Helping children, families, and communities grow stronger together.

• about us
• our work
• kids need you
• our divisions
• newsroom
• resources
• calendar
• translate

Are Family Meetings Effective? A Look at the Research

How effective are family teaming approaches? To date, research has focused principally on Family Group Decision Making and Family Group Conferences (FGDM/FGC), but as states and counties implement and evaluate other approaches, more information is emerging.

What works?

Early indicators show these benefits from FGDM/FGC:

• Families are willing to participate, feel their voices are heard, and are generally satisfied with the process
• Plans developed by families meet child-safety standards and are generally accepted by courts and agencies
• Private family time aids development of quality plans
• Social workers are satisfied with the process
• Fathers are more engaged in FGDM/FGC than in traditional case planning

Studies also show that FGDM/FGC:

• Boosts the rate at which children are placed with family when they must enter foster care, which enhances placement stability
• Increases supports to families and strengthens family functioning
• Reduces disproportionate representation of children in foster care by diverting them from care or returning them home from care safely

Areas of controversy

Some studies indicate that FGDM/FGC does little to improve child and family outcomes. The only study that employed a randomized trial found no significant differences between children involved in the FGDM approach and those whose case planning involved a traditional approach. (The study analyzed subsequent maltreatment rates, placement stability, and permanency-related outcomes.)

The subject of whether children whose families attend FGDM/FGCs are safer than other children needs further research as well. Some studies have shown lower re-abuse rates for FGDM families. A Swedish study, however, found higher re-referral rates. Future research on this and other issues is clearly needed.

TDM and PTP

In addition to growing literature on FGDM, initial research is now becoming available on Team Decision Making (TDM) and the Permanency Teaming Process (PTP). An Alaskan study, for example, found that 70 percent of TDM participants reported the TDM meeting was worthwhile, and 68 percent agreed with the placement decision made at the meeting. A study of PTP found improved permanency outcomes – rising rates of exit to legal permanence – and positive satisfaction indicators among PTP participants. 

Challenges to family teaming

Whatever the teaming strategy used to involve young people and their families, continuing challenges in implementing and evaluating the approaches include:

• Implementation. A review of the first round of Child and Family Services Reviews’ final reports and Program Improvement Plans reveals that most states struggle with high caseloads, a challenge to effective team meetings. States cite as barriers:
  
  • A lack of caseworker training on teaming
  • Difficulty in scheduling team meetings
  • Attorneys’ understanding of the process
  • Case-planning forms and automated computer systems that don’t capture team- or family-related information
• Evaluation. Identifying benchmarks, outcomes, and indicators to track the success of teaming approaches involving youth and families and reaching permanence continue to be a work in progress.

Improving family meetings

States are taking steps to improve their family teaming approaches, such as:

• Providing caseworker training on family involvement and family teaming
• Developing guidelines and tools related to teaming implementation
• Clarifying policies and practice standards to require family engagement in case planning and decision making
• Providing formalized supports for the family teaming approach
• Collecting data and pursuing quality assurance activities to evaluate and ensure family involvement in teaming approaches

Learn More

• Review Casey Family Services’ bibliography of family teaming research. Casey invites readers to contribute any teaming research you think would improve this bibliography.

More Articles