Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
5. Children’s Experiences in Foster Care
Little is understood about the typical environments in which children in foster care reside. The media have described horrific caregiving environments for foster children, and widely distributed magazines, like Time, have decried the state of foster care (Roche, 2000). Scholars have raised serious questions about the capacity of foster homes to provide developmentally appropriate and nurturing services (Orme and Buechler, 2001). Yet there are virtually no independent evaluations of foster caregiving environments, and children who reside in them have rarely had an opportunity to describe them.
This study provides a unique opportunity to gain a detailed description of out-of-home environments and the perceptions of the children in out-of-home placement about their lives. This chapter includes information from the NLSY version of the Home Observation Measure of the Environment (HOME-SF), which is based both on responses from the caregiver and interviewer observation; for older children, questionnaire items were included about the children’s perceptions of their caregivers and their living situations, and about their experiences of violence.
5.1 Environmental Variation by Child and Caregiver Characteristics
How does the caregiving environment (cognitive stimulation and emotional support) vary by child’s age?
To assess the caregiving environment, total HOME-SF scores—comprising cognitive stimulation and emotional support subscale scores, as well as physical environment subscale scores—were computed separately for each of three age groups: less than 3 years old, 3 to 5 years old, and 6 to 10 years old. The HOME-SF score provides information about the caregiving environment and is also a reasonably good predictor of future performance on academic and social indicators (Bradley, Corwyn, Burchinal, McAdoo, and Coll, 2001; Moore, Halle, and Mariner, 2000). Note that for the analyses in this section, HOME-SF scores are examined for children in non-kin foster homes and kin care settings only, because the relationship between caregiver and child is more clearly understood in these settings than in a group home or residential care program.
Because there are slightly different numbers of items in the scale for different age groups, standardized scores were created for the purpose of comparisons across age groups. The scores were standardized by dividing the total score by the number of questions answered. (Note that although the mean scores displayed in Table 5-1 are nonstandardized, the differences indicated in the footnotes to the table are based on comparisons of standardized scores.) When the standardized scores are compared across age groups, there are significant differences in the total, cognitive stimulation, and emotional support scores between children less than 3 and children 6 to 10 years old. The difference in emotional support scores between children less than 3 and children 3 to 5 years old is also significant. In addition, differences in total, cognitive stimulation, emotional support, and physical environment scores between children 3 to 5 years old and children 6 to 10 years old are also significant. Although there are no national norms for the HOME-SF, these findings are inconsistent with those of the NLSY (1998 sample), which indicates that HOME-SF scores are generally no lower for the youngest children (Center for Human Resource Research, 1999).
| Mean Score^(SE) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Less than 3 years old | 3-5 years old | 6-10 years old | |
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.7a (0.10) |
11.7c (0.50) |
9.1 (0.39) |
| Emotional support | 6.7a
b (0.18) |
8.2c (0.30) |
7.6 (0.29) |
| TOTAL SCORE (CS+ES) | 14.4a (0.19) |
19.9c (0.63) |
16.7 (0.58) |
| Physical environment | N/A^^ | 6.98c (0.15) |
7.32 (0.31) |
| (^)Mean scores displayed in the table are nonstandardized,
although comparisons across age groups are based on standardized scores.
(^^)There is no physical environment scale for children less than 3 years old. aIndicates a difference between children < 3 and 6-10 (p<.05) based on standardized scores.(back) bIndicates a difference between children < 3 and 3-5 (p<.05) based on standardized scores.(back) cIndicates a difference between children 3-5 and 6-10 (p<.05) based on standardized scores.(back) |
How does the caregiving environment vary by placement type?
When mean HOME-SF scores were computed by foster care placement type (i.e., separately for children in non-kin foster homes and those in kin-care settings), comparisons within each age group revealed only that children less than 3 years old in kin care settings have significantly lower total scores than children less than 3 years old in non-kin foster homes (Table 5-2). Note that standardized scores are not necessary for the tables below because comparisons are made within age group only.
How does the caregiving environment vary by current caregiver’s age?
When mean total HOME-SF scores were computed by the age of the current caregiver, two significant differences were found: (1) children less than 3 years old with caregivers over 54 years of age have significantly lower total scores than children with caregivers between 35 and 44 years of age (Table 5-3); and (2) caregivers of children between 3 and 5 years old who were younger than 35 received significantly lower emotional support scores than caregivers over 54 years old. Among children 6 to 10 years old, caregivers between 45 and 54 years of age were found to have significantly lower total scores than caregivers between 35 and 44 years of age.
