2. Risks of Reentry into the Foster Care System for Children who Reunified Terry V. Shaw, MSW University of California, Berkeley School of Social Welfare This research is funded by the California Department of Social Services and the Stuart Foundation Presented at the National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data and Technology 8 th National Child Welfare Data Conference

3. Outline 1.Brief overview of federal outcome measures related to reentries. 2.Overview of prior research on foster care reentries. 3.Discussion of the population and methods used for this project. 4.Examination of the results. 5.Conclusions 6.Implications

4. Outcomes, outcomes, everywhere (or why bother looking at reentry?) There have been multiple instances of federal legislation calling for the development of Child Welfare outcome measures. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)

5. ASFA (the Adoption and Safe Families Act) mandated that outcome reports be given to Congress. Reduce recurrence of child abuse and/or neglect, Reduce the incidence of child abuse and/or neglect in foster care, Increase permanency for children in foster care, Reduce time in foster care to reunification without increasing re-entry, Reduce time in foster care to adoption, Increase placement stability, and Reduce placements of young children in group homes or institutions. Outcomes, outcomes … continued

6. Statewide Data Indicators in Child and Family Services Reviews (a subset of the Annual Outcomes) We want to ensure that children are in safe and stable homes. Reentering care is a sign that the reunification was not optimal. Outcomes, outcomes … continued

7. Child and Family Services Outcomes Safety Child and family well-being Permanency –Children have permanency and stability in their living situations –The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children.

8. Foster Care Reentries Of all the children who entered care during the year under review, what percent re-entered foster care within 12 months of a prior foster care episode? National Standard 8.6% or less:

9. Foster Care Reentries Does not follow children through care from their initial entry to the reunification and then to reentry. The federal measure does not look at reentries after 12 months even though Reentry continues to occur well after 12 months. Longitudinal alternative: For all children who enter care and are reunified, what % reenter within 3 mo, 12 mo, 24 mo after reunification?

10. Festinger, T. (1994). Returning to Care: Discharge and Reentry into Foster Care. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America. Previous Research on Reentry to Care Authors and Articles Courtney, Mark E. (1994). "Factors Associated with the Reunification of Foster Children with Their Families." Social Service Review 68 (1): 81-108 Wulczyn, Fred (1991). "Caseload Dynamics and Foster Care Reentry." Social Service Review 65: 133-156. Frame, L., Berrick, J.D., Brodowski, M.L. (2000) “Understanding reentry to foster care for reunified infants.” Child Welfare, 79 (4), pp. 339-369. Frame, L., (2002) “Maltreatment reports and placement outcomes for infants and toddlers in out-of-home care.” Infant Mental Health Journal, 23 (5), pp. 517-540. Wells, Kathleen and Shenyang Guo (1999) “Reunification and Reentry of Foster Children.” Children and Youth Services Review, 21 (4): 273-294

11. Research on Reentry to Care Length of Time in Care prior to Reunification. Type of placement a child experiences in foster care. Number of placements while in foster care. Race/Ethnicity of the Child. Age of child at entry into foster care.

12. Research on Reentry (continued…) Reason for removal from home or entry into the foster care system. Caregiver Drug/Alcohol use. Poverty status (children receiving AFDC). Marital status (single or multi-parent homes). Geographic location (urban/rural). Child health factors.

13. Study Population First Entries to Child Welfare Supervised Foster Care in California (1998-2001). Initial stays greater than 5 days. Children reunifying within 12 months of initial entry into foster care. Missing placement types excluded. Question: What are the differences between the children who reenter care within one year after reunification and those who do not?

14. Variables Examined Child’s Race/Ethnicity Child’s Gender First Entry Year Reason for removal from home. Time in Care prior to reunification. Predominant Placement Type Placement Moves

15. Variables Examined (continued…) Title 4e Eligible –Whether the child was found eligible for AFDC or not. Did the parent(s) receive drug or alcohol services? –Inpatient or Outpatient Substance Abuse Services. –FP – Drug Treatment –Substance Abuse Services and Testing –12-Step Program Family structure child was removed from.

16. Variables Examined (continued…) Primary language spoken at home. Number of placement moves while in foster care. Entry Rates at the census tract level. Population characteristic (census tract). –Percent Female Headed Households –Percent Below Poverty. –Percent Unemployed.

