CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Child Welfare and AdoptionHomelessness and Social IssuesCrime Patterns and Interventions

Comparing outcomes for youth in treatment foster care and family-style group care

Open access
Lee, Bethany R., Thompson, Ron·2008·Children and Youth Services Review
DOI 10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.12.002PMC PMC2515489
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Group care programs are often criticized for producing poor outcomes, especially in light of community-based alternatives like treatment foster care that have a stronger evidence base. In this study, data from Girls and Boys Town were used to compare outcomes of youth in treatment foster care (n=112) and group care (n=716) using propensity score matching, a method that can minimize selection bias in nonrandomized designs. Eighteen background covariates were used to develop propensity scores for the likelihood of receiving treatment foster care rather than group care. Several matching methods generated balanced samples on which the outcomes were compared. Results found that group care youth were more likely to be favorably discharged, more likely to return home, and less likely to experience subsequent placement in the first six months after discharge. Legal involvement and residing in a home-like environment at follow-up did not differ. Positive outcomes for group care youth suggest that family-style group care programs may promote effectiveness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.12.002

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • It is one of the few evaluations of a residential program model including more than one or two agencies.

    “It is one of the few evaluations of a residential program model including more than one or two agencies (Farmer, Murray, Ballentine, Rauktis, & Burns, 2017;Lee & Thompson, 2008).”

    From Improving relationship quality in group care settings: The impact of implementing the CARE model (2020) · cites this paper as Lee & Thompson, 2008

