1 / 30

Talking About PERMANENCY in Our Community

Talking About PERMANENCY in Our Community. What Does the DATA Tell Us? Clark, Coles, Cumberland, Douglas, Edgar, Moultrie & Shelby Counties. How do Coles County Children Enter the Child Welfare System?. Indicated reports FY 2010 Source Number Percent of total Law enforcement 71 36%

lucine
Download Presentation

Talking About PERMANENCY in Our Community

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Talking About PERMANENCY in Our Community What Does the DATA Tell Us? Clark, Coles, Cumberland, Douglas, Edgar, Moultrie & Shelby Counties

  2. How do Coles County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Indicated reports FY 2010 Source Number Percent of total Law enforcement 71 36% School personnel 39 20% Relative/neighbor 21 11% Social services 20 10% Medical 19 10% “Other” 15 8% DCFS personnel 11 6% Child care centers 0 0% Coroner/Medical Exam0 0% 196 100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  3. How do Children in our 7 Counties Enter the Child Welfare System? Indicated reports FY 2010 Source Number Percent of total Law enforcement 162 36% School personnel 74 16% Medical 57 13% Relative/neighbor 51 11% Social services 50 11% “Other” 38 8% DCFS personnel 19 4% Child care centers 0 0% Coroner/Medical Exam 0 0% 451 100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  4. How do Children Enter the Child Welfare System? As shown above, law enforcement was the largest source of indicated reports in Coles County and in the 7 counties. Further, law enforcement reports overall were more likely to be indicated than reports from other major sources. - 66% of reports (162 of 245) from law enforcement personnel were indicated in FY2010 in the 7 counties. In Coles, 69% of law enforcement reports were indicated. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  5. What Types of Harm did Coles County Children Experience in FY10? Type N indicated % of total ABUSE Substantial risk of harm 36 13% Physical abuse 29 11% Sexual abuse 27 10% Emotional abuse 4 1% NEGLECT Blatant disregard 87 33% Lack of supervision 47 18% Environmental 35 13% Lack of health 2 1% 267 100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  6. What Types of Harm did Children in our 7 Counties Experience ? Type N indicated % of total ABUSE Substantial risk of harm 76 13% Sexual abuse 52 9% Physical abuse 48 8% Emotional abuse 8 1% NEGLECT Blatant disregard 211 35% Lack of supervision 99 16% Environmental 97 16% Lack of health 11 2% 602 100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  7. What Types of Harm in our 7 Counties…? By far the most common harm to children is neglect/ blatant disregard for child’s welfare, representing more than a third of all indicated reports. The second most common is neglect/lack of supervision accounting for 16% of indicated cases, followed closely by environmental neglect (16%). Sexual abuse per se accounts for 9% of indicated cases However, when this is combined with substantial risk of sexual injury then 14% of cases relate to sexual harm to children. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  8. Who Entered Care in FY10? 21 children and youth entered foster care in Coles County and 41 children entered care in all 7 counties combined. Coles: Gender: female – 43% male – 57% 7 Counties: female – 34% male – 66% Race: Coles 7 Counties African American 5% (1 child) 2% (1 child) White 95% 76% Hispanic 0% 0% Other/Missing 0% 22% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  9. Who is in Care in Our Counties? At the close of FY10, 52 children were in out-of-home care in Coles County and 104 children in the 7 counties combined. This was decrease from FY09 when 61 (Coles) and 117 (7 Counties) children were in care. RACE/ETHNICITY Coles 7 Counties African American 15% 10% White 85% 89% Hispanic* 0% 1% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 & 2009. *There are on-going concerns about how Latino or Hispanic ethnicity is determined for DCFS clients. This percent is based on classification in QA data. Clark...Shelby Counties

  10. Who is in Care in our Counties? GENDER Coles: 43% female, 57% male 7 Counties: 34% female, 66% male AGE Coles 7 Counties 2 & under 35% 27% 3-5 25% 22% 6-9 17% 18% 10-13 13% 16% 14-17 6% 12% 18+ 4% 5% Source: DCFS QA 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  11. What are the Permanency Goals for Youth in Care?* COLES 7 COUNTIES Reunification 50% 55% Adoption 41% 32% Independence 9% 14% Guardianship 0% 0% 100% 100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 *This table excludes children for whom data were missing or coded as “other” Clark...Shelby Counties

  12. Where are Children Placed?* COLES 7 COUNTIES trad. foster care 39% 35% with kin 37% 39% specialized care 20% 19% institution/group 4% 7% 100% 100% * QA data combines foster and relative care, thus this information is from CFRC for FY09. Clark...Shelby Counties

