Institutional Characteristics of Institutional Care in Chile: What do Carers bring to the relationship with Looked After Children? Manuela Garcia Quiroga - University of Birmingham Dr. Catherine Hamilton-Giachritsis - University of Bath

Large number of children living in alternative care (18,878: rate of 42 per 10,000) Changes in residential placements (70.1% childrens homes. 29.9% Foster Care) 253 Childrens homes (60% with max. 30 children) No published study evaluating these recent changes and its outcomes for attachment. Aim of the research: To study the attachment representations and relational patterns in children and their temporary caregivers in Chile Total Population: 16, 380, ,096.4 km²

Alternative Care in Chile Foster Care priority under 6 New Foster Care Programmes, Family- Type Children´s Homes and few “old- big” institutions Transition Length Placem. Placement seen as temporary. Can lead to change of placement in order to achieve targets. Reunion with biological Family Recent Reports raise Concern Visits are encouraged. Quality of bonds and impact of visits not always assessed. Prolonged placements. 253 Children´s Homes Private Age/ Gender Reasons for placement (Judicial) Some institutions with low quality of Care. Lack of governmental support and supervision. Foster Care run by different institutions. Problems in recruiting and supervising. Parental Inability, Neglect, Moral or Material Danger

Methods Design: Cross sectional studySample: 17 managers. 40 institutional and foster child/caregiver dyads.Quantitative /qualitative factors.Instruments: 1) Attachment representations in children (Attachment Story Completion Task, ASCT. Bretherton et. al, 1990) 2) Possible attachment disorders (Indiscriminate friendliness Interview, Chisholm, 1998). 3) Child-Caregiver interaction (CCERRS. McCall, Groark, & Fish 2010). 4) Presence of Behavioral Problems (CBS Mc Call & Groark, 2010 and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire SDQ (Goodman, 1997 ) 5) Quality of Caregiving Environment (HOME Cadwel & Bradley, 1984) 6) Caregiver’s relevant information: a. Revised Adult Attachment Scale (Collins, 1996) b. COPE Inventory (Carver, Scheier & Weintraub, 1989) c. Motivation Foster Parent Inventory (Yates, Lekies, Stockdale & Jasper, 1997) d. Focus Groups Data collected in Chile.

Results (Institutional Care) Length-number of placements (23 months, 41% one or more prev.) End of Placements (23% family, 11% adoption, 10% referral) Staff (No qualification, wide differences between institutions. Stability: mean of 5 years but some with long time in each institution.) Ratios (8.5 children per adult. 8.5 adults a week per child. Big variability between institutions.) Siblings and visits (44% lived with siblings, 50% of them shared rooms. 29% had siblings in other institutions. 80% visited by biology family) Support Available (100% of Homes had a stable Psychologist) Attachment Beliefs (knowledge and awareness as general trend) Practices (17.6 % key person, 69% encourage involvement, 58.8% “consider” topic)

Results (Carers) COPE (Coping Strategies) Motivation Inventory AARS (Adult Attachment Style) Beliefs about Attachment Focus Groups (Thematic Analysis of their experience of being a Carer and their relationship with the children)

POSITIVE EXPERIENCE Like work with children Positive Team Psychologists support Rewarding EMOTIONAL INVOLVEMENT Affectional Bonds Engagement Differential Bond Give Love Like Second Home Loss DIFFICULTIES/TENSIONS System Level (Visits, end of placement, ratios, information) Relationship Level (Children ’ s families, children, Professionals- Managers, family/work) Initial Negative

Conclusions Potential Positive Factors in institutional care. Can be different to other countries. Policies must be based in local studies. Factors in Carers that are positive. Factors in Institutional Care that need to be addressed. Limitations of this study (relatively small sample, voluntary participation). Further Steps in this study (Children’s data. Foster Families data).