Content uploaded by Cady Landa
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Cady Landa on May 12, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Tamara Fuller, PhD
Cady Landa, PhD
Satomi Wakita, PhD
Kyle A. Adams III, MS
October 2021
Racial Disproportionality in the Illinois Child Welfare System
FY2021 Report
1010 W. Nevada Street, Suite 2080 | Urbana, IL 61801 | (217) 333-5837 | www.cfrc.illinois.edu
Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality
1
Child welfare systems across the nation share the concern that children from some racial and
ethnic minority groups may be disproportionately represented in the child welfare system
compared to their representation in the general population.
2
One of the goals in the
Department’s Child Welfare Transformation Strategic Plan is to track racial equity at critical
decision points to help inform planning and decision-making.
3
This report provides information
relevant to that goal by examining racial and ethnic disproportionality in the Illinois child
welfare system at five critical decision points (see Figure 1) during 2014–2020, including:
A. investigated/screened-in maltreatment reports,
B. protective custodies,
C. indicated maltreatment reports,
D. post-investigation service provision, including substitute care and intact family services,
and
E. timely exits from substitute care.
1
Funding for this work was provided by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. The views
expressed herein should not be construed as representing those of the funding agency or the University of Illinois.
2
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2016). Racial disproportionality and disparity in child welfare. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau.
3
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (January, 2017). Illinois Child Welfare Transformation: 2016-
2021. Springfield, IL: Author.
2
Figure 1. Child Welfare Decision Points
Measuring Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality
Racial and ethnic disproportionality refers to over- or under-representation of a racial or ethnic
group in the child welfare system compared to that group’s representation in the general
population. In this report, it is represented by a Racial Disproportionality Index (RDI), in which
the percentage of children in a racial or ethnic group involved in some part of the child welfare
system is divided by the percentage of children in a relevant base population.
There are two commonly used methods for calculating RDI; each uses a different population in
the denominator. The first is the “absolute RDI,” in which a racial or ethnic group’s
representation at a specific child welfare decision point is divided by that group’s
representation in the general child population. The same denominator (the general child
population) is used when calculating absolute RDIs at each decision point. The absolute RDI
provides information about a racial or ethnic group’s over- or under-representation at each
decision point, but does not take into account the impact that disproportionality at earlier child
welfare decision points has on later decision points.
In order to isolate the impact of disproportionality at each decision point, a second measure,
the “relative RDI,” can be calculated; this measure divides a racial or ethnic group’s
representation at a child welfare decision point by that group’s representation at a prior child
welfare decision point. Relative RDIs change the denominator based on the decision point of
the child welfare system that is being examined. For example, the denominator for calculating
the relative RDI of “protective custodies” is the number of children who were investigated,
instead of the number in the general child population.
To calculate the absolute RDIs in this report, data on race and ethnicity for the Illinois child
population were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics.
4
Figure 2 shows the
4
National Center for Health Statistics. (2020). Vintage 2019 bridged-race postcensal population estimates (April 1,
2010-July 1, 2019). Prepared under a collaborative arrangement with the U.S. Census Bureau. Available online
from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race.htm as of July 9, 2020, following release by the U.S. Census
Bureau of the unbridged Vintage 2019 postcensal estimates by 5-year age groups. [Retrieved 7/29/2020].
3
racial and ethnic distribution of children at each child welfare decision in FY2020.
5
The last
decision point, children in care longer than 36 months, is excluded from the figure because
children in the FY2020 cohort have not been in care for at least 36 months. Throughout the
report, the RDI are reported only for the three largest racial/ethnic groups in Illinois: White
(Non-Hispanic), Black (Non-Hispanic), and Hispanic (any race). The numbers of children in other
racial/ethnic groups involved in the child welfare system in Illinois (e.g., Native Americans,
Asian) are so small that the resulting RDIs fluctuate significantly from year to year. RDIs are
examined for the state as a whole as well as for each DCFS administrative region (Cook,
Northern, Central, and Southern) to discern if there are any regional differences. The appendix
contains the absolute and relative RDI at each decision point for the three racial/ethnic groups
over the past seven years.
Figure 2. Racial/Ethnic Distributions of Children by Child Welfare Decision Point (2020)
Interpreting Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality Indices
Absolute or relative RDI values less than 1.0 indicate under-representation. For example, an RDI
of 0.5 means that children are half as represented at that decision point as they are in the
population (absolute RDI) or at a prior decision point (relative RDI). RDI values equal or close to
1.0 indicate no disproportionality; children in that group are represented at rates that are
proportionate to their representation in the population. RDI values greater than 1.0 indicate
over-representation. For example, an RDI of 2.0 means that children in that group are
represented at twice the rate at a decision point as they are in the population (absolute RDI) or
at a prior decision point (relative RDI). In this report, we consider an RDI of less than 0.9 to
show under-representation, an RDI of 0.9 – 1.1 to show proportional representation, and an
5
The 2019 National Center for Health Statistics postcensal estimates were used for the “General Population” in
Figure 4.2 and the calculations of RDIs in FY2019 and FY2020.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
General
Population
Investigated
Reports
Protective
Custodies
Indicated
Reports
Substitute Care
Entries
Intact Family
Services
Black White Hispanic Other Race/Ethnicity
4
RDI that is greater than 1.1 to show over-representation. Since an RDI of 1.0 indicates no
disproportionality, 1.0 is set as the baseline on the figures. Values above the baseline indicate
over-representation and values below the baseline indicate under-representation. In both
instances, the lengths of the bars in the figure correspond to the amount of disproportionality.
Absolute RDI is the traditional measure for reporting disproportionality, and it provides useful
information about how representations of a racial/ethnic group at a given decision point differ
from their representation in the general population. Absolute RDI is unlikely to change across
the child welfare decision points because shifting from over- or under-representation at one
decision point to another requires the same group be conversely under- or over-represented at
a latter decision point.
Relative RDI adjusts for representation at past decision points. For example, when we examine
the representation of a group of children in protective custodies, we compare that with the
representation of that group among all children being investigated, rather than their
representation in the general population. We ask, "What is the representation of children taken
into protective custodies compared to the representation of children being investigated?"
Disproportionate representation in the relative RDI has already controlled for any previous
over- or under-representation; therefore, even relatively small RDIs (below 0.9 or above 1.1)
are of significant concern and are noted throughout the report.
It is important to note that the child welfare system in Illinois, as in all states, is a reactionary
system: Child maltreatment is investigated only when a report is received. This means the
starting decision point in these analyses (investigations) reflects patterns of disproportionate
reporting. For example, if Hispanic children are reported at disproportionately lower rates than
Hispanic children in the general population, it will also be the case that Hispanic children are
investigated at disproportionately lower rates. This rate of investigation does not mean we can
conclude Hispanic children are safer, however. We lack information about the "true" rate of
maltreatment, and this limits the conclusions we can draw about what absolute and relative
RDI can tell us about child safety and bias in the child welfare system.
Investigated Reports
The first decision point examined is investigated reports. At this stage, DCFS staff at the State
Central Register (SCR) screen each call that is received from a maltreatment reporter to
determine if the circumstances meet the criteria for an investigation. Calls can be either
screened in to become investigated reports or screened out and no further child welfare
actions are taken. Figure 3 shows the absolute RDI (absolute and relative RDI are identical
because the general population is the applicable denominator for both) for the three
racial/ethnic groups (Black, White, and Hispanic) for investigated reports in the state over the
past seven years. White children are proportionally represented compared to their
representation in the general population (RDI = 0.9), Black children are over-represented (RDI =
5
2.0), and Hispanic children are under-represented (RDIs = 0.6-0.7; see Appendix Table 1). There
is little change in any of the three groups over the past seven years.
