This Issue:
Family Reunification **Unapproved DRAFT July 30, 1999**

THE DCFS PERSPECTIVE
DCFS Article (Pending)

LITERATURE SUMMARIES
The Status of Reunification
1. Reunification Nationwide
2. Reunification in Illinois
3. Illinois' Intensive Reunification Program

Service Models
4. Family Preservation Services
5. Family Group Decision Making

Predictors of Reunification
6. A Literature Review Synthesis
7. Visiting is a Strong Predictor
8. Poverty Predicts Failed Reunification

Practice Recommendations
9. Parent-Child Visits need Careful Attention
10. Mothers' View of Reunification
11. Parents and Workers Speak

DCFS Article     top
by - DCFS Division
Article pending...

1. The Status of Reunification Nationwide     top

Barth, R. P. (1997). "Family Reunification." Pages 219-228 in Child Welfare Research Review, Volume II. New York: Columbia University Press.

The author reviews recent reunification literature and programs.

Reunification is the Usual Exit From Care
Reunification is the primary exit from foster care. By four years after placement, two-thirds of children will return home and more return after four years. Reunifications are not particlarly permanent and must be tried repeatedly. About 1 in 4 reunifications fail.

30% Reenter Foster Care

  • 30% of reunified children reenter foster care.
  • Reentries are highest for infants and for children with the shortest stays in care.
  • Young children are 25% more likely to reenter care than older children.
  • Reentry to care is most likely within 6 months of returning home.
  • Black children have the highest reentry rate, followed by white children. Other ethnic groups, including Hispanic children, have the lowest reentry rate.
  • Children from kinship care placements are one-third less likely to reenter care.

Lessons For Reunifying Young Children
It is disturbing that young children, especially those in care a short time, have high reentry rates. Pressure to reunify young children quickly can come from concern about maintaining the children's attachment to their parents. However, decisions to reunify children younger than age 3 when they have been less than 6 months in care should be made cautiously, and the family should be supported with 12 months of post-reunification services. Perhaps very young children should be placed with foster parents who are committed to becoming adoptive parents if reunification fails.

2. The Status of Reunification in Illinois     top

Children and Family Research Center, School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1998). "Report on Outcomes for Children Who are the Responsibility of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services."

Goerge, Robert M. and Bong Joo Lee (1998). "Reunification of Children in Substitute Care in Illinois: 1987-1996." Children and Family Research Center, School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Increasing Numbers of Children are in Care and Kinship Care
The number of children placed in substitute care in Illinois has increased by over 130% between 1990 and 1997. The number of children placed in kinship care in Illinois has increased by over 260% from 1991 to 1997. Currently, over half of the children in placement are in kinship care.

Reunification Rates are Declining in Illinois
The number of children in care that are reunified with their families has declined each year since 1990 in Illinois. In 1990, 46% of children in care were not returned home; in 1997, 79% of children in care were not returned home.

Illinois' Reunification Rate is Now Lower Than Other States Of the six states accounting for about half the U.S. foster care population, Illinois is now last in percentage of children returned home.

  1988 1992
California 51.1% 48.3%
Missouri 49.6% 46.4%
Michigan 44.7% 44.1%
New York 47.8% 41.5%
Texas 39.9% 36.5%
Illinois 48.4% 25.6%

Time in Care and Age Affect Chances for Reunification

  • Children who are in care for more than six months have less than a 20% chance of returning home, and their chances decrease with more time in care.
  • A child's chances for reunification decrease with each placement.
  • A child's first placement (long, short, stable) predicts the nature of her/his subsequent placements.
  • Fewer young children under age 3 are being reunified, while more children aged 6-9 are being returned home.
  • Children who spend at least 3 years with their families are more likely to return home.
  • Children with behavior problems spend more time in care than neglected or abused children.
  • Neglected children spend more time in care than abused children.
  • There are no differences in reunification rates in Illinois by gender.

Reunification Rates Vary by Race, But Why?
Hispanic children have a higher reunification rate than white or black children, but the rates for all three have declined from 1990 to 1997. Black children are more likely to live in Cook County and to enter kinship care, and these factors, rather than race, may explain their lower reunification rate.

