WINSLOW, MARIAH CLAIRE. Home-School Partnerships for Children with Developmental Disabilities (DD) in Foster Care: Barriers and Challenges. (Under the direction of Dr. Kate Norwalk).
by
Mariah Claire Winslow
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Psychology
Raleigh, North Carolina 2019
APPROVED BY:
_______________________________ _______________________________ Dr. Kate Norwalk Dr. Mary Haskett
Committee Chair
BIOGRAPHY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Home-School Partnerships for Children with Developmental Disabilities (DD) in Foster
Care: Barriers and Challenges ... 1
Developmental Disabilities (DD) ... 3
Outcomes of Children with Disabilities in Foster Care ... 4
Importance of Home-School Partnerships ... 5
IDEIA, Parental Involvement, and Foster Children ... 6
Present Study ... 8
Method ... 9
Participants ... 9
Foster Parents ... 9
School Practitioners ... 9
Procedure ... 10
Data Analysis ... 11
Results ... 12
Foster Parent Interviews ... 12
Quality of Home-School Partnerships ... 13
Experience with the Special Education Process ... 14
Additional Barriers to Home-School Partnerships ... 16
School Practitioner Interviews ... 17
Quality of the Home-School Partnership ... 17
Barriers to the Home-School Partnership ... 18
Student Instability ... 18
Lack of Communication ... 19
Legal Requirements ... 20
Discussion ... 21
Implications and Recommendations ... 24
Limitations ... 25
Conclusion ... 26
REFERENCES ... 27
APPENDICES ... 31
Appendix A: Foster Parent Interview Questions ... 32
Home-School Partnerships for Children with Developmental Disabilities (DD) in Foster Care: Barriers and Challenges
Children and youth in foster care represent one of the most vulnerable groups of students in the U.S. Compared to the general student population, students in care tend to score lower on standardized tests of achievement, have higher rates of grade retention, and are significantly less likely to graduate high school (National Working Group for Education and Foster Care, 2011). Due to higher rates of cognitive, emotional and behavioral challenges, students in care are also disproportionately represented among students receiving special education services (Scherr, 2007). Compared to children in foster care or special education only, those receiving both foster care and special education services are at an even higher risk for academic failure (Geenan & Powers, 2006).
The presence of a disability has been identified as both a risk factor for, and a potential outcome of, maltreatment. Although estimates vary depending on the source, children and youth with disabilities are up to 3.4 times more likely to experience maltreatment in the form of abuse and neglect than their peers without disabilities (Sullivan & Knutson, 2000). In turn,
maltreatment can hinder normal cognitive, physical, social-emotional, and/or language and learning development, particularly when it occurs in the first five years of life (Bolger, Patterson, & Kupersmidt, 1998). As a result, these children and youth tend to be disproportionately
with their biological parents or adopted by foster caregivers, resulting in longer lengths of stay within the child welfare system (Rosenberg & Robinson, 2004).
A lack of adequate training and support has been identified as a systemic issue
contributing to the disparities in outcomes for youth with disabilities in foster care. Across most states, training programs for foster caregivers do not focus on the specific needs of children and youth with disabilities. As a result, foster caregivers frequently lack basic knowledge about their foster child’s disability, the skills needed to parent a child with a disability, and knowledge of available supports and resources to meet their child’s special medical and educational needs. Home-school partnerships have the potential to serve as an important source of education and support for foster families of children with disabilities. Indeed, a wealth of research suggests that parental involvement in schools leads to more positive educational outcomes for all students, regardless of disability status, by benefiting children’s academic success and personal well-being (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997; Greenwood & Hickman, 1991). Children’s attendance, sense of well-being, attitude, homework readiness, grades, and educational aspirations have all been linked to parental involvement (Greenwood & Hickman, 1991). Moreover, parent
participation is widely regarded as the cornerstone of special education (Turnball & Turnball, 2001), and legal mandates under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004) require that families have meaningful opportunities to participate in their child’s educational planning and programming.
for involvement) and school practitioners’ perceptions of foster parent knowledge and
educational involvement through the use of interviews. Barriers and challenges to these home-school partnerships will also be discussed.
