Services to Support Children Living in Kinship and Nonrelative Foster Care 2008-2009

Publication Date: March 29, 2023
Explore NSCAW's Services to Support Children Living in Kinship and Nonrelative Foster Care brief to explore how service needs and receipt may vary for children removed from their home and their caregivers when the experiences of voluntary and formal kinship care.

Download Brief

Download PDF (1,920.51 KB)
  • File Size: 1,920.51 KB
  • Pages: 16
  • Published: 2023

Introduction

Research Questions

  1. Do children in kinship care need different services from children in nonrelative foster care?
  2. Are there differences in poverty level and financial struggles among voluntary kinship caregivers, formal kinship caregivers, and nonrelative foster caregivers?
  3. Does type of support received (i.e., financial support, housing, peer support, respite care, foster care training, and health care) differ among voluntary kinship caregivers compared to formal kinship caregivers and nonrelative foster caregivers?
  4. Are there differences in access to basic health-related services between children in voluntary kinship care, formal kinship care, and nonrelative foster care?

This brief highlight information from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being, Second Cohort (NSCAW II) on service needs and receipt for children in kinship care and non-relative foster care in 2008 and 2009. NSCAW is a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of children and families who have come into contact with the child welfare system.

This brief describes how service needs and receipt may vary for children living in different types of out-of-home placements:

  • Voluntary kinship care: the child is living with kin, no payments are received from CWS for the care of the child, and the caregiver does not have a license or certificate to provide foster care.
  • Formal kinship care: the child has been placed with kin through CWS involvement and the caregiver receives payments from CWS. The caregiver may or may not be licensed or certified.
  • Nonrelative foster care: the child has been placed with a nonrelative caregiver through CWS involvement, the caregiver receives payments from CWS, and the caregiver is a licensed or certified foster caregiver.

Purpose

This brief is intended to shed light on how service needs and receipt in 2008—2009 may vary for children removed from their home and their caregivers when the experiences of voluntary and formal kinship care groups are considered separately and compared to nonrelative foster care.

Key Findings and Highlights

  • Nationally representative data from the baseline wave of NSCAW II showed large differences in service needs and receipt of services by kinship and nonrelative foster caregivers.
  • Overall, voluntary kinship caregivers were more likely to live in households with incomes less than 50% of the federal poverty level, more likely to struggle financially, and tended to have more adults but fewer children in the households living off the same household income compared to formal kinship and nonrelative foster caregivers.
  • The three groups were equally likely to receive housing support (e.g., public housing), with less than 1-in-10 of each type of caregivers receiving this type of help.
  • Both voluntary and formal kinship caregivers were more likely than nonrelative foster caregivers to receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
  • Voluntary kinship caregivers were less likely to receive the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) than formal kinship caregivers.
  • Compared to nonrelative foster caregivers, both formal and voluntary kinship caregivers received less respite care and organized peer support group services—supports that may be critical to the well-being of kinship caregivers.
  •  Children living in voluntary kinship care were less likely to have immunizations and dental care services referred, provided, or arranged by a CWS caseworker than those in formal kinship care and nonrelative foster care.

Methods

All analyses were conducted using NSCAW II baseline data from 2008-2009. Descriptive analyses were conducted with weighted data using the SUDAAN statistical package to account for NSCAW’s complex sampling design.  Thus, all percentages are adjusted (weighted) for sampling probabilities. Bivariate analyses (chi-square statistics) were used to test for the statistical significance of the differences across the three caregiver groups. Multivariate analyses in this brief also compare the two caregiver groups that receive payments from CWS (formal public kinship care and nonrelative foster care) with the voluntary kinship caregivers who do not receive CWS payments. Logistic regression analyses modeled service receipt as a function of type of caregiver at baseline. The models for caregiver receipt of services control for caregiver’s age, education, and poverty level. The models for child receipt of services control for child’s gender, age, and race/ethnicity.

Kinship and nonrelative foster caregiver status were based on questions to caregivers, caseworkers, and children about relationships between the child and his or her primary and secondary caregivers, the caregiver’s relationship to the child, the level of involvement of CWS, and whether the child’s caregiver is licensed and/or receives payments to provide care for the child. The variables used to define these groups follow standard definitions of the types of kinship caregivers

Recommendations

The results highlight the need to help kinship caregivers, especially voluntary kinship caregivers, navigate multiple human service systems to access the supports that they need.

Citation

Casanueva, C., Smith, K., Ringeisen, H., Dolan, M., Testa, M., Dolan, M. & Burfeind, C. (2022). Services to Support Children Involved with the Child Welfare System. OPRE Report #2023-039, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Related Documents

Barth, R. P. (2008). Kinship care and lessened child behavior problems: Possible meanings and Implications. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 162, 586‎—‎587.

Barth, R. P., Guo, S., Green, R., & McCrae, J. (2007). Kinship care and nonkinship foster care: Informing the new debate. In R. Haskins, F. Wulczyn, & M. B. Webb (Eds.), Child protection: Using research to improve policy and practice (pp. 187‎—‎206). Brookings Institution.

Beeman, S. K., Kim, H., & Bullerdick, S. K. (2000). Factors affecting placement of children in kinship and nonkinship foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 22(1), 37‎—‎54.

Blazer, D. G., Kessler, R. C., McGonagle, K. A., & Swartz, M. S. (1994). The prevalence and distribution of major depression in a national community sample: The National Comorbidity Survey. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 979‎—‎986.

Casanueva, C., Tueller, S., Dolan, M., Testa, M., Smith, K., & Day, O. (2015). Examining predictors of re-reports and recurrence of child maltreatment using two national data sources. Children and Youth Services Review, 48, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.10.006

Chamberlain, P., Price, J., Leve, L. D., Laurent, H., Landsverk, J. A., & Reid, J. B. (2008). Prevention of behavior problems for children in foster care: Outcomes and mediation effects. Prevention Science, 9(1), 17‎—‎27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-007-0080-7

Chamberlain, P., Price, J. M., Reid, J. B., Landsverk, J., Fisher, P. A., & Stoolmiller, M. (2006). Who disrupts from placement in foster and kinship care? Child Abuse & Neglect, 30(4), 409‎—‎424.

Children's Bureau. (2013). Family connection discretionary grants: 2009-funded grantees cross-site evaluation report- final. https://www.jbassoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Family-Connection-Evaluation-2009.pdf  (PDF)

Cuddeback, G. S. (2004). Kinship family foster care: A methodological and substantive synthesis of research. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(7), 623‎—‎639.

Dolan, M. M., Casanueva, C., Smith, K. R., & Bradley, R. H. (2009). Parenting and the home environment provided by grandmothers of children in the child welfare system. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(7), 784-796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.02.005

Rubin, D., O'Reilly, A. L. R., Luan, X. Q., & Localio, A. R. (2007a). The impact of placement stability on behavioral well-being for children in foster care. Pediatrics, 119(2), 336‎—‎344. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-1995

Rubin, D. M., Downes, K. J., O'Reilly, A. L. R., Mekonnen, R., Luan, X. Q., & Localio, R. (2008). Impact of kinship care on behavioral well-being for children in out-of-home care. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 162(6), 550‎—‎556. <Go to ISI>://000256627400008

Rubin, D. M., O’Reilly, A. L. R., Hafner, L., Luan, X., & Localio, R. (2007b). Placement stability and early behavioral outcomes among children in out-of-home care. In R. Haskins, F. Wulczyn, & M. B. Webb (Eds.), Child protection: Using research to improve policy and practice (pp. 171‎—‎186). Brookings Institution.

Stacks, A. M., & Partridge, T. (2011). Infants placed in foster care prior to their first birthday: Differences in kin and nonkin placements. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32(5), 489-508. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20311

Stein, R. E. K., Hurlburt, M. S., Heneghan, A. M., Zhang, J., Rolls-Reutz, J., Landsverk, J., & McCue Horwitz, S. (2014). Health status and type of out-of-home placement: informal kinship care in an investigated sample. Academic Pediatrics, 14(6), 559-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2014.04.002

Wu, Q., White, K. R., & Coleman, K. L. (2015). Effects of kinship care on behavioral problems by child age: A propensity score analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 57, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.07.020

Glossary

TANF:
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is administered by the Office of Family Assistance within the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. TANF was created by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). The program provides temporary financial assistance while aiming to get people off assistance, primarily through employment. See more at: https://www.opressrc.org/topics/tanf-policy-services-and-benefits
SSI:
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) pays benefits to adults and children with disabilities who have limited income and resources. SSI benefits also are payable to people 65 and older without disabilities who meet the financial limits. A continuing disability review is required to ensure that the beneficiary still has a condition that keeps them from earning a livelihood. For more information see https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/ssi/.
Public Housing:
Public housing is a form of housing tenure in which the property is owned by a government authority and is used by eligible low-income families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. For more information see https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph.