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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
US Berkeley 2/12/2013 linking population-based data to child welfare records: a public health approach to surveillance Emily Putnam-Hornstein, PhD University.
Advertisements

California Child Welfare Indicators Project Q Slides Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley.
How do Macon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Macon/Piatt Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement14833%
The OCFS Initiative to Address Racial Disproportionality in Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice CRP Meeting September 23, 2011 Albany, New York.
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.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara Needell,
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.
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.
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.
Findings From the Initial Child and Family Service Reviews
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare in California: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Race/Ethnic Disparities in Child Welfare New Research Synthesis from Fluke et.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Foster Care in California: What the Data Tells Us Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Emily.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Black/White and Black/Hispanic Racial Disparity in Child Welfare: Controlling.
Safe & Equitable Foster Care Reduction in Multnomah County CCFC Commission Mtg Tuesday, Dec 8 th 2009.
Contra Costa County Disproportionality – Examples and Changes Ray Merritt; Dorothy Powell; Children and Family Services Research and Evaluation.
Child Welfare in North Carolina: Ethnic and Racial Disproportionality and Disparity by D. F. Duncan UNC-CH School of Social Work June 10, 2009.
NYS Office of Children & Family Services Race and Ethnicity: Path Through the Juvenile Justice System Deputy Commissioner Joyce Burrell March 2008.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara Needell,
Creating Racial Equity in Child Welfare: What Do We Know? Judith Meltzer, CSSP Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative Fall Convening November 16, 2010.
Sangamon County Action Team Sara Sanders Christy Cunningham Chrissy Gosteli.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Black/White Racial Disparity in Child Welfare: Findings from Linkages to Birth.
A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS OF RACE AND POVERTY AS RISK FACTORS FOR MALTREATMENT Barbara Needell, PhD Emily Putnam-Hornstein, PhD Bryn King, MSW January.
Michigan’s Child Welfare System Why is Overrepresentation a Critical Issue?
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.
What’s Race Got To Do With It? An Honest Conversation About the Impact of Racism on the Child Welfare System.
CALIFORNIA’S MOST VULNERABLE PARENTS: WHEN MALTREATED CHILDREN HAVE CHILDREN Emily Putnam-Hornstein, PhD Bryn King, MSW Julie Cederbaum, PhD Barbara Needell,
Race and Child Welfare: Exits from the Child Welfare System Brenda Jones Harden, Ph.D. University of Maryland College Park Research Synthesis on Child.
Overview of California’s Child Welfare Indicator Data Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University.
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.
Performance and Progress 2012/2013. Why We Do an Annual Data Presentation To assess the Levy’s performance in various categories against goals. To highlight.
Child Welfare Permanency and Racial Equity Efforts in Illinois Angela Baron-Jeffrey Center for Child Welfare and Education Child Welfare Advisory Council.
California Disproportionality Project Stuart Oppenheim, Executive Director, CFPIC Stuart Oppenheim, Executive Director, CFPIC Lisa Molinar, Lisa Molinar,Director,
Hannah Matthews, CLASP Maki Park, Migration Policy Institute
CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Understand County Performance on Federal & State C-CFSR Measures Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP September.
Daniel Webster Joseph Magruder University of California, Berkeley
Health of Wisconsin: Report Card 2016
Changing the Outcome: Achieving and Sustaining a Safe Reduction in Foster Care: A Policy Institute November 4-6, 2009 Tampa, FL Addressing Disproportionality.
CCWIP Data Analysis Training Using the CCWIP Website to Answer Questions about Key Child Welfare Outcomes Wendy Wiegmann CCWIP August 19, 2016.
How do health expenditures vary across the population?
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.
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.
Daniel Webster & Jay Bell
Wendy Wiegmann ~ CCWIP ~ October 25, 2016
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.
Better Outcomes for All Children
Wendy Wiegmann ~ CCWIP ~ November 7, 2016
Wendy Wiegmann ~ CCWIP ~ March 27-28, 2017
June 11, 2012 CalSWEC F & E Webinar
State Superintendent’s Advisory Committee on 4-Year-Old Kindergarten May 15, 2017 FIND PICTURE!
Disproportionality in Child Welfare
BARBARA NEEDELL, MSW, PhD
Using the CCWIP Data Portal
How do health expenditures vary across the population?
Advancing gender wealth equity: Opportunities in the 2019 legislative session Liz Olson, state policy fellow March 21, 2019.
Overview of Health Disparities in Aging And Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias Carolina Center on Alzheimer’s Disease and Minority Research (CCARMR)
Presentation transcript:

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

Learning Objectives Better understand the terminology surrounding differences in the experiences of children in the child welfare system based on race/ethnicity Know how child welfare outcomes differ for children in the California child welfare system by age and race/ethnicity Understand how poverty may influence disparity among children in the California child welfare system by age and race/ethnicity

What does the literature say about the causes of disparity? Racial bias and discrimination in the child welfare system and other ecologies (e.g., among mandated reporters) Child welfare system processes and (lack of) resources Disproportionate and disparate need of children and families of color Geographic context All may be true! Fluke, J., Harden, B. J., Jenkins, M., & Ruehrdanz, A. (2010). Research synthesis on child welfare disproportionality and disparities. Disparities and Disproportionality in Child Welfare: Analysis of the Research, 1-93.

Terminology

Disproportionality vs. Disparity Disproportionality: When a group makes up a proportion of those experiencing some event that is higher or lower than that group’s proportion of the population Disparity: A comparison of one group (e.g., regarding disproportionality, services, outcomes) to another group

Q4_2016

Black Disproportionality 18.7% 5.5% = 3.4 White Disproportionality 24.0% 28.3% = 0.85 Disparity Index 𝟑.𝟒 𝟎.𝟖𝟓 = 𝟒.𝟎 “Black children are 4 times more likely to enter care than white children.” Q4_2016

Q4_2016 Disparity exists across all child welfare outcomes, especially for Black and Native American children. Disparity gets worse for Black and Native American children as they progress through the system.

Population in Poverty Estimates Combination of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS), and population data from The California Department of Finance. Separate multipliers were created for each Race/Ethnicity at the state level and for each of the 58 counties. Poverty Multiplier = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐶ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑃𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐶ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑛 The multiplier was then applied to the California Department of Finance Population Estimates

Q4_2016 Disparity rates are reduced when poverty/geographic factors are taken into consideration, particularly for Allegations and Substantiated Allegations. For Latino/a children, disparity is reversed.

AGE FACTORS

Q4_2016 For Allegations, disparity is the highest among the youngest Black and Native American children.

Q4_2016 Among substantiations, disparity is also the highest among the youngest Black and Native American children, although there is a high level of disparity among Black 16-17 year olds as well.

Q4_2016 For Entries, there is greater overall racial/ethnic disparity, particularly for Black children, but fewer gradations across age.

Q4_2016 Among in care cares, disparity is highest among the oldest Black children. The same is not true among Native American children.

EXITS

88%

Black Children (n = 5,000) White Children (n = 6,971) 88% 85% For Black children, there is a lower percentage of children who exit to permanency within 72 months from entry [85% (n = 4,211) vs. 88% (6,148)]. Note the difference between the percentage of children who achieve permanency through adoption [17% (n = 833) vs. 25% (n = 1,772)] and guardianship [13% (n = 648) vs. 7% (n = 478)].

Native American Children (n = 310) White Children (n = 6,971) 88% 86% For Native American children, there is a lower percentage of children who exit to permanency within 72 months from entry [86% (n = 266) vs. 88% (6,148)]. Note the difference between the percentage of children who achieve permanency through adoption [17% (n = 53) vs. 25% (n = 1,772)] and guardianship [11% (n = 34) vs. 7% (n = 478)].

Summary Disparity increases for Black and Native American as they progress through the child welfare system. Disparity rates are reduced when poverty/geographic factors are taken into consideration. For Latino/a children, disparity is reversed. Among Allegations and Substantiations, disparity is the highest among the youngest Black and Native American children. Overall disparity is higher for Entries and In Care rates, but more evenly distributed across age groups. Disparity across the system is highest for In Care rates for Black children. Black and Native American children are less likely to exit foster care within 72 months, particularly to adoption.

How is disparity being addressed? Nationally California Cultural trainings to reduce bias and sensitize workers Common Core 3.0 and the Core Practice Model include training to reduce disparity Infusion of funding and technical assistance from the Casey-CSSP Alliance for Racial Equity at the State and local level Standing Committee on Disproportionality (Fresno County) Cultural sensitivity trainings Family and community involvement Team Decision Making/Child & Family Team Meetings Cultural Brokers

Thank You! The California Child Welfare Indicators Project (CCWIP) is a collaboration of the California Department of Social Services and the School of Social Welfare, University of California at Berkeley, and is supported by the California Department of Social Services, Casey Family Programs, the Stuart Foundation, and the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation. CCWIP is a collaboration of the California Department of Social Services and the School of Social Welfare, University of California at Berkeley, and is supported by the California Department of Social Services and the Stuart Foundation.

Questions? Wendy Wiegmann wendy.wiegmann@berkeley.edu 510-643-0839