Developmental Disabilities (DD)
The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services defines developmental disabilities (DD) as chronic conditions that begin at birth or during childhood and adversely affect an individual’s daily living and functioning. These conditions can be caused by a cognitive impairment, a physical impairment, or a combination of both. Although symptoms vary depending on specific conditions and individual differences, the presence of a DD may result in a range of limited functions including difficulties with communication, caring for oneself (e.g., dressing, bathing), learning difficulties, mobility, and living independently. Whereas in many cases the cause of DD is unknown, specific conditions that are categorized as DD include down syndrome, autism spectrum disorders (ASD), intellectual disability (ID), attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and cerebral palsy.
Children with developmental disabilities are at a heightened risk for experiencing
Outcomes of Children with Disabilities in Foster Care
Involvement in the foster care system represents a significant risk factor for academic underachievement and general maladjustment, particularly for children and youth with disabilities. Children in foster care, with or without a disability, often have lower GPAs than their peers in general education, change schools more frequently, earn fewer credits towards high school graduation, and have lower scores on state testing (Geenen & Powers, 2006).
Additionally, these children are more likely to qualify for and receive special education services. For example, one study found that 44% of youth in foster care were also receiving special
education services (Geenen & Powers, 2006). Another study found that between the 1980s and the year 2000, the percentage of foster children who were eligible for special education services increased from 18% to approximately 36%, and that foster children were five times as likely as their peers to need special education assistance (Scherr, 2007). Although many children in foster care are at-risk for experiencing negative outcomes, foster youth with disabilities are at an
increased risk due to the specific nature of their disability (e.g., communication deficits, learning differences), a lack of parental involvement throughout the special education process, and caregivers’ lack of knowledge about the child’s disability.
receiving consent to continue with the special education process. These factors often lead foster parents to feel frustrated at the lack of information regarding their special education rights and the services provided to them (Zetlin, 2006). Thus, to ensure improved educational outcomes for children in foster care with disabilities, it is critical that foster parents and school personnel form positive working relationships.
Importance of Home-School Partnerships
Collaboration between schools and parents is crucial for improving student success, particularly for those with disabilities. Home-school partnerships not only have the potential to improve student outcomes, but parents of children with disabilities can also directly benefit. Addressing both student and family needs can help alleviate stressors associated with raising children with disabilities and support increased levels of family health and adjustment (Edwards & Da Fonte, 2012). Due to the unique challenges families of children with disabilities
experience, these parents often require more information, guidance, support, practical assistance, and advice (Abed, 2014). One study that examined the quality of school interactions for
biological parents of children with learning disabilities uncovered more negative experiences than positive; however, several parents reported that the school helped them learn about the nature of their child’s disability, psychological assessments, confidentiality, and diversity
however, students with DD who are placed in a foster care setting may lack a consistent parental advocate, and therefore not experience the benefits of effective home-school collaboration. IDEIA, Parental Involvement, and Foster Children
of their rights under IDEIA to make educational decisions for a child in their care (Stanley, 2012). IDEIA indicates that a birth or adoptive parent should always be treated as the
educational decision makers whenever they are attempting to act on behalf of the child and their parental rights have not been terminated. While it may not appear that the birth or adoptive parent is always acting in the child’s best interest, the school must accept the decision or request a special education hearing to challenge the decisions the parent is making for the child.
To date, only one study (Zetlin et al., 2010) has examined home-school partnerships among foster parents. The authors conducted focus groups with foster parents, school practitioners, and educational liaisons or advocacy agencies to learn about each group’s experiences with the schooling of children in foster care. Foster parents reported that they struggled the most with understanding the special education process, early intervention services, and intervention specialists. A source of continued stress for foster parents was the difficulty they encountered when trying to get the school to recognize that their foster child needed more intensive supports. Foster parents also complained of the lack of transition planning for older foster youth and extensive waitlists for early intervention services (e.g., Head Start).
