Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Asset-building and the Ontario Looking After Children (OnLAC)
Project:Promoting resilient outcomes in young
people in care
Cynthia Vincent, Shaye Moffat, Marie-Pierre Paquet, Robert Flynn, & Robyn Marquis
Centre de recherche sur les services éducatifs et communitairesUniversité d’Ottawa
Centre for Research on Educational & Community ServicesUniversity of Ottawa
OUTLINE
Background Developmental Assets OnLAC Project
The present OnLAC study Method Results
Implications for practice Discussion with audience
DEVELOPMENTAL ASSETS
Search Institute (www.search-institute.org)
40 Developmental Assets Developed from the best lessons
from prevention, risk reduction, and resilience research (Scales, 1999)
DEVELOPMENTAL ASSETS
20 External Assets: Support Empowerment Boundaries and
expectations Constructive use
of time
20 Internal Assets: Commitment to
learning Positive values Social
competencies Positive identity
External Assets and Internal Assets: Offer protection Promote resilience
The Ontario Looking After Children Project (OnLAC)
Longitudinal study Mandated in all 53 local CASs since 2006 Goal:
to improve the quality of out-of-home care to promote positive parenting to improve
outcomes Strengths-based Supported by resilience research Outcome focused OnLAC + SAFE + PRIDE = Ontario Practice
Model
OnLAC Project
LAC developed in the UK in 1987 Uses the Second Canadian
Adaptation of the Assessment and Action Record (AAR-C2)
Search Institute’s Developmental Assets were adapted when incorporated into AAR-C2
METHOD
Participants: (N = 713, in OnLAC yr 5) 10 - 17 years old 56% male, 44% female Mean age 14 years 85% in foster care (including kinship
care) 15% in group homes 87% Crown Wards
METHOD (continued)
Measures from OnLAC AAR-C2 (and sources of data): Assets profile (CWW) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - SDQ –
Prosocial and Total Difficulties Scales (caregiver) Academic performance (caregiver) Self-esteem (young person in care) Relationship with female caregiver (young person) Placement satisfaction (young person) Adverse life experiences since birth (young person)
RESULTSPercentage of sample with varying
levels of developmental assets (N = 713)
1
18
42
38
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%
5 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40
NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENTAL ASSETS
RESULTSMean number of developmental
assets,by gender
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
MEAN NO. OF DAs
Females Males
28.6 26.0
GENDER
RESULTS
Significant associations of developmental assets with the following outcomes: Positive correlations:
Prosocial Academic performance Self-esteem Relationship with female caregiver Placement satisfaction
Negative correlations: Psychological difficulties (SDQ Total
Difficulties Score)
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with
SDQ Prosocial Score (N = 636)
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
.07 .05 .05.40*
* Statistically significant association
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with
SDQ Total Difficulties Score (N = 636)
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
-.04 -.18*
.09
-.53*
* Statistically significant association
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with
Academic Performance (N = 666)
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
.04 .07 .05 .34*
* Statistically significant association
-.16*
-.11*
.40*
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
-.08
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with
Self-esteem (N = 676)
* Statistically significant association
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with Relationship with Female Caregiver (N =
674)
.03
-.16*
.01
.37*
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
* Statistically significant association
RESULTSNet association (Betas) of predictors with
Placement Satisfaction (N = 693)
.03
-.13*
.01
.38*
-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2
00.20.40.60.8
Beta coeffficients
Gender(F)
Age Cumul.Risk
Develop.Assets
PREDICTORS
* Statistically significant association
DISCUSSION
Present study consistent with research: Females have more assets (mean of 29 assets) Males (mean of 26 assets) More assets = better mental health, more
prosocial behaviour, better academic performance
Assets offset risks 31 assets contribute to maximum protection Asset-building, combined with risk reduction, is
especially effective
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Intervention strategies to offset risk factors: Resources to support academic
achievement Positive relationships and social
networks Opportunities to participate in
extracurricular activities Participation in community Nurture positive self-esteem and self-
identity
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Intervention strategies continued: Risk reduction Provide opportunities for young people to build
on their strengths Identify specific assets to build into plans of care Nurture the acquisition of developmental assets Effective communication between young people,
their caregivers and child welfare workers Collaboration between home, school and
community
REFERENCES
Flynn, R. J., Ghazal, H., Legault, L. (2004). Looking After Children: Good Parenting, Good Outcomes, Assessment and Action Records. (Second Canadian adaptation, AAR-C2). Ottawa, ON, & London, UK: Centre for Research on community Services, University of Ottawa & Her Majesty’s Stationary Office (HMSO).
Masten, A. (2006). Promoting Resilience in development: A general framework for systems of care. In R. J. Flynn, P. M. Dudding & J. G. Barber (Eds.). Promoting resilience in child welfare (pp. 3-17). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Scales, P. C. (1999). Reducing risks and building developmental assets: Essential actions for promoting adolescent health. Journal of School Health. 69, 113-119.
Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D. A. (2000). Contribution of developmental assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science. 4, (1), 27-46.
