The Education of Children in California who Live in Group Homes : Just How Bad is it and What Should be Done? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – The Education of Children in California who Live in Group Homes : Just How Bad is it and What Should be Done? PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 6af801-MWJjO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

The Education of Children in California who Live in Group Homes : Just How Bad is it and What Should be Done?

Description:

The Education of Children in California who Live in Group Homes : Just How Bad is it and What Should be Done? Nina Van Dyke, Ph.D. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:12
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Date added: 25 September 2019
Slides: 45
Provided by: melbournei
Learn more at: http://www.melbourneinstitute.com
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The Education of Children in California who Live in Group Homes : Just How Bad is it and What Should be Done?


1
The Education of Children in California who Live
in Group Homes Just How Bad is it and What
Should be Done?
  • Nina Van Dyke, Ph.D.

2
  • Julie
  • Jessica

3
  • Number of youth in foster care in U.S. gt500,000
    (Weinberg et al. 2001)
  • Number of youth in foster care in California
    gt100,000 (Morena 2001)
  • Number of youth in California who live in group
    homes 18,500
  • Number of group homes in California 1,634

4
Group Homes
  • Also called Licensed Childrens Institutions
    (LCIs)
  • Residential facilities
  • Licensed by the State
  • Six or more youth
  • Mostly dependents or wards
  • Mostly higher level of care

5
How Youth End up in Group Homes
  • Placed by Child Welfare Services (abuse or
    neglect) -- dependents
  • Placed by probation (violated a law)
    alternative to juvenile hall -- wards
  • Placed by an expanded IEP team (severely
    emotionally disturbed)

6
Outcomes for Foster Youth
  • 37 had not finished high school
  • 39 were unemployed
  • 27 males, 10 females incarcerated 1 times
  • 39 receiving public assistance
  • (study of former foster youth 12-18 months after
    emancipation Courtney Piliavin, 1998)

7
This Study (March, 2003)
  • 15 months 1(U.S.) million
  • Goal provide a detailed road map for improving
    educational services AND address issues of
    finance
  • Report
  • 1. Fiscal analysis
  • 2. Existing system
  • 3. Implementation of this system
  • 4. Data analysis
  • 5. Recommendations

8
Methodology
  • Fiscal arrangements
  • finance committee
  • Policies and procedures -- State
  • interviews
  • document reviews
  • stakeholder committee
  • Policies and procedures -- Counties
  • interviews
  • document reviews
  • focus groups
  • youth placement profiles

9
Problem Areas
  • 1. Fiscal arrangement
  • 2. Capacity
  • 3. Accountability and responsibility
  • 4. Records and information transfer
  • 5. Interagency relationships
  • 6. Advocacy

10
100 NPS Reimbursement Formula
  • School districts reimbursed 100 for extra costs
    of special ed services if
  • (a) served in an NPS, AND
  • (1) placed in LCI or FFH
  • (2) by a non-education agency
  • (3) parents ed rights removed, OR
  • (b) placement outside school district in which
    parents live NOT
  • (c) if placed out of state

11
Youth Placement Profiles
  • Track educational and residential history back
    one year
  • Sample 308 youth ages 12-18 eight counties
  • Three field workers
  • 2-5 youth per home, randomly selected
  • Information from caseworkers/probation officers,
    schools, residences, youth
  • About 45 minutes/youth/source

12
Authority
  • Educational records Agent of the State
  • Residential records and youth interviews
    standing court orders from youth's county of
    adjudication

13
Obstacles
  • Judges delayed/refused to issue order
  • Group homes still wouldn't let us in
  • Social workers/probation officers would not
    return repeated phone calls
  • Mental health placements parental consent and
    lawyer's consent
  • Missing data
  • Interviewee couldn't provide information

