ministry of children and family development …€¦ · group infant / toddler 13 group age 3-5 16...
Post on 21-Aug-2020
5 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
MINISTRY OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT REPORT
Volume 6 March 2015
Reporting Period April 2014 – March 2015
MCFD Performance Management Dashboard March 31, 2015
Service Line Performance Indicator Direction Page
1.01 Spare Capacity in Licensed Child Care Spaces
Group Infant / Toddler • 13
Group Age 3-5 • 16
Group School Age • 16
Total Group • 16
Family • 16
Group and Family • 16
Services for Children and
Youth with Special Needs
(CYSN)2.01 Median Annual Cost per CYSN Residential Placement • 25
Child and Youth Mental
Health3.01 Child and Youth Mental Health Services Client Service Satisfaction • 31
Permanency
4.01 Families with a FDR with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding • 38
4.02 Ratio of FDR to INV • 36
4.06 Children Admitted into Care That Previously had a Recent Out-of-Care Placement • 45
4.11 Investigations with Prot. Finding with a Subsequent Investigation with Prot. Finding • 40
4.16a OCO Admissions per 1,000 CIC Admissions • 48
4.16b Admissions into Care per 1,000 Protection reports • 48
5.01 CYIC who Exited to Permanency • 53
5.06 Recurrence of Maltreatment • 51
5.76 Children and Youth Placed in Adoption Homes • 104
5.77 Time from permanent ward to adoption placement • 109
5.61 Aboriginal Children Cared for by Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers • 64
5.81 Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted to Aboriginal Families • 107
Stability
5.11a In First Year of Current Episode of Care - CYIC That Did Not Move in the Last 6 Months • 57
5.11b In First Year of Current Episode of Care - CYIC That Did Not Move • 57
Cost Effectiveness
5.66 Average Annual Cost per Child and Youth in Care (Non-CYSN) • 72
5.71 Funded Bed Utilization Rate (MCFD only) • 74
Wellbeing
5.16 Grade Progression (CYIC) • 80
5.21 Age Appropriate Grade (CYIC) • 77
5.31a Foundation Skills Assessment, Reading • 86,89
5.31b Foundation Skills Assessment, Writing • 87,90
5.31c Foundation Skills Assessment, Numeracy • 85,88
5.41 Age Appropriate Grade (YAG) • 97
5.46 Grade Progression (YAG) • 99
5.51 High School Completion Rate (YAG) • 101
5.36 Claiming Income Assistance Within Six Months of Ageing-Out (CYIC) • 66
5.56 Claiming Income Assistance Within Six Months of Ageing-Out (YAG) • 91
6.01 Clients Receiving Formal Diversion Services That Did Not Commit a New Offence • 113
6.06 Clients Receiving First Community Sentence Services That Did Not Commit a new offence • 114
6.11 Clients Receiving a First Custody Sentence Services That did Not Commit a New Offence • 114
6.16 Youth Court Cases per 10,000 Youth Population • 115
6.21 Youth in Custody per 10,000 Youth Population • 115
Early Years Services: Early
Childhood Development and
Child Care
CFS & Adoption Services
Youth Justice
Key: Green - Performance Improving, Black - Status Quo Yellow - Performance challenges, Red - Performance Deteriorating
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT ..................................................................................................................1
SDA DEMOGRAPHIC DATA .................................................................................................................4
PROVINCIAL LEVEL SERVICE, HUMAN RESOURCE AND EXPENDITURE DATA .........................................6
PROVINCIAL EXPENDITURE .................................................................................................................8
SERVICE LINE OPERATIONAL DATA ................................................................................................... 10
EARLY YEARS SERVICES: EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND CHILD CARE .................................. 10 Summary: ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Case Data and Trends: ........................................................................................................................ 10 Performance Indicators: ..................................................................................................................... 13 Expenditure Data: ............................................................................................................................... 23
SERVICE FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH WITH SPECIAL NEEDS (CYSN) .................................................... 25 Summary: ............................................................................................................................................ 25 Case Data and Trends: ........................................................................................................................ 25 Performance Indicators: ..................................................................................................................... 26 Expenditure Data: ............................................................................................................................... 30
CHILD AND YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH (CYMH) .................................................................................... 31 Summary: ............................................................................................................................................ 31 Case Data and Trends: ........................................................................................................................ 31 Performance Indicators: ..................................................................................................................... 32 Expenditure Data: ............................................................................................................................... 34
CHILD SAFETY, FAMILY, YOUTH AND CHILDREN IN CARE SERVICES .................................................... 35 Child Safety Services: Investigations and Family Development Response ............................................ 35
Summary: ............................................................................................................................................ 35 Case Data and Trends: ........................................................................................................................ 36 Performance Indicators: ..................................................................................................................... 37
Family, Child and Youth Support and Care Services ............................................................................... 44 Summary: ............................................................................................................................................ 44 Case Data and Trends: ........................................................................................................................ 45 Performance Indicators: ..................................................................................................................... 46
Expenditure Data: ................................................................................................................................. 104
ADOPTION SERVICES ...................................................................................................................... 105 Summary: .......................................................................................................................................... 105 Performance Indicators: ................................................................................................................... 105 Expenditure Data: ............................................................................................................................. 112
YOUTH JUSTICE .............................................................................................................................. 114 Summary: .......................................................................................................................................... 114 Case Data and Trends: ...................................................................................................................... 114 Performance Indicators: ................................................................................................................... 114 Expenditure Data: ............................................................................................................................. 117
Subject Index
Caseload
Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates ... 16 Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates, by
Community Size....................................................... 18 Average Monthly Proportion of Facilities with Child
Care Space Utilization of 60% or Higher, BC ........... 20 Child Care Major Capital Funding (Facilities Supported)
................................................................................ 10 Child Care Minor Capital Funding (Facilities Supported)
................................................................................ 10 Child Care Operating Funding Program (Facilities
Supported) .............................................................. 10 Child Care Resource & Referral (Number of Referrals) 10 Children and Youth in Care .......................................... 45 Children and Youth in Care and Out-of-Care ............... 44 Children and Youth in Care by Aboriginal Status ......... 44 Children Whose Child Care is Subsidized, Monthly
Average ................................................................... 11 Communities with Highest Overall Utilization Rates ... 18 Communities with Lowest Overall Utilization Rates .... 19 Community Youth Justice Caseload ........................... 113 Contracted Group & Family Child Care Spaces, Monthly
Average ................................................................... 12 Early Childhood Educator Registry (Registered
Individuals and Organizations) ................................ 10 Incarceration (Remand/PreTrial Detention Only) ...... 113 Incarceration Caseload (Remand and Sentenced) ..... 113 Incarceration Caseload ISSP ....................................... 113 MCFD Specialized CYSN Provincial Services – Number of
Clients Served .......................................................... 28 Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type – Child Care
Operating Funding Program Family Facilities .......... 21 Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type – Child Care
Operating Funding Program Group Facilities .......... 21 Open CYSN Files ........................................................... 24 Utilization Rates for Group Facilities by Size, ............... 20 Youth Court Cases ...................................................... 115 Youth Court Cases per 10,000 Youth Population ....... 115 Youth in Custody ........................................................ 115 Youth in Custody per 10,000 Youth ........................... 115
Demographics
Child & Youth Population ............................................... 4 Financial
Expenditure by Account Classifications (STOB) .............. 8 Expenditure by Service Line ........................................... 8 Expenditure Data Adoption Services.......................... 112 Expenditure Data Child & Youth Mental Health Services
................................................................................ 33 Expenditure Data Child Care Services .......................... 23 Expenditure Data Child Safety, Family Support &
Children in Care Services ....................................... 103 Expenditure Data Early Childhood Development ......... 22 Expenditure Data Services for Children &Youth with
Special Needs .......................................................... 29
Expenditure Data Youth Justice Services ................... 116 Performance Indicator
Children Admitted into Care with a Recent Out-of-Care Placement ............................................................... 46
Discharges to Permanency .......................................... 54 Performance Indicators
Aboriginal CYIC Cared for By Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers ............................................. 64
Age-Appropriate Grade for Youth on Youth Agreements ................................................................................ 97
Age-Appropriate Grade of Children and Youth in Care (CYIC) ...................................................................... 77
Child and Youth Mental Health Services Client Service31 Children and Youth Admitted into Care That Previously
Had a Recent Out-of-Care Placement ..................... 45 Children and Youth in Care Funded Bed Utilization Rate
................................................................................ 74 Children and Youth in Care Who Exited to Permanency
................................................................................ 53 Children and Youth in Care Who Finish School with a
High School Credential ........................................... 82 CYSN Cost per Case...................................................... 25 CYSN Cost per Case Excluding CYIC ............................. 72 Five Year Recidivism of First Community Sentence ... 114 Five Year Recidivism of First Custody Sentence ........ 114 Five Year Recidivism of Formal Diversion Clients ...... 113 Foundation Skills Assessment for Reading, Writing and