Figure 3. Absolute RDI for Investigated Reports—State
When the absolute RDIs for investigated reports in 2020 are examined by region (see Figure 4),
several values stand out. Black children in the Northern region have an RDI of 2.9, greater than
any other region and the state as a whole. White children are under-represented in the Cook
(RDI = 0.5), Northern (RDI = 0.8), and Central (RDI = 0.8) regions, and are proportionally
represented in the Southern region (RDI =0.9). Hispanic children are under-represented in the
Cook (RDI = 0.8), Central (RDI = 0.8), and Southern (RDI = 0.6) regions, but are proportionally
represented in the Northern region (RDI = 1.0). These regional patterns have been consistent
over time (see Appendix Table 2).
Figure 4. Absolute RDI for Investigated Reports—Regional (2020)
2.0
0.9
0.6
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.7
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2.0
0.5
0.8
2.9
0.8
1.0
2.2
0.8 0.8
1.7
0.9
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
6
Asian American and Pacific Islander Children
From 2014 through 2020, Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI, defined as non-
Hispanic Asian alone and non-Hispanic Other Pacific Islander alone) children comprised
5% of the Illinois child population. AAPI children were under-represented in the state’s
protective service system during 2014 – 2020, making up 1-2% of the state’s annual
investigations, with a modal RDI of 0.3 (see Table 1). AAPI children are also under-
represented among children receiving state protective services—more so than
Hispanic children—on a national level.6
Table 1. Asian American and Pacific Islander Children
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
20207
# in general
population8
143,242
144,650
145,218
146,422
146,211
146,140
146,140
% of general
population
4.8%
4.9%
5.0%
5.1%
5.1%
5.2%
5.2%
# of
investigations
1,002
1,125
1,323
1,271
1,502
1,642
1,522
% of
investigations
1.1%
1.2%
1.3%
1.3%
1.4%
2.0%
1.4%
RDI
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.3
6
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2016). Racial disproportionality and disparity in child welfare. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau.
7
The 2019 estimate is used for the number of AAPI children in the general population and RDI calculations for both
2019 and 2020.
8
The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2021). KIDS COUNT Data Center. Available online from
https://datacenter.kidscount.org. [Retrieved 6/1/2021].
BOX 1
7
Protective Custodies
The next decision point examined is protective custody. During an investigation, a child
protective services (CPS) worker can take protective custody of a child if he or she believes that
the child is unsafe in the home or with the caregiver; the child is taken into care for up to 48
hours (excluding weekends) until a shelter hearing is convened.
9
Figure 5 shows the absolute
RDIs at this decision point for the three racial/ethnic groups over the past seven years. White
children are proportionately represented among protective custodies during the last four years,
2017-2020 (RDI = 0.9). Black children are over-represented at rates 2.3 to 2.7 times their
proportion in the Illinois child population, and Hispanic children are under-represented (RDIs
range from 0.3 to 0.5). There has been a decline in the disproportionality among Black children
at this decision point in recent years (see Appendix Table 3).
Figure 5. Absolute RDI for Protective Custodies—State
When the absolute RDIs for protective custodies are examined by region, there are striking
differences for Black children (see Figure 6 and Appendix Table 4); the Northern region has the
highest RDI (4.1), followed by Cook (2.6), Central (2.5), and Southern (1.4) in 2020. There are
also regional differences in the RDIs for protective custodies for White children; they are
particularly under-represented in the Cook region (RDI = 0.3), under-represented in the
Northern (RDI = 0.7) and Central (RDI = 0.8) regions, and proportionally represented in the
Southern region (RDI = 1.0). Hispanic children are under-represented in the Cook, Northern,
and Central regions over the past seven years. The RDIs for Hispanic children in the Central and
Southern regions, both characterized by a small number of Hispanic children, show substantial
9
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (October, 2015). Procedures 300 Section 120 Taking Children
into Protective Custody. Springfield: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.illinois.gov/dcfs/aboutus/notices/Documents/procedures_300.pdf
2.7
0.8
0.4
2.7
0.8
0.5
2.6
0.8
0.5
2.5
0.9
0.4
2.5
0.9
0.3
2.4
0.9
0.4
2.3
0.9
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
8
variability for this decision point over the past seven years (see Appendix Table 4 for seven year
data).
Figure 6. Absolute RDI for Protective Custodies—Regional (2020)
Figure 7 shows the relative RDIs at this decision point for the three racial/ethnic groups over
the past seven years. This is the first decision point at which relative RDIs can be calculated. The
relative RDI shows, for each race/ethnicity group, the percentage of children taken into
protective custody divided by the percentage of children who are investigated. Relative RDIs
greater than 1.0 indicate that children in a race/ethnicity group make up a higher percentage of
children taken into protective custody than their representation among investigations; relative
RDIs less than 1.0 indicate a lower percentage compared to investigations.
Examination of the relative RDI for protective custodies for the three groups at the state level
(Figure 7) shows that Black children are more likely to be taken into protective custody
compared to the rate at which they are investigated (relative RDIs between 1.2 and 1.4), while
Hispanic children are less likely to be taken into protective custody compared to their
investigation rates (relative RDIs between 0.4 and 0.7). The relative RDIs for White children are
close or equal to 1.0, which indicates that there is little difference in the rates of protective
custodies compared to rates of investigation (see Appendix Table 5).
2.6
0.3 0.6
4.1
0.7 0.8
2.5
0.8 0.7
1.4
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
9
Figure 7. Relative RDI for Protective Custodies—State
Regional relative RDIs for protective custodies are shown in Figure 8 (see Appendix Table 6). In
the Cook (RDI = 1.3), Northern (RDI = 1.4), and Central (RDI = 1.2) regions, relative RDIs indicate
over-representation for Black children, while the relative RDI in the Southern region (RDI = 0.8)
indicates under-representation at this decision point in 2020. White children in the Cook region
are under-represented at this decision point, with relative RDI of 0.6. White children in the
other three regions are proportionally represented. Hispanic children in Cook (RDI = 0.7),
Northern (RDI = 0.8) and Southern (RDI = 0.8) regions are under-represented in 2020, while
Hispanic children in the Central region are proportionally represented (RDI = 0.9). Due to small
numbers of Hispanic children at these decision points in the Central and Southern regions, the
relative RDIs for protective custodies for Hispanic children in these regions fluctuated a great
deal over the last seven years.
Figure 8. Relative RDI for Protective Custodies—Regional (2020)
1.4
0.9
0.6
1.3
0.9
0.7
1.3
1.0
0.7
1.2
1.0
0.6
1.3
1.1
0.4
1.2 1.1
0.5
1.2 1.1
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
1.3
0.6 0.7
1.4
0.9 0.8
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.1
0.8
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
10
Indicated Reports
The next decision point examined is indicated maltreatment reports. Reports are indicated
when CPS workers find credible evidence that the alleged abuse or neglect occurred.
10
If the
allegations are indicated, the perpetrators’ names are entered into the State Central Register
and remain there for a period of 5 to 50 years, depending on the allegation type.
11
The absolute
RDIs for the three groups at this decision point over the past seven years are shown in Figure 9.
Black children are consistently over-represented among children with indicated reports, with
RDIs ranging from 2.0 to 2.1. Hispanic children are consistently under-represented, with RDIs
ranging from 0.7 to 0.8. White children are most often proportionately represented (RDI = 0.9)
between 2014 and 2020 (see Appendix Table 7).
Figure 9. Absolute RDI for Indicated Reports—State
At the regional level (see Figure 10 and Appendix Table 8), the Northern region has the highest
over-representation of Black children in indicated reports (RDI = 3.1) in 2020, followed by the
Central (RDI = 2.4), Cook (RDI = 2.2), and Southern regions (RDI = 1.4). White children are
particularly under-represented at this decision point in the Cook region (RDI = 0.4) in 2020.
Hispanic children are under-represented at this decision point in 2020 in the Southern
(RDI=0.6), Cook (RDI = 0.8), and Central (RDI = 0.8) regions, but are proportionally represented
in the Northern region (RDI = 1.1).
