Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter summarizes recent Canadian and international research on the outcomes for youth after they age out of the child welfare system. It paints a disturbing picture for this small and vulnerable population. Youth leaving care face many challenges in making the transition from state care to independence and adulthood. They bear the emotional scars of childhood neglect or abuse. They do not have a family support network, have limited or no financial resources, are often lacking in life skills, and usually have not completed school. Despite these setbacks, we expect them to function independently once they reach age eighteen. Research shows that once youth leave care, they do not fare as well as their peers. They are at much greater risk of relying on social assistance, becoming homeless, engaging in substance abuse, becoming single parents, experiencing mental health problems, or coming into contact with the criminal justice system. Some youth aging out, however, have more successful transitions. These typically have completed high school, have role models, have access to postsecondary opportunities, refrain from alcohol or drug use, and obtain life skills and independent living training. Having stable placements while in care is also critical in ensuring more positive outcomes. Canada does not have the capacity to track the outcomes of youth as they leave the child welfare system, nor can it identify the types of interventions showing the most promise in helping them achieve better outcomes. Canadian governments need to improve their transitional planning for youth in care who are approaching the age of majority. Some recommendations include extending the age for services and financial assistance to age twenty-four, developing standards to prepare youth for leaving care, and exploring ways to enable youth to pursue higher education or training. Finally, Canada should develop a national longitudinal survey to monitor the outcomes of youth after they leave care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".