  1990 1997
Hispanic 29% 16%
White 18% 13%
Black 15% 6%

Children in Cook County Kinship Care are Significantly Less Reunified
Most of the children in care in Cook County are black, and enter kinship care rather than out-of-family care. Children in custody in Cook County are only 60% as likely to be reunified as children from other parts of the state. Some observers suggest that the Cook County Juvenile Court plays a role in delaying reunifications, and perhaps there are other aspects of the Cook County system that bear investigation. Children in kinship care are 25% less likely to be reunified than other children, and they are reunified less quickly.

3. Ilinois' Intensive Reunification Program     top

Rzepnicki, T. L., J. R. Schuerman and P. R. Johnson (1997). "Facing Uncertainty: Reuniting High-Risk Families." Pages 229-251 in Child Welfare Research Review, Volume II. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

The Illinois Family Reunification program established in 1988 is a time-limited, intensive service that provides case management and support services for famiies with children in foster care, with the goal of returning children to their own homes. This study examines outcomes for 1,014 cases between Spring 1990 and November 1993.

Services provided for up to six months included:

  • frequent in-person contact between families and social workers
  • at least weekly visitation between parents and their children
  • cash assistance
  • help with housing problems, and other material needs (such as clothing, food)
  • counseling, including individual counseling (60% of cases), parent training and education (49%), drug and alcohol treatment (40%), family counseling (32%), advocacy services (32%), crisis intervention (26%)
  • medical or dental care (25%)
  • transportation (68% of cases, largely to facilitate parent-child visits)
  • case management services
  • 46% of families received services beyond six months.

Reunification Increased by 20%
The probability of program children returning home surpassed the comparison group after 6 months, eventually exceeding their rates by 20%. However, because cases were not randomly assigned to groups, the two groups may not have been truly comparable. Of program children:

  • 40% were returned to their own homes within 6 months of referral
  • 48% returned within 9 months
  • 53% returned within one year
Chicago children were reunited with their parents at a lower rate at each of the three points (28%, 30%, 40%).

Common Family Problems Were Observed
Substance abuse was a problem for 52% of families at some point during participation in the program. The most common serious family problems included:

  • parent emotional problems (42% of cases)
  • drug abuse (31%)
  • alcohol abuse (29%)
  • poor parenting skills (28%)
  • child behavior problems (24%)
  • marital/adult relationship problems (24%)
  • poverty or financial need (24%)
  • inadequate supervision of children (23%).

Some Child Problems Support Reunification
Problems postively associated with reunification tend to be child-focused, including:

  • relationship problems between the child and peers or siblings
  • parent-child conflict
  • school, academic or behavioral problems.

Children who were abused were more likely to be reunited than those who were neglected.

Parent Problems Hinder Reunification
Problems negatively associated with reunification tend to be parent-focused, including:

  • emotional problems of parents
  • drug abuse
  • homelessness
  • chronic mental illness
  • adult criminal offense.

Services Supporting Reunification
Families who received larger numbers of concrete services were more likely to be reunited. Concrete services include food, furniture or household goods, utility benefits, day care, homemakers and babysitters.

Parent training and family counseling were positively related to reunification, although individual counseling did not affect reunification. The number of counseling services provided did not predict reunification.

Program Had Difficulties With Resources and Appropriate Referrals
The Family Reunification program operated in the shadow of the larger Family First Placement Prevention Program, and received less attention and fewer resources. A component of the program intended to more actively involve foster parents was abandoned early due to difficulties in converting traditional foster care homes into 'family reunification homes' and in recruiting foster parents interested in a more active role.

The staff expected to make referrals to the program did not receive adequate training, and often had little understanding of the program and which cases constituted appropriate referrals.

Close to half the families referred to the program were found to be unsuitable candidates for the service, and were sent back to regular DCFS services.

4. Family Preservation Services Can Support Reunification     top

Walton, Elaine. (1998). "In-Home Family Focused Reunification: A Six Year Follow-up of a Successful Experiment." Social Work Research v22 n4 p205-213.

