CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES’

FAMILY ASSESSMENT RESPONSE
ANNUAL STATUS REPORT TO THE COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN
OF THE CONNECTICUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Prepared by:
Performance Improvement Center,
UConn School of Social Work
July 1, 2018

 Data Definitions and Notes
Family Assessment Response (FAR) data:
◦ LINK/PIE data extract through 12/31/2017
◦ Including only FAR/CSF families, their prior and subsequent reports
◦ Multi-level data structure:
◦ Allegations/victims/perpetrators within reports; reports within protocol; protocol identification Number (DRSID) within
family.
◦ A report could have several allegations, victims, and perpetrators.
◦ A protocol could have several reports.
◦ A family could have several protocols.

FAR case counts:
◦ Total FAR reports accepted in CY 2017: 13,247
◦ After data quality validation process, accepted FAR reports in CY 2017 used in analyses : N=12,459*
◦ FAR Protocols (i.e. combined reports under a single identification number (DRSID)) accepted in CY 2017: N=11,037**

◦ 10,140 families with FAR reports accepted in 2017
Community Supports for Families (CSF) case counts:
◦ 2,037 families received services (i.e., were active) from CSF during CY 2017
◦ 1,373 CSF episodes were discharged in CY 2017
*Excludes reports linked to the wrong family and those with no DRSID.
**Reports that are combined under one protocol and treated as a single report. issues

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

2

 FAR : First FAR Protocols and Total FAR Protocols Accepted by Calendar Year 2017

12,000

11,087

10,000

11,678

11,666

11,037

9,974
8,000

7,278

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

6,917

8,450

8,695

8,398

7,897

6,898

CY 2012*

CY 2013

CY 2014

CY 2015

CY 2016

CY 2017

Number of FAR Protocols Accepted within CY

Number of Families with First FAR Protocol Accepted within CY

*Partial year
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

3

 CSF : Families with First CSF Cases and Total Active CSF Cases by Calendar Year 2017
2,500

2,000

1,816

1,822

1,810

1,744

CY 2013

CY 2014

2,057

2,007

2,037

1,905

1,818

1,803

CY 2015

CY 2016

CY 2017

1,500

1,000

658
500

0

CY 2012*

Number of Families with Active CSF Cases Within CY

Number of Families with First CSF Active Within CY

*Partial year.
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

4

 The following analyses are included in this report as required by Section 17a-101g
(g)(11) of the Connecticut General Statutes
A. The number of accepted reports of child abuse or neglect, and the percentage of reports assigned a Family Assessment Response
B. The disposition of families assigned a Family Assessment Response
C. Reporter type for cases assigned a Family Assessment Response
D. The number and percentage of Family Assessment Response reports that changed track to investigations
E. An analysis of the Department's prior/subsequent involvement with a family that has been assigned a Family Assessment Response
1) Prior child protective services history for FAR cases accepted in CY 2017

2) Analyzing subsequent reports using survival analysis
3) Analysis of subsequent reports for FAR families
4) Analysis of substantiated subsequent reports for FAR families
5) Summary of findings: Prior and subsequent reports for CSF families

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

5

 The following analyses are included in this report as required by Section 17a-101g
(g)(11) of the Connecticut General Statutes
(Continued from previous slide)
F. An analysis of the Department's prior/subsequent involvement with a family that has been assigned to a Community Partner
Agency (i.e. Community Supports for Families (CSF)).
1) Prior child protective services history for CSF cases accepted in CY 2017
2) Analysis of subsequent reports for CSF families
3) Analysis of substantiated subsequent reports for CSF Families
4) Summary of findings: Prior and subsequent reports for CSF families
G. A description of services that are commonly provided to families referred to the Community Support for Families program
H. A description of the Department's staff development and training practices relating to intake
I.

The number and percentage of referred families who were ultimately enrolled in the Community Support for Families program

J.

The number and percentage of families receiving a Family Assessment Response by race and ethnicity

K. The reason for discharge from the Community Support for Families program by race and ethnicity
L.

A comparison of the needs identified and the needs addressed for families referred to the Community Support for Families
program

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

6

 A. The number of accepted reports of child abuse or neglect, and the percentage
of reports assigned to the Family Assessment Response Track

In Calendar Year 2017…

There were a total of
31,236

accepted reports of child
abuse and neglect by DCF

Of the total number of
accepted reports
42.4% (13,247)
were assigned to the FAR
track

Updated 6/28/18– Source DCF

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

7

 B. The Disposition of Reports Assigned a Family Assessment Response:
FAR Reports for Cases Accepted in CY 2017
Referred to Other State
Agency/Voluntary Services
Recommended, 0.6%

Pending, 0.1%

No further Agency
involvement, 42.6%

Assessment Closed - New
Report Received, 1.9%
Unable to complete
Assessment, 2.3%

1. No further agency involvement
(42.6%).
2. Services declined and no safety
factors present (24.8%).
3. Referred to a Community
Partner Agency (i.e.
Community Support for
Families Program) (18.8%).