Additionally, the foster parents recognized that caseworkers were overwhelmed and not always available to intercede on the child’s behalf; therefore, the foster parents viewed the child’s schooling as their responsibility. When foster parents were asked what they needed to better address their child’s needs, they suggested additional training for how to access services,
advocate for their foster child, how to obtain educational rights, and learn about educational and behavioral supports.
the school, and child welfare systems. The biggest challenge reported by the school practitioners was the lack of school stability that students in foster care experience. During a time when these children are experiencing so much change, many of the school practitioners emphasized the importance of keeping the children at their home school. School practitioners also felt as if the school-family partnership was lacking with students in foster care. Specifically, they believed that those children who were placed with relative caregivers who lacked a positive outlook toward school demonstrated the weakest school-family partnership. The group suggested that many school problems and behaviors could be better addressed if these caregivers were present at school meetings and reinforced the strategies at home. Additionally, school practitioners believed that there should be more collaboration with the child welfare agency to ensure school stability. Several participants in the group also complained that the child welfare agency did not take their concerns seriously and were often reluctant to share child information (i.e., who holds education rights). In addition to these challenges that school practitioners faced, they also reported on what they believed to be the specific needs of the foster youth they were serving. The most prevalent problems included learning gaps due to school instability and emotional trauma, poor attendance, and behavioral issues (Zetlin et al., 2010).
Present Study
Previous research has largely focused on examining the challenges and benefits of home-school partnerships among biological parents and their children, without considering the
were considered: foster parents of children with DD and school practitioners (i.e., school psychologists and school social workers) that work with these parents.
Method Participants
Foster Parents. A total of 20 foster parents living in North Carolina were included in this study. All participants self-identified as previously or currently fostering a child with DD. Foster parents included in the study fostered through either private agencies or public agencies (i.e., North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services - Division of Social Services). Participants had cared for foster children across all age ranges: Preschool (5 and under),
Elementary (5-11), and Adolescent (12+). Furthermore, the foster parents had cared for children with DD that presented with a wide-range of diagnoses/symptoms related to DD, including but not limited to, intellectual disability, speech and language delays, sensory processing disorder, autism, developmental delay, fetal alcohol syndrome, ADHD, and fine/gross motor weaknesses. To protect the confidentiality of participating parents, no other demographic information was collected.
School Practitioners. In order to determine which practitioners would be invited to participate, a list of all counties in North Carolina with over 1,000 foster children across a 2-year time span (2011, 2015) was compiled. A total of 19 counties in North Carolina met this
A total of seven school practitioners participated in this study. All practitioners were working in the North Carolina public school system. Five of the school practitioners were school social workers and two were school psychologists. All school practitioners self-identified as having worked with foster children with DD, their families, and child welfare agencies. Five of the nineteen counties are represented in this study. Practitioners that participated in the study were given a $25 gift card to their choice of Target or Walmart. To maintain anonymity, no demographic data were obtained from interviewees.
Procedure
Foster parents were recruited to participate through several outlets (e.g., foster parent groups on Facebook) and participation was voluntary. Foster parents included in the present study were invited to participate in a phone interview to discuss perceived challenges associated with caring for a child with DD, their level of awareness of available supports and resources, and their perceptions of the adequacy of the training they received. Interviews lasted approximately 30 to 60 minutes. School practitioners invited for a phone interview were asked to report on their experiences related to foster youth with DD in the school system, foster parents, and foster care agencies. Each interview lasted approximately 10 to 20 minutes. Both foster parents and school practitioners were informed that the interviews would be audiotaped and all confidential information (e.g., school district name, foster child name) would be redacted; all individuals gave their verbal consent to be recorded. Additionally, all participants received a $25 gift card as compensation for their participation.
and ensure clarity. Primary questions focused on a wide range of topics related to the needs of foster children with DD; however, the present study remained focused on the home-school partnership and the associated barriers and challenges to this relationship.
Data Analysis
All phone interviews were audio recorded, and the recordings were transcribed by an undergraduate research assistant. All personal identifying information was redacted from transcriptions. Transcribed interviews were coded using inductive thematic coding procedures (Braun & Clarke, 2006) to identify potential themes across participants. Inductive analysis is a process of coding data that does not try to fit the information into a pre-existing coding frame or rely on existing theory. Rather, this method of analysis is data-driven and provides a more detailed analysis of some aspect of the data instead of rich description of the data overall (Braun & Clarke, 2009). Since this process of coding data is not driven by a theoretical framework, themes that are discovered may have little relation to the specific questions asked during the interviews. All coding was conducted using Dedoose software. An initial coding scheme was established by the lead researcher based on the first three interviews with foster parents. A training session was conducted for three undergraduate research assistants and two graduate research assistants to review the initial codebook and the computer-based coding program. After this session, research assistants were assigned the same interviews to code until a high-level of consensus was reached across coders. Research assistants were then split into two groups to finish coding the remaining interviews, with at least two assistants assigned to each interview. In addition, the faculty researcher continued to code all foster parent interviews. Codes were
Similarly, the process for coding school practitioner interviews included the development of preliminary codes by the primary graduate researcher. An initial codebook was developed and shared with an undergraduate research assistant. Initial interviews were assigned to the research assistant and once a high-level of consensus was reached amongst the two coders through discussion, the remaining interviews were coded. Final codes for both the foster parent and school practitioner interviews were then assessed for emergent themes.
