AFCARS Data Element

Rating Factor

Findings

Tasks

Estimated/ Completed Date

State/ACF’s Comments/Notes ACF’s Sign-off Notes

#3 Local Agency(County or Equivalent Jurisdiction)

2

Based on the case file review, there are records that did not match what was reported in AFCARS.  

The State and ACF need to review the program code to ensure that it is selecting the county office that has placement and care responsibilities of the case.

The State should set up a conference call with ACF to discuss its findings.

#5 Date of Most Recent Periodic Review (if applicable)

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155):  1998 = 1; 1999 = 3; 2000 = 3; 2001 = 11; 2002 = 47; 2003 = 92

1) The program code checks for hearing types of: 3 (C-2 jeopardy hearing), 5 (TPR – involuntary – retired code), 6 (TPR – voluntary – retired code), or 11 (C-3 termination of parental rights). 

2) Dates of periodic reviews from prior removal episodes are not excluded.

3) The case file review findings indicate an issue with the timely entry of this data.

1a) Remove the State values of “TPR – involuntary” and “TPR – voluntary” from the program code.

1b) Remove the value “jeopardy hearing” from the program code.

1c) Add an option on the screen that reflects a “TPR/Judicial review.”
 
1d) Modify the program code to include the new value.

1e) Modify the program code to not extract TPR hearing dates for the most recent periodic review.

2)  Modify the program code to extract dates of periodic review for the current removal episode.

Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#10 Has the child been clinically diagnosed as having a disability(ies)?

If “yes,” indicate each type of a disability with a “1.”

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Yes = 585; No = 162; Not yet determined = 2,408

1) The design of the screens collecting information on whether a child has been clinically diagnosed with a disability may be contributing to the underreporting of this data and providing false “no” and “not yet determined” responses. 

2) This element defaults to “not yet determined.”

3) The program code does not check if the field “Child has no current clinically diagnosed special need” on the special needs screen has been checked. 

4) A history of this information is not stored in a MACWIS.  If a prior report period is re-submitted, it will not reflect what was known at that time.

5) Based on the case file review, this data is not being entered and updated into the system. 

1a) Modify the system to incorporate this question with the applicable responses. 

1b) Revise the program code based on the revisions in 1a. 

2) Modify the program code by removing the default and mapping missing data to blank.

3) Modify the program code to verify if the indicator is checked and if so, map element #10 to “no.” 

4) Modify the system to maintain a history table based on diagnosis date and “recovery” dates.  These dates should be included in the logic when extracting prior report periods.

Data Quality
5a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

5b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

For #11 - 15:  Space must be available to accommodate all AFCARS disabilities.

#11 Mental Retardation
#12 Visually/Hearing Impaired
#13 Physically Disabled
#14 Emotionally Disturbed
#15 Other Diagnosed Condition

[0 = Does not apply]
1 = Applies

2

1) Elements #11-15 are set to zero if there is no data entry or if element #10 is either “no” or “not yet determined.”

2) For the purpose of submitting subsequent files, this data should not be overwritten to reflect new information that may have been determined at a later date.  It should reflect the health of the child for any given report period.  If data should have been entered and is later entered, then based on the date of the diagnosis it can be extracted for the appropriate report period.
3) Autism is incorrectly mapped to element #14.

4) Several of the records analyzed did not match what was reported in AFCARS.   In elements #11 – 15, the reviewers found conditions that were applicable for AFCARS, indicating the child had been seen and diagnosed with a medical condition by a physician.

1) Modify the program code to initialize these elements to blank.

1a) Modify the program code to set these elements to blank if the answer to element #10 is either “no” or “not yet determined.”

2) Modify the system to maintain a history table based on diagnosis date and “recovery” dates.  These dates should be included in the logic when extracting prior report periods.

3) Modify the “special need” table and map autism to element #15.

Data Quality
4a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

4b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#18 Date of First Removal from Home

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

2

1) There is no code to exclude if the initial placement at the time the agency is given care and placement responsibility (custody) is a hospital or locked facility. 

2) Several of the records analyzed indicated the child had a date of removal prior to the one reported to AFCARS. 

1) Modify the program code that if the child’s first, and/or only placement is a locked facility or a hospital, to exclude the record from the date of first removal date field.

Data Quality
2a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#19 Total Number of Removals from Home

2

1) Based on the case file review finding and the frequency results, the rating factor for this element was changed.  There are 327 records with two or more removals.  The frequencies for element #20 indicate there are 254 records with previous discharge dates.  In the majority of the error cases, the reviewers found that there had been more removal episodes than what were reported to AFCARS.  In most of these the child actually experienced two removal episodes.  In one case, the child had four removal episodes instead of only one, as reported.

2) For the purpose of submitting subsequent files, this data should not be overwritten to reflect information that may have been entered after the report period end date for the period being resubmitted.

1) The State needs to verify that if the data is in the history table the program code is actually getting it.  If there are no problems with the program code, notify ACF in the State’s first improvement plan update. 

2)  Modify the program code or the system to ensure that a history table contains the begin and end date of every removal episode and the extraction code for resubmissions pulls dates and counts removals up through the report period being resubmitted.

#20 Date Child was Discharged from last foster care episode (if applicable)

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

2

1) The program code does not extract the maximum date of discharge prior to the date of the current removal episode.

2) For the purpose of submitting subsequent files, this data should not be overwritten to reflect information that may have been entered after the report period end date for the period being resubmitted.

3) The frequency report has 254 records with previous discharge dates.  This doesn’t match what is reported for element #19.  Errors in the case file review reflect the child had more removal episodes.

1) Modify the program code to extract the maximum date of discharge that occurred prior to the current date of removal (element #21) and comment out the remaining program code.

2) Modify the program code or the system to ensure that a history table contains the begin and end date of every removal episode and the extraction code for resubmissions pulls dates up through the end of the report period being resubmitted.
Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#21 Date of Latest Removal

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

2

1) There is no code to exclude if the initial placement at the time the agency is given care and placement responsibility (custody) is a hospital or locked facility. 

2) For the purpose of submitting subsequent files, this data should not be overwritten to reflect information that may have been entered after the report period end date for the period being resubmitted.

3) Several of the records analyzed indicated the child had a date of removal prior to the one reported to AFCARS and that there was more than one removal episode.

1) Modify the program code that if the child’s first, and/or only placement is a locked facility or a hospital, to exclude the record from the date of first removal date field.

2) Modify the program code or the system to ensure that a history table contains the begin and end date of every removal episode and the extraction code for resubmissions pulls dates up through the end of the report period being resubmitted.

Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#23 Date of Placement in Current Foster Care Setting

2

Frequency Report: There are 17 records missing a placement date.

1) A worker can end a placement without entering a new placement setting or a discharge from care.

2) If the status of the foster care setting changes (i.e., from a foster home to a pre-adopt home, or from one level of care to another), the program code incorrectly extracts that date. 

3) The program code does not check the length of stay for the values “1100, medical-inpatient alcohol and drug treatment,” “1080, Med-Inpatient Medical Services,” and “1090, Med-Inpatient Psychiatric Services.”  If these stays are not for acute care treatment, then the date the placement started must be included.
 

1)  Modify the system to ensure that if a placement is ended that there is an appropriate subsequent action entered by the worker.

2)  Modify the program code to check if there was a change in status and that the child is actually in the same foster home or other setting.

3)  Modify the program code to check whether the stay is for acute care treatment and include the date of the placement, if appropriate. 

Data Quality
4a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

4b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#24 Number of Previous Placement Settings in This  Episode

2

Frequency Report: There are 25 records with zero placements.

1) The program code does not check the length of stay for the values “1100, medical-inpatient alcohol and drug treatment,” “1080, Med-Inpatient Medical Services,” and “1090, Med-Inpatient Psychiatric Services” (LN 1762).  If these stays are not for acute care treatment, then they must be counted in the number of placements.

2) The State staff found an error in the program code as a result of the extracted test case results.  Some service providers provide multiple services and the program code is counting all the types of services and not just placement settings.  (The problem is with the “rsdr_service.”)

3) If the status of the foster care setting changes (i.e., from a foster home to a pre-adopt home or from one level of care to another), the program code incorrectly counts it as placement move.

4)  The program code includes “runaways” in the count of placement changes.

1) Modify the program code to check whether the stay is for acute care treatment and include it in the number of placement settings, if appropriate. 

2)  Modify the program code to count only placement settings and not services.

3) Modify the program code to check if there was a change in status and that the child is actually in the same foster home or other setting.  If so, the program code must not count it as a placement move.

4) Modify the program code to exclude “runaways” in the count of placement moves.
Data Quality
a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#41 Current Placement Setting

1 = Pre-Adoptive Home
2 = Foster Family Home-Relative
3 = Foster Family Home-Non-Relative
4 = Group Home
5 = Institution
6 = Supervised Independent Living
7 = Runaway
8 = Trial Home Visit

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Pre-adopt home = 312; relative foster home = 471; non-relative foster home = 1,532; Group home = 187; Institution = 148; supervised independent living = 169; Runaway = 16; Trial home visit = 256; Not reported = 64.  There are 776 records for non-foster home settings.

1) The program code for “foster home, relative” includes the codes for spouse, stepparent, and former spouse.” 

2)   The program code does not include “great uncle,” but does include “great aunt.” 

3)  The program code checks the following resource type codes for the mapping of “supervised independent living” – “on own,” “life skills program,” “hotel,” and “miscellaneous.” 

4) The program code includes the mapping of “hospitals.”  However, the program code does not check the length of stay in the hospital.  If the stay is for acute care, then the setting should not be included for this element.  If it is for a longer stay, then the setting must be included. 

5) The state includes the codes “alcohol” and “children’s residential services.

6) Workers may be incorrectly entering some respite stays as primary instead of secondary placements.

1a)  Modify the program code for “foster home – relative” to not include the codes for “spouse” and “stepparents.”   If applicable, map to “trial home visit.”

1b)   Modify the program code for “foster home – relative” to not include the code for former spouses.  If the former spouse is  the child’s parent, and if applicable, map to “trial home visit.” If this person was not a parent or related caretaker to the child, then map it to “foster home - non-relative.”

2) Provide the federal review team with an explanation regarding this omission.

3) Provide the federal review team with an explanation regarding these resources.

4) Modify the program code to check whether hospital stays are for acute care or not.  If for other than acute care, include it as a placement location. 

4a) Clarify if psychiatric hospitals are included under the resource type of hospital. 

5) Clarify whether the resource type codes “alcohol” and “children’s residential services” include contracted placement agencies.

Data Quality
6)  Implement training and oversight to ensure that respite stays are not entered as a primary placement.
7) The State needs to ensure training and supervisory oversight for the correct use of “primary” and “secondary” placements.

8a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

8b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#43 Most recent case plan goal

1 = Reunify With Parent(s) Or Principal Caretaker(s)
2 = Live With Relative(s)
3 = Adoption
4 = Long Term Foster Care
5 = Emancipation
6 = Guardianship
7 = Case Plan Goal Not Yet Established

2

Screens:   Child Plan.  This screen contains the following tabs: Child’s wishes, “Ind Lvng,” No reunification, Peer relationship, No TPR, and Other.  On the “no reunification” screen there are two additional tabs, “Adoption or TPR Pending” and “Other Permanent Living Arrangement.”

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Reunify = 914; Live with other relative = 94; Adoption = 928; LTFC = 344; Emancipation = 440; Guardianship = 12; Not yet established = 219; Not reported = 204

1) The State will be making changes (in practice and to the system) on how case plan goals are determined and recorded in the system.

2) As of January 2006, a goal of “State subsidized guardianship” will be implemented in practice.

3) The options “transfer of custody to an agency or non-relative” and “determine whether to pursue termination of parental rights” are no longer used. 

4) If a case worker selects “Other - APPLA” as the child’s case plan goal, they are to also complete the “no reunification, other permanent living arrangement” screen.  However, the system does not automatically direct the worker to this screen.  Also, there is duplication of permanency plan goals between these two screens.

5)  “Other permanent plan (describe)” is mapped to “not yet established.” 

6) The program code checks for a legal status of “voluntary care-young adult” and maps this to “long-term foster care.”  This is used for youth that voluntarily remain in foster care after the age of majority. 

7a) If the case plan goal is blank and the child’s age at the end of the report period is 18, the program code sets the case plan goal to “emancipation.”   If the case plan goal is blank and a there is a permanent plan code “other - APPLA,” the program code checks the child’s age.  If the child is older than 16, the program code will set the child’s goal to “emancipation.”  If the child is 16 or younger, the program code sets this element to “not yet established.” 

1a) Provide ACF with development and implementation plans for the new method for recording case plan goals.
1b)  Provide screen prints and modified program code to ACF.

2a) Modify the program code to correctly extract this goal to “guardianship.” 

2b) Provide updated selection list to ACF (screen print).

3) Inactivate these options on the selection list, or remove them.

3b) Modify the extraction code to exclude these options.

4a) Modify the system to force the worker to complete the “no reunification” screen if “other-APPLA” is selected. 

4b) Modify the screen(s) so that goals are listed only once.

5) Map this option to blank, or if appropriate, to long-term foster care.

6a) Map this to blank and include the most recent goal for the child prior to discharge from foster care.
6b) Modify the program code by commenting out this section from the AFCARS program code.

7a) Modify the program code to map missing goals to blank.

7b) Modify the program code so that it does not determine case plan goals. 

7c)  If the child has been in care for more than 60 days, this element must be blank. 

Data Quality
8a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

8b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#44 Caretaker Family Structure

1 = Married Couple
2 = Unmarried Couple
3 = Single Female
4 = Single Male
5 = Unable to Determine

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Married couple = 916; Unmarried couple = 440; Single female = 1,413; Single male = 141; Unable to determine = 27; Not reported = 218

1) The value “008, whereabouts unknown” is incorrectly mapped to “unable to determine.”

1) Modify the program code to map “whereabouts unknown” to blank. 

Data Quality
2a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#47 Mother’s Date of TPR

AD #19 Date of Mother's TPR

2

AD #19 Frequency report:  There were eight records reported with no TPR date.

1) In the event there is more than one TPR date, the program code does not extract the latest TPR date. 

1) Modify the program code to extract the latest TPR date.

#49 Foster Family Structure

0 = Not Applicable
1 = Married Couple
2 = Unmarried Couple
3 = Single Female
4 = Single Male

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Not applicable = 446; Married couple = 1,173; Unmarried couple = 38; Single female = 317; Single male = 74; Not reported = 1,107

1) The number of records reported in element #41 for non-foster home settings is 776, but there are only 446 records reported for this element as “not applicable.”  According to the program code, if a child’s current placement is not in a foster home this element is mapped to "0, not applicable."  The rating was adjusted based on this finding. 

1) The State needs to re-examine the program code to ensure that there is not an additional problem.

Data Quality
2a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#53 1st Foster Caretaker’s Hispanic or Latino Origin

#55 2nd Foster Caretaker’s Hispanic Origin

[0 = Not applicable]
1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Unable to Determine

2

#53: Frequency report (n=3155):  Not applicable = 0; Yes = 10 (.32%); No = 1, 094 (35%); Unable to determine = 101 (3%); Not reported = 1,950 (62%). 

#55: Frequency report (n=3155):  Not applicable = 0; Yes = 16 (.19%); No = 985 (31%); Unable to determine = 73 (2%); Not reported = 2,091 (66%). 
The number of records reported in element #41 for non-foster home settings is 776. 

1) If the child’s current placement is not in a foster home, this element is not mapped to "0, not applicable." 

1) The State needs to modify the program code to set this element to “not applicable” when the child’s current living arrangement is other than a foster home.

Data Quality
2a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#56 Date of Discharge from foster care

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): 518 records with a date.

This data can be entered into three different locations by the case workers and will populate the appropriate field on the other screens.  The program code checks all these locations. 

Modify the program code to extract this data from the “exit date” field only.

#57 Date of Discharge Transaction Date

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

2

When no transaction date is found, the program code checks other fields to construct a date for this element. 

The program code must extract the system date that is associated with the entry of the discharge date.

#58 Reason for Discharge

[0 = Not Applicable]
1 = Reunification with Parent(s) or Primary Caretaker(s)
2 = Living with Other Relative(s)
3 = Adoption
4 = Emancipation
5 = Guardianship
6 = Transfer to Another Agency
7 = Runaway
8 = Death of Child

2

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Not applicable = 0; Reunify = 216; Living with other relative = 38; Adoption = 154; Emancipation = 93; Guardianship = 2; Transfer to another agency = 5; Runaway = 0; Death = 2; Not reported = 2,645
Number reported = 510.

1) For children that are still in care, this element is mapped to blank. 

2) This data can be entered into three different locations by the case workers and will populate the appropriate field on the other screens.  The program code checks all these locations. 

3) There are fewer records reported with reasons for discharge than the number reported for dates of discharge.   The State needs to ensure that for every discharge there are dates and reasons reported. 

1) Modify the program code to map the records of children still in care to “not applicable.”

2) Modify the program code to extract this data from the “reason for exit” field only.

Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#61 Title IVA (Aid to Families with Dependent Children)

2

1) The program code checks for an indicator for eligibility, not payment. 

2)  There is an interface with the title IV-A information system.  However, the child welfare agency does not receive funding information through the interface.

3) There is not a field on MACWIS to manually enter information on whether a payment was made on behalf of the child during his/her foster care episode.  In the program code there is logic that checks a screen that is no longer used (page 19 of screen prints). 

1) Modify the program code to check for a payment made on behalf of the child during the six month report period.

2) Modify the system so that if a payment is made on behalf of a child in foster care this information will be received by the child welfare agency.  The child welfare agency must receive information regarding whether a title IV-A payment was made on behalf of the child at any time during the report period, and after the child enters foster care.

3) This code should be either removed or commented out.  Or, the State should use this screen to manually enter the data.

#65 None of the Above

2

The program code checks if there are other assets the child receives or if there are other sources of Federal or state funding.  A review of the list indicates that there are some values that should not be included that are mapped to this element (table 24 and 25).

Review and revise the program code to include only those assets that are paid on behalf of the child and serve as a source of support.

#17 If yes, how old was the child when the adoption was legalized?

[0 = Not Applicable]
1 = less than 2 years old
2 = 2-5 years old
3 = 6-12 years old
4 = 13 years or older
5 = Unable to Determine

3

Frequency report (n = 3,155): Not applicable = 2,945; Age categories = 30; Unable to determine = 25; Not reported = 146

The age is calculated based on the date entered on the screen for the previous adoption legalization date.  If no date is entered, this element is set to blank. 

1) Provide worker training that if the exact adoption finalization date is not known, the worker should estimate the date based on the age of the child at the time of the adoption.

2) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

Actions or Conditions Associated With Child’s Removal (Indicate all that apply with a “1”.)

#26 Physical Abuse
#27 Sexual Abuse
#28 Neglect
#29 Parent Alcohol Abuse
#30 Parent Drug Abuse
#31 Child Alcohol Abuse
#32 Child Drug Abuse
#33 Child Disability
#34 Child’s Behavior Problem
#35 Death of Parent
#36 Incarceration of Parent
#37 Caretaker Inability to Cope Due to Illness or Other Reasons
#38 Abandonment
#39 Relinquishment
#40 Inadequate Housing

[0-Does not Apply]
1-Applies

3

Case file review findings:   There were a significant number of errors related to elements #26 – 40.  In general, the AFCARS data indicated that conditions did not apply when in fact the reviewer found that it was a circumstance associated with the child’s removal. 

In many of the cases in the case file review, reviewers found domestic violence as a contributing reason for the child entering care.  This is not an option on the State’s list for reasons of removal.  The State does collect it on the intake/allegation screens and it is reported to NCANDS.  The State may want to consider adding it to the options for reasons of removal. 

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#45 1st Primary Caretaker’s Birth Year

#46 2nd Primary Caretaker’s Birth Year (if applicable)

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

3

Frequency report (n = 3,155):  The report contained the dates:  1995 = 3; 1996 = 1; 2001 = 1

#46: Frequency report (n = 3,155): 1999 = 1; Invalid data 5200 = 1; 965 records reported with valid years. 
There is an issue of this data not being entered into the system as supported by both the frequency report and the case file review.

There is an inconsistency between the frequency numbers reported in element #44 as couples and the number of dates of birth for the second primary caretaker’s date of birth.  There were 1,356 records reported as couples in element #44.

Case file review findings:  18 (43%) of the records analyzed did not match what was reported in AFCARS.   There were 17 error cases reported as blank.  In eleven cases the response to element #44 was either “married couple” (10) or “unmarried couple” (one) and the reviewers found dates of birth.  In four cases, element #44 was either “married couple” (three) or “unmarried couple” (one).  In these cases the reviewer was not able to find dates of birth.  In the remaining two cases reported as blank, one had element #44 reported as blank, but the reviewer found that it was a married couple. In the other blank case, element #44 had a family structure reported in AFCARS. 

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#48 Legal or Putative Father’s TPR

___(mo) ___ (day)____(year)

3

Case file review findings:  9 (20%) of the records analyzed did not match what was reported in AFCARS. There were four error cases reported as blank, but the reviewers found dates.   

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#50 1st Foster Caretaker’s Birth Year

#51 2nd Foster Caretaker’s Birth Year

3

Frequency report (n = 3,155): 1990 =1; 1999 =1; Invalid data 1899 = 2; 1,542 records with birth years.  1,611 records with no data.  There are 676 records reported in element #41 for non-foster home settings (values 1-3). There are 1,602 records reported for #49 with a marital status.

#51: Frequency report (n = 3,155): Invalid data 3 records.  1,210 records with birth years.  There are 1,211 records reported as couples in element #49.

Case file review findings:  6 (14%) of the records analyzed did not match what was reported in AFCARS.   In three error cases, this field and element #49 were blank, but the child was in a relative foster home. 

Case file review findings:  6 (14%) of the records analyzed did not match what was reported in AFCARS.   In one error case, this element was blank, but #49 was verified to be “married couple.” In three error cases, this field and element #49 was blank, but the child was in a relative foster home.

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#54 2nd Foster Caretaker’s Race (if applicable)
a. American Indian or Alaska Native
b. Asian
c. Black or African American
d. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific  Islander
e. White
f. Unable to Determine

3

Each of the race categories had seven errors (17%), except for “white,” which had eight (19%) errors.  In two error cases, the race categories were blank, but element #49 was verified to be a “married couple.”  In three error cases, the race categories and element #49 were blank, but the child was in a relative foster home. 

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

AFCARS Data Element

Rating Factor

Findings

Task

Estimated/ Completed Date

State/ACF’s Comments/Notes
ACF’s Sign-off Notes

#9 Has Agency Determined Special Needs?

1 = Yes
2 = No

#10 Primary Basis for Determining Special Needs

0 = Not Applicable
1 = Racial/Original Background
2 = Age
3 = Membership in a Sibling Group
4 = Medical Conditions or Mental, Physical or Emotional Disabilities
5 = Other State Defined Special Needs

2

#9 Frequency report (n = 154): Yes = 23; No = 131

#10 Frequency report (n = 154): Not applicable = 131; Race = 0; Age = 9; Sibling = 5; Disabilities = 4; Other = 5

1) The program code does not check the actual field where the basis of special needs is entered. 

2) The program code will map element #9 to “no” if there are no conditions selected in elements #11-15.

1) Modify the program code to check the field “AAP Reason” on the “Adoption Assistance Program” screen.  If a reason is selected here, then it should be mapped to the appropriate code for element #10 and set element #9 to “yes.” 

1a) If the condition “medical conditions or mental, physical or emotional disabilities” is selected, then the appropriate disability information must be mapped to elements #11-15. 

2)  Modify program code to set #9 to “yes” only if the primary basis for special needs is “medical conditions or mental, physical or emotional disabilities.”

Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.
3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#11 Mental Retardation
#12 Visually/Hearing Impaired
#13 Physically Disabled
#14 Emotionally Disturbed
#15 Other Diagnosed Condition

2

1) This element is incorrectly initialized to zero.

2) Information regarding disabilities is reported regardless of what is reported in #10. 

3) Autism is incorrectly mapped to element #14.

1) Modify the program code to initialize these elements to blank.

2) Modify the program code to include elements #11 - 15 only if element #10 is a “4.”

3) Map autism to element #15.

Data Quality
3a) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

3b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#18 Mother Married at Time of Birth

1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Unable to Determine

2

Frequency report (n = 154): Yes = 53; No = 94; Unable to determine = 7

1) The program code maps a zero to “no.”

1) Modify the program code to comment out the language that sets a zero to “no.”

#29 Relationship of Adoptive Parent to Child - Stepparent

#30 Relationship of Adoptive Parent to Child - Other Relative

#31 Relationship of Adoptive Parent to Child - Foster Parent

#32 Relationship of Adoptive Parent to Child - Other Non-Relative

0 = Does not Apply
1 = Applies

2

1) The screen does not allow the worker to select more than one relationship.  Modifying the screen will allow the worker to more accurately identify the relationship between the child and the adoptive parents by allowing the workers to select all that apply.

1)  Modify the screen to allow the selection of relationships between the child and the individuals that adopted him/her.

Data Quality
2a)  Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2b) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.

#33 Child Was Placed from

1 = Within State
2 = Another State
3 = Another Country

2

1) The State value “DHS out of state” is incorrectly mapped to “another country.”  The State is not to report adoptions of children placed in their State from another State, so this code would not be applicable.

2) The State value “CPA out of country” is incorrectly mapped to “another State” instead of “another country.”

3) The program code incorrectly checks the ICPC indicator for children placed in Maine by another State.  The program code should not check for incoming ICPCs.

1) Modify the program code by either commenting out this logic or map it to blank.

2) Map “CPA out of country” to “another country.”

4) Modify the program code so that it does not check the ICPC indicator for children placed in Maine by another State.

#35 Receiving Monthly Subsidy

1=Yes
2=No

2

The extraction code checks for a “closure date” of an adoption agreement after the date of finalization.

Modify the program code to ignore end dates of adoption subsidy agreements that are after the date of the adoption finalization.

#20 Date of Father's TPR

3

Frequency report:  There were ten records reported with no TPR date.
 

1) Implement periodic management reports to assess the accuracy and timeliness of this data.

2) Ensure supervisory oversight for the timely and accurate entry of this data.