10
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (October, 2015). Procedures 300 Section 50 Investigative
Process. Springfield: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.illinois.gov/dcfs/aboutus/notices/Documents/procedures_300.pdf
11
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (August, 2002). Procedures 431 Section 140 Maintenance of
Department Records. Springfield: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.illinois.gov/dcfs/aboutus/notices/Documents/procedures_431.pdf
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.1
0.8 0.7
2.0
0.9 0.8
2.0
0.9 0.7
2.1
0.9 0.7
2.1
0.9 0.7
2.1
0.8 0.7
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
11
Figure 10. Absolute RDI for Indicated Reports—Regional (2020)
The relative RDIs at this decision point were calculated by comparing the percentage of children
in indicated reports to the percentage of children in investigated reports. The relative RDIs for
the three groups at this decision point over the past seven years are shown in Figure 11. At the
state level, all three racial groups have relative RDIs at or near 1.0 across the seven years,
suggesting that the degree of disproportionality did not increase or decrease at this decision
point compared to the previous decision point (see Appendix Table 9). The regional relative
RDIs at this decision point (not shown) were also at or near 1.0 for all four regions (see
Appendix Table 10).
Figure 11. Relative RDI for Indicated Reports—State
2.2
0.4
0.8
3.1
0.7
1.1
2.4
0.8 0.8
1.4
1.0
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
1.0 1.0 1.1
1.0 1.0 1.1
1.0 1.0 1.1
1.0 1.0 1.01.0 1.0
0.9
1.0 1.0 1.0
1.1 1.0 1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
12
Post-Investigation Services
The next decisions involve whether or not to provide post-investigation services following an
indicated investigation. In Illinois, there are two types of post-investigative services that can be
provided by the child welfare system—substitute care and intact family services. If the child
welfare worker concludes that "there are safety threats that cannot be controlled or mitigated
through the service provision,"
12
the child may be removed and placed into substitute care. In
other instances, the worker may decide that it is in the best interest of the child to remain at
home while the family receives supportive services in what are known as intact family cases.
Substitute Care Entries
The absolute RDI for substitute care entries for the three groups over the last seven years are
shown in Figure 12 (see Appendix Table 11). Black children are placed into substitute care at
rates about 2.5 times that of their percentage within the Illinois child population, White
children are proportionately represented, and Hispanic children are under-represented
compared to their percentage in the Illinois child population (RDI = 0.4 or 0.3).
Figure 12. Absolute RDI for Substitute Care Entries—State
When the absolute RDIs for substitute care entries are examined by region, there are striking
differences for Black children (see Figure 13 and Appendix Table 12). In 2020, the Northern
region has the highest RDI (4.7), followed by Cook and Central (RDI = 2.6), and Southern (RDI =
1.3). White children are especially under-represented in substitute care entries in Cook (RDI =
12
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (October, 2015). Procedures 300 Section 130 Reports of
Child Abuse and Neglect. Springfield: Author. Retrieved from
https://www2.illinois.gov/dcfs/aboutus/notices/Documents/procedures_300.pdf
2.6
0.9
0.4
2.7
0.8
0.4
2.6
0.9
0.4
2.5
0.9
0.4
2.5
0.9
0.3
2.4
1.0
0.3
2.4
0.9
0.4
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
13
0.4), and to a lesser degree in the Northern (RDI = 0.7) and Central regions (RDI = 0.8). Hispanic
children are under-represented in all regions during 2020 (RDIs = 0.6-0.7).
Figure 13. Absolute RDI for Substitute Care Entries—Regional (2020)
The relative RDIs for substitute care entries at the state level were calculated by comparing, for
each race/ethnicity group, the percentage of children entering substitute care to the
percentage of children with indicated reports (see Figure 14 and Appendix Table 13). Black
children have relative RDIs of 1.2-1.3 in 2014-2019, meaning that their removal rate is higher
than their indication rate. White children enter substitute care at rates proportional to their
representation among indicated reports (RDIs between 1.0 and 1.1). The relative RDIs for
Hispanic children have been between 0.4 and 0.6 for the past seven years, meaning that
workers remove Hispanic children from home and place them into substitute care less
frequently than their indication rates.
Figure 14. Relative RDI for Substitute Care Entries—State
2.6
0.4 0.6
4.7
0.7 0.7
2.6
0.8 0.6
1.3 1.0
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
1.3
1.0
0.5
1.3
1.0
0.6
1.3
1.0
0.6
1.2 1.0
0.6
1.2 1.1
0.4
1.2 1.1
0.5
1.1 1.1
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
14
Regional relative RDIs for 2020 substitute care entries are shown in Figure 15. Black children
are over-represented among substitute care entries in the Cook (RDI = 1.2) and Northern (RDI =
1.5) regions and are proportionally represented in the Central region (RDI = 1.1) and Southern
(RDI = 1.0) regions. In 2020, White children entered substitute care at rates proportional to
their representation among indicated reports in all regions (RDIs = 0.9-1.0). In 2020, Hispanic
children are under-represented in all regions (RDIs = 0.6-0.8) except the Southern region (RDI =
1.1). However, the relative RDI of Hispanic children for this decision point in the Southern
region fluctuated considerably over the previous six years (RDIs = 0.5-1.4), most likely due to
the small numbers of Hispanic children entering substitute care in this region each year (see
Appendix Table 14).
Figure 15. Relative RDI for Substitute Care Entries—Regional (2020)
Intact Family Services
Figure 16 shows the absolute RDI for children receiving intact family services (see Appendix
Table 15). Black children are over-represented (RDIs = 1.6-1.9), White children are
proportionately represented (RDIs = 0.9-1.0), and Hispanic children are under-represented
(RDIs = 0.7-0.8).
1.2
0.9
0.7
1.5
1.0
0.6
1.1 1.0
0.8
1.0 1.0 1.1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
15
Figure 16. Absolute RDI for Intact Family Services—State
Figure 17 shows the 2020 absolute RDI for intact family services for each of the DCFS regions.
The RDI for Black children, showing over-representation in all regions, is largest in the Northern
region (RDI = 3.0) and smallest in the Southern region (RDI = 1.4). White children are under-
represented in the Cook (RDI = 0.5) and Northern and Central regions (RDI = 0.8). Hispanic
children are proportionally represented in the Cook, Northern, and Central regions, and are
under-represented in the Southern region (RDI = 0.6; see Appendix Table 16 for seven year
data).
Figure 17. Absolute RDI for Intact Family Services—Regional (2020)
1.9
0.9 0.7
1.8
0.9 0.8
1.6
1.0
0.8
1.7
1.0
0.7
1.9
1.0
0.7
1.6
1.0
0.7
1.8
1.0
0.7
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
1.6
0.5
1.1
3.0
0.8
1.1
2.2
0.8 0.9
1.4
1.0
0.6
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
16
Figure 18 shows relative RDI for receipt of intact family services at the state level, which was
calculated by comparing, for each race/ethnicity group, the percentage of children receiving
intact family services to the percentage of children with indicated maltreatment reports. The
relative RDIs for intact family services for White and Hispanic children vary between 1.0 and 1.2
over the past seven years. This means that children in these racial and ethnic groups were
provided with intact family services at rates equal to or higher than the rates at which they
were indicated for maltreatment. However, Black children were mostly under-represented
among those receiving intact family services relative to those with indicated maltreatment
reports (see Appendix Table 17).
Figure 18. Relative RDI for Intact Family Services—State
Figure 19 shows regional variation in the 2020 relative RDI for intact family services. During
2020, Cook was the only region in which the relative RDI for Black children for intact family
services shows Black children under-represented among children who receive intact family
services compared to their representation among children with indicated maltreatment reports
(RDI = 0.7). In all other regions in 2020, Black children were proportionally represented for
intact family services relative to their representation among indicated reports (RDIs = 0.9-1.0).
