Child Welfare: Connecting Research, Policy, and Practice

14. Making Group Home Care a Positive Alternative, Not the Last Resort

14 Making Group Home Care a Positive Alternative, Not the Last Resort James Anglin Residential care for young people has been challenged in recent decades in terms of its suitability as a form of extrafamilial care for children and youth. Based upon the findings of a research study of 10 residential programs in British Columbia, this chapter presents a theoretical framework for understanding the key elements and dynamics of a well-functioning group home, and offers several examples of how this framework is influencing group care training and practice initiatives internationally. In addition, the place of group homes relative to foster homes in the child welfare system of care is discussed and assessed. Background A review of the British and North American literature on residential care for children and youth over the past 35 years reveals the impressive resilience of this form of service. Despite many rather scathing critiques (Rae-Grant & Moffat, 1971; Rubin, 1972; Steinhauer, 1991; Vail, 1966), revelations of institutional abuse (Bloom, 1992; Collins & Colorado, 1988; Levy & Kahan, 1991), and attempts to eliminate residential programs altogether (Cliffe & Berridge, 1992; Coates, Miller, & Ohlin, 1978), residential care continues to play a significant role in virtually all child and family service systems. Further, while the number of children in residential programs has decreased significantly since the 1970s, it appears that most jurisdictions have accepted the inevitability of preserving at least a minimal number of residential care programs in perpetuity. While 215 treatment foster homes which offer a blend of familial and specialized care have been developed, staffed group care residences, generally with between two and eight young people, have become the preferred form of residential care in many Western countries, and one preferred to large institutions. It would seem that, in relation to the social service system as a whole, residential care is something like tip of the iceberg that protrudes out of the water; if you try to remove it, the iceberg moves upward to maintain its overall balance. In recent decades, a number of political forces and ideological movements have placed considerable pressure on residential care programs. These have included deinstitutionalization, recessionary economic conditions, increased demand for accountability and quality assurance, the mandating of permanency planning, and the assertion of children’s rights, among others. As well, there has been a strong movement in favour of “homebuilder”and “family preservation”programs in North America and internationally.These programs seek to provide brief interventions into the lives of client families in order to defuse a problem, or resolve a crisis, without having to remove children from their own homes. In the minds of some, traditional residential care has come to be seen as passé, misguided, overly intrusive, ineffective, and exorbitantly expensive. In fact, it has become a commonplace belief that residential care for young people is to be avoided at almost all costs. Brown and Hill (1996) say, in reference to a wraparound service, that the goals of the program include “preventing admission to residential care” (p. 38). Such challenges to the provision of residential care as a positive service have created a need to take a careful, in-depth look at the nature of residential care as a modality of child welfare, and to understand what makes a well-functioning residential home. The findings reported here resulted from a study of staffed group homes designed to assess whether group home care could be a positive service for young people, and if so, to identify the characteristics and dynamics of a well-functioning home and to understand better the place of residential care in the overall child welfare system. Creating a Framework for Understanding “Well-Functioning”Residential Care The author undertook a research study involving in-depth involvement with 10 group care residences in British Columbia over a 14-month period. The purpose of this study was to construct a theoretical framework that would offer an understanding of what makes a well-functioning group home for young people . The research approach selected as most appropriate to this task was the ANGLIN 216 grounded theory method, as articulated in a variety of texts by the co-founders of the method, Glaser and Strauss (Glaser, 1978, 1992; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The basic aim of grounded theory is to generate theory from social data derived inductively from research in social settings (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 23). Such data gathering techniques as participant observation, semi-structured interviews, informal conversations...