1. Increasing Permanency Options in Child Welfare: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) Program Daniel Webster Joseph Magruder University of California, Berkeley Aron Shlonsky Bernard Wong Praveen Sawa Jonathon Schmidt University of Toronto The 11 th National Child Welfare Data and Technology Conference Washington, DC July 2008 The Performance Indicators Project is funded by the California Department of Social Services and the Stuart Foundation

2. Introduction 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

3. 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.

4. 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 & clothing allowances ).

5. Methods California Children’s Services Archive Data System Prospectively followed children who entered care after implementation of KinGAP. Preliminary analysis employed 2-stage probit model to examine potential selection bias --First stage modeled likelihood of exit to KinGAP --Second stage accounted for estimates from first stage, and modeled the likelihood of recurrence of maltreatment & reentry to care within 24 months. Results indicated that stage one had no significant influence on stage 2 (Prob > chi2 = 0.759). Further analysis is ongoing to examine other instrumental variables for predicting the likelihood of exit to KinGAP

6. Methods (continued) Due to results found in preliminary analysis, and in order to use censored information, ran event history analysis to model recurrence and reentry. Children entering foster care from Jan. 1, 2000 – Dec. 31, 2005 were chosen to allow at least 1 year to see who became eligible for KinGAP (N=51,412)—i.e., had a kin placement of 12 months or more—and at least 1 year of follow up for those who did exit to KinGAP (N=6,704). For multivariate models, children exiting to KinGap were followed from discharge to a subsequent substantiated referral, or reentry to care (or study end date—January 1, 2008).

7. KinGAP Entries Of children entering care 2000-2005 who became eligible for KinGAP, 6,704 (13% of those eligible) left foster care for KinGAP by study date Median Age: 8 years Median Time In Care: 2 years Gender: 51% Female

8. KinGAP Entries continued Ethnicity#% Black205230.6 White126618.9 Hispanic318047.4 Asian/Other1542.3 Native American490.7 Missing30.04

9. KinGAP Entries continued

10. Net Permanency Gain Post KinGAP

11. Cumulative % of Children with Substantiated Referrals After Entering KinGAP (n=6,704) ≤ 1 yr ≤2 yrs ≤4 yrs ≤3 yrs Based on data through December 31, 2007. ≤6 yrs ≤5 yrs

12. Use of KinGAP appears to be decreasing, but there has been a “net permanency gain” since its inception Children exiting to KinGAP are relatively unlikely to experience a subsequent substantiated referral (about 3% within 1 year, 13% within 5 years). For those children who exited to KinGAP: Six to ten, and eleven to sixteen year olds were more likely than children less than six to experience recurrence. Females were more likely than males to experience recurrence. Children who entered care in 2002 and 2005 were less likely to experience recurrence than those entering in 2000. Children in a second or greater spell when they entered KinGAP were more likely to experience recurrence. Results

13. Cumulative % of Children Re-Entering Foster Care from KinGAP (n=6,704) ≤ 1 yr ≤2 yrs ≤3 yrs ≤ 4 yrs Based on data through December 31, 2007. ≤5 yrs ≤6 yrs

14. Children exiting to KinGAP are relatively unlikely to reenter foster care (about 1% within 1 year, 6% within 5 years). Reentry for positive reasons (e.g., to reunify, be adopted by relative) were excluded. For those children who exited to KinGAP: Eleven to sixteen year olds were more likely than children less than six to reenter. Children entering care in 2002 were less likely to reenter care than those in 2000. Children who had 3 or more moves prior to discharge to KinGAP were more likely to reenter care. Children from Los Angeles were more likely than those from other counties to experience reentry. Results

15. Discussion Use of KinGAP appears to be decreasing, but there has been a “net permanency gain” since its inception KinGAP children experience low rates of recurrence of maltreatment and reentry to foster care. KinGAP is an innovative program that provides public child welfare with an additional means to achieve permanency. Federal legislation permitting the use of IV-E funding for KinGAP could encourage more use of this permanency option. Future research will seek to make a comparative analysis of disruption rates between KinGAP, reunification, and adoption.