1. What factors influence inequality between children in care and other children? Differences in their intergenerational transitions Carme Montserrat Ferran Casas University of Girona ISCI Conference Session: Inequality among children, intergenerational transitions July 2011

2. Contents 1.Inequality of opportunities in the education system: the case of children in care 2.Quantitative data from YIPPEE project 3.Qualitative data from YIPPEE project 4.Suggestions for establishing a system of indicators comparable across countries 5.Final considerations about intergenerational transitions

3. 1. Inequality of opportunities in the education system: the case of children in care

4. Premises (1) No country has regular statistics on the educational results of young people leaving care (except for the UK). The lack of data has traditionally been used to deny the existence of a social problem. This population is not only at high social risk when they enter the protection system, but also after they leave it (O'Sullivan and Westerman, 2007). This confirms the need for specific intervention programmes and objectives which are also relevant while they are in residential or family care.

5. Premises (2) The social integration of young people provided for by equal opportunities also depends on achievements in education and training. Those who do not complete compulsory and post- compulsory education  will be at a social disadvantage  can be considered to be at risk of social exclusion  should be recipients of preventive programmes Of those young people who drop out of education  a significant percentage come from the protection system  insufficient training to find qualified work in the labour market.

6. 2. Quantitative data from the YIPPEE project

7. Denmark (Bryderup et al. 2010) Highest level of education % of 17 y.o. young people in public care) (N=1,800) % of all 17 y.o. young people (N= 64,286) Non education completed 20.8%3.8% Compulsory school 79.1%96.2% Vocational education and training 0.1%--

8. Do students who fall behind at school recover over time?  Let’s look at the results for young people aged between 27 and 30 Denmark

9. Denmark (source Bryderup et al. 2010) Highest level of education % of young people aged 27-30 who were in care their 16th year (N=3419) % of all young people aged 27- 30 y.o. (N= 257.904) No completed education 11.9%1.3% Compulsory school 50.0%17.8% Post compulsory secondary education 30.8%46.1% Higher education7.3%34.8% Total100%

10. A B Pathways in the post compulsory education in Spain Non formal apprenticeship C Certificate of school attendance/without certificate Children from care

11. Spain (Catalonia) (2009-2010) Overall population In care Expected level at age 1569.4%31.7% Repeat year during Compulsory Secondary Education (ESO) 9.1%64.5% Graduated at age 1660%20.6% Graduated when in Year 4 of ESO 81.9%59.6% Special Education School1.1%10.6%

12. Spain (Catalonia) (2009-2010) 30.9% of children in care from the cohort born in 1994 left compulsory education at 15 without the certificate 12.9% displayed absenteeism during the 2009-10 school year 29.4% had serious behavioural problems and disciplinary measures were adopted at school. Half of them are guided towards PCPI (non qualified professional courses), while in the overall population only 4.4% are in such studies The longer they stay at the same school, the fewer attainment and behavioural problems are observed.

13. 3. Qualitative data from the YIPPEE project in Spain

14. Characteristics of the young people interviewed (N=35) 68% women 66% born in Spain 14% unaccompanied foreign minor All them living in Catalonia More in residential care than in family foster care Living accommodation at the first interview (aged18 -21) No. Residential facility with support (post care service)16 Apartment (own tenancy, shared with friends,…)13 Foster carers5 Older sister1

15. Studying at the first interview? Intermediate Vocational Training (post-compulsory secondary) 411.4% 1st year Upper Secondary Education (post- compulsory secondary) 1 3% 2nd year Upper Secondary Education (post- compulsory secondary) 411.4% Access Course to Advanced Specific Vocational Training (Higher education) 514.3% Advanced Specific Vocational Training (HE)411.4% University411.4% Others617.1% They were not studying720%

16. While in the protection system Facilitating factors to continue in education (1) Permanency of placement Having a stable key adult in their lives Staying at the same school The prioritising of education in their foster care The carer’s high level of involvement in the issue of education The carer’s high expectations with regard to education Carers and teachers transmitting the value of education: education is the key to leaving their situation of great social difficulty behind them.

