Intersection of Race and Poverty in Receiving Alternative Response Among Children with Allegations of Neglect

Background and Purpose

Neglect is the most prevalent type of child maltreatment accompanying immediate or persisting effects on children. The child welfare system has responded to the allegations of neglect in several ways in order to achieve safety, permanency, and well-being of children. Alternative Response (AR) providing family-centered services is arranged for the children at the low risk of maltreatment to reduce traditional investigations to child maltreatment allegations and promote family self-sufficiency. However, how the child welfare system assigns allegedly neglected children to AR, in particular, how race/ethnicity and family economic status influence this decision has not been fully studied. Considering ever-growing racial and economic disparities in the child welfare service provision, this study aims to examine the association between neglect allegations and AR, the moderation effects of race, poverty, and the combination of those on the association.

Methods

This study used the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System of 2016, which documented all case-level child maltreatment reports. Only cases within the Texas five regions which fully implemented AR were selected. If a child had multiple recodes, the latest case was selected (N=127,255). The assignment to AR was a dependent variable. The neglect allegation was an independent variable. Race/ethnicity of the child (white or non-white) and the receipt of public welfare programs were moderators. Allegations of physical abuse, sexual abuse, and other types of maltreatment, the existence of the previous victimization, caregiver’s substance abuse, and child age were included. Logistic regression models were constructed using Stata15. A three-way interaction analysis with post hoc probing techniques was also used.

Results

75 percent of children referred to CPS were alleged victims of neglect. 13 percent were assigned to AR. The initial model (without interaction) showed that children with neglect allegation were less likely to be assigned to AR than their counterpart (OR=.37, p<.001). White children were more likely to be assigned to the AR than racially minority children (OR=1.18, p<.001). Children whose family received public assistance were less likely to be assigned to AR (OR=.74, p<.001). Then the interaction between neglect allegation and being a racial minority was added. Minority children with alleged neglect were less likely to be assigned to AR than white counterparts (OR=1.15, p<.001) Next, while excluding the previous interaction, the interaction between a neglect allegation and receipt of public assistance was added. However, it was not statistically significant. Last, the three-way interaction term of neglect, race, and public assistance was significant (OR=0.73, p<.05). Receiving public assistance strengthened a negative association between neglect allegation and AR assignment for minority children, but not for white children.

Conclusions and Implications

There was an intersection of race and economic status in the decision-making in the AR assignment. Racial minority children from low-income families experienced double-jeopardy in receiving AR, leading to being marginalized from equal opportunities for promoting family self-sufficiency. Well-Informed and consistent guideline should be developed. Additional training should be provided to reduce workers’ bias and increase cultural competencies.