Best Practice Guide for Positive Parenting A resource for practitionersworking with families

Editorial team María José Rodrigo López

CoordinatorUniversity of La Laguna

Pere Amorós MartíUniversity of Barcelona

Enrique Arranz FreijoUniversity of the Basque Country

María Victoria Hidalgo GarcíaUniversity of Seville

María Luisa Máiquez ChavesUniversity of La Laguna

Juan Carlos Martín QuintanaUniversity of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

Raquel-Amaya Martínez GonzálezUniversity of Oviedo

Esperanza Ochaita AldereteAutonomous University of Madrid

Coordination Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces

Subdirectorate for Social Affairs

Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare

Directorate General of Family and Child Services

Edited by: FEMP. C/ Nuncio, 8 28005 Madrid. Tel: +34 91 364 37 00. Fax: +34 91 365 54 82. femp@femp.es Legal deposit: M-30573-2015.

Designed and printed by: Gráficas Nitral SL. Arroyo Bueno, 2. Tel: +34 91 796 77 02.

3

Collaborators María Ángeles Espinosa BayalSantiago Agustín RuizHéctor Gutiérrez Rodríguez

Autonomous University of Madrid

Nuria Fuentes PelaezAinoa Mateos InchaurrondoMari Cruz Molina GaruzCrescencia Pastor Vicente

University of Barcelona

María Angels Balsells BailonUniversity of Lleida

Carlos Becedóniz VázquezMaría del Henar Pérez HerreroLucía Álvarez BlancoBeatriz Rodríguez RuizMaría Teresa Iglesias GarcíaVerónica García DíazAntonio Urbano Contreras

University of Oviedo

Fernando Olabarrieta ArtetxeAinhoa Manzano FernándezJuan Luis Martín Ayala

University of the Basque Country

Lucía Jiménez GarcíaBárbara Lorence LaraSusana Menéndez Álvarez-DardetJosé Sánchez Hidalgo

University of Seville

Translation: Michelle Hof

Working groups

Group (1) Coordination: Esperanza Ochaita and María Ángeles Espinosa

Autonomous University of Madrid

Santiago AgustínAssociate Professor, Interfaculty Department of De-velopmental and Educational Psychology, Autono-mous University of Madrid. Researcher at the UAM-UNICEF Institute for “Needs and Rights of Childhood and Adolescence” (IUNDIA).

Catalina AlcarazChildren with Social Difficulties. Dept of Studies in Social Innovation. Spanish Red Cross.

Erenia BarreroTrainer. National Training School. SOS Academy Spain. Children’s Villages.

Gabriel González-BuenoDirector of Childhood Policy. UNICEF Spain.

Romina GonzálezSave the Children Spain. Advocacy officer, liaison for prevention of violence and promotion of proper treatment. Save the Children Spain.

Juan GuillóDirector of Social Mobilisation. Save the Children Spain.

Gema PaniaguaPsychologist, Early Intervention Team, Leganés.

Cecilia SimónProfessor, Department of Developmental and Educa-tional Psychology, Autonomous University of Madrid.

Javier TamaritDirector, Quality of Life Department, FEAPS. Spa-nish Confederation of Organisations for Persons with Learning Disabilities.

4

Collaborating experts and entities

Group (2) Coordination: Pere Amorós, Nuria Fuentes and Ainoa Mateos

University of Barcelona

Elena BoiraDirector, Family Support Services. Family Secreta-riat. Social Welfare Department.

Montse BuisanDeputy Director, Social Integration Department. Obra Social La Caixa.

Adela CamíPresident and Director General of the Eduvi coope-rative.

Paco CentenoDirector for Children, Hospitalet de Llobregat City Council.

Araceli LazaroSecretary, Observatory on the Rights of the Child. Re-gional Government of Catalonia.

Isabel VázquezDirector, Sao-Prat Centre.

Group (3) Coordination: Juan Carlos Martín Quintana

University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.

Antonio Santana SánchezSocial Policy Officer, Foster Care Section. Gran Cana-ria Island Government.

Soraya Gil OssaSocial Action Officer, Technical Unit for Family and Childhood. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria City Council.

Eduardo Cabrera CasimiroHead of Service, Municipal Social Services. San Bar-tolomé de Tirajana Town Council.

Soledad Mesa Martín and Verónica Mesa Martín Municipal Social Services Officers. Telde Town Coun-cil.

5

Group (4) Coordination: María Josefa Rodrigo and María Luisa Máiquez Chaves

University of La Laguna

Ana Brito de LuisPlanning and Evaluation Officer, IASS, Childhood and Family Unit. Tenerife Island Council.

María Mercedes González GonzálezCoordinator, Social Services, Tegueste Town Council. Tenerife.

Emilio Jiménez RosalesChief Psychologist, Risk Teams, San Cristóbal de La Laguna City Council. Tenerife.

María Fátima Marichal BelloSocial worker in the La Cuesta Social Work Unit, Social Welfare and Quality of Life Department, San Cristóbal de La Laguna City Council. Tenerife.

Carmen Julia Martín RamosCoordinator, Social Services, Los Silos Town Council. Tenerife.

Carmen Olga Méndez LeónEducator, Social Services, Los Silos Town Council. Te-nerife.

Luz Marina Rodríguez GarcíaSocial worker, Social Services, Tegueste Town Coun-cil. Tenerife.

Group (5) Coordination: Raquel-Amaya Martínez González

University of Oviedo.

Carlos Becedóniz VázquezRegional Ministry for Social Welfare and Housing. Government of the Principality of Asturias.

María del Henar Pérez HerreroDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

María Teresa Iglesia GarcíaDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

Lucía Álvarez BlancoDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

Beatriz Rodríguez RuizDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

Verónica García DíazDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

Antonio Urbano ConterasDepartment of Educational Sciences. University of Oviedo.

Group (6) Coordination: María Victoria Hidalgo, José Sánchez, Bárbara Lo-rence and Lucía Jimenez

University of Seville

Pilar Hidalgo FigueroaHead of Service for Prevention and Family Support, Directorate General for the Elderly, Children and Families. Regional Ministry for Equality, Health and Social Policy of the Governing Council of Andalusia.

Encarna Sánchez EspinosaDirector, Childhood and Family Service. Seville Pro-vincial Council.

Antonio Garrido PorrasTechnical Consultant, General Secretariat for Public Health and Participation. Regional Ministry for Equa-lity, Health and Social Policy of the Governing Council of Andalusia.

José Antonio PolonioCoordinator, Training and Family Support Program-me, Delegation for Family, Social Affairs and Areas of Special Intervention, Seville City Council.

Reyes CasaresPresident, Seville Chapter, Western Andalusia Psy-chologists’ Association.

Alfonso González De Valdés CorreaPresident, Asociación Ponte.

6

Pilot study

Víctor GrimaldiJosé Antonio Polonio

PsychologistPsychologist

Delegation for Family, Social Affairs and Areas of Special Intervention.Seville City Council.

Antonio Garrido Psychologist Ministry for Equality, Health and Social Policy, Governing Council of Andalusia.

Antonia González RodríguezPilar Sotomayor Díaz

Social Worker Psychologist

Service for Prevention and Family Support. Local Chapter for Equality, Health and Social Policy. Huelva

Alfonso González de Valdés Correa Psychologist Asociación Ponte

María Dolores GarcíaBonifacia Cantero

Social Worker Psychologist

Childhood and Family Service Vitoria-Gasteiz Town Council

Ainhoa Manzano FernándezJuan Luis Martín Ayala

PsychologistPsychologist

Etxadi. Bilbao

Elisabete Burgoa Psychologist Lea Artibai Municipal Association. Markina

Erenia Barrero RodríguezMaría del Mar Líndez Líndez

Psychologist Psychologist

SOS Children’s Villages Spain. Madrid

María Salamanca MesaIefkine Hamparzoumian Montilla

PsychologistSocial Worker

SOS Children’s Villages Spain. Madrid

Mª Pilar Rodríguez González Family Educator SOS Children’s Villages Las Palmas. Telde. Gran Canaria

Francisca Romero SierraC. Teresa Muñoz CiudadMiguel Manau PenellaHéctor Cruz Dauden

Social Worker & Psychologist TeacherTeacher & Social Worker Social Worker

Children’s Villages Day Centre. Zaragoza

María Isabel Picazo GujaroCristina Díaz Sánchez

PsychopedagoguePsychopedagogue

Asprona. Albacete-Feaps

Miguel HierroPilar González Lozano

Psychologist Psychologist

Family Support Centres. Caf-1. Tres Cantos. Madrid

Mª Ángeles Medina MazaNuria Rupérez PascualMª Jesús de la Hermosa Serrano

Psychopedagogue and Teacher Psychopedagogue and Teacher Pedagogue

Early Intervention Team Colmenar Tres Cantos. Madrid

Pepa González LaraMaría José Ramírez Iglesias

Social Educator Social Worker

Centre Obert Riatl. LesSanta Coloma de Gramanet. Barcelona

Anna Vicente Bibiloni Javier Loyo Rivera

Psychologist Family Therapist

Eduvic. Hospitalet de Llobregat. Barcelona

María Luisa Suárez Álvarez Pedagogue Regional Ministry for Education, Culture and Sport. Principality of Asturias

Alejandro García Villa Psychologist Regional Ministry for Education, Culture and Sport. Principality of Asturias

Raquel Álvarez Fernández Teacher & Pedagogue Gijón-West Centre for Teaching Resources. Gijón. Principality of Asturias

7

Rosario Borreguero Gómez Psychologist Les Rosario Acuña. Gijón.Principality of Asturias

Susana Pilar Álvarez García Social Worker Colunga Town Council. Colunga.Principality of Asturias

Mª José Fernández RodríguezMª José Martínez Díaz

Psychologist Social Worker

Technical Intervention Team, Family Support. Principality of Asturias

Ana Isabel Rosado Sánchez Social Worker C. M. Social Services. Villaviciosa.Principality of Asturias

Sara Flórez García Psychologist “Materno Infantil” foster care centre, unit for children aged 0-3. Principality of Asturias

José Ramón Hevia Fernández Doctor Directorate General for Public Health. Health Ministry. Principality of Asturias

Adriana Fernández García Psychologist La Sidra Municipal Association. Nava.Principality of Asturias

Ángel Rey García Social Worker Asociación Centro Trama. Oviedo

Graciela López Lizarralde Noemí Gonzales Caballero

Mónica Donate VeraAna Belén Fernández Alemán

Social Worker Social Worker, Social Educator & Psychopedagogue PsychologistSocial Educator

San Bartolomé de Tirajana Town Council.Gran Canaria

Bárbara Hernández DenizNatalia Gil ÁlvarezMaría Morales Santana

Social Educator Psychologist Social Educator

San Bartolomé de Tirajana Town Council. Gran Canaria

María Soledad Mesa MartínMaría Verónica Mesa Martín

Social Educator Social Educator

Telde Town Council. Gran Canaria

Contents

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

2. JustificationfortheBestPracticeGuide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

3. Definitionandlevelsofbestpractices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

4. ObjectivesofthisGuideandfieldsofapplication..........28

5. UsingtheGuideasaresourceforevaluating programmesandservices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

6. StructureoftheBestPracticesProtocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

7. ApplyingtheProtocol:anopportunity forchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

ANNEX1.BestPracticesProtocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

Part1.Bestpracticesinservicesfromapositiveparentingstandpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

Part2.Bestpracticesinprofessionalworkwithfamiliesfromapositiveparentingstandpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

Part3.Bestpracticesinevidence-basedprogrammesfromapositiveparentingstandpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69

ANNEX2.Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74

9

1Introduction

Introduction

Our conception of what parenting should looklike has changed considerably in our society.This is due not only to the large variety offamily structures and the diversity of culturesthat currently co-exist in our society, but alsotoashiftinmindsetthattouchestheveryheartof the parenting task. This can be expressedas the need to replace the concept of parentalauthority,whichfocusessolelyonmeetingaimsrelated to the child’s obedience and discipline,with the much more complex and demandingconceptofparentalresponsibility.Here,thekeyquestionisnotwhethertheparentfigureshouldexertthenecessaryauthoritytoensureachild’sobedience.Rather,itisabouthowthisauthoritycanbeexertedresponsiblyinawaythatprotectsthechild’s rights -withoutofcourseneglectingthe mother’s and father’s rights - and thatfosters the child’s skills in critical thinkingandparticipation in the socialisationprocess,whileat the same time progressively fostering thechild’sautonomyandcontributiontocommunitylife.

There has been much concern expressed inresponsetothisqualitativeshiftinhowaparent’sresponsibilities are viewed, including amongstmothers and fathers themselves. Parents oftenfeelpowerlesstoact,astheydonotknowhowtoachievesuchcomplexparentinggoals,andfeellike they are losing control over their children.Other times, feelings of discouragement andstressarisenotbecauseparentsdonothowtogoabout the task of parenting, but rather becausethey find themselves unable to do so, as maybethecaseforsingleparentsorcouplesraisingchildrenwithoutthenecessarysupportnetworks.This can lead to extreme situations which canhaveanegativeimpactontheentirefamily,andespeciallyitsmostvulnerablemembers.

The response to these concerns lies in positiveparenting, an approach that has emerged fromrecentEuropeanpolicies,andmorespecifically,

Recommendation 19 of the Committee ofMinisters of the Council of Europe (2006) toMember States on Policy to Support PositiveParenting.

11

This can be expressed as the need to replace the concept of parental authority, which focuses solely onmeeting aims related to the child’s obedience and discipline, with the much more complex and demanding concept of parental responsibility

Positive parenting, as defined in thisRecommendation,refersto“parentalbehaviourbased on the best interests of the child that isnurturing,empowering,non-violentandprovidesrecognitionandguidancewhichinvolvessettingofboundariestoenablethefulldevelopmentofthe child” (p.2, English version). According tothisdefinition,theaimoftheparentingtaskistofosterpositivefamilyrelationships,basedontheexerciseofparentalresponsibility,toensuretherightsofchildrenandadolescents inthefamilysetting and optimise the development of theirfullpotentialandwelfare.

Inthissense,theaboveRecommendationisfullyinlinewiththerightsofchildrenandadolescentssetforthintheUnitedNationsConventionontheRightsoftheChild,withtheserightsestablishedas the prime objective to be ensured withinthe family setting (Ochaita & Espinosa, 2004;Ochaita, Agustín & Espinosa, 2010). Positiveparenting stresses the best interest of the childor adolescent above any other consideration;sees children and adolescents as holders ofrights (not justaspassiverecipientswithneedsto be satisfied); and highlights their activeparticipation in family and society and theircentralroleineffectingsocialchange.Allofthis

means that theparenting taskmust be fulfilledin a way that respects the child’s dignity. Thistherefore brings us away from the concept ofthe parent figure as the adult individual “who

owns and is responsible for the child” and theconceptof thechildoradolescentasa“subjectrequiring protection”, andmoves us toward anunderstanding of the child or adolescent as anactive subject with rights that parent figuresmustfoster,respectandprotect.

Positive parenting is parenting that fostershealthy,protectiveandstableemotionalbonds;provides a structured environment for growingup in,withroutinesandhabits thatareappliedflexibly to transmit rules and values; offersstimulation, support and opportunities forlearning; and is based on the recognition ofthe child’s achievements and abilities and theprovisionofeverydayguidance,all ina settingthat is free of physical, verbal or emotionalviolence. The positive parenting approach alsotakes into accountwhat parent figures need inorder to carry out the parenting task properly:information, guidance and reflection on thefamily’s parenting model; time for themselvesand with the family; faith in their own abilityas parent figures and satisfaction with theparentingtask;andinformalandformalsupporttohelpovercomedifficultiesandreduceparentandfamilystress.

Thecomplexityof themother’sor father’s taskrequires that the individuals responsible forcaringforandraisingachilddeveloparangeofabilitiesorskillsthatgobeyondparentingskillsproper.Theseincludeallthoseskillsthatreflectthemannerinwhichtheseindividualsperceiveandexperiencetheirroleasparents;theirability

12

Positive parenting is parenting that fosters healthy, protective and stable emotional bonds

toseekoutthesupporttheyneedtoensurethefamily functions as autonomously as possible;and the skills related to a healthy personalmaturityaswellasthoserelatedtotheresilienceat the family and personal level, which willallowthemtomanagetheirliveseveninadversecircumstances(Inset1).

Of course, parenting does not take place in avacuum,butratherexistsinarangeofdifferentpsychosocial ecologies or environments thatwill eitherhelporhinder theexercisingof thisresponsibility. In speaking of ecologies, we aredrawingfromtheecological-systemicmodels(e.g.Bronfenbrenner,1987)thatstatethatindividualsdevelop within a framework of systems ofinfluences that encompasses microsystems,which are closest to the individual, such asthe family, peers and school; mesosystems,which involve the relationships betweenmicrosystems;exosystemssuchastheextendedfamily, friends, the workplace and supportservices;andmacrosystems,whichcoverbeliefs,values, ideologies and historical events suchas wars, economic crises, and social upheaval,that involve influences that are increasinglydistal but no less important to individuals. Theparenting task is carried out in the sphere ofthe most intimate diadic relationships linkedtothepersonalhistoriesofthemothers,fathersor parent figures with their families of origin,but also expands to include the framework ofrelationships with an intimate partner, at theworkplace, within extended family supportnetworks,andwithfriends,neighboursandthecommunitysurroundingafamilyandaccordingto the socio-historicalandeconomicconditionsof time inwhich theyare living.Therefore, theparental ecologies in which parenting takesplaceareextremelyvariedasafunctionofalloftheabovesystemsofinfluence.Itcanthereforebe deduced that positive parenting is not onlya suitable approach for ensuring families arehappy, harmonious structures where childrenareassuredoptimalconditionsfordevelopment.

time as a result of life transitions or crises andirrespective of their degree of vulnerability tothechallengesanddifficulties that lifepresentsthem. This approach is also useful in casesinvolvingtheinitiationofaprocessofseparationof a child from their family and where an

13

Inset 1. Competence areas in positive parenting (Rodrigo, Máiquez, Martín & Byrne, 2008)

Competences Description

Child-raising • Warmth and affection in relationships

• Monitoring and supervi-sion of child behaviour

• Stimulating and suppor-ting learning

• Ability to adapt to the child’s characteristics

Parental agency • Parental self-efficacy• Internal locus of control• Agreement between

intimate partners• Appropriate perception

of the parental role

Personal autonomy, seeking out social support

• Involvement in the child-raising task

• Taking responsibility for the child’s welfare

• Positive view of the child and the family

• Seeking assistance from significant individuals

• Identifying and utilising resources to cover needs as mothers

Personal development

• Impulse control and stress management

• Assertiveness and self-esteem

• Social skills• Resolution of

interpersonal conflict• Ability to multitask• Creating and carrying

out a life plan

Italsohelpsusunderstandthefamily’sneedforsupport,whatevertheircircumstances,whetherornottheyarecurrentlygoingthroughadifficult

Parenting does not take place in a vacuum, but rather exists in a range of different psychosocial ecologies or environments that will either help or hinder the exercising of this responsibility

intervention is being planned to ensure thefamily’s future reunification. All families needsupport,toagreaterorlesserextent,andsothemainchallenge lies inknowinghowtoprovidefor thebroaddiversityof family circumstancesthough appropriate, high-quality services thatwillsupporttheirfunctioningintoday’ssociety.Our intention here is to emphasise the factthat the positive parenting approach is usefulnot only in universal primary prevention, butalso in selective, indicatedprevention,whereaproblematicsituationhasalreadybeenidentifiedthatcouldleadtotheseparationofachildfromthefamilyiftheappropriatestepsarenottakentopreventit.

