“CPS is not a housing agency”; Housing is a CPS problem: Towards a definition and typology of housing problems in child welfare cases Corey S. Shdaimah ⁎ School of Social Work, University of Maryland, Baltimore, 525 W. Redwood St., Baltimore, MD 21201, United States abstract article info Article history: Received 25 January 2008 Received in revised form 11 June 2008 Accepted 22 July 2008 Available online 27 July 2008 Keywords: Child welfare practices Poverty Child safety Housing Child welfare policy Despite claims that child protective services are not designated as housing agencies, many child welfare- involved families face housing challenges that may be considered a risk to the health and safety of children. This article is based on interviews with judges, lawyers and social workers (N = 18) in a city in the Northeastern U.S. Participants were selected from a variety of child welfare constituencies, including parents, children, and the state. They provided grounded understanding of when and how housing concerns arise in their cases. Findings suggest the need for a definition of housing problems that encompass a broader range of housing difficulties and include cases where housing problems may be obscured by other problems. A typology is developed categorizing housing problems as precipitating or complicating, derived from when and how they present. Both types may also remain a final hurdle to reunification of families who have been separated. Changes are recommended at the “street level” and at the policy level, including the expansion existing definitions of housing problems as a gateway to resources; providing child welfare professionals with better knowledge of housing problems and flexibility in addressing them and assessing their impact on families; and the collection, analysis and dissemination of more comprehensive housing data. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Child welfare professionals are charged with protecting the welfare and safety of children. With safe and adequate housing increasingly out of reach for so many in the United States, housing is likely to be a factor influencing child welfare cases for the foreseeable future. A better understanding of how and when housing affects child welfare decisions is crucial to help child welfare professionals and policymakers better serve children and families. This article is based on a qualitative study with judges, lawyers and social workers (N = 18) who represent a range of child welfare constituencies. All interviews took place in a large city in the Mid-Atlantic U.S. in 2006–07. They explored respondents' perceptions of how and when housing con- cerns arise in child welfare cases as they evolve on the ground. The findings suggest a broad definition of housing problems and a ty- pology to help guide child welfare professionals and policymakers to identify and address the housing needs of child protective services- involved families. They also suggest a number of changes that can be made at the “street level” and at the policy level in order to improve our knowledge of, and services for, housing problems in the child welfare context. 1.1. Child welfare and housing Most child welfare-involved families are extremely poor. Despite policies that prohibit child removal for reasons of poverty, poverty may in fact be a leading cause of child welfare involvement (Pelton, 1989). It is not clear, however, just how poverty impacts CPSI families or even what we mean when we talk about a concept as encompassing and contested as poverty. To better understand one specific aspect of how poverty impacts CPS involvement, this article focuses on housing problems, which, according to Courtney, McMurtry, and Zinn, “are both corollaries of poverty and threats to child and family well being” (2004, 394). Child welfare involvement may jeopardize existing housing arrangements and, once families become child welfare involved, their housing comes under scrutiny (Reich, 2005, 130– 132). Even though the lack of housing is not legal grounds for removal, lack of adequate housing often serves as a reason for removal or failure to reunify (see Harburger & White, 2004). Further evidence of this is provided in Eamon and Kopel's (2004) review of recent state court decisions in which three of the four successful individual challenges to child welfare were based on the finding that children were removed “for reasons of poverty.” Each involved inadequate housing, as did three out of the four class action suits reviewed. Inadequate housing is consistently correlated with substantiated findings of child abuse and child neglect (Zuravin, 1989; Freisthler, Merritt & LaScala, 2006) and with failed reunification (Jones, 1998). Homelessness, housing problems that do not rise to the level of Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 211–218 ⁎ Tel.: +1 410 706 7544. E-mail address: cshdaimah@ssw.umaryland.edu. 0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.07.013 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth