Child Protective Services Decision-Making: The Role of Children's Race and County Context

Background and Purpose:

Child Protective Services (CPS) reaches a large proportion of the child population in the U.S., and this is especially true for historically disadvantaged groups. Nationally, children from Black and American Indian families (and, to a lesser extent, Hispanic families) are overrepresented at most stages of CPS involvement relative to their presence in the population, whereas White and Asian children are underrepresented. However, there is extensive variation in CPS decision-making across and within states; thus, there remains disagreement the extent to which racial groups have similar CPS outcomes within county (the typical organizational level of CPS), and whether the county’s sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., poverty, racial composition) are similarly associated with CPS decision-making across racial groups.

We investigated two research questions: (1) Is race predictive of substantiation and out-of-home placement among children investigated by CPS, net of state and county effects?; and (2) Are the associations of county sociodemographic characteristics with substantiation and out-of-home placement similar across racial groups?

Methods:

We used years 2009-2015 of two national datasets: the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) and the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS). Together, these datasets provide information on characteristics and case outcomes of children investigated by CPS.

We estimated a series of multi-level logistic regression models with children nested within counties to estimate the odds of substantiation and out-of-home placement.

Results:

Net of child, case, and county characteristics, and state of residence, Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and multi-racial children all had significantly greater odds of substantiation and out-of-home placement than non-Hispanic White children. Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic children had greater odds of substantiation, but not out-of-home placement. Asian children had lower odds of substantiation and out-of-home placement than non-Hispanic White children.

In impoverished counties, Black, Asian, and multi-racial children have lower odds of substantiation, while Black and White children have lower odds of out-of-home placement. County percentage of Black residents is associated with reduced odds of substantiation among White children, and reduced odds of out-of-home placement among White, multi-racial, and Hispanic children. This finding did not extend to Black children. In counties with high percentages of Hispanic residents, Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and Hispanic children have higher odds of substantiation, but Hispanic children have a lower likelihood of out-of-home placement. 

Conclusions and Implications:

Overall, case and geographic factors did not fully account for racial disparities in decision-making. In some cases, county context appeared to have different effects on decision-making depending on child race. A better understanding of how environmental contexts influence CPS workers’ decision-making is needed. Moreover, the finding that county poverty was negatively associated with substantiation and removal for some groups suggests a potential constraint on (or rationing of) agency resources in high-need areas.