Society for Social Work & Research New Orleans 1/14/2017

Slides:



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

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,
Race Matters: Synthesis of Research Findings Robert B. Hill, Ph. D. Disproportionality Teleconference May 24, 2005.
California Department of Social Services Children’s Services Operations and Evaluation PRESENTED TO THE CHILD WELFARE COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 12, 2012 REVISED.
RISK OF RE-REFERRAL AMONG INFANTS WHO REMAIN AT HOME FOLLOWING REPORTED MALTREATMENT Emily Putnam-Hornstein, PhD James Simon, MSW Joseph Magruder, PhD.
How do Macon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Macon/Piatt Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement14833%
Economic Incentives and Foster Child Adoptions Economic Incentives and Foster Child Adoptions Laura Argys and Brian Duncan Department of Economics University.
How do Coles County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Clark...Shelby Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement7136%
How do LaSalle County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? LaSalle County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement20755%
How do Morgan & Scott County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Morgan and Scott Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total.
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 Peoria County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Peoria County Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement19235%
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%
How do Logan County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Logan, Mason and Menard Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total.
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.
An overview of basic California foster care data Joe Magruder, MSW Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California.
Reunification for Siblings in Out-of-Home Care Using a Statistical Technique for Examining Non-independent Observations Presented by: Joseph Magruder,
CHAPIN HALL Permanency, Disparity and Social Context Fred Wulczyn Chapin Hall, University of Chicago.
Increasing Child Welfare Permanency Options: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment Program Daniel Webster, MSW, PhD University of California, Berkeley.
Policy and Practice Options Related to Exit Issues Experimenting and Improving the Recovery Coach Model Joseph P. Ryan, Ph.D. Working Conference on Race.
Risks of Reentry into the Foster Care System for Children who Reunified Terry V. Shaw, MSW University of California, Berkeley School of Social Welfare.
Linking Education to Permanency Outcomes: How and Why Improving Educational Outcomes Promotes Permanency.
Measuring a Collaborative Effort a Child Welfare – Drug & Alcohol Family Preservation example Family Design Resources, Inc.  Fawn Davies  Deborah W.
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.
Creating Racial Equity in Child Welfare: What Do We Know? Judith Meltzer, CSSP Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative Fall Convening November 16, 2010.
Youth Mental Health and Addiction Needs: One Community’s Answer Terry Johnson, MSW Senior Director of Services Senior Director of Services Deborah Ellison,
Foster Care Re-entry Study A Hennepin County Project conducted in collaboration with the Minnesota Department of Human Services and the University of Minnesota.
When permanency remains elusive: A longitudinal examination of the early foster care experiences of youth at risk of emancipating Joe Magruder, MSW Emily.
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.
Race and Child Welfare: Exits from the Child Welfare System Brenda Jones Harden, Ph.D. University of Maryland College Park Research Synthesis on Child.
Supervisor Core Training: Managing for Results Original presentation was created for Version 1.0 by Daniel Webster, Barbara Needell, Wendy Piccus, Aron.
Permanency Outcomes for Children in Erie County Department of Social Services Brett Loschiavo, Public Administration · Project Advisor – Dr. Suparna Soni.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Longitudinal Dynamics of Youth in Foster Care Joseph Magruder Emily Putnam-Hornstein.
AB 636 presented at the joint hearing between the ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES and the ASSEMBLY SELECT COMMITTEE ON FOSTER CARE Sacramento, CA.
The Social and Family Backgrounds of Infants in Care: Predicting Subsequent Abuse Dr. Paul Delfabbro School of Psychology University of Adelaide.
Increasing Permanency Options in Child Welfare: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) Program Daniel Webster Joseph Magruder University.
RELATIVE GUARDIANSHIPS: INCREASED OPTIONS FOR SUSTAINED PERMANENCY Joseph Magruder, PhD University of California, Berkeley Daniel Webster, PhD University.
Background Objectives Methods Study Design A program evaluation of WIHD AfterCare families utilizing data collected from self-report measures and demographic.
BackgroundBackground ObjectivesObjectives MethodsMethods Study Design 1E-06 One of the biggest challenges for the Child Welfare System is sustaining successful.
Provincial Permanency Data Results for DFNAs and CFSAs Prepared by Service Analysis Branch May 27, 2009.
Using Administrative/EMR Data to Understand Health Risk Behaviors among Teens in Foster Care Sarah Beal, PhD.
Conclusions & Implications
Vulnerable Children Legislation Changes
An introduction to Survival analysis and Applications to Predicting Recidivism Rebecca S. Frazier, PhD JBS International.
Daniel Webster Joseph Magruder University of California, Berkeley
Kinship 101: Information for Relatives and “Suitable Others”
Care into practice: the legal framework
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.
SSIS V13.1 Release Training
Hon. Karen R. Carroll February 12, 2018
Equity from the Start Disproportionality and Disparity Among Young Children in the CW System: What the Data Tell Us Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP May 10, 2017.
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEWS (CFSRs)
The Current State of Foster Care in Virginia
CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Understand County Performance on CFSR 3 Measures Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP May 1, 2017.
CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Answer Questions about Key Child Welfare Outcomes Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP January 19, 2016.
Equity from the Start Disproportionality and Disparity Among Young Children in the CW System: What the Data Tell Us Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP May 10, 2017.
Everything you always wanted to know about S. - urvival Curves (
Placement Stability & Permanence
Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement (APPLA)
4 Domains Child Welfare, Juvenile Education and Mental/Health
Jeffrey E. Korte, PhD BMTRY 747: Foundations of Epidemiology II
Placement Stability & Permanence
BARBARA NEEDELL, MSW, PhD
Improving Overlap Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D.
Background checks are required by state and federal law prior to CA/DCYF staff authorizing an individual (other than a parent) to have unsupervised access.
Using the CCWIP Data Portal
Presentation transcript:

Society for Social Work & Research New Orleans 1/14/2017 Relative permanence: Society for Social Work & Research New Orleans 1/14/2017 Reentry for Children Discharged to Subsidized Legal Guardianship with Kinship Caregivers Joseph Magruder, PhD University of California, Berkeley Daniel Webster, PhD Andrea Lane-Eastman, MA University of Southern California Arno Parolini, PhD University of Melbourne Aron Shlonsky, PhD

Background Relative placements, past findings: More stable Reunification slower Reentry less likely for those who reunify Achieving permanency is more difficult - relatives (and social workers) have resisted adoption by kin California extended guardian assistance payments (Kin- GAP) to relatives who were foster parents in 2000. Ongoing analysis to examine the impact of relative guardian exits on achieving permanency and the longevity of this type of discharge. How likely do these children return to care, and what characteristics are associated with disrupted guardianships?

Data & Method California Children’s Services Archive Data System Exits from Jan. 1, 2001 to Dec. 31, 2010 were included. Event history analysis of reentry following exit to relative guardianship: Children were followed from discharge to reentry* to care (or study end date—October 1, 2016) Stratified Cox regression Cox regression with time-dependent variables *Does not include “positive” reentries that ended with adoption or guardianship with same caregiver as original guardian.

Reentry over time (in days) following discharge to relative guardianship 25,596 total children exited to relative guardianship from 2001 to 2010. 4,620 (18%) had returned to care by the study cut off date. Percent reentering within 12 months (~3%) and 24 months (~6%) were much less than reentry rates found in past analyses for similar follow up times for children exiting to reunification (C1.4: 12mo≈12%; 24mo≈17%), or other forms of guardianship. Past analyses also indicated that exits to relative guardianships had lower rates of recurrence at 12 months.

