LAUSR

Most child welfare professionals use safety assessment instruments to determine a child’s immediate safety. Surprisingly, the content validity of these instruments has hardly been examined, even though this provides valuable and essential information on their quality. Therefore, the aim of this manuscript was to examine the content validity and usability of a Dutch child safety assessment instrument by conducting two complementary qualitative studies. In Study 1, clinical professionals using the instrument (n = 15) were interviewed on what aspects of immediate child safety they considered essential to assess and on the usability of the instrument. In Study 2, other clinical and non-clinical experts on immediate child safety (n = 18) were interviewed on what aspects of immediate child safety they considered essential. All immediate child safety threats measured in the instrument were considered important, but the participants indicated that several additional threats should be measured for properly determining a child’s immediate safety. Examples of threats missed by the participants were whether or not a child is being emotionally abused, and whether harm is inflicted upon the child by anyone other than the primary caretakers. In general, the tool was considered useful for determining the immediate child safety, but participants provided recommendations for improvement for instance on the wording of items, the descriptions of items, and the (potential) outcomes of the instrument. The content validity of the child safety assessment instrument could be strengthened by adding several threats to the instrument. General implications of the results for the safety assessment instrument are discussed.