Factors predicting foster carer satisfaction and the

decision to stay in fostering

Mrs Anne EatonDr Marie Caltabiano

James Cook University

I can understand why there is not only a shortage of [foster] carers but also why new carers quite often last for only a short time. … I have three children of my own but have opened my home to others.

After being approved recently, I was asked to care for three extra children which I took on as I was the last resort due to the short supply of carers. I have as yet been given no training, no information, no handbook. I have no idea if there are any support groups or meetings I can attend. I do not know what my entitlements are in regards to support, transport, equipment etc…

(A Queensland Foster Carer, April 2005)

Out-of-Home Care Queensland

An increase of 69% in three years

2005: 5,337 Children in Foster care

2002: 3,163 Children in Foster Care

2004: 4,184 Children in Foster Care

2003: 3,497 Children in Foster Care

(Department of Child Safety, 2006)

Foster Carers

“a person who has been fully assessed, trained and approved by the Department of Child Safety to provide family-based care for children who are subject to statutory child protection intervention” (p.33).

(Department of Child Safety, 2004)

Definition

Status of Foster Carers

Foster carers are frequently treated almost as a necessary evil rather than specialist volunteers who contribute much emotionally, personally and financially to the care of children.

(p.117, CMC, 2004)

Some Background Research

84% rate support as very importantLack of support - a reason for quittingJob control is more rewardingLack of control lowers satisfaction

Some Background Research

Satisfaction impacts on retentionIntention to quit correlated with departure

(AFCA, 2001; Baum et al, 2001; Bond & Bunce, 2003; Carter, 2004; Dollard et al., 2000; McHugh, 2002; Pasztor & Wynne, 1995; Sinclair et al, 2004; McCubbin et el, 1996; Pearlin et al, 1990; Reber, 1995)

Satisfaction is linked to motivation

Our Research

investigated the interaction between perceived supports, locus of control, satisfaction, and personal commitment of Queensland foster carers and their possible influence on retention rates

investigated the interaction between perceived supports, locus of control, satisfaction, and personal commitment of Queensland foster carers and their possible influence on retention rates

What we Did

186 Queensland Foster CarersMembers of Foster Care Queensland (FCQ)Self-Report Style Questionnaire

(AFCA, 2001; Dept Child Safety, 2004)

What we did

Demographic details about carersSupport for fostering Foster Carer Locus of ControlSatisfaction with fostering Commitment to the children in careLikelihood of staying or leavingThree open-ended questions

Questionnaire content included:

What we expected -The Hypotheses

Support

ControlSatisfaction

PersonalCommitment

Stay or Leave

Satisfaction

The Statistical Results

DV: Total Satisfaction

Multiple Regression Analysis

IVs: Perceived Support & Locus of Control

F (2,173) = 87.24, p < .001

• Both IVs made a significant contribution to the prediction of the DV

The Statistical Results

IVs: Satisfaction and Commitment

Logistic Regression Analysis

Both IVs made a significant contribution to the prediction of the DV

DV: Stay or Leave

What we expected -The Hypotheses

Support

ControlSatisfaction

PersonalCommitment

Stay or Leave

So What?RetentionMatching

The Factor ResultsPerceived Support – emotional & practical

based on discrepancy between ideal and actual

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

overall lower than ideal

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

LowestDiscrepancies

HighestDiscrepancies

Spouse/Partner Child Safety Officer

Best Friend Agency Support Person

Extended Family Member FCQ FAST Delegate

Foster carer to foster carer

The Factor Results

Normal distribution of scores

Locus of Control Locus of control scale score

Locus of control scale score

102

86

82

79

76

73

70

67

64

61

58

55

52

49

46

43

40

35

32

Fre

qu

en

cy

10

8

6

4

2

0

Slightly more internals than externals

The Factor Results

Personal CommitmentHave you made a personal commitment to a child in your care?

N %

Yes 129 69.4

No 54 29.0

No Answer 3 1.6

Total 186 100.0

Have you made a personal commitment to a child in your care?

N %

Yes 129 69.4

No 54 29.0

No Answer 3 1.6

Total 186 100.0

Have you made a personal commitment to a child in your care?

N %

Yes 129 69.4

No 54 29.0

No Answer 3 1.6

Total 186 100.0

The Factor ResultsOverall Satisfaction with

Fostering

N %

Very Satisfied 29 15.6

Satisfied 70 27.6

Neither Satisfied nor dissatisfied

43 23.1

Unsatisfied 22 11.8

Very unsatisfied 22 11.8

Total 186 100

Overall Satisfaction with Fostering

N %

Very Satisfied 29 15.6

Satisfied 70 27.6

Neither Satisfied nor dissatisfied

43 23.1

Unsatisfied 22 11.8

Very unsatisfied 22 11.8

Total 186 100

Overall Satisfaction with Fostering

N %

Very Satisfied 29 15.6

Satisfied 70 27.6

Neither Satisfied nor dissatisfied

43 23.1

Unsatisfied 22 11.8

Very unsatisfied 22 11.8

Total 186 100

43.2%

23.6%

The Factor ResultsLeave or Stay?

