| Abstract: | The arguments of the Department of Health working party in their publication Assessing Outcomes in Child Care (1992) are reviewed and the proposals in the report compared with the experience of the Community Infant Project (CIP) in Boulder, Colorado. The suggestion that standardized measures are required for comparability of service outcomes is accepted but the working party's decision to advocate a system of schedules which relies upon workers' subjective ratings and the arguments upon which this is based are questioned. The working party's approach is contrasted to that found in the CIP, where standardized outcome measures are employed. Results from the author's research into the outcome of an untreated control group (for the CIP programme) are presented as one example of the benefits of the use of outcome measurement in work with children. The Government should ensure that UK practice benefits from the different approach and philosophy to be found in the US experience. |