However, in five of the previous six years, Black children were under-represented in intact
family services in this way in the Southern region, as well (see Appendix Table 18). In 2020,
White children in the Cook region are over-represented for intact family services relative to
their representation among children with indicated reports (RDI = 1.2); this ratio is proportional
in the other regions (RDI = 1.0). In 2020, Hispanic children are over-represented for intact family
services relative to their representation among children with indicated reports in the Cook (RDI
= 1.3) and Central (RDI = 1.2) regions. Over the previous six years, the RDIs for Hispanic children
1.0 1.0 1.0
0.9
1.1 1.2
0.8
1.1 1.1
0.8
1.1 1.0
0.9
1.1 1.0
0.8
1.2
1.0
0.8
1.2
1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
17
show much year-to-year variability in both the Central and Southern regions (see Appendix
Table 18).
Figure 19. Relative RDI for Intact Family Services—Regional (2020)
Substitute Care Exits
The final decision point examined is substitute care exits. When children are removed from
their families and placed into substitute care, the goal is for them to safely exit substitute care
as soon as possible, either through reunification with their biological caregivers, adoption, or
guardianship. A sizeable percentage of children remain in substitute care for long periods of
time in Illinois, and this indicator examines the percentage of children in each racial group that
remain in substitute care for more than three years. When the absolute RDIs are examined at
this stage, Black children are over-represented, with RDIs around 3.0. Both White (RDIs = 0.7)
and Hispanic (RDIs = 0.4) children are under-represented (see Figure 20 and Appendix Table
19).
0.7
1.2 1.3
1.0 1.0 1.0
0.9
1.0 1.2
1.0 1.0 1.1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
18
Figure 20. Absolute RDI for Remaining in Care Longer than 36 Months—State
The regional patterns for the absolute RDI are shown in Figure 21 (see Appendix Table 20).
Disproportionality for Black children in the Northern region is very high, five and a half times
their proportion in the general population (RDI = 5.5). Black children are also over-represented
among children remaining in substitute care for more than 36 months in the Central (RDI = 3.0),
Cook (RDI = 2.7), and Southern (RDI = 1.7) regions. White children are under-represented in the
Cook (RDI = 0.3), Northern (RDI = 0.7), and Central (RDI = 0.8) regions. Hispanic children are
under-represented in the Cook, Northern, and Central regions (RDI = 0.4-0.6).
Figure 21. Absolute RDI for Remaining in Care Longer than 36 Months—Regional (2020)
The relative RDI for this indicator examines the percentage of children in each racial group that
remain in substitute care for more than three years compared to the percentage of children in
3.1
0.7 0.4
3.1
0.7 0.4
3.2
0.7 0.4
2.9
0.7 0.4
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017
2.7
0.3 0.6
5.5
0.7 0.4
3.0
0.8 0.4
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
Black White Hispanic
Cook Northern Central Southern
19
the same racial group that entered substitute care. When examining these relative RDIs at the
state level (see Figure 22 and Appendix Table 21), Black children are over-represented among
the children who stayed in care for longer than 36 months (RDI = 1.2 for children who entered
care in 2017), White children are under-represented (RDI = 0.8 for children who entered care in
2017), and Hispanic children are proportionally represented (RDI = 1.1). Examination of the
regional relative RDIs for this cohort show mostly proportional representation across regions
for all racial and ethnic groups, with the exception of Hispanic children in the Central and
Southern regions, where there is substantial fluctuation in rates corresponding to small
numbers of Hispanic children in substitute care (see Appendix Table 22).
Figure 22. Relative RDI for Remaining In Care Longer than 36 Months—State
Discussion and Conclusions: Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality
This report examines racial and ethnic disproportionality in the Illinois child welfare system at
decision points where children in a particular racial/ethnic group may be disproportionately
represented compared to their representation in the general population or at a previous
decision point. By doing so, we can begin to identify decision points in the child welfare system
where over- or under-representation may become magnified. These decision points may then
serve as a starting point for efforts to root out racial biases—be they implicit, explicit, or
institutional—that harm children.
We examined racial and ethnic disproportionality in two ways. Absolute racial
disproportionality indices were calculated that compared children’s percentages at child
welfare decision points with their corresponding percentages in the Illinois child population.
The results of these analyses found that, compared to their percentage in the general child
population, Black children were over-represented and Hispanic children were under-
represented at every decision point in the child welfare system over the past seven years;
1.2
0.8
1.0
1.1
0.9 0.9
1.2
0.8 0.9
1.2
0.8
1.1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Black White Hispanic
2014 2015 2016 2017
20
White children, in contrast, were proportionally represented. The over-representation among
Black children in the child welfare system is particularly high for children who remain in
substitute care more than 3 years; the percentage of Black children who remain in care longer
than 3 years is almost 3 times their percentage in the Illinois child population. Regional analysis
indicates that the highest rates of disproportionality for Black children occur in the Northern
region; RDIs are lowest in the Southern region.
Relative RDIs examine the representation of a particular racial/ethnic group at one decision
point compared to a prior, relevant decision point. When relative RDIs were examined for the
state, analyses indicated that disproportionality was exacerbated among Black and Hispanic
children at the protective custody and substitute care entry decision points: Black children
became more over-represented and Hispanic children more under-represented.
Disproportionality also increased for Black children at the substitute care exit decision; the
percentage of Black children that remained in care longer than 3 years was even larger than the
percentage of Black children that entered care.
In contrast to the consistent pattern of over-representation of Black children in the Illinois child
welfare system, the relative RDI analysis shows that Black children are under-represented
among children who receive intact family services compared to their representation among
children with indicated reports. In other words, the proportion of Black children who receive
intact family services is smaller than the proportion of Black children with indicated reports. In
contrast, White and Hispanic children are either slightly over-represented or are
proportionately represented among children receiving intact family services when compared to
their representations among children with indicated reports. The fact that Black children are
over-represented among substitute care entries but under-represented among intact family
service case openings suggests that DCFS staff decision-making at investigation conclusion and
case opening deserves additional scrutiny.
Both over-representation and under-representation could result from unfair treatments or
uneven resource allocations against a specific racial or ethnic group. One of the goals in the
DCFS strategic plan is to eliminate racial/ethnic disparity through implementing the Family
Focused, Trauma Informed, and Strengths Based (FTS) Illinois Core Practice Model in
communities.
13
Careful tracking of RDIs over time can inform any improvement in the
Department’s efforts in this important area.
13
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (January, 2017). Illinois Child Welfare Transformation: 2016-
2021. Springfield, IL: Author. Retrieved from
https://www2.illinois.gov/dcfs/aboutus/newsandreports/documents/2016-
2021_illinois_childwelfare_transformation_strategic_plan_final.pdf
21
Appendix Tables
Appendix tables provide data for the racial/ethnic disproportionality analyses included in this
report. The data used in this appendix come from three sources: 1) Illinois child population data
were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics; child welfare data were obtained
from 2) the Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS) and
3) the Child and Youth Centered Information System (CYCIS). Both the SACWIS data and the
CYSIS data were extracted on December 31, 2020. Note that the numbers in the tables are
rounded to one decimal place for display purposes.
