Screening and Assessment Tools for Child Welfare

Family Assessment Measure III (FAM-III) has received the Assessment Rating of "A - Reliability and Validity Demonstrated" based on the published, peer-reviewed research available. The assessment must have 2 or more published, peer-reviewed studies that demonstrated that the measure is reliable and valid. For more information on all of the Assessment Ratings, please click here.

Skinner, H. A., Steinhauer, P. D., & Santa-Barbara, J. (1983). The Family Assessment Measure. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 2(2), 91-105.

Sample:
Participants: 475 families participating in Toronto-based health and social service settings.
Race/Ethnicity: Not given

Summary:
Families in this study were divided into "Problem" and "Non-Problem" families. Problem families currently had one or more family member receiving treatment for psychiatric problems, substance abuse, school, or major legal problems. Family members who were at least 10 years old completed the FAM. The three subscales were found to have good internal reliability for both adult and child participants. The diagnostic power of the scale was assessed by comparing Problem and Non-Problem families. The FAM successfully distinguished between groups, with Problem families having significantly different scores on role performance and involvement and Non-Problem families scoring higher in the areas of Social Desirability and Denial.

Jacob, T. (1995). The role of time frame in the assessment of family functioning. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21(3), 281-288.

Sample:
Participants: Families with at least one adolescent between 12 and 18, recruited from newspaper advertisements.
Race/Ethnicity: 90% White

Summary:
Families in this study completed the Family Environment Scale (FES), the FAM, and the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES-II). Scales were completed more than once and the instructions regarding time frame were varied. For example, at one assessment a participant might be asked to describe their family "in general" and at another assessment to describe them "during the past week." All three assessments showed good test-retest reliability for parents and children and high positive correlations between the different time-frame instruction conditions. However, most subscales did show differences in overall scores across the two instruction conditions. The exception was the FAM which did not show significant time-frame instruction effects. The author suggests that this may be due to a greater emphasis on general characteristics versus specific behaviors for the FAM, relative to the other two measures.