While some qualitative researchers have utilized the concept of inter-coder reliability to quantify the agreement between coders (Neuendorf, 2017), other researchers have recommended establishing a clear protocol for coding and the development of a thorough codebook (as
described above) in order to reach agreement between coders (Gibbert, Ruigrok, & Wicki, 2008). The present study utilizes the latter method through a process known as consensus coding. This method is a more effective approach when working with larger groups, where there may be more coding consistency concerns (Olson, McAllister, Grinnell, Walters, & Appunn, 2016). Similar to the previously described coding process, researchers code the same interviews and discuss any disagreements during research team meetings. Disagreements are discussed until coders reach consensus.
Results Foster Parent Interviews
comments, three primary themes emerged: (1) variability in the quality of home-school partnerships; (2) experience with the special education process; and (3) additional barriers to home-school partnerships. Each of these themes is summarized below.
Quality of the Home-School Partnerships. Foster parents in this study were largely split into two groups in terms of the relationship quality they have with their foster child’s school; either they have had only positive experiences with school personnel, or report both positive and negative interactions. Therefore, all foster parents report at least some qualities of positive partnerships with their foster child’s school. For example, when foster parents described their positive experiences with school staff (e.g., teachers, speech therapists, etc.), they
frequently noted appreciating flexibility, patience, accommodations, good communication, supportiveness, and helpfulness. One foster parent noted:
Her teacher was very supportive and kind of knew the situation that was going on, it was great. So, her and I emailed if there was anything going on, and overall I’d say that the school was not really a problem at all.
Rather than only reporting positive relationships with schools, some foster parents reported mixed experiences. These experiences and relationships occasionally varied based on school-type (i.e., public vs. charter) and the specific school staff or group of individuals (e.g., teacher vs. administration). For example, one foster parent talked about the difference in quality of
relationship that varied by school-type:
The kids that we had were in two separate schools so the first one was our public school system, and that one was not as good. The second one we were able to
Another foster parent mentioned the discrepancy in the quality of the relationship that varied between school staff and administration:
His teachers have been extremely helpful, but the school district has been a little difficult. Similarly, a foster parent noted the difference between certain teachers:
...some teachers are totally open and fine but some teachers you almost feel like you’re getting the eye roll like ‘oh I’ve got another child with ADHD.’
Overall, negative relationships were typically associated with experiences during the special education process, which is discussed in further detail below.
Experience with the Special Education Process. In addition to reporting on the overall relationship with the schools more broadly, some foster parents spoke specifically to their experiences with the special education process. For the purpose of this study, the special education process included mention of the Individualized Education Plan (IEP), 504 Plan, the IEP/504 team, IEP/504 meetings, and evaluations for special education. Overall, five foster parents noted only positive experiences with the special education process, two foster parents noted only negative experiences, and two foster parents had mixed experiences. When asked to describe how they felt about the special education process and level of communication with the schools, one foster parent noted:
In contrast, another foster parent detailed how the special education process was used in order to move their foster child to another school, in lieu of addressing the foster child’s needs within their base school:
...it was kind of like they were just doing the IEP like it was the first step of the process to try to get him to a different school, rather than dealing with the issues. So that one, they were just checking off the boxes and going through the motions so that way so they could get what they needed, the documentation, to move him to another school.
Ultimately, this foster parent decided to remove their foster child from the public school setting and into a charter school. Another foster parent described her frustration when their foster child was placed in an inappropriate setting due to an inaccurate IEP:
This IEP shows that he needs to be able to read...but he was reading for me on a first-grade level. So, it was clearly inaccurate, and they said, ‘We have to go with the
paperwork. Let’s get him into a classroom and we’ll redo the IEP.’ So, the classroom he was zoned for, because his IEP was not accurate, was located across town, so we had to take him across town to a self-contained classroom and he was the only student who was verbal or ambulatory in his classroom. So, it was way too restrictive, not an appropriate placement.
