Taking action on racial disproportionality in the child welfare system

Mirroring national trends, children of color in Washington state's King County are overrepresented at every point in the child welfare system and fare worse by most measures than are Caucasian children. The King County Coalition on Racial Disproportionality was formed to reduce and ultimately eliminate racial disproportionality in the county's child welfare system. The research-based strategies implemented to address the issue focused on children in care longer than two years. They included participation in the Breakthrough Series Collaborative on Racial Disproportionality, implementation of benchmark hearings, and development of Champions for Permanence. Now in the beginning stages, perhaps the most significant success is heightened awareness within the community of the disparate outcomes for children of color in the child welfare system.     

Emerging strategies for reducing racial disproportionality and disparate outcomes in child welfare: the results of a national breakthrough series collaborative

Racial disproportionality in child welfare has been discussed as a seemingly intractable challenge with complex contributing factors. Some argue that these dynamics are far too difficult to be significantly impacted by public child welfare systems alone. The Breakthrough Series Collaborative (BSC) methodology, incorporating an analysis of structural racism and potential system bias, was proffered as a tool for engaging public child welfare agencies in a rapid, action-oriented process for identifying innovative strategies and practices to reduce racial disproportionality and disparate outcomes. This article describes the Disproportionality BSC process, as well as the work of participating jurisdictions with respect to transforming organizational culture and testing/implementing child welfare practice improvements. A theory of change is presented and critical lessons learned are shared in the form of collaborative reflections.     

Family group decision making and disproportionality in foster care: a case study

Research on the disproportionate number of children of color in the child welfare system suggests that we should focus on key decision points such as investigations, substantiations, and placements to understand how experiences of children vary by race and ethnicity. This article describes one community's efforts to use Family Group Decision Making in placement decisions to reduce disproportionality in foster care by diverting children from regular foster care services and keeping them within their extended families.     

Individual and systemic/structural bias in child welfare decision making: Implications for children and families of color

The factors contributing to observed racial disproportionality and disparity in the child welfare system have been the subject of national discourse for decades. This qualitative study used focus groups to engage child welfare and collaborating system decision makers, community partners, and families in a subjective interpretive analysis of racial disproportionality and disparity that had been demonstrated by a previous quantitative analysis of Oregon's child welfare system. Thematic analysis yielded eleven themes from the participant focus groups, four of which clustered around individual and structural/systemic bias and are examined in this paper: visibility bias; cultural bias and insensitivity; personal influences on determination of minimally adequate care; and foster and adoptive parent recruitment and licensing practices. Participants offered recommendations to improve outcomes for children and families of color in light of these observations: increase awareness of bias, create checks and balances in decision-making, contract with and hire culturally and racially diverse professionals, and increase funding for training.     

Substantiating neglect of first nations and non-aboriginal children

First Nations (Native American) children are greatly overrepresented in the Canadian child welfare system, and disproportionality in the substantiation of maltreatment contributes to this overrepresentation. This study explores the factors driving disproportionality in the substantiation of maltreatment and, more specifically, neglect. Data from the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (2008) are used in multivariate analyses which examine the relationship between the substantiation of maltreatment/neglect and worker assessments of case, child, household, and caregiver characteristics. These case factors fully explain disproportionality in maltreatment substantiation for First Nations and non-Aboriginal children; the disproportionality reflects underlying differences in the case, child, household and caregiver characteristics identified in First Nations and non-Aboriginal investigations. However, case factors do not fully explain disproportionality in substantiation of neglect-only investigations. Further analysis indicates that the weight that workers assigned to caregiver substance abuse, housing problems, and presence of a lone caregiver when substantiating neglect also differed for First Nations and non-Aboriginal children. Discussion of these findings explores possible explanations for these differences, and links to broader discussions around definitions of neglect and the role of substantiation in child welfare decision making processes.     