| Mean Score(SE) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Less than 3 years old |
3-5 years old | 6-10 years old | |
| Foster home | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.8a (0.12) |
11.9 (0.53) |
9.2 (0.50) |
| Emotional support | 7.7b (0.17) |
8.8 (0.45) |
9.5 (0.40) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 15.5c (0.21) |
20.7 (0.57) |
18.7 (0.75) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 6.82 (0.23) |
7.32 (0.45) |
| Kin care | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.4 (0.16) |
11.5 (0.57) |
9.0 (0.63) |
| Emotional support | 7.1 (0.18) |
9.3 (0.51) |
9.1 (0.70) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 14.5 (0.19) |
20.8 (1.05) |
18.1 (1.29) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 7.18 (0.25) |
7.30 (0.44) |
^There is no physical environment score for children less than 3 years old. aIndicates a difference in cognitive stimulation scores between children less than 3 in foster home and kin care settings (p<.01).(back) bIndicates a difference in emotional support scores between children less than 3 in foster home and kin care settings (p<.01).(back) cIndicates a difference in total scores between children less than 3 in foster homes and kin care settings (p<.01).(back) |
| Mean Score (SE) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Less than 3 years old | 3-5 years old | 6-10 years old | |
| < 35 years | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.6 (0.17) |
12.1 (0.36) |
(0.49) |
| Emotional support | 6.1 a,b (0.68) |
8.4 d (0.35) |
(0.80) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 13.7 a (0.73) |
20.5 (0.48) |
17.5 (1.12) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 6.70 (0.21) |
6.53 (0.44) |
| 35-44 years | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.7 (0.13) |
11.0 (0.67) |
9.5 (0.30) |
| Emotional support | 7.9 c (0.22) |
9.0 (0.39) |
10.1 c,e (0.43) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 15.6 c (0.28) |
20.0 (0.78) |
19.6 b (0.49) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 6.70 (0.24) |
7.46 (0.20) |
| 45-54 years | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.9 (0.34) |
12.3 (0.36) |
9.4 (0.58) |
| Emotional support | 7.3 (0.24) |
8.6 (0.66) |
8.9 (0.37) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 15.2 (0.40) |
20.9 (0.95) |
18.3 (0.76) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 7.20 f (0.24) |
6.97 (0.41) |
| > 54 years | |||
| Cognitive stimulation | 7.5 (0.14) |
11.5 (0.32) |
8.2 (1.02) |
| Emotional support | 7.1 (0.30) |
9.4 (0.34) |
8.8 (0.44) |
| TOTAL (CS+ES) | 14.6 (0.38) |
20.9 (0.48) |
17.0 (1.42) |
| Physical environment | N/A^ | 6.21 (0.37) |
7.01 (0.49) |
^ There is no physical environment score for children less than 3 years old aIndicates a difference in score between caregivers less than 35 and 35-44 years (p<.05).(back) bIndicates a difference in score between caregivers less than 35 and 45-54 years (p<.05).(back) cIndicates a difference in the score between caregivers age 35-44 and >54 years (p<.05).(back) dIndicates a difference in the score between caregivers less than 35 and >54 years (p<.05).(back) eIndicates a difference in the total score between caregivers age 35-44 and 45-54 years (p<.05).(back) fIndicates a difference in the physical environment score between caregivers age 45-54 and >54 (p<.05).(back) |
5.2 The Neighborhood Context
How do neighborhood problems vary by out-of-home placement type?
For information about the environment in which the child’s residence was situated, the caregiver was asked nine items concerning the community; Table 5-4 displays the mean for those items. The total mean scores for these self-report items are shown for children in non-kin foster homes, kinship foster care, and group care. These items were summed and comparisons made among the types of placements, which showed no significant differences among types of placement for total community environment.
Taken together, these findings indicate that the kinship care neighborhoods have fewer strengths, but that the threats appear to resemble those in other out-of-home care settings.
| Mean (SE) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-kin foster homes |
Kinship foster care |
Group care | Overall frequency | |
| 1. Assaults and muggings | 1.08 (0.02) |
1.12 (0.04) |
1.17 (0.08) |
1.10 (0.02) |
| 2. Gangs | 1.18 (0.05) |
1.25 (0.06) |
1.26 (0.08) |
1.21 (0.04) |
| 3. Open drug use or dealing | 1.20 (0.06) |
1.23 (0.06) |
1.18 (0.07) |
1.20 (0.04) |
| 4. Unsupervised children | 1.27 (0.04) |
1.31 (0.07) |
1.22 (0.09) |
1.28 (0.04) |
| 5. Teenagers hanging out and a nuisance | 1.23 (0.04) |
1.15 (0.05) |
1.23 (0.08) |
1.20 (0.03) |
| 6. Safe as most other neighborhoods* | 1.29 (0.05) |
1.51 (0.06) |
1.49 (0.21) |
1.38 (0.04) |
| 7. Neighbors help each other out | 1.61 (0.05) |
1.73 (0.10) |
1.82 (0.22) |
1.66 (0.05) |
| 8. Parents are involved | 1.68 (0.05) |
1.83 (0.06) |
1.92 (0.19) |
1.75 (0.04) |
| 9. A better place to live than most* | 1.31 (0.04) |
1.50 (0.04) |
1.48 (0.14) |
1.38 (0.04) |
| Total score | 11.69 (0.19) |
12.34 (0.31) |
11.56 (1.29) |
11.89 (0.17) |
| ^ Items 1 through 5 are scored as follows: 1-
not a problem at all, 2- somewhat of a problem, 3- a big problem. Items
6 through 9 are scored, in general, as 1- better than others, 2- about
the same as others, 3- worse than others. * Indicates significantly fewer strengths in kinship than non-kin foster home environment, using t-test (p<.01). |
5.3 Child-Caregiver Relationships
What is the child’s relationship with the caregivers?