Transferred to
Ongoing Services Unit,
4.1%
Referred to Community
Services, 4.8%

Referred to Community
Partner Agency, 18.8%

The top three dispositions of FAR
protocols accepted in CY 2017
were:

Services Declined &
No Safety Factors,
24.8%

(N of Protocols Accepted= 11,037)
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

8

 C. Reporter Type for Reports Assigned a Family Assessment Response
FAR Reports for Cases Accepted in CY 2017
The top five reporters of FAR protocols
accepted in CY 2017 were:

School
33.2%

Multiple Reporters across
reports in this DRSID
1.4%

Missing
0.3%

Court Professional/Attorney
3.4%

Police
15.3%

Other Social Services Staff
4.1%

Other single reporter
4.6%
Anonymous
7.9%
Family/Self
8.1%

Mental Health
11.2%

Hospital/Physician/HealthCare
10.7%

1.
2.
3.
4.

Schools (33.2%).
Police (15.3%).
Mental health provider (11.2%).
Hospital/Physician/Health Care
worker (10.7%).
5. Family/Self (8.1%).

Other single reporter:
0.8% Neighbor
0.1% Clergy
0.05% Foster Parent
3.7% Other (unspecified)

Other Social Services:
2.0% DCF Employee
1.0% Social Services Worker
0.7% Licensed Day Care
0.2% Residential Provider
0.2% Shelter
0.03% Rape Crisis

(N of Protocols Accepted= 11,037)
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

9

 D. Family Assessment Response Reports That Changed Track to Investigations

A total of 13,247
reports of child
abuse and neglect
were accepted by
DCF in CY 2017 and
assigned to the
FAR track.

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

Of those,
9% (n=1,180)
were changed to the
Investigation track.

10

 E (1): Prior Child Protective Services History for FAR Families Accepted in CY 2017
FAR: CPS History and Prior Substantiated Reports by Region

•

31.5% of FAR families with
an accepted FAR report in
CY 2017 had at least one
prior CPS report. (68.5%
had no prior reports)

•

18.2% of these families had
at least one substantiated
report prior to their first
FAR report.

•

22.4% of FAR families
received a prior report
more than 12 months
before their first FAR report.

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

29.3%

20%
10%

17.8%

33.4%

21.2%

31.8%

30.9%

29.2%

17.3%

16.3%

16.8%

Region 3

Region 4

Region 5

35.7%

31.5%

21.4%

18.2%

Region 6

Statewide

0%

Region 1

Region 2

Prior Report

Prior Substantiated Report

(N=10,082 (10,140 families with FAR reports accepted in 2017 - 58 families missing Region information)

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

11

 E (2). Analyzing Subsequent Reports Using Survival Analysis

A statistical technique, Survival Analysis, was conducted to determine what
proportion of FAR and CSF families has not received a subsequent report in a given
time period.
 Survival Analysis is used to analyze data in which the time until the event is of
interest. In this case, it is the time to a subsequent report or a substantiated
subsequent report.
 Survival Analysis provides the least biased method for calculating subsequent
reports as it accounts for cases that have had enough time to have a
subsequent or a substantiated subsequent report and those that have not.

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

12

 E (3). Analysis of Subsequent Reports for FAR Families
Survival Analyses indicated:
Cumulative Proportion of FAR Families
with No Subsequent Report at End of Time Interval
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

•
•

83%
74%

•

63%

56%

52%

49%

•
•
•
•

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 69

Months Since 1st FAR Approval
Black
N=8,021
MST=42.3

Hispanic
N=12,015
MST=45.5

White
N=20,913
MST=64.4

(N=43,354; 3,895 missing Race/Ethnicity)
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

Other
N=2,405
MST=69.0

Total
N=43,354
MST=55.0

83% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within 6 months of their first FAR approval date.
74% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within 12 months of their first FAR approval date.
63% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within two years of their first FAR approval date.
56% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within three years of their first FAR approval date.
52% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within four years of their first FAR approval date.
49% of FAR families have not received a subsequent report
within five years of their first FAR approval date.
Unadjusted survival rates to the first subsequent
report indicate that there are statistical differences among
race/ethnicity groups. FAR families whose race/identity is
identified as “Other” had the best subsequent report rate
when compared to all other groups (Median Survival Time
(MST)=69 months). FAR families identified as “Black” had the
worst subsequent report rate when compared to all groups.
Survival rates for Black, Hispanic, and Other differed
significantly from White.
13