However, once this child was eventually placed into an appropriate setting, the foster parent reported good experiences with the special education process at the base school and noted that the foster child was able to exit his IEP within a few months.
explained her concern with implementation of her foster child’s 504 Plan despite successful 504 meetings:
As far as the meetings for the 504 plan they went well, I think they followed them mostly, but they weren’t following it as well this year as they were last year…I don’t think he was being pulled out. His 504 plan accommodations were that he would be pulled out of the room for quizzes and tests and that he would be given his tests verbally and I don’t think that was happening.
Similarly, another foster parent mentioned the lack of service delivery:
...he’s supposed to get a certain amount of speech therapy each quarter and they’ve had a lot of trouble getting one, so he hasn’t received speech therapy since the first quarter of the school year and that has been a big problem…
Additional Barriers to Home-School Partnerships. In addition to the previously mentioned barriers to the home-school partnership as they relate to the special education process, foster parents identified several broader challenges that impact their relationship with the school, including the lack of availability of services and resources, and teacher constraints. As it relates to the availability of services, one foster parent described the lack of early intervention services for children with DD:
Similarly, another foster parent described the lack of resources provided to parents who have children that require extra support:
So that’s kind of [hard], figuring out how to work with the schools and find additional resources to help kids who are, kids who are educable but something's not connecting. Additionally, foster parents in this study reported that teacher constraints (i.e., class size, time constraints, discipline) often impacted their relationship with the school. For example, one foster parent noted that the relationship quality with the school has shifted due to class size:
I think that it just wasn’t as good of a fit as last year, and last year’s teacher also didn’t have as many students because they don’t have a cap, or they have a cap in third grade, but they don’t in fourth grade, so that’s really challenging.
Likewise, another foster parent noted:
you’ve [the educator] got 35 kids and so you just do what you can in any given amount of time so I do understand the restraints or the constraints should I say that they’re under trying to be all things for all people is very difficult; however still trying to make an impact on the learning, discipline can be a challenging thing teachers have to be subjected to.
This foster parent (a previous educator) also mentioned that her overall relationship quality with the school is good because she knows how to “speak the language.”
School Practitioner Interviews
more frequently. More specifically, one practitioner reported good communication and helpfulness when working with foster parents:
The ones [foster parents] that I have dealt with, they have been very nice. You know just kind of getting in touch and things that we do need, they’ve been real good about working with us as best as they can.
These interactions suggest, at least from the school perspective, that strong home-school partnerships exist for some foster families.
However, several school practitioners reported more negative experiences relating to the level of foster parent involvement in the school. For example, one practitioner commented that while an important aspect of home-school partnerships consists of forming positive relationships with parents by inviting them to events, such as community nights, foster parents are typically less involved. Another practitioner described her experiences with foster parent involvement and her perception of possible ulterior motives:
Just speaking from my personal experience in foster care, a lot of parents work in foster care just to get a check. I know it sounds horrible, but we ran into that a lot; like it was hard for us to even get parents to transport a child to school.
Although positive interactions with foster parents are experienced by some school practitioners, it is evident that there are several barriers that impact the strength of these home-school
partnerships.
Barriers to the Home-School Partnership
a concern, particularly for those with developmental disabilities. Several participants noted that due to an overall lack of foster parents in their counties, it is even more difficult for agencies to find placements for children with disabilities. Students with disabilities frequently change foster home placements, sometimes placing them out-of-county, and therefore moving from school-to-school. Despite school practitioners advocating for students in foster care to remain in their schools, they continue to face challenges, especially when attempting to work with foster families. For example, one practitioner suggested that:
these kids have had a variety of placements and they have very little stability which makes it really difficult to work with the families because they’re only there for a few months and some of the kids that we work with have some very intensive needs. Lack of Communication. A lack of communication between the foster home, foster care agency, and the school was identified by five school practitioners as a barrier that impacts the quality of the home-school partnership. While some school practitioners identified more general concerns relating to a lack of communication (i.e., “just being able to get in touch with someone and be able to see who’s responsible say they get sick”), others identified issues that directly relate to the quality of transition planning and special education service delivery. Despite its strong impact on the home-school partnership, lack of communication was often identified as an issue originated from the foster care agency. For example, one practitioner describes her experience with the scheduling of Best Interest Determination (BID) meetings (i.e., meetings that decide if a student should remain at their school of origin when entering the foster care system) during a school year:
[county name] schools they heard from DSS and that’s how they knew to go on and start the meeting because otherwise we wouldn’t know.
