Children's Bureau Website - Minnesota - Continuous Benefit Program/Assisted Guardianship

Minnesota

Demonstration Type:	Continuous Benefit Program/Assisted Guardianship¹
Approval Date:	September 10, 2004
Implementation Date:	November 17, 2005
Expected Completion Date:	October 31, 2010
Interim Evaluation Report Expected:	June 30, 2008
Final Evaluation Report Expected:	April 30, 2011

Target Population

The target population for Minnesota's demonstration includes title IV-E-eligible children ages 0–18 for whom reunification has been ruled out as a permanency option. In addition, children must have resided with the prospective guardian or adoptive family for at least six consecutive months before they may participate in the demonstration.² Minnesota's demonstration places particular emphasis on American Indian and African American children in long-term foster care and children with special needs. Special needs children include those who are older; part of a sibling group; or who have intense psychological, physical, and behavioral problems.

Jurisdiction

The State is operating its demonstration in five counties: Cass, Carlton, Dakota, Hennepin, and Ramsey. Dakota, Hennepin, and Ramsey are Minnesota's most populous counties. Cass and Carlton Counties have significant American Indian populations and are located in greater Minnesota.³ The demonstration may be extended to additional counties over time.

Intervention

Minnesota's title IV-E waiver, known as the Minnesota Permanency Demonstration (MnPD), expands eligibility and services within the State's existing title IV-E foster care program by providing a continuous set of benefits to foster families who adopt or accept permanent legal and physical custody (i.e., guardianship) of children in their care. The overall goal of the demonstration is to increase the willingness of foster families to adopt or assume guardianship of children by eliminating financial barriers to these permanency options. Under the State's traditional subsidy programs, counties may negotiate guardianship and adoption subsidy payments with foster caregivers that are approximately 50 percent lower than foster care maintenance payments. In contrast, caregivers who adopt or assume guardianship of a child under the MnPD are offered a monthly payment equal to the child's existing monthly foster care maintenance payment. Participating caregivers must meet all State foster care licensing requirements and be committed to providing a permanent home for the child through either adoption or guardianship. Both "kin" and "non-kin" caregivers are eligible to participate in the demonstration.⁴

Evaluation Design

Minnesota's evaluation includes process and outcome components, as well as a cost analysis. The State's evaluation contractors are implementing a two-part research design to evaluate the demonstration: (1) an experimental design with random assignment to experimental and control groups in the larger metropolitan counties of Hennepin and Ramsey; and (2) a quasi-experimental, matched-case comparison design in the rural or suburban counties of Cass, Carlton, and Dakota. For this matched-case comparison component, the State's evaluators are matching experimental group children with comparison group children in non-participating counties using demographic (e.g., race, age, gender), geographic, and case-related variables (e.g., placement status, legal status).

Sample Size

In Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, the State randomly assigned eligible families in open child protective services cases to the experimental and control groups at a 1:1 ratio. Similarly, new cases are randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio after reunification has been ruled out as a permanency option and the family has met all other eligibility requirements. Siblings are exempt from random assignment in order to keep sibling groups together to the fullest extent possible.

At the time of the waiver's approval in September 2004, the State estimated that approximately 665 children in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and 102 children in the non-metropolitan counties of Cass, Carlton, Dakota, and Mille Lacs⁵ would be eligible to participate in the demonstration.

Process Evaluation

The State's process evaluation describes how the demonstration was implemented and identifies differences in the services received by experimental and control/comparison group cases. Using data available in the State's SACWIS database, supplemented by interviews with caregivers and youth, the process evaluation addresses the following research questions:

How were child welfare staff informed about the continuous benefit option, and what procedures were put into place for offering the continuous benefit to families?
How many families met the eligibility criteria for the continuous benefit?
How many eligible families were offered the continuous benefit? How many families were offered both the guardianship and adoption options under the continuous benefit project?
How many caregivers accepted or declined the continuous benefit?
What were caregivers' reasons for accepting or declining the continuous benefit? Among families that declined the benefit, what factors made traditional services more attractive?
Of those families that accepted the continuous benefit, how many chose to pursue adoption and how many chose to pursue guardianship?
Among families that chose guardianship, how many guardianships were finalized? Among families that chose adoption, how many adoptions were finalized?
What is the average length of time for finalizing a guardianship and an adoption?
Among caregivers who pursued guardianship, what were the barriers to establishing guardianship? Among caregivers who pursued adoption, what were the barriers to finalizing the adoption?
What cultural considerations influenced foster parents' decision-making process?