A Three-Pronged Approach to Addressing Racial Disproportionality and Disparities in Child Welfare: The Santa Clara County Example of Leadership, Collaboration and Data-Driven Decisions

Disproportionality and disparities in the treatment of children of color has been a growing concern in the child welfare system. System stakeholders have begun to recognize the problem through data, which help identify discrepancies within their jurisdictions. Nationally, the primary concern is the overrepresentation of African American children within the child welfare system, where African Americans represent proportions of the foster population at a level more than twice as high as they are represented in the community at large. In some jurisdictions, however, this is only one piece of the disproportionality concern. San Jose, for example, has both an overrepresentation of African American and an overrepresentation of Hispanic children in the child welfare system. Because San Jose’s child welfare population is unique, they have had to take a unique approach to addressing these concerns. This article outlines strategies and tools used to begin reducing disproportionality within the child welfare and juvenile dependency court system, using San Jose’s experience as an example. Some of the key approaches to addressing disproportionality include ensuring a systems approach (creating a Cross Agency Systems Team that prioritizes services for parents and children in various systems, e.g., mental health, substance abuse, etc.); addressing disproportionality from multiple perspectives and examining the roles’ of caseworkers, supervisors, service providers, judges, and attorneys; gaining community and system stakeholder buy-in by maintaining momentum and providing opportunities for dialogue about the complex issues facing families of color; using a data-driven approach to inform ongoing initiatives and changes in policy and practice (e.g., closely examining policies and practices such as the frequency of recommendations to by-pass reunification services); and implementing changes in practice at multiple levels including child welfare and on the bench. The examination of San Jose’s approach reveals challenges, successes, and lessons learned.     

Children ever in care: an examination of cumulative disproportionality

Most studies of ethnic disproportionality in child welfare examine data in one of two ways: a point in time approach or an entry cohort approach. While each provides insight into disproportionality, neither gives a full picture of the differences among ethnic groups in the experience of the child welfare system over time. This study uses longitudinal administrative child welfare data to examine ethnic disproportionality in involvement with the child welfare system during the first seven years of life at three levels of contact: (1) initial referrals, (2) substantiated referrals, and (3) first entries. Findings suggest the experience of African American families, and probably Native American families, with the child welfare system is much different from other families.     

Disentangling substantiation: The influence of race, income, and risk on the substantiation decision in child welfare

Understanding the source of disparities found at decision-making points along the child welfare pathway is essential to understanding and addressing the overrepresentation of African American children. Although research has documented the existence of disparities, it has been less successful in identifying the explanatory factors behind them. Critiques of research examining these disparities have suggested that poverty is likely a stronger explanatory factor than race, yet analyses that include measures of poverty using data from child welfare systems have largely not been conducted. This study uses data from the Texas child welfare system to identify the factors contributing to disparities at the substantiation decision. Given the relationship between poverty and child maltreatment, the analyses control for the effect of family income, as well as other factors related to maltreatment, to better understand the effect of race on this decision-making point. Findings indicate that when family income is controlled, race is not a significant factor in the substantiation decision. However, when also controlling for caseworker perceptions of risk, race emerges as the stronger explanatory factor. This suggests not only an important relationship between race, income, and risk assessment, but also that disproportionality in the child welfare system is a complex phenomenon that cannot be explained by a single factor. These results further demonstrate that the effect of racial bias on decision-making remains an important consideration in understanding the overrepresentation of African American children.     

Deconstructing disproportionality: views from multiple community stakeholders

While the existence of racial disproportionality has been well documented, the causes of disproportionality are less clear. Studies identifying contributing factors have relied largely on analyses of state and national data sets, which may lack the robust data necessary to fully explain the factors related to this issue. Further, a limitation of existing research is the lack of data from the voice of those in communities affected by disproportionality. This study was designed to develop a deeper understanding of disproportionality from the views of multiple community stakeholders. Using a qualitative approach, data were collected to provide a greater depth of information that can be used alongside existing studies toward developing an enhanced understanding of disproportionality in child welfare.     