19. Note: California child population is 7% Black, 35% White, 44% Hispanic 10% Asian/Other, 0.5% Native American, 3.5% two or more.

21. Gender characteristics Reunification Reentries 49%51% 48% 52%

23. Overall Population of children who reunified by First Entry Year

27. Results Sibling correction was used allowing for the inclusion of all siblings in a sibling group. Adjustments in standard errors made by using GEE (Generalized Estimating Equations) as part of a logistic regression analysis. Adjusts the standard errors to account for potential correlation due to clustered data – in this case due to sibling groups.

28. Limitations The data for this study is based on an administrative data system. Measures of drug/alcohol services only examine recommended services, not whether the services were used.

29. Models Used Bivariate analysis Interim model –Does not account for community indicators, poverty indicators, or services Full model –Contains all of the variables discussed earlier

30. White Black Hispanic Asian Native American Other Bivariate 1.00 1.33 0.84 0.65 ns 0.31 Interim Model 1.00 1.13 0.86 0.68 ns 0.29 Full Model 1.00 ns 0.35 Odds of Reentry - Ethnicity

31. Odds of Reentry – Reason for Removal Neglect Physical Abuse Sexual Abuse Other Abuse Bivariate 1.00 0.74 0.72 ns Interim Model 1.00 0.77 0.74 ns Full Model 1.00 ns

32. Odds of Reentry – Length of time in Care 0-3 Months 3-6 Months 6-9 Months 9-12 Months Bivariate 1.00 ns 0.62 0.63 Interim Model 1.00 0.85 0.63 0.65 Full Model 1.00 0.73 0.51 0.52

33. Odds of Reentry – Age at Entry Age 0 Age 1-5 Age 6-10 Age 11-18 Bivariate 1.00 0.88 0.84 0.88 Interim Model 1.00 0.89 0.87 ns Full Model 1.00 0.90 0.88 ns

34. Odds of Reentry – Predominant Placement Kinship Care Foster Care FFA Court Spec. Group Shelter Guardian Bivariate 1.00 1.48 1.35 ns 1.35 1.21 ns Interim Model 1.00 1.32 1.29 ns 1.23 ns Full Model 1.00 1.34 1.25 ns 1.38 1.44 ns

35. Odds of Reentry – Other Factors Title 4e Eligible Drug/Alcohol Services Single Parent Primary Language Placement Moves Bivariate 2.01 2.32 1.19 0.56 ns Full Model 2.14 2.33 1.16 0.65 ns

36. Odds of Reentry – Other Factors, pt 2 Percent Female Headed Household Percent Below Poverty Entry Rate Percent Unemployed Bivariate 1.01 ns 1.10 ns Community Model 1.01 0.99 1.08 ns

37. Conclusions When variables measuring poverty, drug and alcohol services, and marital status are added into the model – ethnicity is not a significant predictor of reentry. Gender is not a significant predictor of reentry. A longer stay in care initially is protective. (The shorter the initial stay in care the higher the likelihood of reentry).

38. Conclusions (continued…) The older a child is at first entry the less likely they are to reenter compared to infants. Compared to kinship care, different predominant placement types increase a child’s odds of reentry. Children who are 4e eligible are over 2X more likely to reenter care than non-4e eligible children.

39. Conclusions (continued…) Children whose parent(s) are assigned drug/alcohol services are over 2X more likely to reenter care than other children. Coming from a primarily non-English speaking home is protective. Children from primarily non-English speaking homes are 2/3 as likely to reenter care. For every 1% increase in the pct of female headed households in the census tract there is 1.01X the odds of reentering care.

40. Conclusions (continued…) For every 10 per 1,000 increase in the entry rate at the Census Tract level there is 1.08X increase in the odds of reentering foster care. Gender, Entry Year, Number of placement moves, Percent Below the Poverty Line and Percent Unemployed were not significant predictors of reentry.

41. Implications For children in care for only a short period of time - post-reunification services should be available for at least 12 months. Workers need to be aware of how severe of an effect poverty has on children's risk of entry/reentry. Formalized coordination with drug/alcohol services, and mental health services are needed.

42. The End! Terry V. Shaw – tvshaw@berkeley.edutvshaw@berkeley.edu (510) 643 - 2585 Center for Social Services Research Web Page http://cssr.berkeley.edu/CWSCMSReports