Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal

, Volume 24, Issue 6, pp 509–522 | Cite as

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

Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Kinship care Kinship placement outcome group Disrupted kinship care Child protective services 

References

  1. Berrick, J. D. (1997). Assessing quality of care in kinship and foster family care. Family Relations, 46, 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berrick, J. D., Needell, B., Barth, R., & Jonson-Reid, M. (1998). The tender years: Toward developmentally sensitive child welfare services for very young children. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Child Welfare Research Center (2006). Child Welfare Services (CWS/CMS) Reports Performance Indicators Project. Children in Child Welfare Supervised by Placement Type. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/ (accessed March 3rd, 2006).
  4. Courtney, M. E. (1994). Factors associated with the reunification of foster children with their families. Social Service Review, 68(1), 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dore, M., & Kennedy, K. (1981). Two decades of turmoil: Child Welfare Services, 1960–1980. Child Welfare, 60, 371–382.Google Scholar
  6. Dubowitz, H., & Feigelman, S. (1993). A profile of kinship care. Child Welfare, 72(2), 153–169.Google Scholar
  7. Gleeson, J, & Hairston, C. (eds.). (1999). Kinship care: Improving practice through research. Washington D. C.: Child Welfare League of America.Google Scholar
  8. Iglehart, A. (1994). Kinship foster care: Placement, service, and outcome issues. Children and Youth Services Review, 16, 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pecora, P., LeProhn, N., & Nasuti, J. (1999). Role perception of kinship and other foster parents in family foster care. In R. Hegar & M. Scannapeice (Eds.), Kinship foster care: Policy, practice, and research, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Pecora, P., Whitikar, J., Maluccio, A., Barth, R., & Plotnick, R. (1992). The child welfare challenge. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  11. San Bernardino County Human Services (2005). 2004 Annual report. (available at http://hss.co.san-bernardino.ca.us/HSS/docs/annualreport/2004HSSAnnualReport.pdf) (accessed December 15, 2005) .
  12. Scannapieco, M., Hegar, R. L., & McAlpine, C. (1997). Kinship care and foster care; A comparison of characteristics and outcomes. Families and Society, 78(5), 480–488.Google Scholar
  13. Shore, N., Sim, K. E., Leprohn, N. S., & Keller, T. E. (2002). Foster parent and teacher assessments of youth in kinship and non-kinship foster care placements: Are behaviors perceived differently across settings? Children and Youth Services Review, 24, 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Spar, K. (1993). Kinship foster care: An emerging federal issue. Report to U. S. Congress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  15. Terling-Watt, T. (2001). Permanency in kinship care: An exploration of disruption rates and factors associates with placement disruption. Children and Youth Services Review, 23, 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Testa, M., & Slack, K. S. (2002). The gift of kinship foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 24, 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. (2000). Administration for children and families, administration on children, youth and families, children’s bureau. Report to the Congress on Kinship Foster Care, http:// aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/index.htm (accessed August 16, 2005).
  18. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2005). Administration for children and families, administration on children, youth and families, children’s bureau, http://www. acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/publications/afcars/report10.htm. Preliminary Estimates for FY 2003 (accessed August 15, 2005).

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Work, College of Social and Behavioral SciencesCalifornia State University, San BernardinoSan BernardinoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Social Work, College of Social and Behavioral SciencesCalifornia State University, San BernardinoSan BernardinoUSA

Personalised recommendations