Limitations

On the first hand, relevant information on different approaches of Aftercare had been collected through primary literature reviews. International and national research studies, articles, laws and policies were studied to understand the existing practices of Aftercare, especially focusing on the available living arrangements for children leaving care institutions.

Secondly, apart from literature reviews, collecting information from stakeholders and key informants in sample organizations in the field of child care was the important component of data collection in this study. The data collection process included administration of in-depth semi-structured interviews and open-ended interviews with the key informants such as the head of the organizations and other staff responsible for direct implementations. The interviews were taken with prior information about the study and taking due consent from the key informants for the discussion.

Thirdly, the focused group discussions were done with young adults of Rainbow Homes Program who had moved from the care on attaining the age of 18 years and now leaving in different shared accommodations (such as in groups, hostels, swadhar homes etc.) with and/or without support from the organization. The criteria for selection of young adults for focused group discussion was that they completed 18 years of age and must have stayed in Rainbow’s care for a long term. A total of 67 young adults in 4 sample cities who left care homes at the age of 18 and staying in different living arrangements were included in the FGDs at the time of their convenience, thus not disturbing their regular schedules of work or attending educational classes. FGDs with young adults were arranged either at their places of accommodations or Rainbow’s office premises in sample states. A semi-structured questionnaire guided the FGDs to keep the discussion focused, which was to understand the care experiences of Young Adults in different accommodations. This method of interactive dialogues allowed young adults to express their feelings and experiences in their own language and thus helped us discovering the realities faced by them. All the interviews were audio taped and later transcribed verbatim, which formed the database for this study.

Since, mostly the qualitative information received regarding aspects of aftercare and that many of the practices, gaps, challenges and opinions on solutions were common across sample states, as described by the practitioners and/or young adults leaving care, the study did not attempt to consolidate qualitative information. Instead, the few common areas/practices are taken in order to elicit pertinent recommendations in response to the gaps.

Alike all other research studies undertaken by Rainbow Homes Program, this study also followed the organization’s ethical protocols to maintain confidentiality, privacy and dignity of the Rainbow’s young adults as well as stakeholders involved in the study. Before taking the Rainbow’s young adults into focused group discussions, the objectives of the study were clearly explained by the research team as well as the state team members and the information provided by them has been used after due consent of the young adults. Similarly, data from the representatives of NGOs studies for this research were collected after clearly explaining the objectives and taking due consent about usage of information provided by them.

- Very small sample size and therefore problems depicted in different living arrangements might be restricted. Extending the sample in other cities might bring rich information on the experience of children and impact on children staying in different living set ups. Also due to small sample size the findings may not be representative of the experiences of the cross section of population of care leavers. Hence the results of this qualitative study cannot be generalised. - Inability to reach young person leaving care long before and hence young adults in the sphere of Organization’s “Future” program had been reached out. Since many of the YAs interacted

had just moved from the organizations and started living outside, the challenges described by them could be exaggerated. - Another important limitation has been the absence of proper documentation of aftercare practices by organizations. Also, very limited number of literatures existed in public domain on interventions of aftercare, especially in terms of supporting care leavers to cope with challenges of outside living. - Responses and opinions from stakeholders and young children have been taken as they were narrated. No mechanism to validate responses

provided by the stakeholders because of lack of documents on interventions shared by them. - Most of the organizations studied for this report found to be providing emotional and to some extend financial supports to the care leavers after they move away from the organization.

However, in the absence of funding support from government, the interventions for young adults living outside were not uniform in the organizations. Hence, any conclusion on financial contributions required by the care leavers at different point of time after leaving care could not be drawn.