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says both programs evaluated in this study were administered by the same organization, Girls and Boys Town. The paper therefore does not describe an evaluation spanning more than one or two agencies; its claim to novelty concerns comparing two care types that followed the same treatment model. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. Barth RP. Institutions vs. foster homes: The empirical base for a century of action. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC, School of Social Work, Jordan Institute for Families; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  2. Barth RP. Foster home care is more cost-effective than shelter care: Serious questions continue to be raised about the utility of group care in child welfare services. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2005;29:623–625. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  3. Bates BC, English DJ, Kouidou-Giles S. Residential treatment and its alternatives: A review of the literature. Child & Youth Care Forum. 1997;26(1):7–51. [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker SO, Caliendo M. Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects. The Stata Journal. 2007;7(1):71–83. [Google Scholar]
  5. Berrick JD, Courtney M, Barth RP. Specialized foster care and group home care: Similarities and differences in the characteristics of children in care. Children and Youth Services Review. 1993;15:453–473. [Google Scholar]
  6. Breland-Noble AM, Elbogen EB, Farmer EMZ, Dubs MS, Wagner HR, Burns BJ. Use of psychotropic medications by youths in therapeutic foster care and group homes. Psychiatric Services. 2004;55(6):706–707. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.55.6.706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  7. Breland-Noble AM, Farmer EMZ, Dubs MS, Potter E, Burns BJ. Mental health and other service use by youth in therapeutic foster care and group homes. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2005;14(2):167–180. [Google Scholar]
  8. Braitman LE, Rosenbaum PR. Rare outcomes, common treatments: Analytic strategies using propensity scores. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2002;137(8):693–695. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-8-200210150-00015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  9. Chamberlain P, Mihalic SF. Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care: Blueprints for Violence Prevention, Book Eight. In: Elliott DS, editor. Blueprints for Violence Prevention Series. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  10. Chamberlain P, Ray J, Moore KJ. Characteristics of residential care for adolescent offenders: A comparison of assumptions and practices in two models. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 1996;5(3):285–297. [Google Scholar]
  11. Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Using a specialized foster care community treatment model for children and adolescents leaving the state mental hospital. Journal of Community Psychology. 1991;19:266–276. [Google Scholar]
  12. Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Comparison of two community alternatives to incarceration of chronic juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1998;66(4):624–633. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.66.4.624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  13. Child Welfare League of America. CWLA Standards of Excellence for Residential Services. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  14. Coen AS, Libby AM, Price DA, Silverman K. Inside the black box: A study of the residential treatment center program of Colorado. Denver, CO: Division of Child Welfare Services, Colorado Department of Human Services; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  15. Collins ME, Schwartz IM, Epstein I. Risk factors for adult imprisonment in a sample of youth released from residential child care. Children and Youth Services Review. 2001;23(3):203–226. [Google Scholar]
  16. Curtis PA, Alexander G, Lunghofer LA. A literature review comparing the outcomes of residential group care and therapeutic foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. 2001;18(5):377–392. [Google Scholar]
  17. D’Agostino RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine. 1998;17:2265–2281. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::aid-sim918>3.0.co;2-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  18. Dahl E, Lorentzen T. What works for whom? An analysis of active labour market programmes in Norway. International Journal of Social Welfare. 2005;14:86–98. [Google Scholar]
  19. DeSena AD, Murphy RA, Douglas-Palumberi H, Blau G, Blandina Horwitz SM, Kaufman J. SAFE Homes: Is it worth the cost? An evaluation of a group home permanency planning program for children who first enter out-of-home care. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2005;29:627–643. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.05.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  20. Dishion TJ, McCord J, Poulin F. When interventions harm. American Psychologist. 1999;54(9):755–764. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.54.9.755. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  21. Dodge KA, Dishion TJ, Landsford JE, editors. Deviant peer influences in programs for youth. New York: Guilford Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  22. Dodge KA, Sherrill MR. Deviant peer group effects in youth mental health interventions. In: Dodge KA, Dishion TJ, Landsford JE, editors. Deviant peer influences in programs for youth. New York: Guilford Press; 2006. pp. 97–120. [Google Scholar]
  23. Drais-Parrillo AA, editor. The Odyssey Project: A descriptive and prospective study of children and youth in residential group care and therapeutic foster care. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  24. Eddy JM, Chamberlain P. Family management and deviant peer association as mediators of the impact of treatment condition on youth antisocial behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2000;68(5):857–863. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.68.5.857. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  25. El-Bassel N, Gilbert L, Wu E, Go H, Hill J. HIV and intimate partner violence among methadone-maintained women in New York City. Social Science & Medicine. 2005;61:171–183. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  26. Essama-Nssah B. Propensity score matching and policy impact analysis. Paper presented at The World Bank, Poverty Reduction Group Meeting; Washington, DC. 2006. [Google Scholar]
  27. Fisher PA, Chamberlain P. Multidimensional treatment foster care: A program for intensive parenting, family support, and skill building. Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders. 2000;8(3):155–165. [Google Scholar]
  28. Fixsen D, Blase K. Publications regarding the Teaching-Family Model. Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute; University of South Florida: 2002. [Google Scholar]
  29. Fraser MW. Intervention research in social work: Recent advances and continuing challenges. Research on Social Work Practice. 2004;14(3):210–222. [Google Scholar]
  30. Frensch KM, Cameron G. Treatment of choice or a last resort? A review of residential mental health placements for children and youth. Child & Youth Care Forum. 2002;31(5):307–339. [Google Scholar]
  31. Friman PC. Behavioral, family-style residential care for troubled out-of-home adolescents: Recent findings. In: Austin J, Carr JE, editors. Handbook of Applied Behavioral Analysis. Reno, NV: Context Press; 2000. pp. 187–207. [Google Scholar]
