Abstract: Purpose: Much controversy exists regarding how to best serve the interests of severely abused and neglected children who are at imminent risk of being removed from their homes. Debates over the effectiveness of utilizing foster care versus family preservation efforts continue throughout the policy, practice, and research communities. This study examines the efficacy of Michigan's Families First intensive family preservation program.

Methods: The study used an experimental randomized control group design with a sample of 202 subjects. The sampling pool included families for whom a Wayne County Juvenile Court judge or referee had signed a petition for the removal of at least one child from the home due to imminent safety risks. Questionnaires were administered at entry into the study, 6-months post-entry, and 12-months post-entry to assess various domains of child well-being. Descriptive statistics and multiple analysis of variance analyzed hypotheses related to both ultimate and instrumental outcomes between the groups. Correlations related to variables predicting out-of-home placement also were examined.

Results: Findings indicated that the Families First program met its primary goal of preventing unnecessary placement of children in out-of-home care. Children in the Families First condition had an average of .3 placements as compared to 1.2 placements for children in the foster care condition. When out-of-home placement was required, Families First subjects spent fewer days in such placements. Children in the experimental group were significantly less likely to receive a subsequent substantiated abuse or neglect report than were children in the control group.

Implications: Results indicated that the Families First program was able to prevent children from being placed into traditional foster care or other out-of-home placements. A frequent concern about family preservation programs is the possibility that leaving the child in the home will place him or her at risk for subsequent abuse. This concern is not supported by the findings. Such results support recent policy and practice trends toward working to preserve families in order to serve the best interests of children.