Introducing
Safety-Organized Practice
What Is Safety-Organized Practice?
Cultural Humility
Partnership-Based
Collaborative Practice
Signs of Safety
Trauma-Informed Practice
Multicultural Process of Change
Appreciative Inquiry
Solution-Focused Interviewing
Signs of Safety
•
Developed in Australia in late 1990's by Steve Edwards and Andrew
Turnell – bringing the best of solution focused therapy to CW
•
A response to both the need for critical thinking and enhanced
partnerships
•
Objectives of Signs of Safety are:
»
ENGAGEMENT: Create a shared focus to guide casework among
all stakeholders (child, family, worker, supervisor, etc.)
»
CRITICAL THINKING: Help these stakeholders consider
complicated and ambiguous case information together and sort it
into meaningful CW categories
»
ENHANCING SAFETY: Clear the way for stakeholders to engage in
"rigorous, sustainable, on the ground child safety" efforts
Trauma-Informed Practices
Most of the children and many of the parents involved in the child
welfare system have experienced some form of trauma.
Symptoms of trauma can worsen already challenging situations and
make the work of engagement and increasing child safety even
more difficult. Trauma-informed practices can reduce ongoing
symptoms and are woven into safety-organized practice.
Safety-organized practice draws heavily from the National Child
Traumatic Stress Network's principles and strategies and from Bruce
Perry's work at the National Trauma Academy, which focuses on
trauma's impact on brain development and child development.
By focusing on assisting families and their communities in building
their own capacities for keeping children safe, safety-organized
practice helps clients respond to traumatic experiences.
Cultural Humility
Hu-mil-i-ty, noun.
1. The quality or condition of being humble; lack of pride;
modesty. 2. The act of modesty or self-abasement; submission.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (1973; p. 441)
Cultural Humility
A cultural humility perspective challenges us to learn from the people
with whom we interact, reserve judgment, and bridge the cultural
divide between our perspectives in order to facilitate well-being and
promote improved quality of life. Such a perspective frees the observer
from having to possess expert knowledge in order to maintain
knowledge-based power, control, and authority over matters about which
diverse populations are far more knowledgeable.
Tervalon, M., and Murray-Garcia, J. (1998)
Integrated Practice Contributions
Steve de Shazer
Insoo Kim Berg
Sue
Lohrbach
Rob
Sawyer
Valarie
Batts
CRC
Staff
Child welfare
professionals,
families, and
children across
California
Andrew
Turnell
Susie
Essex
Nicki
Weld
Sonja
Parker
Safety-Organized Practice
GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIPS
• Solution-focused interviewing
• Strategies for interviewing children
CRITICAL THINKING
• Mapping
• Structured Decision Making®
(SDM) assessments
ENHANCING SAFETY
• Harm and danger statements
• Well-formed goals
• Building safety networks
• Collaborative planning
What changes? What stays the same?
The heart of the this approach is a focus on
collaboratively created goals that describe what the
statutory agency needs to see to close the case
AND the family's ideas and ways of creating safety.
Sometimes, the agency will be unable to fully
support the family's specific perspectives and
wishes.
When indicators of harm and danger outweigh signs
of safety, statutory intervention may be required,
and this will always be part of the child protection
role.
Plan for the Day
Morning
•Background
•Overview of these two days
•Introductions
•Community agreements
Break
•A rigorous, balanced assessment
•Solution-focused interviewing
Afternoon
•A common language?
•Mapping and mapping practice
Overview of the Training
Day
Main Topics
Wednesday
Orientation, (re-)introducing safety-organized practice,
interviewing for danger and safety, mapping
Thursday
Harm and danger statements, safety goals,
networks, planning, interviewing children, next steps
Introductions and Agreements
Your Purpose for Being Here
Imagine in two days you leave this training feeling as though
it was really valuable for you to be here…
What is the most that could happen in these two days that
would leave you feeling it was worth the time to be here?
On what, for you, does it depend?
•What would the trainer(s) have to do?
•What would your fellow workshop participants have
to do?
•What would you have to do (or not do)?
The Approach to Teaching and Learning at
This Workshop
Teachers are facilitator-learners.
Learners are holders of wisdom, knowledge, and
skills.
Workshop is a site where teacher and learner share
knowledge and together develop something unique
and new (e.g., 1 + 1 = 3).
Learning from the inside out is being part of
experiences, then stepping back from them to
develop new learning and best practices.
Emergent Design
Proposed Community Agreements
•
"Try on"
•
We will respect all requests for confidentiality/anonymity.