Child welfare policy makers, program managers, and scholars have long emphasized the importance of the relationship that children have with their out-of-home caregivers (Maas and Engler, 1959; Wald, Carlsmith, and Leiderman, 1988). The presumption in law and practice is that foster care, rather than group home care, is a family-like setting. A related presumption holds that kinship foster care is a more family-like setting than non-kinship foster care and that children in kinship foster care have a greater degree of comfort in placement (Berrick, Barth, and Needell, 1994).
OYFC children’s feelings about their relationship with their primary and secondary caregivers were measured using a shortened version of the Rochester Assessment Package for Schools - Student (RAPS-S). Questions were asked of children aged 11 years and older. Children answered how well each statement described them by answering 1 = not at all true, 2 = not very true, 3 = sort of true, and 4 = very true. Negatively worded items were reverse coded for scoring. Items were summed and averaged, creating a score ranging from 1 (most negative view of caregiver) to 4 (most positive view of caregivers). A mean rather than a summed score was calculated to account for the fact that not all children answered the same number of questions (e.g., not all answered questions for the secondary caregiver). While subscales for the RAPS do exist, internal consistency was low for these subscales (ranging from .06 and .52 for Autonomy Support and Structure to .64 and .76 for Parental Emotional Security and Involvement). Consequently, only the overall Relatedness score was used (a=.91).
Feelings of relatedness to the primary and secondary caregiver were examined for children in kinship foster care, non-kinship foster care, group care and all out-of-home placement types combined. Because of the wide variety of placements within the other out-of-home placement category, other was not included in comparisons. The other category is included within the total of all out-of-home placement types only. On average, OYFC children reported feeling positive about their caregivers (Table 5-5), rating their sense of relatedness as 3.23 out of 4 . The only significant difference was between kinship and group care, with children in group care reporting less of a sense of relatedness (t = 2.46, p < .05) than those in kinship care.
| Mean | Standard Deviation |
Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kin | 3.42 | .07 | 2.4 | 4 |
| Non-Kin | 3.15 | .13 | 1.5 | 4 |
| Group Home | 3.15 | .08 | 1.9 | 3.9 |
| All Placement Types | 3.23 | .10 | 1.5 | 4 |
| ^ As measured by a shortened version of the Rochester Assessment Package for Schools – Student, Relatedness scale (RAPS). |
How close do children feel to their primary and secondary caregivers?
Closeness to caregiver was measured using an unscaled set of items from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (AddHealth: Carolina Population Center, 2001). AddHealth is a longitudinal study of health-related behaviors of children in grades 7 through 12. Children were asked to report separately for the primary and secondary caregiver. Questions asked about how close the children (aged 11 and older) felt to their caregiver and how much the children felt the caregiver cared about them. Subscale scores were examined for the primary and secondary caregiver separately as well as for both caregivers combined, in both kinship and non-kinship foster homes. The primary caregiver tends to be the foster mother (53%), other non-relative (20%), grandmother (16%), aunt (7%), or other person (4%), whereas the secondary caregiver tends to be the foster father (64%), grandfather (14%), foster mother (7%), uncle (5%), other non-relative (5%), or other person (5%). There were also 10 questions for each caregiver regarding various activities the children and caregiver had engaged in during the past four weeks.
In comparing the AddHealth population to OYFC children as summarized in Table 5-6, with 1 = not at all and 5 = very much, the AddHealth children tended to report feeling closer to their caregivers than OYFC children do, although children’s reports were generally positive.
Overall, OYFC children tend to feel at least slightly better about their relationship with their secondary caregiver, usually a male (foster father, uncle, or grandfather) than their primary caregiver.
| Mean (SE Mean)^^ |
||
|---|---|---|
| AddHealth^ | OYFC | |
| How close do you feel to your primary caregiver? | 4.67 | 3.94 (.12) |
| How much do you think your primary caregiver cares about you? | 4.88 | 4.37 (.10) |
| How close do you feel to your secondary caregiver? | 4.46 | 4.07 (.15) |
| How much do you think your secondary caregiver cares about you? | 4.81 | 4.40 (.11) |
| ^ As measured by the National Longitudinal Study of
Adolescent Health (AddHealth).
^^ AddHealth standard errors could not be obtained so confidence intervals could not be calculated. |
What types of activities do children engage in with their primary and secondary caregivers, and how does this vary between kin and non-kin caregivers?
In response to what types of activities do children engage in with their caregivers, yes answers were summed for the nine items that indicate closeness to caregivers (having a serious argument was omitted) to calculate an average number of activities engaged in that promoted closeness to the caregiver. OYFC children report engaging in an average of five of the nine activities with their primary caregiver and slightly fewer with the secondary caregiver (3.75). There are no significant differences in the number of activities engaged in by children in kin and non-kin foster care.
