Effects of a Foster Parent Training Intervention on Placement Changes of Children in Foster Care

Abstract

Placement disruptions undermine efforts of child welfare agencies to promote safety, permanency, and child well-being. Child behavior problems significantly contribute to placement changes. The aims of this investigation were to examine the impact of a foster parent training and support intervention (KEEP) on placement changes and to determine whether the intervention mitigates placement disruption risks associated with children's placement histories. The sample consisted of 700 families with children between ages 5 and 12 years, from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. Families were randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition. The number of prior placements was predictive of negative exits from current foster placements. The intervention increased chances of positive exit (e.g., parent/child reunification) and mitigated the negative riskenhancing effect of a history of multiple placements. Incorporating intervention approaches based on a parent management training model into child welfare services may improve placement outcomes for child in foster care. Keywords parent management training; foster parents; placement disruptionsThe child welfare system provides services designed to promote the well-being of children by ensuring safety, achieving permanency, and strengthening families to care successfully for their children (National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-being Research Group, 2005). For a number of families serviced by the child welfare system this may require removing the child from the home and placing him/her in the care of either a relative or a foster family. Once in foster care, the goals of promoting safety, permanency, and child well-being can be undermined by disruptions in placement. Recent research suggests that one of the major contributors to placement disruptions is the externalizing behavior problems exhibited by many foster children (Chamberlain et al., 2006;Newton, Litrownik, & Landsverk, 2000). The primary goals of the current study were twofold: to examine the impact of a foster parent training and support intervention on placement changes and disruptions, and to determine whether the intervention mitigated placement disruption risks associated with children's placement histories.Correspondence should be directed to Joseph M. Price, Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, 6363 Alvarado, Ct., Suite 103, San Diego, CA 92120; (619) 594-5241; fax, (619) 594-6780; email, jprice@sunstroke.sdsu.edu. NIH Public Access Importance of Stability in Family SettingsStability in safe, nurturing family settings affords children opportunities to develop positive and supportive relationships, especially with caregivers and other significant adults (e.g., teachers) that, in turn, facilitates normative development (Cicchetti & Valentino, 2006;Sroufe, Duggal, Weinfield, & Carlson, 2000; Thompson, Flood, & Goodwin, 2006). Stability in family settings also provides continuity in school settings, peer networks, health care providers, and access to community resources an...

RCT of a Mentoring and Skills Group Program: Placement and Permanency Outcomes for Foster Youth

“…Studies have found that participation in these interventions is associated with fewer negative exits from foster placements and greater permanency. 8,[15][16][17] Interestingly, 2 of these studies found that the interventions moderated the association between placement instability and permanency outcomes. 15,17 Another study found that placement changes predicted dysregulation in cortisol for the control group only.…”

“…8,[15][16][17] Interestingly, 2 of these studies found that the interventions moderated the association between placement instability and permanency outcomes. 15,17 Another study found that placement changes predicted dysregulation in cortisol for the control group only. 18 Our study adds to the growing body of literature by examining the impact of a child-focused intervention on permanency and placement outcomes.…”

Acknowledging the Complexity of Processes Leading to Foster Care Breakdown

“…According to various, mainly quantitative studies, frequently cited reasons for breakdown that are attributed to the foster child include: behavioural and attachment problems on the part of the child (James, 2004;van Santen, 2013;Vanderfaeillie et al, 2008), divided affiliations and loyalties (Blandow, 2004;van Santen, 2013), and school problems (Ekins, 2009;van Santen, 2013). Reasons for breakdown attributed to the foster parents include: subjecting the foster child to physical or sexual abuse (James, 2004;Price et al, 2008;Vanderfaeillie et al, 2008), being unable to cope (Andersen, 2014;Gehres, 2007), demanding an exclusive relationship (Gehres, 2007), suffering too much stress from the behaviour of the foster child (James, 2004), being affected by critical life events (Ekins, 2009;James, 2004), and not receiving enough support from the social network (Ekins, 2009;Price et al, 2008;van Santen, 2013). Factors relating to the system are relatively rarely identified as a cause of breakdown, and little attention is paid to the interaction between the different actors involved in the process (birth family, foster family, foster child, foster siblings, representatives of the authorities, social workers, etc.).…”

“…Factors relating to the system are relatively rarely identified as a cause of breakdown, and little attention is paid to the interaction between the different actors involved in the process (birth family, foster family, foster child, foster siblings, representatives of the authorities, social workers, etc.). References are made to emerging difficulties and "rivalries between family systems" (van Santen, 2013), unclear arrangements and poorly implemented support services on the part of the child welfare system (Ekins, 2009;Gehres, 2007;Price et al, 2008), and the insufficient availability of information about the foster child (Kalland & Sinkkonen, 2001). …”

Trends in Child Protection and Out-of-Home Care

“…11 We used these data to evaluate trends and case outcomes. 13 we refer to the first 4 outcomes as "positive exits" because these are desirable permanency outcomes in child welfare.…”