In Utah, family preservation programs that provide brief, intensive in-home services to families at risk of child placement have been successful. In 1989-1990, the same type of services were offered as part of an experimental family reunification program. The services were offered to 62 children and the outcomes were compared to 58 children who received routine reunification services. The families were given help with:

  • family communication and problem solving skills
  • parenting skills
  • food, housing, employment, health and mental health needs
  • in-home support after the child is returned home.

Brief Intensive Services Increased Reunification
The experimental services had better short-term outcomes than the routine foster care services.

  • The experimental-group children were in their homes an average of 72.7% of the time during 90-day service period while the control-group children were in their homes an average of 16.4% of that time.
  • By the end of the 90-day service period, 96.5% of the experimental-group children had returned home compared with 32.1% of the control-group children.
  • After 12 months, 75.4% of the experimental-group children were still at home while only 49% of the control-group children were still at home.

Families Served Had Better Long-Term Stability
At the time the cases were closed, the experimental group children had these characteristics:

  • required less agency supervision time
  • lived at home longer
  • had less-restrictive placements.

After six years, the two groups were similar in the number of their referrals to child protection and their amount of agency involvement. However, 66% of the experimental-group families were considered 'stabilized' while only 33% of the control group families were considered stabilized.

5. The Family Group Decision Making Model Can Support Reunification     top

Burford, G. and others (1996). "Reunification as an Extended Family Matter." Community Alternatives: International Journal of Family Care v8 n2 p33-55.

This Canadian demonstration project adapted the model of Family Group Decision Making for use in situations involving family violence. The Family Group Decision Making model is based on the New Zealand approach to family conferencing.

The project brought 32 extended families comprising 384 family members together for individual family conferences. All were multi-problem families with confirmed abuse between family members.

The conferences lasted on average 5.5 hours, and were structured in stages. Professionals presented information about family cases and community resources. The family met privately to discuss options and develop a plan, which was reviewed and approved by the coordinator. Plans included reunification, placement with kin, and ways to avert the removal of a child.

The Family Group Decision Making Model Supports Reunification Through Partnerships
The model encourages reunification of extended family relationships through building family, community and government partnerships. The aim is not mediation or to rehash family history, but to form a plan to stop the family violence and prevent it from happening again. The model can serve a variety of goals, including

  • preventing out-of-home placement
  • returning children to parents or kinship placement
  • promoting family relationships
  • forestalling alienation or loss of identity with biological relatives in cases of outside placement.

Primary Goal is Safety, Not Preservation
Safeguarding all abused family members is more important than keeping the nuclear family together. Holding offenders responsible for their actions and involving family members in decisions about their affairs are also important goals.

The Project Shows Positive Results
The model as practiced in the study did not increase risk for abused or vulnerable family members; instead it increased sympathy and decreased blame toward victims in the extended family network. The process increased understanding and cooperation between investigators and the family. Participating family members and professionals alike expressed high satisfaction with the process. The model was found to be adaptable to diverse cultural, family and local traditions, while promoting justice.

Attention to Detail Was Key to Success
Careful attention to detail in preparations and in supporting family participants was important to conference success, including:

  • selecting family members to participate by involving a key family member

  • taking care to encourage and reassure participants

  • ensuring that a support person is present who is unambiguously aligned with a person making a disclosure

  • paying attention to logistical and practical details such as preparing special food, arranging car transportation for large families on the morning of their conference, or assisting with untangling governmental red tape to help get families to their conference.

6. Predictors of Reunification: A Literature Review Synthesis     top

Directly from page 9 of Barrick, Jill Duerr, Melissa Lim Brodowski, Laura Frame, and Sheryl Goldberg (1997). "Factors Associated with Family Reunification Outcomes: Understanding Reentry to Care for Infants." Prepared for Alameda County Social Services Agency. Bay Area Social Services Consortium and U.C. School of Social Welfare. Berkeley CA: University of California.

The authors prepared this list of predictors from their review of approximately 30 articles on family reunification and foster care reentry.

Major
Domain		 Characteristics Significant for Family Reunification Characteristics Significant for Reentry to Care
Child
  • More likely for younger children
  • Least likely for African Americans
  • Less likely with the presence of
    • behavioral/mental health problems
  • Less likely with the presence of developmental disabilities
  • More likely for younger children
  • More likely for African Americans
  • More likely with the presence of behavioral/mental health problems
Parent Less likely when the following are present:
  • substance abuse
  • prior CPS intervention
  • experience of abuse as a child
  • mental illness/developmental disability
  • unemployment
  • domestic violence
  • criminal history
  • ambivalence
 More likely when the following are present:
  • lack of parenting skills
  • previous mental health hospitalization
CPS Reports Less likely when the following are present:
  • reports based on neglect, parental
    • absence/incapacity
  • chronic abuse pattern
  • reports on severe abuse
  
Household
  • More likely with the presence of social support systems
  • More likely with stable living environments
  • Slower rates of reunification with AFDC eligible homes
  • More likely when there is a lack of social support system
Foster Care
Placements
  • More likely with shorter length of time in care
  • More likely with fewer placements
  • Less likely with kin placements
  • More likely with regular visits from the parents
  • More likely with shorter length of time in care
  • More likely with more placements
  • Less likely with kin placements
Worker
  • More likely with smaller caseload sizes
  • More likely with timely case plans
  • More likely with less child welfare experience
Services
  • More likely when the following are present:
  • comprehensive services and case management
  • concrete assistance to families
  • greater number and intensity of services
  • prevention and after care services
  

7. Visiting is a Strong Predictor of Reunification     top

Davis, I., J. Landsverk, R. Newton, and W. Ganger (1996). "Parental Visiting and Foster Care Reunification." Children and Youth Services Review v18 n4-5 p363-382.

Past research shows that children in foster care who are most visited by their parents are also most likely to be reunified with their parents. In San Diego, data from the cases of 922 children in foster care were analyzed to test the effect of parental visiting on the rate of reunification. When parents visited their children at the level recommended by their reunification plans, the families were much more likely to be reunified. Although visiting is a strong predictor of reunification, this study does not clarify whether visiting indicates a pre-existing willingness on the part of the parents to regain their children, or whether visiting itself promoted reunification.

Factors Correlated With Reunification
The child most likely to be reunified:

  • was Anglo-American or Hispanic
  • lived with two parents, at least one of whom was a biological parent
  • was removed from the home for sexual abuse as opposed to physical abuse or neglect
  • had a mother who visited as recommended in the reunification plan.

The child least likely to be reunified:

  • was African-American
  • lived with only one parent or a non-parent
  • was removed from the home for other than sexual abuse
  • had a mother who visited less than recommended in the reunification plan.

Visiting was more frequent for children in kinship placements, and although fathers visited less frequently than mothers, fathers' visits were still correlated with a higher likelihood of reunification.

8. Poverty Predicts Failed Reunification     top

Jones, L. (1998). "The Social and Family Correlates of Successful Reunification of Children in Foster Care" Children and Youth Service Review v20 n4 p305-323.

The authors looked at data for 445 children from 245 families in San Diego county who were reunified with their parents. They found that poverty was the strongest predictor of failed reunification.

Predictors of Failure

  • Children removed from inadequate housing are more likely to reenter foster care or be re-referred.
  • Parent(s) who are unemployed and receiving public assistance are more likely to be re-referred or have their children removed again.
  • Neglected children are more likely to be re-referred, but not to reenter foster care.
  • Children with medical or behavioral problems are more likely to reenter foster care.

Surprisingly, the data did not show that single parent households or parental substance abuse predicted failed reunification.

Provide Help with Poverty
Child welfare must help families with the problems related to poverty, such as poor education, poor housing, unemployment and unsafe neighborhoods if reunifications are to be successful.

9. Parent-Child Visits Need Careful Attention     top

Loar, L. (1998). "Making Visits Work." Child Welfare v77 n1 p41-56.

Visits between parents and children are key to successful reunification. However, arranging for successful visits means more than planning the location and schedule of visiting. For the time to be productive, the content and structure of the visits need special attention.

Parents May Lack Visiting Skills
Most visiting plans overestimate parents' abilities to interact appropriately with their children. Parents may lack basic capabilities such as:

  • experience playing with a child and being able to enjoy the play
  • knowing how to use children's toys
  • ability to read
  • ability to contain their own negative feelings
  • ability to recognize or imagine how children feel
  • ability to appreciate their child's company
  • skills for any leisure activity other than drug use, violence and sex.