•
Everyone always has the right to pass.
•
Silence is a contribution.
•
We agree to share airtime and stick to time limits.
•
We agree to speak personally, for ourselves as individuals.
•
We agree to be aware of the differences between intent and impact.
•
We agree to disagree and avoid making assumptions/generalizations.
•
We agree to allow others to finish speaking before we speak to avoid
interruptions and side conversations.
•
We will work together to hold to these agreements and authorize the
trainers to hold us to them.
Interviewing for
Safety and Danger
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
A practice of using questions and having conversations that
gather rich, detailed, pertinent information about the history of
protection and the history of the problem:
•
Helps key stakeholders (family, workers, providers, supervisors)
think through difficult situations together;
•
Develops a common language, purpose, and goals;
•
Believes in the possibility of change;
•
Gathers the information needed for the CAT assessments and
decision support; and
•
Is based on solution-focused interviewing.
Click to edit Master title style
What is the impact
of the caregiver's
actions on the child?
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
Her father:
physically abusive,
dangerous
Foster
care
Past
D
V
D
E
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
O
F
F
M
E
D
S
Suicide attempt by
gas in the kitchen
while the children
were home
Poverty
Present
Future
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
????
Past
Present
Future
What will Cheryl's future probably look like?
What do we know about danger?
What do we know about safety?
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
Suicide attempt by gas
in the kitchen while
the children were home
Past
Present
"I took the
girls and put
them in the
next room."
Future
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
Present
Past
"My mom
gave
custody
of me
to my
aunt."
"My mom
and aunt
made
sure I got
an
education."
L
E
F
T
H
U
S
B
Proper
care of
girls
through
school,
doctor,
therapy
"I took the
girls and put
them in the
next room."
Future
"I'm getting
up at 4:00 a.m.
to meet them
and get them
to school."
Interviewing for Safety and Danger
What will Cheryl's future probably look like?
What do we know about danger?
What do we know about safety?
Past
Present
Future
????
"Naïve" Practice
Past
Present
Future
"Problem-Saturated" Practice
Past
Present
Future
"Naïve" Practice
Past
Present
Future
A Full Assessment
Past
Present
Future
The Three Questions
Three Questions That Organize the Interview
What are we
worried
about?
What is
working well?
What needs to
happen next?
"What are we worried about?"
Ask questions that…
•Raise behavioral descriptions and move past vagueness,
generalizations, and jargon;
•Reveal all the family members' positions on the problem—
especially the children's;
•Stay connected to the focus of the interview: What is the
impact of the caregiver's actions on the child?; and
•Stay connected to the content you need to acquire: What
CAT® questions will you need to answer to get the best
possible help from the assessments?
"What are we worried about?"
Ask questions that reveal …
Caregiver
Behavior
Impact
on the
child
Exercise I: Surfacing the
Generalizations We Live by Every
Day!
In Small Groups:
Make an exhaustive list of ALL the generalizations, labels and generally
IMPRECISE descriptions we use every day to describe families!
•Start by taking a piece of paper and dividing it into half – the “working
well” and the “worries”.
•Then come up with a list of all the common phrases, descriptions, we
use every day about families that tell us NOTHING about impact!
•Take 5-10 minutes to do this. Prepare to report out to large group.
•Keep it real!
www.nccd-crc.org
Generalizations Versus Behavioral
Descriptions and Impact
"She is mentally ill."
•
How does he/she know?
•
What caregiver behaviors are associated with it?
•
When do those behaviors show themselves?
•
How do those behaviors impact the child?
•
How do you know? How do you find out?
» What does the child know?
» What has the child seen?
» What are you worried is happening or will happen?
Generalizations Versus Behavioral
Descriptions and Impact
"He is an alcoholic."
•
What does he drink?
•
When does he drink?
•
Where is the child when he drinks?
•
What caregiver behaviors are associated with it?
•
When do those behaviors show themselves?
•
How do those behaviors impact the child?
•
How do you know?
•
How do you find out?
Generalizations vs. Behavioral Descriptions
and Impact
Think to yourself the image of an “alcoholic”….hold
that….would we all have the same interpretation?
Even alcoholics say for years…”I’m an alcoholic”.
Exercise Part II:
Interviewing for ‘the Worries’
Get into Groups of Three:
•Interviewer
•Interviewee
•Coach/observer
The interviewer should ask questions of interviewee about a family they or a
supervisee are working with, with the goal of reaching an exhaustive list of all the
worries…but they need to be described in the following format:
Caregiver
Behavior
Impact on
the child
Try not to use any of the vague or imprecise terms you just came up with!
www.nccd-crc.org
"What is working well?"
