Ready or Not: Assessing Youths` Preparedness for Independent Living

Ready or Not: Assessing
Youths' Preparedness for
Independent Living
Kimberly A. Nollan, Merrily Wolf, Dorothy
Ansell Judith Bums, Leigh Barr, Wanda Copeland,
and Glen Paddock
This article discusses the utility of the Ansell-Casey
Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA) in assessing life skills
necessary for living successfully in the community
upon emancipation from out-of-home care. ACLSA,
completed by youths and their caregivers, identifies
skills that have been mastered and those yet to be
learned. Assessment information can be used for goal
setting, strength identification, and relationship building, as well as to direct program planning and training
in self-sufficiency services.
Kimberly A. Nollan, Ph.D., is Research Specialist; Merrily Wolf, B.S.W., is Research
Assistant; Judith Burns, M.S.W., is Social Worker; Leigh Barr, B.S.W.; is Case Assistant and Alumnae; Wanda Copeland, M.Ed., is Foster Parent; and Glen Paddock,
Ph.D., is Practice Integration Specialist, The Casey Family Program, Seattle, WA.
Dorothy Ansell, M.S.W., is President, Ansell and Associates, Tampa, FL. The authors
extend special thanks to the Casey youths, foster parents, staff, and Seattle Division
Transition Team, as well as the consultants who contributed to this work. In particular, the authors recognize A. Chris Downs and Peter ]. Pecora for their invaluable
editorial advice and comments.
0009-4021/2000/020159-18 $3.00 © 2000 Child Welfare Uague of America
159
160
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX. #2 • March/April
S
herri, age 18, was raised in family foster care from
the age of 7. She was brought into care due to neglect and legal problems resulting from her mother's
drug use. In high school she made and kept her own appointments, occasionally fixed family meats, and held a
job at a fast-food chain. Sherri's demeanor, however, is
that of a much younger person. Her friends and her boyfriend are all significantly younger than she is. Sherri is
often unprepared for class and other commitments. She
attended one semester of junior college and was placed
on academic probation. During this time she received
money from financial aid and employment. She paid her
bills and met her other financial obligations, but spent
nearly every penny by the time her next check came. Sherri
now wants to move out of her family foster home to live
with a roommate.
Sherri is typical of many of the more than 200,000 adolescents in
the United States in out-of-home care [Tatara 1997]. Several studies have found that youths placed in out-of-home care demonstrate less desirable outcomes than peers in the general population in the areas of education, employment, public assistance, and
housing {for extensive literature reviews see McDonald et al.
[1996] and Pecora et al. [1996]). The federal Independent Living
Initiative of 1986 (P.L. 99-272) requires that all youths in out-ofhome care be tested for life skill competencies by the age of 16.
The intent of the initiative is that life skill deficiencies be identified and remediated before emancipation.
The disruptions and traumas often suffered by youths in outof-home care may delay or interrupt the development of the
knowledge and skills they need for self-sufficiency.* Program* For purposes of this article, self-sufficiency is defined as "the knowledge, skills, and
personal and collective power necessary to meet needs and to function interdependently at multiple system levels, with economic self-sufficiency as one of several desirable outcomes" [Freeman 1996: 525].
K.A. Nollan / M. Wolf / D. Ansell / J. Bums / L. Barr / W. Copeland / G. Paddock
161
ming and services designed to fill the needs and gaps in skill
mastery created by these delays are essential for successful emancipation and social integration of youths in out-of-home care.
Youths, caregivers, and service providers must take responsibility early in the placement process for developing an overall selfsufficiency plan by identifying needed attitudes, skills, and behaviors [Mech 1994; North et al. 1988]. Part of this responsibility
is assessing youths' readiness to live on their own.
This article discusses the utility of the Ansell-Casey Life Skills
Assessment {ACLSA) to address these needs. The ACLSA, completed by youths and their caregivers, assesses the life skills found
necessary for living successfully in the community upon emancipation from out-of-home care. It is a strengths-based tool for assessing life skills, setting goals for skills not yet learned, and evaluating program effectiveness.
Assessing Life Skills
The literature on assessment of youth self-sufficiency and life skills
broadly separates into two categories: tangible and intangible
skills. Tangible skills are those skills needed for daily living, selfmaintenance, and obtaining and sustaining gainful employment.
