CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: Using Data from CWS/CMS Barbara Needell, MSW,

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,

Crowne Plaza Hotel, Foster City, California January 23, 2008 STRENGTHENING PARTNERSHIPS TO BUILD A PLAN FOR CAPTA CHANGES.

California Child Welfare Indicators Project Q Slides Center for Social Services Research School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley.

Using Publicly Available Data to Engage IV-E Students in Research and Statistics: Instructional Modules MODULE 2 SLIDE DECK: LESSONS IN USING (AND MISUSING)

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Data Use vs. Misuse: The challenging nature of publicly available data Emily.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Ethnic/Racial Disproportionality and Disparity: A National Perspective Barbara.

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,

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Data 201: The Empirical Data Strikes Back* Emily Putnam-Hornstein, MSW Center.

California’s Child Welfare Outcomes & Accountability System: Using Performance Measures to Encourage Improvement Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for.

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.

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.

CWS Outcomes System Update: (data through April 1, 2008 ) Racial/Ethnic Disparities (data for CY 2007) Center for Social Services Research University of.

California Child Welfare Outcomes and Accountability Legislation: Evolving Toward System Improvement with Longitudinal Data & Analysis Panel on Increasing.

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

Data 101: Numbers, Graphs, and More Numbers

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Making the Most of Your Composite Computational Spreadsheet: Tools from California.

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 CFSR2 National Standard/Composite Scores Center for Social Services Research.

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 Prepared for The California Disproportionality Project Center for Social Services.

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.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Pro Bono Publico: Avoiding Child Welfare Data Abuse Panel on Meaningful Measurement.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley The Child and Family Services Review Composite Scores: A “Great Start” Barbara.

The New Data Frontier Central California Area Social Services Consortium (CCASSC) and the Fresno County Experience The Administrative Use of Data to Promote.

Safety and Permanence in Child Welfare Second Canadian Roundtable on Child Welfare Outcomes October 8-9, 2009 Montreal, Canada Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD.

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.

Child Welfare in North Carolina: Ethnic and Racial Disproportionality and Disparity by D. F. Duncan UNC-CH School of Social Work June 10, 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.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Predictors of Child Welfare Contact Between Birth and Age Five: An Examination.

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,

Child Welfare Administrative Data: The UCB Performance Indicators Project cssr.berkeley.edu/CWSCMSReports Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services.

Presentation originally created by William C Dawson & Amy C Nuñez The Performance Indicators Project & the Administrative Office of the Courts: Toward.

County of __________ Welcome to our System Improvement Planning Process! Facilitated by:

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts Children’s Roundtable Summit.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Safety and Permanence in Child Welfare Second Canadian Roundtable on Child Welfare.

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,

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare Performance Indicators Project: “irresistible information”

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.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: Data Trends & Child Outcomes Center for Social.

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.

Measuring Child Welfare Agency Performance: Advantages and Challenges of State, County, & University Collaboration National Association of Welfare Research.

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

Changing the Outcome: Achieving and Sustaining a Safe Reduction in Foster Care: A Policy Institute November 4-6, 2009 Tampa, FL Setting the Course: Unpacking.

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.

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.

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.

Center for Social Services Research

Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts Children’s Roundtable Summit November 21, 2009 Making Data Informed Decisions (Ramblings from the Left.

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

CFSR2 Data Indicators: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Using the CCWIP Data Portal

Presentation transcript:

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California’s Child Welfare System: Using Data from CWS/CMS Barbara Needell, MSW, PhD Center for Social Services Research University of California at Berkeley November, 2007 The Performance Indicators Project at CSSR is supported by the California Department of Social Services and the Stuart Foundation Presentation developed by Emily Putnam-Hornstein, MSW

Tracking Child Welfare Outcomes Counterbalanced Indicators of SystemPerformance PermanencyThroughReunification, Adoption, or Guardianship Length of Stay Stability of Care Rate of Referrals/ Substantiated Referrals Home-Based Services vs. Out of Home Care Positive Attachments to Family, Friends, and Neighbors Use of Least Restrictive Form of Care Source: Usher, C.L., Wildfire, J.B., Gogan, H.C. & Brown, E.L. (2002). Measuring Outcomes in Child Welfare. Chapel Hill: Jordan Institute for Families, Reentry to Care

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California: Referrals, Substantiations & Entry Rates (per 1,000 Children) Referral Rates Substantiation Rates Entry Rates

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 1998 to 2007 California: First Entries by First Placement Type (children in care for 8 or more days) Group/Shelter Kinship FFA Foster TOTAL

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 1998 to 2007 California: Foster Care Caseload by Placement Type Group/Shelter Kinship FFA Foster TOTAL

CA CWS Outcomes System California Child Welfare System Improvement and Accountability Act (AB636) became law in 2001 and went into effect in January 2004—quarterly outcomes reports at state and county level. –We have eliminated some of the original ab636 measures and have included all new federal measures. –Provides additional measures needed to understand performance (e.g., % of siblings placed together). –We are working on additional measures of well-being. Mirrors Family to Family Outcomes Retains key process measures (e.g., child visits, time to investigation) Began with county self assessments and System Improvement Plans (SIPS) that identified key challenges and strengths Peer Quality Case Reviews (PQCRs) are being conducted in each county to dig deeper into specific issues

