Ress contextual stressors. In addition to low supervision by these families, kinship foster caregivers also request and receive fewer financial services by means of foster care payments than nonkinship foster caregivers (Ehrle Geen, 2002). Caregivers may lack the resources to follow up on receipt of services, which would be more difficult and perhaps of lower priority for caregivers who are ill and preoccupied with day-to-day needs and their own medical care. Furthermore, the extreme vulnerability to economic hardship experienced by kinship foster families may compromise the ability to monitor and follow through with disciplinary techniques compared to other caregivers. Positive effects of placement with older and sicker caregivers in non-kin settings may reflect considerations of contextual factors and placement options by the child welfare system. While caseworkers may identify kin caregivers as their first choice for youth, regardless of individual and family characteristics, a more complex decision-making process may occur when placing youth with nonkin caregivers. For example, caseworkers may choose not to place a child known to exhibit behavior problems with a foster caregiver struggling with health problems. Presumably, caseworkers hope to find stable foster environments for youth, and are attentive to those characteristics of the youth and foster caregiver that could disrupt the placement. Kinship placements have been shown to be more stable than nonkinship settings (PD150606 chemical information Schwartz, 2008), which could explain a discrepancy in consideration of contextual factors. There may be less concern or incentive, as kin may be more likely to maintain a placement regardless of challenges faced. However, results of this study indicate change in internalizing and SC144 biological activity externalizing outcomes. Thus, if outcomes relate to caseworker selection of placement sites, it would imply that caseworkers were able to predict which youth would be likely to improve their behavior after being removed from the home. Further research is necessary to understand the nuances of how caseworkers make decisions around placements, or if there is another variable at play.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptJ Soc Serv Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 February 25.Rufa and FowlerPageIn addition to the effects described above, other developmental and contextual factors independently predict changes in youths’ emotional and behavioral health over time. Youth mental health outcomes at 18-month follow-up were predicted by their scores at baseline. Specifically, both internalizing and externalizing scores predicted increased internalizing scores later, while externalizing outcomes were only predicted by initial reports of externalizing behavior. This effect is likely due to the propensity for youth experiencing internalizing symptoms to also exhibit behaviors such as irritability and reactive aggression, as stated above (White et al., 2013). Results suggest when youth experience at least one change in placement setting between baseline and interviews 18 months later, externalizing symptoms worsen. This effect was not seen for internalizing symptoms. It is possible that experiencing multiple placement changes increases behavior problems; however, research also suggests youth with behavior problems are more likely to have disruptions in their placement (Fisher, Stoolmiller, Mannering, Takahashi, Chamberlain, 2011). These moves may be a res.Ress contextual stressors. In addition to low supervision by these families, kinship foster caregivers also request and receive fewer financial services by means of foster care payments than nonkinship foster caregivers (Ehrle Geen, 2002). Caregivers may lack the resources to follow up on receipt of services, which would be more difficult and perhaps of lower priority for caregivers who are ill and preoccupied with day-to-day needs and their own medical care. Furthermore, the extreme vulnerability to economic hardship experienced by kinship foster families may compromise the ability to monitor and follow through with disciplinary techniques compared to other caregivers. Positive effects of placement with older and sicker caregivers in non-kin settings may reflect considerations of contextual factors and placement options by the child welfare system. While caseworkers may identify kin caregivers as their first choice for youth, regardless of individual and family characteristics, a more complex decision-making process may occur when placing youth with nonkin caregivers. For example, caseworkers may choose not to place a child known to exhibit behavior problems with a foster caregiver struggling with health problems. Presumably, caseworkers hope to find stable foster environments for youth, and are attentive to those characteristics of the youth and foster caregiver that could disrupt the placement. Kinship placements have been shown to be more stable than nonkinship settings (Schwartz, 2008), which could explain a discrepancy in consideration of contextual factors. There may be less concern or incentive, as kin may be more likely to maintain a placement regardless of challenges faced. However, results of this study indicate change in internalizing and externalizing outcomes. Thus, if outcomes relate to caseworker selection of placement sites, it would imply that caseworkers were able to predict which youth would be likely to improve their behavior after being removed from the home. Further research is necessary to understand the nuances of how caseworkers make decisions around placements, or if there is another variable at play.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptJ Soc Serv Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 February 25.Rufa and FowlerPageIn addition to the effects described above, other developmental and contextual factors independently predict changes in youths’ emotional and behavioral health over time. Youth mental health outcomes at 18-month follow-up were predicted by their scores at baseline. Specifically, both internalizing and externalizing scores predicted increased internalizing scores later, while externalizing outcomes were only predicted by initial reports of externalizing behavior. This effect is likely due to the propensity for youth experiencing internalizing symptoms to also exhibit behaviors such as irritability and reactive aggression, as stated above (White et al., 2013). Results suggest when youth experience at least one change in placement setting between baseline and interviews 18 months later, externalizing symptoms worsen. This effect was not seen for internalizing symptoms. It is possible that experiencing multiple placement changes increases behavior problems; however, research also suggests youth with behavior problems are more likely to have disruptions in their placement (Fisher, Stoolmiller, Mannering, Takahashi, Chamberlain, 2011). These moves may be a res.