Establishing CASA as an Evidence-Based Practice

Abstract

In this article the authors examine the evidentiary status of the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program through a review of current research findings and a critical analysis of the study methodologies used to produce those findings. Due to the equivocal research findings and widespread methodological weaknesses (most notably selection bias) in the literature base, it is determined that there is not currently enough evidence to establish CASA as an evidence-based practice. In spite of the challenges to the feasibility of such research, a future research agenda is suggested that calls for the execution of large randomized controlled trials in order to produce findings that will inform a deeper understanding of CASA effectiveness in improving child outcomes.

Keywords:

• CASA
• Court Appointed Special Advocates
• child welfare
• foster care

Notes

*Selection criteria: This table only includes studies that: (a) used treatment and comparison groups to examine indicators of CASA efficacy, and (b) were available for primary review by the authors. Unpublished studies that could not be obtained by the authors, non-comparison survey data, and purely descriptive reports were among those excluded.