Outcome Evaluation

The State's outcome evaluation compares the experimental and control/comparison groups for significant differences in the following outcome measures:

Number and proportion of children who achieve permanency through adoption, guardianship, or reunification;
Mean/median length of time in out-of-home placement;
Mean/median length of time in the child welfare system;
Number and proportion of children who move from non-relative foster care to relative placements;
Number and proportion of children with a subsequent alleged and/or substantiated abuse or neglect report;
Number of disrupted placements per child;
Number of displacement days per child; and
Client and family well-being, including educational and health status of participating children and overall family functioning.

Cost Study

The State's cost analysis compares the costs of major services received by cases in the experimental group with the costs of providing traditional services to cases in the control/comparison groups. The cost analysis examines the use of key funding sources, including all relevant Federal sources such as titles IV-A, IV-B, IV-E, and XIX of the Social Security Act, as well as State and local funds. In addition, the State is conducting a cost-effectiveness analysis where feasible to identify costs per successful outcome for the experimental and control groups.

Evaluation Findings

Process Evaluation

As of October 31, 2007, 465 children have been assigned to the experimental group and 441 children have been assigned to the control/comparison group. The two largest metropolitan counties, Hennepin and Ramsey, account for 368 children assigned to the experimental group, with the remaining 97 children coming from Carlton, Cass, and Dakota Counties. Hennepin County temporarily suspended new assignments to the demonstration in June 2007 to address concerns regarding the financial implications of continued participation in the waiver. After resolving these concerns, Hennepin County resumed assigning new children in April 2008.

Over the first 24 months of the demonstration project, 327 experimental group children (70 percent) are living in a home in which the foster parent is known by evaluators to have been offered the MnPD benefit option.

Based on information from interviews with the foster caregivers of children assigned to the experimental group, 86 percent have accepted the MnPD benefit option, with 75 percent deciding to adopt the child in their care, 21 percent deciding to accept a transfer of permanent legal custody, and 4 percent who have not yet decided on one of the two permanency options. In addition, 58 percent of those foster parents that accepted the MnPD benefit reported that they could not have afforded to adopt or accept legal custody or would have been placed under greater financial stress without the continuous benefit.

Outcome Evaluation

As of October 2007, 53 percent of children in the experimental group moved to permanency through adoption or permanent legal custody compared with 37 percent of children in the control group. For experimental cases in which it is known that the foster family was offered the MnPD benefit, the percentage of children who moved to permanency rises to 70 percent. Of these, 139 children have been adopted while the caregivers of 60 children have assumed permanent legal custody.

Among American Indian children in the experimental group, 64 percent have moved to permanency compared to 31 percent of American Indian children in the control group. Of the foster families caring for an American Indian child known to have been offered the MnPD benefit, the percentage of children who moved to permanency increases to 86 percent.

Across all participating counties, the mean number of days in foster care for children in the experimental group is 307 days compared to 380 days for children in the control group.

Additional findings will become available as implementation continues.

Web Links

General information and progress reports for Minnesota's Permanency Demonstration are available at the following Web site: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/dhs16_137480

¹ Based on information provided by the State as of January 2008. Back

² In February 2006, Minnesota's Terms and Conditions were amended to allow participating counties to apply to the State for an exception, under limited circumstances, to the requirement of six months in placement with the prospective guardian for otherwise eligible children. Back

³ The County of Mille Lacs initially planned to participate but withdrew from the demonstration in February 2007. Back

⁴ The State's definition of "kin" includes persons related to the child by blood, marriage, or adoption, or an individual who is an important family friend with whom the child has resided or has significant contact. Back

⁵ Mille Lacs County later withdrew from the demonstration. Back

Back to Table of Contents