Clients on care and protection orders
Specialist homelessness services (SHS) provide support to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The following summarises evidence from the SHS Collection (SHSC) about children on care and protection orders (CPO). For more comprehensive analyses and the most recent data use the hyperlinks on each evidence statement to the underlying data or find the evidence sources at the end of this page.
Evidence summary
Around 1 in 30 of all SHS clients are children on a CPO[1].
The most common care arrangement among children on a CPO who are SHS clients is parents (around 2 in 3)[1]. Children may also be in placements approved by each state or territory’s child protection department when they are unable to live with their families due to safety concerns. Family and domestic violence is the most common main reason for seeking assistance from an SHS agency among children on a CPO[1].
Mental health issues are the strongest risk factor associated with receiving future SHS support among children on a CPO who are SHS clients. They are also more likely to have experienced homelessness and to receive accommodation support, compared with children not on a CPO[2].
Over half of SHS clients on a CPO have been assisted by an SHS agency at some point since July 2011, that is, returning SHS clients[1]. Children on a CPO are around 3 times more likely than other SHS child clients to have received SHS support in the past[2].
Compared with children who accessed only SHS, children who came into contact with both child protection and SHS were more likely to have experienced family and domestic violence[3].
Children require safe, secure, and stable home environments to maintain mental and physical wellbeing for their development into adulthood, with short periods of being at risk of or experiencing homelessness associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing negative health outcomes in the long term (AIFS 2012; Bassuk et al. 2014; Clair 2019; Flatau et al. 2012). Children experiencing homelessness are also at increased risk of being homeless as adolescents and adults (Flatau et al. 2012).
Child abuse and neglect is often associated with disadvantage and issues such as poverty, homelessness, alcohol and drug addiction, family and domestic violence and mental health issues (DSS 2021). Family and domestic violence is one of the main reasons that families seek assistance from SHS agencies. It is also one of the leading reasons for statutory intervention, and SHS agencies often work with the same families and children as child protection authorities (MICAH Projects 2016).
Care and protection orders (CPOs) are legal orders or arrangements that place partial or all responsibility for a child’s welfare with child protection departments. In Australia, state and territory governments are responsible for statutory child protection. Their respective departments work with children and families to protect children from abuse, neglect or other harm (AIHW 2023). More information on children on care and protection orders is available at Child protection Australia 2023–2024.
Pathways into homelessness
Pathways into homelessness for children on care and protection orders are complex. Children may seek support from SHS agencies with their carers for reasons unrelated to the CPO, or, children may seek support alone after leaving their home due to family violence, abuse or neglect (Noble-Carr and Trew 2018).
For some young people, being placed on a child protection order does not always lead to a safe, stable, and secure housing situation. Being placed on a CPO means that a young person can be placed in a residential or foster care household (out-of-home care) (Noble-Carr and Trew 2018). A critical element of a child’s wellbeing in out-of-home care is placement stability, and child protection agencies prioritise this where possible (AIFS 2021; Prentice 2018; Seselja 2017). Reviews of outcomes and experiences for children in care have found that many (for example, nearly two-thirds of children in Victoria) experience placement instability, marked by multiple placements during their time in care (CCYP 2020; Asif et al. 2024). This instability can exacerbate trauma and can lead to adverse outcomes for children transitioning from out-of-home care, including increased chances of experiencing homelessness, mental health issues, and interactions with the youth justice system (AIFS 2011; CCYP 2020).
Exiting care
Young people in out-of-home care can legally exit the system at 18 years old, with the transition from care to independence challenging for many young people (Zhao and Waugh 2025; OECD 2022). Young people leaving care often feel ill-equipped to transition into independent living due to limited transition planning, with many feeling a lack of emotional readiness, an unfamiliarity with post care services, and limited development of living and financial skills required to live independently (Zhao and Waugh 2025; Noble-Carr and Trew 2018). Young people in care also fear losing social networks such as caseworkers and carers when they leave the care system; an essential safety net for young people navigating change (McDowall 2020).
Compounding factors such as a lack of affordable housing and discrimination due to age, income and rental history make finding stable housing difficult for young people exiting care (Zhao and Waugh 2025). An Australian survey of 325 young people found that 1 in 6 (17%) transitioning from care experienced homelessness immediately on leaving care and almost 1 in 3 (30%) experienced homelessness in the first year after leaving care (McDowall 2020).
Pathways to stable housing
Without appropriate planning and wrap around services, young people exiting the care system risk exiting into homelessness and enduring preventable disadvantage and harm (Martin et al 2021).
Supporting young people exiting out-of-home care is an important consideration to preventing future experiences of homelessness (Flatau et al. 2012). Most jurisdictions in Australia offer extended care leaver support up until at least the age of 21, allowing young people exiting care to remain in existing care placements, enabling a gradual transition into independent living (Zhao and Waugh 2025). However, young people that are unable to remain in those placements and cannot be reunified with family, need wider supports including appropriate transition planning to enable young people to secure stable housing in anticipation of aging out of the care system (Zhao and Waugh 2025; OECD 2022).
