Parent Mentoring in the UK Child Welfare System: Findings from an Implementation Evaluation in a Family Drug & Alcohol Court (FDAC) Setting

Background:

Parent mentoring in child protection (CP) is increasingly recognized internationally as an influential factor in promoting parent engagement and positive outcomes. Parent mentoring involves parents with lived CP experience working with parents receiving CP interventions. In England, these approaches are emerging with some early examples in localities or services areas. One such area is the Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC), an alternative family court for parents with substance misuse issues. This implementation evaluation, funded by What Works for Children’s Social Care as part of the Department for Education’s Supporting families: Investing in practice program, explores the early implementation efforts in two FDAC sites. Research questions address stakeholder experiences, impact, and future recommendations for national implementation. This paper addresses conference themes by exploring some of the early facilitators and barriers to establishing more inclusive and socially just practices in an English child welfare system for marginalized populations.

Methods:

A mixed methods approach, informed by the principles of realist evaluation, were initially planned but adjustments due to pandemic conditions resulted in a primarily qualitative approach. Two of the fourteen FDAC sites in England were recruited to the study and data collection focused on site implementation and service delivery efforts during a two-year period (September 2020-October 2022). Study methods included individual interviews, focus groups, and online ethnographic observation. Stakeholder participants represented in the study were parent mentor coordinators (n=3), parent mentors (n=6), FDAC parents (n=4), FDAC professionals (n=18), and FDAC judges (n=3). All FDAC sites nationally were invited to participate in an online feasibility survey with a 43% response rate. Administrative data was reviewed as part of data collection methods. Qualitative data analysis was undertaken as an iterative process, alongside data collection to inform the specific areas of inquiry and depth of focus. Interviews were transcribed and, along with field notes, analysed to identify overarching themes guided by constant comparison methods.

Results:

Findings address positive and challenging features and perceived impact of parent mentoring services. Positive feature themes include the lived experience of mentors, and their empathic, non-judgmental, stance when delivering ‘straight-talking’ mentoring practices, as well as sustained mentor training and support. Themes related to, largely system, challenges include ‘unfit for purpose’ policies/procedures; insufficient/inaccessible resources; voluntary nature and expectations of the mentor role; recruitment/retention practices; personal-professional boundaries; and professional-mentor relations. The perceived impact for parents included enhanced wellbeing/resilience, family functioning, and an improved understanding of and engagement with FDAC processes. Parent mentor impact included improved self-confidence and life aspirations, maintaining recovery, continued developmental needs, and reciprocity in mentoring relationship.

Conclusions:

This study is one of the most comprehensive studies of a parent mentoring program in England and the first study of FDAC parent mentoring programs. Findings highlights the breath of system challenges associated with adopting more equal and socially just practices in complex and bureaucratic English child protection systems. Findings highlight the need for investment and capacity building to promote effective implementation and service delivery, as well as shifts in organizational culture and processes to promote innovative and family-friendly practices.