The 10 questions about both caregivers regarding various activities the child and caregivers had engaged in during the past four weeks were examined individually. Children in kinship care tended to be more likely than children in non-kin foster care to have talked to their primary caregiver about dating. OYFC children appear to be somewhat more likely than AddHealth children to talk about a personal problem, work on a school project, or other school matters with their primary caregiver (Table 5-7).
How does caregiver punitiveness vary by kinship and non-kinship foster care?
We used the HOME-SF to estimate the level of punitiveness in the homes in which the OYFC children reside. Using a punitiveness/hositility subscale based on the observational items of the HOME-SF (Linver, Filigni, and Brooks-Gunn, 2001), we assessed punitive caregiving environments for children under 6. The items in the scale (a = .72) included observations of whether the mother/guardian shouted, expressed annoyance or hostility, criticized, slapped or spanked, and restricted the child multiple times during the interviewer’s home visit. Among children 3 to 5 years old, kin and non-kin caregivers showed no significant difference on the overall punitiveness scale. About one-third of caregivers showed some punitiveness during the observation by the interviewers.
5.4 Children’s Perceptions and Expectations
Public policy intends that children in out-of-home care will be well cared for and safe. Policy makers and program providers also want to know whether children feel cared about and are experiencing life in ways that will help them to develop a positive future. This section enumerates the characteristics of out-of-home settings and how children respond to them.
What are children’s perceptions of out-of-home care?
Developing an understanding of children’s experiences in out-of-home care is pivotal to evaluating the process and outcome of providing child welfare services. Child welfare service planners and providers are increasingly attentive to the experiences of children in out-of-home care. However, only a few studies (e.g., Berrick, Frasch, & Fox, 2000; Johnson, Yoken, & Voss, 1995) have asked children about their view of permanency. In NSCAW, children aged 6 and older (n=320) were asked how they viewed their current living situation, their thoughts about where they would live in the future, and their view of their biological parents. Results are summarized in Table 5-8. Over half (52%) of these children were in traditional foster homes, one-third (33%) were in kinship foster homes, and 15% were in group care. Almost two thirds (63%) had been in at least one placement prior to the current placement. Children reported leaving those placements for a variety of reasons, including unforeseen circumstances (5%), family reunification with parents or siblings (13%), child behavior (15%), and child request (10%). Thirteen percent reported never being told why they left their last placement.
| Question | AddHealth^ | OYFC Kin % (95% CI) |
OYFC % Non-Kin (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary caregiver | |||
| Shopping | 73 | 66 (45, 82) |
75 (54, 89) |
| Played sport | 9 | 13 (4, 32) |
26 (15, 41) |
| Attended religious service | 38 | 29 (14, 51) |
55 (41, 69) |
| Talked about dating | 46 | 66 (50, 79) |
28 (14, 48) |
| Attended event | 26 | 28 (12, 52) |
37 (24, 52) |
| Talked about personal problems | 38 | 66 (48, 81) |
68 (56, 78) |
| Had serious argument about child's behavior | 33 | 35 (19, 55) |
23 (14, 34) |
| Talked about school | 62 | 88 (72, 95) |
70 (58, 80) |
| Worked on school project | 13 | 37 (17, 63) |
32 (22, 45) |
| Talked about other school things | 51 | 88 (76, 95) |
68 (53, 80) |
| Secondary caregiver | |||
| Shopping | 27 | 42 (21, 66) |
51 (33, 68) |
| Played sport | 32 | 36 (17, 59) |
33 (16, 58) |
| Attended religious service | 31 | 14 (4, 41) |
35 (23, 49) |
| Talked about dating | 27 | 49 (27, 72) |
32 (20, 47) |
| Attended event | 24 | 12 (3, 41) |
30 (15, 50) |
| Talked about personal problems | 19 | 37 (18, 61) |
30 (15, 50) |
| Had serious argument about child's behavior | 25 | 5 (1, 27) |
10 (4, 22) |
| Talked about school | 51 | 73 (36, 93) |
47 (32, 62) |
| Worked on school project | 11 | 7 (1, 27) |
19 (9, 38) |
| Talked about other school things | 44 | 71 (34, 92) |
44 (30, 59) |
| ^AddHealth standard errors could not be obtained so confidence intervals could not be calculated. |
| Demographic Characteristicsof Children | Percent | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 6-10 | 54 |
| 11-15 | 46 | |
| Race | Black/Non-Hispanic | 38 |
| White/Non-Hispanic | 38 | |
| Hispanic | 17 | |
| Other | 7 | |
| Placement type | Foster Care | 52 |
| Kinship Care | 33 | |
| Group Care | 15 | |
| Placement History | ||
| How many have been in placement before? | 63 | |
| Why did they leave the last placement? | Unforeseen Circumstances | 5 |
| Family Reunification | 13 | |
| Child Behavior | 15 | |
| Child Request | 10 | |
| Child was not told reason | 13 | |
| Other/Don't Know | 44 | |
| Who made the decision? | Child | 7 |
| Professional | 21 | |
| Non-Kin Caregiver | 32 | |
| Relative | 21 | |
| Other/Don't Know | 26 | |
| Who told the child about the decision? | Professional | 39 |
| Non-Kin Caregiver | 16 | |
| Relative | 16 | |
| Other/Don't Know | 29 | |
| How involved was the child in the decision? | Little, if any | 56 |
| Somewhat | 6 | |
| Very | 25 | |
| Don't Know | 13 | |
| Family Visits | ||
| Frequency of Visits - Mother | Never | 30 |
| < 1 month | 14 | |
| Once or twice a month | 17 | |
| Once a week or more | 42 | |
| Frequency of Visits - Father | Never | 41 |
| < 1 month | 12 | |
| Once or twice a month | 19 | |
| Once a week or more | 28 | |
| Feelings after visits^^ | Happy/Relaxed | 74/29 |
| Sad/Upset/Lonely | 24/16/13 | |
| Angry | 8 | |
| Worried/Afraid/Guilty | 11/9/7 | |
| Child avoids visits | Yes | 12 |
| No | 84 | |
| Hopes for the Future | ||
| Believe they will live with their siblings again | Yes | 8 |
| No | 5 | |
| Don't Know | 61 | |
| Refused | 26 | |
| If child could live with anyone, who? | Mother | 47 |
| Father | 19 | |
| Current Caregiver | 16 | |
| Aunt/Uncle | 13 | |
| Grandmother | 12 | |
| Biological Sibling | 6 | |
| All others | 10 or less | |
^ Children could indicate “all that apply;” similar categories are grouped together. ^^Due to rounding, groupings may not total to 100% |
A series of questions focused on family visiting while in placement. Most children (61%) reported seeing their biological mother twice per month or less. Sixty-five percent desired more contact with their mother. Almost three-quarters (72%) reported seeing their biological fathers twice per month or less; 60% desired more contact with their fathers. Most children (77%) reported wanting more contact with siblings and frequently missing their family. Most (61%) said that they did not know how often they were able to visit with their siblings; 13% reported that they never saw their siblings, and 26% refused to answer the question. Very few children (12%) reported avoiding family visits.
The most frequently endorsed feeling after family visits was “happy,” with 74% of children reporting this feeling. Almost a quarter (24%) reported feeling sad. Fewer than 15% reported feeling angry (8%), worried (11%), lonely (13%), afraid (9%), or guilty (7%). Over a quarter reported feeling relaxed (29%), and 16% reported feeling upset following visits. Approximately one third of children (34%) reported that visits were frequently cancelled.
Being placed in a foster home does cause significant change in children’s lives. Most of the children had moved to a new neighborhood (87%) or changed schools (84%) as a result of placement. Overall, about half (54%) the children reported that their new neighborhood were better than where they lived before, and 59% reported that their new school was better than their previous school.
Although children must adapt to a host of life changes when placed in foster care, most appear to view their experiences in foster care positively. About 90% of children like the people that they are living with and feel like they are part of their foster family. In addition, slightly over one-third (36%) reported wanting to be adopted by their foster family and one-half indicated they want their current home to become their permanent home. Only 11% of children had tried to leave their current placement.
Many children retain hope for reunification with their families. Fifty-eight percent of the children reported thinking that they will live with their biological parents again, and 74% believe that “things will be different this time.” In addition, when asked with whom they would most like to live, the most frequently chosen answers were the biological mother (47%) and the biological father (19%). Sixteen percent endorse their current foster placement. Twelve percent reported they would like to live with a grandmother, and 13% reported wanting to live with an aunt or uncle. Under 10% endorsed any of the following: stepparents, great grandparents, biological siblings, foster siblings, other relatives, friends, former foster parents, or any type of group care. Less than 5% reported wanting to live in a current group setting, with a boyfriend or girlfriend, with a teacher or other adult, or alone. None of the respondents reported wanting to live with former foster parents, in a previous group care setting, or in a juvenile justice/incarceration facility.
These findings can be interpreted in a variety of ways. First, one might wonder whether the children felt comfortable enough in the interview setting to share more negative thoughts about their current placement. Ideally, interviews were to be private and conducted in a separate space from the foster parent. However, certainly some living situations did not permit an optimal level of privacy. Another possible interpretation is that, while children are appreciative of their current living situations, the circumstances that brought them into care do not break their ties to their biological parents and they maintain hope that those relationships can continue and be more positive in the future.
A summary construct was used to assess the children’s perceived level of permanence. The measure contains five items that ask whether the child likes the people they are living with, feels like a part of the family, believes they can live in their current placement until they grow up, that they will be living with their current caregiver next year, that they would like the current placement as a permanent home, and that they would like the caregiver to adopt them. Responses to these dichotomous items were summed to create a measure ranging from 5, indicating a low level of perceived permanence, to 10, indicating a high level of perceived permanence (a = .76). The mean score was 8.61, with no statistically significant difference noted between children in group, foster, or kinship care. This score would suggest that children in foster care do seem to feel some sense of permanence even in the midst of enormous upheaval. Children in group care did have a lower mean score (7.51) on this measure, but no statistically significant difference was found.
How do the experiences vary by out-of-home placement type?
