Volume 25, Issue 99 (1-2026)
refahj 2026, 25(99): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.USWR.1397.080
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Takaffoli M, Shati M, Vameghi M, Mousavi M T, Arshi M. (2026). Developing Indicators for Evaluating the Child Welfare System in Iran according to the Logical Model. refahj. 25(99), : 2 doi:10.32598/refahj.25.99.2097.5
URL: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-4518-en.html
URL: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-4518-en.html
Developing Indicators for Evaluating the Child Welfare System in Iran according to the Logical Model
Keywords: adolescents, At-risk children, children, child welfare, child protection, evaluation, indicator, Iran
Full-Text [PDF 520 kb]
(186 Downloads)
| Abstract (HTML) (496 Views)
Full-Text: (36 Views)
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Throughout history, perceptions of children and childhood have evolved, as have the roles of families and societies in ensuring appropriate care, upbringing, and support for children. The adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) explicitly recognized the critical responsibility of governments to protect and support children. Many countries now provide a range of services, including education, healthcare, and targeted support for at-risk children, within the framework of child welfare systems. In some contexts, these systems feature structured, evidence-based processes for policymaking and service delivery aimed at vulnerable populations.
In recent decades, there has been growing attention to evaluating child welfare systems using multi-dimensional indicators, driven by the need to enhance service effectiveness and efficiency. Policymakers, planners, and service providers seek programs that are both effective and cost-efficient. Consequently, various indicators have been developed to evaluate child welfare systems across multiple domains.
In Iran, despite numerous child-related laws and the existence of multiple agencies providing services for at-risk children, no formally coordinated system currently exists. Moreover, there is no integrated mechanism to monitor and evaluate policies and services. Some studies have described Iran’s child welfare system using international definitions, highlighting the fragmentation in policymaking and service delivery and emphasizing the need for a systematic, unified approach. Given the importance of optimizing limited resources, developing indicators to measure and evaluate Iran’s child welfare system is essential to facilitate comparisons of policy and service outcomes over time and among different groups of vulnerable children.
Method
This study aimed to develop a comprehensive set of evaluation indicators for Iran’s child welfare system. Initially, indicators were extracted and constructed based on a review of both domestic and international sources. The indicators were categorized into four domains: inputs (74 indicators), processes (17 indicators), outputs (53 indicators), and outcomes (71 indicators).
Content validity—including Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI), Scale-Content Validity Index (S-CVI), and overall comprehensiveness—was assessed through expert input. Inter-rater agreement was measured prior to the content validity assessment. The study population comprised academic experts, policymakers, planners, and managers involved in child welfare services, particularly for at-risk children, across governmental, public, and non-governmental organizations. A total of 33 participants were purposively selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, with 20 experts completing the checklist for analysis.
Findings
The evaluation indicators for Iran’s child welfare system were finalized in four categories: inputs (74 indicators), processes (17 indicators), outputs (53 indicators), and outcomes (71 indicators).
Inputs comprised five main domains: budget and financial resources; human resources; legal, executive infrastructure; service users; and service access.
Processes included three main domains: delivering services based on guidelines and standards, registration and documentation of cases, timely provision of services, and other aspects of interventions based on guidelines and standards.
Outputs consisted of two main domains: service coverage, and service user satisfaction.
Outcomes were organized into five main domain: public awareness about child maltreatment prevention and intervention; the well-being of at-risk children in support of child protection services; empowerment of the families of at-risk children in support of child protection services; readiness for discharge or independence of at-risk children in support of child protection services; and empowerment of young people in support of child protection services.
Discussion
Comparison with international indicators demonstrates alignment between the proposed Iranian indicators and those used in countries adopting a child protection approach, such as the United States and Canada, where child abuse and neglect are central concerns. In countries with less integrated welfare systems, supportive and preventive services are less emphasized. The outcome indicators developed in this study, however, adopt a comprehensive perspective, similar to practices in Australia and the United Kingdom, addressing child well-being and development beyond re-abuse prevention, while also considering family empowerment.
These indicators incorporate multiple perspectives, including evaluators, child welfare staff, service recipients, and the public, reflecting systemic, holistic, and integrated thinking. Although some indicators currently lack data or established mechanisms for collection and analysis, they highlight the need to develop such infrastructure. Planning for data collection, monitoring, and benchmarking at national and provincial levels, as well as comparisons with international practices, can enhance the evaluation of Iran’s child welfare system. Importantly, the indicators allow differentiation based on gender, age, health status, residence, and risk status, enabling detailed analysis of service delivery and effectiveness across diverse groups of vulnerable children.
Ethical Consideration
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences (IR.USWR.1397.080).
Authors’ Contributions
Marzieh Takaffoli: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Mohsen Shati: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing.
