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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of social work : JSW 2022-05, Vol.22 (3), p.779-803
Main Authors: Pronk, Sanne, Germie, Van den Berg, Kuiper, Chris, Popma, Arne, Geert Jan, Stams, Mulder, Eva
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