Appropriate transition planning for young people leaving care addresses not only housing, but also employment, education, access to support services, living and financial skills development and support for building social networks (Zhao and Waugh 2025, OECD 2022; Noble-Carr and Trew 2018). The service response for young people exiting care must address the specific needs and situation of the individual including young parents or those with disability who may need further supports to find and maintain safe and appropriate housing (Zhao and Waugh 2025; Purtell et al 2021).
About the Specialist Homelessness Services data – defining children on care and protection orders
The Specialist Homelessness Services (SHS) Collection (SHSC) commenced in July 2011. SHS agencies provide a variety of services to assist people who are experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness.
SHS clients are considered to be under a care and protection order (CPO) if they are under 18 and have provided any of the following information in any support period during the reporting period.
- they reported that they were under a CPO and had the following care arrangements:
- family group home
- residential care
- kinship care (reimbursed)
- kinship care (not reimbursed)
- foster care
- other home-based care (reimbursed)
- independent living
- other living arrangements
- parents, or
- they have reported ‘transition from foster care/child safety residential placements’ as a reason for seeking assistance or the main reason for seeking assistance.
Source report | Time periods | Contents |
|---|---|---|
2011–12 onwards | Summarises the characteristics of clients receiving support from specialist homelessness services throughout financial years, including the services requested, outcomes achieved, and unmet requests for services. | |
2. Specialist homelessness services client pathways: Children on care and protection orders in 2014–17 | 2014–17 | The Specialist Homelessness Services (SHS) longitudinal data set was used to analyse a cohort of clients receiving services in 2014–17 who were aged under 18 and were on a care and protection order (CPO). Examining the characteristics and SHS service use patterns for this group of clients for a period of 3 years before and after 2014–17. |
1 July 2011 to 30 June 2015 | This report examines interactions across homelessness, youth justice and child protection. Linked data has been used to understand demographics, personal circumstances, service provision and housing outcomes of children and young people who came into contact with both the child protection system (an investigated notification, care and protection order or out-of-home care) and received specialist homelessness services (SHS). | |
2011–12 onwards | Customisable demographic data cubes. |
AIFS (Australian Institute of Family Studies) (2011) The link between child maltreatment and adolescent offending, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne.
AIFS (2012) Housing and children’s wellbeing and development, Evidence from a national longitudinal study, Family Matters 2012, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Issue No. 91. Melbourne.
AIFS (2021) The multiple meanings of permanency, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne.
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) (2024) Child protection Australia 2023–24, AIHW, Australian Government.
Asif N, Breen C, and Wells R (2024) ‘Influence of placement stability on developmental outcomes of children and young people in out-of-home care: Findings from the Pathways of Care Longitudinal Study’, Child Abuse & Neglect, 149, 106145.
Bassuk M, Richard M and Tsertsvadze A (2014) ‘The Prevalence of Mental Illness in Homeless Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’, Journal of American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Vol 54, Issue 2, P86-96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2014.11.008.
CCYP (Commission for Children and Young People) (2020) ‘Keep Caring: Systemic inquiry into services for young people transitioning from out-of-home care’, Commission for Children and Young People, Melbourne.
Clair A (2019) ‘Housing: an Under-Explored Influence on Children’s Well-Being and Becoming’, Child Ind Res 12, 609–626, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9550-7.
DSS (Department of Social Services) (2021) Safe and Supported: the National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children 2021–2031, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Flatau P, Conroy E, Eardley T, Spooner C and Forbes C (2012) ‘Lifetime and intergenerational experiences of homelessness in Australia’, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne.
Martin R, Cordier C, Jau J, Randall S, Thoresen S, Ferrante A, Chavulak J, Morris S, Mendes P, Liddiard M, Johnson G, and Chung D (2021) ‘Accommodating transition: improving housing outcomes for young people leaving OHC’, AHURI Final Report No. 364, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited, Melbourne.
McDowall J (2020) ‘Transitioning to Adulthood from Out-of-Home Care: Independence or Interdependence’, CREATE Foundation.
MICAH Projects (2016) ‘Families caught in the homelessness and child protection cycle: a supportive housing model for keeping families together’, Common Ground Queensland.
Noble-Carr D and Trew S (2018) ‘Nowhere to go: investigating homelessness experiences of 12–15 year olds in the Australian Capital Territory’, Institute of Child Protection Studies, Australian Catholic University.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2022) ‘Assisting Care Leavers: Time for Action’, OECD Publishing, OECD.
Prentice, the Hon. J (2018) Community Services Ministers’ Meeting Communiqué: National Permanency Work Plan for children and young people [media release], Australian Government.
Purtell J, Mendes P, and Saunders B J (2021) ‘Where Is the Village? Care Leaver Early Parenting, Social Isolation and Surveillance Bias’, International journal on child maltreatment: research, policy and practice, 4(3), 349–371, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42448-021-00084-8.
Seselja, the Hon. Z (2017) Community Services Ministers’ Meeting communique: Permanency reform for children and young people [media release], Australian Government.
Zhao Y, Waugh J, and Mendes P (2025) ‘A scoping review of the transition experiences and outcomes of young women leaving residential out-of-home care’, Children Australia, 47(1), 3057.