Transcript Document

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
Washingto n, DC
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 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
INDICATORS OF PATERNAL
INVOLVEMENT
Possible automated case management system
indicators of paternal involvement:
 Paternal identity
 Contacts
 Known address
 Case plan participation
DATA SOURCES
 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
 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
INDICATOR: PATERNAL IDENTITY–
BIRTH CERTIFICATE
Unknown Fathers
Percent with Unknown Fathers
Infants born 1999 to 2006
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
Birth Certificate
20.0
10.0
0.0
No CWS
Involvement
Referral
Substantiated Case Opened
Removal
Most Intensive Child Welfare Service Level
Adoption
INDICATOR: PATERNAL IDENTITY CWS RECORD
Unknown Fathers
Percent with Unknown Fathers
Infants born 1999 to 2006
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
Birth Certificate
20.0
CWS Record
10.0
0.0
No CWS
Involvement
Referral
Substantiated Case Opened
Removal
Most Intensive Child Welfare Service Level
Adoption
INDICATOR: PARENTAL CONTACTS
Percent of Infants with Reported Parent
Contact
Reported Percent of Parents Contacted
Within 2 Months of Referral - Removals Only
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
Mothers
Fathers
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Birth Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
INDICATOR: PATERNAL VS.
MATERNAL CONTACTS
Reported Ratio of Children with Paternal Agency Contact
to Children with Maternal Agency Contact
Ratio of Children with Paternal Contact to
Children with Maternal Contact
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
All Removals
0.4
All Referrals
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Birth Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
INDICATOR: KNOWN ADDRESS
 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.
Mothers Fathers Ratio
%
%
Referral Only
91.7
43.2
0.47
Substantiated Referral, no case
or removal
97.0
51.2
0.53
Case Opened, no Removal
98.5
52.7
0.54
Removal, no Adoption
99.0
57.0
0.58
Adoption
95.9
50.1
0.52
All Referrals
94.8
48.4
0.51
INDICATOR: CASE PLAN
PARTICIPATION
 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.
CONCLUSIONS
 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
INDICATOR: FATHER KNOWN - CWS
RECORD
Unknown Fathers
Percent with Unknown Fathers
Infants born 1999 to 2006
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
Birth Certificate
20.0
CWS Record
10.0
0.0
No CWS
Involvement
Referral
Substantiated Case Opened
Removal
Most Intensive Child Welfare Service Level
Adoption
QUESTIONS?
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]