1. PATERNITY ESTABLISHMENT AMONG CHILDREN REPORTED TO CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES Joseph Magruder, PhD Emily Putnam-Hornstein, PhD Wendy Wiegmann, MSW Barbara Needell, PhD January 13, 2012 Society for Social Work Research Washington, DC

2.  Thank you to our colleagues at the Center for Social Services Research and the California Department of Social Services  Funding for this and other research arising from the California Performance Indicators Project generously provided by the California Department of Social Services, the Stuart Foundation, & Casey Family Programs ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

3. Possible automated case management system indicators of paternal involvement:  Paternal identity  Contacts  Known address  Case plan participation INDICATORS OF PATERNAL INVOLVEMENT

4.  Vital Statistics:  Birth Records for 4,317,321 children born in California between 1999 and 2006  Child Welfare Services Case Management System:  Child Welfare Services records for 237,211 California infants born between 1999 and 2006 and referred to child welfare as infants  Child Welfare Services records for 126,981 children born between 2007 and 2010 and referred to child welfare as infants (364,192 Child Welfare referrals in all)  Match  Birth certificate match for 211,665 (89%) of the 237,211 Child Welfare Services children born between 1999 and 2006 DATA SOURCES

5.  The Child Welfare Data for this presentation are based on extracts from California’s Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS)  Extracts are configured into a longitudinal database as part of a collaboration between the California Department of Social Services and the Center for Social Services Research (CSSR) at UC Berkeley DATA SOURCES

6. INDICATOR: PATERNAL IDENTITY– BIRTH CERTIFICATE

7. INDICATOR: PATERNAL IDENTITY - CWS RECORD

8. INDICATOR: PARENTAL CONTACTS

9. INDICATOR: PATERNAL VS. MATERNAL CONTACTS

10.  Reported knowledge of parental addresses was constant for the 1999 to 2010 cohorts.  As the child moves into the system, the proportion of children whose parents’ addresses are known increases as does the ratio of known fathers’ addresses to known mothers’ addresses.  The exception is adoption. INDICATOR: KNOWN ADDRESS MothersFathersRatio % Referral Only91.743.20.47 Substantiated Referral, no case or removal97.051.20.53 Case Opened, no Removal98.552.70.54 Removal, no Adoption99.057.00.58 Adoption95.950.10.52 All Referrals94.848.40.51

11.  The involvement of the father in the case planning process is a potential indicator, but case plan functionality is a recent addition to CWS/CMS.  For cohorts between 2005 and 2010 for children with an open case:  33% of mothers had some reported case plan involvement  19% of fathers had some reported case plan involvement  Ratio of paternal to maternal involvement was.58, with no trend over time  The low rates even for mothers suggest that the system’s case planning functionality is not yet being fully utilized. INDICATOR: CASE PLAN PARTICIPATION

12.  Paternal identity: Caseworkers, and mothers, are identifying fathers, especially when stakes are high – especially when compared with birth records  Contacts: Increased success contacting fathers and/or in documenting those contacts  Known address: Locating fathers continues to be elusive  Case plan participation: Engaging fathers continues to be difficult CONCLUSIONS

13. INDICATOR: FATHER KNOWN - CWS RECORD

14. QUESTIONS? joemagruder@berkeley.edu ehornste@usc.edu bneedell@berkeley.edu