In a statewide implementation, the manualized SafeCare home–based model was effective in reducing child welfare recidivism and producing high client satisfaction. Concerns about the effectiveness and acceptability of structured, manualized models with American Indians have been raised in the literature, but have rarely been directly tested. This study tests recidivism reduction equivalency and acceptability among American Indian parents. A subpopulation of 354 American Indian parents was drawn from a larger trial that compared services with versus without modules of the SafeCare model. Outcomes were 6-year recidivism, pre/post/follow-up measures of depression and child abuse potential, and posttreatment consumer ratings of working alliance, service satisfaction, and cultural competency. Recidivism reduction among American Indian parents was found to be equivalent for cases falling within customary SafeCare inclusion criteria. When extended to cases outside customary inclusion boundaries, there was no apparent recidivism advantage or disadvantage. Contrary to concerns, SafeCare had higher consumer ratings of cultural competency, working alliance, service quality, and service benefit. Findings support using SafeCare with American Indians parents who meet customary SafeCare inclusion criteria. Findings do not support concerns in the literature that a manualized, structured, evidence-based model might be less effective or culturally unacceptable for American Indians. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
This website is supported by Grant Number 90CZ0034-01-00 from the Children’s Bureau within the Administration for Children and Families, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Neither the Administration for Children and Families nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse this website (including, without limitation, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided). The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Administration for Children and Families and the Children’s Bureau.