There is always a history of protection.
•Based in solution-focused questions.
•If we do not know "what is working well," we do not know
how worried to be.
•Ask questions that rigorously surface the history of protection
and how that history can be applied in the future for the
child's safety.
•"Listen for the empty spaces."
Listening for the Empty Spaces
Her father:
physically abusive,
dangerous
Foster
care
Past
D
V
D
E
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
O
F
F
M
E
D
S
Suicide attempt by
gas in the kitchen
while the children
were home
Poverty
Present
Future
Listening for the Empty Spaces
Her father:
physically abusive,
dangerous
Foster
care
Past
D
V
D
E
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
O
F
F
M
E
D
S
Suicide attempt by
gas in the kitchen
while the children
were home
Poverty
Present
Future
What is the history of protection?
"What is working well?"
Ask questions that reveal …
Caregiver
Behavior
Impact
on the
child
Generalizations Versus Behavioral
Descriptions and Impact
"She is stable."
•
Stable meaning what?
•
Stable from what?
•
What caregiver behaviors are associated with stability?
•
When do those behaviors show themselves?
•
How do those behaviors impact the child?
•
How do you know?
•
How do you find out?
Exercise: Two Reports
Solution-Focused
Interviewing
Why Solution-Focused Interviewing?
From multiple research studies:
The best outcomes for children and families occur
when constructive working relationships exist
between families and professionals and between
professionals themselves.
Good working relationships are the best
predictor of good outcomes!
Solution-Focused Interviewing: At the Heart
"Motivation (for change) may be linked to the
degree of hope that change is possible."
US National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect
Five Solution-Focused Questions
Exception
Questions
• Past history of
protection
Scaling
• Danger/safety
• Progress
Position
Questions
• Seeing through
other people's eyes
Coping
Preferred Future
• Skill at finding
solutions to
difficulty
• Future goals
All surrounded by: Cultural Humility
Cultural Humility
Scaling
Exception
Questions
• Danger/safety
• Progress
• Past history of
protection
Coping
• Skill at finding
solutions to
difficulty
Position
Questions
• Seeing through
other people's eyes
Preferred
Future
• Future goals
Cultural Humility
Exception Questions
"Has there ever been a time [the problem] could have
happened…maybe almost did…but somehow you were
able to do something different?"
•Cornerstone of solution-focused question.
•CRITICAL to get details.
•Seeks times when the problem could have occurred as usual,
but did not.
•No problem is absolute in its effects.
•A place to begin looking for safety, strengths, resources, and
alternative actions.
•People who know they have been able to change are more likely
to do it again.
Scaling Questions (Conversations)
0
Least
10
Most
"On a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being the most danger and 10 being
the most safety for this child, where do you think this particular
situation rates?"
Follow-Up Questions
•
What exactly did you see or hear that allowed you to give the
the rating you did and not one above or below?
•
What do you think would need to happen to increase your
rating by one?
•
Can I tell you what my number is? This is what I think would
need to happen for my number would go up by one…
What Can You Rate?
You can use these to assess and have conversations about …
Danger/
Safety
Willingness
Capacity
Confidence
Progress
Relationship or Position Questions
Questions designed to help someone shift
perspective and see through another's eyes:
"If your son was here right now and heard
everything we have talked about, what do you
think he would be most worried about?"
"When your daughter is older and dating, what
would you tell her if she was dating someone who
was doing to her what your boyfriend has been
doing to you?"
Coping and Preferred Future Questions
Coping
"The things you have been going through are not
easy. How do you think you have been able to do as
well as you have?"
Preferred Future
"You are pretty clear that this is not how you want
things to be. How would you like things to be
instead? What needs to happen for things to be like
that?"
"Ten years from now when your child is older, what
story do you hope he/she has of this time?"
Cultural Humility
Local Wisdom
"Have others from your family, culture, or heritage had to face
challenges like this before? What did they do? How did they
survive? What wisdom of theirs, if any, would be good to use
in our work?"
Naming Oppression
"Do you think people from the same particular cultural or
ethnic group have had to face these kinds problems more than
others? How do you make sense of this?"
"Not Knowing" Across Difference
"As a person of a different cultural background, there may be
things about you, your family, and/or your culture that I do
not understand. When I encounter those things, would be
okay if I ask you about them?"
