Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T15:01:40.333Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring the experience of consumers: reliability and factorial structure of the Take Two stakeholder survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2019

Margarita Frederico Open the ORCID record for Margarita Frederico [Opens in a new window] ,
Allison Cox Open the ORCID record for Allison Cox [Opens in a new window]  and
Mohajer A. Hameed
Margarita Frederico*
Affiliation:
Discipline of Social Work and Social Policy, School of Allied Health, Victoria, Australia
Allison Cox
Affiliation:
Take Two, Berry Street, Victoria, Australia
Mohajer A. Hameed
Affiliation:
Take Two, Berry Street, Victoria, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Margarita Frederico, Email: M.Frederico@latrobe.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The service user experience of children, their families and other stakeholders in a therapeutic program should inform quality of care, practice and organisation of services. Children referred to Take Two are clients of Child Protection for whom abuse and neglect have been substantiated. This paper aims to describe the development of the Take Two Stakeholder Survey, as well as to examine the reliability and factorial structure of the survey. In addition, the experience of consumers utilising the service will be described together with recommendations for clinical practice improvements and enhanced consumer engagement.

Keywords

Childrenfamiliesconsumer feedbackstakeholder surveyout-of-home care
Type
Articles
Information
Children Australia , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 154 - 161
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, M. C. (2015). Measuring experience of care: Availability and use of satisfaction surveys in residential intervention settings for children and youth. Residential Treatment for Children and Youth, 32(2), 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, J., & Delfabbro, P. (2005). Children’s adjustment to long-term foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 27(3), 329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, R., & Place, M. (2005). Working in collaboration—A therapeutic intervention for abused children. Child Abuse Review, 14(1), 26–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromfield, L., Higgins, D., Osborn, A., Panozzo, S., & Richardson, N. (2005). Out-of-home care in Australia: Messages from research. Australian Institute of Family Studies. Retrieved from https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/sites/default/files/publication-documents/outofhome.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bromfield, L., & Osborn, A. L. (2007). 'Getting the Big Picture': A Synopsis and Critique of Australian Out-of-home Care Research, NCPC Issues No. 26. Australian Institute of Family Studies Melbourne. Retrieved from https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/getting-big-picture-synopsis-and-critique-austraGoogle Scholar
Brunk, M., & Koch, J. R. (1999). Assessing the outcomes of children’s mental health services: Development of the youth services survey for families. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Research Conference Proceeding: A system of care for children’s mental health: Expanding the research base. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.Google Scholar
Cashmore, J., & Ainsworth, F. (2004). Audit of Australian out-of-home care research. Sydney NSW: Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies.Google Scholar
Commission for Health Improvement (CHI). (2002). Experience of Service Questionnaire [On-line]. Retrieved from https://www.corc.uk.net/outcome-experience-measures/experience-of-service-questionnaire/Google Scholar
Frederico, M., Jackson, A., & Black, C. (2005). Reflections on complexity: Take Two First Evaluation Report 2004 – Summary Report. Bundoora: School of Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20070830140331/https://www.berrystreet.org.au/Publications/T2evaluationreport_1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Frederico, M., Jackson, A., & Black, C. (2006). Give Sorrow Words – Take Two Second Evaluation Report 2004-2005 La Trobe University Bundoora Australia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederico, M., Jackson, A., & Black, C. (2010). More than words – the language of relationships: Take Two – third evaluation report. Bundoora, Australia: School of Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University. Retrieved from http://library.bsl.org.au/jspui/bitstream/1/2317/1/TakeTwo_Evaluation_Report_3complete.pdfGoogle Scholar
Gain, L., & Young, L. (1998). Outcome measurement in child protection: International literature review and critical analysis of child protection and alternative placement outcome measures. Melbourne, Australia: Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision.Google Scholar
Gilbertson, R., & Barber, J. G. (2002). Obstacles to involving children and young people in foster care research. Child & Family Social Work, 7(4), 253–258.Google Scholar
Harris, G., Poertner, J., & Joe, S. (2000). The parents with children in foster care satisfaction scale. Administration in Social Work, 24(2), 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, S. (2009). Listening to children in care: A review of methodological and theoretical approaches to understanding looked after children’s perspectives. Children & Society, 23(3), 226–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, A., Frederico, M., Cox, A., & Black, C. (2019). The Treatment of Trauma: The Neurosequential Model and “Take Two”. In Huppert, B. (Ed.), Traumatized people: Psychotherapy seen through the lens of diverse specialist treatments (pp. 423–456). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapp, S. A., & Propp, J. (2002). Client satisfaction methods: Input from parents with children in foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 19(3), 227–245.Google Scholar
Larsen, D. L., Attkisson, C. C., Hargreaves, W. A., & Nguyen, T. D. (1979). Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: Development of a general scale. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(3), 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, W., & Hill, C. E. (2009). Quantitative and qualitative methods for psychotherapy research: Introduction to special section. Journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research, 19(45), 369–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMurtry, S. L., & Hudson, W. W. (2000). The client satisfaction inventory: Results of an initial validation study. Research on Social Work Practice, 10(5), 644–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis in practice. In Flick, U. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. London, UK: Sage Publications, e-book, https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446282243.n12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuntzner-Gibson, D., Koren, P. E., & DeChillo, N. (1995). The youth satisfaction questionnaire: What kids think of services? Families in Society, 76(10), 616–624.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55.Google Scholar
Tilbury, C., Osmond, J., & Crawford, M. (2010). Measuring client satisfaction with child welfare services Journal of Public Child Welfare, 4(1), 77–10. doi:10.1080/15548730903563160CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trotter, C. (2008). What does client satisfaction tell us about effectiveness? Child Abuse Review, 17(4), 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar