Child Protection DayMarch 24, 2011

CPS and Child Abuse Prevention: Protecting Budget and

Advocating Legislative Proposals

Madeline McClure, LCSW, Executive Director Diana Martinez, JD, Director of Public Policy

TexProtectsThe Texas Association for the Protection of Children

www.texprotects.orgmadeline@texprotects.org // diana@texprotects.org

2

I. Incidents of AbuseII. CPS and Prevention Cut HighlightsIII. Impact of CPS cuts

◦ Family and Substitute Care◦ CPS Staff Issues

IV. Impact of Prevention CutsV. Advocacy Primer

Outline

3

Incidents of Child Abuse and Neglect in Texas

4

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

5,200,000

5,400,000

5,600,000

5,800,000

6,000,000

6,200,000

6,400,000

6,600,000

6,800,000

# Reports # Confirmed # Actual IncidenceChild Population

Num

ber

of C

ases

(R

epor

ts/C

onfir

med

)

Child

Pop

ulat

ion

Child abuse and neglect incidence continue to climb annually in Texas.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 4th National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, only 50% of actual CA/N cases are investigated by CPS

2010 DataChild Population 6,584,709Alleged Victims 288,080Confirmed 66,897 Removed 16,347

TX Child Abuse and Neglect Continues Upward Trend

5

103,000 COWBO

Y STADIU

M

103,000 COWBO

Y STADIU

M

82,080 COWBOY STADIUM

288,080Alleged

Child Abuse Victims

To put the number of actual reports of child abuse in perspective, consider the maximum capacity crowd that attended the Super Bowl recently at Cowboys Stadium. Think of that stadium filled to the brim 2 3/4 times over.

Now imagine them all filled with Texas children. That is the real number of children being seriously neglected, physically or sexually abused by their own parents or other family members in 2010 alone.

Actual Reports of Child Abuse

6

Child Fatalities in Texas

FY19

97

FY19

98

FY19

99

FY20

00

FY20

01

FY20

02

FY20

03

FY 20

04

FY20

05

FY20

06

FY20

07

FY20

08

FY20

09

FY20

100

50

100

150

200

250

300

103

171

135156

195203184

204201227223213

280

227

Many of these abused children died at the hands of those caregivers: 227 in 2010, 15 of whom were in foster care at the time of their death.

The trend numbers for child deaths are alarmingly high. The Texas child population grew from 5,618,202 in 1997 to 6,584,709 in 2010, a 117% increase while child abuse fatalities increased an astounding 120% from 1997 to 2010, over this same period.

7

TDFPS Funding Cuts2010 E 2011

Budgeted

Agency Requested HB 1/ SB1

Change from

2010-11

Change from

requestTotal TDFPS Agency

$2,740,323,715

$3,116,310,229 $2,486,625,005 -$253.7 mil.-9.3%

-$629.7 mil -20%

Total CPS $2,250,506,449

$2,560,421,857 $2,084,483,193 $166,023,256 -7.4%

-$475,938,664 -18.6%

Statewide Intake

$36,933,583 $43,320,279 $36,402,389 -$531,194-1.4%

-$6,917,890-18.7%

Prevention$88,109,457 $99,807,000 $48,247,099 -$39,862,358

-45%-$51,559,901

-58.5%CPS Direct Delivery Staff

$837,809,055 $920,311,139 $789,636,570 -$48,172,485-5.7%

-$130,674,569-14%

8

Impact of CPS Cuts –Family and Substitute Care

CPS Funding Cuts2010 E 2011

Budgeted

Agency Requested

HB 1/ SB1Change

from 2010-11

Change from

requestRelative Caregiver Payments(Kinship Care)

$14,527,726 $17,938,859 $0 -$14,527,726-100%

-$17,938,859 -100%

Relative Day care (child care)

$18,291,284 $18,961,608 $7,322,150 -$10,969,134-60%

-$11,639,458-61%

Protective Day Care (bio family)

$36,512,724 $43,555,950 $28,112,032 -$8,400,692-23%

-$15,443,918-35%

Adoption Subsidy/ PCA Payments

$349,542,694 $423,255,878 $340,777,143 -$8,765,551-2.5%

-$82,478,735-19.5%

Foster Care Payments

$760,796,146 $885,978,502 $704,075,972 -$56,720,174-7.5%

-$181,902,530-20.5%

9

HB1/SB1 eliminates kinship-support caregiver program and reduces childcare funding

=Slashed financial supports for relatives who take abused kin into home.

HB1/SB1 cuts protective day care for FBSS cases + HB1/SB1 project FBSS caseworkers’ caseload to

increase 25% = less support for Family Preservation All the above = less children with family and relatives and More kids in foster care

Family Preservation Cuts

Texas Children Adopted2010 20044,803 2,512 90% increase!

HB1/SB1 eliminates adoption subsidy payments for new families =

Less adopted children and more children languishing in foster care

Elimination of Adoption Subsidies

12

Cost of Care*Family

PreservationKinship Care Adoption Foster Care

$1,092 $3,277 $2,722 $8,924 GR / $21,766 All

Funds

While we cut our family preservation supports, kinship care supports and adoption subsidies, we will have no choice but to increase child placements in foster care, at a cost 2.7-8x higher expense to the state GR.

*Calculations by CPPP, Jane Burstain

Current foster care providers don’t receive enough to cover the cost of care:

57.6% children are placed outside their county

18.5% sibling groups are not placed together

17% kids are placed out of RegionYETHB1/SB1 rolls back foster care rates by 7%

plus adds a 5% reduction: Total 12% cut= Less foster care providers

Foster Care Rate Cuts

14

Cuts to:Family PreservationKinship CareAdoption AssistanceFoster Care

Will result in:Kids being removed with no place to goKids not being removed because there’s no

place to go

Unintended Consequences

15

Impact of CPS cuts - Caseloads

16

Total DFPS FTE’s-823.6

Total CPS FTE-749.5 90% of the Total DFPS Cuts

-406 CPS caseworkers 112 laid off- Remaining are left vacant: 294

-66 Units = 3 Texas Regions

Employee Cuts: CPS

17

CASELOAD COMPARISIONSInvestigator FBSS CVS

FY 05 42 17.5 37FY 06 35 20 45FY 07 22.1 21.1 43.6FY 08 22.1 20.7 39.1FY 09 20.7 19 28.2FY 10 E 29.1 21.9 29.5FY 11 E 23 19.2 27.8FY 12 24 22.5 28.6FY 13 24.8 24 29.1CWLA Recommended

12 12 15

18

State CPS Caseloads vs. Recommended Levels and National Average

Investigator FBSS* CVS**0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45FY06

FY07

FY 08

FY 09

FY 10 E

FY 11 E

FY 12 SB1 and HB 1 pro-jections

FY 13 SB1 and HB 1 pro-jections

National Average

Child Welfare League of Amer-ica (CWLA) Recommended

How can the LBB project: Increase in SWI (reports) = +11,668 +5% Increase in Investigations = +8,401 +5% Increase in confirmations = +2,433 +6%

While ELIMINATING over 66 CPS units and Project that caseloads will decrease from

2010 to 2012?Investigators: 29.1 to 24 -17.2%CVS: 29.5 to 28.6 -3.4%

CPS Increase in Cases and Caseload2010-2012 Mystery Math?

20

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

2007 2008 2009 2010

Texas CPS Caseworker Turnover

For those children entering the CPS system, we do not provide them with a caseworker that will see their case through:Turnover for caseworkers have started trending up since the bottom of the recession: We are back up into the 30% plus turnover rate for new workers and investigative workers.

21

Turnover Reduces Child Permanency - Human Costs

Series10.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

74.50%

17.50%

0.10%

Chart Title

Number of Caseworkers

High turnover is what decimates the functioning of the CPS system. And it hurts children in state conservatorship: Several studies, such as this, found that with each hand-off of a caseworker, a child’s chance of reaching permanency in one year drops off dramatically.

12

6-7The Child Welfare Training Institute: : http://www.cwti.org/RR/impact%20DVD%20intro.pdf(1990)Katz, L., “Effective Permanency Planning for children in foster care”. Social Work, 35, 220-226. Study in Washington and Idaho showed that when caseloads were reduced to no more than 10 children per worker, permanency for children was accomplished in a timely manner.United States General Accounting Office. 2003. Child Welfare: HHS Could Play a Greater Role in Helping Child Welfare Agencies Recruit and Retain Staff: “Some of the caseworkers we interviewed handle double the number of cases recommended and spend between 50-80% of their time completing paperwork, thereby limiting their time to assist children and families”

22

Less Investigators / Higher turnover =More cases:

administratively closed +screened out +rated lower priority = slower response time =

More kids left in harms way

Less CVS workers mean children languishing in system longer = more expense and higher risk of state becoming permanent “parent” of children: Poor outcomes

Less FBSS workers mean more children removed with no place to go and less children remaining with FOO.

Unintended Consequences

23

Prevention IssuesImpact of Cuts

24

$0.0000$0.5000$1.0000$1.5000$2.0000$2.5000$3.0000$3.5000$4.0000$4.5000$5.0000$5.5000$6.0000

$6,250,000,000

$1,140,800,000

$45,883,500$24,123,500

TX 2007 Total Cost spent on Consequences of Child Abuse

Total Costs of CPS System - 2011 Budgeted

Total PEI Prevention & Early In-tervention - 2011 Budgeted

Total Proposed PEI - Total HB1 Proposal for 2012

The Graduate College of Social Work University of Houston analysis of the costs of child abuse concluded that Texas spent $6,279,204,373 in 2007 on direct and indirect costs dealing with the after-affects of child abuse and neglect.(2009) Cache Seitz Steinberg, Ph.D. Kelli Connell-Carrick, Ph.D. Patrick Leung, Ph. D. Joe Papick, MSW Katherine Barillas, MSW, ABD (August, 2009). REPORT TO THE INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR BUILDING HEALTHY FAMILIES AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES: Evaluation Elements 1-6 Final Report.

(2007) TDFPS Costs projected for 08-09: LAR budget for CPS costs including foster/ adopt costs. Excludes other DFPS functions (APS, CCL, PEI). Total PEI costs 2007 LAR Prevention budget for 08-09

Problem: Texas Child Abuse Costs and Prevention Investment-Inverse Ratio

25

Child Abuse Prevention Services: Texas vs. US average*

2007 20080

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

State Average w/o TX Texas

Num

ber o

f Chi

ldre

n pe

r 1,0

00

Rec

eivi

ng P

reve

ntio

n Se

rvic

es

*US Dept. HHS, Administration for Children & Families, Child Maltreatment 2007; retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/ US Dept. HHS, Administration for Children & Families, Child Maltreatment 2008; retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm08/

But we invest less in prevention than any other state in the nation: In Texas only 5 of every 1,000 children receive prevention services compared to a national average of 44 of every 1,000 children.

26

PEI (Prevention) Budget ImpactProgram Budgeted

2011HB 1 SB 1 % Cut

STAR Program $21,000,862 $13,699,728 $13,699,728 -34.8%CYD Program $7,847,599 $5,039,300 $5,039,300 -35.8%Texas Families (TFTS)

$4,121,878 $2,610,039 $2,610,039 -36.7%

Child Abuse Prevention Grants

$1,813,365 $1,640,667 $1,640,667 -9.5%

Other At-Risk Prevention

$8,955,911 $0 $2,290,576 -100% (HB1) -74.4% (SB1)

Overall: PEIOverall PEI $45,883,574 $24,123,550 $26,414,125 42% SB1

(40%)47% HB1

(45%)

Home Visitation Programs Prevention and early intervention strategy Offer parenting support interventions in the home for

families with young children plus risk assessment, information, guidance.

Services delivered by professionals or trained community workers.

Monthly Visits for generally a 2-3 year period Common Outcomes:

◦ Improved pregnancy outcomes◦ Improved parenting practices◦ Safe home environments◦ Improved child health and development ◦ Improved School readiness◦ Enhanced Family economic self-sufficiency

Home Visitation Programs: National

Home-Based Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY)

Relief Nursery Healthy Families Parents as Teachers (PAT) Avance Family Connections Triple P Nurse Family Partnership

29

NFP Legislation SB 156 (80-R) currently serving 2,000 TX

Families $17.8 million for FY 2010-11 Proposed budget cut of 50% to $8.9 mil.

2012-13 1,000 currently served pregnant or post-

partum mothers, babies and families will abruptly end services if cuts go forward.

Top Prevention Priority

30

Nurse-Family PartnershipProgram Goals Improve pregnancy outcomes Improve child health and development Improve parents’ economic self-sufficiencyKey Program Components First-time, low income mothers paired with

specially trained nurses Evidence-based: 3 RCT over 3 Decades Nurse home visits client during pregnancy

to child age 2

31

NFP Outcomes1. Increase Families Economic Self-Sufficiency 20% reduction in months on welfare 32% fewer subsequent pregnancies 83% increase in Mom’s labor force participation by the

child’s fourth birthday 46% increase in father’s presence in household

2. Improves child’s health and development: Reduces child abuse and neglect by 48% 56% decrease in child’s Emergency room visits

3. NFP improves mother’s pre-natal health 79% reduction in preterm delivery for high-risk

pregnancies.

32

4. Increase in Child’s School Readiness: 50% reduction in language delays of child

age 21 months; 67% reduction in behavioral/intellectual

problems at age six 5. Reduction in Criminal Activity 60% fewer arrests of the mother; 72% fewer

convictions of the mother 59% reduction in child arrests at age 15

NFP Outcomes (cont.)

33

NFP Cost-Benefit

Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation analysis (2011):◦ Government saves an average of $9,056 per

family served by the first child’s 5th birthday.◦ Texas state government saves $3,270◦ Federal government saves $5,786

RAND Corporation analysis (2005):◦ Net return of over $34K per family served by

child age 15 vs. total family cost of just over $7K◦ Five-fold ROI

34

Priority Budget AgendaWe must fund CPS and Prevention Original LAR including caseload growth just to continue current services levels:•Full caseworker request reflecting caseload growth•Relative supports (child care and kinship assistance)•Protective Day Care (Family Preservation)•Adoption subsidies (avert foster placements)•Restore Foster care rates•Fund projected caseload growth•Prevention services

= $522.7 Million Restored for TDFPS plusFULL FUNDING FOR NFP +$8.9 mil. =Total Needed for 2012-13: $531.6 mil.

35

Advocacy Primer

Legislative Session Competition During the 81st Legislative Session:

7,443 bills were filed 1,461 bills (19.6%) passed All this occurred in 140 days

Legislators Respond To: Active members of their districts Organizations that are engaged and

understand the process. Organized efforts -3 calls, letters, faxes

on 1 issue.

36

The Four “I’s” of ADVOCACY

1. Identify

2. Interest

3. Inform

4. Investment

Need to move through steps 1-4 in order

37

IDENTIFY Identify your legislators.

Who represents your interests? Know at least your 2 elected state

officials: Representative and SenatorGo to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us Under “Who Represents Me”

Identify with your legislator. Learn about your representative’s

political affiliation and interests. An example of a way to do this is to

volunteer for their political campaign or attend an event they will be at.

38

INTEREST Interest legislators with a story

Write to your legislators: # abused kids in their county

Get information from the DFPS Data Book: http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/documents/about/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2010/5CPS.pdf

Tell a personal story / concern from the news.

Legislators don’t want to be seen as anti-children.

Remember they were elected to serve their community and most of them are very in tune with trying to serve their district. 39

INFORM

Inform your legislator.

Developed a focused message.

Be a resource.

Be informed yourself.

Never overstate problem or solution.

40

INVESTMENT Investment is commonly referred to as the “ask”. It is getting your legislator to commit to help by:

File a bill, co-sponsor a bill or support a bill that will help the cause.

Champion / support funding for your major issues.

Fight against legislation that will hurt your cause.

Raise awareness of the issue. Connect you to individuals that can help your

cause.

41

Putting the 4 “I’s” to Work Setting up a meeting

Preparing for the big day

Meeting with your legislator

42

Setting up the Meeting Ask to speak to the person who schedule’s for the

legislator.

State your name, the organization you belong to and let them know are a constituent (you live in the legislator’s district or your organization is located in the legislator’s district).

Topic you want to discuss

Ask for 20 minutes

If booked, ask for a 5 minute meeting - If not, ask if you can schedule meeting with the person who handles the issue - policy analyst or chief of staff

Follow-up with an email request

43

Preparing for the Big Day Make sure you know where you are going.

Parking (San Jacinto and 12th) Meeting room (3N.4, Court of Criminal Appeals) Location of legislator’s office that you will be visiting

Information on the Texas Senate, Texas House of Representative websites – Capitol Office

Bring your materials.

Wear comfortable shoes.

Business causal dress to business dress.

Wear a blue ribbon.

44

Visiting Your Legislator Thank them for the meeting.

Acknowledge the commitment they have made. State common connection if you have one.

Tell them who you are (a volunteer (briefly describe organization) / a CPS worker / a concerned citizen). and why this is important to you.

Get to the Point Quickly: Your Advocacy Agenda Keep your message simple (3 issues) Listen well (verbal and non-verbal) Never be disagreeable.

Ask for support (investment)

Please fill out your review form after the meeting has occurred.

45

REMEMBER:

In politics there are no permanent enemies; an enemy today may be an ally tomorrow.

The bottom line is that the Texas Capitol revolves around relationships.

46

Your Voice

You don’t get to choose how you are going to die. Or when. You can only decide how you’re going to live. Now.

~ Joan Baez

You must do the thing that you think you cannot do. ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

47

BE PART OF THE SOLUTION:GET INVOLVED!

Join TexProtects – We need each voiceE-mail Amanda Langford

Director of Membership and DevelopmentAmanda@texprotects.org

We are dedicated to providing you:• Concise legislative summaries• Advocacy Action Alerts• Sample letters for legislators• Talking points• Legislator contact information• The opportunity to shape 2011 legislation

48

Q & A

A recording of this webinar will be available for download.

Madeline McClure, madeline@texprotects.org

Diana Martinez, diana@texprotects.org

Thank you!

50

Use of this PresentationTexProtects encourages you to reproduce and distribute these slides. If you reproduce these slides, please give appropriate credit to TexProtects or The Child Protection Roundtable and/or appropriate cited authority.

The data presented here may become outdated. For the most recent information, please contact TexProtects.

TexProtects The Texas Association for the Protection of

ChildrenMadeline McClure, madeline@texprotects.org