2. How do Coles County Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Clark...Shelby Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement7136% School personnel3920% Relative/neighbor2111% Social services2010% Medical 1910% “Other”158% DCFS personnel116% Child care centers00% Coroner/Medical Exam00% 196100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

3. How do Children in our 7 Counties Enter the Child Welfare System? Clark...Shelby Counties Indicated reports FY 2010 SourceNumber Percent of total Law enforcement16236% School personnel7416% Medical5713% Relative/neighbor5111% Social services5011% “Other”388% DCFS personnel194% Child care centers00% Coroner/Medical Exam00% 451100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

4. How do Children Enter the Child Welfare System? Clark...Shelby Counties As shown above, law enforcement was the largest source of indicated reports in Coles County and in the 7 counties. Further, law enforcement reports overall were more likely to be indicated than reports from other major sources. - 66% of reports (162 of 245) from law enforcement personnel were indicated in FY2010 in the 7 counties. In Coles, 69% of law enforcement reports were indicated. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

5. What Types of Harm did Coles County Children Experience in FY10? Clark...Shelby Counties Type N indicated% of total ABUSE Substantial risk of harm3613% Physical abuse2911% Sexual abuse2710% Emotional abuse41% NEGLECT Blatant disregard8733% Lack of supervision 4718% Environmental35 13% Lack of health 2 1% 267100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

6. What Types of Harm did Children in our 7 Counties Experience ? Clark...Shelby Counties Type N indicated% of total ABUSE Substantial risk of harm7613% Sexual abuse529% Physical abuse488% Emotional abuse81% NEGLECT Blatant disregard21135% Lack of supervision 9916% Environmental9716% Lack of health 112% 602100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

7. What Types of Harm in our 7 Counties…? Clark...Shelby Counties By far the most common harm to children is neglect/ blatant disregard for child’s welfare, representing more than a third of all indicated reports. The second most common is neglect/lack of supervision accounting for 16% of indicated cases, followed closely by environmental neglect (16%). Sexual abuse per se accounts for 9% of indicated cases However, when this is combined with substantial risk of sexual injury then 14% of cases relate to sexual harm to children. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

8. Clark...Shelby Counties 21 children and youth entered foster care in Coles County and 41 children entered care in all 7 counties combined. Coles: Gender: female – 43%male – 57% 7 Counties: female – 34%male – 66% Race:Coles7 Counties African American5% (1 child)2% (1 child) White95%76% Hispanic0% 0% Other/Missing0%22% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 Who Entered Care in FY10?

9. Who is in Care in Our Counties? Clark...Shelby Counties At the close of FY10, 52 children were in out-of-home care in Coles County and 104 children in the 7 counties combined. This was decrease from FY09 when 61 (Coles) and 117 (7 Counties) children were in care. RACE/ETHNICITY Coles7 Counties African American 15% 10% White 85% 89% Hispanic* 0% 1% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 & 2009. *There are on-going concerns about how Latino or Hispanic ethnicity is determined for DCFS clients. This percent is based on classification in QA data.

10. Who is in Care in our Counties? Clark...Shelby Counties GENDER Coles: 43% female, 57% male 7 Counties:34% female, 66% male AGE Coles7 Counties 2 & under35%27% 3-525%22% 6-917%18% 10-1313%16% 14-17 6%12% 18+ 4% 5% Source: DCFS QA 2010

11. What are the Permanency Goals for Youth in Care?* Clark...Shelby Counties COLES7 COUNTIES Reunification50% 55% Adoption 41%32% Independence9%14% Guardianship0%0% 100%100% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 *This table excludes children for whom data were missing or coded as “other”

12. Where are Children Placed?* Clark...Shelby Counties COLES7 COUNTIES trad. foster care 39% 35% with kin 37% 39% specialized care 20% 19% institution/group 4% 7% 100% * QA data combines foster and relative care, thus this information is from CFRC for FY09.

13. How was Permanency Achieved For Children in FY10? Clark...Shelby Counties Coles: 27 children achieved permanency in FY10 7 Counties: 49 children achieved permanency Coles 7 Counties N % N % Adoption 1037%1531% Reunification 1141%2551% Subsidized Guard’ship 622%918% Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

14. How have 12 Month Permanency Rates Changed over Time? Clark...Shelby Counties Source: CFRC 2009

15. How have 24 Month Permanency Rates Changed Over Time? Clark...Shelby Counties Source: CFRC 2009

16. Clark...Shelby Counties 12 month permanency rates over the 5 years presented ranged from a low of 18% to a high of 36% The rate was 27% for the most year available. 24 month permanency rates ranges from a low of 37% to a high of 59%. The rate was 54% for the most recent year available. Source: CFRC 2009. [Such data are not yet available from QA] What are the Permanency Trends in our Counties?

