The 2011 Looking After Children Outcomes Data
Project: A summary of findings
Acknowledgements
The department would like to thank the many individuals, groups and organisations who contributed to the
outcomes data project.
The Statewide Looking After Children Reference Group strongly supported the project, by encouraging
community service organisations to participate and by facilitating collection of the de-identified data. Many
community service organisations enthusiastically collaborated with the department to select and de-identify
appropriate records. A special thanks to Dr Sarah Wise from Research Beautiful who undertook the data
analysis and prepared the technical report.
This publication is available as a PDF and an accessible Word version on
http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/about-the-department/plans,-programs-andprojects/programs/children,-youth-and-family-services/looking-after-children-invictoria-lac/lac-references-and-reports/looking-after-children-outcomes-data-project2011
Published by the Victorian Government Department of Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria.
© Copyright State of Victoria 2014
This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the
provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.
Authorised by the State Government of Victoria, 50 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne.
ISBN
978-0-7311-6636-7 (print)
978-0-7311-6637-4 (on-line)
978-0-7311-6638-1 (Word)
January 2014
Department of Human Services
Contents
Victoria’s out-of-home care services ............................................................................. 3
The Looking After Children practice framework ............................................................ 3
About the outcomes data project ................................................................................... 4
Data characteristics .................................................................................................................... 4
About the 2010–11 sample......................................................................................................... 4
Progress-in-care data ................................................................................................................. 5
Time-series data......................................................................................................................... 5
What the data project found .......................................................................................... 6
Findings from the 2010–11 data .................................................................................... 6
Children who were doing well in care ......................................................................................... 6
Children with poorer outcomes in care ....................................................................................... 6
Progress-in-care data ................................................................................................................. 6
Figure 1: Change since last assessment ..................................................................................................... 7
Findings across the seven life areas ............................................................................. 8
Health ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Emotional and behavioural development .................................................................................... 8
Education ................................................................................................................................... 8
Family and social relationships ................................................................................................... 9
Identity........................................................................................................................................ 9
Social presentation ..................................................................................................................... 9
Self-care ..................................................................................................................................... 9
Comparing the 2010–11 findings with the other datasets ........................................... 10
Changes in 16 measures across time ...................................................................................... 10
Figure 2: Change in 16 outcome measures between 2007 and 2010–11 ................................................ 10
Findings for particular groups of children .................................................................... 11
Children with a disability or serious health condition ................................................................ 11
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children ........................................................................... 12
Figure 3: Outcomes for Aboriginal children compared with non-Aboriginal children ......................... 12
Overall, encouraging findings ...................................................................................... 13
Page 2 of 13
Victoria’s out-of-home care services
Victoria’s child protection services take action to keep vulnerable children safe when they are at risk of harm in
their family home.
Children and young people who cannot safely remain in their family home can be placed on a short or long-term
basis with relatives, foster carers or in residential care. This is called ‘out-of-home care’ or ‘placement services’.
At the time of this research up to 5,700 Victorian children were living in out-of home care at any time.
The Looking After Children practice framework
Victoria’s out-of-home care program has been using the Looking After Children practice framework since 2002–
03 to provide collaborative, outcomes-focused care for children and young people who are placed away from
their families as a result of a child protection intervention.
The Looking After Children approach aims to provide children with the sort of experiences that are essential to
ensure normal physical, social and psychological development. Looking After Children identifies seven
dimensions of development: health, emotional and behavioural development, education, family and social
relationships, identity, social presentation and self-care skills.
Looking After Children – the seven dimensions of development:

health

emotional and behavioural development

education

family and social relationships

identity

social presentation

self-care skills.
Children are assessed using the Assessment and progress record – a practice tool that incorporates ageappropriate assessment of how each child is faring across the seven developmental dimensions.
Page 3 of 13
About the outcomes data project
In late 2011 the Department of Human Services undertook a project to investigate how children in Victoria’s outof-home care services were faring.
The project used samples of de-identified client records completed by care teams1 in three separate time
periods for children in out-of-home care. In other words, the data was not collected specifically for this project;
rather it is information that was recorded as part of the ongoing management of the day-to-day care provided to
children by their care teams using the Looking After Children practice framework.
Data characteristics
The project involved collating and comparing three datasets derived from de-identified assessment records
completed for children in out-of-home care over three different time periods. The three datasets are as follows:

614 records completed in 2007

263 records completed in 2009–10

511 records completed in 2010–11.
The project team analysed 40 outcome measures across the seven areas of development identified in the
Looking After Children practice framework.
It is important to note that the data from 2010–11 is derived from assessment records2 in a different format from
the 2007 and 2009–10 records, so some of the data is not directly comparable. The focus of this report is on the
findings derived from the most recent and more comprehensive 2010–11 Assessment and progress records;
however, where possible the 2010–11 data has been compared with the older data.
It is also important to note that the regional distribution of the sample children was determined according to the
department’s regional structure that existed at the time the project was undertaken, which consisted of eight
regions – three metropolitan and five rural.3
About the 2010–11 sample
The sample had the following characteristics:

balanced in terms of gender

representative of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander4 children and those with disabilities

broadly age representative, except there were more preschoolers and slightly fewer adolescents than the
general out-of-home care population

broadly geographically representative, except there were slightly more rural children than the general out-ofhome care population

included children in foster care, residential care and supported kinship care arrangements, although the
majority were in foster care

excluded children in permanent care.5
1
In out-of-home care a child’s care team comprises the placement agency caseworker, the foster carer, kinship carer or key residential
worker, the child protection practitioner and some others, as well as the child’s parents whenever possible.
2
In 2009 the department engaged Anglicare Victoria to redevelop the Looking After Children assessment record to better reflect Victoria’s
out-of-home care policies and practice and to align it with internationally comparable datasets.
3
In 2012 the department’s regional structure changed to 17 local areas making up four divisions.
4
Throughout this document the term ‘Aboriginal’ refers to both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Page 4 of 13
Progress-in-care data
Almost 60 per cent of the children in the 2010–11 sample had been in care long enough to have had a previous
assessment.
This allowed the project team to compare ‘progress-in-care’ measures in the children’s assessment records to
determine the extent to which these children had made progress in any of the seven life areas.
Time-series data
Of the 40 measures, 16 are comparable across datasets and were analysed as a time series. However, given
that the 2009–10 data is considered to be less representative than the other two datasets, the primary
comparison was between the 2010–11 data and the 2007 data.
5
Permanent care means that carers have full guardianship responsibilities.
Page 5 of 13
What the data project found
Research studies suggest that children placed in out-of-home care have poorer outcomes overall compared
with children in the general community. 6 The 2011 Looking After Children Outcomes Data Project suggests that
an encouraging number of children are experiencing improvements in their health and wellbeing while in care.
Findings from the 2010–11 data
The majority of the 511 children in the data project sample had achieved positive outcomes in most areas of
their life while in care. At the same time there were still too many children who were not faring well.
Children who were doing well in care
More of the younger children than the older children were doing well in care across all areas of their lives,
particularly in their education and emotional and behavioural development.
The children doing well were also more likely to be in foster care than in residential care or kinship care.
However, it must be remembered that the kinship care sample was fairly small and was a specific subsample of
those in kinship care. Therefore, the sample was not representative of all children in kinship care.7
Children with poorer outcomes in care
The group of children in care who were not doing as well emotionally and not doing as well educationally tended
to come from the older age groups. This may be the result, at least in part, of many older children coming into
care later with more difficulties having accumulated prior to entering care.
More children in residential care were not faring as well as those in foster care or kinship care. This is not
surprising because residential care is generally only provided for children with the most complex needs and
trauma-related behaviours.
Progress-in-care data
Of the children who had been in care long enough to have had a prior assessment, about half had improved
outcomes in each of the seven life areas (each measure had at least 50.2 per cent of the children improve).
For each measure at least 44 per cent of the children experienced no change between assessments. This is
related in part to the high baselines – for example, 85.7 per cent of the children were already generally well and
healthy.
Those who had deteriorated comprised a very small proportion of the sample – 2.9 per cent or less – except in
relation to emotional and behavioural development where 8.9 per cent deteriorated.
Overall these findings are encouraging, because they show that, across all the life areas, the majority of children
had improved while in care.
6
Barber, JG & Delfabbro, PH 2004, Children in foster care, Taylor and Francis, London.
Sawyer, MG, Carbone, JA, Searle, AK & Robinson, P 2007, ‘The mental health and wellbeing of children and adolescents in home-based
foster care’, The Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 186, no. 4, pp. 181–184.
7
The kinship care sample was drawn from those who had very recently begun placement support provided by newly established agency-
based kinship services. These services are not provided to the majority of those in kinship care.
Page 6 of 13
Figure 1: Change since last assessment
The project findings suggest that, in terms of their wellbeing while in care, these children’s problems and
difficulties seemed greatest just after they came into care; and much of the cause of their problems and
difficulties may lie in their circumstances before they came into care. These circumstances include neglect,
extreme poverty, parental substance use, family violence, abandonment and abuse. However, the experiences
children have while in care also contribute to their overall life outcomes. The challenge of out-of-home care is to
enable children to achieve better life outcomes by improving the care they receive after they enter into care.
Children faring better in out-of-home care tended to be:

younger

in foster care.
Children faring worse in out-of-home care tended to be:

older

in residential care.
Page 7 of 13
Findings across the seven life areas
Health
The overwhelming majority of children in out-of-home care – 85.7 per cent – were generally well and healthy.
The incidence of most long-term health conditions appeared to be similar to the general community except more
children had emotional, psychological and nervous conditions and learning difficulties.
Emotional and behavioural development
The children’s emotional and behavioural development was assessed by their care teams using an approach
that incorporated Dr Robert Goodman’s8 Strengths and difficulties questionnaire.
The findings confirm that children in out-of-home care have much more difficulty in this area than do children in
the general population.
There is a much higher proportion of children with clinically significant strengths and difficulties scores (39.6 per
cent of those aged five years and older) compared with the general population of Australian children (10 per
cent).
However, more than half of the very young children and nearly half of those aged five years and older in the
sample had strengths and difficulties scores within the normal range – despite the neglect and abuse they had
experienced prior to being placed in care.
Also, of the 55.2 per cent of children who had been in care long enough to have more than one assessment,
just half (50.2 per cent) had improved emotionally and behaviourally since coming into care and another 40 per
cent had remained at the same level.
Education
The education findings are mixed.

58.6 per cent of the sample children aged five years or older were attaining educational achievements that
matched their ability, while 31 per cent were somewhat below and 4.8 per cent were seriously below.

87.2 per cent of the sample children aged five years and older were attending school full time. 12.8 per cent
were not attending school full time; however, most were attending part-time courses such as TAFE or
special education arrangements. Fewer than 1 per cent were not participating in any education at all.

15.7 per cent of school-aged children had had three or more unscheduled changes of school since coming
into care and 28.5 per cent had had an unscheduled change in the previous 12 months.

26.2 per cent had missed one to two days’ school in the previous four weeks and 13.8 per cent had missed
three or more days. These absenteeism levels are in line with general community levels. 9

33.2 per cent of those five years and older participated in a wide range of activities in and out of school.
42.1 per cent participated in some activities, while 16.8 per cent participated in few activities and 7.2 per
cent participated in no activities.

58.8 per cent of those who had been in care for at least 12 months and had a previous assessment were
assessed as having progressed educationally since their last assessment. 39.6 per cent maintained
previous education levels and 4.2 per cent had worse educational outcomes.
8
Warnick, EM, Bracken, MB & Kasl, S 2008, ‘Screening efficiency of the Child Behavior Checklist and Strengths and Difficulties
Questionnaire: a systematic review’, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, vol. 13, pp. 140–147.
9
28 per cent of children in the general community self-reported skipping school in the previous month.
Source: The state of Victoria’s children report 2009.
Page 8 of 13
Family and social relationships
The findings in relation to family and social relationships divided the sample into two groups: a larger group who
were having positive experiences in care and a smaller but still sizeable group with poor family and social
relationships outcomes.
The majority of the sample children were having positive relationships in care, as shown in the following
findings.

88.3 per cent of the under two year olds and 61.7 per cent of those aged three years and older had a
positive relationship with their primary caregiver.

88.3 per cent had an adult they could turn to in a crisis.

88.2 per cent had a positive connection with at least one member of their birth family.

52.8 per cent were having regular contact with siblings at least monthly.

59.6 per cent of those under nine years who had been with the same carer for at least 12 months, and 56.1
per cent of those 10 years and older, had had only one placement.

