Skip ACF banner and navigation
Department of Health and Human Services logo
Questions?  
Privacy  
Site Index  
Contact Us  
  Home   |   Services   |   Working with ACF   |   Policy/Planning   |   About ACF   |   ACF News Search  
Administration for Children and Families US Department of Health and Human Services

Children's Bureau Safety, Permanency, Well-being  Advanced
 Search

Home > Statistics & Research > Child Welfare Outcomes 2001 > Chapter Two

 

Chapter II. Key Findings Pertaining to State Performance on the National Child Welfare Outcomes

The Child Welfare Outcomes Reports to Congress provide an ongoing annual assessment of State performance on seven national outcomes pertaining to the safety and permanency of children who come into contact with the Nation's public child welfare systems. An overview of national performance on these outcomes is provided in table 1 on the following page. National performance on each measure was calculated by collapsing the data for all States. For example, for outcome measure 1 in table 1, the data represent all children in the country who were victims of a substantiated (or indicated) maltreatment report during the first 6 months of the reporting period, who had another substantiated (or indicated) maltreatment report within 6 months.

Additional analyses conducted for Child Welfare Outcomes 2001 focused on State performance on the outcomes in 2001 and changes in performance from 1999 to 2001. These analyses focus on the range of performance among the States on specific outcome measures and the median and mean performance of States. Although 1998 data are presented in the data pages in chapter 4, they were not included in the analyses because the 1998 data file was not comparable to the files for 1999, 2000, and 2001. The data analyses address State performance in the following areas:

The findings of the data analyses pertaining to each of these areas are presented in the sections below. Each section includes a discussion of the following:

A decision was made to assess change from 1999 to 2001 rather than change across each year in order to take a broader perspective on performance change. However, it is important to note that even this analysis should be interpreted with caution because actual trends in performance often are not observable for 4 to 5 years. The changes observed are best viewed as providing an initial assessment of change across States rather than a "trend" analysis.

For the purposes of this report, change in performance over time was assessed by calculating the percent change in performance from one year to the next.6 Also for purposes of this Outcomes Report, performance is considered to have "improved" if the percent change is 5.0 or larger in the appropriate direction, depending on the measure. Performance is considered to have "declined" if the percent change is 5.0 or larger in the opposite direction. Performance is considered to have remained the same (i.e., "no change") if the percent change is less than 5.0 in either direction. Although there is no absolute standard for determining whether "real change" occurred, the decision to use a percent change of 5 as a baseline is intended to prevent interpreting very small percent changes over time as evidence of a change in performance. In addition, for individual States, a percent change may reflect improvements in data quality or changes in State reporting procedures rather than actual changes in performance.

Table 1: National performance on select child welfare outcome measures for all States reporting.

Outcome Measure Year* National Standard (%)
1999 2000 2001
1.1 Percent of children who were victims of substantiated or indicated child abuse and/or neglect during the first 6 months of reporting period who had another substantiated or indicated report within a 6-month period. 8.5% (N=29) 8.6% (N=34) 8.9% (N=40) 6.1% or less
2.1 Percent of children in foster care who were the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff member. 0.77% (N=21) 0.62% (N=31) 0.50% (N=38) 0.57% or less
3.1 Percent of children exiting foster care who exited to a permanent home (adoption, legal guardianship, or reunification). 82.6% (N=51) 83.9% (N=51) 84.4% (N=52) NA**
3.2 Percent of children exiting foster care who had a diagnosed disability who exited to a permanent home (adoption, guardianship, or reunification). 75.8% (N=47) 78.1% (N=46) 78.6% (N=48) NA**
3.3 Percent of children exiting foster care who were older than 12 at the time of entry into foster care who exited to a permanent home (adoption, guardianship, or reunification). 67.0% (N=51) 67.3% (N=51) 67.6% (N=52) NA**
3.4 Percent of children exiting foster care to emancipation who were age 12 or younger at the time of entry into foster care. 31.9% (N=50) 32.0% (N=51) 32.2 (N=51) NA**
4.1 Percent of children reunified with their parents or caretakers at the time of discharge from foster care who were reunified within 12 months from the time of entry into foster care. 64.6% (N=50) 64.9% (N=51) 65.7% (N=52) 76.2% or more
4.2 Percent of children entering foster care that were re-entering care within 12 months of discharge from a prior foster care episode. 11.1% (N=51) 11.4% (N=51) 11.5% (N=52) 8.6% or less
5.1 Percent of children exiting foster care to a finalized adoption who exited within 24 months from the time of the latest removal from home. 20.8% (N=48) 20.0% (N=50) 22.3% (N=52) 32.0% or more
6.1 Percent of children in foster care for less than 12 months who experienced two or fewer placements. 77.5% (N=51) 81.9% (N=51) 82.7% (N=52) 86.7% or more
7.1 Percent of children age 12 or younger at the time of their most recent placement who were placed in a group home or institution. 11.3% (N=51) 9.8% (N=51) 10.4% (N=52) NA**

* Measure 1.1 is based on a calendar year, measure 2.1 is based on the first 9 months of a calendar year, and all other measures are based on the Federal fiscal year. back
** Not Applicable (NA) means that a national standard was not established for the measure.

State Performance in Prevention Further Maltreatment of Child Victims

Children's safety is the primary concern of all child welfare services, particularly the safety of children who have already been identified as maltreatment victims —i.e., children who were the subjects of substantiated or indicated maltreatment reports. The Department established two outcomes to address this concern: outcome 1: reduce recurrence of child abuse and/or neglect; and outcome 2: reduce the incidence of child abuse and/or neglect in foster care. Findings of data analyses pertaining to these outcomes are presented below.

Outcome Measure 1.1 : For all children who were victims of substantiated or indicated child abuse and/or neglect during the first 6 months of the reporting period, what percentage had another substantiated or indicated report within a 6-month period?

Outcome measure 1.1 assesses State performance with regard to preventing child victims from experiencing further maltreatment by their parents or caretakers. The Department established the following national standard related to this measure as part of the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR): Of all children who were victims of substantiated or indicated child abuse or neglect during the first 6 months of a specified year, 6.1 percent or fewer children had another substantiated or indicated report within 6 months.

State performance in 2001 regarding maltreatment recurrence

Forty States reported sufficient data in 2001 to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) to calculate outcome measure 1.1. Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from 1999 to 2001 regarding maltreatment recurrence

Table 2 provides key findings regarding State data for recurrence of maltreatment (outcome measure 1.1) in 1999, 2000, and 2001. In general, the mean performance remained consistent over time, while the median performance declined slightly (+8.1 percent change). There was no substantive change in the percentages of States meeting the national standard (i.e., the percent change from 1999 to 2001 of -4.4 percent is less than 5.0, which was cited at the beginning of this chapter as the standard that this report will use as an indication of substantive or "actual" change).

Table 2. State performance in 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding maltreatment recurrence.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 29 33 40
Mean performance (% recurrence in 6 months) 7.5 7.8 7.6
Median performance (% recurrence in 6 months) 7.4 7.9 8.0
Percent of States meeting national standard of 6.1 percent 34 30 32.5

Figure 1 provides data showing the percentage of States exhibiting a change in performance on outcome measure 1.1 from 1999 to 2001. As shown in the figure, 52 percent of the 29 States reporting data for this measure exhibited a decline in performance; 27 percent improved performance; and 21 percent exhibited "no change" in performance (defined as a difference of a percent change of less than 5.0 in either direction). Despite the finding that 52 percent of the States exhibited a decline in performance from 1999 to 2001, only 3 States (10 percent) exhibited a continuous decline in performance over that 3-year period, and no State exhibited continuous improvement. Instead, for most States, a change in performance in one direction from 1999 to 2000 was followed by a change in the other direction from 2000 to 2001. An additional finding was that only 6 (21 percent) of the 29 applicable States met the national standard of 6.1 percent or less for this measure in all 3 years (Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas).

Figure One

Figure 1. Change in State performance from CY 1999 to CY 2001 regarding the incidence of maltreatment recurrence (outcome measure 1.1) (29 States reported data for this measure in CY 1999).

Outcome Measure 2.1: Of all children who were in foster care during the reporting period, what percentage was the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff member?

Outcome measure 2.1 assesses State performance with regard to ensuring that children placed in foster care are protected from abuse or neglect by their caretakers. The Department established the following national standard related to outcome measure 2.1 for the CFSR: Of all children in foster care in the State during a specified time period, 0.57 percent or fewer were the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff member.

State performance in 2001 regarding the incidence of maltreatment in foster care

In 2001, 38 States provided sufficient data to NCANDS and to the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) to calculate outcome measure 2.1. Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from 1999 to 2001 regarding maltreatment in foster care

Table 3 presents data pertaining to State performance on outcome measure 2.1 in 1999, 2000, and 2001. The data indicate improvement from 1999 to 2001 in both the mean performance (-22.4 percent change) and the median performance (-9.6 percent change) on this measure. In addition, the percentage of States meeting the national standard for this measure of .57 or less exhibited improvement from 1999 to 2001 (+27.9 percent change).

Table 3. State performance in 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding the incidence of maltreatment of children while in foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 21 31 38
Mean performance (% children maltreated in foster care) 0.67 0.65 0.52
Median performance (% children maltreated in foster care) 0.52 0.47 0.47
Percent of States meeting national standard of 0.57% or less 52 58 66

Although there was improved performance with regard to the overall percentage of children experiencing maltreatment in foster care, 62 percent of the 21 States included in this analysis exhibited declines in this measure from 1999 to 2001, as shown in figure 2, with 5 States exhibiting continuous decline over the 3-year period. However, 7 of the 13 States that exhibited declines in performance still met the national standard. Five (24 percent) of the 21 States met the national standard for this measure in all 3 years (Arizona, Kansas, Indiana, Texas, Utah).

Figure Two

Figure 2. Change in State performance from 1999 to 2001 (for the first 9 months of the calendar years) regarding the incidence of maltreatment of children in foster care (outcome measure 2.1) (21 States reported data for this measure in CY 1999.)

State Performance in Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care

A primary goal of child welfare services is to achieve permanency for children placed in foster care through reunification with their families, adoption, or legal guardianship. The Department assesses State performance in achieving permanency for children in foster care through five measures developed for outcome 3 —increase permanency for children in foster care. The outcome measures and the results of the data analyses are presented below. No national standards are related to the measures for outcome 3.

Outcome Measure 3.1: For all children who exited foster care during the reporting period, what percent left either to reunification, adoption, or legal guardianship?

Outcome measure 3.1 assesses State performance in achieving permanency for all children in foster care. The Department recognizes the following three types of discharge reasons as discharges to a permanent home:

Discharges from foster care for reasons other than reunification, adoption, or guardianship include children who: (1) were emancipated from foster care because they reached a particular age; (2) were transferred to another system (such as mental health or juvenile justice); or (3) died.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency

In FY 2001, 51 States reported sufficient data to AFCARS to be included in the analysis of outcome measure 3.1. (West Virginia was excluded from the analysis because 38.2 percent of the children discharged from foster care in FY 2001 did not have "reason for discharge" information.) Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency

Key data for outcome measure 3.1 in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 are presented in table 4. The data indicate no substantive change in either the mean or the median performance on this measure over time.

Table 4. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding permanency for children exiting foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 46 47 51
Mean performance (% exits to permanency) 83.7 84.1 84.6
Median performance (% exits to permanency) 85.0 85.7 85.3
Performance range (% exits to permanency) 59.6-94.9 66.9-94.5 68.8-97.3

The performance of most States individually also remained consistent from FY 1999 to FY 2001. As shown in figure 3, of the 46 States included in the analysis, 72 percent demonstrated no change in performance from 1999 to 2001 (i.e., the change did not exceed 5 percent in either direction). One State (New Hampshire) exhibited continuous improvement on this measure over the 3-year period from 1999 to 2001, but no State exhibited a continuous decline.

Figure Three

Figure 3. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding children's exits from foster care to permanent homes (outcome measure 3.1) (N = 46). Five States were excluded from the analysis because of a high percentage of missing data in FY 1999 for this measure, and one State was excluded because the State did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome measure 3.2: For children who exited foster care and were identified as having a diagnosed disability, what percentage left either to reunification, adoption, or legal guardianship?

Outcome measure 3.2 assesses State performance with regard to attaining permanency for children who might be considered "difficult to place in a permanent home" because they have a diagnosed disability.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency for children with a diagnosed disability

In FY 2001, 46 States reported sufficient information to AFCARS to be included in the analysis of outcome measure 3.2. (States were excluded from the analysis if they did not report a reason for discharge for more than 20 percent of the children exiting from foster care who had a diagnosed disability.) Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency for children with a diagnosed disability

Table 5 presents data pertaining to State performance on outcome measure 3.2 in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001. The data indicate no substantive change in mean or median performance.

Table 5. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding permanency for children with a diagnosed disability.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 42 43 46
Mean performance (% exiting to permanency) 75.1 78.1 78.4
Median performance (% exiting to permanency) 75.2 79.1 78.4
Performance range 36.8-90.9 50.0-97.0 53.0-96.5

The lack of substantive change in mean and median performance is matched by a general stability in performance of individual States over time. As shown in figure 4, 52 percent of the States exhibited no change in performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001. However, 31 percent of the States improved performance on this measure and 3 States (District of Columbia, Montana, Tennessee) exhibited continuous improvement over the 3-year period from FY 1999 to FY 2001. One State (Delaware) exhibited a continuous decline in performance over this time period.

Figure Four

Figure 4. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to a permanent home for children with a diagnosed disability (outcome measure 3.2) (N = 42). Five States were excluded from the analysis because of a high percentage of missing data in FY 1999 for this measure and five States were excluded because they did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome measure 3.3: For children who exited foster care and were older than age 12 at the time of their most recent entry into care, what percentage left either to reunification, adoption, or legal guardianship?

Similar to outcome measure 3.2, measure 3.3 is intended to assess State performance in attaining permanency for children who may be considered "difficult to place." For this measure, the assessment focuses on State success in finding permanent homes for children who were adolescents (i.e., older than age 12) when they entered foster care.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency for children who were older than age 12 at the time of entry into foster care

In FY 2001, 48 States provided sufficient data to AFCARS to be included in the analysis of data for outcome measure 3.3. Four States were excluded from the analysis because 20 percent or more of the children exiting from foster care who were adolescents when they entered foster care did not have "reason for discharge" information. The analysis of FY 2001 State data resulted in the following findings:

As shown in figure 5, an additional analysis of the 2001 data found that children who entered foster care when they were adolescents were less likely to be discharged to a permanent home than were: (1) all children exiting foster care, and (2) children exiting foster care who had a diagnosed disability. Many children who entered foster care as adolescents tended to be discharged to another agency (such as juvenile justice or mental health) or to independent living (through emancipation from foster care).

Figure Five

Figure 5. State performance with regard to the mean percent of children exiting foster care who were discharged to a permanent home (reunification, adoption, or guardianship).

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency of children older than age 12 at the time of entry into foster care

Table 6 provides key State data for outcome measure 3.3 in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001. Similar to the data for outcome measures 3.1 and 3.2, there was no substantive change in mean or median performance on this measure over time.

Table 6. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding exits to permanency of children who were older than age 12 when they entered foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 44 42 48
Mean performance (% exiting to permanency) 68.8 68.7 69.7
Median performance (% exiting to permanency) 71.0 72.6 72.3
Performance range (% exiting to permanency) 35.8-86.8 17.6-87.5 28.9-92.4

Data presented in figure 6 indicate that 52 percent of the 44 States included in the analysis exhibited no change in performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001. However, 25 percent of the States improved performance, although only 3 of these States (Florida, Georgia, Maryland) exhibited continuous improvement over the 3-year period from FY 1999 to FY 2001. One State (Louisiana) exhibited a continuous decline over the 3-year time period.

Figure Six

Figure 6. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to permanency of children who were older than age 12 when they entered foster care (outcome measure 3.3) (N=44). Seven States were excluded from the analysis because of a high percentage of missing data in FY 1999, and one State was excluded because it did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome measure 3.4: Of all children exiting foster care to emancipation, what percentage was age 12 or younger at the time of entry into foster care?

Outcome measure 3.4 assesses State performance with regard to ensuring that children who enter foster care at young ages do not "grow up" in the system.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding age of entry into foster care of children who are emancipated from foster care

In FY 2001, 51 States provided sufficient data to AFCARS to calculate outcome measure 3.4 (Nebraska did not report data for this measure). The analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding the age at foster care entry of children emancipated from foster care

Table 7 provides State data on this measure for FY 1999, 2000, and 2001. There was no substantive change in mean or median performance on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001.

Table 7. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding age of entry for children emancipated from foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 50 51 51
Mean performance (% children who entered care at age 12 or younger) 27.8 27.8 29.1
Median performance (% children who entered care at age 12 or younger) 27.7 26.7 28.0
Performance range (% children who entered care at age 12 or younger) 0-63.0 0-61.2 0-62.5

The data presented in figure 7, however, indicate that although there was no change in mean or median performance on this measure, 73 percent of the States exhibited a change in performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001, with 42 percent exhibiting a decline in performance and 31 percent exhibiting performance improvement. Only three States (Idaho, Kansas, Texas) demonstrated continuous improvement from FY 1999 to FY 2001, while seven States exhibited a continuous decline in performance during that time period. For most States, a change in one direction from FY 1999 to FY 2000 was offset by a change in the other direction from FY 2000 to FY 2001.

Figure Seven

Figure 7. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding the percent of children emancipated from foster care who were age 12 or younger when they entered foster care (outcome measure 3.4) (N = 49). Two States were excluded from the analysis because they did not report data on this measure in 1999, and one State was excluded because it did not report data for this measure in FY 2001.

Outcome Measure 3.5: For all children who exited foster care, what percentage by racial/ethnic category left either to reunification, adoption, or legal guardianship?

Outcome measure 3.5 is intended to assess State performance in achieving permanency for children of different races and ethnicities. The data analyses for this measure focused on whether children of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds were more or less likely to exit foster care to a permanent home.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding exits to a permanent home for children of varying races and ethnicities

Comparisons were conducted on State performance in attaining permanency for White (non-Hispanic), Hispanic, Black (non-Hispanic), and Alaska Native/Native American children. Other racial/ethnic categories were not included in the analyses because they represented only a small percentage of any State's foster care population.

The results of the analysis comparing exits to permanency for White (non-Hispanic) children and Hispanic children are presented in figure 8. This analysis included only States in which at least 10 percent of the exiting foster care population was Hispanic and at least 10 percent was White (non-Hispanic). As shown in the figure, there was no difference in the percentage of White (non-Hispanic) children and Hispanic children exiting foster care to a permanent home. In addition, as shown in figures 9 and 10, there were no differences in the percentages of Black (non-Hispanic) and Hispanic children exiting to a permanent home and no difference in the percentages of Black (non-Hispanic) or White (non-Hispanic) children exiting foster care to a permanent home (figure 10).

Figure Eight

Figure 8. Comparison of State performance in FY 2001 with regard to exits from foster care that were exits to a permanent home for Hispanic children and White (Non-Hispanic) children (outcome measure 3.5) (N=12). States included are those in which at least 10% of the exiting foster care population was Hispanic and at least 10% was White (non-Hispanic).

Figure Nine

Figure 9. Comparison of State performance in FY 2001 with regard to exits from foster care that were exits to a permanent home for Hispanic children and Black (non-Hispanic) (N = 9). States included are those in which at least 10% of the exiting foster care population was Hispanic and at least 10% was Black (non-Hispanic).

Figure Ten

Figure 10. Comparison of State performance in FY 2001 with regard to exits from foster care that were exits to a permanent home for Black (non-Hispanic) children and White (non-Hispanic) children (N=35). States included are those in which at least 10% of the exiting foster care population was Black (non-Hispanic) and at least 10% was White (non-Hispanic).

Figure 11 depicts performance with respect to exits from foster care to permanency for Alaska Native/Native American children and White (non-Hispanic) children for 10 States in which at least 5 percent of the children exiting foster care were Alaska Native/Native American. As shown in the figure, the largest difference between the groups occurred in Washington State, where 91.9 percent of White (non-Hispanic) children exited to permanency compared to only 65.3 percent of Alaska Native/Native American children. In addition, in Nebraska, New Mexico, and North Dakota, the difference between the groups exceeded 10 percentage points, with White (non-Hispanic) children more likely than Alaska Native/Native American children to achieve permanency at the time of their discharge from foster care.

Figure Eleven

Figure 11. Comparison of State performance in FY 2001 with regard to exits from foster care that were exits to a permanent home for Alaska Native/Native American children and White (non-Hispanic) children (N = 10). States included are those in which at least 5% of the exiting foster care population was Alaska Native/Native American and at least 10% was White (non-Hispanic).

State Performance in Achieving Permanency in a Timely Manner

As noted previously, a primary goal of child welfare services is to achieve permanency for children in foster care either through reunification, adoption, or guardianship. In addition, the Department believes that it is critical to achieve permanency for a child as quickly as possible after a child enters foster care, without jeopardizing the child's continued safety.

To address this issue, the Department established two outcomes that assess State performance in attaining permanency in a timely manner: (1) outcome 4 —reduce time in foster care to reunification without increasing re-entry; and (2) outcome 5 — reduce time in foster care to adoption. Three measures were developed to assess State performance in attaining these outcomes. These measures and data analysis findings are presented below.

Outcome Measure 4.1: Of all children who were reunified with their parents or caretakers at the time of discharge from foster care, what percentage was reunified in the following time periods?

  1. less than 12 months
  2. at least 12 months but less than 24 months
  3. at least 24 months but less than 36 months
  4. at least 36 months but less than 48 months
  5. 48 or more months

Outcome measure 4.1 assesses State performance with regard to the timeliness of reunifications. The Department established the following national standard related to this measure for the CFSR: Of all children who were reunified with their parents or caretakers at the time of discharge from foster care (in a specified fiscal year), 76.2 percent or more were reunified in less than 12 months from the time of the latest removal from home. The information provided below focuses on an analyses of State performance with regard to achieving reunifications in less than 12 months.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding the percentage of children exiting to reunification who were reunified within 12 months of entry into foster care.

In FY 2001, all 52 States provided data to calculate outcome measure 4.1. Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding the percentage of children exiting to reunification who were reunified within 12 months of entry into foster care.

Table 8 provides the results of the analyses of State data for FY 1999, 2000, and 2001. Although there was no substantive change in mean performance on this measure, there was a slight improvement (+6.8 percent change) in median performance. The most striking finding, however, was the increase in the percentage of States meeting the national standard for this measure (a +23 percent change from FY 1999 to FY 2001).

Table 8. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding reunifications within 12 months from the time of entry into foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 50 51 52
Mean performance (% reunified within 12 months) 67.6 68.9 68.7
Median performance (% reunified within 12 months) 64.8 68.0 69.2
Performance range (% reunified within 12 months) 39.0-86.4 39.9-87.0 40.3-90.1
Percent meeting national standard of 76.2% or more 30 37 37

The analysis of change in performance for individual States (shown in figure 12) found that 50 percent of the States exhibited no change in performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001. Although 34 percent of the States improved performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001, no State exhibited continuous improvement over the 3-year period from FY 1999 to FY 2001, and only 2 States exhibited a continuous decline in performance over this time span. Fourteen (28 percent) States met the national standard for this measure in all 3 years (Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Washington, Wyoming).

Figure Twelve

Figure 12. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding reunifications within 12 months of entry into foster care (outcome measure 4.1) (N = 50). Two States were excluded from the analysis because they did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome Measure 4.2: Of all children who entered foster care during the reporting period, what percentage reentered care within 12 months of a prior foster care episode?

In establishing national outcomes regarding the timeliness of permanency, the Department determined that it was necessary to address the possibility that expedited permanency might result in re-entries into foster care. For example, if a child were reunified with the family before the family was sufficiently prepared or before the necessary changes had been made, the child might need to be removed from the home again. Outcome measure 4.2 is intended to address this concern. The Department established the following national standard related to this measure for the CFSR: Of all children who entered foster care during a specified fiscal year, 8.6 percent or less re-entered foster care within 12 months of discharge from a prior foster care episode.

A consistent finding of the analyses of FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 data is that, although there are exceptions, States exhibiting a relatively high percentage of reunifications within 12 months also demonstrate a relatively high percentage of re-entries within 12 months. In contrast, States with a relatively low percentage of reunifications within 12 months also tend to have a relatively low rate of foster care re-entries within 12 months. In fact, in FY 2001, only 4 States (Wyoming, Georgia, South Carolina, New Mexico) met the national standards for both reunifications within 12 months and re-entries into foster care within 12 months. The analysis of FY 2001 data resulted in a correlation between the percentage of reunifications occurring within 12 months and the rate of re-entry into foster care within 12 months that was significant at the p < .001 level (Pearson's R = .516).7 This level of significance indicates that the probability that the relationship between these variables occurred "by chance" is less than .001.

The consistent finding of a significant correlation between these variables indicates that there is a relationship between reunifications that occur quickly and the rate of re-entry into foster care. This raises concerns about potential unanticipated results of State efforts to expedite reunifications.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding re-entries into foster care

The analysis of FY 2001 State data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding re-entries into foster care

Table 9 presents key findings of the analysis of State data for FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding re-entries into foster care. The data in the table indicate no substantive change in mean or median performance on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001, although there was a slight increase (+8.6 percent change) in the percentage of States meeting the national standard for this measure.

Table 9. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding re-entries into foster care within 12 months of a prior foster care episode.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 51 51 52
Mean performance (% re-entering within 12 months) 10.8 10.8 11.2
Median performance (% re-entering within 12 months) 10.2 10.2 10.4
Performance range (% re-entries within 12 months) 0 - 26.7 0 - 27.7 0 - 31
% of States meeting the national standard of 8.6 % or less 35 37 38

As shown in figure 13, 57 percent of the 51 reporting States exhibited a decline in performance on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001. Five States (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Wyoming) exhibited continuous improvement on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001, although 10 States exhibited a continuous decline in performance over the 3-year period. For most States, a change in one direction from FY 1999 to FY 2000 was offset by a change in the other direction from FY 2000 to FY 2001. An additional finding was that 13 States met the national standard for this measure in all 3 years (Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia). However, only South Carolina met the national standards for both foster care re-entries and reunifications within 12 months in all 3 years.

Figure Thirteen

Figure 13. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding re-entries into foster care within 12 months of a prior foster care episode (outcome measure 4.2) (N = 51). One State was excluded from the analysis because it did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome Measure 5.1: Of all children who exited foster care to a finalized adoption, what percentage exited care in the following time periods?

  1. Less than 12 months from the time of the latest removal from home
  2. At least 12 months but less than 24 months
  3. At least 24 months but less than 36 months
  4. At least 36 months but less than 48 months
  5. 48 or more months

Outcome measure 5.1 assesses State performance with regard to the timeliness of the adoption process. The Department established the following national standard related to this measure for the CFSR: Of all children who exited foster care to a finalized adoption during the specified fiscal year, 32 percent or more exited foster care in less than 24 months from the time of the latest removal from the home.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding the timeliness of exits to adoption

In FY 2001, all 52 States provided data sufficient to calculate outcome measure 5.1. Analyses of these data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to a finalized adoption

Table 10 presents a summary of State data for FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 pertaining to finalized adoptions occurring within 24 months of the child's entry into foster care. The data indicate declines from FY 1999 to FY 2001 in mean performance (-9.4 percent change), median performance (-12.9 percent change) and in the percent of States meeting the national standard of 32.0 percent or higher for this measure (-12.9 percent change).

Table 10. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding discharges to adoption that occurred within 24 months of the child's entry into foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 48 50 52
Mean performance (% adoptions within 24 months) 27.7 25.0 25.1
Median performance (% adoptions within 24 months) 24.1 19.8 21.0
Performance range (% adoptions within 24 months) 3.0-70.7 4.6-72.4 5.1-70.8
% of States meeting the national standard of 32.0% or more 31 24 27

Despite the general decline in mean and median performance for all States, 54 percent of the 48 States included in the analysis of change from FY 1999 to FY 2001 exhibited an improved performance on this measure (as shown in figure 14), and 10 of these exhibited continuous improvement over the 3-year period (Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah). For the remainder of the States, a change in one direction from FY 1999 to FY 2000 was followed by a change in the other direction from FY 2000 to FY 2001. Nine States met the national standard for this measure in all 3 years (Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, South Dakota,Texas, Utah).

Figure Fourteen

Figure 14. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding exits to adoption occurring within 24 months of the child's entry into foster care (outcome measure 5.1) (N=48). Four States were excluded from the analysis because they did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

State Performance in Ensuring Stable and Age-Appropriate Placements for Children in Foster Care

Another goal of the child welfare system is to ensure that children in foster care experience placement stability and are in placements that are appropriate for their age. The Department established the following two outcomes to address placement stability and age-appropriate placement: (1) outcome 6 —increase placement stability; and (2) outcome 7 —reduce placements of young children in group homes or institutions. Results of analyses of State performance on these two outcomes are presented below.

Outcome Measure 6.1: Of all children served who had been in foster care for the time periods listed below, what percentage had no more than two placement settings during that time period?

  1. Less than 12 months from the time of latest removal from home
  2. At least 12 months but less than 24 months
  3. At least 24 months but less than 36 months
  4. At least 36 months but less than 48 months
  5. 48 or more months

Outcome measure 6.1 assesses State performance with regard to placement stability. The Department established the following national standard related to this measure for the CFSR: Of all children who have been in foster care for less than 12 months from the time of the latest removal from the home, 86.7 percent or more have had no more than 2 placement settings. The results of the analyses for this measure focus on the time frame of "less than 12 months from the time of the latest removal from home."

State performance in FY 2001 regarding placement stability

In FY 2001, 51 States provided sufficient data to calculate outcome measure 6.1. The analysis of FY 2001 State data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding placement stability

Table 11 presents data pertaining to State performance on this outcome measure in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001. The data demonstrate no substantive change in mean or median performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001. However, there was a decline (-30.6 percent change) from FY 1999 to FY 2001 in the percentage of States meeting the national standard for this measure. Because it requires only a slight change in percentages to impact whether the national standard is met, this change would not necessarily affect States' overall mean or median performance.

Table 11. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding children's placement stability for their first 12 months in foster care.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 50 50 51
Mean % of children in foster care for less than 12 months who experienced no more than 2 placement settings. 82.7 83.1 82.8
Median % of children in foster care for less than 12 months who experienced no more than 2 placements settings. 84.2 85.2 83.3
Range (%) of children in foster care for less than 12 months who experienced no more than 2 placement settings. 58.9-99.8 57.7-99.9 59.5-99.6
% of States meeting the national standard of 86.7% or more 36 32 25

The analysis of State changes in performance over time (shown in figure 15) resulted in a finding that 66 percent of the States included in the analysis exhibited no change in performance on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001. Only one State (Utah) exhibited continuous improvement on this measure over the 3-year period from FY 1999 to FY 2001, and no State exhibited continuous decline. The analysis also found that 10 States met the national standard for this measure in all 3 years (Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Iowa, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Wisconsin).

Figure Fifteen

Figure 15. Change in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 with regard to stability of placements for children in foster care for less than 12 months (outcome measure 6.1) (N = 50). One State was excluded from the analysis because of a high percentage of missing data for this measure in FY 1999 and one State was excluded because it did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Outcome Measure 7.1: For all children who entered foster care during the reporting period and were age 12 or younger at the time of their most recent placement, what percentage was placed in a group home or institution?

Outcome measure 7.1 is intended to assess State performance with regard to age-appropriate foster care placements. Although generally recognized good practice supports the concept that, at times, a child's treatment needs may require that the child be placed in a group home or institution, these placement settings are rarely appropriate for children age 12 and younger. A national standard related to this outcome measure has not been established.