They can be described as skills "we know or do" (adapted from
Polowy et al. [1986]). Included are skills such as money management, household management, transportation, finding and using resources for leisure and recreation, and vocational interests
and aptitudes. Intangible skills are those needed for interpersonal
relationships and for maintaining employment, such as decisionmaking, problem-solving, planning, communication, self-esteem,
anger and grief management, and social skills [Cook et al. 1989;
Ryan etal. 1988].
Both tangible and intangible skills must be assessed simultaneously to provide a complete picture of youth functioning
[Lyman & Jaklitsch 1994]. A variety of instruments exist to mea-
162
.
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
sure life skills. Some have been developed by agencies without
psychometric analyses and norming, such as the Daniel Memorial Independent Living Skills System [Daniel Memorial Inc., Institute for Independent Living 1994]; The Life Skills Inventory:
Summary Report Form [Ansell &c The Independent Skills Center
South Bronx Human Development Organization, Inc. 1987]; and
The Independent Living Skills Assessment Tool [Blostein &
Eldridge 1988]. The reliability and validity of these instruments
have not been established. Other instruments have known psychometric properties (e.g., the Scales of Independent Behavior
[Bruininks et al. 1984] and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales
[Sparrow et al. 1984]), but were designed for use primarily with
developmentally delayed youths. The scores of youths who show
no apparent delays may appear at the top end of the range and
any additional gains they make may not be measurable.
Additionally, the measures described above do not usually
permit youths, caregivers, or service providers to complete the
same or similar measures independently. In fact, most of the selfsufficiency measures do not directly capture the youth's opinion
regarding skill level. Differences of opinion between youths and
caregivers, however, can provide useful information to service
providers and educators on the life skill areas in which youths
may need training and development, as well as on those skills
youths self-identify as strengths and weaknesses.
In response to the limitations of these instruments, the AnsellCasey Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA) was designed to assess
youths at certain developmental points. Three versions of the
ACLSA were created, each for youths of different ages, given that
attention must also be focused on the developmental sequences
of life skills attainment [Mech & Rycraft 1996]. Although designed
for youths in out-of-home care, the ACLSA is appropriate regardless of a youth's living circumstance (e.g., living with biological
or adoptive parent(s), in out-of-home care, or in residential treatment).
K.A. Nollan / M. Wo!f / D. Ansell / J. Bums / L. Barr / W. Copeland / G. Paddock
163
The Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment
Project Goals and Instrument Development
The primary goal guiding the research and measurement design
of the ACLSA was to create a sound instrument that would assess current levels of life skills knowledge and use of youths in
out-of-home care. Such an assessment would be used for both
individual case planning and program development around selfsufficiency. Another goal was to involve consumers and agency
personnel in the research process to maximize the validity and
practicality of the assessment tool.
An Independent Living Committee at The Casey Family Program, using an extensive literature review, generated initial items
for the ACLSA. Experts in the area of self-sufficiency then critiqued those items. Focus groups of youths, caregivers, and child
welfare staff revised items and the instrument's format. Next, focus groups and pilot investigations were conducted with caregivers and youths in urban and rural locations. Consultants helped
ensure that items were developmentally appropriate and suitable for people of different genders, cultures, and ethnicities.
Each version of the ACLSA was field tested. The ACLSA-II
was field tested in 1995 with youths served by a private, longterm out-of-home care agency and their caregivers to uncover
the strengths and limitations of youths in care while examining
the instrument's psychometric properties. Differences in skill levels reported by caregivers and youths were assessed, as were general areas of competency and areas needing further development.
Age, gender, and ethnic differences were tested, as well as differential exposure to certain risk or protective factors [see Nollan
1996; Nollan et al. 1997b]. A year later, the ACLSA-I and ACLSAIII were field tested and similar analyses conducted [see Nollan
et al. 1997a]. Revisions for version 2.0 were made based both on
empirical analyses of the ACLSA's field test version as well as
consumer and expert feedback.
164
.
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
Instrument Description
The ACLSA is a strengths-based measure of capabilities and behaviors (both tangible and intangible) generally viewed as important life skills for youths ages 8 to 19. It is available in paper
or on the Internet. The ACLSA's construction was guided by a
content-referenced testing approach [Anastasi 1982]. Thus, interpretation is based on reference to the specific content of the assessment. An individual's performance is compared to the domain of possible skills to see how well the person has mastered a
skill set. A consequence of content-referenced assessments is that
scales are expected to be skewed and item variance reduced.*
Because the ACLSA was designed to be strengths based, it was
expected that a high percentage of scores would fall in the midto high-range, especially scores for youths with training in independent living skills. The ACLSA was designed, however, to provide an index of ability, purposefully biased toward capturing
youths' strengths. Age differences (older youths scoring higher
than younger youths) were found in all versions of the ACLSA
[Nollan etal. 1997a].
The ACLSA's three age ranges (for youths ages 8 to 11
(ACLSA-I), 12 to 15 (ACLSA-II), and 16 to 19 (ACLSA-III)) are
based on theory and ACLSA data. Nonetheless, usage of a particular version may vary according to a youth's developmental preparedness. Each version has a form to be completed by
both the youth and his or her caregiver or service provider.
Some items are identical across ACLSA versions, others become
progressively more sophisticated for older youths. Life skill
areas addressed by each scale of the ACLSA are summarized
in figure 1. Graphics at the beginning of each scale area make
the assessment user friendly and alert the respondent to the
change in scale. Specific items included in the ACLSA-III are
presented in figure 2.
* For further discussion of content-referenced testing, see Anastasi [1982].
K.A. Ndlan / M. Wolf / D. Anseil / J. Bums / L. Banr / W. CopelarKi / G. Paddock
165
FIGURE 1
Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA) Scaies and Subscales
Sociai Development
Leisure Time
Social Relationships
Communication
Emotional Weil-Being &
Parenting
Self-Awareness
Educational and Vocational Development
Decision-Making
Career Planning & Employment
,
,
Work & Study Skills
Physical Development and Self-Care
Health & Safety
Pregnancy Awareness
Moral Development
Values. Rights. & Responsibilities
Money, Housing, and Transportation
Money Management
Housing
Household Management
Transportation & Mobility
Supplemental Checklist
'
Instrument Comparison
Further clarification of the content and nature of the ACLSA is
apparent upon its comparison to the Daniel Memorial Independent Living Skills System. Overall, each form covers 13 to 16 skill
areas. One area of difference is the age range of youths targeted
for assessment completion. The ACLSA has three developmental
forms, covering the age range of 8 to 19 years of age. The Daniel
Memorial is targeted toward youths ages 14 and older, offering
one form for all. The ACLSA and the Daniel Memorial short form
are similar in the amount of time needed to complete them (40
and 45 minutes, respectively), however, the long form of the
Daniel Memorial requires two to three hours.
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX. #2 • March/April
FIGURE 2
Anselt-Casey Life Skills Assessment-Ill, Version 2.0 Individual Report
Social
Development
Balances school, work, family, friends, fun
Plans affordable activities for free time
During free time, doesn't get into
trouble
Gets along with 1 male/1 female friend
Gets along with someone he/she lives
with
Gets along with birth/adoptive family
member
Talks over problems with a friend
Talks with an adult he/she feels close to
Identifies hurtful/dangerous relationships
Avoids hurtful/dangerous relationships
Can describe qualities wanted in a
partner
Can explain "OK" and "Not OK" touch
Can turn down unwanted sexual advance
Introduces self to new people
Interprets nonverbal communication
Listens to others and asks them
questions
Tries to find compromise in disagreements
Clearly presents ideas to groups
Expresses ideas well in writing
Asks for help when he/she needs it
Explains how he/she is feeling
Gets help if feelings bother him/her
Accepts praise without being embarrassed
Considers criticism without undo anger,
sadness, or defensiveness
Deals with anger/conflict without
violence
Can name 3+ good things about self
Can name 3 areas for self-improvement
Can explain own cultural background
Can tell about own family history
Can explain own religious/spiritual
beliefs
Can explain parental responsibilities
Can explain baby/child care
Can explain what to do for upset baby/
child
Educational and
Vocational Development
Can describe and write 3+ goals
Can describe steps to reach a goal
Can explain good and bad points of a
choice
Considers multiple options for decisions
Thinks about how choices affect others
Thinks about how choices affect the
future
Asks friends or family for ideas about
choices
Can describe 2 career/work options of
interest
Can explain education or training
needed for career options
Can name 3 ways to find job openings
Can explain importance of job references
Can fill out a job application
Can prepare for a job interview
Can get financial aid information
Can get a copy of own birth certificate
Can get a copy of own Social Security
card
Can identify/explain response to
discrimination or sexual harassment
Looks over work for mistakes
Prepares for exams and presentations
Uses computers to help with school or
job
Uses library, newspaper, etc., to get
information
Works well by himself/herself
Works well with other people
Gets work done on time
Gets to school or work on time
Follows directions from teacher or boss
—continued
©1997 Dorothy I. Ansell and The Casey Family Program. Ail rights reserved. Not to
be circulated or reproduced without permission.
K.A. Nollan / M. Wolf / D. Ansell / J. Bums / L Ban- / W. Copeland / G. Paddock
167
FIGURE 2 (CONTINUED)
Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment-Ill, Version 2.0 Individual Report
Money, Housing,
and Transportation
Physical Development
and Self-Care
Can explain how to use bank services
Can interpret pay stub information
Can interpret billing information
Can explain good/bad points of using
credit
Can tell how to establish/maintain good
credit
Can name 2 ways to save money on
purchases
Can contact places to get financial
advice
Budgets money to cover expenses/bills
Saves money to buy special things
Resists sales and peer pressure
Files his/her income tax return
Can respond to ads for housing
Can determine whether housing is safe
Can develop monthly budget for living
on own
Can figure start-up cost of living
independently
Can arrange for new phone/utility
service
Can complete a rental agreement/lease
Can explain responsibilities of rental
agreement or lease
Can get help if conflict with property
manager
Can tell good/bad points of having
roommate
Launders clothes according to the label
Fixes own clothes when they need it
Fixes breakfast, lunch, or dinner
Uses kitchen utensils/appliances
Stores food so it doesn't spoil or go bad
Follows fire prevention and safety rules
Resets circuit breakers or replace fuses
Keeps own living space clean
Prevents or minimizes roaches, mold, etc.
Protects against possible break-ins
Can give directions to residence
Can read city, county, and state maps
Can explain how to get/renew driver's
Can make own medical appointments
Can get information on sex or pregnancy
Can explain two ways to prevent STDs
Can care for minor injuries and
illnesses
Can name own medicines
Can explain why he/she takes medicines
Can explain side effects of own
medicines
Can explain physical consequences of
tobacco, alcohol, illegal drug use
Can tell how to use fire extinguisher
Can name 2+ places to get help or be
safe
Can explain how girls get pregnant
Can explain the signs of pregnancy
Can explain how to prevent pregnancy
Can tell why a pregnant girl needs
good food, rest, exercise, and
medical care
Can explain effects on fetus if a
pregnant girl uses cigarettes, alcohol,
illegal drugs
license
Can explain how to register a vehicle
Can explain how to get car insurance
Can explain consequences of DUI/DWI
Can use buses/public transportation
Moral
Development
Refuses illegal, dangerous, hurtful
activities
'
Respects other people's things
Respects others' personal and civil
/
rights
'
Respects others' views, lifestyles,
' '
attitudes
Explains own beliefs/values when
asked
Explains "fairVnot fair" when asked
Makes decisions based on own beliefs
Talks with friends about how they feel
Helps others
Is polite to others
Shows appreciation for things others do
168
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
The ACLSA is designed to be a self-report completed by the
youth and/or caregiver. The Daniel Memorial form is designed
to be administered as an interview, with the youth as respondent. In practice, however, the ACLSA may be used as an interview, and the Daniel Memorial may be used as a self-report. Finally, the ACLSA can include up to 10 questions tailored to the
unique aspects of the program/person being evaluated.