 E (4). Analysis of Substantiated Subsequent Reports for FAR Families
Survival Analyses indicated:
Cumulative Proportion of FAR Families
• 96% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
with No Substantiated Subsequent Reports at End of
reports within 6 months after their first FAR approval date.
Time Interval
• 94% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
96% 94%
100%
reports within 12 months after their first FAR approval date.
90%
87%
85%
83%
90%
• 90% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
80%
reports within two years after their first FAR approval date.
70%
• 87% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
60%
reports within three years after their first FAR approval date.
50%
• 85% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
40%
reports within four years after their first FAR approval date.
30%
• 83% of FAR families have not received substantiated subsequent
20%
reports within five years after their first FAR approval date.
10%
• Unadjusted survival rates to the first substantiated subsequent
0%
report indicate that are statistical differences among
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 69
race/ethnicity groups: FAR families identified as Other had a
Months Since 1st FAR Approval
better and FAR families identified as Black had a worse
Black
Hispanic
White
Other
Total
substantiated subsequent report rate than those identified as
N=8,021
N=12,015
N=20,913
N=2,405
N=43,354
White. Although the substantiated subsequent report rate
between black and white was statistically significant, the
difference was small.
(N=43,354; 3,895 missing Race/Ethnicity)
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

14

 E (5). Summary of Findings: Prior and Subsequent Reports for FAR Families
 There were no statistically significant differences by race after adjusting for significant predictors. Risk factors that
play a substantive role in predicting the outcome of subsequent reports include:






Age of victim is under five
Higher risk category level
Single parent families
Homelessness







Primary caregiver has alcohol/drug problem
Prior injury to child resulted in CAN
Child has delinquency history
Child is developmentally disabled
Child has mental/behavioral health problems

 Most FAR families did not have a substantiated subsequent report.


There were no statistically significant differences by race after adjusting for significant predictors Risk factors that play a

substantive role in predicting the outcome of substantiated subsequent reports include:

 Age of victim is under five
 Higher risk category level
 Single parent families

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017






Homelessness
Number of prior investigations (3)
Primary caregiver has alcohol/drug problem
Child is medically fragile

15

 F (1). Prior Child Protective Services History for CSF Families Active in CY 2017
CSF: CPS History and Prior Substantiated Reports by Region
100%
90%

•

80%
70%
60%

51.4%

53.6%

50.8%

56.3%

51.1%

51.4%

44.4%

50%
40%
30%

27.2%

26.8%
20.2%

20.1%

20%

16.3%

20.4%

13.9%

•

51.4% of all CSF families
have at least one prior CPS
report.
Of the families that had a
prior CPS report, the highest
proportion occurred more
than 12 months before their
CSF episode start date.

10%
0%
Region 1

Region 2

Region 3
Prior Report

Region 4

Region 5

Region 6

Statewide Total

Prior Substantiated Report

(N= 1,705; 98 missing LINK data)

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

16

 F (2). Analysis of Subsequent Reports for CSF Families
Cumulative Proportion of CSF Families
with No Subsequent Reports at End of Time Interval by Race

Survival Analyses indicated:
•

79% of CSF families have not received a subsequent
report within 6 months of their CSF episode end
date.

•

67% of CSF families have not received a subsequent
report within 12 months of their CSF episode end
date.

•

53% of CSF families have not received a subsequent
report within two years of their CSF episode end
date.

•

45% of CSF have not received a subsequent report
within three years of their CSF episode end date.

•

40% of CSF have not received a subsequent report
within four years of their CSF episode end date.

•

Wilcoxon (Gehan) statistic 9.23 showed significant
difference between races (p=.026).

100%
90%

79%

80%

67%

70%

53%

60%

45%

50%

40%

40%

37%

30%
20%
10%
0%
0

3

6

9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66

Months After Episode End Date
Black

Hispanic

(N=6,368, 119 missing race/ethnicity)

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

White

Other

TOTAL

17

 F (3). Analysis of Substantiated Subsequent Reports for CSF Families
Survival Analyses indicated:

Cumulative Proportion of CSF Families
with No Substantiated Subsequent Reports at End of Time Interval
by Race
95%

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0

3

6

91%

9

86%

82%

80%

•

95% of CSF families have not received substantiated
subsequent reports within 6 months of their CSF
episode end date.

•

91% of CSF families have not received substantiated
subsequent reports within 12 months of their CSF
episode end date.

•

86% of CSF families have not received substantiated
subsequent reports within two years of their CSF
episode end date.

•

82% of CSF families have not received substantiated
subsequent reports within three years of their CSF
episode end date.

•

80% of CSF families have not received substantiated
subsequent reports within four years of their CSF
episode end date.

•

There were no statistically significant differences in
substantiated subsequent report rates between
races.

