Supportive housing program for homeless families: Foster care outcomes and best practices
Description
Purpose: This study is an outcome evaluation of Cottage Housing Incorporated's Serna Village Program (CHI), a supportive housing program serving homeless families in Sacramento, California.
Methods: This quasi-experimental study examined a sample of 293 children and youth who lived with their parents in CHI between 2002 and 2009.
Results: 71% of the children had a history of foster care before CHI; 10% of the youth reentered foster care after graduating from CHI (compared with reentry rates of 20–40% from other studies). The CHI youth overall spent less time in care after foster care reentry when compared to other Sacramento County youth. Child welfare costs of the sample before entering CHI were $1,313,262, yet at reentry, child welfare costs were $295,632 (2.5 to 5 years after leaving CHI).
Conclusions: Child welfare recidivism rates and total child welfare costs after reentry may decrease for homeless families by providing them with permanent housing and support services.
Methods: This quasi-experimental study examined a sample of 293 children and youth who lived with their parents in CHI between 2002 and 2009.
Results: 71% of the children had a history of foster care before CHI; 10% of the youth reentered foster care after graduating from CHI (compared with reentry rates of 20–40% from other studies). The CHI youth overall spent less time in care after foster care reentry when compared to other Sacramento County youth. Child welfare costs of the sample before entering CHI were $1,313,262, yet at reentry, child welfare costs were $295,632 (2.5 to 5 years after leaving CHI).
Conclusions: Child welfare recidivism rates and total child welfare costs after reentry may decrease for homeless families by providing them with permanent housing and support services.
Format
webpage
Type
journal article
Citation
Lenz-Rashid, S. (2017). Supportive housing program for homeless families: Foster care outcomes and best practices. Children and Youth Services Review, 79, 558-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.07.012