Additionally, another practitioner emphasized the importance of working closely with foster care agencies to ensure a continuum of care and strong communication with the foster parent:
...right now, as far as I know there’s no prompting of ‘okay now you have a foster parent who has a student come into their home and maybe that student already has an IEP’ there’s nothing as far as I know that prompts the school that the student [is] in a foster care setting and we need to hold meetings to preemptively provide that [foster] parent with information instead of waiting for them to contact the school in case they don’t understand something. That would require that the agency and school are working really closely together that the alert would just go up immediately.
Legal Requirements. Understanding and navigating the many legal requirements associated with the foster care system, such as confidentiality, was identified as a significant barrier to establishing a strong partnership between the school and foster home. While
maintaining that certain rules and laws were important to ensure the protection of the student in foster care, four school practitioners described how these requirements can impact the special education process and level of information sharing that is allowed. For example, instead of focusing on building a strong relationship with the foster parent, one practitioner described the anxiety she experienced when dealing with various legalities:
Similarly, several practitioners described the confusion surrounding who is and who is not allowed to sign documentation related to special education services during IEP meetings. While these legal requirements certainly have an impact on how paperwork is completed, they also impact who is aware of the foster student’s situation. One practitioner noted:
I’ve had teachers that when they come to the results meetings and we’re talking with the foster parents they have no idea a lot of what the child has gone through or what they’re currently going through until that meeting and that session together.
Ensuring that everyone that is directly involved in a foster student’s education is aware of their situation is imperative for developing and maintaining a strong home-school partnership.
Discussion
The purpose of the present study was to better understand home-school partnerships for foster parents of children with DD, and the related barriers and challenges to these partnerships experienced by both foster parents and school practitioners. Both sets of participants in this study reported mixed experiences as it relates to the perceived quality of the home-school partnership; however, all foster parents reported at least some positive experiences with the schools. This finding is promising, in that some aspects of school systems are meeting foster parent, and thus, foster child, needs. Additionally, most school practitioners reported positive experiences when interacting with foster parents, suggesting that they are generally aware of and accommodating to the unique needs of foster parents of children with DD.
Results of this study demonstrate that both foster parents and school practitioners have had positive experiences when interacting with one another. Specifically, foster parents
generally flexible when scheduling meetings, patient when working with the foster child, and accommodating to the foster family’s needs. Additionally, school practitioners noted that foster parents were generally easy to contact and helpful when collecting needed materials to aide special education processes. School practitioners also reported that foster parents frequently attended meetings when they related to special education services and foster care (i.e., BID meetings). As mentioned previously, strong home-school partnerships have the potential to improve student outcomes, while also providing benefits to parents (i.e., trainings, resources, support, etc.). These findings suggest that this partnership is evident for some foster parents and school practitioners, which provides a good starting point for additional growth and collaboration between home and school.
extrinsic benefits. This preconceived notion of foster parent intentions is troubling and places the foster parent at a disadvantage when attempting to form a positive home-school partnership.
Many of the negative experiences reported by foster parents related to some aspect of the special education process, whether that be the implementation of services or the quality of the referral, evaluation, and eligibility process. Some foster parents felt like the school system was only focused on documentation procedures, rather than focusing the foster child’s needs directly. This finding coincides with a reported barrier of school practitioners: legal requirements. School practitioners in this study reported that they felt some anxiety surrounding the record-keeping requirements of special education for foster children, given their unique situation that requires strict confidentiality and adherence to legalities. This heightened anxiety has the possibility to manifest as only “going through the motions,” instead of emphasizing the importance of building strong home-school partnerships and addressing the foster child’s concerns. It is also important to note that school practitioners reported student instability as a significant concern that impacts the home-school partnership. It is possible that a lack of attention to building relationships is also based on the notion that the foster child could change placements, and therefore schools, at any moment. Additionally, foster parents in this study noted their concern with implementation fidelity of their foster child’s IEP or 504 Plan, suggesting that foster children with DD, who are doubly at risk of experiencing negative educational outcomes, are not always receiving the services they desperately need.
lack of communication and involvement of foster parents as a barrier affecting the quality of the home-school partnership. This suggests that there may be a disconnect between foster parents’ perceptions of school involvement and school practitioners’ perceptions. Despite the lack of resources and support noted by some foster parents, several were aware of the many constraints placed on teachers, such as discipline and the large number of students in their classrooms, suggesting that some foster parents are able to empathize with the many demands that teachers are subjected to.