71.1 per cent had at least some friends and 70.3 per cent of school-aged children were seeing friends
outside school at least sometimes.
However, there was another group with poor family and social experiences in care.

47.2 per cent were having no or only irregular contact with their siblings.

26 per cent had few or no friends.

29.7 per cent rarely or never saw friends outside school.

43.9 per cent of those aged 10 years or older had experienced some placement disruption.
Overall, family and social relationships improved for 45 per cent of children after they came into care and for
almost all the rest (48.7 per cent) they stayed the same.
Identity
The identity findings indicate that the majority of children in out-of-home care have developed a positive identity
and self-view. Younger children in care and children in home-based care have more positive self-views and less
negative self-views than older children and children in residential care. Slightly more Aboriginal children (66.2
per cent) than non-Aboriginal children (62.4 per cent) had a positive self-view and also fewer Aboriginal children
(3.1 per cent) had a negative self-view than non-Aboriginal children (18.4 per cent).
Social presentation
There were no concerning social presentation findings in relation to ensuring that children looked and felt well
cared for, and the majority of children could communicate easily with others. However, there was a group of
children who could only communicate with difficulty, including more than one-quarter of Aboriginal children and
more than 40 per cent of those with a disability.
Self-care
The self-care skills findings indicate that although there were clear indications of improvement in this area over
time, most children tended to less frequently undertake age-appropriate self-care tasks and had less capability
on these self-care tasks than was desirable. This is particularly concerning for adolescents in care, because
they are preparing to leave care.
Page 9 of 13
Comparing the 2010–11 findings with the other datasets
The time-series data used in this project is not data for the same children at different time points; rather, it
considers how samples of children in the care system were faring during each time period. Each dataset has a
mix of children who had been in care for various periods, including those who had come into care quite recently.
The findings show that there was little difference in how children in care were faring overall between 2010–11
and 2007.
Given that in each sample up to 40 per cent of the children had been in care less than one year, the context of
more children coming into care with increasingly higher levels of complex problems and difficulties is significant.
In this context, maintaining their current levels of health and wellbeing outcomes may be considered to be an
achievement.
Changes in 16 measures across time
Of the 40 measures, 16 are comparable over the three datasets. As noted earlier it is most relevant to compare
the 2010–11 findings with those from 2007.
Of the 16 measures, one varied significantly, seven varied by 3 per cent or more and eight showed negligible or
no change.
It is notable that the overall proportion of children experiencing emotional and behavioural problems had not
changed since 2007. This, as indicated above, is despite children newly entering care having more complex
problems.
Figure 2: Change in 16 outcome measures between 2007 and 2010–11
Statistically significant change
Measure: Having an adult to turn to in a crisis (modest improvement)
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Ease of communication with others (slight improvement)
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Being normally well
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Interested in learning or inquisitive and eager to learn (under five years)
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Some or serious disruption in continuity of care
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Having friendships with others
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Frequently seeing friends outside of school
Measures that varied by 3 per cent or more (nor statistically significant)
Measure: Fully relating to cultural background
Measures that did not change
 freedom from emotional and behavioural problems

acceptability of behaviour to adults

school readiness of three and four-year-old children

match of ability and educational achievement (children over five years)

participation in activities outside of school

definite attachment to at least one caregiver

acceptability of child’s appearance to adults

positive view of self and abilities.
2007
81.3%
2007
78.6%
2007
90.0%
2007
83.9%
2007
37.4%
2007
24.0%
2007
74.4%
2007
24.6%
2010–11
88.3%
2010–11
82.9%
2010–11
87.0%
2010–11
80.7%
2010–11
41.6%
2010–11
26.8%
2010–11
70.5%
2010–11
29.5%
Page 10 of 13
Findings for particular groups of children
Children with a disability or serious health condition
About 15 per cent of the children in the 2010–11 sample (69) were identified as having a disability or serious
health condition, including 6.6 per cent who were receiving disability services. The project team compared
outcomes for these children with the rest of the sample children. The findings were as follows:
Health – children with a disability had similar health outcomes.
Emotional and behavioural development – many more children with a disability aged five years and over had
clinically significant behavioural problems (51.2 per cent) than those without a disability (36.5 per cent).
Education – the children with a disability were doing better with their education than the children without a
disability.

