Kinship Care Placements Research Articles

Kinship care for the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment.

Every year a large number of children around the world are removed from their homes because they are maltreated. Child welfare agencies are responsible for placing these children in out-of-home settings that will facilitate their safety, permanency, and well-being.However, children in out-of-home placements typically display more educational, behavioural, and psychological problems than do their peers, although it is unclear whether this results from the placement itself, the maltreatment that precipitated it, or inadequacies in the child welfare system. To evaluate the effect of kinship care placement compared to foster care placement on the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. We searched the following databases for this updated review on 14 March 2011: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials(CENTRAL),MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, ERIC, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science and Humanities, ASSIA, and Dissertation Express. We handsearched relevant social work journals and reference lists of published literature reviews, and contacted authors. Controlled experimental and quasi-experimental studies, in which children removed from the home for maltreatment and subsequently placed in kinship foster care were compared with children placed in non-kinship foster care for child welfare outcomes in the domains of well-being, permanency, or safety. Two review authors independently read the titles and abstracts identified in the searches, and selected appropriate studies. Two review authors assessed the eligibility of each study for the evidence base and then evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies.Lastly, we extracted outcome data and entered them into Review Manager 5 software (RevMan) for meta-analysis with the results presented in written and graphical forms. One-hundred-and-two quasi-experimental studies,with 666,615 children are included in this review.The 'Risk of bias' analysis indicates that the evidence base contains studies with unclear risk for selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, reporting bias, and attritionbias, with the highest risk associated with selection bias and the lowest associated with reporting bias. The outcome data suggest that children in kinship foster care experience fewer behavioural problems (standardised mean difference effect size -0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.49 to -0.17), fewer mental health disorders (odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.62), better well-being (OR 0.50,95% CI 0.38 to 0.64), and less placement disruption (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69) than do children in non-kinship foster care. For permanency, there was no difference on re unification rates, although children in non-kinship foster care were more likely to be adopted(OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.49), while children in kinship foster care were more likely to be in guardianship (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.40). Lastly, children in non-kinship foster care were more likely to utilise mental health services (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.37). This review supports the practice of treating kinship care as a viable out-of-home placement option for children removed from the home for maltreatment. However, this conclusion is tempered by the pronounced methodological and design weaknesses of the included studies.

Kinship Care for the Safety, Permanency, and Well‐being of Children Removed from the Home for Maltreatment: A Systematic Review

This Campbell systematic review examines whether kinship care is more effective than foster care in ensuring the safety, permanency and wellbeing of children removed from their home for maltreatment. The review summarizes findings from 102 studies involving 666,615 children. 71 of these studies were included in meta‐analyses.Kinship care is a viable option for the children that need to be removed from the home for maltreatment. However, policy issues remain to balance the cost‐effectiveness of kinship care with a possible need for increased levels of caseworker involvement and service delivery. A considerable number of the included studies showed weaknesses in their methodologies and designs. There is a need to conduct more high quality quantitative studies of the effects of kinship care based on robust longitudinal designs and psychometrically sound instrumentsAbstractBACKGROUNDEvery year a large number of children around the world are removed from their homes because they are maltreated. Child welfare agencies are responsible for placing these children in out‐of‐home settings that will facilitate their safety, permanency, and well‐being. However, children in out‐of‐home placements typically display more educational, behavioural, and psychological problems than do their peers, although it is unclear whether this results from the placement itself, the maltreatment that precipitated it, or inadequacies in the child welfare system.OBJECTIVESTo evaluate the effect of kinship care placement compared to foster care placement on the safety, permanency, and well‐being of children removed from the home for maltreatment.SEARCH METHODSWe searched the following databases for this updated review on 14 March 2011: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, ERIC, Conference Proceedings Citation Index‐Social Science and Humanities, ASSIA, and Dissertation Express. We handsearched relevant social work journals and reference lists of published literature reviews, and contacted authors.SELECTION CRITERIAControlled experimental and quasi‐experimental studies, in which children removed from the home for maltreatment and subsequently placed in kinship foster care were compared with children placed in non‐kinship foster care for child welfare outcomes in the domains of well‐being, permanency, or safety.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISTwo review authors independently read the titles and abstracts identified in the searches, and selected appropriate studies. Two review authors assessed the eligibility of each study for the evidence base and then evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies. Lastly, we extracted outcome data and entered them into Review Manager 5 software (RevMan) for meta‐analysis with the results presented in written and graphical forms.RESULTSOne‐hundred‐and‐two quasi‐experimental studies, with 666,615 children are included in this review. The 'Risk of bias' analysis indicates that the evidence base contains studies with unclear risk for selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, reporting bias, and attrition bias, with the highest risk associated with selection bias and the lowest associated with reporting bias. The outcome data suggest that children in kinship foster care experience fewer behavioural problems (standardised mean difference effect size ‐0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐0.49 to ‐0.17), fewer mental health disorders (odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.62), better well‐being (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.64), and less placement disruption (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69) than do children in non‐kinship foster care. For permanency, there was no difference on reunification rates, although children in non‐kinship foster care were more likely to be adopted (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.49), while children in kinship foster care were more likely to be in guardianship (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.40). Lastly, children in non‐kinship foster care were more likely to utilise mental health services (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.37).AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONSThis review supports the practice of treating kinship care as a viable out‐of‐home placement option for children removed from the home for maltreatment. However, this conclusion is tempered by the pronounced methodological and design weaknesses of the included studies.

Kinship care

This article summarises the main research evidence about children living in kinship care placements in the United Kingdom (UK). It identifies key themes emerging from the literature and concludes with policy and practice recommendations. It is argued that whilst the evidence about kinship care outcomes is equivocal it nevetheless indicates that kinship care is at least as good as other placements and that it should become more integrated into permanency planning and family support, and be propery recognised, financed and supported.

Support in Kith and Kin Care: The Experience of Carers

As a home-based care option for children at risk of significant harm, kinship care placements are steadily increasing in Australia as they are in other western countries. This article describes a qualitative research study undertaken with 65 kin (relative) and kith (nonrelative) carers in Victoria in the years 2004–2007. The aims of the research were to explore the lived experience of carers and to understand their support needs. The findings distinguish similarities and differences between the experience of formal and informal grandparent carers, non-grandparent relative carers and nonrelative carers. The article discusses the role of caregiving for the different groups, family relationships, finances (having enough money, as well as having too little), relationships with government agencies, respite and peer support.

Kinship foster care and the risk of juvenile delinquency

Formal kinship care represents the placement of a maltreated or otherwise vulnerable youth in the care and protection of a known relative or adult with a recognized kin bond. The practice of identifying and utilizing kin placements in child welfare has significantly increased over the last two decades. In part, the increased use of kinship care reflects the priorities, preferences, and mechanisms specified in federal legislation. A fairly broad literature demonstrates the value of kin homes in child welfare. Yet significant gaps in the understanding of kin homes remain, especially with regard to youth outcomes across allied service systems. In the current study we use administrative records from a large urban county and propensity score matching to investigate the relationship between kinship care placements in child welfare and the risk of delinquency. The sample (n = 13,396) is diverse and our design is longitudinal in that we follow youth through child welfare and juvenile systems for several years. The results indicate that the relative risk of delinquency is significantly greater for African American and white male adolescents served in kin homes. For Hispanic males and Hispanic females, kin homes are associated with a decreased likelihood of delinquency. There is no kin placement effect associated with African American or white females.

Transitioning from informal to formal substitute care following maltreatment investigation

This study examined associated factors of placement into formal substitute care following a maltreatment investigation and the relationship between children's entry into formal substitute care and changes in caregivers. The sample from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being included 3038 children who lived with biological parents or were placed in informal kinship and non-kinship care at the close of investigation. Placement in informal kinship and non-kinship care following a maltreatment investigation, younger age of a child, previous CPS reports, and poverty status were associated with greater odds of subsequent entry into formal substitute care. Informal kinship care following an investigation appears to be a placeholder and many of the children in such an arrangement are incorporated into the formal substitute care system. The transition from informal to formal substitute care, however, does not necessarily mean a disruption in children's placement. It can be beneficial to start foster parent training at an early stage of the assessment and preparation process for informal kin and non-kin caregivers because many of them are to become foster caregivers. It may also be advantageous to develop a standardized tool to assess informal caregivers' service needs, and make training and support services responsive to those particular needs.

“Nobody Knows Me No More”: Experiences of Loss Among African American Adolescents in Kinship and Non-Kinship Foster Care Placements

Youth in out-of-home care confront numerous disruptions in relationships and social environments, but how they experience such disruptions and their perception of these changes as losses has received little attention in the research literature. Furthermore, the increased use of kinship foster care raises questions regarding the effect of such placements on children’s experience of loss. Due to the overrepresentation of African American children in both the child welfare system and in kinship placements, race is a central variable in understanding the kinship care context and how it impacts loss. Using interview data from 18 African American adolescents in kinship and non-kinship placements, qualitative findings are presented regarding differences in relational and locational disruptions and in perceptions of those disruptions. Compared to non-kinship participants, adolescents in kinship placements experienced fewer disruptions in relationships and location and also experienced the restoration of losses as well as outright relational gains in entering their relative placements. Implications for policy, practice, and research are also discussed.

