home assessment and training

Infant and child health care assessment and training:

  • Use HEALTH checklists to assess parent skills
  • Teach any skill deficits (i.e., how to take a temperature)
  • Teach use of health checklists and how to determine when to self-treat illness and when to seek medical care
  • Include problem solving training as needed

Parent and staff training:

  • Modeling
  • Role rehearsal
  • Performance criteria in simulation and actual interactions.
  • Monitoring of staff for model fidelity.
  • Booster training if performance falls below criteria


Group Format

SafeCare was not designed to be conducted in a group.

SafeCare has not been tested for use in a group setting.


Recommended Parameters

Recommended intensity: Weekly sessions at approximately 1.5 hours each

Recommended duration: 18-20 weeks


Homework

SafeCare includes a homework component.

Description: Planned activities, safety, and health care checklists


Delivery Setting

SafeCare is typically conducted in a(n): Adoptive Home, Birth Family Home, and Foster Home.


Parent Component

SafeCare was designed with a Parent Component.

SafeCare addresses the following presenting problems and symptoms: Difficulty managing behavior and child health and safety concerns


Child Component

SafeCare was designed with a Child Component.

SafeCare addresses the following presenting problems and symptoms: Difficult behavior and inability to do developmentally appropriate daily living tasks

Age range(s): 0-5

SafeCare was developed for children with developmental delays.

SafeCare has been tested for children with developmental delays.

Relevant research studies:

Shipley-Benamou, R.,Lutzker, J.R., & Taubman, M. (2002). Teaching daily living skills to children with autism through instructional video modeling. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4, 165-175, 188.

Huynen, K.B., Lutzker, J.R., Bigelow, K.M., Touchette, P.E., & Campbell, R.V. (1996). Planned activities training for mothers of children with developmental disabilities: Community generalization and follow-up. Behavior Modification, 20, 406-427.


Racial/Ethnic Diversity

SafeCare was not designed for specific racial/ethnic/cultural groups.

SafeCare was not tested in specific racial/ethnic/cultural groups.


Education and Training Resources

There is a manual that describes how to implement this program.

There is training available for SafeCare.

Training contact: Dr. John Lutzker at the Marcus Institute, lutzkerj@marcus.org. Website: www.marcus.org.

Number of days/hours: 5 days at 8 hours per day

Training is obtained: Provided onsite by certified trainers

There currently are not additional qualified resources for training.


Identified Resources Necessary to Implement Program

The typical resources for implementing SafeCare are: A Home Visitor, a Coach, and space for offices. Material resources needed to implement the program include: Audio recorders (one for each home visitor so that they can audiotape each sessions for the purpose of coaching). Basic safety latches (cabinet latches, drawer latches, and door knob latches), which are fairly inexpensive (e.g., 10 for $2). A screwdriver for each home visitor for the installation of safety latches. Dolls (used dolls are fine) to use during role-plays with the parents. Plastic bins to carry materials. Other optional supplies include such things as digital thermometers, stickers for reinforcing children’s positive behaviors, band-aids, an electric screwdriver for the installation of safety latches, etc.


Minimum Provider Qualifications

Experience suggests at least a college education, but it has not been fully explored. The most important issues is that staff be trained to performance criteria.


Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

Show Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

Gershater-Molko, R.M., Lutzker, J.R., & Wesch, D. (2002). Using recidivism data to evaluate Project Safecare: Teaching bonding, safety and healthcare skills to parents. Child Maltreatment, 7(3), 277-285.
Type of Study: Matched comparison group design
Number of participants: 41 SafeCare participants, 41 Family Preservation participants
Population:

    Age Range: Families with children aged 0 to 5.
    Race/Ethnicity: Not available
    Status (e.g., foster care, CW): All families had a substantiated child abuse claim with the DCFS.

