Untitled

Abstract

The predictive validity of the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS) is investigated using the data set generated by the national evaluation of the demonstration service grants funded by the Center for Mental Health Services. Logistic regressions were performed separately for contact with the law and poor school attendance, which were both assessed at 6 months postintake. Other variables included in the model besides the CAFAS total score at intake were age, gender, and family risk factors. The results show that the CAFAS total score at intake was a positive predictor of the likelihood of contact with the law and poor school attendance, even after controlling for age, gender, and risk factors. Furthermore, the CAFAS total score was predictive even after excluding scores on CAFAS subscales, which may have been influenced by absenteeism or delinquency. These findings are consistent with recent research indicating that the CAFAS predicts recidivism in juvenile delinquents.

Effectiveness of Wraparound Versus Case Management for Children and Adolescents: Results of a Randomized Study

“…Subscale scores are summed to produce a total CAFAS scale score ranging from 0–240. Interrater reliability has been found to range from .92 to .96 for the total, and it has shown predictive validity of youth incarceration and hospitalization (Hodges & Kim, 2000). Raters completed self-training reliability exercises and used the full Parent Interview (Hodges, Xue, & Wotring, 2004) to improve reliability.…”

Predicting Youth Improvement in Community-Based Residential Settings with Practices Derived from the Evidence-Base

“…Concurrent validity studies with the CAFAS have also established a relationship between this measure and intensity of care provided, restrictiveness of living settings, contact with the law, juvenile justice involvement (odds ratio = 1.35 to 8.88), social relationship difficulties (odds ratio = 1.43 to 5.71), school-related problems like absenteeism (odds ratio = 1.02 to 5.98), and risky behaviors (odds ratio = 1.20 to 8.38; Hodges & Kim, 2000;Hodges & Wong, 1996).…”

Exploratory two-level analysis of individual- and school-level factors on truant youth emotional/psychological functioning

“…As mentioned, the psychological literature on school absenteeism generally emphasizes school refusers, not truants, suffer from mental health difficulties, since school refusers are thought to be motivated to absenteeism due to mental health issues. But research has found that truant youth also suffer from mental health problems (e.g., Hodges & Kim, 2000; Steinhausen et al, 2008), though the magnitude and nature of emotional problems among truant youths may differ from those among school refusers. Importantly, the data in this study do not indicate that the youths’ school absenteeism was directly related to their mental health problems, only that the youths were truant and possessed mental health problems.…”

“…Hodges and Kim (2000) found mixed results about the association between truancy (youths reported by their parents to attend school 75% or less of the time) and mental health. Their results indicated truant youth did not significantly differ from non-truant youth in their total scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991), an instrument used to assess mental health and antisocial behavior problems.…”

“…Steinhausen et al’s study is limited, however, by the way truancy was defined (affirmative response to one question about cutting class). Similar to Hodges and Kim’s study (2000), the measures of mental health problems were crude composite indicators, preventing examination of specific domains of mental health functioning. Moreover, Steinhausen et al’s study relied on responses to two questions to classify youth as school refusers, truants, or control youth.…”