Table 1. Absolute RDI for Investigated Reports
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in investigated
reports
33.9%
34.3%
33.2%
33.3%
33.1%
33.2%
33.3%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
16.5%
16.4%
16.4%
Absolute RDI
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
White
Children in investigated
reports
48.0%
46.3%
46.9%
46.8%
46.4%
45.4%
45.8%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
53.0%
52.8%
52.8%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in investigated
reports
15.1%
16.7%
17.4%
17.4%
17.9%
18.5%
18.0%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
24.8%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
22
Table 2. Absolute RDI for Investigated Reports by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in investigated reports
52.1%
52.2%
50.5%
50.8%
49.6%
49.2%
50.4%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
25.0%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
White
Children in investigated reports
18.3%
15.9%
16.9%
16.5%
16.1%
15.7%
16.1%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
32.5%
32.7%
32.7%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Hispanic
Children in investigated reports
25.5%
28.3%
29.2%
29.4%
30.8%
30.9%
29.3%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
35.5%
35.4%
35.4%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.8
Northern
Black
Children in investigated reports
26.8%
26.7%
25.9%
25.9%
26.6%
26.5%
26.0%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
8.9%
9.0%
9.0%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.0
2.9
2.9
3.0
2.9
2.9
White
Children in investigated reports
49.0%
47.2%
46.9%
46.4%
45.2%
44.5%
44.7%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
57.8%
57.3%
57.3%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Hispanic
Children in investigated reports
20.8%
23.0%
24.4%
24.8%
24.8%
25.8%
26.0%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
26.3%
26.6%
26.6%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
Central
Black
Children in investigated reports
25.2%
26.2%
26.2%
26.5%
26.1%
26.5%
27.0%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.2
White
Children in investigated reports
68.8%
67.6%
67.1%
66.6%
67.0%
66.1%
65.1%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
77.0%
76.9%
76.9%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
Hispanic
Children in investigated reports
4.1%
4.7%
5.0%
5.2%
5.5%
5.6%
6.0%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
7.5%
7.6%
7.6%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
Southern
Black
Children in investigated reports
24.0%
25.8%
24.8%
25.0%
26.0%
25.4%
25.7%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
15.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Absolute RDI
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.7
White
Children in investigated reports
71.9%
70.0%
70.9%
70.8%
69.8%
70.4%
69.5%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
78.4%
78.3%
78.3%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in investigated reports
2.3%
2.6%
2.9%
2.9%
2.8%
2.8%
3.0%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.8%
4.8%
Absolute RDI
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
23
Table 3. Absolute RDI for Protective Custodies
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in protective
custodies
46.0%
45.2%
42.5%
41.3%
41.9%
39.2%
38.5%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
16.5%
16.4%
16.4%
Absolute RDI
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.3
White
Children in protective
custodies
43.9%
42.0%
44.7%
47.2%
49.5%
49.9%
48.8%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
53.0%
52.8%
52.8%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in protective
custodies
8.9%
11.7%
11.9%
10.7%
7.7%
9.9%
11.5%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
24.8%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.5
24
Table 4. Absolute RDI for Protective Custodies by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in protective custodies
70.7%
65.6%
66.8%
67.2%
71.9%
66.5%
65.9%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
25.0%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.9
2.7
2.6
White
Children in protective custodies
11.7%
11.3%
11.1%
11.0%
12.5%
12.5%
10.3%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
32.5%
32.7%
32.7%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.3
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
15.8%
22.0%
20.9%
20.4%
14.5%
20.1%
21.9%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
35.5%
35.4%
35.4%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.6
Northern
Black
Children in protective custodies
40.6%
40.0%
41.9%
43.6%
41.0%
44.3%
37.0%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
8.9%
9.0%
9.0%
Absolute RDI
4.6
4.5
4.8
4.9
4.6
4.9
4.1
White
Children in protective custodies
44.2%
44.5%
38.7%
41.5%
43.1%
37.9%
41.9%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
57.8%
57.3%
57.3%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
13.8%
13.8%
18.3%
14.8%
14.5%
16.9%
20.0%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
26.3%
26.6%
26.6%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.8
Central
Black
Children in protective custodies
36.9%
37.3%
32.5%
30.7%
32.6%
30.4%
31.2%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.1
2.6
2.5
2.6
2.4
2.5
White
Children in protective custodies
59.9%
57.4%
61.8%
63.9%
63.6%
64.2%
62.4%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
77.0%
76.9%
76.9%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
2.4%
4.5%
4.8%
4.2%
3.4%
4.1%
5.4%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
7.5%
7.6%
7.6%
Absolute RDI
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.7
Southern
Black
Children in protective custodies
24.3%
24.9%
23.2%
22.5%
21.8%
22.4%
20.9%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
15.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Absolute RDI
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.4
White
Children in protective custodies
74.3%
71.3%
74.0%
72.1%
75.9%
73.3%
75.9%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
78.4%
78.3%
78.3%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
1.0%
2.5%
2.5%
5.0%
1.6%
3.6%
2.5%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.8%
4.8%
Absolute RDI
0.2
0.6
0.6
1.1
0.3
0.7
0.5
25
Table 5. Relative RDI for Protective Custodies
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in protective
custodies
46.0%
45.2%
42.5%
41.3%
41.9%
39.2%
38.5%
Children in investigated
reports
33.9%
34.3%
33.2%
33.3%
33.1%
33.2%
33.3%
Relative RDI
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.2
White
Children in protective
custodies
43.9%
42.0%
44.7%
47.2%
49.5%
49.9%
48.8%
Children in investigated
reports
48.0%
46.3%
46.9%
46.8%
46.4%
45.4%
45.8%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
Hispanic
Children in protective
custodies
8.9%
11.7%
11.9%
10.7%
7.7%
9.9%
11.5%
Children in investigated
reports
15.1%
16.7%
17.4%
17.4%
17.9%
18.5%
18.0%
Relative RDI
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.6
26
Table 6. Relative RDI for Protective Custodies by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in protective custodies
70.7%
65.6%
66.8%
67.2%
71.9%
66.5%
65.9%
Children in investigated reports
52.1%
52.2%
50.5%
50.8%
49.6%
49.2%
50.4%
Relative RDI
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.3
White
Children in protective custodies
11.7%
11.3%
11.1%
11.0%
12.5%
12.5%
10.3%
Children in investigated reports
18.3%
15.9%
16.9%
16.5%
16.1%
15.7%
16.1%
Relative RDI
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.6
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
15.8%
22.0%
20.9%
20.4%
14.5%
20.1%
21.9%
Children in investigated reports
25.5%
28.3%
29.2%
29.4%
30.8%
30.9%
29.3%
Relative RDI
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.7
Northern
Black
Children in protective custodies
40.6%
40.0%
41.9%
43.6%
41.0%
44.3%
37.0%
Children in investigated reports
26.8%
26.7%
25.9%
25.9%
26.6%
26.5%
26.0%
Relative RDI
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.7
1.4
White
Children in protective custodies
44.2%
44.5%
38.7%
41.5%
43.1%
37.9%
41.9%
Children in investigated reports
49.0%
47.2%
46.9%
46.4%
45.2%
44.5%
44.7%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
13.8%
13.8%
18.3%
14.8%
14.5%
16.9%
20.0%
Children in investigated reports
20.8%
23.0%
24.4%
24.8%
24.8%
25.8%
26.0%
Relative RDI
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.8
Central
Black
Children in protective custodies
36.9%
37.3%
32.5%
30.7%
32.6%
30.4%
31.2%
Children in investigated reports
25.2%
26.2%
26.2%
26.5%
26.1%
26.5%
27.0%
Relative RDI
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.2