Strategies for improving child welfare services for families of color: First findings of a community-based initiative in Los Angeles

A disproportionate number of families served in child welfare are families of color. But relatively few strategies for helping families of color have been monitored for their impact. This article reports early findings from a Los Angeles County based public child welfare office that has continuously developed, tracked, and has now begun to assess strategies supporting preservation and reunification of families of color. Some promising trends revealed by a four year data period include the reduction of number of African-American children within the caseload, reductions in substantiated referrals and removals. The most recently developed strategy, which uses specialized four person case management teams, was evaluated through the use of a comparison group. Public agency data revealed that families served by the team, compared with families served through customary agency services, had improved outcomes, including a higher percentage of cases closed with the child remaining in the home, and greater permanency exits from foster care. Additionally the data revealed that the case management team developed to mitigate disproportionality among African-American families also improved outcomes for Hispanic/Latino families.     

The relationship between child welfare financing,screening, and substantiation

This study examines the relationship between state-level child welfare spending and two important decision points in the child welfare system: the decision to screen out a referral and the decision to substantiate. The model is estimated using a pooled fractional probit estimator that controls for year effects and state-level clustering. The findings suggest that decreases in state-level child welfare expenditures predict increases in the proportion of referrals that are screened out and decreases in the proportion of maltreatment claims that are substantiated. The results are robust to the inclusion of caseload and federal spending as control variables, to the exclusion of states known to have changed their screening or funding practices during the sample period, and to the use of combined state and local child welfare expenditures as an explanatory variable in lieu of state-level child welfare expenditures. The findings imply that the amount of money a state spends on child welfare may influence important decisions in the child welfare process.     

African American Families and the Role of Physical Discipline: Witnessing the Past in the Present

The use of physical discipline within African American families is examined from a historical perspective within the context of institutionalized racism and racial disproportionality in the child welfare system. African American parenting strengths are explored, demonstrating that the use of physical discipline can be purposeful, controlled, and appropriate, utilized to protect African American children and instruct them how to behave and survive within a racist society. Available literature on corporal punishment is reviewed, and implications for culturally informed child welfare practice are provided.     

Connective complexity: African American adolescents and the relational context of kinship foster care

Attempts to address racial disproportionality in child welfare must include a focus on the benefits and challenges facing children in kinship care. African American children not only are overrepresented in the child welfare system, but also are placed disproportionately in kinship foster care. Using a sample of 18 African American adolescents ages 11 to 14, this article explores how the relational context of care experienced by adolescents in kinship foster care differs from that of adolescents in nonkinship foster family placements. Findings are presented regarding the stability of relationships as well as complex role dilemmas experienced by kinship youth as they relate to caregivers and birthparents in the child welfare context. Implications are given for practice with kinship families.     

Delineating disproportionality and disparity of Asian-Canadian versus White-Canadian families in the child welfare system

ObjectiveThis paper builds upon the analyses presented in three companion papers using data from the 2003 and 2008 cycles of the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (CIS-2003 and CIS-2008) and the Ontario Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (OCANDS) to examine disproportionality and disparity of child welfare involvement for Asian-Canadian children involved in the child welfare system.MethodsThis study used CIS-2008 data adjusted by Census child population data to examine rates per 1000 and three disparity indexes (population-based disparity index [PDI], decision-based disparity index [DDI], and maltreatment-based disparity index [MDI]) to determine the representation of child maltreatment investigations for Asian-Canadian versus White-Canadian children involved in the child welfare system. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the odds of case closure for substantiated child maltreatment investigations, and whether Asian ethnicity remained significant while controlling for child demographics and household composition, case characteristics, and clinical concerns.ResultsThis study found that Asian-Canadian children were underrepresented in the child welfare system compared to White-Canadian children (13.9 per 1000 Asian children in the Canadian population vs. 36.1 per 1000 White children in the Canadian population). Child welfare involvement for Asian-Canadian children are almost 2 times more likely to close after an investigation than White-Canadian children. The three disparity indexes (PDI, DDI, MDI) showed substantially different results with respect to the representation of child maltreatment investigations involving Asian-Canadian versus White-Canadian children for physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, emotional maltreatment, and exposure to domestic violence.ConclusionsDisproportionality and disparity are complex phenomena. The variation in results derived from different methods of calculating representation suggests the need for greater clarity and consistency in the definitions and methodology in examining racial disparity in child welfare research. Some methodological considerations for future child welfare research with Asian-Canadian populations were discussed.     

