A Look at Family Finances in Foster Parenting

by Claire Chiamulera

It’s no surprise that a foster family’s finances affect children’s foster care experiences and placement stability. New research by the Chapin Hall Center for Children reveals that foster families faced with growing financial pressures may choose to cut back or stop fostering, or their ability to perform their roles may be limited. The findings are significant in the current economic climate as they create challenges for legal and social work professionals who seek safe caregivers for children in the child welfare system.

The researchers interviewed 35 Illinois foster parents in 2005 and 2006 to learn about their financial circumstances, family composition, employment status and related issues. The researchers were especially interested in how financial strain affects foster parents’ ability to perform their roles and their choices about whether to continue fostering.

Based on an analysis of the interviews, the researchers grouped the foster parents into three categories of financial well-being:

(1) Strained - These foster parents had outstanding or unpaid bills, lacked money for basic needs, reported having utilities turned off or “going without” and were stressed about bills. Foster parents in this group tended not to be married and half relied on fixed income sources (e.g., pensions, disability payments) for money. Those with jobs typically had low-earning jobs that lacked health insurance or other benefits. (Eight foster parents comprised this group.)

(2) Managing - These foster parents were able to pay their bills and reported few big financial problems. Several reported the foster care payment was too low to cover such items as clothing and food for the child. Foster parents in this group tended not to be married. Some parents relied on fixed-income sources, while others had jobs that were generally unskilled or entry level. These foster parents often had three or more foster children in the home. (Seventeen foster parents comprised this group.)

(3) Secure - These foster parents reported being financially secure and were generally comfortable. They could afford to give their foster children extras. They also had retirement, vacation, education, and other savings accounts. Foster parents in this group were more likely to be married, with both adults working, generally in long-term professional positions with steady incomes. They also had fewer children in the home, both biological and foster. (Ten foster parents comprised this group.)

How Family Finances Affect Foster Placements

The three groups had distinct patterns in the way they perceived and performed their roles as foster caregivers. Their financial circumstances played into these patterns, shaping daily decisions about balancing work and child care, the kinds of activities they provided their foster children, how involved they were in accessing services for their foster children, and their decisions to continue fostering and to provide permanency through adoption. Findings in these areas are briefly summarized below.

Child care - Affording child care was a top concern among the strained and managing groups. Parents in these groups who held jobs—typically low-skilled with few benefits and little flexibility— struggled to balance the economic benefits of their jobs with the costs of child care. For some, the impact of child care on their family’s costs of living was a factor in their decision not to foster or to live with less financial security. Low child care reimbursement rates from the state was frustrating for all three groups and affected their commitment to fostering.

Activities - Foster parents in all three groups understood the importance of participating in activities as part of normal child and family life. However, the types of activities foster parents provided varied based on their level of financial strain or security. Parents in the strained group were more likely to have the children play in the home and occasionally go outside for walks, picnics and the like. Outings, such as to the zoo, church, and restaurants, were less frequent, as were organized activities like sports, clubs, or camps. Neighborhood safety and the participation costs were common barriers for these parents to providing a broader range of activities.

Foster parents who were managing or secure had resources to offer more activities. Outings to entertainment venues, parks, pools, etc. were more frequent and varied and children were more involved in organized activities such as camps, church groups, sports, music and dance lessons, and clubs. These families faced fewer neighborhood safety concerns and tended to live in communities with more resources. Foster parents in the secure group were more creative in seeking out free or low-cost activities for their children and requesting reimbursement from the state child welfare agency or other sources.

Services - Differences existed among the three groups in how involved they were in accessing medical, mental health, education and other needed services for the children in their care. They also differed in their understanding of the nature and importance of services. Foster parents in the secure group showed a much deeper knowledge of services and could give details about providers, service type, duration, location, reasons for, and their opinions on quality. They were also more involved in overseeing and advocating for appropriate services, and would seek services independently if a child had an unmet need. These parents’ professional backgrounds and educations appeared to be a factor in their ability to identify and access services.

Foster parents in the strained and managing groups, in contrast, had only a basic knowledge of services in which their foster children participated and were less active in accessing and facilitating services. They tended to rely on caseworkers and school staff to identify and arrange services. When they did try to access services on their own, they reported concerns about the time and effort involved in identifying providers who accepted Medicaid.

The researches also found differences in the level of involvement in services among children placed with nonrelative and relative caregivers. Almost all nonrelative caregivers reported that their children were participating in services recommended by their child’s caseworker. In contrast, very few children in relative care were participating in services. In seeking an explanation, the researchers found that in some cases relative caregivers did not view the recommended services as having value above other options (e.g., one relative caregiver believed attending day camp was more valuable than the recommended physical therapy). Another explanation is that relative caregivers receive less training and support than nonrelative caregivers about the value of services and how to access them.

Continued fostering/permanency - Foster parents’ decisions to continue fostering or to seek permanent arrangements by adopting children in their care were influenced by their initial motivations for fostering and their sense of financial security. Parents in the secure group, who were largely motivated to foster because of their desire to adopt, either went on to successfully adopt or provided temporary care in the hope of eventually adopting. Those who successfully adopted were likely to end their roles as foster caregivers. Those who continued fostering often struggled with the duty to support reunification while forming attachments to the child; in some cases, this struggle proved too great for parents and influenced their decisions not to continue fostering.

Foster parents in the strained or managing groups were motivated by altruistic reasons, such as providing temporary loving homes during a time of need. They were hesitant about adopting, in some cases due to financial concerns. Some were concerned that they would not be able to provide all the services the child had become accustomed to on their own because of costs.

Practice Tips:

This study offers insights about how foster parents’ financial circumstances affect their caregiving and foster children’s experiences. The findings do not mean that foster parents who are financially strained are less able to provide quality care, or that foster parents who are financially secure are best qualified. Simply, financial circumstances affect decisions that foster parents make about fostering, and how they approach and understand their roles. The researchers suggest considering the findings when developing recruitment and retention strategies and improving the quality and sustainability of foster homes. Such efforts could include:

n drafting legislation that increases financial supports for foster parents, particularly those in financially strained groups;

n improving criteria to determine if prospective foster parents have adequate household resources to care for children, both before placement and over time;

n helping foster parents balance child care and jobs by strengthening available child care subsidies and supports and helping them understand them;

n devoting resources to training and supporting relative caregivers about the value of services for children in their care and strategies to access them; and

n improving foster parents’ involvement in service delivery by encouraging caseworkers and foster parents to identify and agree on roles based on an assessment of their strengths, resources, and competencies and providing foster parents training and support.

To learn more:

This study, Does Money Matter? Foster Parenting and Family Finances, by Cheryl Smithgall, Jan DeCoursey, and Robert George, 2008 is available online at www.chapinhall.org