Why Solution-Focused Inquiry?
An Example From San Diego County
Safety Mapping
Collaboration is not just a noun;
it is a series of practices.
Developing understanding whereby
everyone is clear about why we are here,
what we are trying to accomplish, and how we
are going to do it
Participation which allows everyone's voices
to be heard and allows people to feel a sense
of ownership and presence in the process
Creating shared commitments
for action and the outcomes
Collaboration is not just a noun;
it is a series of practices.
Assessment of
families
Assessment
with families
Safety Mapping
What: Safety mapping is a process of gathering and
organizing the information to reach joint
understanding and agreement.
Why: A regular problem in child welfare is the lack
of understanding, participation, and agreement
between the family and the organization (and within
the organization itself).
How: Can be used with the family to guide an
assessment and planning conversation and can be
used in supervision or case consultation.
Assumptions in Safety Mapping
•
Relationships are the most significant factor in
promoting child safety, permanency, and well-being.
•
The words we use matter—building a series of
shared agreements over time to reach a larger goal
requires that we share some common language.
•
Organizing information about safety and danger
to children is not easy—it can be hard to "admit
we might be wrong."
•
The more that information is effectively
organized among all the key people involved, the
more likely it is that effective decisions can be made.
Safety Mapping Starts With the Three
Questions
What are we
worried
about?
What is
working well?
What needs to
happen next?
Safety Mapping: Set the Context
Purpose
• What do the
people attending
the mapping
want to get from
it?
• If it involves a
decision of some
kind, which SDM
assessment can
help with that
decision?
• Know what
questions to ask.
People and
Community
Cultural
Considerations
• Who is in the
family?
• Extended family?
• Who else cares
about the child?
• Who else knows
what is going on?
• Genogram
• Ecomap
• Safety circles
• How does the
family identify
across critical
parts of their
identity (race,
class, ethnicity,
religion, sexual
orientation,
etc.)?
• Name differences
openly.
• Be curious about
what you do not
understand.
Safety Mapping Key Terms
What is
working
well?
What are
we worried
about?
Harm
Safety
Danger
Complicating
factors
Risk
Strengths
Safety Mapping: Key Terms
Harm
• Past actions by a caregiver that have hurt the child
physically, developmentally, or emotionally.
» HARM IS ABOUT THE PAST
Danger
• Credible worries/concerns child welfare and others in the
community have about actions the caregiver may take in
the future that will harm that child.
» DANGER IS ABOUT THE FUTURE
Risk
• The resulting likelihood of repeated future harm.
» RISK GIVES US AN IDEA OF HOW WORRIED WE
SHOULD BE ABOUT SOME DANGER ACTUALLY
OCCURRING
Harm, Danger, and Risk
•
Statistically, the best predictor of future harm is
past/current harm.
•
As a result: Our ability to concretely define our future
concerns (danger) and how worried we should be (risk)
rests on clear understanding of what exactly has happened
in the past (harm).
•
One key is distinguishing harm/danger from other things
that may not be impacting the child.
•
Ask yourself: what questions do I need to ask to
understand the impact of the caregiver's actions on
the child? Difficult things that are not harm can
happen to and within families.
Harm
Caregiver
Behavior
Impact
on the
child
Safety
Safety is:
Actions of protection
taken by the caregiver
that mitigate the danger
and are demonstrated
over time.
Initial source: Boffa, J., & Podestra, H. (2004). Partnership and risk assessment in child
protection practice. Protecting Children, 19(2), 35–49. Adapted over time by Andrew
Turnell and members of the Massachusetts Child Welfare Institute.
Safety
•
All families have some signs of safety.
•
The best predictor of future protection is past protection.
•
Without searching for examples of protection, it is difficult
to know the extent of the signs of danger or to determine
how protection could be enhanced and measured in the
present and future.
•
With safety, the key is to consider the definition: are these
actions of protection demonstrated over time? Or are
these things good and helpful … but maybe not safety?
Safety and services are not the same thing!
Safety
Caregiver
Behavior
Impact
on the
child
Complicating Factors
• Anything that complicates the work with the
family that is not direct harm.
• Warning signs, red flags, issues that make the
provision of protection more difficult but in and
of themselves are not direct dangers.
Mental illness, teenage parenting, poverty, low IQ—
what else is a complicating factor?
Supporting Strengths
Skills of living, coping skills, or cultural/familial
histories of recovery or support that are important
but do not directly support the provision of
protection.
Being organized, exercising, being good at
sports/school—what else?
