Classroom or Workplace: Is There a Tradeoff Between Education and Employment in Obtaining Secure Independent Housing for Youth Transitioning from Foster Care?

Background and Purpose

Housing insecurity places youth in transition at risk for negative social, economic, and health outcomes across the life course. Currently, little is known about how youth navigate this balance between seeking an education (“classroom”) and maintaining gainful employment (“workplace”), and how these potential tradeoffs are associated with youth housing outcomes. This study explores these relationships, and proposes the following research questions for youth in transition: (1) What is the relationship between education, employment, and housing outcomes over time? and (2) Is there a tradeoff to combining education and work with respect to secure independent housing?

Methods 

The sample includes youth (ages 16-26) aging out of foster care in five states who were involved in a transitional living program (n=2,821).  The strength of these data lies in the collection of housing, education, and employment status during every meeting between a youth participant and his/her clinician, yielding 88,753 separate observation points across 2,821 youth.  We conduct ANOVA analyses to compare secure housing outcomes across education attainment and employment status and plot housing trajectories for each combination of education and employment.  Population-averaged (GEE) longitudinal logistic regression models, accounting for the clustering of time within persons and employing an autoregressive correlation structure, are used to predict secure independent housing (defined as living independently, with a roommate, or with a significant other) in youth as a function of education and employment, controlling for demographic characteristics.

Results

ANOVA analyses indicate significant differences in obtaining secure housing across education level F(3,89402 = 2561, p<.001)  and employment status F(4,89401 = 641, p<.001). Population-averaged logistic regression models indicate that number of visits with clinician (p<.001), age (p<.001), gender (female) (p<.001) predict higher odds of obtaining secure housing, while Black youth (as compared to Whites) (p<.01), are less likely to obtain secure independent housing. Compared with those youth who are unemployed and not in school with no HS/GED reference group, college attendance (p<.001), not-in-school but having HS/GED (p<.001), working part time (p<.001), and working full time (p<.001) are associated with higher odds of obtaining secure independent housing. We also find significant relationships in the interaction between work and employment for the following combinations: working part-time and in college (p<.001), working full-time and in-college (p<.01), and seeking part-time (p<.001) and in college.

Conclusions and Implications 

For our first research question, the main effects of our model suggest that higher levels of education and working full- or part-time are associated with higher odds of finding secure independent housing.  We also find that youth are more likely to obtain secure independent housing with each additional visit in the transitional living program. For our second research question, we find that working full- or part-time and attending high school, trade school, or college, each not only work independently to support youth secure housing outcomes, but have even greater effects when combined together.  These findings suggest that there is no “tradeoff” between work and school with respect to housing – in fact, youth seem to be better off when participating in both together.