Abstract of Distinction: Youth Integration in Foster Care Settings As an Indicator of Temporal Well-Being

Background:

Children in foster care are at risk of a host of negative developmental outcomes (Author, 2014). The ability of practitioners to assess the temporal well-being of youth in care is an important, yet largely absent component of child welfare intervention and service planning.

The objective of this study was to examine growth trajectories for youth reports of foster home integration (Author, 2016) over an 18-month period of time, and to determine if youth and case characteristics explain trajectories for this construct. The research question guiding this investigation were: Do youth characteristics (i.e., age, race, gender) and case characteristics (i.e., prior care placements, placement changes, treatment condition) explain youth reports of foster home integration over time?

Methods:

Data were drawn 202 participants in a sibling-focused intervention designed to enhance well-being for youth in care (Author, 2014). Participants were randomly assigned to treatment or services as usual. Measurements were taken at four separate time points every six months, over an 18-month period of time.

The dependent variable in this investigation was a 9-item youth-reported measure of foster home integration (alpha=.86). This measure asks youth to rate the quality of their interactions and relationships with caregivers and other members in the foster home.

Independent variables included youth age (M=11.8, SD=2.0), gender (50% female, n=101), and race (50% non-White, n=101), placement experiences prior to study enrollment (M=4.1, SD=3.2), placement changes during study participation (M=.7, SD=1.1), and treatment condition (50%, n=101).

The analytical approach involved testing a series of growth curve models in Stata 14. An unconditional means model was tested, followed by a repeated measures unconditional growth model for the home integration construct. To test for the possible influence of youth and case characteristics on home integration trajectories, the aforementioned independent variables were entered into a conditional growth curve model.

Results:

The unconditional means model (Y_ti=8.68, p<.01) and unconditional growth model (Y_ti=8.71, p<.01) were significant. The conditional growth curve model was also significant (Y_ti=9.62, p<.01, Wald X²=20.27), with youth age (T_ti=-.10, p<.01) and placements experienced during study enrollment (T_ti=-.12, p<.01) explaining variance in home integration over the four time points. Gender, race, treatment exposure, and pre-study placement experiences were not significantly associated with home integration growth trajectories.

Implications:

This study examined the temporal well-being of youth in foster care. Findings suggest being older and experiencing more placement changes was negatively associated with home integration over time. This suggests the need to provide additional home integration supports to youth who experience placement change, and to conduct differential assessment of youth integration based on the developmental stage of the child. Assessing indicators of temporal well-being (e.g., home integration) may provide intervention researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with important information to inform prevention planning efforts.