'Choices of evidence: tacit philosophical assumptions in debates on evidence-based practice in children's welfare services'.
Sponsored by AHRC, January 2010-January2012
Principal investigator: Eileen Munro (Social Policy, LSE)
Co-investigators: N.Cartwright and E. Montuschi
Associate investigator: J.Hardie
Research assistants: A.Spray; R. Alfandari; L.Caffrey
Short description:
There is a growing interest in using the rigour of scientific methods to develop a more reliable knowledge base for intervening in family life with the aim of improving children's safety and well being. Empirical studies are being conducted in several countries to evaluate the effectiveness of services and these are forming a body of research that can be drawn upon by those making decisions about how best to help families. The Evidence Based Policy and Practice movement promotes the value of using research but the way it is developing is in danger of losing the rigour of scientific research and of undermining the justifiable confidence we have in the findings of empirical research.
This project aims to analyse and evaluate under what conditions (theoretical and practical) children, young people and families can benefit from the lessons from empirical studies and evidence-driven research.
The project was suspended by one year to allow the principle investigator to compile the 'Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report - A child-centred system', published in 2011. The research team is now completing an end-of-project pamphlet by the provisional title 'Improving child welfare decisions: the role of research'.