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley CFSR National Standards Round 1 of the CFSRs –2 of the “outcomes” = 6 items (2 for safety, 4 for permanency) –States failing to meet a given standard had to include that item in their Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) Round 2 of the CFSRs –Also comprised of 6 items with standards attached –BUT…this time the permanency standards are comprised of 15 different measures distilled into four composites –TOTAL of 17 FEDERAL MEASURES

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Safety Indicator 1 Indicator 2 Permanency Composite 1 Composite 2 Composite 3 Composite 4 Component A Component B Component A Component B Component C Component A Component B Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3 Measure 4 Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3 Measure 4 Measure 5 Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Working with Composites National standards for both the safety indicators and permanency composites are based on State performance in 2004, 75 th percentile In California, we at CSSR attempt to replicate each of the measures, break them out by child welfare and probation agencies, and report/update quarterly. Although national standards have been set for the composites rather than individual measures… –The goal is to improve State performance on all measures (every improvement reflects a better outcome for children) –Improvement on any given measure will result in an increase in the overall composite score –Local data analysis should reveal which measures need to be targeted, and how

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California: CWS Outcomes System: UCB Measures, Percent IMPROVEMENT January 2004 compared to October 2007 Note: (+) indicates a measure where a % increase equals improvement. (-) indicates a measure where a % decrease equals improvement. indicates a measure where performance declined.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley California: CWS Outcomes System: UCB Measures, Percent IMPROVEMENT January 2004 compared to October 2007 Note: (+) indicates a measure where a % increase equals improvement. (-) indicates a measure where a % decrease equals improvement. indicates a measure where performance declined.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley January 2004-October 2007 California CWS Outcomes System: Federal Measures, Percent IMPROVEMENT Note: (+) indicates a measure where a % increase equals improvement. (-) indicates a measure where a % decrease equals improvement. indicates a measure where performance declined.

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2007 California CWS Outcomes System: Performance Relative to Federal Standard/Goal Federal Standard/Goal 100%

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2002 to 2007 California: C3.1: Exits to Permanency (24m In Care), by Exit Type % Reunification % Guardianship % Adoption Total # in Care 24m+ % Exits to Permanency

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2002 to 2007 California: C3.3: In Care 3 Years Or Longer (Emancipated Or Age 18) # in Emancipating or Age 18 National Goal % In Care 3+ Years

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2002 to 2007 California: C4.1,2,3: Placement Stability At Least 24 Months In Care 12 to 24 Months In Care 8 Days to 12 Months in Care

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2002 to 2007 California: C4.1,2,3: Placement Stability Count

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 1998 to 2007 California: First Entries by Race/Ethnicity (children in care for 8 or more days) Black White Native American Hispanic TOTAL Asian/PI

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 1998 to 2007 California: Foster Care Caseload by Race/Ethnicity Asian/PI Black White Hispanic TOTAL Native American

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2000 First Entries California: Percent Exited to Permanency 72 Months From Entry 88% 79%

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2000 First Entries California: Percent Exited to Permanency 72 Months From Entry by Relative vs. Non-Relative Placement =94% =84% =75%

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2006 California: Referrals per 1,000 by Age and Ethnicity *Series Total

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2006 California: Substantiated Referrals per 1,000 by Age and Ethnicity *Series Total

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2006 California: Entries to Foster Care per 1,000 by Age and Ethnicity *Series Total

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley 2006 California: Children in Foster Care per 1,000 by Age and Ethnicity *Series Total

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley Public Data: Putting it All Out There PROS: –Greater performance accountability –Community awareness and involvement, encourages public-private partnerships –Ability to track improvement over time, identify areas where programmatic adjustments are needed - County/County and County/State collaboration CONS: –Potential for misuse, misinterpretation, and misrepresentation –Available to those with agendas or looking to create a sensational headline –Misunderstood data can lead to the wrong policy decisions –“Torture numbers, and they’ll confess to anything” Gregg Easterbrook

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley DATA ABUSE will not help end CHILD ABUSE Beware:  County/state rankings on individual measures Composite scores that mask issues Small populations Inappropriate views Logical “flipping” Consider: Performance over time Age, gender and race/ethnicity Interaction among outcomes (counterbalance) Local practice and policy changes needed to impact outcomes

CENTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley CSSR.BERKELEY.EDU/UCB_CHILDWELFARE Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Cuccaro-Alamin, S., Shaw, T., Dawson, W., Piccus, W., Magruder, J., Exel, M., Conley, A., Smith, J., Dunn, A., Frerer, K., & Putnam Hornstein, E., (2007). Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved [month day, year], from University of California at Berkeley Center for Social Services Research website. URL: Barbara Needell (pcs)