Family group conference provision across the lifespan of child welfare intervention: A mixed-method realist-informed evaluation comparing three stages of welfare concern

Sobo-Allen, Lee, Liao, Lois, Scourfield, Jonathan ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6218-8158, Smith, Felicity, Wood, Sophie, Meindl, Melissa ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1231-0175, Au, Kar Man, Palmer, Abigail ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0022-430X, Evans, Rhiannon ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0239-6331, Lugg-Widger, Fiona ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0029-9703, Mahachi, Tarirai Lincoln, Pallmann, Philip ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8274-9696, Petrou, Stavros, Robling, Michael ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1004-036X, Schroeder, Elizabeth-Ann and Wilkins, David ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2780-0385 2026. Family group conference provision across the lifespan of child welfare intervention: A mixed-method realist-informed evaluation comparing three stages of welfare concern. The British Journal of Social Work , bcag248. 10.1093/bjsw/bcag248

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB)

Abstract

Family group conferences (FGCs) in children’s services are convened meetings of family networks to make plans for a child who is in need or at risk. There remain gaps in evidence, including how variation in implementation context affects FGC experiences and outcomes. The Family Views and Context Study is part of a wider realist-informed evaluation (Family VOICE). It involved 380 individuals who had attended FGCs, from 155 families across the UK. Family members completed questionnaires at three time points, including standardized measures for self-efficacy, family functioning, adult well-being and child psychosocial health. FGC coordinators also completed questionnaires. This article focuses on one key aspect of variation in implementation context, namely the stage of child welfare concern. Three categories are compared: (1) early help and child in need; (2) child protection and edge of care; and (3) children in state care. In addition to questionnaires, a sub-group of participants (n = 25) took part in semi-structured interviews, purposively sampled for these three stages of concern. Quantitative comparisons found almost no significant differences between the three categories in family experiences or outcomes. Qualitative interviews suggested more similarities than differences in participant experiences, perceptions of FGC mechanisms, and intended outcomes, across the three categories.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Published Online
Status:	In Press
Schools:	Schools > Social Sciences (Includes Criminology and Education) Schools > Medicine Schools > School of Social and Spatial Sciences Research Institutes & Centres > Centre for Adult Social Care Research (CARE) Research Institutes & Centres > Centre For Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer) Research Institutes & Centres > Centre for Trials Research (CNTRR) Research Institutes & Centres > Children’s Social Care Research and Development Centre (CASCADE)
Publisher:	Oxford University Press
ISSN:	0045-3102
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	19 October 2026
Date of Acceptance:	15 September 2026
Last Modified:	19 Oct 2026 10:30
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/190281

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item