White
Children in protective custodies
59.9%
57.4%
61.8%
63.9%
63.6%
64.2%
62.4%
Children in investigated reports
68.8%
67.6%
67.1%
66.6%
67.0%
66.1%
65.1%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
2.4%
4.5%
4.8%
4.2%
3.4%
4.1%
5.4%
Children in investigated reports
4.1%
4.7%
5.0%
5.2%
5.5%
5.6%
6.0%
Relative RDI
0.6
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.9
Southern
Black
Children in protective custodies
24.3%
24.9%
23.2%
22.5%
21.8%
22.4%
20.9%
Children in investigated reports
24.0%
25.8%
24.8%
25.0%
26.0%
25.4%
25.7%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.8
White
Children in protective custodies
74.3%
71.3%
74.0%
72.1%
75.9%
73.3%
75.9%
Children in investigated reports
71.9%
70.0%
70.9%
70.8%
69.8%
70.4%
69.5%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.1
Hispanic
Children in protective custodies
1.0%
2.5%
2.5%
5.0%
1.6%
3.6%
2.5%
Children in investigated reports
2.3%
2.6%
2.9%
2.9%
2.8%
2.8%
3.0%
Relative RDI
0.4
1.0
0.9
1.7
0.5
1.3
0.8
27
Table 7. Absolute RDI for Indicated Reports
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in indicated
reports
34.1%
34.9%
32.8%
33.7%
34.5%
34.2%
35.2%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
16.5%
16.4%
16.4%
Absolute RDI
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.1
White
Children in indicated
reports
46.9%
45.2%
47.1%
47.3%
47.0%
46.1%
44.4%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
53.0%
52.8%
52.8%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
Hispanic
Children in indicated
reports
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
17.4%
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
24.8%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
28
Table 8. Absolute RDI for Indicated Reports by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in indicated reports
50.4%
51.2%
47.7%
51.3%
52.6%
51.8%
53.7%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
25.0%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.2
White
Children in indicated reports
17.8%
15.3%
16.9%
15.0%
14.3%
14.4%
14.2%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
32.5%
32.7%
32.7%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
28.3%
31.0%
33.1%
31.2%
30.9%
31.3%
29.5%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
35.5%
35.4%
35.4%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
Northern
Black
Children in indicated reports
27.5%
28.4%
27.6%
27.8%
28.2%
29.0%
28.0%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
8.9%
9.0%
9.0%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.1
White
Children in indicated reports
45.5%
44.5%
42.7%
43.2%
44.1%
41.5%
41.1%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
57.8%
57.3%
57.3%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
24.4%
24.8%
27.7%
27.2%
25.6%
27.3%
28.8%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
26.3%
26.6%
26.6%
Absolute RDI
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
Central
Black
Children in indicated reports
28.6%
29.7%
29.1%
29.5%
28.4%
27.3%
30.2%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.4
White
Children in indicated reports
66.1%
64.3%
65.1%
64.3%
65.6%
66.5%
62.6%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
77.0%
76.9%
76.9%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.8
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
4.3%
4.8%
4.8%
5.2%
5.1%
5.0%
5.8%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
7.5%
7.6%
7.6%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
Southern
Black
Children in indicated reports
22.1%
24.3%
23.7%
22.8%
24.4%
23.3%
20.9%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
15.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Absolute RDI
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.4
White
Children in indicated reports
74.8%
71.1%
72.5%
73.2%
72.2%
73.1%
75.3%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
78.4%
78.3%
78.3%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
2.3%
3.2%
3.0%
3.3%
2.6%
2.8%
2.7%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.8%
4.8%
Absolute RDI
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.6
29
Table 9. Relative RDI for Indicated Reports
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in indicated
reports
34.1%
34.9%
32.8%
33.7%
34.5%
34.2%
35.2%
Children in investigated
reports
33.9%
34.3%
33.2%
33.3%
33.1%
33.2%
33.3%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
White
Children in indicated
reports
46.9%
45.2%
47.1%
47.3%
47.0%
46.1%
44.4%
Children in investigated
reports
48.0%
46.3%
46.9%
46.8%
46.4%
45.4%
45.8%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children in indicated
reports
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
17.4%
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
Children in investigated
reports
15.1%
16.7%
17.4%
17.4%
17.9%
18.5%
18.0%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
30
Table 10. Relative RDI for Indicated Reports by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in indicated reports
50.4%
51.2%
47.7%
51.3%
52.6%
51.8%
53.7%
Children in investigated reports
52.1%
52.2%
50.5%
50.8%
49.6%
49.2%
50.4%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
White
Children in indicated reports
17.8%
15.3%
16.9%
15.0%
14.3%
14.4%
14.2%
Children in investigated reports
18.3%
15.9%
16.9%
16.5%
16.1%
15.7%
16.1%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
28.3%
31.0%
33.1%
31.2%
30.9%
31.3%
29.5%
Children in investigated reports
25.5%
28.3%
29.2%
29.4%
30.8%
30.9%
29.3%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
Northern
Black
Children in indicated reports
27.5%
28.4%
27.6%
27.8%
28.2%
29.0%
28.0%
Children in investigated reports
26.8%
26.7%
25.9%
25.9%
26.6%
26.5%
26.0%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
White
Children in indicated reports
45.5%
44.5%
42.7%
43.2%
44.1%
41.5%
41.1%
Children in investigated reports
49.0%
47.2%
46.9%
46.4%
45.2%
44.5%
44.7%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
24.4%
24.8%
27.7%
27.2%
25.6%
27.3%
28.8%
Children in investigated reports
20.8%
23.0%
24.4%
24.8%
24.8%
25.8%
26.0%
Relative RDI
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
Central
Black
Children in indicated reports
28.6%
29.7%
29.1%
29.5%
28.4%
27.3%
30.2%
Children in investigated reports
25.2%
26.2%
26.2%
26.5%
26.1%
26.5%
27.0%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.1
White
Children in indicated reports
66.1%
64.3%
65.1%
64.3%
65.6%
66.5%
62.6%
Children in investigated reports
68.8%
67.6%
67.1%
66.6%
67.0%
66.1%
65.1%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
4.3%
4.8%
4.8%
5.2%
5.1%
5.0%
5.8%
Children in investigated reports
4.1%
4.7%
5.0%
5.2%
5.5%
5.6%
6.0%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
Southern
Black
Children in indicated reports
22.1%
24.3%
23.7%
22.8%
24.4%
23.3%
20.9%
Children in investigated reports
24.0%
25.8%
24.8%
25.0%
26.0%
25.4%
25.7%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
White
Children in indicated reports
74.8%
71.1%
72.5%
73.2%
72.2%
73.1%
75.3%
Children in investigated reports
71.9%
70.0%
70.9%
70.8%
69.8%
70.4%
69.5%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
2.3%
3.2%
3.0%
3.3%
2.6%
2.8%
2.7%
Children in investigated reports
2.3%
2.6%
2.9%
2.9%
2.8%
2.8%
3.0%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.2
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
31
Table 11. Absolute RDI for Substitute Care Entries
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children entering
substitute care
44.5%
45.5%
43.5%
41.4%
41.6%
39.6%
39.5%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
16.5%
16.4%
16.4%
Absolute RDI
2.6
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.4
White
Children entering
substitute care
45.8%
43.1%
45.6%
48.0%
50.2%
51.1%
48.9%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
53.0%
52.8%
52.8%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
Hispanic
Children entering
substitute care
8.6%
10.4%
10.3%
10.0%
7.4%
8.6%
10.7%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
24.8%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.4
32
Table 12. Absolute RDI for Substitute Care Entries by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children entering substitute care
72.1%
66.6%
68.0%
65.9%
73.6%
69.1%
65.3%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
25.0%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.9
2.8
2.6
White
Children entering substitute care
11.5%
11.9%
12.5%
12.1%
11.3%
11.7%
12.2%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
32.5%
32.7%
32.7%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.4
Hispanic
Children in indicated reports
14.7%
20.4%
18.8%
21.5%
13.8%