14
Data Collection Indicators
15
Age of Youth in Sample
16
Gender of Youth in Sample(Source Caseworker/PO
interviews)
17
Race/Ethnicity of Youth in Sample(Sources
Caseworker/PO interviews 2000 Census, based on
1999-00 K-12 enrolment)
18
Agency Responsible for Youth in Sample
19
Do Parents Maintain Educational Rights?(Source
Caseworkers/POs)
20
Demographics of Youth in Sample
  • About 16 years old
  • Mostly boys
  • Overrepresentation of Blacks underrepresentation
    of Latinos
  • Placed by Social Services or Probation
  • For 15 of the youth, caseworker/PO doesn't know
    if parents maintain ed rights

21
Frequencies and Annual Costs of Services for
Youth in Sample (based on current residential and
education placements)(Source current group
homes and schools)
22
Numbers of Youth in Sample Who Receive Mental
Health Services(Source Group Homes)
23
Spending on Youth Examples
  • Levon
  • lives in a group home
  • attends an NPS
  • receives the following services intensive day
    Tx, med support, crisis intervention, TBS
  • avg annual cost 152,704
  • Jose
  • lives in a group home
  • attends regular ed classes in a regular pub
    school
  • receives mental health services
  • avg annual cost 78,328

24
How Academic Progress Previous Semester
Documented(Source Schools)
25
Grade Point Average (GPA)(Source Schools)
26
Enroled Credits Earned (Prior Semester)
27
Educational Outcomes
  • No one has any idea how a lot of these youth are
    doing
  • Most of the youth who did not receive letter
    grades are in special ed
  • The youth for whom we do have educational
    information are falling behind

28
Number of Days Missed Between Educational
Placements (over prior 12 months)(Source
Schools)
29
Number of Days Youth Resided at Current Group
Home Before Enroled in School
30
Reasons Youth Missed School(Source Current
Group Homes)
31
Amount of School Missed
  • Significant numbers of youth have missed several
    days or more of school over the past year when
    they changed schools/homes
  • Youth say they missed more
  • Regular public schools put up roadblocks to
    enroling these youth

32
Number of Educational Placements Over Past 12
Months(Source Schools)
33
Number of Educational Placements Over Past 12
Months According to Youth
34
Length of Time Spent at Any Given School(Source
Schools)
35
Educational Itinerancy
  • Youth frequently change schools
  • Youth report more changes than do schools
  • Schools report only 56 attended same school over
    past 12 months youth report only 37
  • Twenty per cent of schools and 41 of youth
    report attending three or more schools over past
    year
  • Youth rarely stay at one school for long

36
Changed School Mid-Semester Because of
Residential Change(Over Youth's Time in Foster
Care)(Source Youth)
37
Number of Mid-Semester Moves(Over Youth's Time
in Foster Care)(Source Youth)
38
Number of Residential Placements Over Past 12
Months
39
Whether Out-of-County Placement Driven by
Residential or Educational Needs(Source
Caseworkers/POs)
40
Reason for Termination of Educational
Placement(Source Caseworkers/POs)
41
Residential Itinerancy
  • Overwhelmingly, youth change schools because they
    change residential placements
  • Youth change homes frequently
  • More than 2/3rds of youth say they have changed
    schools mid-semester
  • Average of four such moves over a youth's life

42
RecommendationsOverarching Principals
  • Child-centered system
  • Education agencies (State and local) primarily
    responsible
  • Foster youth recognised by State as special group
  • Education recognised as primary service
  • Voice for foster youth
  • All needs considered together as a whole
  • Educational success dependent on stability of
    residential and educational placements
  • All professionals involved act as advocates

43
Recommendations for Change
  • 1. Alternative to 100 NPS reimbusement formula
  • 2. Strengthen accountability and monitoring of
    public and nonpublic education received
  • 3. Develop independent state and local oversight
    boards
  • 4. Change/expand Ombudsman Office
  • independent
  • education
  • 5. Establish interagency working goups (State and
    county levels)

44
Recommendations for Change (cont.)
  • 6. Education agencies responsible for education
    of foster youth clear roles for others
  • 7. Ensure continuous enrolment in same school
  • 8. Single, statewide, web-based data system
    accessible to all agencies
  • 9. Acceptance and awarding of partial credit
  • 10. Interagency training
  • 11. Improvement and increased monitoring of court
    and community schools
About PowerShow.com