  32. Friman PC, Jones M, Smith GL, Daly DL, Larzelere RE. Decreasing disruptive behavior by adolescent boys in residential care by increasing their positive to negative interactional ratios. Behavior Modification. 1997;21:470–486. doi: 10.1177/01454455970214005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  33. Friman PC, Toner C, Soper S, Sinclair J, Shanahan D. Maintaining placement for troubled and disruptive adolescents in voluntary residential care: The role of reduced youth-to-staff ratio. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 1996;5(3):337–347. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gorske TT, Srebalus DJ, Walls RT. Adolescents in residential centers: characteristics and treatment outcome. Children and Youth Services Review. 2003;25(4):317–326. [Google Scholar]
  35. Guo S, Barth RP, Gibbons C. Propensity score matching strategies for evaluating substance abuse services for child welfare clients. Children and Youth Services Review. 2005;28(4):357–383. [Google Scholar]
  36. Guo S, Rose RA, Bowen GL. Quasi-Experimental Strategies When Randomization Fails: Propensity Score Matching and Sensitivity Analysis. 2006, January; Paper presented at the Society for Social Work and Research Tenth Annual Conference; San Antonio, TX. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hair HJ. Outcomes for children and adolescents after residential treatment: A review of research from 1993 to 2003. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2005;14(4):551–575. [Google Scholar]
  38. Handwerk ML, Field CE, Friman PC. The iatrogenic effects of group intervention for antisocial youth: Premature extrapolations? Journal of Behavioral Education. 2001;10(4):223–238. [Google Scholar]
  39. Iezzoni L. Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  40. Larzelere RE, Daly DL, Davis JL, Chmelka MB, Handwerk ML. Outcome evaluation of Girls and Boys Town’s family home program. Education and Treatment of Children. 2004;27(2):130–149. [Google Scholar]
  41. Leow C, Marcus S, Zanutto E, Boruch R. Effects of advanced course-taking on math and science achievement: Addressing selection bias using propensity scores. American Journal of Evaluation. 2004;25(4):461–478. [Google Scholar]
  42. Leve LD, Chamberlain P. Association with delinquent peers: Intervention effects for youth in the juvenile justice system. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2005;33(3):339–347. doi: 10.1007/s10802-005-3571-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  43. Leve LD, Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Intervention outcomes for girls referred from juvenile justice: Effects on delinquency. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2005;73(6):1181–1185. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  44. Lipsey MW, Wilson DB. Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders: A synthesis of research. In: Loeber R, Farrington DP, editors. Serious & violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998. pp. 313–345. [Google Scholar]
  45. McMillen JC, Zima BT, Scott LD, Jr, Auslander WF, Munson MR, Ollie MT, Spitznagel EL. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among older youths in the foster care system. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2005;44(1):88–96. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000145806.24274.d2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  46. Mitra N, Indurkhya A. A propensity score approach to estimating the cost-effectiveness of medical therapies from observational data. Health Economics. 2005;14:805–815. doi: 10.1002/hec.987. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  47. Osgood DW, Bridell LO. Peer effects in Juvenile Justice. In: Dodge KA, Dishion TJ, Landsford JE, editors. Deviant peer influences in programs for youth. New York: Guilford Press; 2006. pp. 141–161. [Google Scholar]
  48. Pecora PJ, Whittaker JK, Maluccio AN, Barth RP, Plotnick RD. The child welfare challenge: Policy, practice and research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  49. Piotrkowsi CS, Baker AJL. Predicting discharge dispositions among adolescents in residential treatment. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth. 2004;21(3):69–86. [Google Scholar]
  50. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DR. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70(1):41–55. [Google Scholar]
  51. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DR. The bias due to incomplete matching. Biometrics. 1986;41(1):103–116. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Ryan JP. Dependent youth in juvenile justice: Do positive peer culture programs work for victims of child maltreatment? Research on Social Work Practice. 2006;16(5):511–519. [Google Scholar]
  53. Seeger JD, Williams PL, Walker AM. An application of propensity score matching using claims data. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 2005;14:465–476. doi: 10.1002/pds.1062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  54. Sosin MR. Outcomes and sample selection: The case of a homelessness and substance abuse intervention. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology. 2002;55:63–91. doi: 10.1348/000711002159707. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  55. Stroul BA, Friedman RM. A system of care for severely emotionally disturbed children & youth. Washington, DC: CASSP Technical Assistance Center, Georgetown University Child Development Center; 1986. [Google Scholar]
  56. Sunseri PA. The prediction of unplanned discharge from residential treatment. Child & Youth Care Forum. 2001;30(5):283–303. [Google Scholar]
  57. Teare JF, Larzelere RE, Smith GL, Becker CY, Castrianno LM, Peterson RW. Placement stability following short-term residential care. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 1999;8(1):59–69. [Google Scholar]
  58. Thompson RW, Smith GL, Osgood DW, Dowd TP, Friman PC, Daly DL. Residential care: A study of short and long-term educational effects. Children and Youth Services Review. 1996;18:221–242. [Google Scholar]
  59. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health; 1999. [Google Scholar]
  60. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: One Year in Foster Care Report. Washington, D.C: Administration for Children, Youth and Families; 2001a. [Google Scholar]
  61. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health; 2001b. [Google Scholar]
  62. Vorrath HH, Brendtro LK. Positive peer culture. 2. New York: Aldine Publishing; 1985. [Google Scholar]
  63. Wells K. Placement of emotionally disturbed children in residential treatment: A review of placement criteria. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 1991;61(3):339–347. doi: 10.1037/h0079274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  64. Whittaker JK. Reinventing residential childcare: An agenda for research and practice. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth. 2000;17(3):13–30. [Google Scholar]
  65. Winship C, Morgan SL. The estimation of causal effects from observational data. Annual Review of Sociology. 1999;25:659–706. [Google Scholar]
  66. Wolf MM, Pillips EL, Fixsen DL, Braukmann CJ, Kirigin KA, Willner AG, Schumaker J. Achievement Place: The Teaching-Family model. Child Care Quarterly. 1976;5(2):92–103. [Google Scholar]
  67. Youngbauer JG. The Teaching-Family model and treatment durability: Assessing generalization using survival analysis techniques, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas; Lawrence: 1997. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, B. R., & Thompson, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Boys Town (US)
Corresponding author
Lee, Bethany R.
ORCID
Venue
Children and Youth Services Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-07
Volume
30
Issue
7
Pages
746-757
ISSN
0190-7409 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.12.002
PMC
PMC2515489
OpenAlex
W1982687642
Cited by
87
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
19.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Children and Youth Services Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p30mh068579-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P30-MH-068579)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
Keywords
treatment foster care, youth outcomes, foster care, discharge outcomes, return to home, placement stability, legal involvement, home-like environment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review