Location/Institution: Information not provided in journal article.
Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations). This study examined recidivism [habitual relapse] in a sample of families referred to the study by the local child welfare system due to recent substantiated reports of child abuse and/or neglect. The control group was matched based on child's birth date and geographical location from a sample of families participating in a Family Preservation program. Families in the SafeCare group had significantly lower rates of re-abuse reporting during the 24-month follow-up period than the control group. At 36 months after the intervention 85% of the SafeCare families had no further reports of child abuse, compared with 54% of the Family Preservation families. One limitation noted was that only those families who had completed all components of SafeCare, including post-training data collection using the Beck Depression Inventory, Child Abuse Potential Inventory and Parenting Stress Index were included in the treatment group, while there was no comparable assurance of level of service provided for the Family Preservation group, which makes the comparison less generalizable.
Length of post-intervention follow-up: A minimum of 24 months.

 

 

Gershater-Molko, R., Lutzker, J.R., & Wesch, D. (2003). Project SafeCare: Improving Health, safety and parenting skills in families reported for and at-risk for child maltreatment. Journal of Family Violence, 18(6), 377-386.
Type of Study: Pre/post test
Number of participants: 41 families completed all three training components.
Population:

    Age Range: Families with children 0 -5.
    Race/Ethnicity: Unknown
    Status (e.g., foster care, CW): Participants were families with recent reports of child maltreatment and those referred by social workers due to the risk factors of parents' age, low level of education, and lack of social support.

Location/Institution: Information not provided in journal article.
Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations):
Parents were trained in treating children's illnesses and maximizing their own healthcare skills (Health), positive and effective parent-child interaction skills (Parenting), and maintaining low-hazard homes (Safety) during a 24-week program. The effectiveness of these training components was evaluated as the change in the parents' scores on role-play situations for child health problems, hazards present in the home, and the frequency and quality of parent-child interactions during activities of daily living. Statistically significant improvements were seen in Health, Safety, and Parenting over baseline measures. However, the authors note that there was a high level of attrition from the program [decrease in using program components] among those who were referred, with only 10% completing all of the training components. This is cited as typical for maltreating and at-risk families referred to interventions with possible contributing factors including family stressors, involuntary referrals, and lack of resources or motivation.
Length of post-intervention follow-up: N/A



References

Show References

Bigelow, K.M., & Lutzker, J.R. (1998). Using video to teach planned activities to parents reported for child abuse. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 20, 1-14.

Bigelow, K.M., & Lutzker, J.R. (2000). Training parents reported for or at risk for child abuse and neglect to identify and treat their children's illnesses. Journal of Family Violence, 15, 311-330.

Cordon, I.M., Lutzker, J.R., Bigelow, K.M., & Doctor, R.M. (1998). Evaluating Spanish protocols for teaching bonding, home safety, and health care skills. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 29, 41-54.

Lutzker, J.R., Bigelow, K.M., Doctor, R.M., & Kessler, M.L. (1998). Safety, health care, and bonding within an ecobehavioral approach to treating and preventing child abuse and neglect. Journal of Family Violence, 13, 163-185.

Mandel, U., Bigelow, K.M., & Lutzker, J.R. (1998). Using video to reduce home safety hazards with parents reported for child abuse or neglect. Journal of Family Violence, 13, 147-162.

Metchikian, K.L., Mink, J.M., Bigelow, K.M., Lutzker, J.R., Doctor, R.M. (1999). Reducing home safety hazards in the homes of parents reported for neglect. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 3, 23-34.

Taban, N., & Lutzker, J.R. (2001). Consumer evaluation of an ecobehavioral program for prevention and intervention of child maltreatment. Journal of Family Violence, 16, 323-330.



Contact Information

Contact name: John Lutzker, Ph. D., Executive Director

Affiliation/Agency: SafeCare/UCCED Centers

Email: jlutzker@gsu.edu

Phone: 770-841-0522

Website: http://chhs.gsu.edu/safecare


Date reviewed: December 2007 (first reviewed in March 2006)