Three-Column Mapping
What Are We
Worried About?
Harm, danger, and
complicating factors:
What Is Working
Well?
Safety, protective
capacities, and
strengths:
0
What Needs to
Happen Next?
Creating and sharing a
danger statement,
enhancing a safety
network, planning:
10
On a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being everyone knows that the children are safe enough to close the case and 0 being things are
so bad that the children cannot be at home now, where is this situation rated? (If there are different judgments, place different
people's numbers on the continuum.)
Department of Child Protection (2011)
Three-Column Mapping
What Are We
Worried About?
Harm, danger, and
complicating factors:
What Is Working
Well?
Safety, protective
capacities, and
strengths:
0
What Needs to
Happen Next?
Creating and sharing a
danger statement,
enhancing a safety
network, planning:
10
On a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being everyone knows that the children are safe enough to close the case and 0 being things are
so bad that the children cannot be at home now, where is this situation rated? (If there are different judgments, place different
people's numbers on the continuum.)
Department of Child Protection (2011)
SAFETY MAPPING: ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
CONTEXT: Purpose of the Consult, Family/System; Cultural Considerations
WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT?
Harm and Danger:
Complicating Factors:
Impact
on
child?
WHAT IS WORKING WELL?
Safety:
Strengths/Protective Capacity:
WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NEXT?
Creating and sharing danger statements and safety goals, enhancing the safety
network, and planning.
0
Danger
10
Safety
Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing risk assessment through organizational learning: A mid-stream report from Massachusetts.
Protecting Children, 25(3), 7–20. Based on Turnell, A., & Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York, NY: Norton
SAFETY MAPPING: ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
CONTEXT: Purpose of the Consult, Family/System; Cultural Considerations
WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT?
Harm and Danger:
Complicating Factors:
Impact
on
child?
WHAT IS WORKING WELL?
Safety:
Strengths/Protective Capacity:
(Individual risk factors described
here)
WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NEXT?
Creating and sharing danger statements, safety goals enhancing the safety
network, and planning
0
Danger
10
Safety
Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing risk assessment through organizational learning: A mid-stream report from Massachusetts.
Protecting Children, 25(3), 7–20. Based on Turnell, A., & Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York, NY: Norton
What Are We
Worried About?
• Cheryl turned on the gas
stove with her children at
home, flooding the home with
toxic fumes. Both she and the
children passed out.
• Cheryl lost her job and cannot
pay her bills.
• Cheryl has been diagnosed
with clinical depression.
• Cheryl stopped taking her
medication three months ago.
• Cheryl says her ex-husband
hit her a number of years ago.
• Cheryl's father was physically
dangerous to both her and
her mom when she was a
child, and she had to grow up
outside of her parents’ care.
0
Danger
What Is Working Well?
• Cheryl put the children in
next room and opened a
window before turning on
the gas.
• The girls’ pediatrician and
teacher say Cheryl takes
good care of the girls. They
are medically up to date; she
attends parent/teacher
conferences and sends the
girls to school dressed
cleanly with lunches packed.
What Needs to
Happen Next?
• Danger statements
• Safety goals
• Expanding the safety
network
• Planning
• Cheryl took out a restraining
order after her husband hit
her.
• Cheryl is proud of her high
school diploma.
• Cheryl's mother made sure
she was protected from
violence and able to get an
education living at Cheryl’s
aunt’s house.
10
Safety
What Are We Worried About?
Harm and Danger:
What Is Working Well?
Safety:
•Cheryl tuned on the gas stove with her children at
home, flooding the home with toxic fumes. Both
she and the children passed out.
Complicating Factors:
Strengths/Protective Capacity:
•Cheryl lost her job and cannot pay her bills.
•Cheryl put the children in next room and opened a
window before turning on the gas.
•Cheryl has been diagnosed with clinical
depression.
•Cheryl stopped taking
months ago.
her medication three
•Cheryl says her ex-husband
years ago.
hit her a number of
•Cheryl's father was physically
dangerous to both
her and her mom when she was a child, and she
had to grow up outside of her parents care.
•The girls’ pediatrician and teacher say Cheryl
takes good care of the girls. They are medically up
to date; she attends parent/teacher conferences
and sends the girls to school dressed cleanly with
lunches packed.
•Cheryl took out a restraining order after her
husband hit her.
•Cheryl is proud of her high school diploma.
•Cheryl's mother made sure she was protected
from violence and able to get an education living at
Cheryl’s aunt’s house.
