Racial Racial Disproportionality Disproportionality

and Disparityand Disparity

Fresno CountyFresno County

Department of Children and Family ServicesDepartment of Children and Family Services

April 2008April 2008

The Problem (2003)The Problem (2003)

1.293,3430.674Native American

9.524,532424Asian

57.33148,01755.83335Hispanic

23.4660,58528.67172White

6.1415,85110.8365Black

100258,198100600Total

%n%n

Census NumbersFirst EntriesEthnicity

1.293,3431.649Native American

9.524,5321.9359Asian

57.33148,01752.891,617Hispanic

23.4660,58521.1645White

6.1415,85122.47687Black

100258,1981003,057Total

%n%n

Census NumbersIn Care July 1Ethnicity

Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., Exel, M., Zimmerman, K., Simon, V., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Frerer, K., Ataie, Y., Atkinson, L., Blumberg, R., Henry, C., & Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (2008). Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved 9/6/07, from University of California at Berkeley Center for Social Services Research website. URL: <http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare>

The Family to Family Process in The Family to Family Process in Fresno CountyFresno County

2002

Family to Family begins

2003

(4) Family to Family Task Groups get underway

Educating Community Supports and Leadership

Disproportionality Committee begins

2004 2005 2006

Development/Evolution of RDD Development/Evolution of RDD WorkWork

Development of Transparent SystemDevelopment of Transparent System

-TDM community reps-TDM community reps

-Neighborhood collaboratives-Neighborhood collaboratives

-Cultural Brokers-Cultural Brokers

-Constant self-evaluation and use of data-Constant self-evaluation and use of data

-Forums with five Tribes/DCFS Administration-Forums with five Tribes/DCFS Administration

RDD work cont.RDD work cont. Systems Changes:Systems Changes:

Formation of RDD committee Formation of RDD committee

• Staff and community partners includedStaff and community partners included Developed Key Result Areas (KRAs) to incorporate Developed Key Result Areas (KRAs) to incorporate

fairness and equity within practice expectationsfairness and equity within practice expectations Hired RDD CoordinatorHired RDD Coordinator Engaged Line Supervisors in discussions on RDDEngaged Line Supervisors in discussions on RDD ICWA PPG’s (don’t know what this is?)ICWA PPG’s (don’t know what this is?) Established ? ICWA training-unit staffEstablished ? ICWA training-unit staff

RDD work cont.RDD work cont.

Practice Changes:Practice Changes: Front door engagement with familiesFront door engagement with families African American Facilitator with African American African American Facilitator with African American

families families Ongoing fairness and equity trainingOngoing fairness and equity training

• ““Undoing Racism” for staffUndoing Racism” for staff

• Brown-bag lunches/videos and speakers dealing Brown-bag lunches/videos and speakers dealing with fairness and equity issueswith fairness and equity issues

Established “Cultural Brokers”Established “Cultural Brokers”

Who are Fresno County’s Who are Fresno County’s Cultural Brokers?Cultural Brokers?

Community members that have received extensive training:

• Child welfare system• Family to Family Initiative

Consistently attend one or more of the F2F collaboratives, and have served as a TDM representative for more than 6 months Ideally (but not always), of the same culture as

the family or have an extensive knowledge of the family’s culture

• Some also have extensive knowledge in specialized topic areas such as substance abuse, domestic violence, ICWA, and immigration

Role of the Cultural BrokerRole of the Cultural Broker Increase the quality of the relationship

between DCFS and the families it serves:

• Helps the agency work with the family and the family work with the agency• Cultural brokers are trained in

DCFS program activities and purposes, child welfare

mandates, and how to work with the court.

Representation of Black Children in Fresno County's Child Welfare System 2000

to 2006

5.68% 5.82% 5.97% 6.14% 6.18% 6.21% 6.22%

17.90%

15.13%

17.61%

11.95%

14.32%

10.56%

6.85%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Population Entries

Why careWhy care

What do we need to support this workWhat do we need to support this work

Training and educationTraining and education

-university and academy-university and academy

-community agencies -community agencies

-judicial system-judicial system Funding that supports ancillary servicesFunding that supports ancillary services Begin RDD discussion with other Begin RDD discussion with other

community partners i.e. education, mental community partners i.e. education, mental health, criminal justice, probationhealth, criminal justice, probation