How to Plan Successful Visits

  • Assess the child's age, developmental stage, attention span, temperament, and hobbies/interests to set up activities that would be enjoyable and beneficial for the child.
  • Assess the parents' attention span and hobbies/interests, and their ability to recognize and encourage positive responses in their child.
  • Find overlapping ties to people, places, and things to provide familiarity for the child, such as visiting in a familiar park where a mother may have taken her child before.
  • Pick a safe and public setting where the stigmatization and embarrassment of visiting at the agency can be avoided.
  • Structure the visit with ritual greetings and good-byes, activities and breaks. Classes or activities at a local 'Y' or library may be appropriate.
  • Periodically review and modify the visits, taking age and development into consideration.

10. Mothers' View of Reunification     top

Marcenko, M.O. and M.I. Striepe (1997). "A Look at Family Reunification Through the Eyes of Mothers." Community Alternative: International Journal of Family Care, v9 n1 p33-48.

Characteristics of Mothers At Risk
12 mothers who had been reunified with their children were interviewed about their experience of child placement and reunification. All or most women:

  • were living in poverty
  • had a child under 2 years of age
  • were single
  • were African-American
  • had mental health and/or substance abuse problems.

Substance Abuse and Poor Housing Lead to Placement
Substance abuse, either by the mother or by others, was the most frequent variable contributing to child placement. Unsafe neighbourhoods filled with violence and drugs also contributed significantly to child placement, and were a key barrier to later reunification.

Mothers' Motivation and Support Helps Reunification
Reunification is more likely for a mother who:

  • is motivated and willing to make changes in her life out of love for her children - mothers' love for their children and the desire to be good mothers was the main factor that made reunification possible
  • experienced a crisis which triggered a resolve to confront problems
  • has sources of strength and support, through family or partners, spirituality, drug treatment or other social services
  • has a strong sense of self and believes in herself
  • has an appropriate place to live - unsafe neighbourhoods and limited housing opportunities are barriers to reunification.

Suggestions for Service

  • Family Drug Use - Target substance abuse prevention programs to children with chemically-dependent siblings and extended family members, not just to children with chemically-dependent parents. Many women in the sample had relatives who were drug users and facilitated access to drugs.

  • Support Sobriety - Avoid drug relapse by helping clients remain sober in settings associated with drug use. When family members are involved in substance abuse, clients may not be able to avoid people and places linked to their drug use.

  • Motivation - Acknowledge that clients want to do what is best for their children and build on that motivation to encourage drug treatment. The desire to do what is good and right for their children eventually gave mothers the strength to enter recovery. Child welfare workers can use this information to identify with chemically-dependent clients, and provide support to enter treatment.

  • Housing - Work to resolve the housing situation. Lack of housing posed the greatest hurdle to reunification for mothers in this study.

11. Parents and Workers Speak     top

Barrick, Jill Duerr, Melissa Lim Brodowski, Laura Frame, and Sheryl Goldberg (1997). "Factors Associated with Family Reunification Outcomes: Understanding Reentry to Care for Infants." Prepared for Alameda County Social Services Agency. Bay Area Social Services Consortium and U.C. School of Social Welfare. Berkeley CA: University of California. 115P.

This California study included a literature review, case record review, in-depth case studies, and focus group interviews.

Focus Group Findings: Parents' Perspectives
18 former welfare clients of Alameda County participated in focus group interviews. The findings from the focus groups include these points:

  • Change - The removal of a child is both traumatic and enlightening for parents. Some parents were stimulated by the removal of their children to begin positively changing their lives.

  • Social Workers - Good relationships with social workers are strongly associated with positive reunification experiences. Parents who felt respected, listened to and heard by their workers had generally positive reunification experiences. Parents believed they worked better with workers of the same racial and class background, and those who were parents themselves.

  • Parents acknowledged the destructive influence of drug addiction on their parenting abilities. Their personal readiness and willingness to change were key factors in their decisions to stop their drug abuse.

  • Partners - The presence of partners often had an negative influence on reunification efforts. Mothers report involvement with men who were physically and sexually abusive, drug addicted and/or convicted felons.

