Exploring How Kinship Caregivers Experience Policy and Practice in Child Welfare at the Systems, Provider, and Family Levels

Background: In 2023, the Biden-Haris administration announced new actions to support kinship caregivers. This policy shift comes alongside significant research demonstrating positive outcomes for children in relative/kin placements. Despite growing research into the benefits of kinship care, there is little research on what policies and practices best support kin caregivers. This study is part of a larger project to support kinship caregiving, promote collaborative parenting principles, and drive systemic change for positive family outcomes. Specifically, this research sought to explore the experiences of kinship caregivers in navigating kinship care policy and practice in one state’s child welfare system.

Method: Focus groups were conducted with 22 kinship caregivers from a Midwestern state. Participants were asked about their experiences with child welfare agencies, perceived facilitators and barriers to collaborative parenting, navigating the child welfare system, and the needs of kinship families. Focus groups were held by Zoom, recorded, and transcribed professionally. Transcripts were coded and analyzed by four members of the research team, and an inductive approach was used to extract themes. Rigor and trustworthiness were established by using a detailed audit trail, team-based coding and analysis, and regular peer debriefing.

Results: Analysis identified five distinct but interrelated themes across system, provider, and family levels. At the system level, two key themes were: 1) Barriers to kin placement and connections, and 2) Complexity of child welfare systems. Kinship caregivers described long waiting periods for placement, limits to visitations, and confusion and frustration with court and legal processes and other care coordination. One overarching theme stood out at the provider-level: Inconsistent knowledge and support from child welfare staff. Caregivers shared variable experiences and degrees of support coming from agency staff, including inconsistency in material resources and information sharing, and gaps in services. At the family-level, two key themes were prevalent: 1) Caregivers lack resources and supports provided to traditional foster homes, and 2) Caregiver experiences are complex and emotionally challenging. Kinship caregivers described an absence of formal training on child welfare processes, insufficient material and financial support, and a lack of preparedness to manage trauma-related behavior and complex family histories.

Conclusion: This research suggests, despite prioritization of kinship care in policy, kinship caregivers remain under-resourced and under-supported in practice. Results indicate several approaches to address challenges faced by kinship caregivers. First, states could implement kinship firewalls to prioritize kinship placements. Second, child welfare agencies could offer kinship-specific training for their workforce, a project already underway in the state. Third, the state must increase financial payments to kinship caregivers to match that of traditional foster homes. While the gap has narrowed, kinship caregivers continue to earn less than licensed homes. Last, kinship caregivers could be provided low-barrier and incentivized opportunities for formal training on managing youth trauma responses and their own emotional well-being. As states increasingly turn to kinship care, the findings of this research underscore the importance of developing and implementing kinship policy that is grounded in research and responsive to the needs of kinship families.