Defining Well-Being: Perspectives from Foster Parents, Kinship Caregivers, Primary Families, and Caseworkers

Background and Purpose: Child welfare systems have transformed from a sole emphasis on protecting children from abuse and neglect to prioritizing their overall well-being. However, the multifaceted nature of child well-being has not been fully understood or integrated into practice and policy. While legislative frameworks define well-being for the evaluation of system outcomes, the nuanced perspectives of various stakeholders on the conceptualization, promotion, and challenges of well-being remain largely unexplored. Our study sought to explore these stakeholders' conceptualizations of well-being, their perceived roles in its enhancement, and the identification of service provision gaps.

Methods: Employing an exploratory qualitative design, we conducted four focus groups with 27 total participants who identified as foster parents, primary parents, kinship providers, or child welfare caseworkers. Thematic analysis, as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2022), facilitated the identification of common themes, while narrative analysis provided depth to individual experiences, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of stakeholder perspectives. This dual-coding approach, applied by two independent coders per transcript with a third for resolution, not only ensured data integrity but also enriched the analysis by capturing the complexity of stakeholders' experiences and perceptions.

Results: Analysis revealed four themes that captured the nuanced definitions of well-being and each stakeholder’s role in meeting well-being needs. The first theme, defining well-being, provides evidence that stakeholders encompassed the federal metrics of the definition (physical, mental health, educational needs), but extended it to include stability, consistency, and attention to creating a comfortable home environment. The second theme, challenges in meeting well-being needs, reveals problems with assessing well-being, fragmented and unhelpful community services, and major issues navigating the child welfare system. Evident across narratives was a critical discourse on the adequacy of current practices in meeting well-being needs, leading to the third theme, well-being interventions. Stakeholders highlighted significant gaps in service provision, particularly in addressing tangible resources, and stressed the importance of a holistic approach to well-being that includes attention to maintaining familial bonds. A final theme, role in meeting well-being needs, provides evidence on the differing roles of each stakeholder group. Caregivers saw themselves as the sole well-being providers and described the role of the child welfare system as confusing and unhelpful. Caseworkers and primary parents saw their role mainly in accountability for meeting case plan goals and a focus on maintaining parental well-being.

Conclusions and Implications: The study underscores a gap between policy-oriented definitions of well-being and stakeholder experiences, suggesting a need for policy and practice reforms that embrace a more holistic, nuanced understanding of child well-being. Recommendations for practice include enhanced financial resources, greater emphasis on stability and consistency in placements, and the integration of models of partnership between substitute caregivers and primary families. Policy implications point towards the development of more comprehensive, flexible criteria for assessing well-being and guiding service provision at case closure. For further research, our findings advocate for continued stakeholder engagement, particularly in refining and operationalizing definitions of well-being that resonate with children's and families' lived experiences.