Brad Richardson, Ph.D. DMC Resource Center The Univ. of Iowa School of Social Work

1. Brad Richardson, Ph.D. DMC Resource Center The Univ. of Iowa School of Social Work Nat’l Resource Center for Family Centered Practice www.uiowa.edu/~nrcfcp

2. Sioux City DMC August 6th, 2012University of Iowa School of Social WorkUniversity of Iowa Research ParkW206 Oakdale HallIowa City, IA 52242-5000 (P) 319-335-4965 (Fax) 319-335-4964www.nrcinhome.socialwork.uiowa.edu

3. DMC data focusing on decision points Adaptation of model for DMR, School Suspensions (Crossover) Recent literature on poverty and disproportionality Sustainability 1-3

4. Defining Terms:Disproportionate Minority Contact Disproportionate Minority Contact R = Representation 1-8

5. Relative Rate Index Formula Relative Rate Index (RRI)= minority rate / white rate 1-10

7. Calculate Rates In 2003, 15,902 out of a total of 194,600 white non-Hispanics were in poverty. What was the poverty rate per 1,000 for white non-Hispanics? 1-11

8. Calculate Rates (cont’d) What was the poverty rate per 1,000 for white non-Hispanics? 15,902/194,600 x 1,000 = 0.0817 x 1,000 = 82 per 1,000 1-12

9. Calculate Rates (cont’d) In the same year, 9,108 black/African-Americans out of a total of 37,500 blacks/African-Americans were in poverty. What was the poverty rate per 1,000 for blacks/African-Americans? 1-13

10. Calculate Rates (cont’d) What was the poverty rate per 1,000 for blacks/African-Americans? 9,108/37,500 x 1,000 = 0.2429 x 1,000 = 243 per 1,000 1-14

11. Calculate Relative Rate Index How did the black/African-American poverty rate (243 per 1,000) compare with (relative to) that (82 per 1,000) of white non-Hispanics (i.e., what was the poverty relative rate index in 2003 when comparing blacks/African-Americans with white non-Hispanics)? 1-15

12. Calculate Relative Rate Index (cont’d) RRI = 243/82 = 2.96 The poverty rate of blacks/African Americans was nearly 3 times as high as that of non-Hispanic whites in 2003— [not black/African Americans are 3 times as likely to be poor]. 1-16

18. Race Equity ScorecardWoodbury County 2005-2010

19. Race Equity Scorecard:Disproportionality re: Out of Home CareWoodbury County, IA 2005-2010

20. Race Equity Scorecard:Disproportionality - Out of Home CareWoodbury County, IA 2005-2010

21. Why are these numbers going up again? . . . What do you think?

22. Differential Offending v. Institutional Racism Using Child Welfare Research (Crossover) 3-3

23. Recent “publications” have been interpreted as concluding: • African American maltreatment of children is 1.73 that of white • Poverty is the underlying causal factor References: • Bartholet, Wulczyn, Barth, Lederman, 2011 -Chapin Hall Issue Brief; • Drake, Jonson-Reid, 2011 – Children and Youth Services Review • Drake, Jolley, Lanier, Fluke, Barth, Jonsen-Reid, 2011 – Pediatrics • Bartholet, 2009, THE RACIAL DISPROPORTIONALITY MOVEMENT IN CHILD WELFARE: FALSE FACTS AND DANGEROUS DIRECTIONS

24. Disproportionality Ratios

25. African American maltreatment of children is 1.73 that of white • Poverty is the underlying causal factor

26. Issues with Current Publications • Rates v. individual level data • Correlation is not causation • “Hispanic paradox” seems to refute conclusions but is interpreted as “support” • Poverty not “actionable” • Suggest that “system helps” but higher entry and exits among AfrAm leave doubt • Only look at one decision point (front end)

27. Institutional Racism v. Differential Offending(4.9:1 RRI at placement 2009)

28. Institutional Racism v. Differential Offending(7.9:1 RRI at placement 2006)

29. Poverty Behavior DHS Involvement Systemic

34. Amadou Diallo

36. Zajac Study of Staff Perceptions of What Determines the Success of Client Families • Structural Factors • Individual Characteristics • Culture and Class

37. Structural Factors • Staff recognize that structural challenges contribute to client families’ lack of success. • Structural challenges are compounded by client families being geographically and socially isolated and by their lack of supports and access to resources.

38. Individual Characteristics • Staff felt motivation and willingness are key to explaining why some client families are more successful than others. • More successful client families are motivated to change and willing to seek and accept help. • Less successful client families are responsible for their problems because they are unwilling or unable to change.

39. Culture • Staff have a vague and general sense of culture • Because culture is unexamined, undefined, staff seem, at times, to use it as a code for sensitive topics such as race and class • Even in the absence of apparent racial differences, staff conflate race and culture • Difficulty articulating what “else” culture is, if not race • “Average White culture”

40. Culture and Class • Staff sometimes appear to equate class with culture in much the same way they equate race with culture • Not clear how staff use class to explain their clients’ relative levels of success • Acknowledge it as a structural factor (i.e., poverty) that makes it difficult for client families to succeed • BUT also characterize the least successful clients (who happen to be in the lower classes) as unmotivated and/or unable to change

41. Combination of these values creates a context in which staff believe:

42. School Incidents/Suspensions

43. Power Struggles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJEDHP9_aD0

44. THANK YOU! • Contact information brad-richardson@uiowa.edu 319-335-4924 515-771-3589