Peer-led Support Groups for Parents Following Child Removal: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study.

IF 3 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evaluation Review Pub Date : 2026-12-01 Epub Date: 2026-06-23 DOI:10.1177/0193841X261462222
Linda M Callejas, Connie Walker-Egea, Svetlana Yampolskaya, Aaliyah Torres, Anna Davidson Abella
{"title":"Peer-led Support Groups for Parents Following Child Removal: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study.","authors":"Linda M Callejas, Connie Walker-Egea, Svetlana Yampolskaya, Aaliyah Torres, Anna Davidson Abella","doi":"10.1177/0193841X261462222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The evidence base for parent support groups in child welfare systems is limited but growing. Evaluation of such programs requires flexible and context-specific designs that capture both outcomes and mechanisms of change. This exploratory mixed-methods evaluation examined a peer-led support group program for parents who experienced child removal in a large Florida county to better understand how these programs operate and benefit parents working toward reunification. A total of 22 parents participated in weekly sessions facilitated by peer specialists with prior child welfare involvement. Quantitative assessments measured changes in psychosocial functioning and engagement in child welfare services, while semi-structured interviews (n = 8) explored participant perceptions of group processes and benefits. Significant decreases were observed in depression, trauma, and loneliness, alongside increases in perceived emotional support. Thematic analysis identified four interrelated themes that informed an empirically grounded conceptual framework describing the functions and benefits of support groups.This evaluation study demonstrates how mixed-methods approaches can yield actionable evidence from small scale community-based interventions and offers insight into the mechanisms that may inform future implementation and evaluation of peer-led models.</p>","PeriodicalId":47533,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Review","volume":" ","pages":"1034-1059"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X261462222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The evidence base for parent support groups in child welfare systems is limited but growing. Evaluation of such programs requires flexible and context-specific designs that capture both outcomes and mechanisms of change. This exploratory mixed-methods evaluation examined a peer-led support group program for parents who experienced child removal in a large Florida county to better understand how these programs operate and benefit parents working toward reunification. A total of 22 parents participated in weekly sessions facilitated by peer specialists with prior child welfare involvement. Quantitative assessments measured changes in psychosocial functioning and engagement in child welfare services, while semi-structured interviews (n = 8) explored participant perceptions of group processes and benefits. Significant decreases were observed in depression, trauma, and loneliness, alongside increases in perceived emotional support. Thematic analysis identified four interrelated themes that informed an empirically grounded conceptual framework describing the functions and benefits of support groups.This evaluation study demonstrates how mixed-methods approaches can yield actionable evidence from small scale community-based interventions and offers insight into the mechanisms that may inform future implementation and evaluation of peer-led models.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童移除后父母的同伴领导支持小组:一项混合方法评估研究。
儿童福利系统中父母支持小组的证据基础有限,但在不断增长。对这些项目的评估需要灵活的和特定于环境的设计,以捕获结果和变化机制。这个探索性的混合方法评估研究了一个同伴领导的支持小组项目,该项目是为在佛罗里达州一个大县经历过孩子被带走的父母提供的,以更好地了解这些项目是如何运作的,并使努力实现团聚的父母受益。共有22名家长参加了由以前参与儿童福利工作的同侪专家主持的每周会议。定量评估测量了儿童福利服务中心理社会功能和参与的变化,而半结构化访谈(n = 8)探讨了参与者对群体过程和利益的看法。抑郁、创伤和孤独感显著下降,同时感知到的情感支持增加。专题分析确定了四个相互关联的主题,为描述支助团体的功能和利益的经验基础概念框架提供了依据。这项评估研究展示了混合方法如何从小规模社区干预中产生可操作的证据,并提供了对机制的见解,这些机制可能为未来同行主导模式的实施和评估提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evaluation Review
Evaluation Review SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Evaluation Review is the forum for researchers, planners, and policy makers engaged in the development, implementation, and utilization of studies aimed at the betterment of the human condition. The Editors invite submission of papers reporting the findings of evaluation studies in such fields as child development, health, education, income security, manpower, mental health, criminal justice, and the physical and social environments. In addition, Evaluation Review will contain articles on methodological developments, discussions of the state of the art, and commentaries on issues related to the application of research results. Special features will include periodic review essays, "research briefs", and "craft reports".
期刊最新文献
Green Policies for the Circular Economy and Entrepreneurship: International Evidence. Peer-led Support Groups for Parents Following Child Removal: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study. Brokerage, Gender, and Academic Performance in Interdisciplinary Co-Authorship Networks: A Study of Policy-Related Social Learning Publications. Under What Conditions Does Evidence Travel? Assessing Context Sensitivity and Generalizability in Cash Transfer Program Effectiveness. Insights From Developmental and Formative Evaluations: Developing and Implementing a Limited-Term Housing Mobility Program.
wanfang
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1