|
Alternate Version
Software you may need
|
|
Child Care Association of Illinois
Outcome Measures 2002 Summary Report
© Copyright 2002 Child Care Association of Illinois All rights reserved. Neither this report nor any part may be reproduced, transmitted, or used in any form without permission in writing from the Child Care Association of Illinois.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
¨ CCA member agencies participated at a rate of 92% of eligible members¨ 45,985 children and families received services from programs reported by CCA member agencies in FY-2002¨ The project collects and aggregates the most critical factors related to services provided to children and families by CCA member agencies¨ Data is measured and tracked across three domains: Satisfaction, Status Change, and Client Functioning¨ CCA member agencies increased and improved outcome reporting data requirements for 2002 and beyond¨ Foster Care Services are now segmented into service groups for comparison:¨ Traditional Care¨ Home of Relative Care¨ Specialized and Treatment Care¨ Special Education Programs report graduation rates and identified academic assessment measures¨ New performance benchmarks were established
INSTITUTION / GROUP HOMES
FOSTER CARE 1. Status change for Foster Care Services are now segmented into service groups for comparison:
2. Overall, stakeholder satisfaction is split with youth and foster parent satisfaction remaining stable while birth parents/other caregivers and referral sources decreased. Parents and Caregivers satisfaction declined 14 percentage points to 73% falling back to 1999 levels while referral sources declined 4 percentage points to 81%. 3. Average length of stay increases by the category of care:
4. Adoption is most often the form of discharge to a less restrictive setting for children in Foster Care, with 48% of Traditional Foster Care and 55% of Specialized and Treatment discharges to a less restrictive setting ending in adoption.
COMMUNITY-BASED PROGRAMS 1. Thirty-four CCA member agencies reported serving 23,695 children and families, with 6 less agencies reporting, services decreased 22% from last year. 2. Overall satisfaction of youth and families remain high at 91% and 93% respectively. Referral source satisfaction fell back slightly to 85%. 3. Two thirds of the cases are closed in one year or less, with 80% reported as stabilized or requiring less intensive services. 4. The percent of clients showing improvement as measured by standardized test instruments remains steady at 68%. SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Child Care Association took the lead in outcome measurement when uniform outcome measures were developed and collected in 1998. As demands have increased on child welfare providers to demonstrate their impact, value, and effectiveness, so has participation among CCA agencies. The goals initially established for collecting outcome measures remain the same: to develop and collect uniform outcome measures that can assist member agencies in improving service quality and serve as a basis for defining success for private agencies delivering child welfare services. The first step in the process was to complete a series of Outcome Measurement Roundtables. As a result of these meetings, CCA has a list of priorities developed by an abbreviated social validation technique. Priorities have been identified for Institutions / Group Homes, Foster Care, Special Education, and Community Based Service programs. The second step was to form a Steering Committee made up of individuals representing each of the above-mentioned areas. This committee oversees the process and makes recommendations to the CCA President/CEO in regard to the aggregate data collection system. The Steering Committee designed a Guide for Satisfaction Surveying and uniform satisfaction survey tool to assist members implementing this portion of their outcome measurement efforts. Step three in the process saw the convening of Workgroups, of individuals expressing interest in specific outcome measurement areas. This step formulated the practical and specific measures / indicators for each of the areas. Revisions to the outcome survey instrument have been minimal until 2002 when several additional indicators were added and Foster Care programs were segmented.
The CCA Outcome Measures project was designed to collect and aggregate the most critical factors related to quality of services provided to children and families by CCA member agencies. CCA has selected the following three outcome categories as priorities for measurement: I. SATISFACTION: Indicators in this area include Client / Youth, Birth Parents or Other Caregivers, Foster Parents and Referral Sources. Agencies are not required to use the rating categories or survey listed by the CCA Steering Committee and may adjust their own satisfaction data to correspond to the CCA recommended scale. II. STATUS CHANGE: This is designed to measure the number of children and families who move to less restrictive settings or crisis stabilization, or require less intensive services, as measured at discharge or Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings. Discharge is defined as the day the child left the program. III. CLIENT FUNCTIONING: Measures the percent of clients and families showing improvement as reported by standardized instruments. Agencies list the standardized instruments they use to assess client functioning, and report all types if they use more than one. Reports reflect the total number of clients assessed and how many have shown improvement since the initial assessment, as defined by the instrument being used. Agencies are to report only pre-service at intake and post-service at the time of discharge.
CCA intends to collect outcome information from the membership on an annual basis, using each fiscal year ending June 30. Outcome information from individual member agencies has been aggregated. Individual member agency information is confidential and comparisons of agencies performance are prohibited. CCA uses the aggregate data on behalf of the member agencies in public policy efforts and in general education, marketing and public relation endeavors. Individual CCA member agencies are provided custom reports and are able to compare their performance with the group thus using the information for quality improvement and program evaluation.