Meroe Vameghi: Conceptualization, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Mir Taher Mousavi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing.
Maliheh Arshi: Conceptualization, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Funding
This research did not receive any grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Introduction
Throughout history, perceptions of children and childhood have evolved, as have the roles of families and societies in ensuring appropriate care, upbringing, and support for children. The adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) explicitly recognized the critical responsibility of governments to protect and support children. Many countries now provide a range of services, including education, healthcare, and targeted support for at-risk children, within the framework of child welfare systems. In some contexts, these systems feature structured, evidence-based processes for policymaking and service delivery aimed at vulnerable populations.
In recent decades, there has been growing attention to evaluating child welfare systems using multi-dimensional indicators, driven by the need to enhance service effectiveness and efficiency. Policymakers, planners, and service providers seek programs that are both effective and cost-efficient. Consequently, various indicators have been developed to evaluate child welfare systems across multiple domains.
In Iran, despite numerous child-related laws and the existence of multiple agencies providing services for at-risk children, no formally coordinated system currently exists. Moreover, there is no integrated mechanism to monitor and evaluate policies and services. Some studies have described Iran’s child welfare system using international definitions, highlighting the fragmentation in policymaking and service delivery and emphasizing the need for a systematic, unified approach. Given the importance of optimizing limited resources, developing indicators to measure and evaluate Iran’s child welfare system is essential to facilitate comparisons of policy and service outcomes over time and among different groups of vulnerable children.
Method
This study aimed to develop a comprehensive set of evaluation indicators for Iran’s child welfare system. Initially, indicators were extracted and constructed based on a review of both domestic and international sources. The indicators were categorized into four domains: inputs (74 indicators), processes (17 indicators), outputs (53 indicators), and outcomes (71 indicators).
Content validity—including Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI), Scale-Content Validity Index (S-CVI), and overall comprehensiveness—was assessed through expert input. Inter-rater agreement was measured prior to the content validity assessment. The study population comprised academic experts, policymakers, planners, and managers involved in child welfare services, particularly for at-risk children, across governmental, public, and non-governmental organizations. A total of 33 participants were purposively selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, with 20 experts completing the checklist for analysis.
Findings
The evaluation indicators for Iran’s child welfare system were finalized in four categories: inputs (74 indicators), processes (17 indicators), outputs (53 indicators), and outcomes (71 indicators).
Inputs comprised five main domains: budget and financial resources; human resources; legal, executive infrastructure; service users; and service access.
Processes included three main domains: delivering services based on guidelines and standards, registration and documentation of cases, timely provision of services, and other aspects of interventions based on guidelines and standards.
Outputs consisted of two main domains: service coverage, and service user satisfaction.
Outcomes were organized into five main domain: public awareness about child maltreatment prevention and intervention; the well-being of at-risk children in support of child protection services; empowerment of the families of at-risk children in support of child protection services; readiness for discharge or independence of at-risk children in support of child protection services; and empowerment of young people in support of child protection services.
Discussion
Comparison with international indicators demonstrates alignment between the proposed Iranian indicators and those used in countries adopting a child protection approach, such as the United States and Canada, where child abuse and neglect are central concerns. In countries with less integrated welfare systems, supportive and preventive services are less emphasized. The outcome indicators developed in this study, however, adopt a comprehensive perspective, similar to practices in Australia and the United Kingdom, addressing child well-being and development beyond re-abuse prevention, while also considering family empowerment.
These indicators incorporate multiple perspectives, including evaluators, child welfare staff, service recipients, and the public, reflecting systemic, holistic, and integrated thinking. Although some indicators currently lack data or established mechanisms for collection and analysis, they highlight the need to develop such infrastructure. Planning for data collection, monitoring, and benchmarking at national and provincial levels, as well as comparisons with international practices, can enhance the evaluation of Iran’s child welfare system. Importantly, the indicators allow differentiation based on gender, age, health status, residence, and risk status, enabling detailed analysis of service delivery and effectiveness across diverse groups of vulnerable children.
Ethical Consideration
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences (IR.USWR.1397.080).
Authors’ Contributions
Marzieh Takaffoli: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Mohsen Shati: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing.
Meroe Vameghi: Conceptualization, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Mir Taher Mousavi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing.
Maliheh Arshi: Conceptualization, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Funding
This research did not receive any grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Type of Study: orginal |
Received: 2025/09/7 | Accepted: 2025/11/16 | Published: 2026/01/27
Received: 2025/09/7 | Accepted: 2025/11/16 | Published: 2026/01/27
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Contact Information
Social Welfare Quarterly
Social Welfare Quarterly, Social Welfare Research Department, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation, Daneshjoo Blvd, Evin, Tehran, Iran, 19857-13834
Journal Tel: 02171732851
Website: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir
Email: refahj@uswr.ac.ir
