Articles in this section focus on topics of permanency in kinship care.
1. Falconnier, Lydia, Nicole Tomasello, Howard Doueck, Susan Wells, Heather Luckey, and Jean Agathen. “Indicators of quality in kinship foster care.” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services 91, no. 4 (2010): 415-420.
Children in kinship care were less likely to re-enter care once returned to their biological parents than are children placed with non-kin. This study also found that children in kinship care experienced fewer placements. (Childfocus).
2. Koh, Eun, and Mark F. Testa. “Children discharged from kin and non-kin foster homes: Do the risks of foster care re-entry differ?.” Children and Youth Services Review 33, no. 9 (2011): 1497-1505.
With respect to reunification, children who exit from kinship foster homes have a much lower likelihood of re-entering foster care when possible confounding factors are ignored. The kinship effect diminishes by 25% when child-level variables that may affect kin caregivers’ decisions to accept the child into their care are taken into account, but it still remains statistically significant (Childfocus).
3. Liao, Minli, and Kevin R. White. “Post-permanency service needs, service utilization, and placement discontinuity for kinship versus non-kinship families.” Children And Youth Services Review 44, (September 2014): 370-378.
This article compares quality of life between kinship and non-kinship post-permanency families. Specifically, the authors compared service needs and service utilization in these two types of family in the aftermath of achieved permanency. Through their research, the authors highlight a few significant findings: There exist substantive differences in socio-demographic characteristics for children and caregivers in kinship placements as compared to those in non-kinship placements. Furthermore, Kinship caregivers reported fewer needs and sought fewer services than non-kinship caregivers. Reasons for placement failure were somewhat consistent between kin and non-kin placements and included child behavior problems, adoptive versus guardianship placement, and the marital status of caregiver.