Exercise of the parenting task, while linkedto the intimacy of the family circle, should beconsidered a domain of public policy, and assuch, all necessary measures should be takenand conditions created to ensure that thisparenting is positive. Positive parenting todayshouldbeconsideredasanasset,aninvestmentin the future, a social resource that is to beprotected and supported, given its key role inthe comprehensive development of individualsand the protection of their rights, especially ofthe most vulnerable, and as an instrument forcommunities’socialcohesionandwelfare.Inthis

sense, the Council of Europe recommends thatallitsMemberStates,aswellasthosecountriesthat have subscribed to the Recommendation,provide the necessary support to ensure theproper development of the parenting task,especiallyinenvironmentswherefamilieslive,toensuretheyreceivearesponsethatisproximate,comprehensiveandinlinewiththeirneeds.

In our environment, the positive parentingframework facilitates the development ofprogrammes,projects,servicesand/ormeasuresto support families that aim to foster, fromdiverse domains of action (social, healthcare,educational and legal), equal opportunities forfamilies as they fulfil the functions entrustedto them by society. One barrier to achievingthis is the fact that we often speak of fathers,mothers, boys, girls, adolescents, grandfathers,grandmothers and other caregivers as separateentities,andyetgrouptogetherallfamiliesunderasingleabstractcategory,thuslosingsightoftheconstructivistandsystemicapproachbywhichafamilyconsistsofawholethatismadeupofallofthesemembers.

The fact is, all family support actions must beplaced within a country’s national, regionaland local planning framework, and political,technicalandcommunitystakeholdersdemandthat such a clarifying, structured approach betaken in family policy. The positive parentingapproachmayactasasourceof inspirationforcarryingoutstrategicplanning, settingpoliticalpriorities, allocating budgetary resources,distributing resources, fostering institutionalrelations and supporting family services. Inparticular,onemustconsidertheimportanceofplanningfamilyinterventionandsupportatthelocal authority level, due to the major impactthat such resources have on families’ welfareandqualityof lifeandgiven theirproximity tothe community. Whatever the name that maybegiven to the services that serveand supportfamilies, major efforts must be undertaken

to strengthen them and ensure that they arenot hollowed out in times of economic crisis.Anythingthatimpoverishestherangeofservicesandresourcesonoffertofamiliesinacommunityentails a risk, and hinders the prevention andpromotionefforts that characterise thepositiveparenting approach, and that, in the long run,

14

In our environment, the positive parenting framework facilitates the development of programmes, projects, services and/or measures to support families that aim to foster equal opportunities for families

willentailunnecessaryextracostsinadditiontodiminishingfamilies’qualityoflifeandwelfare.This brings us to the question of those familiesrequiringmultiple interventions because of theseriousness of the problems they face, who,paradoxically, tend to live in environmentslacking those normalising resources that allowfamiliesto“breathe”andfunctionevenintimesofdifficulty.Communityworkmustberecoveredas the main axis of family intervention. Localauthorities,whicharemore involved thaneverindealingwithemergencysituations,mustbegintocreate supportnetworks thatextendbeyondthe family unit. In short, positive parentingrequires developed communities that act toprotectfamilies.

In line with the preceding ideas, the positiveparentingapproachnecessarilyimpliesprovidingstrong support for the professionals whoworkwith families every day. The Recommendationitself points out the importance of having theright professionals and services in place to beabletocarryouttheimportanttaskofsupportingmothersandfathers,soastoguaranteeeffectiveparenting.Thus,thisRecommendationproposes

guidelines for professionals and services,highlighting the following: the principle ofequalityandaccessibilitythatwillunderlieanymeasure taken; the principle of partnershipand collaboration with those responsible forchildcare, in recognition of their experience;interdisciplinary cooperation and coordinationbetween entities, facilitating the sharing ofresources and working in an interdisciplinarynetwork; an increase of families’ confidencein themselves, avoiding creating an excessivedependenceontheservice;interventionsbasedonpromotingfamilies’ strengthsandresources;and, finally, initial and continuous training forprofessionals,aswellascontinuityoftheactionscarriedoutintheirrespectiveservices.

Toachieveall thisandwith theseprofessionalsand families inmind, for years now a numberofinstitutionalinitiativeshavebeencarriedoutin our environment within the framework ofpositiveparenting,amongwhichwecanhighlighttheresearchconductedfortheMinistryofLabourand Social Affairs: Strategies to prevent andaddressconflictinfamilyrelationships(fathers,mothersandchildren)(Martínez-González,Pérez&Álvarez, 2007) and theProgrammeGuide fortheDevelopmentofEmotional,EducationalandParenting Competences (Martínez-González,2009), publishedby theMinistry ofHealth andSocial Policy. Likewise, guidelines have beenestablished for the Collaboration Agreementbetween theMinistryofHealth,SocialServicesand Equality and the Spanish Federation ofMunicipalities and Provinces (FEMP). The aimis topromote local policies to support families,using as inspiration the positive parentingapproach.Todisseminatethisapproachamongstprofessionals,thefirstproductoftheAgreementconsisted of the drafting of three documents:Positive parenting and local support policiesfor families: Guidelines for Local Authoritieson promoting responsible parenting practices(Rodrigo, Maíquez & Martín, 2010a), Parent

education as a psychoeducational resource forpromotingpositiveparenting(Rodrigo,Maíquez&Martín,2010b)andBestprofessionalpracticestosupportpositiveparenting(Rodrigo,Máiquez&Martín,2011).Thesedocumentsoutlineaseries

15

All family support actions must be placed within a country’s national, regional and local planning framework

of recommendations and practical guidelinesthat,withoutadoubt,areprovingtobeinfluentialand inspiring for all those professionals whostrive topromoteachange in familyassistanceandsupportservices.

Inparallel,theMinistryofHealth,SocialServicesand Equality has been organising an ongoingseriesoffiveConferencesonPositiveParenting(2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2014), as well ascelebrating the 2011 International Day of theFamily under the slogan “Fathers andmothersengaged in positive parenting”, all within theframeworkofactionsaimedatdisseminatingthepositiveparentingapproach.Likewise,amotionhasbeenadoptedintheSpanishCongressurgingthe Government to undertake actions thatpromotetheprincipleofpositiveparenting(June6, 2011), in coordinationwith theAutonomousCommunities and Municipal Social Servicesas well as with all social partners. Recently,the principle of positive parenting and relatedsupport actions was included in the NationalStrategic Plan for Childhood and Adolescence2013-2016. This approachwas also included intheComprehensiveFamilySupportPlanadoptedinMay2015,oneofwhosestrategiclinesfocuseson promoting the positive exercise of familyresponsibilities(positiveparenting).

We feel that it is now time to move beyondrecommendations and general guidelines

and address actual practices. There has beenunanimous agreement that the positiveparentingapproachrepresentsthewayforward,and numerous examples are emerging ofprofessional practices aimed at supporting theideaof“positivemothersandfathers”througharangeofservices,actionsandresources.Andyetwestilllackaspecificproposalthatoutlinesbestpractices in family support services that followthepositiveparentingapproach.Itistime,then,to take it a step further and present this “BestPracticeGuide forPositiveParenting”,which isconceivedasaresourcetosupportpractitionersworkingwithfamilies,asthetitleindicates.ThisGuide aims to take the recommendations andguidelinesthathavebeenidentifiedasdesirableinthepositiveparentingapproachandtranslatethem into practical measures and concreteactions.Thesepracticesaredescribed ina self-assessment protocol, which aims to serve as atool for analysis, reflection and improvementof quality and innovation processes in familysupport programmes and services. Its mainaimis thustosupportprofessionalsbycreatinga space in which they can reflect together ontheir professional practice. It can be used bothbythosewhohavealreadybeguntheprocessof

16

Child Services of theMinistry ofHealth, SocialServicesandEquality,aworkplanwasdesignedthathasallowedfortheveryclosecollaborationofindividualsfromdifferentdomains.Asafirststep,apanelwassetupbringingtogetherexpertsfromthefollowingSpanishuniversities(listedinalphabeticalorderusingtheirnamesinSpanish):AutonomousUniversityofMadrid,UniversityofBarcelona, University of La Laguna, Universityof Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Universityof Oviedo, University of the Basque Countryand University of Seville. This panel producedthe first working draft of the Guide with thesupport of their teams of collaborators. All theexperts have considerable experience in thedomainofpreventionandpromotionofactionsand programmes offering psychoeducationalsupport for families, as well as in the trainingof professionals specialised in this field. Afterseveral meetings of the expert panel andvariousroundsofconsultationwiththeteamsofcollaborators,consensuswasreachedonthefirstdraft(Figure1).

