Becoming and Being Indigenous Foster Caregivers in British Columbia: A Phenomenological Exploration

Abstract

While Indigenous children and youth are overrepresented in child welfare care in Canada, there are limited Indigenous foster parents to provide culturally affirmative care. This study addresses gaps in the literature by exploring the application and fostering processes from the perspectives of Indigenous caregivers in British Columbia. Five semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with Indigenous foster parents. Three key themes emerged: (a) motivations to become foster caregivers, (b) cultural barriers to becoming foster caregivers, and (c) experiences of Indigenous foster caregiving. Findings indicate that the well-being of children and cultural engagement are central to Indigenous caregivers’ fostering experiences. Meaningful cultural engagement addresses the sense of cultural connection and positive cultural identity development, often absent for Indigenous children and youth in care.

Introduction

While there is an urgent need to reduce the number of Indigenous ¹ children in care, the underrepresentation of Indigenous foster home placements remains worthy of attention and subsequent redress to meet children’s care needs. Across the literature, there is ample evidence that connecting to culture and community is vital to supporting the well-being of Indigenous children in care (Bennett, 2015; Carrière, 2007; Ervin et al., 2025; Heid et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2025). Understanding the dearth of Indigenous foster caregivers requires a re-examination of child welfare policies, processes, and practices that impact Indigenous children, their families, and substitute carers. Both safety and the best interest of the child are shared responsibilities in Indigenous communities, whereby both the family and the community care for the child (Kovach, 2021). Placement of Indigenous children and youth with kin or Indigenous foster placements within their own communities is the preferred choice for children and youth to have undisrupted cultural and relational connections with their community and heritage. Until a reduction of Indigenous children and youth in child welfare care is achieved, it is equally important to improve the resources in place for Indigenous children in care, including increasing the number of Indigenous foster caregivers. However, the barriers that potential caregivers experience in the licensing and certification process are not well established in the literature. The aim of the current study is to address this gap in knowledge by exploring the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers in British Columbia, their journeys navigating the application processes, and their wisdom and their insights. Based on their narratives, the findings identify challenges and opportunities with the goal of increasing the number of Indigenous foster caregivers, both kin and nonkin, in British Columbia.

Background

Since colonization, Indigenous children have been the target of forced removal and assimilation by the Canadian government and associated organizations. Becoming systematized on a large scale through the introduction of the Indian Residential School System in 1920 and continuing with the 1951 amendment to the Indian Act to give provinces the jurisdiction to enforce child welfare laws on-reserve (Our Children Our Way Society, n.d.). This amendment resulted in a period now known as the “Sixties Scoop,” in which an estimated 20,000 Indigenous children were removed from their families and placed in non-Indigenous households for fostering and adoption (Indian Residential School History and Dialogue Centre, n.d.; Sinclair, 2007). Many children, particularly those from Métis communities, were intentionally misidentified as non-Indigenous, which further disconnected them from their culture and origin and prevented the possibility of reconnecting later in life (Our Children Our Way Society, n.d.). Throughout this period, Indigenous communities resisted and advocated for sovereignty over child welfare to be restored. In British Columbia, one of the first steps toward this came with the introduction of the delegation model in 1985, wherein the province delegated authority over child welfare to Indigenous Child and Family Service Agencies (ICFSAs) (Indian Residential School History and Dialogue Centre, n.d.). Despite this, the crisis of overrepresentation of Indigenous children in care has only continued to worsen and remains a critical issue today (Quinn et al., 2022).

The current overrepresentation of Indigenous children in child welfare care is staggering, both in British Columbia and across Canada (Hahmann et al., 2024). The number of Indigenous children in the Canadian child welfare system surpasses that of Indigenous children who were placed in the Indian Residential School System (Blackstock et al., 2004; McKenzie et al., 2016). The proportion of Indigenous children in child welfare care continues to remain significantly disproportionate to non-Indigenous children and youth in care (Hahmann et al., 2024; Turner, 2016). In 2011, 47.8% of all foster children younger than 15 years in Canada were Indigenous, despite making up only 7% of the child population. As of 2021, this number increased to 53.7% (Hahmann et al., 2024). In British Columbia, Indigenous children represent 68% of children in the child welfare system when they comprise less than 10% of the province’s child population (BC Gov News, 2024).

In 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Committee (TRC) released a report containing 94 Calls to Action, urging the Canadian government to address the growing crisis of Indigenous child welfare overrepresentation (Mas, 2015) and the traumatic legacy of the Indian Residential School System by intentionally advancing the process of reconciliation among Canadians. To address Indigenous cultural connectivity and move toward reduced numbers of children and youth in child welfare care, Calls to Action 1-5 address the need for Indigenous children and youth to be placed in culturally appropriate environments, whether temporarily or permanently. These Calls to Action also address the requirement that social workers and other helping professionals be educated and trained on the history of the Indian Residential School System and its impacts on Indigenous children and their caregivers (TRC, 2015).

The British Columbia Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD), Child, Family and Community Services Act (MCFD, 2026), and practice standards direct that when removal from the home is unavoidable, priority should be given to placing Indigenous children with biological family members or with members of their own Indigenous community in kinship care. Kinship care embodies “continuity of identity and family knowledge, access to relatives in addition to the primary caregiver(s), continuity with community ways and traditions, as well as familiarity with the foster family prior to placement” (Brown et al., 2009, p. 1019). When kinship placement is not available or possible, child welfare workers are directed to prioritize placing Indigenous children and youth in a foster home with at least one Indigenous caregiver; however, the Indigenous family may be from a different Indigenous Nation than the child’s. Growing up in a community, participating in cultural ceremonies, and being guided through spiritual relationships with Elders and Traditional Knowledge Keepers, Indigenous children and youth can build a solid foundation for developing a strong cultural identity (Carrière, 2007). The health of family and community members influences the well-being of children and youth. Supportive social networks, such as healthy familial and community relationships, connect children in culturally meaningful ways (Bennett, 2015).

The impacts of the overrepresentation of Indigenous children and youth in care are far-reaching. Frequently removed and denied contact with their families and cultures, either by court order or geographic distance, these children and youth must endure additional oppressive experiences within the system, such as denial of support and protection (McKay, 2018). The intergenerational involvement in systems of child welfare has contributed to a loss of connection to heritage, history, and culture and uncertainty of Indigenous identity for young people (Baidawi et al., 2017). A sense of connection and belonging, which are foundational to developing and maintaining a positive cultural identity, are often absent for Indigenous children in child welfare care (Quinn, 2020, 2022), which can be exacerbated by placing Indigenous children with non-Indigenous caregivers. Connecting to tradition and engaging in traditional healing practices are central to efforts by Indigenous Peoples to resist colonization and assimilation policies (Kirmayer et al., 2003). Indigenous youth have recounted experiences of racism and discrimination in non-Indigenous foster homes, highlighting the impact of these foster caregivers’ lack of knowledge of the ongoing effects of colonization (de Finney & di Tomasso, 2015).

British Columbia’s Child, Family and Community Services Act states, “the cultural identity of Indigenous children should be preserved” (MCFD, 2026), which is difficult to achieve as Indigenous children in care seldom have access to meaningful connections with their community and are not typically placed with extended family or with Indigenous foster caregivers. As a result of the scope of the separation of Indigenous children from family and culture, there is an acute need for Indigenous foster caregivers in Canada. The imperative needs of Indigenous children to maintain their cultural connections must be emphasized and respected because it is right, not just to satisfy Ministry mandates. Recruiting and retaining Indigenous foster caregivers should, therefore, be a policy and practice priority; however, despite such efforts in British Columbia, there remains an underrepresentation of Indigenous foster caregivers that must be examined to identify potential barriers (Quinn et al., 2025). The dearth of such providers begs the question of whether the experience of becoming a foster caregiver is itself a factor requiring systemic amelioration.

The current study addresses gaps in the literature related to the perspectives of Indigenous foster caregivers on becoming and being foster caregivers and how they make sense of caring for Indigenous children and youth in foster care. The data will increase understanding of (a) barriers facing Indigenous foster caregivers and (b) possible supports and resources. Rather than utilizing an approach that would collect limited interpretations of participant accounts, a phenomenological approach entails a detailed analysis of the participant perceptions of their lived experiences as Indigenous foster caregivers (Smith & Osborn, 2008). The researcher plays an active role in comprehending the participants’ sensemaking, which requires a process of interpretative activity (Smith & Osborn, 2008). Using open-ended interviewing questions in a location of choice by participants enabled us to establish a positive rapport, which contributed to a more detailed disclosure of participants’ experiences.

The following questions guided this study: 1) How do Indigenous foster caregivers experience navigating the Ministry application process to become foster caregivers? 2) How do Indigenous foster caregivers experience their role as foster caregivers?

Method

The current study examines the foster caregiver recruitment and training process utilizing a hermeneutic (interpretive) phenomenological approach to explore the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers in their process of becoming and being foster caregivers in British Columbia. “As a research methodology, phenomenology is uniquely positioned to help health professions education (HPE) scholars learn from the experiences of others” (Neubauer et al., 2019, p. 1). Researchers using a phenomenological approach study the experiences, perceptions, understanding, and meaning of what and how individuals make sense of a phenomenon. As participants’ knowledge is often shared through storytelling, the centrality of this is in alignment with Indigenous ways of knowing and connecting to community, customs, and traditions. Using individual semi-structured conversational-style interviews, this design prioritizes Indigenous research methodologies, which value the significance of dialogic and storied approaches to research (Archibald, 2008; Archibald et al., 2022; Kovach, 2021). An important methodological consideration was Indigenous self-identification, as we wanted to examine the lived experience of Indigenous Peoples who became foster caregivers. Ethics approval for this research was received from both a research ethics board at a large Canadian university and from the MCFD.

Knowledge and learning shared through storytelling is a sacred and valuable method through which Indigenous Peoples transmit perspectives and values guiding decision-making, customary laws and traditions, and ways of life in their respective communities and relations. Similar to sharing and storing information such as data, storytelling captures Indigenous Peoples’ histories, experiences, relations, and spiritual beliefs (Archibald, 2008; Archibald et al., 2022; Smith, 2012). Storytelling is more than a craft for Indigenous Peoples; it is ceremonial and a way of life, through which lost identities and narratives of ancestors are woven together. While storytelling is an art, it is also a methodology, representing a step toward understanding the perspectives and journeys of Indigenous foster caregivers. Descriptions of participants and data collection methods are presented. A combination of Indigenous, interpretive, and dialogic phenomenological methods was used for data collection and analysis (Archibald, 2008; Archibald et al., 2022; Neubauer et al., 2019; Smith, 2012).

Hermeneutic (interpretive) phenomenological methodology aligns with Indigenous research methodologies and values. Ethical considerations were central, as the methodological approach corresponds with the four Rs of Indigenous research (Kirkness & Barnhardt, 1991), Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit principles, and principles of ethical Métis research (National Aboriginal Health Organization [NAHO], 2011), as well as OCAP principles of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession (OCAP; First Nations Information Governance Centre, 2024). In honoring Indigenous knowledges, customary protocols toward relationship building and sharing of knowledges were followed. Details of the methodology and research design follow.

Author Positionality

The social location of the researchers should also be noted here. Positionality statements are one way to increase accountability on the part of researchers and begin to build trust with communities involved in knowledge creation (Absolon & Willett, 2005). The principal researcher Ashley Quinn belongs to the Waabizheshi-doodem (Marten clan), with mixed Irish settler and Anishinaabe ancestral roots. They have firsthand experience as a former Crown Ward of the child welfare system. Their teaching and research philosophies are grounded in traditional Ojibway teachings of the seven grandfathers or grandparents. These seven principles are wisdom, courage, love, humility, honesty, respect, and truth. They guide the first author’s scholarly practices by fostering the development of creativity, social justice, and critical inquiry in research pertaining to Indigenous Peoples in Canada and beyond.

Jessi Knutson is a Cree Metis and Norwegian woman currently living on unceded and ancestral Coast Salish territory. She is a social worker and Lived Experience Advocate engaged in local, provincial, and federal advocacy for meaningful systemic change in the mainstream colonial child welfare system. Her work is grounded in decolonial and anti-racist practice and Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing and is focused on upholding Indigenous rights, title, and sovereignty for the wholistic health and well-being of kin and community.

Emily Yates is a White, straight, cis social worker allied to Indigenous research. She is of English and Scottish settler descent and lives as an uninvited guest in Ligʷiłdaxʷ territory. She has primarily worked with youth in substance use and in health care. As a practitioner in areas where Indigenous people are frequently overrepresented, she continuously engages in research and learning, by and for Indigenous people, to provide practice that is equitable and accessible.

Meagan Miller is a settler-ally researcher who is deeply committed to promoting positive outcomes for children, youth, and families involved in the child welfare system. Her experience has been shaped through collaboration with Indigenous agencies and community members, which has strengthened her understanding of the historical and ongoing impacts of colonial systems as well as the resilience and cultural strengths that support child and family well-being.

Claudette Grinnell-Davis is descended from marriages a la façon do pays (“in the manner of the country”) and maintains a connection to various aspects of culture, language, and tradition traceable through time to the 1600s in New France. They continue to investigate their heritage, both paternal and maternal, for enrollment or Status eligibility in a Tribe or Canadian First Nation. In the meantime, they are dedicated to the defense of Sovereignty and preservation of Tribal and Indigenous Communities through improving our knowledge about Indigenous child welfare practices and policies across Turtle Island and the Pacific Rim.

Teagan Miller is a settler-ally researcher with a special interest in issues impacting Indigenous Peoples, having worked previously with the first author on studies pertaining to promoting Indigenous pedagogy in social work education and improving outcomes for Indigenous children and families interacting with the Canadian child welfare system.

Recruitment and Participants

Since the current study focuses on Indigenous foster caregivers, it is important to use an Indigenous lens in exploring the experiences of Indigenous Peoples who become foster caregivers. Accordingly, the inclusion criteria for participating in the storymaking process consisted of being an Indigenous foster caregiver who had fostered an Indigenous child in the province of British Columbia. Recruitment took place from June 2018 to July 2019, with a purposive snowball sampling method utilized due to a very small number of people meeting study criteria and therefore not readily accessible via traditional recruitment processes (Naderifar et al., 2017). Recruitment took place within both MCFD-delegated Aboriginal agencies and mainstream agencies. Supervisors and managers at various sites were notified of the study and passed information to potential participants. Researchers worked closely with the Ministry to alleviate the administrative burden of this recruitment process. Challenges to locating participants may be attributed to a small population sample size, less confidence in the anonymity of the research process, limited access to respite care, and traumatization due to sharing sensitive experiences (Parker et al., 2019). Therefore, the establishment of rapport with study participants was pertinent and critical. A further obstacle entailed foster caregiver responsibilities; despite considerable effort, several highly interested and experienced foster caregivers were unable to find time to participate in the study.

A recruitment poster was emailed to child welfare workers to distribute to Indigenous foster caregivers. Once several participants were identified, snowball sampling was utilized to recruit. This entailed requesting the participants to relay the study information to other Indigenous foster caregivers, which continued until no further potential participants were identified. The sample comprised five (n = 5) Indigenous foster caregivers who had obtained approval to provide foster care through MCFD in British Columbia. Participants’ cultural identities included First Nation, Indigenous, Métis, Nisga’a, and Tseshaht. Foster care experience ranged from 3 to 20 years, and participants had between three and 11 placements of Indigenous children and youth in their care. The length of time of these placements ranged from 2 months to 5 years.

Data Collection and Analysis

The intention of the current study was to explore Indigenous foster caregivers’ experiences as foster caregivers to Indigenous children and youth in care. The principal investigator conducted the interviews. In keeping with the principle of reciprocity, one of the “six Rs” of research with Indigenous Peoples, the principal researcher shared their personal experiences and motivations for completing this research with participants prior to interviews (Tsosie et al., 2022). Data analysis was performed by the research team comprising Indigenous and non-Indigenous bachelor of social work program students, supervised by the principal investigator. These attributes and qualifications represented a team with knowledge and sensitivity to work together to identify participants and elicit their accounts in gathering valuable data and conducting analysis.

Ethical considerations were paramount to prevent harm to participants, who were asked to disclose sensitive information pertaining to their role as Indigenous foster caregivers. To ensure the safety and overall well-being of participants, an Elder from the community was available to participants for individual counseling during and after their interviews. This was an Elder who was already involved with MCFD and was known to study participants. No participants accessed this support. At the time of the interview, participants were provided with a contact list of local counseling services and resources.

Only the principal investigator and research assistants had access to the raw data. Participants were informed that they had the right to withdraw at any point in the study, up to 2 weeks after they reviewed and confirmed their interview data and arrangement of themes. No participants withdrew from the study.

Following hermeneutic phenomenology (Alsaigh & Coyne, 2021), prior to the data collection phase, the research team identified the historical context of Indigenous foster caregivers and our preunderstanding of the phenomenon being studied. The next step was to gain an understanding of the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers through semi-structured, conversational-style interviews, which encouraged participants to reflect on their experiences applying for and being foster caregivers. Participants selected their preferred location for the interview, which helped to create a comfortable space in which they could share their lived experiences. The interviews ranged in length from 2 to 3 hours. These conversations were audiotaped, de-identified to ensure confidentiality, and professionally transcribed verbatim. Before moving to the next stage, the transcripts were verified by each participant. After transcription verification, the research team immersed themselves in the transcriptions and audio recordings to achieve a detailed understanding. Special attention was paid to the audio recordings to effectively capture the information given and the emotions expressed during the interviews.

Next, the research team employed line-by-line open coding of the participants’ constructs in the transcripts. The abstraction phase followed next, at which time researchers identified core categories and subcategories, which they then grouped into subthemes. The subthemes were then arranged into themes and again verified with participants for accuracy. The final step consisted of linking the themes with the literature and establishing trustworthiness of the data through credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Trustworthiness of the data analysis relied on the establishment of a positive rapport with participants, returning to the participants on two occasions for verification, and consistency of personal accounts provided by the participants and alignment with the literature from which themes, their meanings, and interpretations were formed.

Findings

The current study explored the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers in Canada, using Indigenous and hermeneutic (interpretive) phenomenological approaches. Through analysis of the interviews, the following three themes emerged: (a) motivations for becoming a foster caregiver, (b) processes involved in becoming a foster caregiver (including supports and barriers), and (c) experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers. Four participants offered recommendations to improve the fostering experiences of Indigenous Peoples.

Motivations to Becoming a Foster Caregiver

In understanding participants’ experiences as foster caregivers, it is important to examine the motivations to fostering Indigenous children. Several themes emerged when participants were asked what motivated them to become foster caregivers. The first theme reflects the importance and generational transmission of cultural values such as family; as one participant explained, “It’s more than just a personal choice. It’s a family thing.” Participants repeatedly emphasized that caring for others and helping those in need are deeply held cultural values. Caregiving was described as a generational family value modeled throughout their upbringing. Several participants shared that their own parents had been foster caregivers or had taken in and cared for the children of extended family members. Participants who had themselves been foster children or who had been cared for by relatives explained that their experiences had instilled in them a desire to “give back and help a child who didn’t have a family and didn’t have a home.” Offering Indigenous children and youth a safe and supportive home was described as “a tradition passed down through generations. It’s a way of turning tough experiences into something positive.”

Another key motivating theme that emerged was responding to the need for Indigenous foster placements and reflecting on experiences of misunderstandings related to cultural differences between MCFD and Indigenous families. All the participants stated that they had become motivated to care for Indigenous children after learning about the disproportionate number of Indigenous children in the care of child welfare and about the severe shortage of Indigenous foster homes. Throughout the interviews, participants referred to the lack of, and need for, Indigenous foster caregivers. Participants expressed a sense of sadness when speaking about the few Indigenous foster families that exist in the child welfare system. Becoming a foster parent was described as a response to the urgent need for Indigenous foster homes.

When asked explicitly what they thought contributed to the shortage of Indigenous foster families, participants highlighted reasons that were interconnected with the experiences and stories they shared during the interviews. Referring to the significant fear, anxiety and cultural differences as deterring Indigenous families from being foster caregivers, one participant compared their responses:

So it is, it’s just, I mean that’s, I look at my strength and, my abilities to, to foster as well as stand up for myself when I needed to, that I was strong in those areas, and I see a lot of foster parents that can’t do that for themselves. There’s a lot of them that are so scared.

Another participant spoke of the stigma facing grandparents who foster children and youth in their extended families:

Well, a lot of it, I’ve heard, you know, grandparents say: “Oh, yeah, they’re your grandchildren, so why should you be paid to look after your grandchildren?” You know? And I mean, um, sure that’s true, I mean, you know, but they still got to eat, they still got to have things, and a lot of grandparents are just on social assistance, right?

These responses help to illustrate the tension that exists between participants’ motivations for becoming a foster caregiver and the actual experience of navigating those systems and processes. The barriers that participants have described above will be further explored in the following theme.

Cultural Barriers to the Process of Becoming a Foster Caregiver

Participants described the process of becoming a foster caregiver as lengthy and often intrusive and recalled undergoing numerous background and medical exams, the standard 4-month foster parent training, and extensive home study interviews. All the participants recalled having what they felt was a weak rapport with the social worker who assessed their level of safety and suitability as potential foster caregivers. Furthermore, they described questions that triggered the participants’ traumatic experiences, which may have intensified their negative experiences (the harm they experience during this process) of this process. As one participant noted,

There is an element of uncertainty permeating the approval process which negatively impacts potential caregivers, as applicants can complete the entire process and only then be informed that they are ineligible to foster children or can become discouraged and remove themselves from the application process.

When recalling the application process to become a foster caregiver, participants reflected on the bureaucratic process and described challenges and barriers that encompassed the following: fear, lack of empathy by workers, lack of trust in the system, and lack of cultural support and integration of Indigenous worldviews. One participant who commented on the grueling application process stated, “It’s really, it’s a government-imposed process . . . it’s not culturally sensitive, um, it’s more compartmentalized, again, you know.” Caregivers explained how the process of becoming a foster caregiver is “very impersonal” and that it does not make room for the inclusion of Elders or support persons such as friends and family. Becoming a foster caregiver through this process is contrary to the relational way of being in the world through which many Indigenous Peoples live.

All the participants stressed the crucial need to have rapport with the worker during the home study and emphasized that a lack of connection intensified challenges. Many participants painted a vivid picture of these home studies, describing them as “intrusive,” “offensive,” and as “neither trauma nor culturally informed.”

One of the things that I found that was really challenging during the application process was having to go through the 1st 2-to-3-hour process. I can remember sitting down and within 15 minutes I’m being questioned about have you ever been like sexually abused physically abused or anything like that and what did it look like I was just like, “Oh my God, holy shit,” that’s a huge intrusive thing we haven’t even developed rapport yet and you’re asking me a super sensitive question. Well, I started hyperventilating because I was sent off to like an Anglican boarding school from 1981 to 1984, which is very similar to the Residential School experience. I was like 13 years old. It wasn’t just the abuse questions, but “Do you and your partner sleep in the same bed? Are you and your partner sexually compatible?”

Throughout the home studies, participants recalled feeling scrutinized and constantly “under a microscope.” One participant expressed that within the first few minutes of a home study, “there’s a lot of fear, and there’s a lot of anxiety . . . especially if you’re from an Indigenous background, to start talking about. . . abuse within 20 minutes of just meeting a brand-new person.” According to the participants, an already fraught process was made more difficult by the lack of discussion with participants about the worker who would conduct the home study. The participants expressed the desire to have had input, for example, to meet with a worker from an Indigenous or an LGTBQ2S+ community. Participants explained that challenges were exacerbated with a lack of rapport with the worker:

Um, these are White people with Eurocentric values that are . . . these weren’t Indigenous people coming to interview me who might’ve been a bit more culturally sensitive. The other thing was too, there was no questions about culture. And when you come into my home, you look at the regalia I have on the wall. And yet all that got bypassed. Like, I recognize that it’s a cultural difference, but that’s a very important cultural difference. If you want to know about who we are, and how we tick, that’s when you stop and you ask questions and you look around, like “Wow! I love that picture, tell me about it.”

Conversely, one participant described their experience with a home study worker who first spent time developing a strong rapport. This participant explained that the home study worker’s respectful attitude helped create safety for them and made it somewhat easier to answer difficult questions. Noting that predominantly non-Indigenous social workers with Eurocentric values conduct the home studies, participants provided two suggestions that would create a more culturally informed approach to the interviews. First, participants suggested that foster caregiver applicants be offered the choice to have an Elder or a support person present during the home study, to provide a sense of safety. Second, participants recommended that foster caregiver applicants be offered the option of having the questionnaire read to them, rather than instructing them to fill out the paperwork.

Experience of Indigenous Foster Caregivers

In the current study, participants provided varying responses on their experiences with both delegated and nondelegated child welfare agencies and designated resource social workers. Analysis of the interviews revealed that caregivers considered a transparent and trusting relationship with their resource social worker to be the most significant factor contributing to feeling supported in the fostering process. For example, one participant stated, “my resource worker was one of my backbones.” A participant who similarly referred to the importance of the relationship with the social worker, noted that their resource social worker attended a community pow-wow,

which instantly created trust for me. As opposed to everybody else talking about it or saying you should do this, and you should do that, but they’re not really in the trenches, they have no idea. So, there’s lots involved and being meaningfully engaged in the community really helps bring down barriers and walls. Like, I’m out there, active in the community, and I can hold my head up high and proud, and humble at the same time. It’s like I’m part of the community and walking the talk.

Another participant who stressed that feeling supported was contingent on the resource social worker observed that there was considerable variability across social workers. This latter comment represents a wider concern participants identified regarding inconsistent support and access to resources. Indeed, some caregivers commented that they leaned heavily on their spouse or other family members for support. One participant believed that during the initial process of becoming a caregiver, it was not made clear to them how crucial it was to have one’s own support network.

Some participants identified the hierarchical structure inherent in child welfare agencies as an obstacle that made it challenging to address the cultural, emotional, and financial needs of the fostering family and the child or youth in their care. This obstacle contributed to what participants described as noncollaborative relationships with resource social workers. The participants consistently depicted many workers as “belittling,” “criticizing,” and “disempowering” them and explained that they found communication with some workers “discouraging” and “energy-draining.” As one caregiver stated,

. . . so, to have that power struggle where it belittles me . . . You know, I’m here, I’m the one with these children 24/7, but you can come into my house and belittle me and make me feel small? Because I’m the one that has to empower myself, to be able to empower these children.

Some participants added that they often felt they needed to fight for what they believed to be the best interests of the children in their care and characterized the discussions on the part of the child welfare organizations as noncollaborative and reflective of culture-based conflicts around considerations of “best interests” of the child, as reflected in the following quotes:

You know, so that whole approach, that communication approach that they have, I get it, they’re trying to help the children transition along, but the lying does not help at all. And that was just one incident.

It was another fight that I had to hurdle, another challenge with the social worker for the best interest of these children and everything that I do is for the best interests of these children. It has nothing to do with my life. I’ve stopped so much parts of my life that, you know, changing everywhere, direction that I have to go to for them, because that’s where I want to be, you know and, having people understand that, you know, my life is different now you know, that expectation of me to be everywhere is not the same because I’m everywhere with my children first period.

My foster child was assessed for autism, and he didn’t have autism, but he has high social anxiety . . . While he was in the school system, he did nothing he just sat there with his head down because he couldn’t look up at people and now at home he’s got 83% in science and about the same in phys-ed so, you know, I mean from zero to this that was quite an accomplishment from just having him more comfortable at home.

I told the worker that they have a responsibility to reunite siblings together under the same roof and if the child doesn’t come here, you’re gonna put him in a group home at $25,000 per month. So, they played games and prevented the child from moving over here for like six months until I was like, damn, I have to call an advocate. This sibling only came to visit once per month for two years. I had to fight this again. It goes back to our cultural values.

Many participants reported receiving inadequate financial compensation by the agency to provide support for the child in their care. While they were willing and ready to be foster caregivers, participants reported feeling frustrated that they could not do so without adequate financial support from MCFD. The following quotes illustrate foster caregiver’s experiences regarding inadequate financial compensation:

Despite being a qualified foster parent and caring for foster children, we were denied appropriate funding and were underpaid by MCFD.

I just found out at a meeting that if you’re a non-Native foster home, you get $450.00 extra per child. And when you’re the grandparent you just get the grandparent allowance. Yeah, so that’s very unfair and your children don’t get any extra like they don’t get a children allowance, they don’t get a school allowance, they don’t get a travel claim, and you know, eyeglasses are more expensive than what the health benefit covers, so that’s not covered . . . I am a level 1 foster caregiver, looking after these children, same type of children, and I really find that very difficult, because I think each grandmother or grandfather should be considered level 1 because they are, it doesn’t matter that they’re looking after their grandchildren, these children have been taken away from their parents, right? They say, “Oh yeah, they’re your grandchildren, so why should you be paid to look after your grandchildren?”

My great grandchild’s foster parents went on holidays, and I was asked to take care of him for the month they were away. They paid me $10.00 per day to look after him.

The challenge came once I was approved as a foster caregiver. MCFD used tactics to justify paying me a lower rate, even though I had a level 3 caregiver status. The tactics were so disrespectful and so demeaning, I contacted the BC Foster Parents’ Association.

The participants described these experiences as “disrespectful” and “demeaning” and described having to reach out for advocacy guidance to obtain appropriate financial compensation while concurrently being solely dependent on one’s own supports, both personal and cultural.

Participants were matched to their foster children based on a pan-Indigenous approach, whereby the foster children were from different Indigenous cultures and customs than their caregivers. This resulted in numerous challenges for participants as they navigated new cultures in their attempt to promote the culture of origin and cultural identity of their foster child. First, and perhaps most resoundingly, participants spoke of the immense difficulty in finding cultural information for their foster children.

Most times when a child is initially taken, they would just list them Aboriginal and then after a few days I would you know push them for more and more information.

The participants explained that they were not provided with direction or a starting point on how to connect foster children to their cultures, as described by the following participants’ quotes:

I have pulled my foster children out of school to attend Indigenous cultural ceremonies and events in their community. And that is a fundamental, huge difference. So, yea, we need really a more concrete list of what foster caregivers can do, cause they want to do it, but they just don’t know how.

We didn’t even have a starting point. And when you have a White resource worker and guardianship worker, they don’t know where to begin either . . . sometimes we hear, “we don’t really need to keep this kid connected to their culture now, we can wait ‘till later.” NO! What are you going to do later, when this child becomes a teenager, and they start going out with gangs and everything. And then you’re gonna try to get them connected to culture again? No! You need to start at a young age and make them feel proud when they’re young.

Moreover, supports in urban settings tend to be pan-Indigenous as they do not typically provide culture supports that are specific and distinct to the child’s particular Nation:

If you were told here’s a Japanese child, keep this kid connected to their Japanese culture, I would be like what the hell to do. Where do I even start? And that’s the same here and when you explain it that way people understand the seriousness because here we are I’m indigenous and I think of myself that way. That’s how I identify and so we have to be careful not to demonize caregivers too much because they really don’t get the direction and we’re not given the direction from the guardian social work guardianship social worker or the resource worker who’s responsible to help us. We’re not given concrete things we should do, all we’re told is keep the kid connected to their culture and you know if I was living up north where the reserve was, like an hour away, different story. But when you’re in the city and you can tap into specific cultural teachings on just that culture because were a mix mash of 300 cultures, like I struggle with that trying to find cultural info for my kids and care and you can’t find it in the city. It’s impossible because we weren’t given that information.

In addition to the lack of organizational support, the participants expressed feeling frustrated that they could not rely on workers, who often did not have the time to undertake such research for children on their caseload. The primary challenge participants identified in connecting to their foster child’s culture was that the burden of this task was placed largely on the caregivers themselves.

There is not much support in and around the culture so basically, I initiate, solely, but we get postings here and there that’s really about all that we get from the agency, whereas cultural culture and the expectation for a foster parent to ensure that culture is in their life is either within their school system or pow-wow notice they sent out. You know, unless you actually know of somebody that’s doing drumming programs, weaving, storytelling or anything like that . . . you really usually have to do your own homework and find those yourself and reach out to the Nations.

I don’t know anything about the Coast Salish. On of the older female foster children got her first menstruation when she was in my care. Her family talked to the family planning meeting members about a particular ceremony that goes with that situation, that event in a young girl’s life. I was interested and I encouraged them, you know, to follow through with that ceremony with the girl and that I would be willing to help in whatever way I can, but when it came to fruition, it was really, I found it difficult to work with the family.