Implications and Recommendations. Few studies have assessed the needs of foster parents by speaking directly with the population, and no studies have had a strong emphasis on examining the home-school partnership through discussion with both foster parents of children with DD and school practitioners. Therefore, these findings provide greatly needed insight into the challenges faced by both groups when providing care for foster children with DD.
Difficulties experienced by foster parents during the special education process call for school practitioners to be more cognizant of their interactions with foster parents and to seek
opportunities in which they can reduce their negative perceptions of this population. School systems have the opportunity to provide many resources to foster parents caring for children with DD, such as parent training events, parent-teacher conferences, and a list of community
resources. However, schools may need to be more proactive in this approach and consider the many challenges that foster parents experience, such as working with their foster child’s biological parents, managing trauma symptoms, and lack of assistance from their social worker/foster care agency (Diaz, 2017).
adhering to legal requirements is interpreted by foster parents negatively and ultimately impacts the home-school partnership. Therefore, there should be a greater focus on working with foster families during pre-service training for school practitioners that are directly involved in special education processes, so that they are more comfortable and familiar with these procedures when they enter the school environment and begin to function more independently, with less direct supervision. Additionally, in-service professional development can be provided to school practitioners to further educate them on foster care laws and the unique needs of these families and children.
Lastly, foster parents in this study were aware of the many demands placed on teachers and school personnel and were able to empathize with them. However, this does not justify the lack of implementation fidelity of foster children’s educational services included within IEPs and 504 Plans. Therefore, pre-service training programs for teachers and school personnel should make a concerted effort to include more in-depth instruction of federal special education law outlined in IDEIA, as it pertains to adherence of IEPs. Additionally, in-service teachers and school personnel should receive on-going professional development regarding the importance of implementing IEPs to fidelity.
Limitations. Despite the many strengths of the present study, there are several limitations to consider. First, this study has a relatively low sample size in comparison to the number of licensed foster parents in North Carolina and the number of school psychologists and school social workers in the state. Although this study was specifically focused on the
disability (Leslie et al., 2003). Therefore, the generalizability of findings may be limited. Additionally, school practitioners in this study self-reported their involvement with foster
families and foster children with DD. Despite being reminded of the specific disabilities that fall under the DD category, it is possible that some practitioners reflected on the experiences when working with foster children more broadly (e.g., effects of trauma, emotional disorders). Lastly, although the interviews were coded without a theoretical framework in mind, it is possible that the interpretation of qualitative data was subjected to the researcher’s personal biases.
REFERENCES
Abed, M. (2014). Challenges to the concept “partnership with parents” in special needs education. i-Manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 7(4), 1–11.
doi:10.26634/jpsy.7.4.2651
Advocates for Children of New York, Inc. (2005). Advocates for Children’s Project Achieve: A model project providing education advocacy for children in the child welfare system. New York: Advocates for Children.
Advocates for Children of New York, Inc. (2000). Educational neglect: The delivery of educational services to children in New York City’s foster care system. New York: Advocates for Children.
Bolger, K. E., Patterson, C. J., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1998). Peer relationships and self-esteem among children who have been maltreated. Child Development, 69(4), 1171–1197. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06166.x
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706pq063oa
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Facts about developmental disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/developmentaldisabilities/facts.html Diaz, R. (2017). The experience of foster parents: What keeps foster parents motivated to foster
long term? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Antioch University, Santa Barbara, CA. Dyson, L. (2010). Unanticipated effects of children with learning disabilities on their families.