The third step in the drafting of this Guideconsisted of setting up working groups,each coordinated by a locally-based expert.Professionals from different domains andservices,bothpublicandprivate,withextensiveexperience in family issuesand family supportwere invited to join these working groups.These working groups conducted a full reviewof the Guide’s content, and their commentsand proposals for changes were recorded inwriting and distributed to all the workinggroupcoordinators.Asafourthstep,aworkingsession was held in Madrid that was attendedby all the experts and by a representative ofthe professionals who had participated in theworking groups. At the meeting, the changesproposed by the working groups, which hadbeen compiled into a single document, wereexaminedandafinalconsensuswasreachedonthem.Asalaststep,apilotstudyforapplyingthe

The principle of positive parenting has been included in the recently adopted Comprehensive Family Support Plan

innovationandchangeandby thosewhohaveyet to overcome existing inertia and resistanceintheirprofessionaldomaintogetstartedonthepathtochange.

To address the difficult task of preparing thisGuide, under the coordination of the GeneralDirectorate of Local Policies of the SpanishFederation of Municipalities and Provincesand the General Directorate of Family and

17

protocolwascarriedoutin30differentservicesrepresenting different domains. The feedbackprovided offered very valuable informationabout theprotocol’s relevance,aswellasaboutitsutilitytotheservicesasaself-assessmenttool.Very interesting suggestions were made thatcontributedtoimprovingthefinalcontentoftheprotocol.

Wewouldliketoexpressoursincerethankstoallthe professionals who participated throughouttheprocessofdevelopingthisGuide,asitwouldnot have been possible to arrive at the desiredconsensuswithout their collaboration. In short,thiswork,whichwasbornofthefertilegroundof applied scientific knowledge, taken togetherwith professional expertise, aims to provide

Panel of experts from

seven Spanish universities (November

2012)

Figure 1. Drafting process for the Best Practice Guide for Positive Parenting

Expert collaborator teams (2013)

Working groups of

professionals who work

with families (January-

March 2014)

Joint working session in

Madrid (May 2014)

Pilot study applying the

protocol (October

2014)

Presentation at the Fifth

Conference on Positive

Parenting (December

2014)

an effective tool for use in family services andpolicies,andisdedicatedtotheprofessionalsandthefamiliesthattheysupportandaccompany.

To address the difficult task ofpreparing this Guide, under the coordination of the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces and the Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, a work plan was designed that has allowed for the very close collaboration of individuals from different domains

2Justification for theBest Practice Guide

AsexplainedintheIntroduction,thisGuidewasdevelopedtoguideandhelpimproveprofessionalpracticewithfamiliesfromtheperspectiveofthepositive parenting approach. We have alreadystatedthatthisapproachenjoysgreatacceptanceamongst professionals. However, even wherethereisconsensusontherecommendationsandthegenerallinestobefollowedinpractice,thisdoes not always translate into the applicationof best practices.At times, inertia is great, andsomemay hold the misguided impression thata given service’s practices are already in linewiththepositiveparentingapproach.Also,newchallengesmayarisethataservicehasnothadtocoverinthepast,whichrequireittoadoptnewpractices.This iswhywehavedecided tospelloutthemainreasonsbehindourdraftingofthisGuide.

First, the positive parenting approach requiresus to consider that the profiles of the familiesreceiving services,orwhomaydo so in future,canbebroad-rangingandheterogeneous.Itisaquestionofhaving to attend to a continuumoffamily situations: from those characterised bymultiple difficulties and a history of problems,withvariedneedsandatriskofbreakingapart,tothosethatmaymerelyrequireone-offsupportandguidancetopromotetheirfamily’swelfare.Givensuchawiderangeof familysituations,adifferentiated approach to family supportmustbedesignedandimplemented,onethatrespectsfamilycontextsandculturaldiversity.Thisisnotalwaysprovidedforintherespectiveservices.

Inmanyofthesesituations,verypositiveresultscan be achieved by proposing preventiveactionsandpromotingskillsdevelopment,whileextending and enriching the family supportnetwork. In this respect, families’ most urgent,specific needsmust be addressed. At the sametime, there is great preventive and eminently

proactive value in ensuring that professionalactions are taken within the general familysupport policy framework, which is designedto respond to needs shared by the majority ofSpanishfamiliesintoday’ssociety.Theseneedsare part and parcel of everyday family life,

Justification for theBest Practice Guide

19

This Guide was developed to guide and help improve professional practice with families from the perspective of the positive parenting approach

especially in those families inmore precariousfinancialsituations,withfewworkopportunitiesandlevelsofwork,familyandlifebalancethatwouldbehardtoachievewithoutthesepolicies.

Thesepoliciesgiverisetoanewspaceforworkingwith families, one that is based on preventionandpromotion,whichhasoftennotbeenworkedout in full detail. It is a proactive spacewhereprofessionalsdonot limit themselves to simplywaitingforaparticularfamilytoexpressaneed,but lookbeyonda specific case to consider theriskandprotection factors that theyobserve inthe community as awhole, and try to advancetoward reducing the former and increasingthe latter. These proactive actions are lessconsolidatedinprofessionals’mindsandneedtobespelledoutinthisGuide.

Second, and as an extension of the above, it isnecessarytoimprovethepresentation,visibilityand accessibility of family support servicesso that the public is aware of them, becomesfamiliar with the content of their programmesandcanaccessthem.Citizens’Chartersarekeydocumentsthatcanhelpraiseawarenessoftheongoing programmes and resources availableat a given social service and outline the rights

andobligationsof thosemakinguseof them. Itis therefore very important to promote familyparticipationintheservice,andtoensurethattheentire service provision process is transparentfor all, with a clear explanation to families of

situation and needs and plan the interventionand resources to be used to improve them, inplace of a diagnosis of the family’s limitationscarried out only from the point of view of theexpert. When planning interventions, it isnecessary to promote coordination among theservicesandresourcestobeused,thusavoidingover-intervention and a family’s excessivecontactwithmanyprofessionals.Allthisclasheswiththoseprofessionalpracticesthatareaimedatdiagnosingdeficienciesanddesigningacaseplanbasedonlyontheprofessional’sperspective,and then proposing actions with multipleresourcesthatareactivatedsimultaneouslyandonlyrequestingthecollaborationofthefamiliesat the end of the process, at which point theyare expected to follow their instructions andguidance.

Fourth, the positive parenting approach placesfamilies at the heart of the service’s actions. Itgoeswithoutsayingthatallservicesworkforthe

20

The positive parenting approach requires us to consider that the profiles of the families receiving services, or who may do so in future, can be broad-ranging and heterogeneous

what is required of them and what they arebeingoffered.Wemustpayparticularattentionto eliminating the material and psychologicalbarriers that prevent some families fromreceiving the support they need, as visiting agivenservicemaystigmatisethefamilyintheirneighbourhood.Onceagain,thisentailstakingaproactiveapproach,aspreviouslydiscussed.

Third, the improvement of the quality of theassistance given to families is a challenge forprofessionals and services, who must rethinktheirprofessionalpracticeinordertoadapttothisnewapproach.Inthisrespect,theprofessionalswho make up the services must be aware ofand applywhat is set out in national, regionaland local plans in terms of the family workthey are to do and the significance that it is tohave.Thisqualitativeimprovementrequires,forexample, thatevaluationsystemsbedevelopedthataresensitivetofamilies’strengths,andthatintervention plans be designed that build theircapacities, on the assumption that all families,even the most vulnerable, have abilities thatcan be fostered to improve their quality of lifeof their members. The process of discoveringa family’s potentials and protection factorsrequiresacooperativeexplorationtoassesstheir

It is necessary to improve the presentation, visibility and accessibility of family support services so that the public is aware of them, becomes familiar with the content of their programmes and can access them

benefit of families, but this approach considers

the manner in which families are treated in a

given service to be fundamental. Services that

place families at the heart of their work fulfil

thefollowingpoints:a)theyreceivefamiliesina

spacethatmeetstheconditionsofconfidentiality,

privacy, consideration and respect as they

establish the narrative of the family situation;

b) they identify and satisfy families’ needs,

promoting theexpressionof theiropinionsand

theirparticipationandcollaboration;c)theykeep

familiesinformedatalltimesabouttheprocess,

communicate fluently with them and transmit

safetyandwell-beingduringtheintervention;d)

theycoordinatewitheachotherandwithother

services;ande)theyactwithtransparencyinthe

procedures,without red tape, situating families

inanenvironmentofrightsanddutiesasusers

21

The improvement of the quality of the assistance given to families is a challenge for professionals and services, who must rethink their professional practice in order to adapt to this new approach

oftheservice, including,firstandforemost, theright toparticipate in the service improvementprocess.

22

Finally, it is necessary to improve quality andinnovationprocessesinfamilysupportservices.Werarelyseesufficientspacebeingallocatedforreflectiononprofessionalpractice; this leadstotheconsolidationoftheuseofroutinepractices,causedbytherapidandurgentdemandsofthesystem and leading to inappropriate forms ofaction. Take, for example, the organisationalpractice of matching specific professionalprofiles (psychologist, pedagogue, socialeducator, social worker) to certain functionsandtasksoftheserviceforthecareofchildren,adolescents and families in general. This formof organisation, which is quite consolidated, isassociatedwithaseriouscompartmentalisationinconceptual frameworkswhenunderstandingproblems and defining actions, which ends upbeingreflected ina lackofcoordinationwithinthe service. This can lead to situations wherenoonetakesresponsibilityforthetasksrelatedtopreventionandanalysisofa family’s reality,so eachprofessional endsupasking the family

interlocutorsforeachtopic,thereisoverlapintheactionscarriedoutwiththemandcoordinationislacking;also,somepsychoeducationalresourcesmay endupbeingoverloadedwhile others areleftunderused,amongmanyotherproblems.Inthisrespect,itisimportantforservicestoreviewall aspects of its professionals’ qualifications

The positive parenting approach places families at the heart of the service’s actions. It goes without saying that all services work for the benefit of families, but this approach considers the manner in which families are treated in a given service to be fundamental

the same questions instead of sharing this

information with colleagues, and there are no

jointassessmentsmadeofthemainintervention

priorities and no agreed case plan. From the

family’s standpoint, this leads to a situation

where theyare forced to engagewithdifferent

and functions within a team, and even withinthe functions themselves,aswellasdraftplansfor interventionand follow-up,anddesignandsupervise theevaluationof the serviceand theinnovationprocesses.