To assess the role of placement type in child attitudes, a series of logistic regressions was performed. A number of differences between placement types emerged. Children in foster care and children in kinship care had much higher odds of liking those with whom they were living than children in group care (OR = 3.57, p<.05 and 10.20, p<.01). Children in foster care and kinship care also had higher odds of wanting their current placement as a permanent home than children in group care (OR = 3.5, p< .05 and 6.4, p<.01). Of children 11 years and older, children in foster care and group care had higher odds than children in kinship care of having tried to leave or run away from their current placement (OR = 6.80, p<.05 and 10.20 p<.01). Children in group care had almost four times the odds of children in foster care and kinship care of having family visits cancelled (OR = 3.60., p< .05 and 3.8, p<.01). Children in foster care had almost three times the odds of children in kinship care of reporting frequently missing their family (OR = 2.73 p<.05).
Although some aspects of children’s experiences appear to differ significantly by placement type, children in different types of out-of-home care generally appear to have similar reactions to placement. Children in kinship care appear to be somewhat more content than those in other types of placements. However, most children appear to view their living situations positively even while hoping for reunification with their families (Table 5-9).
How do the perspectives of children in group care differ from those of other placement types?
Children in group care appear to be different in several ways. First, they have four times the odds of those in non-kin foster homes and 10 times the odds of those in kinship care of reporting that they do not like the people with whom they are living (p<.05 and p<.01, respectively). In addition, they have 3 times the odds of children in non-kin foster homes and 6 times the odd of those in kinship care of reporting not wanting their current arrangement as a permanent home (p<.01 and p<.001, respectively). They also have higher odds of reporting never seeing their biological father or mother (OR = 5.13, p<.05; OR = 4.19, p<.01). From these analyses it can be inferred that children in group care differ significantly from children both in kinship care arrangements and those in foster care with non-kin. Those in group care are less positive about their experience than children in the other two arrangements.
| Foster care (%) |
Kinship care (%) |
Group care (%) |
Total (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family Visits | ||||
| Contact with Mom < twice per month e,f | 69 | 39 | 73 | 60 |
| Desires more contact with Mom | 71 | 56 | 65 | 65 |
| Contact with Dad < twice per monthc | 74 | 26 | 92 | 73 |
| Desires more contact with Dad | 68 | 46 | 73 | 60 |
| Contact with Siblings= never or don't know | 99 | N/A^^ | 100 | 74 |
| Desires more contact with siblings | 77 | 84 | 71 | 77 |
| Family visits are frequently cancelled.c,d | 28 | 29 | 60 | 34 |
| Child frequently misses familyb | 84 | 66 | 78 | 78 |
| View of current placement (% yes) | ||||
| Child likes who they are living witha,f | 91 | 97 | 73 | 90 |
| Feels like part of the family | 90 | 95 | 96 | 92 |
| Wants this home as a permanent homea,f | 50 | 65 | 22 | 50 |
| Child has tried to run away from the homeb,f | 11 | 10 | 15 | 11 |
| Child wants caregiver to adopt them | 39 | 33 | 30 | 36 |
| Child moved to a different neighborhood | 89 | 83 | 91 | 87 |
| Neighborhood is better than previous | 55 | 56 | 47 | 54 |
| Child goes to a different school | 87 | 76 | 88 | 84 |
| New school is better than previous | 61 | 51 | 62 | 59 |
| Hopes for the future | ||||
| Believes they will live with their parents again | 57 | 61 | 61 | 58 |
| Believes living with parents will be different this time | 72 | 77 | 76 | 74 |
aComparison between foster care and group care significant at .05.(back) bComparison between foster and kinship care significant at .05.(back) cComparison between kinship care and group care significant at .05.(back) dComparison between foster care and group care significant at .01.(back) eComparison between foster and kinship care significant at .01. (not used)(back) fComparison between kinship care and group care significant at .01.(back) (^)Only children 11 years and older were included in this analysis. (^^)100% of the children in kinship care refused to answer the question about having contact with siblings. |
How does frequency of contact with parents vary by out-of-home placement?
Both children in group care and foster care reported seeing their family members less than children in kinship care. Children in foster care had three times the odds as children in foster care of reporting seeing their biological mother less than once each month (p< .01). Children in group care had four times the odds of seeing their biological mother less than twice each month as children in kinship care (p< .01). Children in group care had five times the odds of children in kinship care of reporting seeing their biological fathers less than once each month (p< .05). Finally, children in group care have higher odds of visits being cancelled frequently than children in non-kin or kinship foster homes (OR = 3.83, p<.01).
What are children’s expectations for the future?
Two questions from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (AddHealth) about future expectations were also asked of OYFC children aged 10 and older (Carolina Population Center, 2001). AddHealth asked these questions of all children aged 11 and older. The most notable difference between the OYFC and AddHealth participants was response to the question, “What do you think are the chances you will be married by age 25?” Thirty-six percent of OYFC children think there is little chance they will be married by age 25, compared with only 21% of the AddHealth children. Conversely, whereas 37% of the OYFC children are fairly sure that they will be married by age 25, an even greater percentage of the AddHealth children (46%) reported this expectation. OYFC and AddHealth children were very similar in their response to the question, “What do you think are the chances that you will live to be at least 35?” While 3% of both groups feel there is little chance they will live that long, 88% of OYFC children and 87% of AddHealth children report that it is very likely they will live to be 35.
