http://www.researchforum.org/project_general_250.html

National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW)

General Information

View a brief abstract of this project.

View a complete, printer-friendly profile of this project.

Evaluator(s) Research Triangle Institute
Investigator(s) Richard Barth (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Desmond Runyan (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Kathryn Dowd (Research Triangle Institute)
Mary Bruce Webb (US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families)
Paul Biemer (Research Triangle Institute)
Sponsor(s) US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children, Youth, and Families
Funder(s) US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children, Youth, and Families
Subcontractor(s) University of California at Berkeley
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Caliber Associates
 
Domain Child/Family
Status Operational with Findings
Duration Oct 1997 - Sep 2003
Type Research and/or Program Evaluation
Goal To conduct a national study of children who are at risk of abuse or neglect or are in the child welfare system.
Program/Policy Description In 1996, Congress directed the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a national study of children who are at risk of abuse or neglect or are in the child welfare system. The Congress directed that the study follow children over time; collect data on the types of abuse or neglect involved, agency contracts and services, out-of-home placements; and yield reliable state-level data. The Administration on Children, Youth, and Families (ACYF) has undertaken the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW). The study is designed to address crucial program, policy, and practice issues of concern to the federal government, state and local governments, and child welfare agencies. It is the first national study of child welfare to collect data from children and families, and the first to relate child and family well-being to family characteristics, experience with the child welfare system, community environment, and other factors. NSCAW will collect and analyze nationally representative longitudinal data from first-hand reports from children, parents, and other caregivers, as well as reports from caseworkers and teachers. Children are sampled and serve as the unit of analysis. Other respondents are eligible due to their relationship with one or more sampled children.
Notes Click here for information on reports.
 
Last Updated 04/30/04
Type of Summary Reviewed
External Reviewer(s) Kathryn Dowd (Research Triangle Institute)
Contact(s) Kathryn Dowd (KLD@rti.org)
Research Triangle Institute
3040 Conwallis Road
PO Box 12194
(T) (919) 541-6262
(F) (919) 541-1261
Mary Bruce Webb (mbwebb@acf.dhhs.gov)
US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
330 C Street SW, Room 2132
(T) (202) 205-8628
(F) (202)205-9721
Publications Department Reid Maness (crm@rti.org)
Research Triangle Institute
3040 Conwallis Road
PO Box 12194
(T) (919) 541-6000
(F) not reported

Populations Studied

Target Population Children
Adolescents
Subgroups Analyzed Recipients/participants/clients
Children younger than 1 (infants)
Children in Foster Care
Sample Size and Unit 9400 children (aged 0-14) from the child protective services (CPS) sample; 1100 children in the long-term foster care. Targeted number of completed CPS interviews is 5400 and LTFC interviews is 700.

For this nationally representative sample, children are randomly selected from 92 Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) in 98 counties and 36 states nationwide. For most areas of the country, the best definition of a PSU is the county since it corresponds to a clearly defined political entity and geographic area of manageable size. The PSU sampling frame was stratified into nine major strata; eight strata providing state-level estimates and one serving as the remainder stratum (28 states).

Sites Studied

Nationally representative sample of 98 counties in 36 states

Program Components, Policies, and Activities Evaluated

Social/Support services

  • Case management
  • Social/Support Services - misc.
  • Child protection agencies
  • Community/social services

Administration/Implementation

  • Administration/Implementation - misc.

Foster Care Services

  • Foster Care Services - misc.
Variation in program components across sites? No
Notes on program components Administration/Implementation: Agency information including structure and resources, policies and programs, and organizational culture is obtained.

Foster Care: Information regarding child placement and placement changes during time in the child welfare system, as well as caseworkers’ characteristics and attitudes is obtained.

Social/Support Services: Information on child protection agencies, other services for children and families in the sample (including source and amount of services), and reasons some services were not received is obtained.

Outcomes Assessed

Family and relationship outcomes

  • Violence in family or other relationships (child abuse and neglect)
  • Parent-child interactions
  • Family formation and stability/Living arrangements
  • Foster care
  • Family and relationship outcomes - misc.
  • Adoption
  • Parenting attitudes
  • Parenting skills
  • Kinship care

Adult outcomes

  • Social functioning/social relationships
  • Adult outcomes - misc.

Child Outcomes

  • Child social/emotional/behavioral outcomes
  • Child cognitive (attention, problem solving, memory, language, and vocabulary) outcomes
  • Child academic outcomes
  • Child overall development
  • Child outcomes - misc.