Inshort, thisbriefreviewdoesnot intendtobeexhaustivebutratheraimstoillustratetheneedtosetoutaconcreteproposalforbestpracticesinfamilysupportservicesfollowingthepositiveparentingapproach.Weconsidersuchaproposalto be very useful, as it offers the opportunityto ensure ownership and consistency inprofessionalaction.Further,itcanhelpminimiseprofessional bias, thus also reducing the useof improvisation or intuition in professionalpractice.Itcanalsoplaceservicestofamiliesattheheartof a service’s concerns,movingawayfromother formsofattention thatdonot focussufficiently on reinforcing families’ feelings ofcompetence and enabling families to acquire asufficient degree of autonomy so that they canfacetheirdifficultiesandliveouttheirlifeplans.

WewillconcludethissectionwithInset2,whichpresentstheprinciplesthatgivemeaningtotheconceptofbestpracticesinaservicewithinthepositiveparentingapproach.

It is necessary to improve quality and innovation processes in family support services

Inset 2. Decalogue of inspiring principles of best practices from the positive parenting framework

1. Personal fulfilment: View positive parenting as a factor of achievement and personal satisfaction for parents and of protection and prevention of problems in the development of children and adolescents, and also as an instrument of social cohesion and a promoter of active citizenship and the development of human and social capital.

2. Ecological approach: Adopt an ecological view of parenting to understand the conditions that facilitate or hinder this task and promote co-responsibility of society and community development to attain family welfare and quality of life.

3. Respect for diversity: Recognise and respect family, socio-educational, cultural, and gender diversity, always taking into account the best interests of the child or adolescent, the meeting of their needs, the protection and promotion of their rights and their holistic development.

4. Inclusive approach: Provide universally and easily accessible services to families, following a non-stigmatising and non-exclusive principle so as to normalise the use of these resources, while also ensuring that support reaches those most in need through a principle of needs-based progressive universalism.

5. Preventive approach: Encourage support services to families through a collaborative and preventive approach that involves the recognition and promotion of their strengths, to encourage their autonomous functioning and confidence in their possibilities.

6. Participatory approach: Enable the participation of families in family support services, to ensure that their points of view and their needs are taken into account.

7. Scientific basis: Promote, in family support services, the inclusion of individual, group and community evidence-based intervention programmes for parents, children, and adolescents, to expand the range of types of support provided.

8. Professional stability: Ensure job security for the professionals working in programmes and resources targeting families, creating spaces for reflection among professionals to enable the identification, incorporation, and dissemination of best practices in the service.

9. Professional competences: Identify the professional competences required for integrated work with families, placing them within the legal framework of national, regional and local family policies and the deontological principles of the Professional Associations working in this domain.

10. Standard evaluation practice: Include the evaluation of service and programme quality in the plans and actions of the policies to support families, so that evidence can be provided to the competent authorities of the effectiveness and efficiency of said services and programmes, making it possible, in the last analysis, to demonstrate the profitability of applying positive parenting policies.

23

Definition and levelsof best practices

3

25

The concept of best practice refers to anyexperience, guided by principles, objectivesandappropriateprocedures,whichhasyieldedpositive results, demonstrating its effectivenessand usefulness in a specific context. In theprofessionaldomain,theconceptofbestpracticecan refer to a continuum of experiences thatrangefromcommonsenseorthetraditionaluseofcertainwaysofdoingoracting,toprofessionalpractice based on scientific evidence. Threelevels of best practices can be identified: Level1, Individualised professional practice, Level2, Agreed professional practice and Level 3,Evidence-basedprofessionalpractice(Figure2).

InLevel1,practiceisbasedonreceivedpracticalknowledge, a professional’s own experienceor direct observation of the practice of otherprofessionals inhisorherenvironment.This issubjectiveknowledge,sometimesevendetachedfrom conscious experience, which does nottranscendthelimitsoftheindividualprofessionalandisneitherdisseminatednorproven.

In Level 2, an additional step must be taken,which consists of making the effort oftransmitting practices amongst professionalsuntil the conditions are created to arrive at anagreement or consensus among all. One can

alreadyspeakoftheexistenceofbestpracticesatthislevel,asthesepracticescanbeidentifiedanddisseminatedtocreateabaseofprofessionalknowledge that transcends the limits of

LEVEL 1Individual

professional practice

LEVEL 2Agreed

professional practice

LEVEL 3Evidence-based

professional practice

Figure 2. Levels of best practice in professional work

The concept of best practice refers to any experience, guided by principles, objectives and appropriate procedures, which has yielded positive results, demonstrating its effectiveness and usefulness in a specific context

the individual and is converted into sharedknowledge that can be further transmitted toother areas of work and other organisations.However,tobetterdisseminatethesepractices,itisessentialthatprofessionalsshareaconceptualframework (such as that of positive parenting)aswellasaconsistent,commonvocabularythatallowsthemtoexpressandsharetheprocessesexperienced while carrying out these bestpractices.

Level3coversevidence-basedpracticeandisthemostdifficulttoachieve,especiallyinthedomain

ofsocialsciencesand,inparticular,inworkwithfamilies,asitrequiresadvanceddevelopmentofthese sciences to enable the creationof abodyofappliedscientificknowledge.Evidence-basedpracticethereforerequirestranslatingtheresults

26

of research into practical applications, makingaccessible summaries of these results availableto professionals, and then disseminating andsharing them so that they can constitute aninformed practice. For example, in medicine,informedpracticerequiressystematicandhigh-qualityreviewsoftheeffectsofcertaintreatmentsand therapeutic interventions according to thetypes of disorders, which support professionaldecision-makinginspecificcases.

In this Guide, we will move between Level 2andLevel 3 of best practices to the extent thatwehavereliablescientificevidence thatallowsus to demonstrate, for example, how barrierstotheuseofaservicecanbeeliminated,whichintervention strategies work best with at-riskfamilies, or how we can implement parenteducationprogrammestominimiseattrition.Tothiswewilladdourowncontributionsofagreedprofessionalknowledge,whichhasalsoreachedveryinterestinglevelsofpracticalknowledge.

Of course, not all good research results orprofessional practices will immediately beconsidered evidence-based best practice.For this to happen, other quality standardsmust be added to the mix which go beyond

Inset 3. Characteristics of best professional practice

• It permits a comprehensive view of individuals and their relational context, including potentials and strengths.

• It is suited to families and their situations.

• It is in line with professional values and ethics.

• It provides positive results for a specific objective.

• It is innovative in the given context, whether in the process or the result.

• It has a reproducible effect and can be transferred to other areas.

• It is sustainable within a service.

• It empowers families, professionals and the community.

• It is suited to the service’s economic, legal and organisational context.

• It has an impact on other services.

• It has an impact on family policies.

the proven effectiveness of a practice. Thesestandards take into account the characteristicsand specific needs of the recipient of the bestpractice,theethicalvaluesthatshouldgovernaprofessional’sactions,thecontextinwhichthese

In Level 1, practice is based on received practical knowledge, a professional’s own experience or direct observation of the practice of other professionals in his or her environment

In Level 2, an additional step must be taken, which consists of making the effort of transmitting practices amongst professionals until the conditions are created to arrive at an agreement or consensus

practices are applied and their positive impactontheserviceasawholeandonthecommunity.Inset 3 summarises the characteristics of best

27

Inset 4. Professional competences for work with families

Building the professional context• Disciplinary knowledge

• Characteristics and needs of the population to be worked with

• Reference culture

• Legal context

• Professional role

Evaluation and intervention procedures• Professional models and approaches

• Tools and protocols

• Intervention programmes

• Designs for evaluation and dissemination of results

Action planning and management• Identification of needs, planning, decision-

making and implementation of strategies for action

• Working within the organisation on the culture of evaluation, ongoing training, innovation and institutional change processes

• Moving within the organisation toward coordination with other collaborating domains

Interpersonal relationships• Respect/dignity

• Sensitivity/availability

• Comprehension/empathy

• Communication/support

• Warmth/sympathy

• Flexibility/creativity

• Negotiation/mediation

• Stress management/tolerance

professional practice based on Levels 2 and 3thatwehavetakenintoaccountinthisGuide.

The concept of best professional practice isclosely linked to the identificationandanalysisofprofessionalcompetence.Indeed,professionalcompetenceandgoodpracticearetwoconceptsthat enable and strengthen each other so thatone is not fully possible without the other.These professional competences can be broken

down intoseveraldimensions thatallowfor, inturn, the successful positive adaptation to theservice, appropriate professional knowledge ofevaluation and family intervention procedures,theability toplanandmanagetheprofessionaltaskand,finally,asetofpersonalattitudesandvaluesthatenableappropriateworkwithfamiliesand strengthen the processes of collaborationwiththem(Inset4).

