PROSPECTS FOR EXPANDED PARENT EDUCATION SERVICES FOR DIVORCING FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN

The factors influencing court readiness to implement programs for divorcing families that are evidence based (i.e., have received support as being effective in scientific trials) were examined in a stratified random sample of the 3, 140 U.S. counties. Represented in the final survey were 22 large, 58 medium-sized, and 74 small counties with established divorcing parent education programs. For each court, a telephone interview was conducted with a key informant. Results indicate that 95% of counties report that implementing a lengthier, empirically validated program would be helpful to families, would find support from judges (80%), should be done in their county (74%), would find funding (73%), and was the responsibility of the court (69%). The two important barries to implementing longer evidence-based programs are potential funding problems and parents' potentially low attendance.     

THE NEW BEGINNINGS PROGRAM FOR DIVORCING AND SEPARATING FAMILIES: MOVING FROM EFFICACY TO EFFECTIVENESS

This article describes a program of research on effectively transporting the New Beginnings Program (NBP), a university-tested prevention program for divorced families, to community settings. The four steps in this research are described: (1) selecting a community partner, (2) developing effective methods of engaging parents, (3) redesigning the NBP to be easily delivered with high quality and fidelity in community agencies, and (4) adapting the NBP to meet the needs of the full population of divorcing families. The article concludes with a discussion of plans for an effectiveness trial to evaluate the NBP when delivered in community settings.     

What border? Public management innovation in the United States and Canada

Based on samples of 217 of the best applications to the Ford Foundation‐Kennedy School of Government innovation awards and 33 of the best applications to the Institute of Public Administration of Canada's management innovation award, both between 1990 and 1994, this article discusses the nature of public management innovation in the United States and Canada. Some of the issues examined are (1) the characteristics of public sector innovations, (2) where in the organization innovations originate, (3) whether innovations come about as a result of planning or groping, (4) the obstacles to change innovators faced and how they overcame them, (5) the results achieved by these innovations, and (6) whether these innovations were replicated. It is found that, despite the difference between congressional and parliamentary government and the different problems being addressed, the patterns of innovation are similar in the two countries. © 2000 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN EVALUATING FAMILY COURT PROGRAMS

Although there has been in recent years a proliferation of court programs, especially divorced parent education programs, evaluations of the effectiveness of these programs lag dangerously behind their inception, perhaps because program developers and courts lack the expertise to perform these evaluations. The present article provides a primer of the methodological considerations for evaluations of court programs. The authors discuss the following topics: formative versus summative evaluations; how to discover program goals by identifying stakeholders; how these goals translate into measures to be assessed; the data sources for these measures (exit questionnaires, archival data, and follow-up surveys); answering the “compared with what?” question through the selection of an appropriate research design; budgeting the evaluation; and disseminating the findings through appropriate write-up(s).     

Between Either/Or and More or Less: Sovereignty Versus Autonomy Under Federalism

The concept of sovereignty arose with the appearance of themodern state. It has survived because the state has survivedas the seemingly necessary basis for political order. The persistenceof cultural and ethnic nationalism and international anarchyhas given the state a new lease on life. Countertendencies.includingareactionagainstthemonarchicalabsolutismassociatedwith sovereignty, have given rise to federal systemsoffering a more flexible, if less certain, combination of governmenton a large scale with relative autonomy on a smaller, localscale. Given modern realities promoting interdependence andmaking autarky both difficult to sustain and a threat to therights of minorities, it may be better to settle for the "moreor less" of federalism and autonomy than the "either/or" ofthe state and sovereignty.     

Making Something Out of Nothing: Welfare Reform and a New Race to the Bottom

The 1996 welfare-reform law has been characterized as a significantact of devolution. For some, this devolution will free statesto become "laboratories of democracy" that develop better welfarepolicies; for others, it will provoke a debilitating "race tothe bottom" where states will reduce benefits out of fear ofbecoming "welfare magnets" that attract recipients from otherstates. This article suggests that neither "laboratories ofdemocracy" nor "race to the bottom" does justice to the complexitiesof the 1996 reforms. In the case of the former, new federalmandates limit state action and states face informal pressuresto "keep up" with one another in developing new restrictionsso that they can avoid becoming "welfare magnets." In the caseof the latter, we find limited empirical support for the existenceof welfare migration that is supposed to be provoking a "raceto the bottom." We find that there is limited welfare migrationbecause the real value of welfare benefits to recipients doesnot vary nearly as much as common portrayals suggest. Giventhese realities, welfare reform may produce a procedural raceto the bottom that turns the myth of migration into a self-fulfillingprophesy.