Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP)Selected Logic Model Outcomes

in the System of CareCY14 3rd and 4th Quarters

Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth & FamiliesData and Evaluation Unit

April 2015

2

History of Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP)

• Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) was established in 2009 by DCYF to promote activities at the community level

• The partnerships are designed to strengthen and support families whose children are at risk of:1. Abuse and/or neglect

2. Who have a Serious Emotional Disturbance (SED), and/or

3. Who are involved with the RI Training School.

3

FCCPP Serves Four Geographic Regions in Rhode Island

1. East Bay

2. Northern RI

3. Urban Core

4. Washington Kent

4

FCCP Values and Principles

1. Child-centered, youth-guided and family-driven

2. Individualized and strength based

3. Cultural and linguistic competence

4. Trauma informed

5. Community based

6. Collaborative

7. Wraparound

5

Characteristics of Active Families in FCCP, CY14 3rd and 4th quarters

6

Figure 1: Percentage of Families Active in the FCCP by FCCP, , by CY13 3rd and 4th quarters – CY14 3rd and 4th quartersThe FCCPs had 1058 families active during the CY14 3rd and 4th quarters (active defined as opened at least 1 day or greater during the quarter. The total number of children served by the FCCP during these 2 quarters was 1870.

Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS). During CY14 1st and 2nd Quarters 1249 Families were served. 1203 familieswere served during the last two quarters of CY13.

EB NRI UC WK 0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

14.7% 20.4%

46.1%

18.8%14.8% 21.3%

45.2%

18.7%15.3%19.5%

46.0%

19.2%

CY13 3rd and 4th Qtrs CY14 1st and 2nd Qtrs CY14 3rd and 4th Qtrs

7

Figure 2: Hispanic Origin of Primary Child in FCCP, by CY14 3rd and 4th quarters

Latino Non Latino0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

14.7%

74.6%

Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS). Eleven percent of the 1058 active families had missing data.

8

Figure 3: Race of Primary Child in FCCP, , CY14 3rd and 4th quarters

Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS).

3.8% 0.4% 0.5%

11.5%

26.6%

4.2%0.1%

52.9%

African American/Black (3.8%)American Indian/Alaskan Native (0.4%)Asian(0.5%)Blank (11.5%)Caucasian/White (26.6%)Multi-racial (4.2%)Native Hawaiian/Pacific Is-lander (0.1%)Other (52.9%)

Hispanic Origin: 24.1%

9

Figure 4: Median Age of Primary Child in FCCP by FCCP, by CY14 3rd and 4th quarters

EB NRI UC WK0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Median Age = 7

Data Source: RIFIS.

10

Figure 5: Primary Language of the Primary Child in FCCP, , by CY14 3rd and 4th quarters

0.9% 0.1%

76.5%

0.3%0.2%

0.1%

10.5%

0.1%

Creole (Cape Verdean) (0.9%)Creole (Haitian) (0.1%)English (76.5%)Khmer (Cambodia) (0.3%)Other (0.2%)Portuguese (0.1%)Spanish (10.5%)Slovak (0.1%)

Data Source: RIFIS.

11

Data Source: RIFIS. Data was taken from FCCP Intake 1A completed in the reported Quarters. The numbers are not mutually exclusive because the end user can check all that apply. Families can still access FCCP if one of their children is open to Probation.

Figure 6: Percent of FCCP Families Active in FCCP by Eligibility Criteria by CY14 3rd and 4th Quarter

CY13 3rd and 4th Qtrs CY14 1st and 2nd Qtrs CY14 3rd and 4th Qtrs 0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%84.7% 82.5% 86.3%

22.3% 17.3% 17.0%

0.7% 0.8% 1.0%

Risk for Abuse or Neglect Serious Emotional Disturbance (SED)Youth Development Center (YDC)

12

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning

• Indicator: Establish baseline for child and family strengths and functioning and increase in child and family strengths and functioning from baseline.• Data Source: North Carolina Family Assessment Scale (NCFAS)

13

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning

Serious Problem

(-3)

Moderate Problem

(-2)

Mild Problem

(-1)

Baseline/Adequate

(0)

Mild Strength

(+1)

Clear Strength

(+2)