18.9%
21.2%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
35.5%
35.4%
35.4%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.6
Northern
Black
Children entering substitute care
39.2%
41.9%
44.2%
42.4%
38.5%
44.6%
42.0%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
8.9%
9.0%
9.0%
Absolute RDI
4.5
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.3
4.9
4.7
White
Children entering substitute care
43.4%
43.8%
38.5%
44.1%
45.3%
39.4%
39.7%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
57.8%
57.3%
57.3%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
16.2%
12.7%
16.3%
13.0%
15.3%
15.4%
17.6%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
26.3%
26.6%
26.6%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
Central
Black
Children entering substitute care
37.0%
39.5%
35.9%
33.2%
33.7%
31.3%
32.5%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.3
2.9
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.6
White
Children entering substitute care
60.5%
55.6%
59.4%
62.3%
62.8%
64.6%
61.7%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
77.0%
76.9%
76.9%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
1.6%
4.4%
4.2%
3.6%
3.0%
3.0%
4.8%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
7.5%
7.6%
7.6%
Absolute RDI
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
Southern
Black
Children entering substitute care
23.2%
25.3%
22.8%
24.0%
22.4%
23.1%
20.2%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
15.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Absolute RDI
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.3
White
Children entering substitute care
75.5%
71.8%
74.1%
71.5%
75.1%
72.3%
76.3%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
78.4%
78.3%
78.3%
Absolute RDI
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
1.1%
2.3%
2.9%
4.2%
1.9%
3.8%
2.8%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.8%
4.8%
Absolute RDI
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.9
0.4
0.8
0.6
33
Table 13. Relative RDI for Substitute Care Entries
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children entering
substitute care
44.5%
45.5%
43.5%
41.4%
41.6%
39.6%
39.5%
Children in indicated
reports
34.1%
34.9%
32.8%
33.7%
34.5%
34.2%
35.2%
Relative RDI
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
White
Children entering
substitute care
45.8%
43.1%
45.6%
48.0%
50.2%
51.1%
48.9%
Children in indicated
reports
46.9%
45.2%
47.1%
47.3%
47.0%
46.1%
44.4%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
Hispanic
Children entering
substitute care
8.6%
10.4%
10.3%
10.0%
7.4%
8.6%
10.7%
Children in indicated
reports
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
17.4%
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
Relative RDI
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.6
34
Table 14. Relative RDI for Substitute Care Entries by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children entering substitute care
72.1%
66.6%
68.0%
65.9%
73.6%
69.1%
65.3%
Children in indicated reports
50.4%
51.2%
47.7%
51.3%
52.6%
51.8%
53.7%
Relative RDI
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.2
White
Children entering substitute care
11.5%
11.9%
12.5%
12.1%
11.3%
11.7%
12.2%
Children in indicated reports
17.8%
15.3%
16.9%
15.0%
14.3%
14.4%
14.2%
Relative RDI
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
14.7%
20.4%
18.8%
21.5%
13.8%
18.9%
21.2%
Children in indicated reports
28.3%
31.0%
33.1%
31.2%
30.9%
31.3%
29.5%
Relative RDI
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.7
Northern
Black
Children entering substitute care
39.2%
41.9%
44.2%
42.4%
38.5%
44.6%
42.0%
Children in indicated reports
27.5%
28.4%
27.6%
27.8%
28.2%
29.0%
28.0%
Relative RDI
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
White
Children entering substitute care
43.4%
43.8%
38.5%
44.1%
45.3%
39.4%
39.7%
Children in indicated reports
45.5%
44.5%
42.7%
43.2%
44.1%
41.5%
41.1%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
16.2%
12.7%
16.3%
13.0%
15.3%
15.4%
17.6%
Children in indicated reports
24.4%
24.8%
27.7%
27.2%
25.6%
27.3%
28.8%
Relative RDI
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
Central
Black
Children entering substitute care
37.0%
39.5%
35.9%
33.2%
33.7%
31.3%
32.5%
Children in indicated reports
28.6%
29.7%
29.1%
29.5%
28.4%
27.3%
30.2%
Relative RDI
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
White
Children entering substitute care
60.5%
55.6%
59.4%
62.3%
62.8%
64.6%
61.7%
Children in indicated reports
66.1%
64.3%
65.1%
64.3%
65.6%
66.5%
62.6%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
1.6%
4.4%
4.2%
3.6%
3.0%
3.0%
4.8%
Children in indicated reports
4.3%
4.8%
4.8%
5.2%
5.1%
5.0%
5.8%
Relative RDI
0.4
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.8
Southern
Black
Children entering substitute care
23.2%
25.3%
22.8%
24.0%
22.4%
23.1%
20.2%
Children in indicated reports
22.1%
24.3%
23.7%
22.8%
24.4%
23.3%
20.9%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.0
1.0
White
Children entering substitute care
75.5%
71.8%
74.1%
71.5%
75.1%
72.3%
76.3%
Children in indicated reports
74.8%
71.1%
72.5%
73.2%
72.2%
73.1%
75.3%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children entering substitute care
1.1%
2.3%
2.9%
4.2%
1.9%
3.8%
2.8%
Children in indicated reports
2.3%
3.2%
3.0%
3.3%
2.6%
2.8%
2.7%
Relative RDI
0.5
0.7
1.0
1.3
0.7
1.4
1.1
35
Table 15. Absolute RDI for Children in Intact Family Services
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in intact family
services
32.6%
30.0%
26.8%
28.4%
30.9%
26.9%
28.9%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
16.5%
16.4%
16.4%
Absolute RDI
1.9
1.8
1.6
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.8
White
Children in intact family
services
48.2%
48.0%
51.6%
52.1%
51.3%
54.1%
51.2%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
53.0%
52.8%
52.8%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children in intact family
services
17.5%
20.7%
20.6%
18.3%
16.9%
17.6%
18.6%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
24.8%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
36
Table 16. Absolute RDI for Children in Intact Family Services by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in intact family services
47.0%
41.9%
39.1%
41.2%
45.5%
40.2%
40.0%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
25.0%
24.9%
24.9%
Absolute RDI
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.6
White
Children in intact family services
17.1%
16.9%
18.6%
19.2%
15.1%
18.1%
17.7%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
32.5%
32.7%
32.7%
Absolute RDI
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
32.6%
38.5%
41.2%
36.9%
37.8%
38.6%
39.8%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
35.5%
35.4%
35.4%
Absolute RDI
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
Northern
Black
Children in intact family services
27.3%
26.4%
21.2%
26.6%
30.0%
26.0%
26.8%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
8.9%
9.0%
9.0%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.0
2.4
3.0
3.4
2.9
3.0
White
Children in intact family services
48.3%
45.9%
45.3%
44.1%
45.4%
46.0%
43.0%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
57.8%
57.3%
57.3%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
22.7%
26.2%
31.3%
28.2%
23.0%
26.7%
28.5%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
26.3%
26.6%
26.6%
Absolute RDI
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.1
0.9
1.0
1.1
Central
Black
Children in intact family services
28.6%
26.9%
26.6%
28.0%
26.5%
23.5%
27.1%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.1
1.9
2.2
White
Children in intact family services
66.5%
67.9%
69.3%
66.9%
67.6%
70.9%
65.2%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
77.0%
76.9%
76.9%
Absolute RDI
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
4.2%
4.7%
3.8%
4.6%
5.3%
4.8%
6.9%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
7.5%
7.6%
7.6%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.9
Southern
Black
Children in intact family services
19.8%
17.7%
18.0%
14.9%
20.2%
16.9%
21.1%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
15.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Absolute RDI
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.3
1.1
1.4
White
Children in intact family services
77.1%
78.4%
77.9%
81.5%
76.4%
79.3%
75.6%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
78.4%
78.3%
78.3%
Absolute RDI
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
2.9%
3.6%
3.3%
3.0%
3.1%
3.2%
2.9%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.8%
4.8%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
37
Table 17. Relative RDI for Children in Intact Family Services