What Needs to Happen Next?
0
Danger
10
Safety
Why a Map AND an Assessment?
Harm and
Danger:
Safety:
Complicating
Factors:
Strengths
Why a Map AND an Assessment?
•Research based
decision support tools
help us to have
agreement about what
key information we
need to gather for the
decisions we make
Decision
support tools
Family-centered
assessment
•Helps to gather and
organize that
information with the
family
•Helps family participate
in assessment as
partner, not object
•Helps produce
consistent results
across key decisions
while maintaining
transparency with the
family
Consistency and
collaboration
Why a Map AND an Assessment?
•Helps to gather and
organize information in
a balanced,
collaborative, familycentered way.
Safety
Mapping
Risk
Assessment
• Brings the best research
to our assessment to
help us answer the
question, "How likely is it
that this family will
represent within two
years?"
•Key decisions become
consistent over time
with use of the risk
assessment; decisions
become more "owned"
by families through
mapping.
Decisions
and Plans
Why a Map AND an Assessment?
MAP
• Use in the field
•
Family-centered
•
Formatted to help
professionals organize
their thinking and
judgment
•
Shared language for
professionals, family
members, anyone
involved with the family
ASSESSMENT
• Brings the best of
large data sets to
practice decisions
•
Research-based
•
Consistency
•
Reliability (definitions)
•
Equity
•
Aggregate data
SAFETY MAPPING: ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
CONTEXT: Purpose of the Consult, Family/System; Cultural Considerations
WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT?
Harm and Danger:
Complicating Factors:
Impact
on
child?
WHAT IS WORKING WELL?
Safety:
Strengths/Protective Capacity:
GIVE IT A TRY!
WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NEXT?
Creating and sharing danger statements and safety goals, enhancing the safety
network, and planning.
0
Danger
10
Safety
Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing risk assessment through organizational learning: A mid-stream report from Massachusetts.
Protecting Children, 25(3), 7–20. Based on Turnell, A., & Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York, NY: Norton
Reflecting on the Day
• What do you think might work
well about this approach?
• What do you worry about?
• What questions do you have?
• What is important for you to
hold in your heart and thoughts
as we continue training?
Click to edit Master title style
+ Δ
References
Berg, I. K. & Kelly, S. (2000). Building solutions in child protective services. New York, NY: Norton.
Boffa, J. & Armitage, E. (1999). The Victorian risk framework: Developing a professional judgment
approach to risk assessment in child protection work. 7th Australian Conference on Child Abuse and
Neglect, Perth, Australia.
Children's Research Center. (2008). Structured Decision Making®: An evidence-based approach to
human services. Retrieved from http://www.nccd-crc.org/crc/pdf/2008_sdm_book.pdf
de Shazer, S. (1985). Keys to solution in brief therapy. New York, NY: Norton.
Department of Child Protection. (2011). The signs of safety child protection practice framework.
Department of Child Protection, Perth, Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustralia
Johnson, W. (2004). Effectiveness of California's child welfare Structured Decision Making® model: A
prospective study of the validity of the California family risk assessment. Sacramento, CA:
California Department of Social Services. Retrieved from http://www.nccdcrc.org/crc/pubs/ca_sdm_model_feb04.pdf
Lohrbach, S., & Sawyer, R. (2004). Creating a constructive practice: Family and professional partnership
in high-risk child protection case conferences. Protecting Children, 19(2): 26–35.
Turnell, A., & Edwards, S. (1999). Signs of safety. New York, NY: Norton
White, M., & Epston E. (1999). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York, NY: Norton
A Word From Andrew Turnell
The term "safety-organized practice" was first used by Andrew Turnell
(2004) to organize and frame day-to-day child welfare casework. It is
designed to help all the key stakeholders involved with a child—parents,
extended family, the child welfare worker, supervisors, managers,
lawyers, judges, other court officials, and most especially the child
him/herself—to focus on assessing and enhancing child safety at all
points in the case process.
Safety-organized practice is grounded in the working relationships
between all of these stakeholders, and those relationships need to focus
through a risk assessment and planning framework completely
understandable to family and professionals. In many U.S. states,
counties, and jurisdictions, safety-organized practice is a broader
"umbrella term" that integrates elements of Turnell's Signs of Safety
approach to child welfare casework with other child welfare innovations.
To learn more about Turnell's work and the Signs of Safety approach,
visit www.signsofsafety.net. To read his most recent briefing paper (2012
and always updated), visit http://www.signsofsafety.net/briefing-paper.