Increasing Child Welfare Permanency Options: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment Program Daniel Webster, MSW, PhD University of California, Berkeley.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Expedited Family Reunification Project
Advertisements

Kinship Care and Behavioral Outcomes for Children in the Child Welfare System David Rubin, MD MSCE Director or Research & Policy Safe Place: The Center.
Using Data to Plan Waiver Strategies and Drive Improvements: Key Indicators and Trends April 11, 2012.
Subsidized Guardianship Permanency Initiative. SG Introduction Focuses on improving permanency outcomes for children in out-of-home care through a comprehensive.
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,
California Department of Social Services Children’s Services Operations and Evaluation PRESENTED TO THE CHILD WELFARE COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 12, 2012 REVISED.
California Child Welfare Indicators Project Q Slides Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley.
Children Ever in Care Terry V. Shaw, MSW Joseph Magruder, MSW University of California, Berkeley School of Social Welfare This research is funded by the.
How do Macon County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Macon/Piatt Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement14833%
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.
California’s Child Welfare Outcomes & Accountability System: Using Performance Measures to Encourage Improvement Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for.
The C-CFSR or Some of My Best Friends are Outcome Measures National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data and Technology 8th National Child Welfare Data.
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.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Data Are Your Friends: California’s Child Welfare Outcomes and Accountability.
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.
Reunification for Siblings in Out-of-Home Care Using a Statistical Technique for Examining Non-independent Observations Presented by: Joseph Magruder,
Policy and Practice Options Related to Exit Issues Experimenting and Improving the Recovery Coach Model Joseph P. Ryan, Ph.D. Working Conference on Race.
The California Child Welfare System: Data Snapshot Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Emily Putnam Hornstein, MSW Joseph Magruder, MSW Center for Social Services.
Findings From the Initial Child and Family Service Reviews
Risks of Reentry into the Foster Care System for Children who Reunified Terry V. Shaw, MSW University of California, Berkeley School of Social Welfare.
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 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 California’s Child Welfare System: Using Data from CWS/CMS Barbara Needell, MSW,
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.
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.
A New Narrative for Child Welfare February 16, 2011 Bryan Samuels, Commissioner Administration on Children, Youth & Families.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Child Welfare: Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity Barbara Needell,
Data Quality Initiative-Update May 14, Data Quality Initiative The eWiSACWIS Data Quality Initiative will support counties, the BMCW and the Special.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: A Data Snapshot Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: Using Data from CWS/CMS Barbara Needell, MSW,
1 Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare Report to the Community January 13, 2006 Jan. – Dec Progress summary of 2005  Safety  Permanence  Well-Being.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts Children’s Roundtable Summit.
Michigan’s Child Welfare System Why is Overrepresentation a Critical Issue?
AB 12: California Fostering Connections to Success Act Policy Overview and Implications for THP-Plus Presentation to THP-Plus Institute July 28, 2009.
Questions & Answers about Extending Foster Care to Age 21 THP-Plus Institute November 8, 2010 Oakland, CA.
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.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley CFSR2 Data Indicators: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Center for Social Services.
California Child Welfare Indicators Project YOUTH IN EXTENDED FOSTER CARE Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California,
Race and Child Welfare: Exits from the Child Welfare System Brenda Jones Harden, Ph.D. University of Maryland College Park Research Synthesis on Child.
NCADS Child Maltreatment 2000 Data about child abuse and neglect known to child protective Services (CPS) agencies in the United States in 2000.
Supervisor Core Training: Managing for Results Original presentation was created for Version 1.0 by Daniel Webster, Barbara Needell, Wendy Piccus, Aron.
Overview of California’s Child Welfare Indicator Data Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University.
11/28/12 1 CALIFORNIA FOSTERING CONNECTIONS TO SUCCESS ACT Version 2.0 Assembly Bill 12.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: Data Trends & Child Outcomes Center for Social.
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.
Measuring Child Welfare Agency Performance: Advantages and Challenges of State, County, & University Collaboration National Association of Welfare Research.
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.
CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Applying Data for System Improvement: Probation Agency Staff Daniel Webster,
Daniel Webster Joseph Magruder University of California, Berkeley
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.
Society for Social Work & Research New Orleans 1/14/2017
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
Presentation transcript:

Increasing Child Welfare Permanency Options: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment Program Daniel Webster, MSW, PhD University of California, Berkeley Joseph Magruder, MSW University of California, Berkeley Aron Shlonsky, MSW, PhD University of Toronto National Association for Welfare Research and Statistics 46 nd Annual Workshop August 2003 The Performance Indicators Project is funded by the California Department of Social Services and the Stuart Foundation

Background 1979 Miller v. Youakim decision - relative caregivers serving as foster parents eligible for Title IV-E funding Foster care by relatives increased, peaking –Nationally in 1998 at 29% –California in 2000 at 43% Foster placements with kin are different –More stable –Reunification slower –Reentry less likely for those who reunify –Achieving permanency is more difficult - kin (and social workers) have resisted adoption by kin

Guardianship as a Kin Permanency Option The disparity between foster care and TANF payments is a barrier to kin becoming guardians. In response, states have established subsidized guardianship programs. The California program, “KinGAP” was implemented in January 2000.

KinGAP Requirements To be eligible for Kin GAP the child must: have been a court dependent, have lived with the relative for 12 consecutive months, have had the guardianship established as part of a permanent plan, and concurrently or subsequently have had the dependency dismissed. Payment has been limited to the basic foster care rate (since revised to include difficulty of care rates).

Methods California Children’s Services Archive Data System Children first entering KinGAP program from Jan. 1, 2000 – Dec. 31, 2005 (N=16,287) were included. Children were followed from discharge to KinGAP to subsequent substantiated referral, or reentry to care (or study end date—January 1, 2006). Bivariate frequencies Multivariate event history models on recurrence of maltreatment and reentry

KinGAP Entries Since 2000, 16,287 children are reported to have left foster care for KinGAP Median Age: 10 years Median Time In Care: 4 years –5 years in 2000 –3 years in 2005 Gender: 52% Female

KinGAP Entries continued Ethnicity#% Black6, White2, Hispanic6, Asian/Other Native American Missing350.2

KinGAP Entries continued

KinGAP Net Permanency Gain

Cumulative % of Children with Substantiated Referrals After Entering KinGAP (n=16,287) ≤ 1 yr ≤2 yrs n=5,384n=2,894n=2,309 ≤3 yrs ≤4 yrs n=2,253 Based on data through December 31, n=2,050 ≤5 yrs

Children exiting to KinGAP are relatively unlikely to experience a subsequent substantiated referral (about 3% within 1 year, 11% within 4 years). For those children who exit to KinGAP: Six to ten, and eleven to fifteen year olds are more likely and older teens less likely than children less than six to experience recurrence. Hispanic and Native Americans are more likely and Asian children less likely than Whites to experience recurrence. Females are more likely than males to experience recurrence. Children initially removed for reasons of sexual abuse are about half as likely as those removed for neglect to experience a subsequent substantiated referral. Children from counties other than Los Angeles were more likely to experience a subsequent substantiated referral. Results

Cumulative % of Children Re-Entering Foster Care from KinGAP (n=16,287) ≤ 1 yr ≤2 yrs n=5,384n=2,894n=2,309 ≤3 yrs ≤ 4 yrs n=2,253 Based on data through December 31, n=2,050 ≤5 yrs

Children Children exiting to KinGAP are relatively unlikely to reenter foster care (about 2% within 1 year, 8% within 4 years). For those children who exit to KinGAP: Six to ten, and eleven to fifteen year olds are more likely and older teens less likely than children less than six to reenter. African American and Hispanic children are more likely than Whites to reenter. Children initially removed for reasons of sexual abuse are about half as likely as those removed for neglect to reenter care. Children from big counties were more likely than those from Los Angeles to experience reentry. Results

Discussion KinGAP has led to a “net permanency gain.” KinGAP children experience low rates of recurrence and reentry to care. KinGAP is an innovative program that provides public child welfare with an additional means to achieve permanency. Decision to participate in IV-E Waiver must take into account usage of this discharge option. Before finalizing models, we will explore issues of potential bias introduced by autocorrelation and stages of incidental selectivity.