  • Child Contact - Developing and sustaining relationships with their children while in care was both painful and a struggle for parents.

  • Foster Parents - Personable, open and flexible foster parents were highly valued. Foster parents who were unsupportive of parents' efforts to reunify were an added source of frustration, stress and anger.

  • Assistance - Concrete forms of assistance were most valued. Parents valued concrete assistance such as furniture, transportation, child care. Services to help secure stable housing were also valued highly. Parenting classes, particularly Black parenting classes, were deemed useful.

Focus Group Findings: Workers' Perspectives

11 child welfare workers from Alameda County participated in focus group interviews. The findings of the focus groups include these points:

  • Motivation - Involved parents get reunified. Parents who take responsibility for their problems and make real life changes are most likely to succeed in reunification.

  • Relationship - The personal relationship between workers and parents is the most important part of service delivery. Racial matching is important, as is the mediating ability and cultural sensitivity of the worker.

  • Case Loads - Case load levels and complexity of cases make it difficult for workers to effectively serve families. This results in increasing worker frustration and burn-out.

  • Obstacles - Parents and workers face obstacles of race and poverty.

  • Substance Abuse - Parental substance abuse hinders reunification. Addiction and recovery are complex processes, which make it difficult for workers to effectively help parents.

  • Funding - Workers are frustrated by limited funds to spend on services for clients. Workers believed that drug testing, drug treatment, affordable housing, and homemaker services were vital to help families stay together.

  • Investigation vs Reunification - Workers noted a conflict between the agency's investigative process and the reunification process, and wished a more consistent message would be communicated to families as they move through the system.

Practice Recommendations
Former welfare clients and social workers who participated in the focus group study made these suggestions to improve service:

At Pre-Placement...

  • Intensive Services - Provide in-home intensive services to prevent infants from entering foster care in the first place. Infants removed at younger ages reenter the system at higher rates. Try to keep these infants at home whenever possible, perhaps using the Family Preservation model combining concrete assistance with intensive case management.

  • Special Needs - Offer additional support services for vulnerable infants born with special needs. Infants born with problems like low birth weight or prenatal drug exposure have the highest risk for future health problems and reentry into care. Provide support and education to help parents cope with the difficult task of caring for these children.

At Placement...

  • Placement History - Carefully monitor families with multiple reports prior to placement, and families with older siblings already in placement. These characteristics may indicate a high level of family dysfunction that will need intensive pre- and post-reunification services.

  • Visitation - Ensure immediate, ongoing and frequent visitation, particularly between parents and their infants, to avoid disrupting their attachment to their children. Services such as transportation, and alternative living arrangements such as supervised residential treatment facilities can help.

  • Peer Mentoring - Develop a peer mentoring program for parents in the reunification process. Successful former clients can act as role models and support new clients by helping explain a sometimes confusing system.

  • Support - Provide ongoing support and encouragement for existing positive influences in the family. Reinforce the fathers' participation in services. Consider the role of clients' support systems and engage them wherever possible.

  • Education - Ensure that parent education and training classes for families with substance abuse problems cover substance abuse issues.

At Reunification...

  • Risk Assessment - Complete a standardized risk assessment form at every major decision-point in the case. This helps in monitoring areas of strength and concern in a family, and in comparing case circumstances over time.

  • Infants - Pay close attention to permanency planning timelines for infants. Infants develop rapidly, and services must be timely and responsive to ensure the best possible chance for stability. Planning for reunification or other options must begin immediately on placement.

At Post-Placement...

  • Preservation Services - Provide Family Preservation or Family Maintenance services to families who reunify. This could include families with substance abuse problems, criminal involvement, or unstable housing situations.

  • Housing - Channel more resources into providing housing. Financial assistance for adequate housing is essential for families if reunification is to last. Workers should consider close collaboration with the local housing authority, creative solutions such as such as shared housing with other families in care, and relocation services.

  • Training - Provide Parenting Skills Training and Support for Families Post-Reunification. The period of transition home is difficult for many parents and children. Assistance in managing inevitable conflicts may help to prevent foster care reentry.

See pages xvii to xix of this report for further County Level, Education, and Research recommendations.

top