Sometimes you don’t really get accurate information from the social worker about the child’s culture or family history because the social worker doesn’t know a lot about the child, especially if they’ve just been removed. They don’t really give you any information about the child’s band, but because I knew the last names I was like “Oh, I know where you’re from” like right away because I grew up in that territory. Then I reached out to the band and I contacted the band to get information on the family, to get information on traditional foods, and there’s an app an iPhone app to learn the language so we downloaded it on our phones. There’s a music CD too that has drummers that the band has created, so I ordered that and they sent me one for free. So I reached out to get that stuff done, but that wasn’t done by the guardianship social worker.

Apart from occasional postings of cultural events by MCFD and schools, the caregivers were left on their own to conduct this research, contact First Nations communities, and rely on their own connections to locate cultural information and events for their foster children.

In their efforts to bridge this gap by connecting with the child’s biological families, all the participants expressed feeling “disheartened” to find out that family ties diminished once children were placed with the foster caregivers. Participants shared:

Usually if I want something, I’ll find it myself, because that’ll be faster than trying to ask the social worker to do it.

Children are removed and taken from one community and brought to an urban community two to three hours away, they lose their connection they lose connection with their Elders to be able to sit down and hear somebody speak in their language and share stories about family and about their Nation.

Sometimes I go against the grain, and I got in trouble for it a few times, for having to go in that direction myself. It is like that for me, and it should be like that for everybody else. It’s really important that you have some sort of relationship with their parents as a foster caregiver in order for your child to be happy because if they see that you don’t get along with their natural parents or you don’t like their natural parents, they feel that.

I don’t know my foster child’s culture. It would be good if we could bring him for home visits, then they could maybe incorporate when we’re on a visit, that he could have some cultural teachings while he is there visiting with his mother.

With one family that I worked with, the father of one of the children was supported when he took his son to his house, he was provided with food money and all that. The other father was even provided with gas money, and then when it comes to the mother, she gets nothing in support with her visits with the children.

Participants who were able to connect with their foster children’s families and communities understood the lengthy time required to create trusting relationships before visits could happen, as well as the prolonged time it took social workers to approve the visits.

Parents would not know me. So, they had no idea, you know how is my child being cared for? I think when it comes to relationships, that really can be very tenuous subject because I’m looking after their children. They would really rather have them in their own home but because of whatever child protection concern they weren’t, but it took time to try and develop relationships and sometimes it took way too long for social workers to say OK let’s set up visits . . . I think there is a real gap in supporting foster parents, whether there Indigenous or not, in understanding the really strong connection that Indigenous children have with their siblings and with their community and with their parents. I think we’re really missing the boat . . . I hear parents say in communities in First Nations communities, this is not our way for children to be removed from our parents. An I thought and being Indigenous myself and growing up in a family with addiction, that’s not our way either so let’s not cherry pick which cultural tradition you want to argue for as in your position and talk about what we can do together to resolve this and it’s like everybody’s being pitted one against the other the community against the agency the parents against the agency the children you know they’re being pulled from their community and they don’t even they are often missed in being part of that conversation because of their age.

When siblings were placed in different homes, caregivers needed to coordinate with each other to arrange meetings for siblings; the participants explained, however, that such coordination became difficult when other caregivers did not similarly prioritize cultural or familial connections.

Caregivers repeatedly emphasized that the lack of information and communication by MCFD was challenging and created barriers; they found many workers difficult to reach and relayed that workers did not regularly communicate concerns with caregivers: “We’ll go days or weeks, sometimes with child protection it’ll be months, before we get a communication back to any concerns they might have,” one caregiver stated. Other participants shared that after waiting months for an MCFD worker to arrange a meeting that was requested by the participant, they realized that the worker did not know how to help them address their foster child’s behavioral and mental health challenges.

The participants believed that it is the responsibility of guardianship social workers to help foster children remain connected to their communities. Based on the participants’ narratives in the interviews, however, it appears that the success of a child’s cultural development and identity is dependent on a combination of dedication of the guardianship social worker, the child’s extended family, the child’s community, the foster parent’s access to information, and the funding made available through the guardianship worker or cultural coordinators. Some caregivers shared that the onus was placed on the foster children themselves to provide most of the information about their culture and family.

Participant Recommendations to Improve Experiences of Indigenous Foster Caregivers

All participants stressed that additional resources were needed to improve the fostering experiences of Indigenous Peoples and the children in their care. Participants emphasized that it was critical to add culturally relevant questions to the foster care application questionnaire: “Asking questions about the cultural traditions, practices and values, that to me is so fundamental,” and “The first things we always do is like, who are you, where are you from?” Caregivers further stressed that the application process needed to be more clearly explained and documented to avoid misinterpretation regarding the process and the agency’s expectations. Participants relayed that the lack of Culturally Safe approaches was apparent in the application questions as well as the neglect to include Elders, traditional knowledge keepers, or Indigenous workers in the process. Participants emphasized the need to involve an Indigenous support person knowledgeable in child welfare issues related to Indigenous Peoples and the LGBTQ2S+ community. Finally, all participants agreed that social workers should be knowledgeable about Indigenous issues, through training such as Cultural Safety, “You really need to live it and feel it and understand it, so that when you sit eye-to-eye interviewing people, they know that you know what they’re talking about.” One participant shared,

A support group would be good. Sometimes there’s like, an unofficial foster parent support groups in the community. A big need is with teenagers because everybody is afraid of teenagers. Nobody wants to foster them but that’s where the most placement breakdowns occur. So, I’ve been trying to get a support group for foster parents who foster teens to trade strategies and ideas like that, for high-risk, hard to manage youth.

With respect to recommendations, participants concurred that more support was needed for both the caregivers and the children. For example, the participants suggested that a clinical psychologist or other mental health professional working directly with caregivers to support parenting practices and emotional well-being could help prevent placement breakdown. One participant pointed out that it was necessary to have in place a worker who can attend to crises in foster homes in a timely manner, particularly as waitlists for Ministry counselors can be months long. Moreover, they explained that care plan meetings are typically only scheduled monthly, which is insufficient to address the needs of the children and foster caregivers on a rolling basis.

Discussion

Despite the implementation of mandates by MCFD in British Columbia to have Indigenous children in culturally matched placements, as well as Section 16 of Bill C-92, which prioritizes placement of Indigenous children within their family or community (Indigenous Services Canada, 2024), there remains an underrepresentation of available Indigenous foster placements. The current study is unique in exploring the perspectives of Indigenous Peoples in becoming and being foster caregivers. Through storytelling, the participants shared recollections of their journeys in becoming and being foster caregivers. Analysis of the narratives offers emerging themes regarding supports, barriers, and challenges the participants experienced, along with their recommendations to improve the fostering experience and address issues such as retention of Indigenous foster caregivers.