Numeracy, Grade 4 and Grade 7 ............................ 84 Grade Progression of Children and Youth in Care ....... 80 Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement
................................................................................ 99 Per Cent of Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in
Adoption Homes ................................................... 104 Placement Stability ...................................................... 57 Proportion of Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted to
Aboriginal Families ............................................... 107 Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection
Finding with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months.............. 40
Proportion of Families with a Closed Family Development Response with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months ................................................................... 38
Ratio of Family Development Response to Investigations.......................................................... 36
Recurrence of Maltreatment of Former Children and Youth in Care .......................................................... 51
Relative Use of Admissions into Care and Admissions to Out-of-Care Controlling for Protection Reports ..... 48
Spare Capacity in Licensed Child Care Spaces ............. 13 Time Taken for CYIC to Go from Permanent Status to
Adoption Placement ............................................. 109 Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming
Income Assistance (IA) Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out 66
Youth on a Youth Agreement Who Finish School with a High School Credential .......................................... 101
Youth Who Claim Income Assistance (IA)
Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out of Youth Agreements ............................................. 91
Service Line Index
Early Years Services: Early Childhood Development and Child Care Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates ........ 16
Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates, by
Community Size ........................................................... 18
Average Monthly Proportion of Facilities with Child Care
Space Utilization of 60% or Higher, BC ........................ 20
Child Care M Major Capital Funding (Facilities Supported)
..................................................................................... 10
Child Care Minor Capital Funding (Facilities Supported) .. 10
Child Care Operating Funding Program (Facilities
Supported) ................................................................... 10
Child Care Resource & Referral (Number of Referrals) ..... 10
Children Whose Child Care is Subsidized, Monthly Average
..................................................................................... 11
Communities with Highest Overall Utilization Rates ........ 18
Communities with Lowest Overall Utilization Rates ........ 19
Contracted Group & Family Child Care Spaces, Monthly
Average ....................................................................... 12
Early Childhood Educator Registry (Registered Individuals
and Organizations) ...................................................... 10
Expenditure Data Child Care Services .............................. 23
Expenditure Data Early Childhood Development ............. 22
Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type – Child Care
Operating Funding Program Family Facilities .............. 21
Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type – Child Care
Operating Funding Program Group Facilities .............. 21
Spare Capacity in Licensed Child Care Spaces .................. 13
Utilization Rates for Group Facilities by Size .................... 20
Children and Youth with Special Needs (CYSN) CYSN Cost per Case ........................................................... 25
Expenditure Data Services for Children &Youth with
Special Needs ............................................................... 29
MCFD Specialized CYSN Provincial Services – Number of
Clients Served .............................................................. 28
Open CYSN Files ............................................................... 24
Child and Youth Mental Health (CYMH) Child and Youth Mental Health Services Client Service .... 31 Expenditure Data Child & Youth Mental Health Services . 33
Child Safety, Family, Youth and Children in Care Services Aboriginal CYIC Cared for By Aboriginal Communities and
Service Providers .......................................................... 64
Age-Appropriate Grade for Youth on Youth Agreements . 97
Age-Appropriate Grade of Children and Youth in Care
(CYIC) ............................................................................ 77
Children Admitted into Care with a Recent Out-of-Care
Placement .................................................................... 46
Children and Youth Admitted into Care That Previously
Had a Recent Out-of-Care Placement .......................... 45
Children and Youth in Care Funded Bed Utilization Rate . 74
Children and Youth in Care Who Exited to Permanency... 53
Children and Youth in Care Who Finish School with a High
School Credential ......................................................... 82
CYSN Cost per Case Excluding CYIC ................................... 72
Discharges to Permanency................................................ 54
Foundation Skills Assessment for Reading, Writing and
Numeracy, Grade 4 and Grade 7 .................................. 84
Grade Progression of Children and Youth in Care ............ 80
Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement ... 99
Placement Stability ........................................................... 57
Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection
Finding with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection
Finding in the Next 12 Months .................................... 40
Proportion of Families with a Closed Family Development
Response with a Subsequent Investigation and
Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months .................. 38
Ratio of Family Development Response to Investigations 36
Recurrence of Maltreatment of Former Children and Youth
in Care ......................................................................... 51
Relative Use of Admissions into Care and Admissions to
Out-of-Care Controlling for Protection Reports .......... 48
Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming
Income Assistance (IA)
Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out ..... 66
Youth on a Youth Agreement Who Finish School with a
High School Credential ............................................... 101
Youth Who Claim Income Assistance (IA)
Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out of Youth Agreements .................................................. 91
Adoption Services Expenditure Data Adoption Services .............................. 112
Expenditure Data Child Safety, Family Support & Children
in Care Services .......................................................... 103
Per Cent of Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in
Adoption Homes ........................................................ 104
Proportion of Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted to
Aboriginal Families .................................................... 107
Time Taken for CYIC to Go from Permanent Status to
Adoption Placement .................................................. 109
Youth Justice Community Youth Justice Caseload ................................ 113
Expenditure Data Youth Justice Services ........................ 116
Five Year Recidivism of First Community Sentence ........ 114
Five Year Recidivism of First Custody Sentence .............. 114
Five Year Recidivism of Formal Diversion Clients............ 113
Incarceration Caseload (Remand and Sentenced) .......... 113
Incarceration Caseload (Remand/PreTrial Detention Only)
................................................................................... 113
Incarceration Caseload ISSP ........................................... 113
Youth Court Cases .......................................................... 115
Youth Court Cases per 10,000 Youth Population ........... 115
Youth in Custody ............................................................ 115
Youth in Custody per 10,000 Youth ................................ 115
Other Child & Youth Population .................................................... 4
Expenditure by Account Classifications (STOB) .................. 8
Expenditure by Service Line ............................................... 8
NOTE: Data Changes At the end of July 2015 MCFD completed a project to improve the quality of electronically held
Children and Youth in Care data. Because of a time lag between the closure of some files and the
electronic data entry of closure, the true number of Children and Youth in Care is lower than
previously reported. Volume 4 of this report gave the number of Children and Youth in Care at
March 31, 2014 as 8,169; this has been revised to 7,934. After completing the file clean-up, the
number for July 31, 2015 is 7,210.
1
The Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) supports healthy child development
through its commitment to collaborative professional practice delivered across a range of services.
These services strive to maximize the potential of children and youth and achieve meaningful
outcomes for children, youth and families. MCFD’s approach to service delivery is focused on
service excellence, operational excellence and continuous learning and growth.
MCFD is committed to improving outcomes for children, youth and families by implementing
effective performance management. Performance management supports the ministry in measuring
progress with its strategic and operational agenda.
This Performance Management report is designed to support improvements in service delivery,
outcomes, human resource and financial and costs management performance by providing
information to support effective decision making at all levels. This semi-annual public report
highlights the importance of increasing the overall scope, quality and usability of operational
data to improve practice effectiveness and operational efficiency.
For more information or to provide feedback, please contact:
https://extranet.gov.bc.ca/forms/gov/contact/index.html
Key Elements This report includes the following key elements:
Service Lines and Service Delivery Structure – an outline of ministry service lines and
structure.
Service Delivery Area (SDA) Demographic Data – a snapshot of the relative potential
demand for services across each SDA to help inform service delivery, human resource and
budget planning.
Provincial Level Service, Human Resource and Expenditure Data – basic provincial level
data on MCFD operations.
Service Line Operational Data – operational case, expenditure, and outcome data for
each of the service lines. As this section is further developed in future reports, it will
provide basic analysis of trends and variation in demand/accessibility, workload, and
costs.
2
Service Lines and Service Delivery Structure MCFD delivers or funds services across six service lines to approximately 156,000 children, youth
and families every year:
Early Years Services (Early Childhood Development/Child Care) (ECD/CC)
Services for Children and Youth with Special Needs (CYSN)
Child and Youth Mental Health Services (CYMH)
Child Safety, Family, Youth and Children in Care Services (CS/CYIC)
Adoption Services (AS)
Youth Justice Services (YJ)
With the exception of Early Years Services, some Services for Children and Youth with Special
Needs, and Youth Justice Services that are administered centrally, services are delivered across
the province in 13 Service Delivery Areas (SDA). Each SDA is divided into Local Services Areas
(LSA). There are 47 LSAs:
3
SDA services are delivered through:
MCFD teams (each led by a Team Leader):
Children and Youth with Special Needs Service Teams
Child and Youth Mental Health Service Teams
Child Safety Service Teams
Children in Care Guardianship Service Teams
Adoption Service Teams
Youth Justice Probationary Service Teams
Youth Service Teams
Delegated Aboriginal Agencies (providing a range of services):
Voluntary Family, Youth and Kinship Care Support Services
Child Safety Services
Children in Care Guardianship Services
Adoption Services
Contracted Community Social Services Agencies (including Aboriginal community social service agencies, providing a range of services):
Early Childhood Development
Children and Youth with Special Needs
Child and Youth Mental Health Services
Child Safety Voluntary Family, Youth and Kinship Care Support Services
Children in Care Guardianship Support Services (includes foster care)
Adoption Services
Youth Justice Services
In addition to SDA services, a number of services are coordinated and delivered provincially
including: Child Care Subsidy and Child Care Operating Funding; Autism, Services for the Deaf
and Hard of Hearing; campus based Mental Health Services; and Youth Justice Institutions and
Forensic Services.
Service delivery is linked to a provincial office located in Victoria with sub-offices in Vancouver,
Kelowna and Prince George that provide:
Service Delivery Oversight
Legislation and Policy
Offices of the Provincial Director of Child Welfare
Justice
Adoptions
Aboriginal Service Improvement
Quality Assurance
Corporate Services (Finance, Contract Management, Strategic Human Resource Management, and Modelling, Analysis & Information Management)
4
Population and Population Proportion by Age Cohort, by SDA 2015
Service Delivery Area Population 0 to 18
yrs. 0 to 2 yrs.
3 to 5 yrs.
6 to 12 yrs.
13 to18 yrs.
BC 4,681,748 885,189 132,679 134,367 320,974 297,169
Kootenays 154,957 28,529 3,851 4,374 10,699 9,605 Okanagan 355,781 62,103 8,622 9,076 22,717 21,688 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 221,678 41,170 5,679 6,211 15,166 14,114 East Fraser 293,482 66,317 10,041 10,405 24,433 21,438 North Fraser 653,857 123,612 19,314 18,894 44,247 41,157 South Fraser 788,499 172,264 25,277 26,090 62,887 58,010 Vancouver/Richmond 871,079 138,576 23,517 20,935 48,359 45,765 Coast/North Shore 283,481 54,315 7,096 7,786 20,129 19,304 South Vancouver Island 449,643 75,621 11,223 11,490 27,494 25,414 North Vancouver Island 318,488 55,425 7,760 8,395 20,243 19,027 Northwest 74,228 17,373 2,556 2,546 6,435 5,836 North Central 144,128 31,494 4,581 4,935 11,582 10,396 Northeast 72,447 18,390 3,162 3,230 6,583 5,415
Service Delivery Area Population Proportions
0 to 18 yrs.
0 to 2 yrs.
3 to 5 yrs.
6 to 12 yrs.
13to 18 yrs.
BC 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Kootenays 3.3% 3.2% 2.9% 3.3% 3.3% 3.2% Okanagan 7.6% 7.0% 6.5% 6.8% 7.1% 7.3% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 4.7% 4.7% 4.3% 4.6% 4.7% 4.7% East Fraser 6.3% 7.5% 7.6% 7.7% 7.6% 7.2% North Fraser 14.0% 14.0% 14.6% 14.1% 13.8% 13.8% South Fraser 16.8% 19.5% 19.1% 19.4% 19.6% 19.5% Vancouver/Richmond 18.6% 15.7% 17.7% 15.6% 15.1% 15.4% Coast/North Shore 6.1% 6.1% 5.3% 5.8% 6.3% 6.5% South Vancouver Island 9.6% 8.5% 8.5% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6% North Vancouver Island 6.8% 6.3% 5.8% 6.2% 6.3% 6.4% Northwest 1.6% 2.0% 1.9% 1.9% 2.0% 2.0% North Central 3.1% 3.6% 3.5% 3.7% 3.6% 3.5% Northeast 1.5% 2.1% 2.4% 2.4% 2.1% 1.8%
5
Child Population (Ages 0 to18) Years 2009 to 2015 and Forecast to 2020
Aboriginal Child Population by Age Cohort and SDA, 2011 National Household Survey
Service Delivery Area
Aboriginal Population
(2011) 0 to18
yrs. 0 to 2 yrs.
3 to 5 yrs.
6 to 12 yrs.
13 to 18 yrs.
BC 232,290 79,455 11,835 12,030 27,835 27,755
Kootenay 8,465 3,075 390 440 1,150 1,095 Okanagan 19,200 7,095 930 1,000 2,705 2,460 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 26,530 8,880 1,230 1,425 3,060 3,165 East Fraser 18,405 7,295 1,030 1,010 2,590 2,665 North Fraser 14,545 4,425 675 645 1,485 1,620 South Fraser 18,870 6,875 1,090 840 2,625 2,320 Vancouver Richmond 14,780 3,600 570 535 1,285 1,210 Coast / North Shore 12,425 3,690 520 485 1,270 1,415 South Vancouver Island 22,050 7,435 1,250 1,180 2,500 2,505 North Vancouver Island 25,395 8,825 1,445 1,445 2,975 2,960 Northwest 22,080 7,275 1,100 1,325 2,535 2,315 North Central 20,360 7,600 1,090 1,155 2,590 2,765 Northeast 9,180 3,370 520 525 1,110 1,215
840,000
850,000
860,000
870,000
880,000
890,000
900,000
910,000
920,000
930,000
940,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
6
Children Served:
Over a one year period MCFD serves approximately 156,000 distinct children and their families,
18% of the 0 to18 population.
Human Resource Management:
MCFD Workforce Composition – Regular Employees by Service Delivery Area, March 31, 2015 (Employee Count Regular and Auxiliary Employees by SDA, March 31, 2014 and March 31, 2015)
Service Delivery Area Employee Count1 March 31, 2014
Employee Count March 31, 2015
BC2 4,464 4,4763
Kootenays 134 133 Okanagan 261 242 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 231 237 East Fraser 209 203 North Fraser 311 306 South Fraser 411 416 Vancouver/Richmond 254 240 Coast/North Shore 155 163 South Vancouver Island 305 315 North Vancouver Island 289 293 Northwest 128 134 North Central 181 186 Northeast 72 77 ADM Service Delivery 4 2 Service Delivery Operations 4 9 Youth Custody 298 2594 Youth Forensic 121 118 Maples 128 120 Complex Needs Dedicated Facility 0 21 Facilities Administration 23 23 After Hours 109 105 Learning & Development 11 12 Operations & Management Performance 7 8 Provincial Office 570 623 Provincial Services 248 231
1 Data includes both regular and auxiliary employees, including those currently on leave. 2 Source: CHIPS as of April 14, 2015. 3 As of March 31, 2015, the total employee count of 4,476 was comprised of 4,091 regular and 385 are auxiliary employees. 4 The decrease in the number of staff in Youth Custody was due in part to the closure of the Victoria Youth Custody Centre.
7
MCFD Workforce Composition – Regular Employees on March 31, 20151,2
Overall, MCFD’s workforce is comprised of 91% regular and 9% auxiliary employees. Provincial
Services, After Hours, Youth Custody, Maples, and Facilities Administration (which include food
service workers) have a larger percentage of auxiliary employees due to the need to cover
facilities that operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
1 The bar chart presents regular employees as a proportion of the total workforce within a given service delivery area, whereas
auxiliary employees account for the remaining proportion of the workforce. Data includes both active employees and those currently on leave.
2 Source: CHIPS as of April 14, 2015.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
8
Provincial Expenditure
Expenditure by Service Line, April 2014 to March 2015 ($ Millions)
Child Safety, Family Support and Children in Care services make up 39% of overall ministry
expenditures.
Expenditure by Account Classifications (STOB), April 2014 to March 2015 ($ Millions)
Early Years Services249.281
17%
Services for Children & Youth
with Special Needs311.055
22%
Child & Youth Mental Health
Services80.426
6%
Child Safety, Family Support & Children In Care
Services566.724
39%
Adoption Services29.136
2%
Youth Justice Services63.770
4% Service Delivery Support122.716
9%
Executive & Support Services
14.102 1%
Gross Expenditures by Lines of ServiceTotal $1,437.209M
321.801
63.752
1,048.961
2.695
(2.432)
(78.900)
Salaries& Benefits
OperatingCosts
GovernmentTransfers
Other Expenses
Recoveries- Internal to Gov't
Recoveries- External to Gov't
Net Expenditures by Major STOB GroupingTotal $1,355.877M
9
Over 77% of ministry gross expenditures before recoveries from other ministries, governments
and/or agencies are Government Transfers. Government Transfers are payments to other
individuals or organizations for goods and services received by clients.
