1 / 49

Racial Disparities in Child Protective Services

Racial Disparities in Child Protective Services. Based on January 19, 2008 Presentation. Introducing the Qualitative Story. Qualitative study presented by: Margaret (Griesgraber) Skrypek, Susan J. Wells and Maxie Rockymore University of Minnesota School of Social Work

mckayt
Download Presentation

Racial Disparities in Child Protective Services

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. Racial Disparities in Child Protective Services Based on January 19, 2008 Presentation Introducing the Qualitative Story Qualitative study presented by: Margaret (Griesgraber) Skrypek, Susan J. Wells and Maxie Rockymore University of Minnesota School of Social Work Contact: swells@umn.edu Principal Investigator: Susan J. Wells; Research Assistant: Margaret (Griesgraber) Skrypek Minnesota DHS Coordinator: Maxie Rockymore Data Analysis Contributors: Ila Kamath, Scotty Daniels, Alex Beutel, Mary Pfohl, Louis B. Carter, Dinorah Martinez-Osorio, and Nancey Riley A Study of the African American Racial Disparities Committee, the Minnesota Department of Human Services and four Minnesota counties

  2. Study Background and Quantitative Findings

  3. Analyses Completed • Quantitative - assigning numerical values to variables in order to understand behavior by statistical modeling and measurement • Qualitative - subjective judgment based on non-quantifiable information, such as text, notes and comments Quantitative analysis is a powerful tool for evaluation, but the story is more complete when it is combined with qualitative analysis.

  4. Selection of Cases • All neglect cases in 4 counties • Selection requirements • a single type of maltreatment. • children not previously placed • race: all African American or all white; • no children identified as Hispanic ethnicity • ages 0 through 11 • parents born in the USA

  5. Total Cases Selected • Total of 1,095 • Substantiated for neglect • From four Minnesota counties in 2001 • African American (58%) and Caucasian (48%) children

  6. Matched Case Study 103 pairs of cases were matched on: • Age group (0-5 and 6-11) • Reason for referral - type of neglect • Gender • County

  7. Evolution of Number of Cases or Pairs • 1,095 original cases • After case matching, 103 original pairs – 206 cases • Some cases were eliminated later For example: • Child was of more than one race • Family was immigrant or other culture • 81 pairs remained – 162 cases (If pairs of eliminated cases were included - 180 cases)

  8. Descriptive Data for Study Counties • Anoka 18 children • Hennepin 76 children • Olmsted 20 children • Ramsey 48 children N = 162

  9. Descriptive Data for Study (cont.) Type of Neglect • Abandonment: 4 • Educational neglect: 28 • Endangerment: 52 • Inadequate Supervision: 14 • Neglect (food, clothing, shelter): 58 • Prenatal exposure: 6 N=162

  10. Three Parts of Record Review Questionnaire (for Paired Cases) • Assessment – 162 cases 81 pairs • Case Management – 55 cases 13 original pairs • Reunification - 39 cases 7 original pairs

  11. Today’s Focus • Very quick review of 162 – 81 pairs • Overview of quantitative analysis of 180 cases • Qualitative analysis of 180 cases

  12. Qualitative Variables Used for Quantitative Study • History of maltreatment • Extensive; multi-generational • Interaction of worker and family • Worker negative; parent uncooperative • Poverty: yes or no • Substance abuse extensive • Relative was a resource • Primary problem contributing to maltreatment • Family moved, case outcome unclear • Police arranged informal placement

  13. Family Composition at Assessment Percentage of Pairs with Biological Father in Household McNemar level of significance p = .004 significant finding

  14. Other Significant Differences at Assessment N = 81 pairs

  15. Police Involvement at Assessment Percentage of Pairs in Which Police Arranged an Informal Placement McNemar level of significance p = .039 significant finding

  16. Cases Opened for Case Management Services Percentage of Pairs in which the Case was Opened for Case Management Services McNemar level of significance p = 1.0 Not significant

  17. Cases Opened for Reunification Services Percentage of Pairs in which the Case was Opened for Reunification Services McNemar level of significance p = .690 Not significant

  18. Similarities among Cases • There were no significant differences in parental drug abuse, inadequate housing, felony history, contact with the law, father’s disabilities, termination of parental rights for older siblings, or death of one or both parents.

  19. Multivariate Analysis • That is, was the case referred for Reunification Services at any time during the intervention process? (Does not include cases that were in placement initially but went home right away.)

  20. New Variables • Several scales were created to reduce the number of variables • Three variables of particular interest follow…

  21. Maltreatment Summative Scale (0-3) • None of the following • Maltreatment history found at investigation • Maltreatment extensive (qualitative var.) • Maltreatment multi-generational (qual.var.)

  22. Mom Drug and Law Probs Scale • No drug problems or problems with the law (0) • Problems with drugs or problems with the law (1) • Problems with drugs and problems with the law (2)

  23. Parent-Worker Relationship (0-1) • Worker negative • And/Or • Parent uncooperative This is not a scale; there is only a yes/no answer

  24. Multivariate Analysis Results

  25. Variables in the Equation B S.E. Sig. Exp(B) 95.0% C.I.for EXP(B) Lower Upper Q01children -.849 .237 .000 .428 .269 .680 WrkrJudgPrnt UncoopScale 2.011 .424 .000 7.471 3.252 17.167 Ages1_4 1.507 .684 .028 4.512 1.180 17.243 AfricanAmerican by Ages1_4 -2.327 1.043 .026 .098 .013 .753 MaltreatHistScale .214 .342 .531 1.239 .634 2.421 AfricanAmerican by MaltreatHistScale 1.067 .427 .013 2.906 1.258 6.714 MomDrugLawProbs 1.062 .321 .001 2.892 1.541 5.427 SubsAbuse_Extensive 1.979 .616 .001 7.237 2.164 24.208 Constant -2.418 .684 .000 .089

  26. Other Important Variables • Bio Dad in the household • Mom cognitive, physical or MH disabilities • County • Source of report was health • Relative is a resource

  27. Percent Children Placed when Parent Uncooperative by Race African American Uncooperative or Worker Negative-> Yes=29, No=58 Caucasian Uncooperative or Worker Negative-> Yes=29, No=65

  28. Percent Children Placed:Maltreatment History by Race Number of Children – Maltreatment History Scale by Race 0 1 2 3 Total African 29 33 21 4 87 American Caucasian 36 31 24 2 93

  29. Percent Children Placed:Maltreatment History by Race Number of Children – Maltreatment History Scale by Race 0 1 2 or 3 Total African 29 33 25 87 American Caucasian 36 31 26 93 Maltreatment History Scale Indicates the number of instances of the following: history of maltreatment, maltreatment extensive, and/or multigenerational maltreatment.

  30. Percent Referred for Placement(in Which Referral for Reunification Services was Made)by Age Children Identified as Both African American & Caucasian are not included on this graph. Number of Children - Age by Race -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Total African 1 13 4 6 4 2 11 10 6 7 9 7 7 87 American Caucasian 3 14 5 7 5 5 4 7 7 12 5 11 8 93 Total 4 27 9 13 9 7 15 17 13 19 14 18 15 180

  31. Qualitative Study

  32. So, What Can We Know From the Qualitative Study? Examples of questions we had: • What was the problem financial difficulties about? • How did age differences work?

  33. Introduction to the Qualitative Study • Use of the same data sources as the quantitative study • Opportunity to clarify findings from the quantitative study • Deeper look at whether and how race may affect case decisions and outcomes

  34. Qualitative Methods – Step 1 • Researchers re-read all 206 original case record surveys • When data was confusing or unclear, researchers re-read the case record to fill in missing information • Text from these readings and selected quantitative variables were used to create a new qualitative database

  35. Qualitative Method – Step 2 • Data in the database was checked and rechecked against the surveys and the case records for accuracy • Data was imported into NVIVO software – a specialized system for qualitative analysis

  36. Qualitative Methods – Step 3 • To gain insight from community members with child welfare experience, a sample study was completed with 36 selected cases • 3 community members and 2 researchers participated in the sample study • The cases were selected randomly but were representative of the larger group of 206 cases • Using lessons learned from the sample reading, a full qualitative analysis was completed on the text of 162 cases

  37. Age Discovered to be a Defining Variable • Child’s age was important in understanding differences among placement decisions and race. • The following age groups were established: • Less than one year old • One to four years old • Five to nine years old • Ten or eleven years old

  38. Highlights • Themes that emerged across age groups: • Parental competence • Disinterest • Inability (might include mental health) • Crisis • Resources (educational neglect) • Domestic Violence • Drugs/Alcohol • Use • Other involvement Racial patterns within these case categories vary by age!

  39. Highlights (continued) • Themes that occurred across age groups with consistent racial patterns: • Police involvement • Arrests • Formal vs. informal placements • County may also be important

  40. Children Less than One Year Old (N=30) • Positive toxicology and pre-natal cases • Similar outcomes regardless of race • Omitted from further qualitative analysis

  41. Children One to Four Years Old (N=30) • Parental Competence Case Types: • Parental disinterest • Inability to parent • Child emotional or physical problems • Crisis Case Types: • Short-term emergencies • Domestic violence • Extensive Substance Abuse* Case Types: • Multiple relapses during case management • Methamphetamine use • *Indicates possible racial pattern 26 of the 30 cases in this age group (86.7%) were in three categories.

  42. Patterns in 1 – 4 Age Group (N=30) • Caucasian families more likely to experience long term placement and to undergo TPR/TLC. • Police were involved in 12 cases • Racial pattern observed in whether police made formal placements or allowed informal placements

  43. Children Five to Nine Years Old (N=74) Crisis & Parental Competence* Case Types: Domestic violence Poor parenting Alcohol use Educational Neglect Case Types: Resource deficit Mental health of caregiver Parent Out of Home* Case Types: Police involvement* Abandonment Parent/Child Mental Health* Case Type *Indicates possible racial pattern 67 of 74 cases in this age group (91%) were in four categories

  44. Patterns in 5 – 9 Age Group (N=74) • African American children more likely to enter long term placement for this age range. • All cases (6) that resulted in a child being placed permanently outside the home were TLCs to relatives. • Police were involved in many of these cases, 10 of which included out of home placements. • All 10 cases were either drug raids, parental substance abuse, or criminal activity. • 6 cases were arrests - all were African American parents (one during case management.)

  45. Children Ten or Eleven Years Old (N=30) Parent Drugs/Alcohol* Case Types: Parental substance abuse Police drug raids Educational Neglect Case Types: Resource deficit Parent or child mental health Parental Competence Case Types: Disinterest in parenting Inability to parent Short-term Crisis Case Types: Domestic violence Resource issues *Indicates possible racial pattern 30 of 30 cases in this age group (100%) were in four categories

  46. Patterns in 10-11 Age Group (N=30) • African American and Caucasian children equally unlikely to enter long term placement • Police arranged out of home placements in 3 cases in this age range. • One formal placement for a Caucasian child whose homeless mother requested 72 hour hold for child. • Two informal relative placements for children whose parents were arrested for drug raids. One of these children was Caucasian and one was African American.

  47. Other factors to consider • Several cases closed early because the family moved, which may affect the data related to case outcomes. • What is the impact of parents’ perceived level of cooperation on workers’ attitudes? • More Caucasian families using other mechanisms to avoid child welfare involvement – i.e. family court to transfer custody to a non-custodial parent.

  48. Implications • Case types differ by race • So, to some extent, other differences might be expected • Nevertheless, what can we learn from every day practice about potential differences? • How can we keep children out of the system when they don’t need to be there?

  49. Conclusion Thank you for your attention Questions?

More Related