CYDL Project One Symposium Least and Most Advantaged Albertan Youth Leslie Twilley, PhD October 1, 2012

Context – Literature Some youth are more advantaged than others Low socio-economic status is an often-studied disadvantage, and has been found to be associated with poor outcomes in areas such as health, education, and behaviour. Poor mental health is another type of disadvantage, associated with elevated rates of service use in domains such as health care, justice and corrections, special education programs, foster care, and income support. Research also shows that some youth have many disadvantages and remain resilient, while some youth have many advantages but poor outcomes. Slide 2

Context – Definition of advantage We wanted to study advantage/disadvantage for Albertan youth Our task was to come up with a definition of advantage that was consistent with previous findings and could be operationalized with our data We chose from among our key indicators, available for all youth in Project One Least and most advantaged youth were defined in terms of educational achievement, mental health status, and socio-economic status Slide 3

Context – Population Description Criteria for advantage categories Indicator Least advantaged Most advantaged Registered in the Alberta Health Care Insurance Plan Yes Enrolled in Alberta Education Age 12 to 17 years Educational achievement Below expectations Above expectations Mental health condition No Socio-economic status Lowest Highest 211,638 youth met the first three criteria 1.1% of these (2,281 youth) were the least advantaged in Alberta 3.6% (7,517 youth) were the most advantaged 95.4% (201,840 youth) were neither least nor most advantaged (“remaining youth”) Slide 4

Gender Slide 5

Region of residence Slide 6

Number of physician visits Slide 7

Number of Emergency Room Visits Slide 8

Number of hospitalizations Slide 9

Number of hospitalizations   Number of hospitalizations Advantage status Least advantaged youth Most advantaged youth Remaining Albertan youth Number of youth No hospitalization 2,020 7,445 197,439 One hospitalization 187 62 3,746 Two or more hospitalizations 74 10 655 Total 2,281 7,517 201,840 Percent of youth 88.6 99.0 97.8 8.2 0.8 1.9 3.2 0.1 0.3 100.0 Slide 10

Intervention Services Slide 11

Offence charges Slide 12

Corrections Slide 13

Percent of youth who were least advantaged Intervention services 9.2% Family Support for Children with Disabilities 16.3% Offence charges 7.2% Corrections (custody) 13.4% Corrections (community) 7.3% Population 1.1% Slide 14

Challenged Youth In one set of analyses, we looked at vulnerable youth from a different point of view We identified youth from our population (registered in ACHIP & Education, 12 to 17 years old) who faced one or more of the following challenges: Subject of a maltreatment-related investigation or intervention Received FSCD services Had offence charges Involved in corrections 6.5% of the population (13,859 youth) were “Challenged Youth” by this definition We then looked at these youth in terms of key indicators, focusing on educational achievement Slide 15

Challenged youth Slide 16

Challenged youth Slide 17

Summary Least advantaged youth were more likely than most advantaged youth to be male, to live in rural areas, to visit physicians often, to attend an emergency room or be hospitalized, or to receive maltreatment-related intervention services Least advantaged youth were over-represented in intervention services, FSCD, receipt of offence charges, and involvement in corrections Youth facing challenges were more likely to meet or exceed educational expectations if they were lived in a higher SES neighbourhood or did not have a mental health condition (also females and low users of health services). These effects are likely due to complex interactions between factors such as past experiences, current experiences, access to services, and factors identified in our analyses. More data needed! Slide 18

Acknowledgements Slide 19