Likely to Give up in Next 18 Months

N %

Very likely 27 14.7

Somewhat likely 10 5.4

Unsure 21 11.4

Somewhat Unlikely 33 17.9

Very unlikely 93 50.3

Total 184 100

20.1%

The Factor Results

Plus…

Logistic Regression Analysis of Likelihood to Stay as a Dependant of Satisfaction and Commitment

95% CI for Odds Ratio

Variables B Wald Test

df Sig Odds Ratio

Upper

Lower

Commitment

.93 4.49 1 .034 2.54 1.07 6.03

Satisfaction .04 16.63 1 .000 1.04 1.02 1.05

Logistic Regression

Logistic Regression Analysis of Likelihood to Stay as a Dependant of Satisfaction and Commitment

95% CI for Odds Ratio

Variables B Wald Test

df Sig Odds Ratio

Upper

Lower

Commitment

.93 4.49 1 .034 2.54 1.07 6.03

Satisfaction .04 16.63 1 .000 1.04 1.02 1.05

Logistic Regression Analysis of Likelihood to Stay as a Dependant of Satisfaction and Commitment

95% CI for Odds Ratio

Variables B Wald Test

df Sig Odds Ratio

Upper

Lower

Commitment

.93 4.49 1 .034 2.54 1.07 6.03

Satisfaction .04 16.63 1 .000 1.04 1.02 1.05

Commitment has a greatest impact

The Factor Results

“I am 150% committed to the two children I have in care. Their needs are foremost in my life…” “[My] commitment to a seven year-old child in our long‑term care…”“We are very committed to the long-term children we have”

Commitment has the greatest impact

“Despite the massive inadequacies at the department our unconditional love and support to our foster child, and the joy she has brought to our family makes it all worthwhile”

The Factor Results Commitment has the greatest impact

“The children I have are the only reason I will not give up fostering”

Conclusion

Control and support Satisfaction Official supports need improvementSatisfaction and commitment Retention20% (317) expected to leaveReplacement is difficult and costlyChildren will be affected IF carers numbers decrease

Conclusion

RecognitionSome control and more supportConsideration of satisfaction levelsRemember: Foster carers are volunteers!High quality of careMore stable home environmentMore experienced carers

Thank You

Contact DetailsDr Marie Caltabianomarie.caltabiano@jcu.edu.auPhone 07 4042 1183

Mrs Anne Eatoneaton1@ledanet.com.auPhone 07 4054 3608

ReferencesAustralian Foster Care Association. (2001). Suppoerting Strong Parenting in the Australian Foster Care Sector. Canberra: Department of Family and Community Services. Retrieved March 16, 2003 from: http//www.fcaact.org.au/exec_ht.html Australian Foster Care Association (2005). Foster Care – The current Context. Retrieved 18 June, 2006, from www.fostercare.org.au/docs/fc_currentcontext.pdfBaum, A.C., Crase, S.J., & Crase, K.L. (2001). Influences on the decision to become or not become a foster parent. Families in Society, 82 (2), 202-213.CMC. (2004). Protecting Children: An Inquiry into Abuse of Children in Foster Care. Brisbane: The Crime and Misconduct Commission, Queensland.Carter, J. (2004). Wanted: A New Vision for Foster Care. Paper presented at the Australian Foster Care Association Annual Conference, Canberra.

ReferencesDelfabbro, P., Barber, J.G., & Cooper, L (2000). Placement disruption and dislocation in South Australian substitute care. Children Australia, 25, 16-20.Department of Child Safety. (2004). Child Protection Queensland: 2004 Child Protection System ‘Baseline’ Performance Report. Brisbane: Queensland GovernmentMcCubbin, H., Thompson, A., & McCubbin, M. (1996). Family assessment: Resiliency, coping and adaptation – Inventories for research and practice. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin System.McHugh, M. (2002). The Costs of Caring: A Study of Appropriate Foster Care Payments for Stable and Adequate Out-of-Home Care in Australia. Report prepared for Child and Family Welfare Association of Australia, Australian Foster Care Association, and the Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies: Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.

References O’Neill, C. (2000). Adoption, permanent care and foster care: Home-based care in and beyond the 199’s. Journal of Pediatrician's: Child Health, 36, 415-417.Pasztor, E.M. & Wynne, S.F. (1995). Foster Parent Retention and Recruitment: The State of the Art in Practice and Policy. Washington: Child Welfare League of America.Pearlin, L.I., Mullan, J.T., Sempe, S.J. & Skaff, M.M. (1990). Caregiving and the stress process: An overview of concepts and their measure. The Gerontologist, 30, 583-594.Sinclair, I., Gibbs, I., & Wilson, K. (2004). Foster Carers: Why They Stay and Why They Leave. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Wilson, K., Sinclair, I., & Gibbs, I. (2000). The trouble with foster care: the impact of stressful ‘events’ on foster carers. British Journal of Social Work, 30, 193-209.

What carers were satisfied with

Looking after foster childrenFeeling pride in being a foster carerSaw caring for foster child as enjoyableThe number of meetings to attendAvailability of reimbursements for child-related costs Value of training offeredQuality of training offered

What carers were not satisfied with

Amount of emotional support receivedNeeding to assert their rights to be treated as a professional team memberReliability of promises by departmental workersEmotional support received is as good as for paid employmentThe range of the training offered

What carers were not satisfied with

Organization of practical supportsAbout the need for some of the training Grief and loss support when child leavesTheir opportunities to participate in policy development and changesDepartmental processes that makes it difficult to be a good carerThe emotional support that is received