Objective: Conduct secondary data analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of Massachusetts’ Adolescent Outreach Program for Youths in Intensive Foster Care (Outreach) for increasing social support (SS) among enrolled youth. Participants: 194 youth in intensive foster care under the guardianship of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families with a goal of independent living (IL) or long-term substitute care, and born between August 1985 and December 1990 (67% female, 66% White, 27% Hispanic) participated in the study between September 2004 and March 2009. Method: We hypothesized that Outreach compared to services as usual (SAU; control group) would increase participants’ SS and that there would be racial/ethnic disparities in SS as a function of the Outreach. Treatment effects were tested using mixed-effect models. Results: Outreach did not increase foster youth’s SS, compared to SAU. No racial/ethnic disparities in program effect were detected. Discussion and Applications to Social Work: Providers of IL services should reconsider how best to build and strengthen SS among the foster youth they serve.

This study aims to compare different approaches to measuring racial/ethnic disparities in mental health (MH) service use among a nationwide representative sample of children referred to the child welfare system and compare the magnitude and direction of potential disparities in MH service use over time. Using data from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being, six summary measures of disparity were implemented to quantify racial/ethnic disparities in MH service use. This study found that youth of color were less likely than their White counterparts to receive MH services. This racial/ethnic disparity was found to increase over time; however, the magnitude of the increase varied considerably across disparity measures. In addition, the estimated increases in disparity were even greater when the sample was limited to youth in need of MH services. This study shows that the same data may produce different magnitudes of disparity, depending on which metric is implemented and whether MH need is accounted for. A greater understanding of and justification for selection of methods to examine MH disparities among child welfare researchers and policy makers is warranted.