An Analysis of Services Provided by an Independent Living Program

• In Event: Poster Session 06
  In Poster Session: PS 06 Topic - Prevention and Interventions

Abstract

Introduction
Independent Living Programs (ILPs) facilitate foster youths’ transition to adulthood including in education (Montgomery, Donkoh, & Underhill, 2006) and employment (Lemon, Hines, & Merdinger, 2005). Youth are likely to receive these services individually, but multi-domain services are warranted (Chor et al, 2018). The purpose of this study is to determine the services youth are linked to through a multi-domain ILP.
Method
This study involved coding of case notes from 37 ILP cases from between March 2013 to March 2018. The sample consisted of 43% males, 57% females. 14% of subjects were African American, 19% were Bi-Racial, and 68% were Caucasian. 19% of subjects were Hispanic. Qualitative text analysis (Kuckartz, 2013) was used. All codes beginning with the word “youth” mentioning a service related to the ILP or the community were used. Inductive category construction was employed. Thirty categories were created within the seven ILP intervention domains (education, employment, housing, health/mental health, relational/practical support services, prevention, life skills) that included broader groupings of services. Frequencies of services were calculated.
Results
Frequent codes were specialized educational services, workforce development programs, placement settings, individual mental health counseling, medical treatment, financial assistance, substance abuse treatment, and life skills training (see Table 1). Results regarding IL services showed caseworker/Independent Living Coordinator assistance, work involving IL goals, and IL groups were counted frequently.
Discussion
Results reflect the number of foster youths with learning difficulties (Pecora, 2012). Infrequent postsecondary education and financial aid codes highlight difficulties with planning. Foster youth are unsure how to obtain financial aid (Benbenishty & Schiff, 2009). Foster youth have several options for becoming established in full-time work after leaving care (Arnau-Sabates & Gilligan, 2015). Workforce development programs likely contribute. Housing findings suggest how transitional housing gives foster youth a, “newfound sense of control” (Curry & Abrams, 2015). Mental health findings support a high level of mental illness in foster youth (Greeno et al., 2019) and that they are prescribed psychotropic medication at two to eight times the rate of the general population (Lee & Morgan, 2017). Medical codes validate work stating that foster youth lack adequate medical, dental, vision, and hearing services until ILP intervention (Massinga & Pecora, 2004). Findings regarding permanency-related services reflect this ILP’s emphasis. Practical support results demonstrate the ILP’s ability to link youth with financial benefits and transportation. The ILP’s interagency collaboration enables work with community support programs. Prevention findings reflect that foster youth abuse substances (Greeno et al., 2019). The ILP engages youth in extracurricular activities such as the IL retreat and Youth Advisory Board (YAB). The ILP has not effectively promoted birth control unlike other interventions (Taylor et al., 2020). Similar to other programs, this ILP facilitated learning life skills such as budgeting (Lemon et al., 2005).
Caseworkers and Independent Living Coordinators were emphasized as the main individuals working with youth. Results highlighted the importance of the program’s goal structure and the centrality of IL groups. The ILP initiated more services than it terminated.

Authors

• Laura Nathans, Penn State Scranton
  Presenting Author

• Lori Chaffers, Lackawanna Office of Youth and Family Services
  Non-Presenting Author