/
T he Transition from State/NGO Care to Adulthood: T he Transition from State/NGO Care to Adulthood:

T he Transition from State/NGO Care to Adulthood: - PowerPoint Presentation

celsa-spraggs
celsa-spraggs . @celsa-spraggs
Follow
400 views
Uploaded On 2016-05-22

T he Transition from State/NGO Care to Adulthood: - PPT Presentation

International B est P ractice SSPA Seminar Series 2013 Dr Nicola Atwool Senior Lecturer University of Otago Overview Outcomes for care leavers New Zealand research on care leavers ID: 329774

support care people young care support young people transition services leavers youth education accommodation leaving outcomes cyf year social

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "T he Transition from State/NGO Care to A..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

The Transition from State/NGO Care to Adulthood:International Best Practice

SSPA Seminar Series 2013

Dr

Nicola Atwool, Senior Lecturer, University of

OtagoSlide2

OverviewOutcomes for care leaversNew Zealand research on care leavers

What makes a difference?

Where are we in New Zealand?

Current challengesWhat’s happening in your area?The way forwardSlide3

Outcomes for care leaversAcross the English-speaking world there is evidence of poor outcomes for care leavers in all domains of their lives:AccommodationEducational attainmentEmployment and Income

Social support and family relationships

Physical and mental health

Alcohol and substance abuseOffendingVictimisationEarly entry to parenthoodSlide4

New Zealand researchInternationally attention has been focused on the needs of care leavers since the 1980sFirst New Zealand research was published in 2000

There have been no prospective longitudinal studies of care leavers in New Zealand

Trish Ward’s

analysis of the case files of 35 16 year olds as at 1 April 1997 demonstrated that, like their counterparts in other countries, they were a highly vulnerable group ill-prepared for independent living

63% of case files made no reference to pending independence

29% of Orders were discharged early

Deborah Yates’ in

-depth exploration of the experience of 8 care leavers reinforced these

findings and the picture that emerged was very similar to that provided by international research. Slide5

Impetus for changeIn his December 2000 Ministerial review of Child, Youth and Family Mick Brown recommended that consideration be given to 16 year-olds in care with insufficient support being placed in the guardianship of the Chief Executive and supported constructively through their transition to adulthood at least to the age of 20

Cousins (2000) reviewed best practice models for young people leaving care and recommended two models developed in the UK and Australia as appropriate for NZ

Cousins also highlighted the lack of specific legislative provision for services for care leaversSlide6

More recent researchFitzgerald, Mortlock & Jeffs

(2006) reported on interviews with 7 care leavers in

Christchurch:

All described having little support at the time they left careRecommended changes that could be implemented including

:

life

skills, mentors, support to continue education and ongoing care to age 25 if needed.

Pania

Coote

(2007) interviewed 5 care leavers in Southland. Findings were very similar to those of Ward and Yates.

Focused

on loss of connection with family and recommendations included revisiting

Puao-te-ata-tu

, more emphasis on family connection and transition planning

.

Leoni

(2007) interviewed 8 care leavers and 10 professionals and community members. Her findings indicate similar levels of difficulty and 2 participants had become isolated from

whānau

during their time in care and remained so.Slide7

Other evidenceThe Welfare Working Group reported in 2010 that those most at risk of long-term welfare dependence (around 2,400) enter the system through Independent Youth Benefit, Emergency Maintenance Allowance or Domestic Purposes benefit before the age of 18.60% of that group were reported to have had previous contact with, or were in the care of, CYF

MSD (2011) reports that most people at high risk of life-course persistent offending were known to CYF before entering the corrections system.

People with CYF records account for 80% of those imprisoned by age 20.Slide8

Other evidenceECPAT Child Alert (2010) interviewed 13 young people engaged in under-age prostitutionSix identified having been in the care of Child, Youth and FamilyOf these m

any

were homeless and living on the streets at the time they began

Two had been involved with prostitution from the age of 12, three at 14, and one at 16Slide9

Questions, comments, issuesAn opportunity for questions, comments or issues before we move on to looking at what makes a differenceSlide10

What makes a difference?Legislative and Policy frameworks supporting the transition from careLiving Skills programmes prior to leaving care have value but are not enough

Specialist teams and the provision of Personal Advisers

Continuing care

Financial support to enable young people to remain with foster carers after 18 and until 21Safe, secure accommodationA range of options allowing for a graduated transition including supervised group living, live-in carer

, supported independent accommodation, lead tenant, and foyer housing Slide11

What makes a difference?Employment and Education assistanceWorks best as part of holistic programmeSecure accommodation is essential to enable participation