17. Disproportionality and Disparity in our Counties Clark...Shelby Counties Disproportionality is when the percentage of a group of children in a population is different from the percentage of the same group in the child welfare system. For example, if 25% of the children in a county were African American, then 25% of those in foster care should be African American, all things being equal. That would be proportional. If these percents differ there is disproportionality. Disparity is unequal treatment or outcomes when comparing children of color to non-minority children. For example, if Hispanic children are less likely to achieve permanency than white children then there are disparate outcomes by race/ethnicity.

18. Is There Disproportionality in Our Counties*? Clark...Shelby Counties YES African American children continue to be overrepresented among children in care in our Counties. Coles: 2% of the child population is African American, compared to 15% of those in care. 95% of the child population is White, compared to 85% of those in care. 3% of the child population is Hispanic, compared to 0% of those in care 7 Counties: 1% of the child population is African American, compared to 10% of those in care. 96% of the child population is White, compared to 89% in care 4% of the child population is Hispanic, compared to 1% in care. * Data from here forward are presented for the 7 counties due to the small number of African American children in care.. Source: CFRC 09 (for population data) QA FY10 (for report data)

19. Clark...Shelby Counties Disproportionality

20. Clark...Shelby Counties Disproportionality Over Time

21. Clark...Shelby Counties Are There Differences in Permanency Goals by Race?* YES African American White. Reunification333%4456% Adoption667%2228% Guardianship00%00% Independence00%1215% 9100%78100% HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. *This table excludes children for whom permanency goals were missing or coded as “other”. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

22. Is There Disparity in Permanency Achievement? Clark...Shelby Counties YES In FY10, 103 children achieved permanency, 10 African American and 93 white children. African American children and White children who were in care in FY10 left care at slightly different rates, with African American children slightly more likely to leave care than White children (African American 50% & White children 47%) African American youth were somewhat more likely than White youth to exit via reunification (60% vs 50%) White youth were more likely than African American youth to exit via adoption (34% vs 0%) HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

23. Is There Disparity in Permanency Achievement Over Time? Clark...Shelby Counties The numbers of African American children in care are too small to meaningfully track 12 and 24 month permanency.

24. What is the “Bottom Line” on Disproportionality? Clark...Shelby Counties In FY10, were African American children more likely to be reported as neglected / abused in our Counties? YES Although African American children are 1% of the population, they comprise 4% of the reported cases. White children comprise 96% of the child population but 95% of those reported. Hispanic children represent 4% of the population but less than 1% of those reported. Source: CFRC 09 (for population data) QA FY10 (for report data)

25. What is the “Bottom Line” on Disproportionality? Clark...Shelby Counties Once reported, are African American children more likely to be indicated than White children? YES In FY10 of all reports for African American children, 37% were indicated Of all reports for White children, 28% were indicated. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

26. Clark...Shelby Counties Once indicated did African American and White children enter care at similar rates in FY10? Only 1 African American child entered care in FY10 so no meaningful comparison can be made. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010 What is the “Bottom Line” on Disparity?

27. Disparity Clark...Shelby Counties Are African American children less likely to have reunification as a goal than White children? YES In FY10, 33% of African American children had a goal of reunification compared to 56% of White children. Were African American children less likely to exit care than White children? NO In FY10 50% of African American children in care achieved permanency compared to 47% of White children. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THESE DIFFERENCES MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

28. Disparity Clark...Shelby Counties Did African American children achieve permanency differently from White children in FY10? YES In FY10, African American children were slightly more likely than White children to achieve permanency through reunification (60% & 50%). African American children were much less likely to exit care through adoption (0% to 34%) HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THIS DIFFERENCE MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL. Source: DCFS QA FY 2010

29. Disproportionality and Disparity: The Summary Clark...Shelby Counties In FY10 in the 7 counties: African American children were more likely to be reported than White children When reported, African American children are more likely to be indicated than White children. However, in FY 10 African American children were slightly more likely to achieve permanency than White children. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN THESE DIFFERENCES MAY NOT BE MEANINGFUL.

30. On-going Questions for our Area Clark...Shelby Counties