‘I made some mistakes . . . but I love them dearly’ the views of parents of children in informal kinship care

ABSTRACTIn‐depth semi‐structured interviews with 30 parents of children living with relatives in informal kinship care arrangements revealed the parents' views of the reasons for the informal kinship care arrangements, quality of their relationships with the children and their caregivers, their current and future roles in their children's lives, feelings experienced when with and away from the children, positive and negative aspects of kinship care, future goals and dreams for their children, and their assessments of their own strengths and challenges. Results of these interviews suggest several implications for social work practice and research.

Kinship care and sibling placement: Child behavior, family relationships, and school outcomes

Using Child Protective Services (CPS) and Long Term Foster Care (LTFC) samples from the National Study of Child and Adolescent Well-being (NSCAW), this study examines 2488 observations of 1415 different children to investigate relationships among kinship foster care, sibling placement, and child welfare outcomes, including youth behavior, family and caregiver relationships, and school performance. Although a growing body of literature has addressed issues of kinship placement and sibling placement, no prior studies have examined outcomes of both types of placement, including possible interactions when placements involve kinship foster care of sibling groups. This article first provides an overview of research concerning outcomes of kinship foster care or joint placement of siblings in foster care. Following discussion of the study's samples and variables, the article presents both descriptive and regression analyses of outcomes. It concludes with a discussion of the substantive findings, their implications, and limitations.

Kinship Care for the Safety, Permanency, and Well‐being of Children Removed from the Home for Maltreatment

Child abuse and neglect are common problems across the world that result in negative consequences for children, families and communities. Children who have been abused or neglected are often removed from the home and placed in residential care or with other families, including foster families. Foster care was traditionally provided by people that social workers recruited from the community specifically to provide care for children whose parents could not look after them. Typically they were not related to the children placed with them, and did not know them before the placement was arranged. In recent years many societies have introduced policies that favour placing children who cannot live at home with other members of their family or with friends of the family. This is known as ‘kinship care’ or ‘families and friends care’. We do not know what type of out‐of home care (placement) is best for children.This systematic review was designed to help find out if research studies could tell us which kind of placement is best. Sixty two studies met the methodological standards we considered acceptable. Wherever possible we combined the data from studies looking at the same outcome for children, in order to be more confident about what the research was telling us. Current best evidence suggests that children in kinship care may do better than children in traditional foster care in terms of their behavioral development, mental health functioning, and placement stability. Children in traditional foster care placements may do better with regard to achieving some permanency outcomes and accessing services they may need. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.Executive summary/AbstractBACKGROUNDEvery year a large number of children around the world are removed from their homes because they are maltreated. Child welfare agencies are responsible for placing these children in out‐of‐home settings that will facilitate their safety, permanency, and well‐being. However, children in out‐of‐home placements typically display more educational, behavioral, and psychological problems than do their peers, although it is unclear whether this results from the placement itself, the maltreatment that precipitated it, or inadequacies in the child welfare system.OBJECTIVESTo evaluate the effect of kinship care placement on the safety, permanency, and well‐being of children removed from the home for maltreatment.SEARCH STRATEGYThe following databases were searched to February 2007: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, C2‐Spectr, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work Abstracts, SSCI, Family and Society Studies Worldwide, ERIC, PsycINFO, ISI Proceedings, CINAHL, ASSIA, and Dissertation Abstracts International. Relevant social work journals and reference lists of published literature reviews were handsearched, and authors contacted.SELECTION CRITERIARandomized experimental and quasi‐experimental studies, in which children removed from the home for maltreatment and subsequently placed in kinship foster care, were compared with children placed in non‐kinship foster care on child welfare outcomes in the domains of well‐being, permanency, or safety.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISReviewers independently read the titles and abstracts identified in the search and selected appropriate studies. Reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for the evidence base and then evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies. Lastly, outcome data were extracted and entered into REVMAN for meta‐analysis with the results presented in written and graphical forms.RESULTSSixty two quasi‐experimental studies were included in this review. Data suggest that children in kinship foster care experience better behavioral development, mental health functioning, and placement stability than do children in non‐kinship foster care. Although there was no difference on reunification rates, children in non‐kinship foster care were more likely to be adopted while children in kinship foster care were more likely to be in guardianship. Lastly, children in non‐kinship foster care were more likely to utilize mental health services.AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONSThis review supports the practice of treating kinship care as a viable out‐of‐home placement option for children removed from the home for maltreatment. However, this conclusion is tempered by the pronounced methodological and design weaknesses of the included studies.