Bias, racism and evidence-based practice: The case for more focused development of the child welfare evidence base

In spite of continuing concerns about disproportionate representation of African Americans, American Indians, and selected other groups in foster care, development of the practice and policy evidence base has paid scant attention to incorporating the specific concerns of these communities in intervention research. The authors review the current foundation of evidence-based practice and identify gaps in the knowledge base with specific reference to race/ethnicity/culture and class. They recognize the current concerns regarding disproportionality in child welfare services; and summarize the current research on bias and racism to establish potential mechanisms contributing to racially disproportionate outcomes. Addressing these literatures in concert with one another gives new meaning to the phrase, culturally competent evidence-based practice. Culturally competent practice goes beyond admonishing practitioners and policy makers to be more sensitive or to undertake such training. It is a pathway to the development of a more targeted and relevant evidence base: 1) rigorous intervention research with diverse populations could be more intentionally developed and 2) existing rigorous research on successfully addressing bias could be more broadly applied and tested in child welfare. A model for evaluating the validity of the evidence base with respect to diverse populations is proposed.     

创新福利模式 优化社会管理

创造适合国情的福利模式,是社会管理成功的基础和奥妙所在。一个好的福利模式要能保持四个基本均衡:经济发展与福利支出的均衡,福利支出中的基础部分与非基础部分的均衡,福利机制中的刚性与柔性的均衡,福利责任结构中的政府与市场、家庭、个人之间的均衡。中国一些富裕农村所搞的集体福利为实现这些均衡提供了实践经验,而这些经验与底线公平理论非常契合。底线公平福利模式具有四个特点和优势:教育为基,劳动为本,服务为重,健康为要。它充分发挥中国优秀文化和社会结构优势,把发展性要素内置于福利模式之中,可以实现社会福利的内外平衡,为社会安全奠定基础。     

A new paradigm: Bringing a historical and sociopolitical trauma lens to the training for welfare practitioners working with Aboriginal families

This article argues that child protection agencies must provide mandatory training about the Aboriginal experience within the welfare state and the resultant trauma that exists in Australian Indigenous communities. This article highlights the areas of curriculum to be included in training for welfare practitioners working with Aboriginal families in the New South Wales child protection system. The training content explores the Stolen Generations’ trauma experiences of child loss and examines the dichotomy between past child welfare laws and present child protection laws and intergenerational racism. Another key component of the training comprises information about the impacts of trauma on brain development.     

Using sibling data to understand the impact of family group decision-making on child welfare outcomes

Few studies have examined the impact of family group decision-making (FGDM) on child welfare outcomes. Studies in this area have often suffered from small sample sizes and lack of adequate comparison groups. Since FGDM is administered at the family level, sibling data provides an ideal way to compensate for small sample sizes and low enrollment rates in research evaluating FGDM. This study utilized sibling data from California's Title IV-E Waiver Demonstration Project Evaluation in Fresno and Riverside Counties to compare child welfare outcomes for children of families randomly assigned to receive FGDM (Fresno County, n = 110; Riverside County, n = 87) to children of families assigned to receive traditional child welfare services (Fresno County, n = 74; Riverside County, n = 52). After controlling for clustering effects using general estimating equations (GEE), group differences in child maltreatment, placement stability, and permanence were modeled using linear and logistic regression. Outcomes from both counties suggested no group differences. Though neutral outcomes on child welfare indicators may bring into question FGDM's efficacy for changing child welfare outcomes, this study confirms previous findings with smaller sample sizes on the impact of FGDM and demonstrates a methodological improvement over individual or family-case analyses.     

Measuring racial disparity in child welfare

Overrepresentation of certain racial/ethnic groups in the foster care system is one of the most troubling and challenging issues in child welfare today. In response, many states have started reporting outcomes by race and ethnicity to identify disproportionately high rates of system contact. The identification of disproportional representation is the first step in developing targeted strategies to address disproportionality--highlighting where resources should be directed and guiding future research. However, present and future efforts to address disproportionality must be accompanied by statistically sound and meaningful methods of measurement. In this article, we argue for the adoption of a relative rate measure of representation--a "Disparity Index"--as the primary instrument for assessing racial disparity in child welfare.