MISSING THE MARK: THE IMPORTANCE OF FINANCIAL ANXIETY IN FINANCIAL SKILLS TRAINING FOR FOSTER YOUTH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that many former Canadian foster youth struggle with financial issues after aging out of care. Much of the financially focused intervention literature speaks to financial literacy training within independent living programming (ILP) or financial empowerment within individual development accounts (IDAs). These important programs offer educational modules to address financial skills or increase youth access to savings. Yet they are not sufficient, as neither addresses the emotional side of personal financial decision-making. Growing up in poverty can create emotional challenges related to money, such as financial anxiety. Financial anxiety affects quality of life in complex ways. Using three clinical composite profiles of youth aging out of the youth protection system in Quebec, this paper highlights some of the complex challenges faced by foster care alumni in dealing with economic insecurities. It is our proposition that we must be more mindful of current and former foster youth’s financial well-being and adapt financial literacy training accordingly. Further, these programs must be assessed for short- and long-term efficacy. Neglecting to measure and address financial anxiety for foster youth and alumni of care risks setting them up for preventable hardships and failures. This paper thus proposes that Canadian child welfare organizations and research teams must further develop this area of inquiry and intervention.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".