17. (2) Inclusion in a group of friends outside the protection system and very much integrated in the education system; acts as a reference group but also as a group to which the young person belongs, fostering a positive social identity and therefore to some extent neutralising their being labelled. The involvement of the school, a friendly attitude which is adapted to children in care. Participation in “normal” leisure-time activities. Maintaining relationships with siblings if desired. The importance of listening to the opinion of these young people and taking it into account,  Better in a foster family or residential home with only few places, although the type of placement in itself is not sufficient condition for achieving these objectives.

18. When they leave care Facilitating factors to continue in education Having a stable key adult to turn to. Receiving educational guidance that promotes post- compulsory education in accordance with their future preferences and aspirations. Not focusing only on immediacy. The existence of housing support services, grants for continuing studying and personalised ongoing support for those who require it, in order to reduce the fear and insecurity they feel when they reach adult age without family support.

19. Catalan Post Care Service (ASJTET) No. of young people

20. 4. Suggestions for establishing a system of indicators comparable across countries

21. Suggestions for establishing a system of indicators comparable across countries A system for the routine collection of relevant data is needed in Europe to monitor the situation of this population in relation to their educational pathways. We need to agree to establish a system of indicators that are comparable among European countries and that can provide information on: (1) The different achievements of this population in relation to the overall population of the same age in each country. (2) The effectiveness of programmes and policy initiatives designed to improve the educational opportunities of young people who have been in care.

22. Suggestions for establishing a system of indicators comparable across countries To propose some steps towards specifying which data would be desirable in order to: Have a more detailed quantitative knowledge of the situation in each country. Make quantitative comparisons possible between countries. Make quantitative evaluations of changes over time possible for each country and across countries.

23. Outstanding factors: quantitative and qualitative information to be collected Information on student’s schooling: Qualifications/Level of studies Attendance School behaviour Repeating years Specific support programmes Peer group integration Reference teacher Participation in school activities (trips, camp, swimming,...) Attention received due to being in care Information on foster care: Stability/changes Reference carer Extracurricular support Physical studying conditions More complex to measure but affects well-being and academic success: involvement and expectations of reference adults

24. Data that would be desirable in order to establish a baseline of further and higher education participation among YPLC in European countries Disaggregated by: Gender Type of placement (residential, foster kinship, foster non-kinship,…) Duration of each placement (less than 1 year, 1-3, more than 3) Receiving after care services (yes/not needing them/missing…) Job status

25. 5. Final considerations

26. Key areas for improvement Making their education the main priority. Accepting their identification as a group with specific educational needs. Avoiding changes in residential homes and schools, working towards permanency. Increasing collaboration between departments and their respective services. Improving expectations with regard to the group. Innovating to meet the current challenges posed by the child protection population. Delaying their economic autonomy  Post care services

27. Final considerations A high number of young people in care are delayed at school after entering the protection system. Most of them leave the protection system suffering even greater delays or not having finished compulsory studies. How can the welfare system (the child protection system) and the post-care support system compensate for deficits and delays? How can we promote equality of educational opportunities for these children? Without establishing education as a major priority such challenges would seem to be insurmountable; as would also be the case without the after care services supporting YPLC These issues involve establishing a system of indicators as a first step.

28. All reports are available at http://tcru.ioe.ac.uk/yippeehttp://tcru.ioe.ac.uk/yippee Casas, F. & Montserrat, C. (2010). Young People from a Public Care Background: establishing a Baseline of Attainment and Progression beyond Compulsory Schooling in Five EU countries. Sonia Jackson and Claire Cameron (Editors). Casas, F., Montserrat, C. & Malo, S. (2010) Young people from a public care background: pathways to education in Spain. The case study report. Casas, F., Montserrat, C. & Malo, S. (2010) Spanish national report summary: Education and young people from a public care background.  Other references: Casas, F. & Montserrat, C. (2009). Sistema educativo e igualdad de oportunidades entre los jóvenes tutelados: estudios recientes en el Reino Unido. Psicothema, 21,4, 543-547 Montserrat, C. & Casas, F. (2010). Educación y jóvenes ex-tutelados: revisión de la literatura científica española. Educación XX1, 13,2  Contacts: ferran.casas@udg.edu carme.montserrat@udg.edu