77%

12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66

Months After Episode End Date
Black

(N=6,368, 119 missing race/ethnicity)

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

Hispanic

White

Other

TOTAL

18

 F (4). Summary of Findings: Prior and Subsequent Reports for CSF Families
 CSF families tend to have a more extensive CPS history.
 There were no statistically significant differences by race. Risk factors that play a substantive role in predicting the
outcome of subsequent reports include:

 Age of victim is under five
 Higher risk category level
 Region*





Single parent families
Prior caregiver has alcohol problem
Unemployment

 Similarly, most families do not receive a substantiated subsequent report within two years of the end of their CSF
episode. There were no statistically significant differences by race. Risk factors that play a substantive role in
predicting the outcome of substantiated subsequent reports include:

 Age of victim is under five
 Higher risk category level
 Region*





Number of prior investigations (3)
Primary caregiver has alcohol/drug problem
Unemployment

*Additional research is planned to understand regional differences. Given the vast differences in populations and community profiles, region
is likely a proxy for factors inherent in the population.
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

19

 G. Services Commonly Provided to Families Referred to The Community Support
for Families Program
Top 10 Services Received by CSF Families in CY 2017
Utilization of Natural Supports

42.4%

Mental Health (child)

41.7%

Housing

38.9%

Food Assistance

33.5%

Mental Health (parent)

32.9%

Advocacy

31.0%

Recreation

31.0%

Energy Assistance/Utilities

30.5%

Employment Services

29.5%

Parenting Skills, Education and Support

27.5%

(n=1,373)

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

20

 I. Referred Families Who Were Enrolled in the Community Support for Families
Program:
2,273 family referrals to CSF in CY 2017
299 (13.2%) were
“referral only”
(i.e., family opts to not participate – no
contact is made with a Community
Partner Agency).

131 (5.8%) were
open or pending
as of 12/31/17

1,843 (81.1%) of the referrals resulted in an episode in 2017
223 (9.8%) of the CSF episodes were classified as “evaluation only”
(i.e., episode open fewer than 45 days and there was no Family Team Meeting or
Plan of Care established with the CSF. )

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

21

 J. Families Receiving a Family Assessment Response in 2017 by Race and Ethnicity
FAR: Race/Ethnicity

CSF: Race/Ethnicity
White
(nonHispanic)
42%

Missing
8%

Missing
2%

White
(nonHispanic)
35%

Other
4%

Other
5%

Any
Hispanic
27%

Black
(nonHispanic)
18%

Families with FAR DRSID protocols accepted in CY 2017
(n=10,140)
FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

Black
(nonHispanic)
20%
Any
Hispanic
39%
Families who received services from CSF during CY 2017
(n= 2,037)

22

 K. Reason for Discharge from The Community Support for Families Program by
Race and Ethnicity
100%

5.4%

90%

2.5%
15.8%

80%

CSF: Reason For Discharge by Caregiver Race
2.0%
4.3%
4.1%
3.3%
4.6%
10.8%

3.8%
10.3%

76.7%

78.1%

8.2%

4.0%

3.9%
11.5%

70%
60%
50%
40%

73.8%

85.7%

77.0%

30%
20%
10%
0%

Black (n=279)
Completed Treatment

New DCF Report Received

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

Hispanic (n=520)
White (n=494)
Family Discontinued

Client/Family Moved

Other (n=49)
Statewide (n=1,342)
Agency Discontinued: Administrative

Other

23

 L. Comparison of The Needs Identified and The Needs Addressed for Families
Referred to the Community Support for Families Program
CSF: Family Needs Identified and Addressed*
Resource Management/Basic Needs

78.8%
43.8%
48.3%

Social Support System
Parenting Skills

32.4%

Coping Skills

30.5%

Physical Health

13.9%

Life Skills
History of Child Abuse and Neglect

4.4%

Substance Abuse/Use

5.8%

None

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

30.8%

14.0%

12.3%
14.6%
5.9%
5.7%

*Please note: The needs addressed may not align exactly
with the needs identified as ‘needs identified’ are collected
at intake and in the course of working with a family
sometimes new needs are developed or discovered.

5.3%
2.2%
2.6%
4.7%
0%

(n= 1,373)

31.6%

28.4%
36.3%

Household Relationships

Emotional/Behavior

78.3%

10%

20%

Needs Identified

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Needs Addressed
24

 H. DCF’s Staff Development and Training Practices Relating to Intake
Differential Response System (DRS) Training Series
•
•
•
•

10 Days of Training
Best Practice Principles
Assessment of Safety and Risk
Critical Thinking

DRS Trainings include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Best Practice: FAR and Investigations
Group Care: Investigation
Worker Safety
Health and Wellness
Sexual Abuse: Minimal Facts for 1st Responders
Human Trafficking
CT Drug Threat - Substance Use
Genograms
Legal
Intimate Partner Violence

• Training series was offered four times during CY 2017 - 107 unique participants.
• Investigations Policy 34-2 – Online Training: 683 DCF staff successfully completed in CY2017

FAR Annual Status Report for CY 2017

25