Correlates of Adverse Childhood Experiences Among Adults With Severe Mood Disorders

Adverse childhood experiences have been found to be associated with poor physical and poor mental health, impaired functioning, and increased substance abuse in the general adult population. The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical correlates of these experiences among adults with severe mood disorders. Adverse childhood experiences (including physical abuse, sexual abuse, parental mental illness, loss of parent, parental separation or divorce, witnessing domestic violence, and placement in foster or kinship care) were assessed retrospectively in a sample of 254 adults with major mood disorders. The relationships between cumulative exposure to these experiences and psychiatric problems, health, substance use disorders, community functioning, trauma exposure in adulthood, and high-risk behaviors were examined. Increased exposure to childhood adverse experiences was related to high-risk behaviors, diagnosis of a substance use disorder, exposure to trauma in adulthood, psychiatric problems (younger age at first hospitalization, number of suicide attempts, and diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder), medical service utilization, and homelessness. The findings extend research in the general population by suggesting that adverse childhood experiences contribute to worse mental and physical health and functional outcomes among adults with severe mood disorders.

Grandparent and Kinship Foster Care: Implications of Licensing and Payment Policies

ABSTRACT In this article, we examine the different licensing and payment policies in the United States for kinship foster care and assess the potential impact of licensing policies on the likelihood that grandparents or other kin will become licensed as formal kinship foster care providers. With this information, discussion is presented that outlines possible barriers to formalized foster kinship care placement and identifies the need for changes in public policy that could lead to increased program access for kinship foster caregivers.

Examining the Perceptions of Grandparents who Parent in Formal and Informal Kinship Care

Child welfare workers are increasingly seeking formal kinship placements with grandparents when the child's biological parents can no longer provide a stable environment. Using a non-probability purposive sample (N = 55), this study explores whether or not caregiver well being is effected by the type of kinship care arrangement (formal vs. informal). The findings suggest that grandparents in formal kinship care arrangements experienced feelings of depression less often, were more satisfied with their parenting experiences and were observed to have a greater sense of satisfaction with life. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Characteristics of Four Kinship Placement Outcome Groups and Variables Associated with these Kinship Placement Outcome Groups

This study investigated factors that might be associated with the disrupted kinship care placements of abused and neglected children. Data were collected from face-to-face interviews of 130 kin caregivers who were randomly selected from lists provided by two child protection agencies and divided into four different outcome groups. Findings of the study revealed that characteristics of the children such as their health status, ages, and the extent to which they were getting into “trouble” were significantly associated with placement outcomes. The caregivers’ perceptions of the quality of relationships between themselves and the children in their care and the birth parents of those children were also associated with placement outcomes. Two other factors affecting outcomes were the frequency of contact between social workers and caregivers and the extent to which services plans were discussed. Practice implications related to these findings are discussed.

The story behind kinship care caseload dynamics: An analysis of AFCARS data, 2000–2003

Findings from an analysis of four years of point-in-time data from the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) suggest that the number and share of children living in kinship care arrangements declined. This study shows that using point-in-time data alone to assess caseload trends can obscure important caseload dynamics. Assessing kinship care entrants and exits demonstrate that the number of children entering kinship care actually increased, suggesting that use of kinship care by states increased. The perceived decline in kinship care suggested by point-in-time estimates is likely driven by increases in the number of children exiting from kinship care that occurred at a faster rate than entrants. Additionally, this study revealed that three states, California, Florida, and Illinois, are significant contributors to the finding that the share of children in kinship care declined in point-in-time data. After removing these states from the analysis, there was a slight increase in the number of children living in kinship care arrangements. In conclusion, to clearly demonstrate the nuances of caseload dynamics, point-in-time national estimates should be examined in concert with an analysis of entrants, exits, as well as state-by-state analyses.

