1. Quantitative Performance Measures for Juvenile Dependency Court Administrative Office of the Courts March 14, 2008

4. Conference on Juvenile Court Standards: 1921 “In order that it may be possible to compile information covering a period of years and to compare the work of one court with that of others, it is essential that uniform terminology and methods of statistical tabulation and presentation of fundamental items be agreed upon. By this means only can significant social data concerning the prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency and neglect be obtained.”

5. Juvenile Court Statistics: 1921 “Juvenile court judges, probation officers, and others concerned with delinquency and dependency are without adequate statistical information indicating the extent and nature of these problems. Federal statistics of births and deaths are available to the public health worker, and of manufacture, trade and agriculture to the business man and the farmer, but no plan has yet been developed for the collection on a national scale of statistics of dependency and delinquency.”

6. Welfare & Institutions Code Section 16545 …the Judicial Council shall adopt, through rules of court, performance measures…so that courts are able to measure their performance and track their own progress in improving safety, permanency, timeliness, and well- being of children…

7. Child Welfare Performance Measurement in California Counties collect data CDSS through CWS/CMS U.C. Berkeley CSSR Federal AFCARS/ NCANDS data CollectionStandardsReporting SACWIS CFSR AB 636 CFSR Outcomes & Accountability

8. Federal Safety and Permanency Performance Standards SafetyPermanency Recurrence of maltreatmentReunified in under 12 months Recurrence of maltreatment in foster care Median stay in foster care Reentered foster care Time to adoption Discharged to permanent home Children in care 3+ years Number of placements

9. Court Performance Measurement in California Courts collect data CCMS AOC No federal reporting scheme CollectionStandardsReporting Performance Measure Reporting ABA/NCSC/ NCJFCJ I Pew Commission ABA/NCSC/ NCJFCJ II Blue Ribbon Proposed Measures

10. Proposed Dependency Court Performance Standards Hearing timeliness and reasons for delays Due process: continuity of oversight and participation of parties Safety (Federal and state measures) Permanency (Federal and state measures) Well being: court inquiry and findings on physical and mental health, education, transitioning from care, relatives and connections Demographics Court process: caseload, cross over cases, court services

11. Federal Court Improvement Program Mandate: “Explain the State court’s planned activities and how those activities will lead to tangible, measurable, and time-specific improved outcomes for children and families in the child welfare system”

12. What are the causal relationships? Measures of timeliness, due process and court services Measures of safety and permanency

13. Projects examining the relationships among court measures and outcomes: National Dependency Drug Court Study AOC agreement with CSSR to use child welfare data Meeting at Beyond the Bench of dependency court and drug court researchers Court Improvement Program Model Court evaluation California Rule of Court Proposal

14. Dependency Court Research Meeting, December 2006 Cross-Over Youth (Drs. Ryan and Herz Dependency Drug Courts (Dr. Grella, Ms. Worcel) Children’s participation in hearings (Dr. Goodman) National measures (Dr. Marlowe)