Environment Intake 5.7 14.3 15.2 38.1 13.3 12.4 Transition 2.4 6.7 10.0 44.8 20.0 16.2

Parental Capabilities Intake 2.9 14.3 18.6 39.0 11.4 13.3 Transition 2.9 8.1 12.4 41.9 18.1 16.7

Family Interactions Intake 6.2 14.3 26.7 31.0 14.3 6.7 Transition 5.7 6.7 16.2 65.7 24.8 10.0

Family Safety Intake 5.7 14.3 19.0 39.0 8.6 11.4 Transition 4.3 4.8 8.1 51.4 15.2 15.2

Child Well-Being Intake 6.7 17.1 21.0 32.4 11.9 9.0 Transition 4.3 8.1 15.2 39.5 20.0 11.9

Social/Community Life Intake 1.4 7.6 21.0 45.7 15.2 8.1 Transition 1.9 5.7 12.4 47.1 21.0 11.0

Self-Sufficiency Intake 8.6 16.7 19.5 31.9 13.3 9.5 Transition 7.1 9.5 15.7 38.1 19.0 9.5

Family Health Intake 7.1 19.0 21.4 28.6 14.8 8.1 Transition 4.3 10.0 18.6 37.1 20.0 9.5

Table 1: Percent of ratings in each NCFAS domain at intake and discharge (N=210)

Data: RIFIS. Two hundred ten families were pulled from all 1058 families active in the last 2 quarters of CY14.

From a system level, from intake to baseline, clear and mild strengths increased across each domain while serious and mild problems decreased across all domains.

14

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning (cont.)

Figure 7: Percent of Families Showing Change in NCFAS Ratings, (N=210)

Data Source: RIFIS.

While a majority of the families did not experience any change from intake to transition, over Two thirds of the families maintained positive scores from baseline to transition (63.4% to 76.2%).Significant positive changes were found in all domains, (20.4% to 32.2%). A small number of families Experienced negative changes in each domain area, (3.4% to 7.7%).

Family Health

Self-Sufficiency

Social/Community Life

Child Well-Being

Family Safety

Famiy Interactions

Parental Capabilities

Environment

0.0%10.0%

20.0%30.0%

40.0%50.0%

60.0%70.0%

80.0%90.0%

Positive ChangeNo ChangeNegative Change

15

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services.

• Indicator: Child and family assessments are completed within a determined number of days of referral for services as defined by clinical standards for emergency and non emergency cases.

• Data Source: NCFAS, Ages and Stages, Ohio Scales, Crisis Plan, Functional Assessments and Strengths Need Cultural Discovery (SNCD)

16

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services.

Figure 8: Percent of FCCP families that completed NCFAS, at intake and transition, by CY13 3 rd and 4th quarters – CY14 3rd and 4th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

Data: RIFIS. Data based on children/families who were open for more than 45 days and closed during the reporting period.

CY13 3rd and 4th Quarters CY14 1st and 2nd Quarters CY14 3rd and 4th Quarters0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

60.0%

66.0%

34.0%

Goal: 75%

17

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services.

Table 2: Percentage of Completed Assessments for Families Open to an Agency for more than 45 days by CY13 3 rd and 4th quarters – CY14 3rd and 4th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

CY13 1st and 2nd

Quarters

CY13 3rd and 4th

Quarters

CY14 1st and 2nd

Quarters

CY14 3rd and 4th

Quarters

Goal

Ages and Stages Baseline

(N=399)13.5%

(N=393)5.9%

(N=424)21.7%

(N=344)9.0%

50%

Ohio Scales Baseline – Parent

(N=775)17.5%

(N=642)15.6%

(N=751)17.4%

(N=570)11.1%

50%

Data Source: RIFIS. Calculation is determined from the agency open date and includes children/youth that are age appropriate to the assessment.

18

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. (Cont.) Table 3: Average Number of days for NCFAS completion, CY14 3rd and 4th Quarters (Goal review: July 2015

for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

Data Source: RIFIS. The FCCP standards for completing a baseline NCFAS is 45 days. Calculation is determined from the agency open date.

