AB 636

Mental Health/CWS PartnershipSacramento, CA

3/17/06

Barbara Needell, MSW, PhDCenter for Social Services ResearchUniversity of California at Berkeley

The Performance Indicators Project at CSSR is supported by the California Department of Social Services

and the Stuart Foundation

AB636—Up and Running

County Self Assessments, Self Improvement Plans, and Peer Quality Case Reviews all use performance measures as a foundation.

Teams formed at the local level use data to identify strengths challenges, and decide appropriate responses.

Quarterly Performance Measures are posted publicly.

Even after only two years, we can see measurable improvement.

Point in Time

Exit Cohorts

Entry Cohorts

Data

3 Views of Data

To fully understand child welfare performance,

we must use longitudinal data…--data that follows children throughout their entire child welfare experiences

--this is what we now have in California, what we use in AB636 (and related efforts like Family to Family), and what we post publicly and update quarterly.

Most of the National Standards (federal measures) are from datasets that only contain one year ‘s information at a time, and are not linked across years--cannot measure using entry view

Child welfare/mental health linked administrative data analyses should encompass all 3 views

AB636 Current MeasuresRates per 1,000 child population--Reports, Substantiated Reports, First Entries to Foster Care, Point in time In Care

Recurrence of Maltreatment (1A and 1B)Rate of Child Abuse and/or Neglect in Foster Care (1C)Recurrence of Abuse/Neglect Where Children Were Not Removed (2A)Child Abuse and Neglect Referrals by Time-to-Investigation (2B)Monthly Social Worker Visits with Children (2C)Length of Time to Exit Foster Care to Reunification (3E and 3A)Length of Time to Exit Foster Care to Adoption (3D and 3A)Multiple Foster Care Placements (3B and 3C)Rate of Foster Care Re-Entry (3F and 3G)Siblings Placed Together in Foster Care (4A)Foster Care Placement in Least Restrictive Settings (4B)ICWA Placement Preferences (4E)Independent Living Program (8A)

1.0%

1.4%

2.8%

3.4%

3.5%

4.5%

5.8%

6.5%

6.7%

11.5%

19.4%

29.4%

0.3%Point in Time Placement with Kin (+)

Referral Rate (- )

Reunification within 12 Months (+)

Placement with Siblings (+)

Rate of Foster Care Entry (- )

Placement Stability (+)

Recurrence of Abuse or Neglect (- )

Rate of Children in Foster Care (- )

Substantiation Rate (- )

Re- entry to Foster Care (- )

First Entry to Kin Placement (+)

First Entry to Group or Shelter (- )

Adoption within 24 Months (+)

California:AB636 Measures,

Percent IMPROVEMENT from January 2004 to January 2006

Note: (+) indicates a measure where a % increase equals improvement. (-) indicates a measure where a % decrease equals improvement.

DATA: Friend or Foe?

Beware: • County/state rankings on individual measures• Composite scores that mask issues• Small populations• Inappropriate views

Consider: • Performance over time!!!!!• Age, gender and race/ethnicity• Interaction among outcomes (counterbalance)• Local practice and policy changes needed to impact

outcomes

GO BEARS!

Barbara Needell510.642.1893

bneedell@berkeley.edu