Member agencies of the Child Care Association provided the information on which this report is based. Survey forms were designed by the Steering Committee to obtain the most critical factors for each priority area. Individual agencies collected and reported outcome data from Fiscal Year 2002. D.D. Fischer Consulting conducted data entry and analysis of the data. The Steering Committee was responsible for developing this final report. The number of children and families reported as served in the survey contains duplications. Clients may be served by one or more programs or agencies during the reporting period. Aggregate findings are based on the number reporting, and do not necessarily represent the entire child welfare population or CCA membership, but serve as a summary based upon the bias and limitations of the samples. In some cases individual sample sizes may be small relative to the total population served. Use of various standardized instruments to measure client functioning may not be comparable due to individual client treatment needs, but are used to reflect improvements in the aggregate. Control groups were not used and the establishment of benchmarks is intended for improvement of services only and not as the sole measure of quality.
Institution and Group Home: Institution and Group Home services are delivered primarily to wards of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, however, the Department of Corrections, local school districts and County Probation Departments purchase services.
Providers of Institution and Group Home services have been asked by purchasers to change from being a long-term living arrangement to becoming a treatment option that provides short-term, aggressive services. There has been a dramatic change in the needs of the youth being placed in I/GH settings as follows: ¨ More pronounced severe emotional disturbances,¨ Many present severe behavior management problems and aggression,¨ Providers are expected to effectively serve youths with mild to moderate mental retardation, and¨ Specialized and intensive services are provided to children with sexual behavior problems.The primary services delivered by Institutions and Group Homes are designed to stabilize, treat, and help children with severe emotional disturbance and/or behavior disorders. I/GH services also include programs designed to serve developmentally disabled youth. Institution and Group Home data does not include Independent Living, Diagnostic, and Emergency shelter programs. Foster Care: Foster Care data is collected from several types of Foster Care programs, Traditional, Home of Relative, Treatment, and Specialized. In addition to services provided to children in placement, services are extended to the biological, extended family, and siblings. Traditional Foster Care: Offers a family setting for children without serious emotional disturbance but are in need of living away from home in a caring family atmosphere. Home of Relative Care: Provides care for children who must live away from their parents but who have relatives willing to, and capable of, caring for them. Treatment & Specialized Care: Offer family settings for children diagnosed as needing treatment for emotional disturbance and/or behavior disorders but capable of living, with supports, in a family atmosphere.
Community Based Services: Community Based Services covers a wide range or array of services, family preservation, youth services, homemaker, counseling, screening assessment and support services (SASS), and intensive treatment services (ITS). Participants combine and report all Community Based Services together. Family Preservation Services: The purpose for these services is to provide intensive services to families where children are at low to medium risk of being abused and neglected. Services are provided to families who request help from DCFS in order to lower the risk of abuse or neglect in their homes. This program allows families to obtain community services before problems develop. Services are intended to allow a family to remain intact and to learn skills to assist their family with problems. Youth Services: Services provided to runaway and homeless youth who are at risk of becoming involved with juvenile justice and/or child welfare systems due to runaway or status offending behavior. An array of services is offered: crisis intervention, short-term placement, family preservation or reunification counseling are provided.Homemaker Services: Assist adults to learn to care for their children and, in some locations and circumstances, to provide transportation so that children may visit with their parents and siblings.Counseling: Individual, Group, and Family Services as needed. Counseling services are aimed at improving problems of personal, interpersonal, social adjustment, problems of intrapsychic origin, mental disorders, as well as other issues putting a child at risk of involvement in the child welfare or juvenile justice systems or extrusion from their home or community.Screening Assessment and Support Services (SASS): Pre-Admission/Post-Discharge Screening and Assessment Services to prevent unnecessary psychiatric hospitalization and to provide monitoring and case planning services for children who need hospitalization.Intensive Treatment Services (ITS): Offers therapeutic intervention and support services to promote a child’s emotional and behavioral stability.
Nonpublic Special Education These specialized educational programs are operated by child welfare agencies to provide educational services to children with severe disabilities who cannot be served in regular public school settings even with supports and accommodations. With the exception of specialized early intervention programs, students must be ages 5 to 21 and must have a disability eligibility determination conducted by the school district prior to referral to the program by the district. The vast majority of these students served by CCA member agency programs have disability designations as severe emotional and behavioral disabilities. The primary services provided by nonpublic special education facilities are designed to stabilize and educate children with severe disorders. Services include work with parents in their homes.
This report and the information that it contains was developed with the assistance of the Outcome Steering Committee of the Child Care Association of Illinois. Outcome Steering Committee Members: Debi Armstrong - The Baby Fold Jane Bonk - The Youth Campus Erin Borders - St. Joseph’s Carondelet Child Center Kim Cragg - Lifelink/Bensenville Home Society Melisa Curtis - Lawrence Hall Youth Services Bill Gillis - Central Baptist Children’s Home Shawn Grubb - Cunningham Children’s Home Scott Hassett - Catholic Social Service, Peoria Diocese Stephanie Hassett - Children’s Home Association of Illinois Amy LaRue - Children’s Home and Aid Society of Illinois Donna Ree - Ada S. McKinley Community Services Mary Lou Spengal - Kemmerer Village Michael Wojcik - Lutheran Social Services of Illinois
CCA Staff: Bridget Helmholz Jan Schoening Facilitator: D.D. Fischer CCA, Outcome Measures Report 1998 - 2002 ComparisonI. MEMBER AGENCIES REPORTING
*The number of children and families served contains duplications. Clients may be served by one or more programs or agencies during the reporting period.
