Evaluation of the Mockingbird Programme

Retired Project
Foundations have chosen to retire the planned evaluation of the Mockingbird Programme as it did not achieve sufficient statistical power to conduct the planned impact analyses. Find out more:

Evaluation of the Mockingbird Programme

Summary

This protocol summarises plans for an evaluation of The Fostering Network’s Mockingbird Programme, as part of the Department for Education’s Supporting Families: Investing in Practice programme.

Who, what, why and how?

The Mockingbird programme is delivered by The Fostering Network. It is an innovative method of foster care using the Mockingbird Family Model, which is an extended family model that provides sleepovers and short breaks, peer support, regular joint planning and training, and social activities. The programme aims to improve the stability of fostering placements and strengthens the relationships between carers, children and young people, fostering services and birth families.

The Fostering Network will work with seven new DfE-funded sites, to support the roll-out, implementation and delivery of the Mockingbird programme. We have appointed the Rees Centre at Oxford University to conduct an independent impact evaluation of the model. The Rees Centre’s evaluation aims to assess the impact of the Mockingbird programme on placement stability (as measured by the rate of unplanned placement endings), on foster carer retention (as measured by the rate of de-registration of foster carers), and on changes in wellbeing of children in care (as measured by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire). This evaluation will follow a quasi-experimental design, which plans to use coarsened exact matching and difference-in-difference statistical techniques to compare Mockingbird participants to a matched comparison group.

The Rees centre will also conduct a light-touch process evaluation, to complement the work that The Fostering Network is currently doing to understand more about the implementation of the programme, and will lead on a cost-benefit analysis to focus on any monetisable outcomes.

Research Questions

Primary research questions:

  • Primary impact measures: What is the impact of the Mockingbird programme on placement stability as measured by the rate of unplanned endings?
  • Secondary measures: What is the impact of the Mockingbird programme foster carer retention as measured by the rate of de-registration of foster carers? What is the impact of Mockingbird on changes in the wellbeing of children in care?

Secondary research questions:

  • How does foster carer satisfaction and foster-carer wellbeing change over time through the intervention?
  • How does the child and young person wellbeing change over time for those participating in Mockingbird? How does their satisfaction with the amount of contact with their siblings who are also in foster care seem to be affected by participation in the Mockingbird programme?
  • How many people have participated in Mockingbird (foster carers, children and young people)? What kinds of activities have they participated in?
  • What are the perceived facilitators and enablers to implementing the Mockingbird programme and achieving intended outcomes?
  • What is the return on investment associated with the Mockingbird programme for monetisable outcomes?

Evaluation partners

Rees Centre

Due Date

This project is due to be completed by May 2023.
SHARE

Research protocol

Download

Related Projects

Cost ratings:

Rated 1: Set up and delivery is low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.

Rated 2: Set up and delivery is medium-low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.

Rated 3: Set up and delivery is medium cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.

Rated 4: Set up and delivery is medium-high cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.

Rating 5: Set up and delivery is high cost. Equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.

Set up and delivery cost is not applicable, not available, or has not been calculated.

Click here for more information.

Child Outcomes:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Evidence ratings:

Rated 2: Has preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome from a quantitative impact study, but there is not yet evidence of causal impact.

Rated 2+: Meets the level 2 rating and the best available evidence is based on a study which is more rigorous than a level 2 standard but does not meet the level 3 standard.

Rated 3: Has evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous study.

Rated 3+: Meets the level 3 rating and has evidence from other studies with a comparison group at level 2 or higher.

Rated 4: Has evidence of a long-term positive impact through at least two rigorous studies.

Rated 4+: Meets the level 4 rating and has at least a third study contributing to the Level 4 rating, with at least one of the studies conducted independently of the intervention provider.

Rating has a *: The evidence base includes mixed findings i.e., studies suggesting positive impact alongside studies, which on balance, indicate no effect or negative impact.

Click here for more information.