Inshort,thebestpracticesincludedinthisGuidebringtogetherappliedscientificfindingsandtheprofessionalknowledgeresultingfromconsensusachievedthroughpractice,whichareadaptedtospecific individuals, families and communitiesandappliedwithinthedeontologicalframeworkof professional practices and the legal,organisationalandcommunitycontextthatgivesthemmeaningandlegitimacy.

Level 3 covers evidence-based practice and is the most difficult to achieve, as it requires advanced development of these sciences to enable the creation of a body of applied scientific knowledge

Objectives of this Guide and fields of application

4

29

The overall objective of the Best PracticeGuide is: To incorporate the positive parentingapproach into family support services tostrengtheninnovationandqualityimprovementprocesses by changing organisational culturesandprofessionalpractices.

This overall objective is clarified andcomplementedbythefollowingspecificaims:

•To identify best professional practices inpositiveparenting.

•To develop a protocol for analysing bestprofessionalpractices.

•To disseminate best practices in positiveparenting by promoting training and theexchangeofexperiences.

•To facilitate the identification and promotionofcompetencesamongsttheprofessionalswhoworkwithfamilies.

•Topromotechannelsforcollaborationbetweenpolicymakers,professionalsandresearchers.

Ascanbeseeninitsspecificobjectives,thisGuideaimstobeatoolforidentifyingbestpracticesinpositive parenting, which can then be used tocreateaprotocolthatwillfacilitatereflectionintherespectiveservicesandinthosepoliciesthatarekeytoensuringqualityinterventions.Weareconvincedthatusingthisprotocoltoevaluateaservice, programme or resource constitutes anopportunity to generate a process of internal,participatoryandsharedtraining.Whatistrulyimportantinthisprocessmaynotbesomuchtheresultingimprovement-asimportantasthatmaybe -as theoverallprocessof realparticipation,of personal and collective strengtheningwherepowerful agreements and alliances can begenerated that lead to excellence. In the samesense, this Guide can serve as an instrumentfor promoting the proper transmission of bestpracticesbyfosteringtheuseofasharedlanguagethat is understandable by professionals with

diverse disciplinary profiles and who work invariousservices.Thedescriptionofbestpracticesconstitutes a clear and effective step towardidentifying the competences thatwill allow forthesepractices tobedeployed,and this in turnmay facilitate training for the professionalsinquestion. Finally, thisGuide canbe a reasonto cultivate very close collaboration channelsbetweenexperts, researchersandprofessionalsso that they can continue to incorporate thefindings and professional knowledge acquiredwithinthepositiveparentingapproachtoensuretheyhavethedesiredimpactonfamilypolicies.

This Guide is intended for use by all relevantservicesandprofessionalswhoworkintheareasof Social Services, Education, Health, Justice,or any other area where advice, guidance,intervention or support is provided to families.ThisGuideaimstobeequallyapplicabletopublicservices for families, professional associationsand foundations, NGOs, and private serviceproviders,tonamejustafewexamples.Assuch,theterm“professional”isusedheretorefertoalltechnicalstaff,whatevertheirroleintheservice,and includes coordinators. It is essential thattheirpointofviewbeconsidered,sincesomeofthebestpracticeshavetodowithorganisationalaspects of the service, while others refer tothe concrete processes of the professional’sinteractionwiththepeopleorfamiliesusingtheservice.

ThisGuidealsorecommendsthatfamiliesusingthe services be involved in the process, hencetheimportanceofdisseminationandawarenessraising among families. It is also important toraiseawarenessamongthegeneralpublic,sothatthey can better understand the improvementsbeingmadetotheservices,andsothattheyareawareoftheirownrightsandobligations.Finally,thisGuideismeantforpolicymakersatdifferentlevelsoftheadministrationwhoareresponsibleforfamilypolicy,as theircontributioniskeytoensuringthatthebestpracticesdescribedinthisGuidecanbeimplemented.

Using the Guide as a resource for evaluatingprogrammes and services

5

31

This Guide is an invaluable tool for evaluatingthe conditions in a given service and assessingthe suitability and relevance of professionalactions, whether they are framed in a formalprogrammecontextornot.Thisevaluationmaybeconductedbytheserviceinquestionitself,ormaybecarriedoutbyotherinstitutionswiththerelevantexperience(suchasuniversities)actingas external partners. With this in mind, thefollowing describes some, but not all, possibleusesofthisGuide.

In the first place, since professional practice isusually carried out in the context of a service,action or resource, this Guide can be used toanalyse which characteristics must be fulfilledand the extent to which they adequatelysupportthefamilieswhilefollowingthepositive

partners (through programmes, resources orother actions). In this respect, it highlights anumber of evidence-based aspects that can beusedtoensureprogrammequality.Forexample,Inset 5 lists the features of parenting supportprogrammesthatensurethebestresults.

This Guide can also be used to conductcomparative evaluations of different proposalsfor programmes or resources and assist in thedecision as towhether they shouldbe adoptedbytheserviceornot.Allthisispossiblebecauseit provides quantifiable indicators that can beused to ensure any evaluation is objective. Inanycase,evaluationsshouldhelpfacilitateandshapethechangeprocess,aswillbeseeninthefollowingsections.

When using this Guide, it is essential thatprofessionals and programme or servicecoordinatorskeepanopenmindwhenlaunchingany evaluation process intended to improvetheir work. As often happens in innovationprocesses,itisreasonabletoassumethatbarrierswillbeencounteredwhenthedecisionis takentouse theGuide.Tohelpusersunderstandandovercome resistance to change, the followinginsetliststhebarriersthatmayhindertheuseoftheGuideinprogrammesandservices,aswellaspossibleways toovercomethesebarriers (Inset

This Guide can also be used to conduct comparative evaluations of different proposals for programmes or resources and assist in the decision as to whether they should be adopted by the service or not

This Guide is an invaluable tool for evaluating the conditions in a given service and assessing the suitability and relevance of professional actions, whether they are framed in a formal programme context or not

parenting approach. Second, professionalactionsincludereceivingandassessingfamilies,and intervening where necessary. A largepart of thisGuide therefore is spent looking atbest practices related to these actions. Third,a considerable proportion of family supportresources are channelled through programmesintended to support positive parenting. TheGuide may therefore serve to help identifythe best professional practices to be applied insuchprogrammes.Fourth,theGuidecanalsobeused toevaluate thequalityofservicesalreadybeing provided to citizens by existing external

6).Someofthesesolutionswillrequirenotone-offactions,butjointactionstargetingtheentireservice.

Inset 5. Characteristics that most improve the effectiveness of parenting support programmes

• They take a preventive approach that is aimed at strengthening a family’s abilities.

• They specify their target audience.

• They identify the needs of a family and its members, both before and during programme participation.

• They are based on scientifically proven theories and experiential methodology.

• They offer appropriate training for the professionals involved.

• They ensure implementation quality (e.g. faithful application of the programme, proper group access and creation, participant attendance, ideal programme duration).

• They enjoy institutional support that ensures their continuity.

• They present results demonstrating their positive impact on the target group, the service and the community.

Whenthesebarriersareovercome,theemphasison the development of best practices ends uphaving a galvanising effect on the service, asit fosters the dissemination of innovation andcreativityandstimulatesprocessesofexcellenceand ongoing improvement. Furthermore, bestpractices represent an opportunity to lookbeyondone’sdailyframeworkofaction,allowingpractitioners to learn from past mistakes andlooktothefuture.

Whenprofessionalsandservicesareguidedbybest practices, confidence goes up both amongthe general public and among partners andentities involved in the improvement process.Asbestpracticesaremeanttobedisseminated,this reduces gaps between domains, servicesand organisations and fosters exchange basedon facts and shared practices. Best practicestherefore facilitate the coordination of actionswith other involved partners and institutionalstakeholdersandpromotenetworking.

32

When using this Guide, it is essential that professionals and programme or service coordinators maintain an open mind when launching any evaluation process intended to improve their work

When these barriers are overcome, the emphasis on the development of best practices ends up having a galvanising effect on the service, as it fosters the dissemination of innovation and creativity and stimulates processes of excellence and ongoing improvement

• Lack of agreed conceptual framework and common language; no legal framework or assignation of responsibilities.

• Staff overworked, with little time to reflect on practice.

• No external incentives to launch a process of innovation.

• Lack of openness, distrust toward other institutions or services with more of a history in innovation.

• Scepticism about the idea that such situation-specific knowledge can be evaluated, transferred and applied across the board.

• Few communication channels for discussing practice between professionals in different services.

• Little tradition in the evidence-based practice movement in the domain of social work with families and minors.

• Limited progress in the culture of service quality as it is not often considered in family policy.

• Joint adoption of the positive parenting analytical framework, legal recognition and assignation of responsibilities.

• Setting aside time for reflection on and critical discussion of practices in the service.

• Putting effort into identifying the best practices that already exist within and around the service.

• Creating links with universities or other research or innovation entities.

• Fostering evaluation of professional practice, and identifying objective indicators for this.

• Creating scenarios and networks for dissemination of best practices between professionals.

• Defining agreed objectives for improving practices, which will be promoted and incentivised within the service.

• Assessing the promotion of best professional practices in national, regional and local policies to support the family.

Barriers Actions to overcome them

Inset 6. Barriers to best practices, and actions to overcome them

33

Structure of theBest Practices Protocol

6

35

ThemaintoolinthisGuideistheBestPracticesProtocol, which examines the positiveparenting-related aspects of professional workin family support services that may be subjectto improvement. As such, this Protocol is notintendedtocontainanexhaustivelistingoftheentirerealmofpossibleaspectstobeconsidered;rather, it aims to focus on those particularlyrelevantaspectsthatallowustoaddresswhetherthe professionals and services in question arefollowingbestpracticesinlinewiththeprinciplesunderlyingthepositiveparentingapproach.