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Black
Children in intact family
services
32.6%
30.0%
26.8%
28.4%
30.9%
26.9%
28.9%
Children in indicated
reports
34.1%
34.9%
32.8%
33.7%
34.5%
34.2%
35.2%
Relative RDI
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.8
White
Children in intact family
services
48.2%
48.0%
51.6%
52.1%
51.3%
54.1%
51.2%
Children in indicated
reports
46.9%
45.2%
47.1%
47.3%
47.0%
46.1%
44.4%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
Hispanic
Children in intact family
services
17.5%
20.7%
20.6%
18.3%
16.9%
17.6%
18.6%
Children in indicated
reports
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
17.4%
16.9%
17.9%
18.5%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
38
Table 18. Relative RDI for Children in Intact Family Services by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cook
Black
Children in intact family services
47.0%
41.9%
39.1%
41.2%
45.5%
40.2%
40.0%
Children in indicated reports
50.4%
51.2%
47.7%
51.3%
52.6%
51.8%
53.7%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.7
White
Children in intact family services
17.1%
16.9%
18.6%
19.2%
15.1%
18.1%
17.7%
Children in indicated reports
17.8%
15.3%
16.9%
15.0%
14.3%
14.4%
14.2%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.2
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
32.6%
38.5%
41.2%
36.9%
37.8%
38.6%
39.8%
Children in indicated reports
28.3%
31.0%
33.1%
31.2%
30.9%
31.3%
29.5%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
Northern
Black
Children in intact family services
27.3%
26.4%
21.2%
26.6%
30.0%
26.0%
26.8%
Children in indicated reports
27.5%
28.4%
27.6%
27.8%
28.2%
29.0%
28.0%
Relative RDI
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.0
White
Children in intact family services
48.3%
45.9%
45.3%
44.1%
45.4%
46.0%
43.0%
Children in indicated reports
45.5%
44.5%
42.7%
43.2%
44.1%
41.5%
41.1%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
22.7%
26.2%
31.3%
28.2%
23.0%
26.7%
28.5%
Children in indicated reports
24.4%
24.8%
27.7%
27.2%
25.6%
27.3%
28.8%
Relative RDI
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
Central
Black
Children in intact family services
28.6%
26.9%
26.6%
28.0%
26.5%
23.5%
27.1%
Children in indicated reports
28.6%
29.7%
29.1%
29.5%
28.4%
27.3%
30.2%
Relative RDI
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
White
Children in intact family services
66.5%
67.9%
69.3%
66.9%
67.6%
70.9%
65.2%
Children in indicated reports
66.1%
64.3%
65.1%
64.3%
65.6%
66.5%
62.6%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
4.2%
4.7%
3.8%
4.6%
5.3%
4.8%
6.9%
Children in indicated reports
4.3%
4.8%
4.8%
5.2%
5.1%
5.0%
5.8%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.2
Southern
Black
Children in intact family services
19.8%
17.7%
18.0%
14.9%
20.2%
16.9%
21.1%
Children in indicated reports
22.1%
24.3%
23.7%
22.8%
24.4%
23.3%
20.9%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
White
Children in intact family services
77.1%
78.4%
77.9%
81.5%
76.4%
79.3%
75.6%
Children in indicated reports
74.8%
71.1%
72.5%
73.2%
72.2%
73.1%
75.3%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
Hispanic
Children in intact family services
2.9%
3.6%
3.3%
3.0%
3.1%
3.2%
2.9%
Children in indicated reports
2.3%
3.2%
3.0%
3.3%
2.6%
2.8%
2.7%
Relative RDI
1.2
1.1
1.1
0.9
1.2
1.2
1.1
39
Table 19. Absolute RDI for Remaining in Care Longer Than 36 Months
2014
2015
2016
2017
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
52.2%
51.3%
52.5%
48.7%
Total child population
16.8%
16.8%
16.6%
16.5%
Absolute RDI
3.1
3.1
3.2
2.9
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
38.3%
37.7%
37.8%
39.8%
Total child population
53.6%
53.4%
53.2%
53.1%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
8.6%
9.8%
9.2%
10.9%
Total child population
24.2%
24.3%
24.5%
24.7%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
40
Table 20. Absolute RDI for Remaining in Care Longer Than 36 Months by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
Cook
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
73.8%
71.0%
74.4%
68.8%
Total child population
26.3%
26.0%
25.7%
25.3%
Absolute RDI
2.8
2.7
2.9
2.7
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
10.9%
11.4%
10.6%
10.3%
Total child population
32.0%
32.1%
32.2%
32.4%
Absolute RDI
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
13.8%
16.7%
14.7%
20.4%
Total child population
35.2%
35.3%
35.5%
35.5%
Absolute RDI
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.6
Northern
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
44.2%
40.5%
48.8%
48.5%
Total child population
8.8%
8.8%
8.8%
8.9%
Absolute RDI
5.0
4.6
5.5
5.5
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
41.2%
43.0%
36.3%
40.1%
Total child population
59.8%
59.3%
58.8%
58.3%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.7
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
14.5%
12.5%
14.1%
11.5%
Total child population
25.0%
25.3%
25.7%
26.0%
Absolute RDI
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
Central
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
42.5%
44.5%
42.0%
37.8%
Total child population
11.9%
12.1%
12.3%
12.5%
Absolute RDI
3.6
3.7
3.4
3.0
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
55.1%
51.7%
55.2%
58.0%
Total child population
78.3%
77.9%
77.5%
77.3%
Absolute RDI
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
1.5%
3.4%
2.2%
3.0%
Total child population
7.0%
7.1%
7.3%
7.4%
Absolute RDI
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.4
Southern
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
28.8%
28.7%
25.8%
25.5%
Total child population
15.1%
15.1%
15.1%
15.2%
Absolute RDI
1.9
1.9
1.7
1.7
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
70.3%
68.6%
70.2%
69.4%
Total child population
79.1%
78.9%
78.8%
78.6%
Absolute RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
0.9%
2.4%
4.0%
5.1%
Total child population
4.3%
4.4%
4.5%
4.7%
Absolute RDI
0.2
0.5
0.9
1.1
41
Table 21. Relative RDI for Remaining in Care Longer Than 36 Months
2014
2015
2016
2017
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
52.2%
51.3%
52.5%
48.7%
Children entering substitute care
44.5%
45.5%
43.5%
41.4%
Relative RDI
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
38.3%
37.7%
37.8%
39.8%
Children entering substitute care
45.8%
43.1%
45.6%
48.0%
Relative RDI
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.8
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
8.6%
9.8%
9.2%
10.9%
Children entering substitute care
8.6%
10.4%
10.3%
10.0%
Relative RDI
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.1
42
Table 22. Relative RDI for Remaining in Care Longer Than 36 Months by Region
2014
2015
2016
2017
Cook
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
73.8%
71.0%
74.4%
68.8%
Children entering substitute care
72.1%
66.6%
68.0%
65.9%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
10.9%
11.4%
10.6%
10.3%
Children entering substitute care
11.5%
11.9%
12.5%
12.1%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.9
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
13.8%
16.7%
14.7%
20.4%
Children entering substitute care
14.7%
20.4%
18.8%
21.5%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.8
0.8
1.0
Northern
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
44.2%
40.5%
48.8%
48.5%
Children entering substitute care
39.2%
41.9%
44.2%
42.4%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
41.2%
43.0%
36.3%
40.1%
Children entering substitute care
43.4%
43.8%
38.5%
44.1%
Relative RDI
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
14.5%
12.5%
14.1%
11.5%
Children entering substitute care
16.2%
12.7%
16.3%
13.0%
Relative RDI
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
Central
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
42.5%
44.5%
42.0%
37.8%
Children entering substitute care
37.0%
39.5%
35.9%
33.2%
Relative RDI
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
55.1%
51.7%
55.2%
58.0%
Children entering substitute care
60.5%
55.6%
59.4%
62.3%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
1.5%
3.4%
2.2%
3.0%
Children entering substitute care
1.6%
4.4%
4.2%
3.6%
Relative RDI
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.8
Southern
Black
Children in care longer than 36 months
28.8%
28.7%
25.8%
25.5%
Children entering substitute care
23.2%
25.3%
22.8%
24.0%
Relative RDI
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
White
Children in care longer than 36 months
70.3%
68.6%
70.2%
69.4%
Children entering substitute care
75.5%
71.8%
74.1%
71.5%
Relative RDI
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
Hispanic
Children in care longer than 36 months
0.9%
2.4%
4.0%
5.1%
Children entering substitute care
1.1%
2.3%
2.9%
4.2%
Relative RDI
0.8
1.1
1.4
1.2
43