Loading…
Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities
Summary In this cross-sectional study, we examined differences between 351 adolescents allocated to secure residential youth care and the non-residential alternative educational facility School2Care (12–18 years old, 63% boys). Data were collected by means of the official school registration system...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of social work : JSW 2022-05, Vol.22 (3), p.779-803 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23 |
container_end_page | 803 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 779 |
container_title | Journal of social work : JSW |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | Pronk, Sanne Germie, Van den Berg Kuiper, Chris Popma, Arne Geert Jan, Stams Mulder, Eva |
description | Summary
In this cross-sectional study, we examined differences between 351 adolescents allocated to secure residential youth care and the non-residential alternative educational facility School2Care (12–18 years old, 63% boys). Data were collected by means of the official school registration system and standardized questionnaires.
Findings
Results showed that adolescents in both settings had severe problems. Emergency situations, problems in daily functioning in all life domains, and previous out-of-home placements were found to be associated with allocation to secure residential youth care instead of non-residential alternative education. These three factors may be considered risk factors for secure residential placement of adolescents with complex needs.
Applications
This study provides input for the prevention of secure residential youth care, because the two dynamic (changeable) risk factors for residential out-of-home placement (i.e., emergency situations and adolescent’s daily life functioning) should be considered as intervention targets in non-residential care, while static factors (i.e., history of out-of-home placement) can be used to improve risk assessment of residential out-of-home placement, with higher risk requiring more intensive treatment according to the risk-need-responsivity model for effective mandated treatment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/14680173211009712 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2642817082</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_14680173211009712</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2642817082</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UEtLAzEQDqJgrf4Abwuet2aSdJM9Sn1CwYuCtyWPiaSs2ZrsIv57UyooiKf5mO_BzEfIOdAFgJSXIBpFQXIGQGkrgR2QGUgBNWubl8OCC1_vBMfkJOcNpQzEks4IXgfvMWG0mCuD4wdirLQbeswW45irEKuMdkpYJczBlV3QfWV1WejoqjjE-jeBbrJ6DEMs2Gsb-jAGzKfkyOs-49n3nJPn25un1X29frx7WF2ta8uBjbVD9NyhYYYicNO02AjrHQfHKVVCKFFelbBUUsnGcGEKi04q11JltGF8Ti72uds0vE-Yx24zTKnckjvWCKZAUrVTwV5l05BzQt9tU3jT6bMD2u3a7P60WTyLvSfrV_xJ_d_wBRwZddc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2642817082</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>SAGE</source><creator>Pronk, Sanne ; Germie, Van den Berg ; Kuiper, Chris ; Popma, Arne ; Geert Jan, Stams ; Mulder, Eva</creator><creatorcontrib>Pronk, Sanne ; Germie, Van den Berg ; Kuiper, Chris ; Popma, Arne ; Geert Jan, Stams ; Mulder, Eva</creatorcontrib><description>Summary
In this cross-sectional study, we examined differences between 351 adolescents allocated to secure residential youth care and the non-residential alternative educational facility School2Care (12–18 years old, 63% boys). Data were collected by means of the official school registration system and standardized questionnaires.
Findings
Results showed that adolescents in both settings had severe problems. Emergency situations, problems in daily functioning in all life domains, and previous out-of-home placements were found to be associated with allocation to secure residential youth care instead of non-residential alternative education. These three factors may be considered risk factors for secure residential placement of adolescents with complex needs.
Applications
This study provides input for the prevention of secure residential youth care, because the two dynamic (changeable) risk factors for residential out-of-home placement (i.e., emergency situations and adolescent’s daily life functioning) should be considered as intervention targets in non-residential care, while static factors (i.e., history of out-of-home placement) can be used to improve risk assessment of residential out-of-home placement, with higher risk requiring more intensive treatment according to the risk-need-responsivity model for effective mandated treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1468-0173</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-296X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/14680173211009712</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adolescents ; Alternative approaches ; Cross-sectional studies ; Everyday life ; Residential institutions ; Risk assessment ; Risk factors ; Teenagers ; Youth</subject><ispartof>Journal of social work : JSW, 2022-05, Vol.22 (3), p.779-803</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0471-568X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33774,79364</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pronk, Sanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Germie, Van den Berg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuiper, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popma, Arne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geert Jan, Stams</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulder, Eva</creatorcontrib><title>Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities</title><title>Journal of social work : JSW</title><description>Summary
In this cross-sectional study, we examined differences between 351 adolescents allocated to secure residential youth care and the non-residential alternative educational facility School2Care (12–18 years old, 63% boys). Data were collected by means of the official school registration system and standardized questionnaires.
Findings
Results showed that adolescents in both settings had severe problems. Emergency situations, problems in daily functioning in all life domains, and previous out-of-home placements were found to be associated with allocation to secure residential youth care instead of non-residential alternative education. These three factors may be considered risk factors for secure residential placement of adolescents with complex needs.
Applications
This study provides input for the prevention of secure residential youth care, because the two dynamic (changeable) risk factors for residential out-of-home placement (i.e., emergency situations and adolescent’s daily life functioning) should be considered as intervention targets in non-residential care, while static factors (i.e., history of out-of-home placement) can be used to improve risk assessment of residential out-of-home placement, with higher risk requiring more intensive treatment according to the risk-need-responsivity model for effective mandated treatment.</description><subject>Adolescents</subject><subject>Alternative approaches</subject><subject>Cross-sectional studies</subject><subject>Everyday life</subject><subject>Residential institutions</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Teenagers</subject><subject>Youth</subject><issn>1468-0173</issn><issn>1741-296X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UEtLAzEQDqJgrf4Abwuet2aSdJM9Sn1CwYuCtyWPiaSs2ZrsIv57UyooiKf5mO_BzEfIOdAFgJSXIBpFQXIGQGkrgR2QGUgBNWubl8OCC1_vBMfkJOcNpQzEks4IXgfvMWG0mCuD4wdirLQbeswW45irEKuMdkpYJczBlV3QfWV1WejoqjjE-jeBbrJ6DEMs2Gsb-jAGzKfkyOs-49n3nJPn25un1X29frx7WF2ta8uBjbVD9NyhYYYicNO02AjrHQfHKVVCKFFelbBUUsnGcGEKi04q11JltGF8Ti72uds0vE-Yx24zTKnckjvWCKZAUrVTwV5l05BzQt9tU3jT6bMD2u3a7P60WTyLvSfrV_xJ_d_wBRwZddc</recordid><startdate>20220501</startdate><enddate>20220501</enddate><creator>Pronk, Sanne</creator><creator>Germie, Van den Berg</creator><creator>Kuiper, Chris</creator><creator>Popma, Arne</creator><creator>Geert Jan, Stams</creator><creator>Mulder, Eva</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U3</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0471-568X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220501</creationdate><title>Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities</title><author>Pronk, Sanne ; Germie, Van den Berg ; Kuiper, Chris ; Popma, Arne ; Geert Jan, Stams ; Mulder, Eva</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Adolescents</topic><topic>Alternative approaches</topic><topic>Cross-sectional studies</topic><topic>Everyday life</topic><topic>Residential institutions</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Teenagers</topic><topic>Youth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pronk, Sanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Germie, Van den Berg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuiper, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popma, Arne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geert Jan, Stams</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulder, Eva</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Social Services Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of social work : JSW</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pronk, Sanne</au><au>Germie, Van den Berg</au><au>Kuiper, Chris</au><au>Popma, Arne</au><au>Geert Jan, Stams</au><au>Mulder, Eva</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities</atitle><jtitle>Journal of social work : JSW</jtitle><date>2022-05-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>779</spage><epage>803</epage><pages>779-803</pages><issn>1468-0173</issn><eissn>1741-296X</eissn><abstract>Summary
In this cross-sectional study, we examined differences between 351 adolescents allocated to secure residential youth care and the non-residential alternative educational facility School2Care (12–18 years old, 63% boys). Data were collected by means of the official school registration system and standardized questionnaires.
Findings
Results showed that adolescents in both settings had severe problems. Emergency situations, problems in daily functioning in all life domains, and previous out-of-home placements were found to be associated with allocation to secure residential youth care instead of non-residential alternative education. These three factors may be considered risk factors for secure residential placement of adolescents with complex needs.
Applications
This study provides input for the prevention of secure residential youth care, because the two dynamic (changeable) risk factors for residential out-of-home placement (i.e., emergency situations and adolescent’s daily life functioning) should be considered as intervention targets in non-residential care, while static factors (i.e., history of out-of-home placement) can be used to improve risk assessment of residential out-of-home placement, with higher risk requiring more intensive treatment according to the risk-need-responsivity model for effective mandated treatment.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/14680173211009712</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0471-568X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1468-0173 |
ispartof | Journal of social work : JSW, 2022-05, Vol.22 (3), p.779-803 |
issn | 1468-0173 1741-296X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2642817082 |
source | Sociological Abstracts; SAGE |
subjects | Adolescents Alternative approaches Cross-sectional studies Everyday life Residential institutions Risk assessment Risk factors Teenagers Youth |
title | Differences between adolescents in secure residential care and non-residential educational facilities |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T12%3A53%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differences%20between%20adolescents%20in%20secure%20residential%20care%20and%20non-residential%20educational%20facilities&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20social%20work%20:%20JSW&rft.au=Pronk,%20Sanne&rft.date=2022-05-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=779&rft.epage=803&rft.pages=779-803&rft.issn=1468-0173&rft.eissn=1741-296X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/14680173211009712&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2642817082%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-deef3deb2b0e13b69e64cfd31d3008448417771587876b34b4cfed78d908bab23%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2642817082&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_14680173211009712&rfr_iscdi=true |