Relationships for care experienced children

The ‘cliff edge’ some children experience when leaving care can be isolating and lonely – we want to better understand how to support children in developing relationships that last when they leave care

Children and young people with experience of care can lack the strong and supportive relationships which are crucial for their development, stability, and mental health.  Care experienced young people can miss out on the security network that some of their peers benefit from, and can experience a ‘cliff edge’ when they leave care. Given the limited evidence currently available, we will start by evaluating some of the most commonly used programmes, while scoping new research in areas where evidence such is sorely lacking. 

What do we already know?

Only one-third of care leavers know where to get help and support when they leave care.  Building supportive relationships for care experienced children is a key protective factor  which can improve outcomes for the most vulnerable children. It can also help prevent intergenerational cycles of care as those children grow up and have children of their own.  

What more do we need to know?

We want to better understand how to support children to develop relationships that last when they leave care. There are currently few programmes or approaches developed to support relationships for care experienced children that have been evaluated.  This means we don’t know how best to supporting children in creating and maintaining these relationships.  

We also would like to see better data on care leavers emotional wellbeing. Regular monitoring of the wellbeing of Care Leavers would provide important information about how this group are doing and how well they are being supported by the current system.  

We also need to know more about how to improve the types of support offered to children in foster care and how to improve the availability of foster carers.  

What are we doing about it?

We will begin by evaluating programmes which are being commonly used to support relationships for this group of children. We will also seek to identify any additional interventions that show promise and can be evaluated for impact with the aim of finding interventions that work to support relationships for children with care experience.  We are currently working to identify a measure that could be used to give us a clearer picture of care leaver wellbeing which could be used as part of national monitoring systems. 

Impact of mentoring and befriending practice & interventions for ‘at-risk’ and care-experienced children & young people

Staying Close Feasibility Study

Latest News

Read our latest news and blogs

News

April 22, 2025

Coming soon: New, updated Foundations Guidebook

Blog

April 8, 2025

Building the evidence on effective mentoring and befriending support for care-experienced children and young people

Keep Up to Date

Sign up to receive our newsletter for the latest news, events and research from from Foundations

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information on how we process your personal data please review our privacy policy.

Cost ratings:

This rating is based on information that programme providers have supplied about the components and requirements of their programme. Based on this information, EIF rates programmes on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates the least resource-intensive programmes and 5 the most resource-intensive. 

1: A rating of 1 indicates that a programmes has a low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.

2: A rating of 2 indicates that a programme has a medium-low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.

3: A rating of 3 indicates that a programme has a medium cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.

4: A rating of 4 indicates that a programme has a medium-high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.

5: A rating of 5 indicates that a programme has a high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.

Child Outcomes:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Evidence ratings:

The evidence ratings distinguish five levels of strength of evidence. This is not a rating of the scale of impact but of the degree to which a programme has been shown to have a positive, causal impact on specific child outcomes.

Level 2: Recognises programmes with preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome, but where an assumption of causal impact cannot be drawn.

Level 2+: The programme will have observed a significant positive child outcome in an evaluation meeting all of the criteria for a level 2 evaluation, but also involving a treatment and comparison group. There is baseline equivalence between the treatment and comparison‐group participants on key demographic variables of interest to the study and baseline measures of outcomes (when feasible).

Level 3: Recognises programmes with evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous evaluation – that is, where a judgment about causality can be made.

Level 3+: The programme will have obtained evidence of a significant positive child outcome through an efficacy study, but may also have additional consistent positive evidence from other evaluations (occurring under ideal circumstances or real world settings) that do not meet this criteria, thus keeping it from receiving an assessment of 4 or higher.

Level 4: Recognises programmes with evidence of a long-term positive impact through multiple rigorous evaluations. At least one of these studies must have evidence of improving a child outcome lasting a year or longer.