Involvement of Refugee Children in Minnesota's Child Protection System

Background and Purpose:

Minnesota is home to some of the largest refugee communities in the US – communities who have often fled wars and unresolved sociopolitical conflict. Although refugee families receive (limited) assistance in their first months of arrival, refugees have identified cumulative sources of stress that impact their family stability and may place them at an increased risk of child protective services (CPS) involvement. However, little is known about the CPS experiences of refugee families, because nativity and immigration status are not routinely captured in administrative records. This study sought to explore CPS involvement of families from Somalia, Ethiopia (Oromo speaking) and Burma by answering:

1. What proportion of refugee youth have a history of CPS involvement?
2. What are the experiences of refugee youth and families in CPS?
3. What are the strengths and needs of refugee families who enter CPS?

Methods:

Administrative data from the Minnesota Department of Education was used to identify youth from refugee communities (based upon the home primary language code). Youth whose primary language was Somali or Bantu were included in the Somali group (n=4,334); Burmese speakers were included in the Burmese group (n=332); and Afan Oromo speakers were included in the Oromo group (n=268). Youth’s records were matched with their corresponding Department of Human Services CPS records. Descriptive statistics, chi-square analysis, and ANOVAs were used to assess involvement and describe the CPS experiences of refugee youth. 

Results:

Findings revealed that 3.5% of refugee youth were involved in an accepted CPS case (as an alleged victim). Most CPS cases (58%) were served through Differential Response; most allegations of maltreatment (61%) were for neglect. Rates of substantiation (via Family Investigation Response) were high (65%). Significant differences among groups were not found with respect to involvement, response, allegation, or substantiation. Approximately 18% of refugee youth experienced out-of-home placement (mean length=60 days). Placement settings significantly differed among groups; 61% of Burmese youth placements were non-relative foster family placements (versus 33% and 37% for Somalis and Oromos, respectively). Residential treatment settings comprised 41% of placements for Somali youth but less than 5% of Burmese and Oromo placements; correctional facilities comprised 32% of Oromo placements but 9% of Burmese and 5% of Somali placements.  Areas of strength included household relationships, low alcohol/drug use, and physical health. Financial resources were needed. Social support systems and mental health/coping skills were areas of strength for some groups but not for others  

Conclusions and Implications:

Involvement of refugee youth was similar to that of the general population in Minnesota. Differences among groups were generally not evident. However, placement settings varied dramatically among groups. While youth and their families demonstrated a high level of resilience, families also had high levels of need (often aligned with immigration patterns). Further research is needed to understand how families experience immigration and CPS involvement, and how prepared CPS professionals are to work with refugee families. There is clearly a need for licensed, relative foster homes and mental health resources for refugee youth who are placed in restrictive settings.