Frequencies and Proportions (N = 25,596) Children Exiting to Relative Guardianship 2001-2010 (Table 1)

Cox Models on Time to Reentry Following Exit to Relative Guardianship Model 1: Stratified Cox Regression (not shown) Replicated effects observed in prior analyses (e.g., higher reentry likelihood for females, Blacks, Hispanics, neglect removal reason; lower reentry for parent incarceration history). Checked model specification: fit was good, however proportional hazards assumption did not hold – e.g., time-varying effects for parent incarceration history, Los Angeles. Prior analyses presented previously also found: females, black and Hispanic children, and some form of client condition to increase likelihood or reentry; and parent incarceration history decreased likelihood of reentry Proportional hazards assumption assessed using test based on Schoenfeld residuals, and generalized by Grambsch and Therneau.

Cox Models on Time to Reentry Following Exit to Relative Guardianship Also, data indicated high number of children reentering between the ages of 11 and 15. Prior analyses presented previously also found: black and Hispanic children, and some form of client condition to increase likelihood or reentry; and parent incarceration history decreased likelihood of reentry Further analysis sought to examine issue of whether reentry is correlated with child development (e.g., ‘teen onset’ effect).

Cox Models on Time to Reentry Following Exit to Relative Guardianship (Table 2) Models were fit adding an indicator for t > 4500 for both, LA and parent incarceration. However the coefficients were insignificant and they were therefore dropped from the model.

Results Model 2: Cox Regression with Time-Dependent Covariates Model fit the data reasonably well. Effects very similar to the stratified Cox regression-- however, time-dependent indicators highly significant. Teen effect looks negligible, but is not. It can only be considered with the Age overall variable (similar to an interaction). A child entering teen years (age 11 – 15) could only be compared with a child not entering the teen years. Applying coefficients, for example, after one year of discharge to relative guardianship—a child entering teen years would have about a 14% greater risk of re-entry than a non-teen. Model fit well based on the cumulative hazard of the Cox-Snell residuals.

Results Continued… Model 2: Cox Regression with Time-Dependent Covariates Child mental health condition identified prior to discharge had more than twice the hazard of reentry, while ‘other’ identified disability (e.g., physical, alcohol, drugs) had decreased reentry risk. Parental incarceration history initially decreased reentry risk; but over time this factor more than doubled risk of reentry (HR > 2.0). LA factor was non-significant, while the interaction with the indicator variable for longer time in LA (t >2500 & t ≤ 4500) was highly significant (HR: 1.35). Model fit well based on the cumulative hazard of the Cox-Snell residuals.

discussion Child development may be correlated with re-entry to care--there could be unmet service needs for relative guardians of children transitioning into adolescence. Client disability factor could indicate caregivers better able to cope with, and/or access post-permanency services for some conditions (physical disability) and not others (mental health). Incarceration history factor could potentially indicate destabilizing influence of parents released from corrections (but additional data would be needed to examine this factor). Risk of reentry for children in LA increases notably after about 7 years (2500 days) post-discharge could potentially be artifact of overrepresentation of large group of children (some perhaps not ideally suited for the program) discharged in the initial years.

Next steps Models still a work in development. Adjust age group categories in additional models to better understand the impact of this factor. Apply modeling approach to account for interaction effects. Number of observations will permit model building on sub-sample, with subsequent application to the rest of the data set. Models are still work in development: Especially the time-dependent effects may be coarse at this point. However the effects appear to be reasonable and in line with the nonparametric results. A preliminary discrete time model was also fit on annual time intervals. The results were very similar, increasing confidence in the findings presented here. To account for interaction effects will apply a non-parametric approach which assumes no functional forms: conditional inference trees, a recursive partitioning algorithm.

Questions. joemagruder@berkeley. edu dwebster@berkeley. edu lanea@usc Questions? joemagruder@berkeley.edu dwebster@berkeley.edu lanea@usc.edu arno.parolini@unimelb.edu.au aron.shlonsky@unimelb.edu.au The California Child Welfare Indicators Project is supported by the California Department of Social Services, the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, and the Stuart Foundation