II. AGGREGATE SURVEY CONFIDENCE Confidence Interval and Sample Size Estimations (+/-) 5%
III. OVERALL SATISFACTION 2002Overall, how satisfied were you with the services provided by the program? [ Percent Satisfied or Very Satisfied ]
Total individuals reporting: 8,833
IV. STATUS CHANGE 2002 Measures length of stay, the movement of children and families to less restrictive settings, permanency, crisis stabilization, or require less intensive services, as measured at discharge or at Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings.
Total number discharged: 22,134
V. CLIENT & FAMILY FUNCTIONING 2002 Measures the percent of clients and families showing improvement as reported by standardized test instruments.
Total number reported: 6,777 * Measures Specialized and Treatment Foster Care
CCA, Outcome Measures Report Institution / Group Home programs do not include: independent living, diagnostic or emergency shelter programs. Number of Agencies reporting: 43 Number of Children served: 2,431 SATISFACTION The overall satisfaction with services provided, as rated by the following groups:
Total individuals reporting: 2,066
STATUS CHANGE Measures the percent of children who move to a less restrictive setting at the time of discharge as follows:
Total number reported: 1,491 *note: Average length of stay excludes long term care facilities over 36 months and short term programs less than 3 months.
CLIENT FUNCTIONING Measures percent of clients showing improvement since the initial assessment, as defined by the standardized instruments. Agencies report only pre-service at intake and post-service at time of discharge:
Total number reported: 1,123 Standardized Instruments most frequently administered: § Child Functional Assessment Rating Scales (CFARS)§ Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment§ Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS)§ Children’s Global Assessment Scale (C-GAS)§ Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach)CCA, Outcome Measures Report Foster Care programs include: Regular, Home of Relative, Treatment and Specialized. Number of Agencies reporting: 42 Number of Children served: 17,467
SATISFACTION The overall satisfaction with services provided, as rated by the following groups:
Total individuals reporting: 2,766
STATUS CHANGE Measures the percent of children who move to a less restrictive setting at the time of discharge as follows:
CLIENT FUNCTIONING Measures percent of Specialized and Treatment clients showing improvement since the initial assessment, as defined by the standardized instruments. Agencies report only pre-service at intake and post-service at time of discharge in primarily specialized and treatment foster care:
Total number reported: 915 Standardized instruments most frequently administered: § Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS)§ Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach)§ C - GAS (Children’s Global Assessment Scale)§ Child Functional Assessment Rating Scales (CFARS)CCA, Outcome Measures Report Community Based programs reporting include: family preservation, youth services, homemaker, counseling, SASS (screening assessment and support services) and ITS (intensive treatment services). Number of Agencies reporting: 34 Number of Children and Families served: 23,695
SATISFACTION The overall satisfaction with services provided, as rated by the following groups:
Total individuals reporting: 3,018
STATUS CHANGE Measures percent of clients showing improvement since the initial assessment, as defined by the standardized instruments. Agencies report only pre-service at intake and post-service at time of discharge:
Total discharges reported: 13,751
CLIENT FUNCTIONING Measures percent of clients showing improvement as reported by standardized instruments as follows:
Total number reported: 4,599 Standardized instruments most frequently administered: § Children’s Global Assessment Scale (C-GAS)§ Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach)§ Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS)§ Daniel Memorial Independent Living Assessment for Life Skills
CCA, Outcome Measures Report Special Education programs include those operated by the CCA member agencies. Number of Schools reporting: 16 Number of Children served: 1,765 SATISFACTION The overall satisfaction with services provided, as rated by the following groups:
Total individuals reporting: 983
STATUS CHANGE Measures the percent of children who move to a less restrictive setting at the time of discharge or are maintained in current setting as identified at Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings as follows:
Total number reported: 1,535
CLIENT FUNCTIONING Measures percent of clients / students showing improvement since the initial assessment, as defined by the standardized instruments. Agencies report only pre-service at intake and post-service at time of discharge. The School attendance rate is calculated by dividing the total days of actual attendance by total enrollment days. Graduation rate consists of eligible students graduating from High School or attainment of a GED.
Standardized Instruments most frequently administered for client functioning: § Woodcock Johnson - Revised§ Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach)§ Kaufman Test for Educational AchievementForm of Academic Assessments administered: § Illinois State Achievement Test (ISAT)§ Prairie State Achievement Test§ Portfolio Assessment
Performance standards or benchmarks were determined by using the most recent three-year moving average for each category reported.
Benchmarks for Traditional, Home of Relative, Specialized and Treatment Foster Care will be established following three consecutive years of data collection.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