Scale Reliability and Validity
Cronbach alpha reliabilities were calculated on field test samples
for the ACLSA-I, ACLSA-II, and ACLSA-III (based on items retained in version 2.0).* A study with the purpose of norming the
ACLSA is now underway. From this, predictive, construct, and
concurrent validity will be tested. In addition, further tests of the
stability of the ACLSA {test-retest, alpha reliability) are planned.
ACLSA-L The field test of the ACLSA-I included 172 youths and
241 caregivers. The youth sample consisted of all youths ages 8
to 11 in the custody of a long-term out-of-home care agency. The
caregiver sample consisted of the caregivers of these youths, as
well as caregivers from a consortium of residential treatment,
group home, and therapeutic foster care agencies. The mean age
of the youths was just over 10 years {SD = 1.18), while the mean
age of the caregivers was 43 years {SD = 12.5). There were nearly
the same number of female as male youths. Youths were ethnically diverse, with 10.3% self-identifying as multiethnic and 59%
as youths of color. Most of the ACLSA-I scales and subscales have
acceptable internal consistency. The alpha reliability coefficients
for scales ranged from 0.73 to 0.89 for caregivers and 0.75 to 0.87
for youths. The subscaie reliabilities for caregivers ranged from
0.48 to 0.83 and from 0.48 to 0.75 for youths, with the majority of
the subscaie reliabilities above 0.65.
ACLSA-II. The field test of the ACLSA-II included 219 randomly
• Interested readers should contact the authors for detailed analyses and results from
the field tests.
K.A. Nollan / M. Wolf / D. Ansell / J. Bums / L Barr/ W. Copeland / G. Paddock
169
selected youths from a long-term out-of-home care agency, ages
12 to 15, for whom both youth and caregiver assessments were
completed in 1995. There were 133 females (60.7%) and 86 males
(39.3%). The average age for the youths was 13.96 years {SD =
0.92). Youths in the sample were ethnically diverse, with 58.4%
being youths of color. About one-quarter of the youths (26.9%)
identified themselves as multiethnic, and one-third (32%) lived
in relative placements. No demographic data were collected on
caregivers. The alpha reliabilities for the ACLSA-II scales ranged
from 0.77 to 0.87 for caregivers and 0.72 to 0.75 for youths. The
alpha reliabilities for the subscales ranged from 0.56 to 0.78 for
caregivers and 0.45 to 0.73 for the youths sampled. The majority
of the subscaie reliabilities were above 0.65.
ACLSA-III. The youth sample (N = 421) for the field test of the
ACLSA-III consisted of all youths ages 16 to 19 in the family foster care component of a long-term out-of-home care agency, as
well as youths participating in an independent living program
overseen by a state agency. The caregiver sample {N = 411) consisted of the caregivers of the youths in the field test, as well as
caregivers from a consortium of residential treatment, group
homes, and therapeutic foster care agencies. The mean age for
the youths was 17.8 {SD = 1.3), while the mean age for their
caregivers was 43.4 {SD = 12.1). The ratio of female to male youths
was similar to the ACLSA-II sample, with females (61.4%) outnumbering males (38.6%). Caregivers were more often female
(79.1%) than male (20.9%). Interestingly, youths completing the
ACLSA-III were less ethnically diverse than the other two age
groups. Ten percent of the youths identified themselves as
multiethnic. The primary ethnic identifications in the youth
sample were Caucasian (61.8%) and African American (20.2%).
The ACLSA-III scales also have acceptable internal consistency. The scale alpha reliabilities ranged from 0.83 to 0.93 for
caregivers and from 0.83 to 0.91 for youths. The subscaie
reliabilities ranged from 0.65 to 0.93 for caregivers and from 0.52
to 0.92 for youths, with the majority of the reliabilities above 0.75.
t70
.
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
Con ten t- Va lidity
Future norming and validation of the ACLSA will include crossvalidation with instruments such as the Behavioral and Emotional
Rating Scale [Epstein & Sharma 1998], the Child Behavior Checklist [Achenbach 1991], and the Daniel Memorial Independent Living Skills System [Daniel Memorial Inc., Institute for Independent Living 1994].
Content or "face" validity is less an empirical concern than a
statement about the integrity of the ACLSA's design process
[Nunnally 1978]. The ACLSA's face validity is probably quite
strong, based on the utilization of child welfare professionals and
consultants as expert judges in selecting and refining the initial
items that make up the ACLSA scales and involvement of youths
and caregivers in instrument construction and revisions, described
earlier.