They were more likely to be attending school full time (69.2 per cent compared with 58.3 per cent).

They had fewer unscheduled changes of school (23.7 compared with 30.5 per cent).

They were less likely to have changed schools in the past 12 months (63.4 per cent

compared with 61 per cent).

They were half as likely to miss more than three days of school (7.7 per cent compared with 14.9 per cent).

Slightly more had educational achievements that matched their abilities (63.4 per cent compared with 61 per
cent).
Children with a disability or serious health condition did better in:

regular educational participation and attendance

number of school changes

educational achievement that matched their abilities

placement stability (nine years and younger).
Children with a disability or serious health condition did less well in:

emotional and behavioural development

positive connections with their family

seeing friends outside school

ease of communication with others

self-care skills capability score (10–14 years).
Family and social relationships – the children with a disability under three years had a worse relationship with
their caregiver than those without a disability; however, the children over three years were doing better in this
area than children without a disability. More children with a disability lacked a positive connection with at least
one member of their family than did children with no disability.
A larger proportion of under nine year olds had greater placement stability. 62.8 per cent (compared with 47 per
cent) had spent 12 months or more living with their current caregiver.
Many more (42 per cent) of the children with a disability rarely or never saw friends outside school compared
with 27 per cent of the children with no disability.
Identity – those with a disability were slightly less likely to have either a positive or a negative view of
themselves and more likely to have a positive view in some situations, than those with no disability.
Page 11 of 13
Social presentation – children with a disability were much more likely to have communication difficulties (40.5
per cent) than those with no disability (12.9 per cent).
Self-care – those with a disability had much more difficulty with self-care skills than those without a disability.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
There were 88 children in the 2010–11 sample who identified as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (17.2 per
cent of the sample). The project team compared their outcomes to the non-Aboriginal children. The findings
were as follows:
Health – Aboriginal children were doing moderately worse, with 18.4 per cent being not ‘normally well’
compared with 12.1 per cent of non-Aboriginal children.
Emotional and behavioural development – overall the outcomes were fairly similar to non-Aboriginal children.
Education – more Aboriginal children were attending school full time and more had educational achievement
that matched their abilities (68.3 per cent compared with 61.4 per cent of non-Aboriginal children). However,
they were twice as likely to miss three or more days in the four weeks prior to the assessment. They were also
more likely to have more unscheduled changes in school since coming into care.
Family and social relationships – almost all (96 per cent) Aboriginal children younger than two were close to
their primary caregiver (86.6 per cent for non-Aboriginal children). However, 50.9 per cent of children over three
years had some problems in their caregiver relationship (37.2 per cent for non-Aboriginal children). More
Aboriginal children had regular contact with their siblings, but fewer saw their friends outside school.
Identity – slightly more Aboriginal children (66.2 per cent) than non-Aboriginal children (62.4 per cent) had a
positive self-view, and fewer (3.1 per cent) had a negative self-view (3.1 per cent compared with 6.6 per cent).
Social presentation – more Aboriginal children (25.6 per cent) had communication difficulties than nonAboriginal children (18.4 per cent).
Self-care – Aboriginal children between 10 and 14 years of age scored slightly better in self-care frequency
(1.86) compared with non-Aboriginal children (1.99) and worse in capability (1.90 compared with 1.76), but
Aboriginal children 15 years and older had better capability scores (1.56 compared with 1.74).
Figure 3: Outcomes for Aboriginal children compared with non-Aboriginal children
Page 12 of 13
Overall, encouraging findings
The 2011 Looking After Children Outcomes Data Project has highlighted the groups of children who are not
doing well in terms of their emotional and behavioural development, schooling and education, family and social
relationships and self-care skills.
The overall findings however suggest that an encouraging number of children are experiencing improvements in
their health and wellbeing while in care. This is reflected in the 2010–11 data, which shows that the majority of
the sample children were doing well overall. The 2010–11 progress-in-care data is particularly encouraging, as it
shows that many children in out-of-home care were making some progress after they had come into care.
The time-series data shows that, despite the increasing complexity and level of trauma in children entering outof-home care, children in the 2010–11 sample had similar levels of health and wellbeing as children in the
earlier samples. The time-series data also reflects, at least in part, the extent to which those children who have
been in care for longer periods have been able to overcome some of their previous difficulties.
Page 13 of 13