The effects of colonialism and oppressive practices on Indigenous Peoples are pervasive; intergenerational trauma, poverty, disease, and disconnection from families and culture have contributed to many difficulties faced by Indigenous families today (Blackstock & Trocmé, 2005). The same lasting effects of colonization and systemic oppression that contribute to the disproportionate number of Indigenous children in care are the same factors contributing to the lack of Indigenous foster caregivers (Brown et al., 2012; de Finney & di Tomasso, 2015). Across the literature pertaining to Indigenous child welfare in different countries, including Canada and the United States, barriers to recruiting Indigenous caregivers include systemic racism, lack of trust, and poor communication (Begay & Wilczynski, 2018; Hanna et al., 2017; Harbour, 2014).

In some ways, the motivation to become foster caregivers for Indigenous Peoples is similar to that of non-Indigenous foster parents in Canada, including wanting to make a positive difference in the lives of children (MacGregor et al., 2006). Unique to Indigenous foster caregivers in the current study, however, was the desire to respond to the overrepresentation of Indigenous children and youth in care by providing Indigenous home placements that reflect Indigenous societal and family values and a connection to Indigenous cultures. Exploring the motivations of Indigenous Peoples to become foster caregivers for Indigenous children or youth remains undocumented in the literature.

A major theme pertained to the process of becoming a foster caregiver, which participants described as “lengthy,” “intrusive,” “bureaucratic,” and “culturally insensitive.” According to participants, home study questions during the initial stages of the foster caregiver application and assessment referred to sensitive and private topics such as abuse and past trauma, which they explained evoked fear and anxiety. Assessments that focus on documenting a foster caregiver’s past traumatic experiences, such as personal involvement in the child welfare system or intergenerational Indian Residential School involvement, to assess their suitability to foster, do not appropriately recognize these experiences as having been inflicted upon Indigenous Peoples to a nearly ubiquitous representation in Indigenous communities. Participants stressed that there was a need for Culturally Safe foster caregiving application and assessment processes (Curtis et al., 2019; Moloney et al., 2023; Ramsden, 2003), including resource workers from Indigenous and LGBTQ2S+ backgrounds. Cultural Safety presumes that safe care is defined by those who receive it (Ramsden, 2003). This is consistent with the TRC Calls to Action 1.iii, 1.iv, and 1.v:

iii. to ensure that social workers . . . are properly educated and trained about the history and impacts of Residential Schools; iv. about the potential for Aboriginal communities and families to provide more appropriate solutions to family healing; v. requiring that all child welfare decision makers consider the impact of the Residential School experience on children and their caregivers. (TRC, 2015, p. 1)

While it is easy to assume that the 5th Call to Action is only about families being serviced in the child welfare system, it may equally be a part of just and reconciling practice to recognize that the 5th Call to Action also relates to Indigenous Peoples who provide care to Indigenous system-involved children.

Participants attributed their responses to fostering Indigenous children and youth to several factors, including the transparency and level of support they received from their resource social worker and the child welfare agency. Those who identified having a supportive foster caregiving experience had established a transparent and trusting relationship with their resource social worker. According to participants, having support from their resource worker increased their knowledge and access to supports and services. Moreover, the responsiveness of their resource social worker to Indigenous cultures, along with participants’ own support networks, such as spouse or family members, enhanced their overall foster caregiving experience.

Most participants, however, reported that they did not have a positive experience with the child welfare agency and that they were not able to establish a positive rapport with their resource worker. In describing their foster caregiving journey, many participants reflected on noncollaborative communication, as well as a lack of guidance and a sense of being criticized by their resource workers (Barnett et al., 2018; Denlinger & Dorius, 2018; Goodwin & Pharris, 2024). Of concern, many participants characterized their experience of foster caregiving as persistently disempowering. According to participants, this disempowerment could manifest in power struggles with child welfare organizations, as the caregivers often felt they had to fight for what they deemed best for the children.

The lack of adequate funding by child welfare agencies to support the needs of the child in their care was identified as a further challenge. The finding that participants faced barriers is supported by literature, which describes the impact of strict government policies and regulations that impede opportunities for Indigenous caregivers who wish to foster Indigenous children from their communities (Daniel, 2011; de Finney & di Tomasso, 2015; Toombs et al., 2018). Such administrative policies and regulations have rejected Indigenous candidates in favor of non-Indigenous caregivers who are granted ministry approval (Daniel, 2011). Discriminatory policies result in chronic underfunding of Indigenous services and in fewer financial supports made available to Indigenous Peoples who wish to become foster caregivers and are unable to do so without appropriate compensation (Blackstock & Trocmé, 2005; John, 2016). Funding gaps and jurisdictional disputes have been a long-standing issue for Indigenous communities. Introduced in 2007, Jordan’s Principle, which pertains to funding for essential services for Indigenous children, is an example of a policy that attempts to address this issue. Initially, the implementation of Jordan’s Principle was ineffective as the scope was so narrow that no child qualified for it (Blackstock, 2016). In fact, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found Canada’s implementation of Jordan’s Principle to be unlawful and discriminatory on the basis of race (Blackstock, 2016). As of 2025, funding remains a significant issue for the effective implementation of Jordan’s Principle, with cuts resulting in a reduction from $1.72 billion in 2023/2024 to $1.64 billion in 2024/2025 (Pugliese, 2025). Funding for education support has been cut even more drastically, falling from $122.1 million to $1.2 million last year (Forester, 2026). As of 2025, there was a backlog of 140,000 applications for funding under Jordan’s Principle (Hyslop, 2025). This staggering number demonstrates the immense need for more support for Indigenous children and youth. Across many systems, including the child welfare system, Indigenous children simply do not have access to the same resources and pathways to support as non-Indigenous children and families.

Participants were cognizant that the foster children in their care had different cultures, traditions, spiritual practices, and histories of colonization than their own. They described how even though they are Indigenous, they were not familiar with or knowledgeable about the child’s distinct community dynamics or cultural activities. A further challenge foster caregivers faced was knowing where to locate resources that would enable the child to have continued cultural access and preserve a healthy cultural identity and sense of belonging to their respective Indigenous communities.

In the current study, the lack of information about their foster child’s culture, along with inadequate funding, impeded the ability of participants to connect the children and youth in their care with their own specific cultures and families. Such conditions, which are consistent with previous research on the needs of foster parents (Brown, 2008; MacGregor et al., 2006), serve as barriers to cultural engagement and frequently result in Indigenous children in child welfare care being culturally disconnected. Consistent with the study findings, caregivers who want to support the child’s connection to the community find that the onus is often on them and their reliance on personal social supports, with little help from the Ministry or social workers (Daniel, 2011; Sanchirico & Jablonka, 2000; Sharda, 2022). Parallel to the current findings, Grand Chief Ed John’s (2016) report emphasizes that MCFD and Designated Aboriginal Agencies (DAAs) must provide the necessary resources to help Indigenous families and communities meet fostering requirements and recommends amending policies that hinder Indigenous Peoples from becoming foster caregivers. Changes to the structure of the child welfare system must be implemented to increase the number of Indigenous caregivers.