5.5 Children’s Perceptions and Expectations
How often have children been exposed to various incidents of violence?
Maltreated children are thought to be especially vulnerable to emotional upset caused by exposure to violence, whether in the home or community (Margolin and Gordis, 2000). For information on exposure to domestic violence, we administered 19 items of the Violence Exposure Scale for Children-Revised (VEX-R). The VEX-R was used to assess frequency of exposure to violent and criminal events in children aged 5 and older. The VEX-R is a child self-report measure in a cartoon format that has been previously administered to minority, inner-city children as well as elementary school children in Israel (Stein et al., 2001). Children responded to these items using the audio-CASI format, which provides substantial privacy.
Table 5-10 summarizes the percentages of children who report experiencing or witnessing each individual incident of violent or criminal behavior as indicated by never, one time, a few times, and lots of times. The percentages reported in the table indicate whether these children have “ever” experienced this level of violence and do not indicate whether they have seen these incidents since entering out-of-home care. At some point in their lives, large percentages of these children have experienced adults shoving or beating up other adults or the children themselves and have seen an adult being arrested at home.
| Type of incident | Never (%) |
One time (%) |
A few times (%) |
Lots of times (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| You saw adult yell at others | 29 | 12 | 33 | 26 |
| You were yelled at by adult | 32 | 13 | 29 | 26 |
| You saw adult throw at other | 66 | 13 | 10 | 11 |
| Adult threw something at you | 70 | 13 | 7 | 9 |
| You saw adult shove others | 71 | 7 | 8 | 13 |
| Adult shoved you | 75 | 8 | 6 | 11 |
| You saw adult slap other | 74 | 9 | 7 | 10 |
| Adult slapped you | 75 | 10 | 5 | 10 |
| You saw adult beat up other | 73 | 9 | 8 | 10 |
| Adult beat you up | 82 | 7 | 2 | 8 |
| You saw adult steal in home | 68 | 14 | 11 | 8 |
| You saw adult point gun at other | 83 | 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Adult pointed gun or knife at you | 89 | 6 | 1 | 4 |
| You saw adult stab other adult | 95 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| You saw adult shoot another | 93 | 4 | <0.5 | 2 |
| You saw person arrested at home | 63 | 15 | 12 | 10 |
| You saw person deal drugs at home | 80 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| You saw kid getting spanked | 41 | 15 | 19 | 26 |
| You were spanked | 54 | 9 | 23 | 14 |
| ^ As measured by the Violence Exposure Scale for Children—Revised (VEX-R) Percentages were rounded, so some rows do not total 100. These incidents include those that occurred before children entered out-of-home care. |
How many children have experienced violence within the last month?
The children were asked further probing questions if they indicated that they had experienced or witnessed an incident of violence or criminal behavior within the last month. Table 5-11 summarizes the percentages of children who indicated that the incident had occurred in the home in which they were currently living and in the last month, broken down by type of placement. These data indicate that a small but not insubstantial number of children had had exposure to yelling, spanking, and incidents of illegal activities and arrests during the prior month. Chi-square analyses compared the occurrence of each event for children in non-kin foster homes and kinship care homes (group care was excluded because of low sample size), but no significant differences were found between placement types on any item. These rates of exposure during the last month are substantially lower than the rates of “ever being exposed” to these incidents.
| Incident | Current caregiver In last month^ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-Kin foster homes (%) | Kinship foster care (%) | Group care (%) | |
| Saw yelling at someone else | 14 | 11 | 4 |
| 15 | 11 | 4 | |
| Yelled at by current resident | 15 | 10 | 4 |
| 10 | 12 | 4 | |
| Saw something thrown at someone else | 3 | 2 | <0.5 |
| 4 | 2 | <0.5 | |
| Adult threw something at child | 4 | <0.5 | <0.5 |
| 4 | <0.5 | <0.5 | |
| Saw adult shove someone else | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 6 | 1 | 1 | |
| Adult shoved child | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | 2 | 2 | |
| Saw adult slap someone else | 1 | <0.5 | 1 |
| 4 | <0.5 | 1 | |
| Adult slapped child | 2 | <0.5 | 1 |
| 2 | 3 | 1 | |
| Saw adult beat up someone else | 5 | <0.5 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| Adult beat up child | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 6 | 3 | 3 | |
| Saw person steal from another in the home | 4 | 1 | 3 |
| 4 | 2 | 3 | |
| Saw adult point knife or gun at someone | 2 | 0 | <0.5 |
| else | 3 | 1 | <0.5 |
| Adult pointed knife or gun at child | <0.5 | 0 | <0.5 |
| 2 | <0.5 | <0.5 | |
| Saw adult stab someone else | <0.5 | <0.5 | 0 |
| 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Saw adult shoot someone else | 2 | 1 | <0.5 |
| 2 | <0.5 | 1 | |
| Saw person arrested | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 | 1 | |
| Saw person deal drugs | <0.5 | 1 | <0.5 |
| <0.5 | <0.5 | 1 | |
| Saw other kid getting spanked | 11 | 6 | 1 |
| 12 | 5 | <0.5 | |
| Child was spanked | 8 | 6 | 1 |
| 4 | 3 | <0.5 | |
| ^ Column percentages are based on all children in out-of-home care older than 5 who completed this measure. |
What is the frequency and extent of incidents of non-violent discipline and maltreatment by caregivers experienced by children?
To gain additional clarification about the experiences that children had had since coming to live in their current setting, the Conflict Tactic Scale Parent Child version (CTS-PC) was used to assess the frequency and extent of nonviolent discipline and child maltreatment incidents as reported by children aged 11 and older. Table 5-12 summarizes the frequency and extent of children who reported experiencing incidents of nonviolent discipline and maltreatment by parents and other adult caregivers living with them, as indicated by the following 22 items. (Four items on the CTS-PC consist of non-violent discipline, and they, too, are included.)
| Type of incident (Parents or other) |
1 time (%) |
2 times (%) |
3-5 times (%) |
6-10 times (%) |
11-20 times (%) |
More than 20 times (%) |
Not in past 12 months (%) |
Never (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hit or kicked child | 6 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 6 | 82 |
| Choked child | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 88 |
| Hit child repetitively | 2 | 3 | <0.5 | 0 | 0 | <0.5 | 5 | 89 |
| Burned child | 3 | 3 | 0 | <0.5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 90 |
| Threatened child with gun/knife | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 92 |
| Threw child down | 5 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 86 |
| Cursed at child | 6 | 10 | 10 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 56 |
| Threatened to kick child out | 5 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 80 |
| Spanked child with hands | 4 | 3 | 2 | <0.5 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 82 |
| Explained why something was wrong | 11 | 11 | 21 | 9 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 31 |
| Put child in time out | 17 | 15 | 13 | 10 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 32 |
| Shook child | 8 | 5 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | <0.5 | 5 | 78 |
| Hit child on bottom | 5 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0.5 | 9 | 77 |
| Gave child something else to do | 14 | 7 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 57 |
| Yelled at child | 20 | 7 | 11 | 5 | 0.5 | 6 | 8 | 43 |
| Threatened to spank child | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 73 |
| Slapped child on body | 3 | 5 | 1 | <0.5 | <0.5 | <0.5 | 11 | 79 |
| Grounded child | 8 | 13 | 16 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 36 |
| Pinched child | 6 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 82 |
| Hit child on body | 2 | 5 | <0.5 | 0 | 0 | <0.5 | 8 | 84 |
| Called child dumb | 4 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 66 |
| Slapped child on face | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | <0.50 | 6 | 82 |
| ^ As measured by the Conflict Tactic Scale Parent Child version (CTS-PC). Some rows do not total to 100% due to rounding. |
If the children indicated that an incident had occurred on the CTS-PC, they were then asked to indicate on six of the severe-behavior items if it had occurred in the past three months. The question—”Did this happen in the last 3 months?”—was ambiguous as to whether this involved the parent or other adult caregiver or if it had happened in the community. Thus, some of these incidents did not result from caregiver behavior. No significant differences were found among the three out-of-home placement types.
5.6 Summary
Direct observation in foster and kinship homes was intended to help clarify the quality of care for children in child welfare supervised out-of-home care. Mean HOME-SF scores in the social and emotional domains were similar across placement types of kinship and non-kinship care, although, among children less than 3 years old, the home environment in non-kinship care had significantly more favorable scores than the kinship care scores. There were some age related differences and interactions with the ages of children and caregivers. Caregivers aged 35 to 44 caring for children less than 3 and between 6 and 10 provide more favorable social and emotional environments than caregivers less than 35 years and 55 years and older caring for children of this age. Taken together, these data suggest that kinship caregivers of young children and caregivers less than 35 or older than 55 may benefit from additional support in their efforts to provide the children in their homes with a more optimal developmental environment.
Assessments of the physical environment show that the difference between kin and non-kin caregivers is not significant for any individual physical environment indicator. These indicators include, for example, whether the home appears clean and not overly cluttered and whether the neighborhood is esthetically pleasing.
On average OYFC children report feeling positive about their caregivers, reporting a high sense of relatedness, though children in group care report the lowest sense of relatedness and a level that was significantly less than children in kinship care. (Again, this may be partly a function of the older ages of children in group care compared to those in kinship care.) Overall, OYFC children tend to feel at least slightly closer to their secondary caregivers. Children in foster care for one year tend to report feeling less close to their caregiver than children in more general population surveys. Yet, OYFC children tend to work on school projects and talk about personal problems and school issues with their primary caregiver more often than do adolescents in the general population. The assessment of the relationship between children and their caregivers is complex and is likely to be affected by the length of stay, their prior knowledge of the caregiver, and the level of problems in living that they bring into the caregiving environment. These analyses do not address the full complexity of this question, but do suggest that the level of closeness is substantial and is in the predicted direction—being highest for kinship caregivers and lowest