CY14 3rd and 4th Quarters

Goal

Average number of days to complete NCFAS baseline

19.5 Within 45 days

19

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. (Cont.)

Table 4: Completed SNCD, CY14 3rd and 4th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

East Bay

Northern RI

Urban Core

Washington Kent

State Goal

SNCD 71 63 137 78 349 All families

Number of Families active 45 days or greater

110 159 365 153 787

Data Source: RIFIS. A completed SNCD is marked final and approved by the supervisor. Child/Youth are those that were open to an agency for 45 days or greater AND those who were open to an agency for 45 days or greater and closed. Child/Youth who closed with the following reasons were omitted: Family declined service, FCCP declined service and Unable to contact family. Calculation is determined from the agency open date.

20

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to

strengths and needs of family• Indicator: Children/family members will receive services within a determined

number of days of being referred as defined by clinical standards for emergency and nonemergency cases.

• Data Source: RIFIS and DCYF Record Reviews

21

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to

strengths and needs of familyFigure 9: Median length of time (hours) to first face to face contact with family by responsePriority, CY 14 3rd and 4th Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

Data: RIFIS.

DCYF: CPS Emergency (N=1) DCYF: CPS Urgent (N=22) DCYF: CPS Routine (N=465) Community Referrals (N=363)0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

0.0

24.0

168.0

192.0

Median

(7 days)

(8 days)

2 hours

24 hours

5 business days

22

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to

strengths and needs of family• Indicator: Children/family engage in family team meetings at frequency as defined

by practice standards• Data Source: RIFIS

23

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to

strengths and needs of family

East Bay

Northern RI

Urban Core

Washington Kent

State Goal

Number of Team Meetings 360 179 291 186 1016 Monthly

Child/Youth open to FCCP 45 days or greater

104 159 364 143 770 All Children open more

than 45 days

Number of meetings per family 3.5 1.1 0.8 1.3 1.3

Average length of time in Agency (days)* 139.1 134.2 128.1 138.6 132.2

Data Source: RIFIS Consumer Assessment Responses by Program. *Child/Youth are 1)open to agency for more than 45 days and 2)open for more than 45Days and closed (did not include families whose close reason was unable to contact, family declined services or FCCP denied family. Some of the children/youth included in these numbers may have been closed prior to the time a team meeting is occurring. * Data based on number of closed cases during the reported quarters. Close reasons not included were unable to contact, family declined services or FCCP denied family.

Table 5:Number of FCCP Team Meetings, by FCCP region, CY14 3rd and 4th Quarters(Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

24

Logic Model Outcome 6: Provide culturally competent services

• Indicator: Staff provides services in the primary language of the child/family member.

• Data Source: RIFIS

Logic Model Outcome 6: Provide culturally competent services

CY14 3rd and 4th Quarters (N=1058)

Goal

Staff provides services in the primary language of the child/family member

98.1% 100%

Data: RIFIS

Table 6: Services provided in primary language to child/family (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

26

Logic Model Outcome 10: Increase the percentage of children who remain safely in their homes receiving community-based

services despite their risk for out-of-home placement/removal.• Indicator: Increased percentage of children/youth who are able to remain safely in

their home receiving community-based services.• Data Source: RIFIS and RICHIST

Logic Model Outcome 10: Increase the percentage of children who remain safely in their homes receiving

community-based services despite their risk for out of home placement/removal

Table 7: Close Reasons for DCYF referred Children/Families, CY14 1st and 2nd Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1st and 2nd quarters)

Data: RIFIS. Children/Families are those that were referred by DCYF and were closed during the first six months of CY14. *The familyMet partial/most/all goals in any of the 4 phases of Wrap.

CY13 3rd and 4th

Quarters(N=575)

CY14 1st and 2nd

Quarters(N=676)

CY14 3rd and 4th

Quarters(N=584)

Goal

Team agrees wrap goals met*

44.8% 44.4% 45.5% 75.0%

Child opened to DCYF

6.2% 7.1% 6.3% 5.0 %

28

Next Steps

1. Ongoing program evaluation

2. Continuous quality improvement

3. Fidelity to Wraparound practices

4. Reassess targets for outcome measures

5. Building community involvement in the regional and statewide FCAB’s