TheProtocolisstructuredalongthreeintegratedlevels that progress from the general to thespecific: Content domains, Best practices andIndicators(seeFigure3).

On the first level, possible improvements toprofessional practices and to the service areexploredinthreeclearlyinterconnectedcontentdomains:

a. Characteristics of family support servicesandorganisationalculture;

b. The process of professional work withfamilies;and

c. The use of evidence-based programmesto support families. These three domainsconstitute the main pillars of the Protocol’scontentaroundwhichpossibleimprovementsareorganised(Figure4).

Domain A: Characteristics of family support services and organisational culture.

Thisdomainisrelatedtothreeaspects:

a. A description of the service (e.g. objectives,Citizens’Charter,visibilityanddissemination,familyparticipation);

b. The service’s capacity for prevention andpromotion (e.g. proactive nature, universalaccess,breadthoffamilyprofiles,preventionandpromotionactivities);and

Figure 3. Integrated structure of the Best Practices Protocol

Best practices

Content domains

Indicators

Figure 4. Content domains making up the Best Practices Protocol

The use of evidence-based programmes to support families

The process of professional work with families

Characteristics of family support services and organisational culture

c. How the service is organised (e.g.professionals’ schedules, spaces available,professionals’ stability, outsourced services,ongoingtrainingopportunities and coordi-nationbetweenservices).

Domain B: The process of professional work with families.

This domain includes the development ofactivities related to those aspects of the familysupportprocessinwhichthepositiveparentingapproach is most noticeable in the differentdomains of its application: educational, social,health and judicial. For example, one cross-cutting aspect of work with families thatis key to the positive parenting approachinvolves analysing whether the family is trulyparticipating in theprocess.Objectives change,asdotheprepositionsused:wenolongerwork“FOR”thefamilybut“WITH”thefamily.InthisdomainoftheGuide,threeaspectsareexamined:

a. Howfamiliesarereceivedwhentheyvisittheservice;

b. The evaluation of the family and parentingsituation and the referral (e.g. reception,alliance and collaboration, referrals,evaluationprocess);and

c. The family intervention process (e.g.collaboration in the intervention process,promotionofstrengthsandabilities,typesofintervention,timespent,integratedwork).

Domain C: The use of evidence-based programmes to support families.

This domain refers to the development ofactivities related to the use of in-serviceprogrammes based on the positive parentingapproach,whichhavetheobjectiveoffosteringstrengthsandbuildingcapacities,andareaimedat both parents and children (e.g. structureof the programme: fundamentals, objectives,recipients, contents, materials and resources,implementation and evaluation). It addressesall those aspects that allowaprogramme to bedefinedasevidence-basedandensureitsproperimplementationintheservice.

ForeachofthethreedomainslistedinFigure4,aseriesofbestpracticesaredefinedinmoredetail,whichdescribethecharacteristicsoftheservice

thatmeet the real needs of families, form partof a comprehensive family support approachor ensure the continuity of a programme’sresources. These characteristics also includea proposal for action by the professional or awayofimplementingprogrammesfromvariousdomains that are inspired by the positiveparenting approach.Of course, itmust be keptinmindthattheconceptofprofessional“action”is very broad and does not merely refer tobehaviours.Abestpracticemayconsistofavalue(e.g.treatingthepersonwhocomestotheservicewithdignityandrespect),anattitude(e.g.relyingon the abilities of the family), a decision (e.g.makingmixedgroupsofat-riskandnormalisedfamilies in the programmes), or amore or lessconcreteactionguideline(e.g.helpingthefamilyto discover its strengths and the opportunitiesoffered by its environments, increasing thoseopportunitiestoofferabetterresponsetofamilyreconciliation needs, from the perspectives ofgenderequalityandfamilydiversity).

The meaning of each best practice is clarifiedthroughalistofquestionsthatinvitethereadertoengageinanin-depthanalysisofthepracticein question. Thus, these questions encouragereflection on best practice and expose existingideas, while allowing for an accurate analysisof theaspect or situation towhich thepracticerefers in the realityofprofessional and servicework.Attheendofeachlistofquestions,readersaregiventheopportunitytoaddmorequestionsrelated to the specific situation that can helpclarifythebestpracticeevenfurther.

For each of the best practices, indicators areproposed that contain even more specificwording that can help detect the presence orabsenceofthispracticeinprofessionalorservicework.Theaimhereistocapturethoseobservableelementsthatcanhelpdeterminewithaccuracywhetherthisbestpracticeispresentornot.Thebestpracticesandindicatorshavebeencarefullyselectedtospurreflectiononimportantareasoftheserviceorprofessionalworkthatarerelatedtothepositiveparentingapproach.Theindicatorsallow for amuchmore accurate description of

36

Inset 7. Example of a best practice, the questions that help clarify its meaning and the indicators and assessment scale used to evaluate its presence

the contents of the best practices, avoiding theillusionoffalserecognitionofapracticewheninrealityitisnotcarriedoutinthetermsintended.

The indicators are evaluated on a scale of 1 to4 (Never, Rarely, Often and Always) to betternuancetheresponses.Thisscalewill inevitablyrepresent a subjective assessment, but at thesame time it allows us to avoid the categoricaldichotomyimplicitina“yes”or“no”assessmentof the presence of a best practice. “Never”means that the indicator is not observed inany way in the service, professional work or

ASSESSMENT SCALE FOR EACH INDICATOR: N. NEVER / R. RARELY / O. OFTEN / A. ALWAYSRespond by placing an X in the applicable box.

programmes. “Rarely”means that the indicatoris not usually present but that there are somedoubts as to whether it may occasionally beobserved. “Often” means that the indicator isobservedwithconsiderablefrequency,althoughtherearesomedoubtsastowhetheritisalwayspresent. “Always” means that the indicator isalways observed. Inset 7 shows an example ofa best practice, with its related questions andindicators, under Domain A “Characteristicsof family support services and organisationalculture”.

37

BEST PRACTICE

QUESTIONS INDICATORS N R O A

BP1. FRAME THE SERVICE’S OBJECTIVES FROM THE STANDPOINT OF DEVELOP-MENTAL RIGHTS AND NEEDS IN CHILDHOOD AND ADOLESCENCE

• Are the rights and needs of children, adolescents and families taken into account in the service provision?

• Is the fact that the individuals visiting the service are citizens in their own right taken into account?

• Is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child respected?

Other...

1. The service takes into account the best interests of the child and respects the developmental needs of children and adolescents when taking action.

2. Children, adolescents and family members are recognised as citizens with rights that must be respected.

3. Emphasis is placed on the obligation of mothers, fathers and other parent figures to engage in positive parenting of the children.

4. Special emphasis is placed on the right of children and adolescents to be heard, to form their own opinions and to participate in the matters that affect them.

5. Efforts are made to ensure that users of the service are aware of their rights and obligations.

6. Activities are organised to raise awareness amongst professionals and the community of the rights of children and adolescents.

7. The service fosters relationships based on respect for family, cultural, socio-economic and gender diversity.

Applying the Protocol: an opportunityfor change

7

39

Theveryprocessofapplying theBestPracticesProtocol contributes to developing innovationand improving service quality. Its applicationrequires,directlyor indirectly, the involvementofall thoseindividualswhoareinvolvedintheservice and is based on their knowledge andexperience.Thus,whilemostoftheresponsibilitylieswiththeprofessionalsworkingintheservice,atsomepointinformationwillhavetobeelicitedfromthefamiliesvisitingtheservices,toensurethat theirviewson theaspects thatmostaffectthemwill beheard.We see theevaluationasacollaborativeprocessinwhichthevoicesofallofthepartners involved ina service’s functioningshouldbeheard,includingthoseofthefamiliesthemselves. This Guide stresses the needs forservicestolistento,compile,analyseandmanageasappropriatethedemandsmade,inwhicheverform,bythefamiliestheyworkwitheveryday.

When applying this Guide, other services canalsobebroughtonboard,assomeofthepracticesand indicators referred tohere involvemattersofsharedresponsibilitythatmustbecoordinatedwith other services. In addition, it is advisablethatusersreceivetrainingintheuseoftheGuideandontheapplicationoftheProtocolandeven,ifpossible,work incollaborationwith teamsofexperts from universities or other institutionsthat can accompany and advise the servicesthroughouttheprocess.TrainingintheuseoftheGuide can also be offered through ProfessionalAssociations, thus allowing members tofamiliarise themselves with the positiveparenting approach, so that they can betteridentifyandassessthebestpracticesassociatedwiththisapproach.

TheinitiativefortheapplicationoftheProtocolcan come either from the services themselvesor from intersectoral or interinstitutionalcoordinating bodies to promote a commonlanguageandtheexchangeofbestpractices,aswellastosharetheexperiencesofimprovementin services and promote networking. Similarly,

the application of the Guide and the resultingimprovementplanmaybeusedasaprerequisiteforthepublicfundingofaservice,programmeorresource,orbeconsideredasarelevantadditionalcredit in a competition for the concession of

The application of the Best Practices Protocol requires, directly or indirectly, the involvement of all those individuals who are involved in the service and is based on their knowledge and experience

services,programmesorresources. Inanycase,the application of the Protocol is aworthwhileundertaking in itself, as it entails a formativeevaluation that can help launch or promote aprocess of improvement of programmes andservices.

The Protocol does not attempt to evaluatethe competences of a single professional inparticular, but rather aims to find ways tosupport the advancement of an entire serviceand its professionals. Such progress does notoccurinavacuum,butrathertakesplacewithina rich interpersonal environmentwith a broadmixofingredients.Progressthusarisesfromtheinterplayofthevalues,emotions,knowledgeandactions of all those involved in the process, aswellasfromcarefulreflectionandanalysisandajointplanningprocessthatinvolvesallparties.Therefore, it is necessary to have professionalson board, and to have the support of policymakers willing to enter into the evaluationprocess and mobilise attitudes favourable tochange(rememberthebarrierstoinnovationandthepossiblesolutionsindicatedinInset6).Inthisrespect,servicecoordinatorsshouldarrangefortimeandspacetobededicatedtotheprocessandthemselves participate actively in applying the

Protocol.NotallaspectsoftheProtocolneedtobeconsideredatonce;rather,itsimplementationcanbephasedin.Itispossiblethatthenatureofthe service is such that only part of the Guideneedstobeapplied.Inanycase,it isimportantthatthoseresponsiblefortheservicesupporttheprocessandareawareoftheeffortsbeingmadetolaunchorpromoteaprocessofimprovementthroughtheapplicationoftheProtocol.

Tofacilitatetheprotocolapplicationprocess,thefollowingdiagramdepictsthestepsthatcouldbetakenwhenworkingwiththeProtocoltoensureitisaforceforchange(Figure5).

Someconsiderationsarepresentedbelowaboutwhateachphasemightentail,keeping inmindthat-providedtheobjectivesforeachphasearemet-thereismuchroomformanoeuvreheretoallowforcreativityandflexibility inthedesignandimplementationofeachphase.

Phase 1: Begin work with the Protocol

The objective of this phase is to create theconditions necessary to begin the process,motivate colleagues to participate, and set thestage for a productive and efficient evaluation.It all starts with the setup of a small group ofindividuals who will steer and facilitate the

evaluation process. This group of facilitatorsshould include at least one seniorprofessional,onejuniorcolleagueandtheservicecoordinator.This group shouldalso enjoyofficial support toensureitsstabilityandcontinuity.

40

Figure 5. Diagram of the protocol application process

Phase 1:Begin work with

the Protocol

Phase 2:Analyse the service

and professional actions

Phase 3:Improvement

plan

Phase 5:Review

progress

Phase 4:Support implementation of

the improvement plan

The Protocol does not attempt to evaluate the competences of a single professional in particular,but rather aims to find ways to support the advancement of an entire service and its professionals

Theprocesswillcertainlybemorerobustifitisconductedinconjunctionwithexistingconcernsaboutchangeprocessesorplanstoimprovetheservice.

ItisnotamatterofimmediatelystartingtofillouttheProtocolbutofactivatingpreviousknowledgeand reflections that will motivate and preparetheserviceforitsuse.Thegroupmembersshouldtherefore inform other service staff of the needto apply the Protocol and explain to them itsobjectives and materials. It is also important toconductanexercisethatwillencouragereflectionon how much is known about the positiveparentingapproachandtodisseminatethethree

documents referred to in the introduction or,better still, design a training plan around them.Ananalysis shouldalsobemade thatexamines,among other things, any existing improvementandinnovationprocessesintheservice,theactualtimespentreflectingonpracticesandthedegreeofsatisfactionwiththeserviceamongprofessionalsand families. In this phase, it can be helpful tocontactotherserviceswheretheProtocol isalsobeingapplied to exchangefirst impressions andspurmotivation.Finally,aspreviouslyindicated,itwouldbeveryusefultocallonexternalexpertsfor support and accompaniment throughout theprocess(Figure6).

Phase 2: Analyse the service and professional actions

The objective of this phase is to apply theProtocol.Forthis,thegroupoffacilitatorsshouldfirst familiarise itself with its structure: theContentdomains,Bestpractices,QuestionsandIndicators. It is essential to understand one’sown situation in each content domain beforeconsidering the best practices presented in theProtocol. Everything sounds reasonable and itmayseemthateverythingisalreadybeingdonein the service, but opinions expressed before

respondingtotheprotocolmayshowthatthisisnotactuallythecase.

Once this is done, the group of facilitatorscan then respond in an orderly fashion to thequestions intheProtocol,keeping inmindthat,as theygothroughthebestpractices,questionsand indicators, together with prior knowledgeand the previously completed analysis, newissuesmaycomeupthathadnotbeenpreviouslyconsidered. If they are deemed relevant, theycanbeaddedasnewquestionsattheendofeachlistofquestionsproposedintheProtocol.

Once the Protocol has been completed, otherservicememberscanbeconsultedtoascertainwhethertheyagreewiththeassessmentsmade

41

Figure 6. Structure of participation in the Protocol completion process

Group of facilitators

Service professionals

Service users

Other services

External consultants

The objective of this phase is to apply the Protocol. For this, the group of facilitators should first familiarise itself with its structure

The group of facilitators can then respond in an orderly fashion to the questions in the Protocol, keeping in mind that new issues may come up that had not been previously considered

bythegroupoffacilitators.Onceagain,itshouldbe pointed out that families using the serviceshouldparticipateinsomeoftheprotocolfieldswheretheirviewsmaybeconsideredrelevant.It is also very useful to collaboratewith otherservicesandexternalconsultantswhomaybeable to contribute to this process, as shown inFigure6.

Phase 3: Draft the improvement plan

In the third phase of the Protocol process, thegroupoffacilitatorsneedstocarryouttwotasks.First,theyneedtorecogniseandstrengthenthepresenceintheserviceofthosebestpracticesandindicatorsthatweredeterminedtobefulfilledinthe application of the Protocol, to ensure theywillbemaintained.Thisexercisealsoconstitutespositive reinforcement for the professionalsworking in the service. The second task is todevelop an improvement plan addressingthose best practices and indicators where newquestions arose and/or which did not receive

When setting priorities for improvement, thegroup of facilitators should take into accountthe views of the service’s professionals and

Figure 7. Elements of the improvement plan that must be defined for each priority

Priority Time required

Resources to be used

Training needs

How progress will be assessed

The first task is to recognise and strengthen the presence in the service of those best practices and indicators that were determined to be fulfilled in the application of the Protocol, to ensure they will be maintained

positive assessments. These must be organisedand prioritised so that a feasible improvementplancanbedrafted.

The second task is to develop an improvement plan addressing those best practices and indicators where new questions arose and/or which did not receive positive assessments

the opinions of its families. The priorities thusselected will vary considerably in scope andin terms of the time and resources required toimplementthem.Amixofshort-andlong-termpriorities should be established. It should bepossibletomakeprogressonsomeprioritiesinafewshortweeksormonths,anditisalsopossibleto launch proposals or support initiatives thatdonotrequiremajor investments toprovideaneffectiveresponsetothereconciliationneedsoffamiliesinthedomainofproximity.

Getting policy makers involved in thesepossibleimprovementsiskey,astheseareoftendecisionsthataretheirresponsibility.However,in some cases more time may be needed to

42

makeimprovements-forexample,whenit isaquestionofreorganisingworkspacesorchangingorganisational cultures, conceptual models orstrategiesforworkingwithfamilies.Organisingthe goals into short-, medium- and long-termobjectivesisagoodwaytoensureanambitiousprojectwillbecompletedsuccessfully.

Many of the changes identified as prioritiesmay require material and/or human resourcesto be employed to achieve certain actions. Forthis reason, it is important tohavea clear ideaoftheresourcesavailabletotheserviceandthecommunity, and to consider ways to optimisetheiruse thatwill facilitate their application totheimprovementplan.Thegroupoffacilitatorsshouldalsodefinethetrainingneedsidentifiedintheprocess,assomeofthechangesmayrequireextra ongoing training efforts in specific areas.Finally, the procedures for assessing progressshould be defined for each priority, and therequisite evaluation criteria should be spelledout(Figure7).

Once the group of facilitators has developeditsproposal foran improvementplan, it shouldnegotiatethedetailswiththeotherprofessionalsand arrange for the appropriate dissemination

facilitatorsisresponsibleformonitoringprogressineachpriorityarea.Ofcourse,iftheprocessisfunctioningproperly, all of themembersof theserviceshouldbecomeinvolvedandparticipateactively in implementing and evaluating theplan.

Phase 4: Support implementation of the improvement plan

The fourth phase in the process involvesimplementingtheplanforchangeineachofthepriorities identified.Maintaining improvementsandguaranteeingcontinuityforspecificprojectsand/orservicesisaprerequisiteforensuringtheireffectiveness. The review of the improvementprocess should lead the group of facilitatorsand other professionals to pay more attentiontowhatisgoingoninagivenservice.Thisnew

When setting priorities for improvement, the group of facilitators should take into account the views of the service’s professionals and the opinions of its families

of the plan so that everyone is aware of whatit contains. It is possible that the improvementplan results in the need for changes thatextend beyond the scope of responsibility oftheprofessionals involved,as theymayrequiredecisions to be taken by family policy makersat different government levels. The group of

43

The fourth phase in the process involves implementing the plan for change in each of the priorities identified. Maintaining improvements and guaranteeing continuity for specific projects and/or services is a prerequisite for ensuring their effectiveness

awarenessofwhatishappeninginaservice,andofwhat ischangingandwhat isnot, is in itselfasignofsuccess.Itshowsthatprofessionalsarefocused on their task and capable of analysingitinsideandout.Onceagain,theviewsofthosewhousetheservicecanproveextremelyusefulin perceiving what