Types of Studies

Type Longitudinal/Prospective Study
Aim To answer the following questions:
1. Who are the children and families who come into contact with the child welfare system?
2. What pathways and services do children and families experience while in the child welfare system?
3. What are short- and long-term outcomes for these children and families?
 

Data Sources

Source Survey
Title Child Interview
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection 9400 children (aged 0-14) from the child protective services (CPS) sample; 1100 children in the long-term foster care. Children are the unit of analysis. Other respondents are eligible due to their relationship with one or more sampled children.
In-person interviews conducted with child at baseline and 18 months.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Method includes interview and developmental assessments/screenings.
Topic areas include:
All children: cognitive skills, language, school achievement, behavior problems, mental health, relationships with peers and adults, attitudes and motivations, and exposure to violence.
Older children (ages 11+):: delinquent behavior, sexual behavior substance abuse, maltreatment history, and services received.
 
Source Survey
Title Caregiver Survey
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection Caregivers of children in the CPC and LTFC samples with a co-residency requirement of 2 months.
In-person interviews conducted with caregivers at baseline and 18 months; and interview with caregiver (telephone) on service utilization after 12-months.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Method also includes interview.
Topic areas include:
About children: health and disabilities, services received, daily living skills, social skills, temperament, behavior problems, and disruptions in living environment.
About themselves: mental health/substance abuse, physical health, services received, parenting knowledge and attitudes, relationship with child, disciplinary techniques, and social support.
About family/community: domestic violence, neighborhood environment, parental criminal involvement, and demographics.
 
Source Survey
Title Local Child Welfare Agency Survey
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection Two components to survey: 1) interviewer-administered with Local Agency Directors; and 2) self-administered (mail survey) with Local Agency Directors for all primary sampling units in the study.
Data collected annually.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Method also includes interview.
Project developed questions covering the following topics:
Organization of child welfare services
Services and service dynamics
Client characteristics at county level and caseload dynamics
Staffing and training
Budget and expenditures
Changes in the child welfare system.
 
Source Survey
Title State Child Welfare Agency Survey
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection State Child Welfare Agency Directors in all 50 states.
Data collected annually by telephone.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Method also includes interview.
Project developed questions covering the following topics:
Organization of child welfare service delivery
Collaboration between child welfare agencies and service providers
Subcontracting services
Investigation process
Case management practices
Use of performance-based measures
Impact of TANF, Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA), and the Interethnic Adoption Provisions (IAP) and Foster Care Independence Act innovative programs.
 
Source Survey
Title Caseworker Survey
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection Caseworkers of children in the CPS and LTFC samples.
In-person interviews conducted with investigative caseworker at baseline; interview with services caseworker (in-person) on service utilization at 12 months and 18 months after close of investigation.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Measure also includes interview.
Caseworker baseline interview topic areas include:
Risk assessment for children and families, caseworker characteristics and attitudes, and services for children and families in the sample (services received, including source and amount; reasons some services were not received; child placement; and child placement changes during time in the child welfare system).

Caseworker post-baseline interview topic areas include:
History before and since the case report, caseworker involvement with the child and family, services for children and families in the sample (services received, including source and amount; reasons some services were not received; child placement and adoption possibilities; child placement changes during time in the child welfare system; and family compliance and progress), and results and recommendations of court hearings.

 
Source Survey
Title Teacher Survey
Sample Characteristics/Data Collection Teacher survey administered by mail for children in grades K-12 in the CPS and LTFC samples.
Survey administered at baseline and 18-months after investigation.
Sites All sites
Response Rate/Attrition Notes Fielded sample number not reported.
Additional Execution Notes Topic areas include:
Teacher-Child Relations, School Engagement, Peer Relationships, Social Skills and School Socialization, Student Behavior, Interpersonal Aggression, Grade Progression, Academic Performance, School Absences, Home-Teacher Contacts, Special Education Needs, and Demographics.
 