Permanent connection to committed adults

Permanency for teenagers

Youth connections projectsSpecialist ServicesMore likely to work with more disadvantaged young peopleImprove accommodation outcomes and assist with life skills

Limited impact on other outcomes

Highest rates of success achieved with comprehensive support including case management, accommodation support, living skills, links to education and training, support to rebuild connections with family, and practical and material supportSlide12

Critical FactorsExtending care beyond the age of 18Care leaving is regarded as a process not an event3 distinct phases: leaving; transition; integration into new positionEstablishing and consolidating personal identity is a key aspect of the developmental transition to adulthood

Particularly challenging for care leavers if they do not have a coherent narrative of their lives or have unresolved trauma

Must have access to information

Independence vs inter-dependenceWe are social beings and positive connections are a key factor in resilienceSlide13

Critical FactorsCare leavers are not all the same! 3 groups have been identified:Moving onSurvivors

Victims

Important to start with an assumption that all care leavers need support and tailor this to the particular challenges each group/individual facesSlide14

Best PracticeCare leaving processProgrammes

need to reflect

3 stages of transition: preparation for independent living; managing the transition; post-care mentoring and supportFocus on interdependenceNetworks of support with meaningful connections with supportive adults and peers

Inclusion of birth family and caregivers in transition planning

Provision of a coordinated range of services

Living skills

Secure and safe accommodation

Access to education, training or employment

Financial support

Access to general health services and any specialist services that may be required

A designated coordinator for each care leaver

Legislative and policy frameworkSlide15

New Zealand situationIn December 2009 there were 1,437 young people aged 14–16 in the custody of CYF and 89 aged 17 or over

By 30 June 2012 there were 834 14–16 year olds in the custody of CYF and 24 aged 107 or over

Young people exit care at 17, younger than any other English-speaking country

CYF has a transition policy in line with best practice but there is no legislation to back this up and indications are that application is inconsistent and the most challenging young people are likely to have an abrupt transition. OCC report on Children in Care noted that:

Caregivers, social workers and lawyers highlighted this as an area of concern

Many of the 47 young people interviewed expressed anxiety about what would happen when they reached their 17th birthday

The only

young people who

made

any reference to transition support knew

about

Dingwall’s

Launch

programme

Slide16

Some good newsIn 2001 the Nelson office of CYF developed an Independent Youth

Programme

to reduce the risk factors for young people leaving care

Based in a Family Home the programme ran over 12 weeks for up to 3 hours a week with social workers actively involved

Able to transfer knowledge and skill; strong peer relationships developed; educative for participants and their social workers

They concluded that visionary, proactive interventions could only succeed as a pilot within the statutory service and a creative approach working collaboratively with the community was recommended

Recommended that CYF adopt a transitional

programme

as part of the discharge process and that

specialised

teams of social workers be trained for this roleSlide17

More good newsTransition services were introduced in Auckland in 2004 at

Dingwall

Trust

(Launch to Independence) and Youth Horizons (Ka Awatea) 2010 evaluation

of the Launch

programme

run by

Dingwall

Trust found that participants valued the support received

Overall had good outcomes in relation to accommodation, education, income, life skills, health, transport, and social networks and relationships

Relationship with personal adviser critical component

Consistent with international

literature the evaluation

highlights

the vulnerability

of care leavers and

the resilience

building potential of transition

programmesSlide18

Current challengesAccommodation has been identified as a key area of difficultyLimited provision of youth-friendly housing optionsHigh youth unemploymentCreation

of a new

category of young people:

NEET (not in education, employment, or training)16–18 year old young parents16–18 year old partners of a person with a child16–17 year old partners without a child16–17 year olds not supported by familyTwo benefits: Youth Payment and Young Parent Payment

Administered

by Youth

Service

Providers designated by MSD

MSD role is

centralised

Different providers in different areasSlide19

Youth PaymentMust be engaged with Youth Service ProviderMust be in education or trainingMust complete a budgeting course and meet regularly with provider to discuss budget1

st

and 2

nd time fail to meet obligations payment will be suspended and any additional payments stoppedWill have four weeks to address3rd time benefit will be stopped immediatelyPayment is accessed by way of debit card which can only be used at designated shops

Cannot be used to purchase cigarettes or alcoholSlide20

Young Parent PaymentEngage with Youth Service ProviderAttend budgeting course and meet to discussActively involved in education, training or work-based learning from time child is one year old or 6 months if in a Teen Parent Unit

Attend parenting course

Child must be enrolled with PHO and Well Child and completing checks

Child must be in ECE or suitable childcare when attending education or trainingSupported by Guaranteed Childcare Assistance Payment paid direct to providerSame sanctions apply as for Youth BenefitSlide21