Eurocentric perspectives embedded in child welfare often discount Indigenous knowledge, practices, and values; this Western paradigm of child welfare is an obstacle for many Indigenous would-be foster caregivers (Blackstock & Trocmé, 2005). While evidence shows that caregivers’ cultural receptivity can be improved through training, many foster parents report difficulties obtaining training, including a lack of resources, struggles finding respite care to attend training, transportation barriers, and a lack of training opportunities (Daniel, 2011; Goodwin & Pharris, 2024; Sanchirico & Jablonka, 2000).

One of the challenges faced in addressing the experiences of Indigenous foster parents is the primary assessment tool used to evaluate appropriate foster homes is the Home Observation for the Measurement of the Environment (HOME; Caldwell & Bradley, 1979, 2016) or an adaptation of the HOME, the HOME Short Form (HOME-SF) developed for use in the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY79).

A more recent adaptation of the HOME short form, the HOME-21, was developed to address 21st-century changes in societal norms related to primary caregivers, uptake of digital technology into a family’s everyday life, and the existence of more non-cisheteronormative families. This scale was validated using two independent samples (Lansford et al., 2022), one of which, the Great Smoky Mountains Study (Costello et al., 2016), had nearly a quarter of its participants who were American Indian due to deliberate oversampling from an Indian reservation within the study catch area. While the validation study found no significant differences by race, the studied American Indian population likely represents a small handful of Indian Tribes whose homelands are in this region whose culture may be different than the Tribes included in the Great Smoky Mountains Study (Costello et al., 2016).

A more Africentric version of an instrument that can be used, similar to HOME, that addresses cultural socialization for African American families has been developed for use in assessing Black families (O’Brien Caughy et al., 2002). A similar assessment that includes American Indian/First Nations/Metis/Inuit populations and assessments of their home environments through a culturally affirmative lens should also be developed. This instrument could assess Indigenous homes in ways that prioritize both traditional parenting practices, including multigenerational households, and identify exposure to important cultural artifacts such as traditional handicrafts (e.g., leatherwork, beading, ivory carving) and traditional medicinal practices, including but not limited to smudging, use of medicine bags, offering tobacco, and so on in the home, without judgment, and prioritize attending traditional ceremonies such as water ceremonies, salmon ceremonies, and potlatch, among others.

It should also be noted that these challenges are not unique to Canada. Elsewhere in the literature, similar issues have been described among Indigenous populations in other regions such as the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. In all of these countries, as in Canada, Indigenous children are vastly overrepresented in care and lack access to culturally matched placements (Bromfield et al., 2007; Crofoot & Harris, 2012; Francis et al., 2023; Gatwiri et al., 2021). Ervin et al. (2025) present a systematic review that examines the experiences of Indigenous caregivers across these different regions and found many themes that echo those of this study. These include lack of financial support, racism and social prejudice, barriers to recruitment efforts, and lack of trust in the child welfare system due to historical and ongoing colonialism (Ervin et al., 2025).

Participants provided recommendations to improve the application and foster caregiving experiences. These include the development and implementation of educational tools that aim to support diverse Indigenous cultures and identities, such as cultural workshops with an educational LGBTQ2S+ component. Most importantly, the participants recommended resources to enhance culturally engaged caregiving in a context of limited resources. Day et al. (2021) completed a systematic review of characteristics and competencies of successful American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) foster caregivers. They found that characteristics such as resilience, adaptability, and connection to cultural identity, as well as other elements, including having access to adequate training and connection to resources and cultural events, contributed to successful outcomes for children and youth.

Limitations

The data for this study were collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, which contributed to the lengthy wait time to conduct member checking. The limitation consisting of the underrepresentation of Indigenous foster caregivers in British Columbia and Canada is reflected in the sample size, due to the shortage of Indigenous foster caregivers who have placement contracts with foster agencies in British Columbia. Furthermore, while it is understood that phenomenological research of this nature is not intended to be generalized, it should be specifically noted that these findings are not intended to be generalized to other Indigenous groups in Canada. Other Indigenous foster caregivers, both within and outside of British Columbia, may have different experiences, and these findings reflect the experiences of the Indigenous foster caregiver participants in this study. Further research should aim to deepen understanding of the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers from other nations and regions in Canada and beyond.

Implications for Practice

In addressing significant gaps in research and practice related to Indigenous foster caregivers, key factors were identified in the current study, highlighting both opportunities and challenges. In exploring the experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers, this study contributes to the emerging body of literature on cultural identity development for Indigenous children and youth living in child welfare care. The findings reveal that substantially more support and resources, including positive and safe support from Ministry personnel, must be made available to Indigenous foster caregivers who are committed to nurturing a positive sense of cultural identity among Indigenous children and youth in their care. Foster caregivers and professionals such as child welfare workers, social workers, counselors, and frontline child and youth workers interested in supporting the cultural identities of Indigenous children and youth will thus gain critical information about the ways foster caregivers and social workers can support Indigenous children and youth. The findings can inform policy development regarding Indigenous children and youth in child welfare care. To contribute to well-being, it is important to prioritize the placement of Indigenous children and youth in care with Indigenous foster placements in their own communities to provide uninterrupted cultural and relational connections to their heritage.

It is vital, ethical, and in line with OCAP principles to incorporate the narratives of lived experiences of Indigenous foster caregivers into policy deliberations and decisions. Doing so will increase understanding of the challenges, the successes, and the solutions to improve current practices, policies, and procedures. These narratives serve as a testament to the strength of Indigenous communities and elucidate the imperative to ensure cultural connection and support to facilitate Indigenous Peoples becoming foster caregivers. Resource social workers play an important role in guiding potential Indigenous foster caregivers through the fostering application and the foster parenting process, particularly by being knowledgeable of Indigenous relations and other cultural resources for Indigenous foster families and children in care.

Colonial child welfare practices and policies continue to impact Indigenous Peoples. To align with the TRC Calls to Action, policies and practices guiding services provided to Indigenous Peoples must include cultural considerations that fortify the cultural identity of Indigenous children and youth in care. The TRC serves as a powerful reminder that fostering requires working in a manner that honors the profound impact of historical traumas and cultural strengths. Especially as the nation of Canada is in transition in its Indigenous child welfare system with the passage of Bill C-92, it is critically important to continue to examine the relationship between foster carers and workers, even if they share the same culture, to continue to address and extend the needed decolonization of Indigenous child welfare in Canada and elsewhere on Turtle Island.