Equipping Parent Advocates: Training Needs, Challenges, and Opportunities

Background and Purpose:
Parent advocacy programs are increasingly recognized as effective strategies for enhancing family engagement and improving outcomes in the child welfare system. While the benefits of these programs are well documented, there is limited research on how Parent Advocates (PAs) are trained for their complex roles or how adequately prepared they feel to support families. This study addresses that gap by examining the training experiences of PAs employed by a large public child welfare agency. The purpose is to evaluate the adequacy of existing training, identify unmet needs, and explore how training can be strengthened to better equip PAs to navigate the child welfare system and support the families they serve.

Methods:
This qualitative study draws on 35 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with PAs, 41 child protective services (CPS) staff, and 16 parents. Interviews explored perceptions of initial and ongoing training, on-the-job learning, and cross-agency collaboration. Data were thematically analyzed using a framework analysis approach to identify key patterns in training content, delivery, and perceived effectiveness.

Findings:
PAs described their training as covering foundational topics such as child welfare agency procedures, confidentiality, family engagement, trauma-informed care, cultural competency, and appropriate boundary-setting. While initial and ongoing training were largely seen as helpful, PAs emphasized that hands-on learning through shadowing and debriefing was essential for navigating case-related challenges.

Despite the strengths of current training models, participants consistently identified gaps. These included limited coverage of legal processes, behavioral health (including mental health and substance use), and social services navigation. Many PAs felt underprepared to respond to parents’ questions about child welfare system or court involvement, leading to uncertainty. PAs also expressed a strong desire for more structured cross-training with CPS staff to improve mutual understanding and coordination.

Additionally, PAs called for deeper training in cultural responsiveness and crisis communication, especially for working with families affected by trauma, intimate partner violence, or child fatalities. Sensitivity and cultural competency training were praised, but many advocates felt additional depth—particularly with lived experience-led instruction—would enhance their ability to support diverse families.

Conclusion and Implications:
Findings suggest that while foundational PA training is generally effective, expanding its scope to include legal literacy, behavioral health, and cross-system knowledge is essential to better prepare advocates for their roles. The study underscores the value of experiential learning and cross-training to bridge system gaps and strengthen collaboration between PAs and CPS staff. Since the study, agencies have revised training curricula and broadened access to child welfare trainings, signaling a shift toward a more integrated and informed PA workforce. Furthermore, the findings offer practical guidance for jurisdictions aiming to build sustainable, equity-driven peer support models in child welfare. Additionally, the study highlights the need for PA training to evolve into comprehensive, career-oriented pathways. Modules on leadership, policy advocacy, public speaking, and systems-change can support PAs in advancing into mentorship, supervisory, or policy roles. Investing in this expanded training vision will help cultivate a skilled, empowered PA workforce capable of driving meaningful transformation within the child welfare system.