![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The Multisite Accelerated Permanency Project (MSAPP) implemented permanency roundtables (PRTs) to increase legal permanency rates for older youth in foster care. PRTs are structured meetings intended to expedite legal permanency (defined as adoption, guardianship, or reunification) for youth by involving experts from both inside and outside child welfare agencies in creative and concrete case planning. The target population of this study included older youth (median age = 17 years) who faced the most challenges in achieving legal permanency, most of whom had a case goal of another planned permanent living arrangement. In 2010, 726 youth participated in PRTs in 4 states through MSAPP. One year after the roundtables, 8.5% of the youth achieved legal permanency. Although the rate of achieving legal permanency was low, other benefits were realized through the process, including increased staff understanding of the importance of legal permanency and identification of strategies to address barriers to achieving legal permanency. Improving rates of achieving legal permanency for older youth in foster care in the future will require effective implementation and evaluation of innovative approaches, including thorough family finding; strategic use of concurrent planning, judicial reviews, and ancillary services; and greater alignment among practice, agencies, policy, and research.
Notes
1. Acronyms vary by jurisdiction, including OPPLA (other planned permanent living arrangement) and PPLA (planned permanent living arrangement).
2. Permanency status was rated on a 6-point scale ranging from poor to permanency achieved, with each scale point having a specific description of a child's situation in terms of living arrangement, safety plan, permanency resource(s), and status of any guardianship or adoption issues.
3. Youth living environments were categorized as follows and were assigned these values: 1) independent living, 2) home of natural parents, 3) home of relative, 4) adoptive home, 5) foster care, 6) specialized/therapeutic home, 7) supervised group setting, 8) residential treatment, 9) intensive inpatient treatment, and 10) detention/jail/state mental hospital.
4. Youth permanency status ratings were assigned the following ordinal values: 1) poor, 2) marginal, 3) fair, 4) good, 5) very good, and 6) permanency achieved. Descriptors for the full Permanency Status Rating Scale can be found on p. 44 of Appendices at http://www.casey.org/media/garoundtable_ap.pdf (note that uncertain was changed to marginal for the current study).