  13. How was Permanency Achieved For Children in FY10? Coles: 27 children achieved permanency in FY10 7 Counties: 49 children achieved permanency Coles 7 Counties N %N % Adoption 10 37% 15 31% Reunification 11 41% 25 51% Subsidized Guard’ship 6 22% 9 18% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  14. How have 12 Month Permanency Rates Changed over Time? Source: CFRC 2009 Clark...Shelby Counties

  15. How have 24 Month Permanency Rates Changed Over Time? Source: CFRC 2009 Clark...Shelby Counties

  16. What are the Permanency Trends in our Counties? 12 month permanency rates over the 5 years presented ranged from a low of 18% to a high of 36% The rate was 27% for the most year available. 24 month permanency rates ranges from a low of 37% to a high of 59%. The rate was 54% for the most recent year available. Source: CFRC 2009. [Such data are not yet available from QA] Clark...Shelby Counties

  17. Disproportionality and Disparity in our Counties Disproportionality is when the percentage of a group of children in a population is different from the percentage of the same group in the child welfare system. For example, if 25% of the children in a county were African American, then 25% of those in foster care should be African American, all things being equal. That would be proportional. If these percents differ there is disproportionality. Disparity is unequal treatment or outcomes when comparing children of color to non-minority children. For example, if Hispanic children are less likely to achieve permanency than white children then there are disparate outcomes by race/ethnicity. Clark...Shelby Counties

  18. Is There Disproportionality in Our Counties*? YES African American children continue to be overrepresented among children in care in our Counties. Coles: 2% of the child population is African American, compared to 15% of those in care. 95% of the child population is White, compared to 85% of those in care. 3% of the child population is Hispanic, compared to 0% of those in care 7 Counties: 1% of the child population is African American, compared to 10% of those in care. 96% of the child population is White, compared to 89% in care 4% of the child population is Hispanic, compared to 1% in care. * Data from here forward are presented for the 7 counties due to the small number of African American children in care.. Source: CFRC 09 (for population data) QA FY10 (for report data) Clark...Shelby Counties

  19. Disproportionality Clark...Shelby Counties

  20. Disproportionality Over Time Clark...Shelby Counties

  21. Are There Differences in Permanency Goals by Race?* YES African American White . Reunification 3 33% 44 56% Adoption 6 67% 22 28% Guardianship 0 0% 0 0% Independence 0 0% 12 15% 9 100% 78 100% • HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. *This table excludes children for whom permanency goals were missing or coded as “other”. • Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  22. Is There Disparity in Permanency Achievement? YES In FY10, 103 children achieved permanency, 10 African American and 93 white children. African American children and White children who were in care in FY10 left care at slightly different rates, with African American children slightly more likely to leave care than White children (African American 50% & White children 47%) African American youth were somewhat more likely than White youth to exit via reunification (60% vs 50%) White youth were more likely than African American youth to exit via adoption (34% vs 0%) HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  23. Is There Disparity in Permanency Achievement Over Time? The numbers of African American children in care are too small to meaningfully track 12 and 24 month permanency. Clark...Shelby Counties

  24. What is the “Bottom Line” on Disproportionality? In FY10, were African American children more likely to be reported as neglected / abused in our Counties? YES Although African American children are 1% of the population, they comprise 4% of the reported cases. White children comprise 96% of the child population but 95% of those reported. Hispanic children represent 4% of the population but less than 1% of those reported. Source: CFRC 09 (for population data) QA FY10 (for report data) Clark...Shelby Counties

  25. What is the “Bottom Line” on Disproportionality? Once reported, are African American children more likely to be indicated than White children? YES In FY10 of all reports for African American children, 37% were indicated Of all reports for White children, 28% were indicated. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  26. What is the “Bottom Line” on Disparity? Once indicated did African American and White children enter care at similar rates in FY10? Only 1 African American child entered care in FY10 so no meaningful comparison can be made. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  27. Disparity Are African American children less likely to have reunification as a goal than White children? YES In FY10, 33% of African American children had a goal of reunification compared to 56% of White children. Were African American children less likely to exit care than White children? NO In FY10 50% of African American children in care achieved permanency compared to 47% of White children. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THESE DIFFERENCES MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  28. Disparity Did African American children achieve permanency differently from White children in FY10? YES In FY10, African American children were slightly more likely than White children to achieve permanency through reunification (60% & 50%). African American children were much less likely to exit care through adoption (0% to 34%) HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Clark...Shelby Counties

  29. Disproportionality and Disparity: The Summary In FY10 in the 7 counties: African American children were more likely to be reported than White children When reported, African American children are more likely to be indicated than White children. However, in FY 10 African American children were slightly morelikely to achieve permanency than White children. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THESE DIFFERENCES MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Clark...Shelby Counties

  30. On-goingQuestions for our Area Clark...Shelby Counties

More Related