Findings Available

Interim Descriptive/Analytical Findings

Findings

06/01/01: National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: State Child Welfare Agency Survey Report
Interim Findings:

  • Two-thirds of the respondents reported that the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) has resulted in enhancements or changes in at least one of the following four areas: child safety, permanency, collaboration with the courts, and data collection.
  • Although there have always been informal collaborations to provide services to clients and their families, administrators report an increased emphasis on formal collaborations between agencies and groups providing services to those children and families served by child welfare agencies.
  • Child welfare providers report increasing participation in multidisciplinary teams. Case teams have long existed, but these innovative programs (1) involve many more partners, including families and (2) begin at an earlier stage in the assessment of children and families.
  • State administrators identified several areas of concern about the future of child welfare, including insufficient funding, increasingly complex caseloads, and workforce issues (e.g., high turnover, low salaries, and insufficient training).
  • The most frequently reported promising developments in child welfare included the following: Growing emphasis on prevention and early intervention; Increased collaboration with other service providers; Greater involvement of families in decision-making; Increased emphasis on evaluation and outcomes.
  • The interviews conducted for this report suggest that, while states face similar challenges, they are using diverse strategies to address them. State administrators consistently expressed interest in learning about how other states are responding to Federal, state, and local changes and challenges. This report will be useful to state and local child welfare agencies as they evaluate and consider the implementation of new service delivery systems, innovative practice models, and the experiences of other states related to recent changes in Federal legislation and policy.
  •  
    06/01/01: National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: Local Child Welfare Agency Survey Report
    Interim Findings

  • Large counties appeared to differ substantially from small counties regarding the delivery of child welfare services, employing a significantly higher proportion of direct service workers, compared to CPS workers, than did other counties.
  • Nonpoor counties had a significantly greater-about four times higher-average per-child child welfare expenditure ($10,739) than did poor counties ($2,689)
  • Urban counties, in general, are reorganizing their services more rapidly than nonurban counties.
  • State-administered child welfare systems appear to have a more structured approach to risk assessment, licensing of kinship homes, and training of child welfare workers and caregivers.
  •  
    10/01/03: National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: One Year in Foster Care
    • Most children (60%) in the OYFC population were placed in out-of-home care with neglect as the most serious type of maltreatment. About half of these were neglected through failure to provide; the other half, through failure to supervise. The most serious types of abuse for the rest were identified as follows:
      • 10%, physical abuse;
      • 8%, sexual abuse;
      • 14%, emotional, moral/legal, or educational abuse, or abandonment; and
      • 8% for reasons other than abuse or neglect (e.g., for mental health services or domestic violence).
      • Many OYFC children have experienced more than one type of abuse.
    • Forty-four percent of OYFC children are in non-kin foster homes, and about one-quarter (24%) are in kinship foster homes.
    • Caregivers were asked about children's health problems that "lasted or reoccurred." Over one-quarter of the OYFC children have some type of recurring physical or mental health problem.
    • Children's functioning was assessed with multiple standardized developmental measures. Children in out-of-home care tend to fall marginally below the norm compared with the general population on nearly every measure, including measures of cognitive capacities, language development, behavioral problems, and academic achievement. Although these lower scores are reason for concern, such scores are somewhat more common among poor children, which are the group of children most involved with child welfare services.
    • Current caregivers tend to be middle-aged or older; almost two-thirds (62%) are aged 40 or older. Caregivers in kin-care settings are more likely to be aged 60 or older than are caregivers in non-kin foster homes or group homes, and caregivers in group homes are much more likely to be under age 40 than caregivers in foster homes or kin-care settings.
    • Caregivers are almost as likely to be single as married (45% vs. 53%).
    • The education of the current caregivers typically is high school or less (56%).
    • The average number of household members in kin-care and nonkin foster homes together is 5.2.
    • On average OYFC children report feeling positive about their caregivers, reporting a high sense of relatedness, though children in group care report this relatedness to a lesser degree than those in kinship care.
    • Children aged 6 and older were asked about their experiences in out-of-home care, including how they viewed their current living situation, their thoughts about where they would live in the future, and their views of their biological parents. In general, a positive picture of foster care arrangements emerged as most children like the people they are living with (90%) and say they feel like a part of the family (92%).
    • The children in group home placements are generally less satisfied with their placement than the children in kinship or nonkinship foster care—more of these children do not like the people they live with and do not want their current arrangement as a permanent home.
    • Child welfare workers were asked to identify some risk factors that the family might have experienced prior to the placement. About 60% of the families had between 3 and 5 of the 7 risk factors examined, with a mean of 3.4. The lack of a second supportive caregiver was the most common risk factor present at the time of placement.
     

    Recommendations

    Existing Publications

    06/01/01 National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: Local Child Welfare Agency Survey Report RTI
    06/01/01 National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: State Child Welfare Agency Survey Report RTI
    10/01/03 National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: One Year in Foster Care RTI
    04/01/99 National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: Project Summary ACF

    Forthcoming Publications

    00/00/00 National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: The First Three Years of the USA's First National Probability Sample of Children and Families Investigated for Abuse and Neglect RTI