Risk of Psychological Difficulties Among Children Raised by Custodial Grandparents

Although custodial grandchildren are believed to be at greater risk of emotional and behavioral problems than children in general, scant research has examined this important public health issue.This study involves data from 733 custodial grandmothers participating in a study funded by the National Institute of Mental Health on custodial grandparenting and 9,878 caregivers from the 2001 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) who completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in reference to target children between ages four and 17. These two data sets were used to determine if custodial grandmothers report greater emotional and behavioral difficulties, as measured by the SDQ, for custodial grandchildren than do caregivers of children from the NHIS normative sample.Custodial grandchildren fared worse than children from the NHIS sample across all domains measured by the SDQ subscales, regardless of the child's gender and whether reporters were recruited by population-based or convenience sampling methods. Comparisons within the sample of 733 custodial grandmothers showed that higher levels of difficulties were reported when grandmothers were caring for boys, were recruited by convenience versus population-based sampling, and were white. Comparisons of the banded scores computed for each SDQ subscale suggested that custodial grandchildren have different cutoff points than children in the general population for a likely diagnosis of a psychiatric disorder.Similar to other children in kinship care arrangements, custodial grandchildren are reported by their caregivers to have higher levels of behavioral and emotional disturbances than children in the overall U.S. population.

The take-up of cash assistance among private kinship care families

Many children in private kinship care arrangements live in families that endure financial hardships. Even though these families are eligible for TANF child-only grants, only one in five receives cash assistance. The purpose of this study is to better understand the take-up of cash assistance for this group. Using national level data, we explore the relationships among child and caregiver characteristics and the receipt of cash assistance. We provide evidence that disadvantaged families are more likely to receive cash assistance than less disadvantaged families. For example, older caregivers and those with less education have higher take-up rates than their counterparts. Similarly, being poor and having received welfare in the past increase the likelihood that assistance is received. Nonetheless, it is important to note that take-up rates are low compared to other social programs. Our results suggest some possible reasons for this. For instance, our findings point to the possibility that many private kinship care families do not take-up cash assistance because they do not know that they are eligible for it through the TANF program. This suggests that outreach may improve participation. It also raises the issue of whether the receipt of cash assistance could be improved if benefits were provided through a program other than TANF.

Kinship care

This article summarises the main research evidence about children living in kinship care placements in the United Kingdom (UK). It identifi es key themes emerging from the literature and concludes with policy and practice recommendations. It is argued that whilst the evidence about kinship care outcomes is equivocal it nevetheless indicates that kinship care is at least as good as other placements and that it should become more integrated into permanency planning and family support, and be propery recognised, fi nanced and supported.

Kinship Care Placement and Children's Academic Performance

Very little consideration has been given to the impact children's living situations can have on their educational performance. The relationship of family environment to the children's educational performance depends in part upon the experiences and intent of the mediating adults who frame, select, focus and interpret the experiences children have in ways that produce an appropriate attitude toward education. Because of changing family patterns, along with significant social and economic factors plaguing many families today, particularly African American families, a substantial number of children continue to grow up in circumstances that put them at risk for unstable family environments, low achievement, and school failure. These unstable family environments often lead to placements in families other than their biological families. Often times these placements are within the state foster care system and for some the placement is with a relative, known as kinship care. Kinship placement is seen as an alternative in maintaining some type of stable family environment for these children at risk. In view of the relatively high incidence of low school performance and other social issues of children at risk, the role of minority families in the education of their children has become a national interest. The issue being addressed in this article centers around specific family processing factors in kinship care environments and its impact on children's academic performance. doi:10.1300/J045v22n03_03.

From the child's perspective: A qualitative analysis of kinship care placements

Kinship care is not a new phenomenon; a relative caring for children who cannot remain in the home of their biological parents has long been a community strategy utilized to preserve families [Hegar, R. L. (1999). The cultural roots of kinship. In R. L. Hegar & M. Scannapieco (Eds.), Kinship foster care (pp. 17−27). New York, NY: Oxford University Press]. Though there is a long and informal tradition of kinship care, the realization within child welfare that kin may be a valuable resource within the foster care system is relatively recent. Therefore, kinship care research does not match its utilization; indeed, it is only a very few studies that describe, from the child's perspective, the experience of living in the care of a relative [Brown, S., Cohon, D., & Wheeler, R. (2002). African American extended families and kinship care: How relevant is the foster care model to kinship care. Children and Youth Services Review, 24 (1/2), 53–77; Chipman, R., Wells, S. J., & Johnson, M. A. (2002). The meaning of quality in kinship foster care: Caregiver, child, and worker perspectives. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 508–521]. The aim of this research is to provide a descriptive analysis of kinship care from the child's perspective. Eight focus groups were conducted ( n = 40) with children living with kinship caregivers; the topics of discussion centered around transitional issues, family relationships, the stigma of being in care, and the child's perceived stability of their placement.