State performance in FY 2001 regarding placements of young children in group homes and institutions

In FY 2001, all 52 States reported data sufficient to calculate outcome measure 7.1. An analysis of FY 2001 State data resulted in the following findings:

Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding placement in group homes and institutions

Table 13 presents key State data for FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 pertaining to placements of young children in group homes and institutions. The data indicate no substantive change in mean performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001.

Table 13. State performance in FY 1999, 2000, and 2001 regarding the percentages of children entering foster care at age 12 or younger who were placed in a group home or institution.

Analysis Results 1999 2000 2001
Number of States reporting 51 50 52
Mean % in group homes and institutions combined 10.9 10.4 11.2
Mean % in group homes 4.9 4.4 5.0
Mean % in institutions 6.1 6.0 6.2

With regard to changes exhibited by individual States (shown in figure 16), 51 percent of the States included in the analysis improved performance on this measure; 35 percent exhibited declines; and 14 percent showed no change in performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001. Ten States exhibited continuous improvement in performance on this measure from FY 1999 to FY 2001 (Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Tennessee, Wyoming). Five States exhibited continuous decline in performance.

Figure Sixteen

Figure 16. Changes in State performance from FY 1999 to FY 2001 regarding placements of young children in group homes and institutions (outcome 7.1) (N = 51). One State was excluded from the analysis because it did not report data for this measure in FY 1999.

Summary

The results of the data analyses presented in this chapter have substantial implications for assessing State performance with respect to the national child welfare outcomes. In addition, table 14 provides the list of States meeting the national standards for each of the measures for which national standards were established.

Table 14. States meeting the national standards in 2001 for the six measures for which national standards were established.

Outcome Measure National Standard States Meeting Standard in 2001* (By rank order from lowest to highest)
1.1** Percent of children who were victims of substantiated or indicated child abuse and/or neglect during the first 6 months of reporting period who had another substantiated or indicated report within a 6-month period. 6.1% or less Virginia, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, Michigan, Arizona, Texas, Minnesota, Nebraska, West Virginia, Maine, Wyoming, Arkansas
2.1***Percent of children in foster care who were the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff member. 0.57% or less West Virginia, New Mexico, Nebraska, Delaware, New Hampshire, Ohio, Arizona, Montana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Texas, Florida, District of Columbia, Michigan, Vermont, California, Idaho, Puerto Rico, Maine, Kansas, South Carolina, Illinois, Utah, Indiana
4.1 Percent of children reunified with their parents or caretakers at the time of discharge from foster care who were reunified within 12 months from the time of entry into foster care. 76.2% or more Oklahoma, Wyoming, Georgia, Hawaii, Wisconsin, North Dakota, Iowa, Utah, South Carolina, Kentucky, Washington, Colorado, Montana, Arkansas, Delaware, South Dakota, Minnesota, Idaho, New Mexico
4.2 Percent of children entering foster care who were re-entering care within 12 months of discharge from a prior foster care episode. 8.6% or less Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, Texas, Kansas, Virginia, Nevada, Nebraska, Michigan, Connecticut, Alaska, Florida, District of Columbia, Wyoming, Georgia, South Carolina, Maine, Louisiana, New Jersey, New Mexico
5.1 Percent of children exiting foster care to a finalized adoption who exited within 24 months from the time of the latest removal from home. 32.0% or more Montana, Idaho, Michigan, Arkansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Kansas, Rhode Island, Iowa, Texas, Colorado, Hawaii, South Dakota, Utah
6.1 Percent of children in foster care for less than 12 months who experienced two or fewer placements. 86.7% or more Michigan, New Mexico, Oregon, New Hampshire, Iowa, New York, Georgia, Maryland, Wisconsin, Delaware, Alabama, Connecticut, Puerto Rico

* Measure 1.1 is based on a calendar year; measure 2.1 is based on the first 9 months of a calendar year; and all other measures are based on the Federal fiscal year. back
** 40 States reported data to NCANDS to calculate this measure. back
*** 38 States reported data to NCANDS to calculate this measure. back

Although no clear patterns of change in performance over time have emerged for the outcome measures, there is consistency from 1999 to 2001 with regard to some of the key findings. These key findings and their implications for assessing State performance are discussed in the following chapter.

6 A percent change differs from a change in percentage points. It is calculated by subtracting "old" data from "new" data and dividing by "old" data. For example, if reunifications within 12 months are 50 percent in 1999 and 75 percent in 2000, the percent change would be +50 percent. If reunifications within 12 months are 75 percent in 1999 and 50 percent in 2000, the percent change would be -33 percent. back
7 The correlation of .516 accounts for 26.6 percent of the variance. Other factors account for the remaining variance of 73.4 percent. back

Return to Table of Contents