Edwards, C. C., & Da Fonte, A. (2012). The 5-point plan: Fostering successful partnerships with families of students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(3), 6–13. doi:10.1177/004005991204400301
Geenen, S., & Powers, L. E. (2006). Are we ignoring youths with disabilities in foster care? An examination of their school performance. Social Work, 51(3), 233–241.
doi:10.1093/sw/51.3.233
Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wicki, B. (2008). What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1465-1474. doi:10.1002/smj.722
Greenwood, G. E., and Hickman, C. W. (1991). Research and practice in parent involvement: Implications for teacher education. The Elementary School Journal, 91(3), 279–288. doi:10.1086/461655
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., and Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3–42.
doi:10.3102/00346543067001003
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400-1415 (2004)
Leslie, L. K., Hurlburt, M. S., Landsverk, J., Rolls, J. A., Wood, P. A., & Kelleher, K. J. (2003). Comprehensive assessments for children entering foster care: A national perspective. Pediatrics, 112(1), 134–142. doi:10.1542/peds.112.1.134
National Working Group for Education and Foster Care (2011). Education is the lifeline for youth in foster care. Washington, D.C: Author and American Bar Association. Retrieved from http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/child/education/data_sheet_ 2011authcheckdam.pdf
North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.). Intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Retrieved from
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/assistance/disability-services/intellectual-developmentalDisabilities
Olson, J. D., McAllister, C., Grinnell, L. D., Walters, K. G., & Appunn, F. (2016). Applying constant comparative method with multiple investigators and inter-coder reliability. The Qualitative Report, 21(1), 26-42.
Rosenberg, S. A., & Robinson, C. C. (2004). Out-of-home placement for young children with developmental and medical conditions. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(8), 711-723. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.02.16
Scherr, T. G. (2007). Education experiences of children in foster care: Meta-analyses of special education, retention and discipline rates. School Psychology International, 28(4), 419– 436. doi:10.1177/0143034307084133
Shannon, P., & Agorastou, M. (2006). Identifying children with developmental disabilities receiving child protection services: A national survey of child welfare administrators. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 87(3), 351-357. doi:10.1606/1044-3894.3539
Slayter, E., & Springer, C. (2011). Child welfare-involved youth with intellectual disabilities: Pathways into and placements in foster care. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 49(1), 1–13. doi:10.1352/1934-9556-49.1.1
Steen, J. A., & Harlow, S. (2012). Correlates of multiple placements in foster care: A study of placement instability in five states. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 6(2), 172-190. doi:10.1080/15548732.2012.667734
Sullivan, P. M., & Knutson, J. F. (2000). Maltreatment and disabilities: A population based epidemiological study. Child abuse & neglect, 24(10), 1257-1273. doi:10.1016/s0145-2134(00)00190-3
Turnbull, A., & Turnbull, R. (2001). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: Collaborating for empowerment (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Van Haren, B., & Fiedler, C. R. (2008). Support and empower families of children with disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(4), 231–235.
doi:10.1177/1053451208314908
White, J., Carrington, J., & Freeman, P. (1990). A study of the educational status of foster children in Oregon: Research and statistics. Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Human Resources, Children’s Service Division.
Zetlin, A. (2006). The experiences of foster children and youth in special education. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 31(3), 161–165.
doi:10.1080/13668250600847039
Appendix A
Foster Parent Interview Questions
1. What have been some of the biggest challenges in fostering a child or youth with IDD? 2. What training did you receive about fostering children or youth with IDD?
3. How relevant was the information that you were given prior to and at the beginning of the child living with you?
4. How did the IDD diagnosis occur?
5. When an IDD diagnosis occurred, were you offered or did you seek additional support? a. (If yes) Where/who did you go for resources or support?
b. (If no) What prevented you from seeking or accessing assistance? 6. Were you supported by the child’s school district?
a. (if yes) What were some of the supports that you found most helpful? b. (if not) Where did you need to be more supported?
7. What role have you played in the educational process for this child?
8. How knowledgeable do you feel about the services available to you through the school district for children with IDD?
9. What additional comments about the importance of partnerships between foster families and local school districts do you have?
Appendix B
School Practitioner Interview Questions
1. What is your experience working with children and youth in foster care with disabilities? 2. What training did you receive about working with children and youth in foster care and
their families?
3. What are some of the challenges in working with this population?
4. What are some of the unique challenges that these youth face in the school setting? 5. Were you offered or did you seek additional support?
a. (If yes) Where/who did you go for resources or support?
b. (If no) What prevented you from seeking or accessing assistance?
6. What is your experience in working with foster care agencies to support these children and youth?
7. What additional comments about the importance of partnerships between foster families and local school districts do you have?
8. What content would you like to see included in a curriculum for foster parents and foster care workers about caring for children and youth with a disability?
