September 24 th, 2015 Susan Smith, MSW, Ph.D. Casey Family Programs.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

The State of Utah’s Children – What does the data tell us David Corwin, MD Utah Court Improvement Summit Many Voices, One Vision: Coming Together.

Advertisements

Using Data to Plan Waiver Strategies and Drive Improvements: Key Indicators and Trends April 11, 2012.

Foster Care Reentry after Reunification – Reentry in One or Two years – what’s the difference? Terry V. Shaw, MSW Daniel Webster, PhD University of California,

Challenges Foster Children Face : some statistics Each year, over 10,000 children in the Northeast enter foster care. Majority of foster children have.

“Yes We Will”: From Placements to Permanency – The 2020 Vision Catalyst for CARE 9 th Annual Child Placement Conference November 12-14, 2008 Dr. Page Walley,

Heidi Gulbrandson– Action Team Leader Hillary Millner Sunah Shin Champaign County Action Team.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare in California: 1. A Quick Tour of the Data 2. A Racial Equity Lens.

Who lives in Rock Island County? Rock Island County Demographics by Race and/or Ethnic Group, 2009 estimate N = 148,826 White113, % Black or African.

How do McLean County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? McLean County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement23350%

How do Champaign County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Champaign County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement22548%

How do Sangamon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Sangamon County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement21638%

Foster Care Reentry Going Beyond 12 Months of Follow-up Terry V. Shaw, MSW, PhD Daniel Webster, MSW, PhD University of California, Berkeley School of Social.

State of New Jersey. Quick Context Lawsuit in 2004, revised in 2006 to MSA Reporting on 250 measures, including placement stability Started by “focusing.

An overview of basic California foster care data Joe Magruder, MSW Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara Needell,

Building a Better Child Welfare System for Fresno's Children: Using Data as Our Foundation (and Friend!) Daniel Webster, MSW PhD Center for Social Services.

Child Welfare Practice Model

The California Child Welfare System: Data Snapshot Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Emily Putnam Hornstein, MSW Joseph Magruder, MSW Center for Social Services.

Identifying the Underlying Factors Related to Placement Stability in Florida Penelope (Penny) L. Maza, Ph.D. Consultant National Resource Center for Child.

Risks of Reentry into the Foster Care System for Children who Reunified Terry V. Shaw, MSW University of California, Berkeley School of Social Welfare.

Inspiration  Ideas  Improvement Practice Improvement Unit District Practice Improvement Specialists District Automation Liaisons Inspiration An agent.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare in California: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara.

Program Staff Presentation 1 Program Staff Presentation.

Data Driven Practice for Program Managers: Riverside County Melissa Correia Adam Darnell Casey Family Programs Daniel Webster, MSW PhD Center for Social.

Contra Costa County Disproportionality – Examples and Changes Ray Merritt; Dorothy Powell; Children and Family Services Research and Evaluation.

Measuring a Collaborative Effort a Child Welfare – Drug & Alcohol Family Preservation example Family Design Resources, Inc.  Fawn Davies  Deborah W.

CALL NOW SPECIAL TOPICS Inside The Numbers STATISTICS ON THE WORK WE DO.

AB 636 Mental Health/CWS Partnership Sacramento, CA 3/17/06 Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services Research University of California at Berkeley.

1 G-FORCE MEETING Division of Family & Children Services September 25, 2009.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara Needell,

Indicating Success in Public Child Welfare Child Outcomes, System Performance and the CFSR Process Susan Smith and Lisa Tuttle Casey Family Programs July.

Creating Racial Equity in Child Welfare: What Do We Know? Judith Meltzer, CSSP Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative Fall Convening November 16, 2010.

1 G-FORCE MEETING October 23, 2008 ON THE ROAD TO GREATNESS!

Subjects of Maltreatment Reports April 2011 through March 2012.

Trends in Child Welfare Outcomes CA Blue Ribbon Commission May1, 2013 The Performance Indicators Project is a collaboration of the California Department.

C hildren and F amily Research Center University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Social Work TM Return to Care: What are the Factors Involved.

 Presented by: Roxanna Jolly.  Foster parents are advocates for an at-risk population. - On Their Own by Martha Shirk and Gary Stangler - “Costs” of.

California Child Welfare Indicators Project YOUTH IN EXTENDED FOSTER CARE Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California,

1 CPA PROVIDER G-FORCE MEETING January 12, Agenda Maltreatment in Care Permanency Continuum Permanency Status Exercise for February DFCS Data.