Implications for Care LeaversComplex system to negotiateNot everybody is aware of the changes further limiting the support available to young people

Obligation on young people to

fulfil

criteriaResources to support compliance are not necessarily available Budgeting servicesParenting programmes appropriate for teen parentsEarly childhood education services

Education facilities for teen parents (Teen Parent Units)

Some PHOs are at capacity and not accepting new enrolments

No safety net for those who do not complySlide22

MSD Funding for NGOs Currently fund more than 2,300 social services to deliver around 4,600 contracts supporting individuals, children and families each yearMessage from the Minister in June 2012:

It’s vital these Government-funded services make a tangible difference to those who need it

most. Services including intensive home visiting for vulnerable children, parenting support, community social work, youth programmes and employment support have the potential to change lives,

but every dollar has to make a difference

.

Strong emphasis on ensuring best results for children and families

Signalled change within government and in relationship with providersSlide23

Steps to ImplementationGovernmentDetermine purchasing priorities – types of services to be funded and whereMSDStreamline relationship and funding management

Further develop contracting mechanisms

Hold providers and MSD accountable for agreed results

Invest in the capability of providers who have the potential to deliver effectivelyMSD Providersassess their organisational capability and delivery using a framework developed in partnership with MSD

Slide24

ChangesBetter use of multi-year and multi-agency contracts and better consistency across MSD’s service linesIncentivising

providers to achieve the results our communities need

F

unding targeted to what we know is working and the organisations that can demonstrate successProviders working together for better outcomes

S

upporting

providers to develop and adapt to changing expectations

S

olid

and measurable outcomes achieved with

current

funding levels

B

etter

ways of measuring that results are being achievedSlide25

Implications for NGOsChanges to be achieved within current fundingRedistribution rather than investmentClimate of uncertainty

Limited opportunity for expansion or development of new services

Greater expectation that service delivery will be coordinated across agencies

Where does this leave young people transitioning from care?Slide26

What is happening in your area?Around the room you will find sheets of paper with three different questions:What resources/supports are available in your community for young people transitioning from care?

What are the gaps in service provision for young people leaving care?

How could transition be better

supported for each of the three groups identified: moving on; survivors; victims?Please respond to these questionsResponses will be collated and feedback from the five seminars will be provided to SSPASlide27

Where to from here?White PaperChildren in care are identified as vulnerableNew multi-agency strategy for children and young people in careStronger transitions from State care returning to a parent, to a Home for Life or to independent living as a young adult

How can this be ensured?Slide28

The way forwardInternationally progress has only been made when specific legislative provision has been made for care leaving services

Effective transition planning involves a multi-agency approach and collaborative partnerships to ensure access to: accommodation; education, vocational training and employment; income support; mentoring; and social networks.

Research highlights that transition is a 3 stage process involving in-care preparation, exit support, and after care services.

Care leavers’

needs

vary and support must be individually tailored

Models of best practice exist

Current projects demonstrate what is achievable and where improvements can be made Slide29

RecommendationsThe OCC report on children in care found that while current CYF policy was consistent with best practice there

was

evidence of non-compliance leading

to variable outcomes. It was recommended that the Minister for Social Development and Employment: (a) introduce legislation to raise the care leaving age to 18; and

(b)

give

consideration to the enactment of the CYPF Act Amendment Bill no.6, which makes provision for transition planning for all young people approaching

independence. Slide30

RecommendationsIn the meantime CYF should ensure that all young people leaving care have individually tailored support packagesIdentification of a support personSafe, secure accommodation

Supported engagement with education, training or employment

Financial support

School and medical recordsA birth certificateInformation about their birth family, the reason they came into care and their journey through careFor Māori care leavers this should include information about their

whānau

,

hapū

and

iwi

connections

Information about Youth Support servicesSlide31

RecommendationsTransition Services in all larger centres and coordinated support services in smaller centres

Early referral – no later than 15 years of age and earlier for young people experiencing placement instability

Provision of a personal advisor or mentor

Comprehensive assessment of need and referral to appropriate services addressing unresolved issues in relation to mental health, substance abuse, physical health and offendingAccommodation ServicesShelter accommodationFoyer housing

Live-in

carer

housing

Nation-wide provision of One Stop ShopsSlide32

ConclusionWe do not expect our own children to leave home at 17 and become fully independent.All young people leaving care need on-going supportMany will require comprehensive and coordinated support packages that continue for three years or moreIt is extremely unlikely that such a service will be established and funded by government

The majority of care leavers are likely to be more receptive to community-based support rather than continued involvement with a government-funded service

These are our young people and we have a collective responsibility to ensure that they have the opportunity to achieve

positive outcomes