blog
“moving the needle” in child welfare.

November 16, 2009

In the not-for-profit world, it is more and more common to hear funders talk about “moving the needle” toward solving social problems. I started hearing this shortly after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced their goal to eradicate malaria. They unveiled a plan to fund a focused effort designed to eliminate malaria-related death from the earth. The boldness of their plan created international excitement, and the idea of eliminating problems which plague humans was a compelling way to attract collaborative partners and additional funders for the cause.

The benefits of this approach are many. To eliminate a social problem compels a strategic delivery of services. A plan is needed which links 1) a clear goal, with 2) a proven solution, and 3) an effective delivery strategy. This approach compels non-profit providers to have a clear mission and to deliver evidence-based services with measurable results achieving the best cost/benefit of resources. This thinking is healthy and helps create effective approaches to service delivery. It is a movement from “touchy-feely” social services to “strategy-focused” social services.

However, there is a downside to this thinking. Problems arise when the idea of “moving the needle” is not thoughtfully understood or is applied too broadly. It worked well for the Gateses because malaria is a relatively simple problem to address. The cause is clearly identified (infected mosquitoes) and a cure is available (vaccination and treatment drugs).  The solution involves the logistics of getting the cure to those at risk. Fortunately, the results are also clearly measurable (Does the number of malaria-related deaths decrease?).

“Moving the needle” requires deeper thought when applied to more complex social problems, such as child abuse and neglect or family violence. These are complicated problems and are influenced by many factors including housing, employment, education, culture, faith, genetics, parental mental health, addictions, and availability of social support systems – to name a few. Because of this complexity, a single “cure” does not exist. Healing strategies require multi-dimensional interventions, which can be difficult to measure. And yes, some interventions include “touchy-feely” work that is hard to quantify, but critical to nurturing and healing children victimized by abuse or violence.

In child welfare, we sometimes must focus our attention on “moving the needle” for one child at a time. ACH Child and Family Services may not be able to eliminate child abuse in Texas, but we do know measurable and evidence-based practices to help “move the needle” for a child and a family. We know how to help a child learn new, non-violent behaviors so that he can move back home with his family. We know how to provide a safe place to live so a child can concentrate on getting her homework finished rather than on protecting herself from violence. We know how to help adults learn new ways to parent children and break generational cycles of abusive parenting. We know how to connect with our other non-profit partners in the community to help families find housing, jobs, medical services, food, clothing, and transportation. Systemic change is very difficult due to the complexity of these issues, but individual progress can be measured. Individual change does not generate the widespread publicity associated with eliminating malaria, but when we see a family “move their needle” toward becoming a safer and happier home for children, we know we have made a difference.

Thank you for helping us make this difference for children and families in north Texas. These are complex issues worthy of thoughtful discussion and I welcome a conversation with you on this topic. Post your comments and let’s continue the conversation. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on how to continue “moving the needle” for children.