1 CCI PROVIDER G-FORCE MEETING January 11, Agenda Maltreatment in Care Permanency Continuum Permanency Status Exercise for February DFCS Data.

SAFE AND THRIVING FOREVER FAMILIES SOONER Division of Family & Children Services G-Force Meeting June 25, 2009.

Program Evaluation - Reunification of Foster Children with their Families: NYS Office of Children and Family Services, Division of Child Care Evelyn Jones,

1. DFCS Performance Update Georgia Child Welfare Reform Council September 16, 2015.

1 CHILDREN SAFE AND THRIVING WITH FOREVER FAMILIES, SOONER DIVISION OF FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES Isabel Blanco, Deputy Director of Field Operations September.

ADOPTION ASSISTANCE ANALYSIS October 13, COMPARISON OF PERCENT OF CHILDREN ELIGIBLE FOR ADOPTION BY CURRENT, PROPOSED AND ALTERNATE CRITERIA SFY.

“A half-century of research demonstrates convincingly that children’s well-being builds upon meeting first their primary needs for a stable and lasting.

The Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) February 2008 Update.

AB 636 presented at the joint hearing between the ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES and the ASSEMBLY SELECT COMMITTEE ON FOSTER CARE Sacramento, CA.

1 DHS Board Meeting Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Overview Mark Washington Division of Family and Children Services August 18, 2010.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Applying Data for System Improvement: Probation Agency Staff Daniel Webster,

San Jose Demographic Findings and Trends, Census 2010 Michael Bills, Senior Planner City of San Jose.

Using Administrative/EMR Data to Understand Health Risk Behaviors among Teens in Foster Care Sarah Beal, PhD.

The Bridging Success Initiative - From Foster Care to a College Degree

Group Care in Florida’s Child Welfare System

CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Answer Questions about Key Child Welfare Outcomes Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP August 19, 2016.

Kinship Foster Care in California Testimony to Assembly Select Committee on Foster Care Sacramento, CA 2/15/06 Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social.

Congregate Care in Ohio

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEWS (CFSRs)

CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Answer Questions about Key Child Welfare Outcomes Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP January 19, 2016.

Wake County Child Welfare EOY Report

Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement (APPLA)

GOT PERMANENCE? DIVISION OF FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES G-FORCE MEETING

4 Domains Child Welfare, Juvenile Education and Mental/Health

Reports by Maltreatment Type

Foster Care in California: What we Know from CWS/CMS Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services Research University of California at Berkeley.

BARBARA NEEDELL, MSW, PhD

Child Outcomes Data July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009

Lisa Litchfield| SSIS Worker Mentor Coordinator

Overview of Public Facing ODJFS Child Welfare Dashboards

Review of Title IV-E Waiver Opportunity

Presentation transcript:

September 24 th, 2015 Susan Smith, MSW, Ph.D. Casey Family Programs

The number of children entering care in Illinois has fluctuated since 2009 and is now near the number of children exiting care. Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Front End Trends Illinois has lower rates of children screened in & children substantiated when compared to national trends. Of note, there’s been an increase in substantiated reports in the last couple years. Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Front End Trends In Illinois, more children experienced another incidence of substantiated maltreatment within 6 months than the national standard. Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Front End Trends Re-entries in Illinois declined and is below the national trend. The percentage of children who enter and exit within 30 days fluctuated since 2009 and is now below the national trend. Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Timely Permanency* The percent of children who exit to permanency within 12 & 24 months (of entry) is well below the national trend. *note: includes children in care for 24 hours or longer Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) While Illinois has almost twice the percentage of children in care 2+ years as compared to nationally, permanency for these youth have increased since Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) There is opportunity in Illinois to move youth out of foster care and into permanent, loving homes. Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Who are the 382 youth in the target population currently placed in congregate care? Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Long stayer youth in congregate care tend to move more frequently and have shorter stays in their current placement.

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Are there differences by race/ethnicity and gender?

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Who are the 384 youth in the target population currently placed in foster care?

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Long stayer youth in foster care tend to move less frequently than long stayer youth in congregate care.

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Are there differences by race/ethnicity?

Data source: state-submitted AFCARS files Fiscal years followed by ‘a’ denote an entry cohort for 10/1/xx-3/31/xx; ‘b’ denotes 4/1/xx-9/30/xx Children in Care for Long Periods (3/31/2015) Given that children in care 4 years or longer make up a larger percentage of long stayers, what is the profile of kids in care 4 years or longer around the state?

Questions? Contact Susan Smith, Casey Family Programs Data Advocacy,