When One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Differing Outcomes for Foster Children in Group Homes

While the number of children in the foster care system in the United States has declined dramatically in recent years, there are nearly 400,000 youth in the system each year who are subject to home placements decided by state-run child and family service departments. Among foster care placements, group homes are considered to be more restrictive and expensive than in-home care and widely thought of as a last resort.

The number of children in the foster care system who are placed in group-home settings varies dramatically by state. While the national average is around six percent, the figure is more than 20 percent in some regions. New research by University of Maryland researchers Wai-Ying Chow and colleagues finds that long-term outcomes for youth who are placed in group homes differ significantly from those of children elsewhere in the foster care system.

There have been few substantive studies that have explored the outcomes of young adults placed in group homes. There is a particular shortage of empirical research that explains why particular youths are placed in group homes and explores their progress and outcomes. One of the research goals of this new study is to understand the demographics of youth living in group homes. The majority of the sample is composed of male African American teenagers. These demographic characteristics are also descriptive of the youth who are the least likely to leave foster care for permanent homes, making them a particularly vulnerable subset of the population. Chow et al. focus their exploratory research on understanding the youth population in group homes to help determine which demographic might benefit the most, and the least, from group home care.

The study sample comprised 180 young adults living in 29 different group homes with an average age of 14.89 years old. A large majority of the youth entered their group home placements with mood conduct disorders. Data about children’s psychosocial functioning were collected at the beginning (T1) and end (T2) of their placements, unless the study ended first. Measures that were of particular interest to researchers were the length of stay in the group home setting and psychosocial functioning (measured by the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths, or CANS, Assessment), which included areas such as life domain functioning, child strengths, emotional and behavioral needs, and risk behaviors.

Through data analyses, the researchers discover a significant connection between time and gender. Boys in group homes show a significant improvement in baseline scores on the CANS assessment, while girls in group homes show no significant difference. This gender difference is observed even among young people of similar ages and lengths of stay. The data also reveals that girls in T2 had significantly weaker scores across categories of major life functioning, such as the ability to protect themselves from stress and others from dangerous behavior. These negative outcomes over time, combined with the lack of measured positive psychosocial benefits, bring into question whether time spent in group homes is to the detriment of girls in foster care.

Age is also an influential predictor of youth outcomes. Among younger adolescents with lower initial levels of behavioral and emotional need, levels of impairment at T2 were higher than for their older counterparts. This suggests that for young children with higher levels of cognitive functioning, group homes could have a negative impact on long-term wellbeing.

But results should be interpreted with caution: the sample is small and the study lacks a comparison group. The exploratory nature of the study, coupled with the lack of uniformity in the intervention models used by group homes, makes generalization difficult.

If future research continues to provide evidence that particular characteristics are indicative of whether a child will benefit from placement in a group home, there are many policy implications. Eliminating the assumption that children and teenagers in the foster care population respond uniformly to different placements would allow for more strategic placement decisions. For policymakers concerned with child welfare, a model informed by data could support better placement decision-making. An empirically driven system shouldn’t be thought contradictory to unique considerations of strengths and challenges across youth and families. Rather, it would reduce some of the guesswork currently involved in youth placement.

Group homes, at their best, are places equipped with extensive therapeutic and structural resources for youth. Understanding how particular youth may benefit and, conversely, suffer in these settings could be important in ensuring that resources are allocated in a way that maximizes child welfare.

Article Source: Chow et al: Youth in Group Home Care: Youth Characteristics and Predictors of Later Functioning. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 2014. 503–519. 2014 National Council for Behavioral Health.

Featured Photo: cc/(saulmora)