Click here to load reader
Upload
oregonfoster
View
1.985
Download
6
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
An Examination of Disproportionality andDisparity in Oregon Child Welfare
Citation preview
5/29/09 1
Decision Point Analysis
An Examination of Disproportionality and
Disparity in Oregon Child Welfare
5/29/09 2
A Study with 3 Components
n Conducted by: The Center for Improvement of Child and Family Services within the School of Social Work at Portland State University
n Conducted for: The Oregon Department of Human Services and the Oregon Commission on Children and Families and the Governor’s Task Force on Disproportionality in Child Welfare
n Sponsored by: Casey Family Programs
Center for the Improvement of Child and Family Services 440 University Building
520 SW Harrison, Suite 440 Portland, Oregon 97201
5/29/09 3
3 Study Components
n Analysis of Administrative Data
n Annotated Bibliography
n Focus Group Analysis
5/29/09 4
Areas the Administrative Data Component will address
n The existence of disproportionality & disparity
n The extent of disproportionality & disparity
n The specific groups affected
n The specific decision points
5/29/09 5
Decision Point Analysis Work Group n Group of Oregon DHS child welfare staff:
n Met 3 times
n Provided: advice &
n A process for making decisions
n 3 Major Decisions: n What decision points/other areas to include
n What time frame for the data
n How to define ‘foster care’
5/29/09 6
Decision Point Analysis Work Group Members: n Stacey Ayers n Cheryl Baldomarolucas n Anna Cox n Maria Duryea n Beth Englander n Kevin George n Kory Murphy n Catherine Stelzer n Shirley Vollmuller
5/29/09 7
Disproportionality and Disparity Definitions
n Disproportionality: when a group makes up a proportion of those experiencing some event that is higher or lower than that group’s proportion of the population
n Disparity: a comparison of one group (e.g, regarding disproportionality in services, outcomes) to another group
5/29/09 8
Disproportionality: an Example Oregon child protective services
5/29/09 9
Disproportionality Index: an Example Oregon & Multnomah County foster care
n Children in care 2 – 4 years: n White NH 0.791 0.565
n Asian NH 0.227 0.531
n Hispanic 0.355 0.327
n Black NH 2.125 2.436
n Native American NH 10.5 22.75
(in care on 12/31/07) (N=1,451) (N=385) Oregon Mult. Co.
5/29/09 10
Disproportionality & Disparity Index: an Example: in foster care 2-4 years
n Disproportionality Index: n White 58.7% in care / 74.2% in pop. = 0.791
n Black 6.8% in care / 3.2% in pop. = 2.125
n Disparity Index: n 2.125/0.791 = 2.686
5/29/09 11
Decision Points Selected
n Reporting: All Child Protective Services/
Child Abuse & Neglect reports in calendar year 2008
5/29/09 12
Decision Points Selected (cont.)
n Screening: Reports assigned for full field assessment (referrals/‘completed assessments’) and those reports not assigned for full field assessment (‘closed at screening’)
5/29/09 13
Decision Points Selected (cont.)
n Disposition: referrals based on their disposition: n Referrals assessed as ‘founded’ n Referrals assessed as ‘unable to determine’
n Referrals assessed as ‘unable to determine’ with the reason of, ‘unable to locate’*
n Referrals assessed as ‘unfounded’ n Referrals assessed as ‘no CPS assessment
required’
5/29/09 14
Decision Points Selected (cont.)
n Removal – non-removal: ‘Founded’ referrals with a ‘removal/hold’ designation and those ‘Founded’ referrals without a ‘removal/hold’ designation
5/29/09 15
Decision Points Selected (cont.)
n Children in foster care (a 6-month cohort): All children in foster care; by type of care groups; by length of stay in care groups
5/29/09 16
Decision Points Selected (cont.)
n Permanency: Children by type of primary permanency plan and children exiting foster care to permanency by type of exit
Decision Points Selected
n Reporting
n Screening
n Disposition
n Removal/Hold
n Foster Care
n Primary Permanency Plan
n Exit from Foster Care
5/29/09 18
Thanks!