Using the ACLSA in Practice
The ACLSA can be used in a variety of ways, both on individual
and programmatic levels. It is a flexible tool that can be adapted
to individual workers and agencies. The ACLSA Individual Report (returned with each form sent in for scoring) is useful for
practice, as it summarizes youth and caregiver responses for a
particular youth by presenting both subscaie means and percentages of mastery. Percentage of mastery is provided graphically
and numerically. It is calculated by counting all items rated "Can
Do This" or "Does This Most or All of the Time" on ACLSA-II
and ACLSA-III, and rated as "Yes" on ACLSA-I and dividing by
the total number of items in the subscaie. In addition, each ACLSA
item is paraphrased and the numerical rating from the respondent is provided on the ACLSA Individual Report. Reviewing
the ratings and written comments on a completed ACLSA form
in tandem with the ACLSA Individual Report provides a starting
point for several individual and programmatic uses.
K.A. Nollan/M, Wolf/D.Ansell/J.Bums/L Barr/W.Copeiand/G. Paddock
171
Use with Individuals
The ACLSA and the ACLSA Individual Report can help youths
and caregivers acknowledge a youth's strengths, develop a realistic picture of his or her readiness for emancipation, and identify areas in which he or she may need to learn more or develop
additional skills. They encourage youths to think about the life
skills necessary for successfully living as an adult. Involving
youths helps them identify their goals and invest in securing the
services they need [Taber & Proch 1988]. In the words of one foster parent, "[The ACLSA] seems to have increased his awareness
of areas that he could work on" [Personal communication with
foster parent from a long-term foster care agency 1996].
ACLSA items can be translated into goals that are specific,
behavioral, and measurable. Often these goals are based on youth
and caregiver reports of areas in which youths need to improve.
An example of an ACLSA item transformed into a goal is, "I will
be able to tell how to use the fire extinguisher in my home" (item
64 of the ACLSA-II, 2.0). Progress can be recorded in a personal
portfolio and in the youth's case record.
In addition to progress on specific items, response patterns
can be used to indicate areas where more general training is
needed. For instance, if the ACLSA Individual Report reflects low
skill acquisition (low percentage of mastery) in the subscaie of
Social Relationships, training and opportunities to use these skills
via organized groups or activities may be needed in that area.
Training could be provided formally by service providers in
groups or individual exercises, or informally by the caregiver.
Monitoring changes in percentage of mastered items or subscaie
means can show progress toward specific knowledge development and skill acquisition.
Because both caregivers and youths may complete the ACLSA,
differences in their opinions are captured. Areas of discrepancy
and agreement can facilitate dialogue between caregivers and
youths, helping them learn from each other's perceptions. This
t72
*
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
creates opportunities to discuss areas of strength and areas needing work, facilitating increased understanding among all team
members. Completing the ACLSA and reviewing the ACLSA Individual Report together also helps youths and caregivers and/
or service providers get to know each other better, thereby
strengthening their relationships. This is especially helpful at the
beginning of relationships.
Another use is derived from the strengths-based nature of
the ACLSA. Youth's strengths previously unknown to the
caregiver or service provider may be identified. Identifying a
youth's strengths may in turn lead to greater involvement of that
youth in teaching peers skills, participating on advisory committees, etc. Caregivers may recognize areas they can work on with
youths outside of formal case plans and goals. The ACLSA encourages caregivers to see what youths can actually do. In addition, it breaks skills into concise, concrete steps, providing focus
for caregivers by giving them specific tasks on which to work.
"This assessment (ACLSA-II) has been helpful in focusing on
problem areas. Also, it has helped me appreciate how well my
foster children are acquiring these life skills" [Personal communication with foster parent from a state agency 1996].
The ACLSA also keeps everyone focused on the youth's eventual emancipation and the skills he/she will need at that time. If
a youth moves to a new location or the youth's case is transferred,
the new caseworker or educator can refer to the ACLSA to gain a
sense of the youth's skill level and the work that needs to be done.
Use of the ACLSA can be enhanced by compiling personal
portfolios with youths. A portfolio is a collection of samples of
the youth's work that communicate his or her interests and give
evidence of his or her talents [Kimeldorf 1994]). Personal portfolios, built upon the strength-based nature of the ACLSA, improve
youths' self-confidence. By documenting specific competencies,
recognition of developmental growth can enhance relationships
between youths and caregivers. Used in conjunction with the
ACLSA, portfolios can facilitate outcome-oriented planning.
Finally, the ACLSA is a time-efficient way to gather informa-
K.A. Nollan/M. Wolf/D. Ansell/J. Bums/L Barr/W. Copeland/G. Paddock
173
tion. A large amount of assessment information can be gathered
in 20 to 40 minutes and the ACLSA Individual Report provides a
quick visual overview for tracking progress.
Although the ACLSA is designed to be self-administered, it
can be modified to an interview format where youths actually
demonstrate or describe their behavior and knowledge. The
ACLSA should be administered every two to three years, although
actual administration is at the discretion of the agency or school.
Eor example, in one western state, all independent living providers administer the measure every six months to assess the effects
of independent living training and delivery of independent living services.
Use at the Program Level
The ACLSA and its accompanying report may also be used at the
program level. Aggregate reports of youths served by the agency
can be useful for group planning. Areas in which a number of
youths need skill development, as indicated by the ACLSA, can
serve as topics for group discussion or curriculum development.
For example, "Money Management" may be an area of focus if
several youths indicate low skill acquisition. Aggregate summaries can also inform the skill level of youths in groups and be
used to design activities. The ACLSA can also be used to identify
areas for staff training. Eor instance, consistently low responses
from youths in a particular scale may indicate little or no staff
attention to the topic.
Similarly, the ACLSA can be used in a pretest/posttest fashion to demonstrate the effectiveness of an intervention, such as a
life skills training group. On a broader level, programmatic outcomes and effectiveness (percentage of mastery or mean improvement) can be calculated. Mean score improvement can indicate
youth and agency progress. These aggregate reports, as well as
pre/post differences and analyses may provide useful information for funding sources. Given the many uses for the ACLSA
and its Individual Reports, agencies can develop creative and flexible methods to measure progress and identify program needs.
174
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
Conclusion
The ACLSA is a strengths- rather than liabilities-based tool that
directly involves both youths and caregivers in assessment. The
instrument identifies specific skills that have been mastered and
those yet to be learned, and can be readily used for goal identification. Use of the ACLSA can help ensure that youths, caregivers, and service providers are informed, involved, and collaborating on youths' skill acquisition. Life skills, however, make up
only one area of the competencies youths need to live on their
own. Other areas, such as emotional stability and attachment, are
also important. Researchers and practitioners should consider
using the ACLSA in conjunction with measures of such areas.
Eocus groups and interviews with youths, caregivers, and
child welfare staff were used to gather feedback about the utility
of the measure in preparation for national dissemination, and use
with youths and caregivers in the general population. The reaction from most users has been positive. Replication of the psychometric properties and the clinical sensitivity of the measure
to detect youth gains, however, need to be confirmed by other
studies. One such study is underway with the goals of establishing national norms for the ACLSA, as well as further establishing its reliability and validity.
The ACLSA may also be a helpful tool for some of the high
priority research areas identified by Lyman et al. [1996: 50], such
as measuring what skill levels predict higher functioning after
leaving care, identifying realistic benchmarks for what youths
should be able to do at different age levels, and formulating prospective research studies that will "identify high-risk factors, measure the scales or areas of knowledge and skills that have been
identified as critical for independent living, and then expose those
kids to the treatment plans that we think are a wonderful solution." More immediately, the ACLSA may support greater use of
outcome-oriented and strengths-based case planning in child and
family services. •
I
K.A. Nollan / M. Wolf / D. Ansell / J. Bums / L Barr / W. Copeiand / G. Paddock
175
References
Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Bchaimr Checklist/4-J8 and 1991 Profile.
Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.
Ansell, D. & The Independent Living Skills Center South Bronx Human Development
Organization, Inc, (1987). Life Skills Inventory: Summary report form. New York: South
Bronx Human Development Organization.
Anastasi, A. (1982). Psychological testing (5th ed.). New York: McMillan Publishing.
Bloslein, S, & Eldridge, W. D. (1988). The Independent Living Skills Assessment Tool (ILSAT).
Final Report. Ohio Department of Human Services (ODHS).
Bruininks, R. H., Woodcock, R. W., Weatherman, R. P., & Hill, B. K. (1984). TIK Scales of
Independent Behavior. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
Cook, R., McLean, J. L., & Ansell, D. 1. (1989). A national evaluation of Title iV-E foster care
independent living programs for youth (Contract No. 105-87-1608). Rockville, MD: Westat,
Inc.
Daniel Memorial Inc., Institute for Independent Living. (1994). Daniel Memorial Independent Living Skills System. Jacksonville, FL; Daniel Memorial Institute, Inc.
Epstein, M. H., & Sharma, J. M. (1998). The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale. Austin,
TX: Pro-Ed, Inc.
,
Freeman, E. M. (1996). Welfare reforms and services for children and families: Setting a
new practice, research, and policy agenda. Social Work, 41, 521-532.
Kimeldorf, M. (1994). Creating portfolios: For success in school, ivork, and life. N4inneapolis,
MN: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc.
Lyman, S., Banks, A., Hahn, A., Harding, J., Keenan, L., Ludy-Dobson, C, Phillips, S., &
Smit, M. (1996). Panel A: Readiness research on independent living. In E. V. Mech &
J. R. Rycraft (Eds.), Preparing foster youths for adult living: Proceedings of an invitational
research conference (pp. 45-51). Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.
Lyman, S., & Jaklitsch, B. (1994). The design and dissemination of an effective assessment process. Daily Living, 8(1), 5-6.
McDonald, T. P, Allen, R. I., Westerfelt, A., & Piliavin, 1. (1996). Assessing the long-term
effects of foster care: A research syiitliesis. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of
America.
i
Mech, E. V. (1994). Preparing foster youth for adulthood: A knowledge-building perspective. Children and Youth Services Review, 16(3/4), 141-145.
t76
CHILD WELFARE • Vol. LXXIX, #2 • March/April
Mech, E. V., & Rycraft, J. R. (1996). Preparing foster youths for adult living: Proceedings of an
invitational research conference. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.
Nollan, K. A. (1996). Self-sufficiency skills among youth in long-term foster care {unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Washington, Seattle, WA).
Nollan, K. A., Downs, A. C, Pecora, P. J., Ansell, D., Wolf, M., Lamont, E., Horn, M., &
Martine, L. (1997a). Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment Manual, Version 2.0. Seattle,
WA: The Casey Family Program.
Nollan, K. A., & Pecora, P. J., Downs, A, C, Wolf, M,, Horn, M., Martine, L., & Lamont,
E. (1997b). Assessing life skills of adolescents in out-of-home care. International journat of Child and Family Welfare, 2,113-126.
North, J., Mallabar, M., & Desrochers, R. (1988). Vocational preparation and employability development. Child Welfare, 67. 573-586.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pecora, P J., Kingery, K., Nollan, K. A., & Downs, A. C. (1996). Examining the effectiveness
of family foster fare: A select literature review. Seattle, WA: The Casey Family Program,
Research Department.
Polowy, M., Wasson, D., & Wolf, M. (1986). Fosterparentscope. Buffalo, NY: New York
State Child Welfare Training Institute.
Ryan, P, McFadden, E. J., Rice, D., & Warren, B. L. (1988). The role of foster parents in
helping young people develop emancipation skills. Child Welfare, 67, 563-572.
Sparrow, S. S., Balla, D. A., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1984). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales.
Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Taber, M. A., & Proch, K. (1988). Parenting: An essential child welfare service. Social
Work, 33, 63-64.
Tatara, T. (1997). U. S. child substitute care flow data and the race/ethnicity of children
in care for FY 1995, along with recent trends in the U.S. child substitute care populations. VCIS Research Notes, 113, March. Washington, DC: American Public Welfare
Association.
(Address requests for a reprint to Kimberly A. Nollan, The Casey Family Program,
Research Departmeiit, 1300 Dexter Avenue North, Suite 400, Seattle, WA 981093547.)