MCFD has three primary service delivery methods:
1. MCFD Delivered; a. MCFD directly delivered services b. Clients access funding for specific support or services such as autism c. MCFD subsidizes services such as Child Care
2. Delegated Aboriginal Agency Delivered; and
3. Foster Homes and Community Social Service Agency Delivered
Over $725 million was paid through STOB 80 agreements and contracts to over 6,100 Foster
Homes and Community Social Service Agencies for services between April 1, 2014 and March 31,
2015.
Contract/Vendor Counts and Expenditures April 1, 2014 to March 31, 20151,2,3
Program/Service Type Vendors Contracts Expenditure ($ Millions)
Adoption Services 1,463 2,405 22.79 Adoption Supports 1,462 2,402 22.55 Planning for Permanency 1 3 0.24 Child & Youth Mental Health Services 176 375 38.34 Community Based Programs - CYMH 166 365 38.14 Program Delivery- CYMH 0 0 0.01 Specialized Provincial Programs - CYMH 10 10 0.19 Child Safety, Family Support & Children In Care Services 3,823 6,324 383.51 Alternates to Care 941 1,377 10.16 Children & Youth In Care 2,616 4,296 254.44 Family Support Programs - CS, FS & CIC 230 573 95.14 Program Delivery - Child Welfare 4 7 0.78 Youth Support Programs 32 71 22.99 Early Years Services 142 304 39.88 Child Care Programs 15 44 9.82 ECD Programs 127 260 30.07 Services for Children & Youth with Special Needs 384 1,008 213.75 Family Support Programs - CYSN 182 413 38.68 Foundational Programs 60 269 111.40 Special Needs Children in Care 112 279 30.54 Specialized Provincial Services - CYSN 30 47 33.13 Youth Justice Services 133 220 23.88 Community Based Programs - YJ 57 131 19.22 Specialized Provincial Programs - YJ 76 89 4.66 Total 6,121 10,636 722.15
1 Source: CDW GL report for STOB 80 FY2014/2015 Expenditures (April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015). 2 Table does not include Executive Support Services – Service Delivery Support (15 contracts, $3,529,915). 3 Each contract and vendor is counted only once, even if represented in multiple program/service types.
10
This report contains case, expenditure and, where available, outcome data.
Early Years Services: Early Childhood Development and Child Care
Summary:
This section provides data on Child Care Subsidy, child care spaces, utilization, Early Childhood
Development and child care expenditures, and average child care costs.
Case Data and Trends:
Child Care Programs and Services 2014/2015
Program April 2014 to March 2015
Child Care Operation Funding Program (Facilities Supported)
3,940 Organizations (5,060 Facilities)
Minor Capital Funding (Facilities Supported)
231 Facilities
Major Capital Funding (Facilities Supported)
33 Facilities
Early Childhood Educator Registry (Registered individuals and organizations)
2,234 New ECE Certifications 1,789 ECE Assistant Certifications 15,402 Total Active ECE Certifications 6,029 Total Active ECE Assistant Certifications 34 Approved Educational Institutions
Child Care Resource & Referral (Number of referrals)
57,807 individuals1
1 As at March 31, 2015, 57,807 families received referrals to local child care services. Child Care Resource & Referral programs
also assisted 15,538 parents with completing the Child Care Subsidy application forms; registered 585 licence-not-required child care providers; assisted 36 licence-not-required child care providers became licensed; provided 5,359 drop-in community development activities; the BC Aboriginal Child Care Society provided 3,858 consultations and 48 culturally specific training courses and workshops.
11
Children Whose Child Care is Subsidized, 2014/2015 and 2013/2014, Monthly Average
Service Delivery Area1 2014/2015 2013/2014 Change
BC 21,172 24,397 -13.2%
Kootenay 616 799 -22.9% Okanagan 1,661 1,998 -16.8% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 1,300 1,500 -13.4% East Fraser 2,000 2,258 -11.5% North Fraser 2,487 2,833 -12.2% South Fraser 3,828 4,293 -10.8% Vancouver Richmond 2,519 2,996 -15.9% Coast / North Shore 671 762 -12.0% South Vancouver Island 2,034 2,346 -13.3% North Vancouver Island 2,220 2,552 -13.0% Northwest 520 610 -14.7% North Central 1,020 1,175 -13.2% Northeast 134 152 -12.4%
Distinct Children and Families Receiving Monthly Child Care Subsidy April 2005 to March 2015
The subsidy caseload has decreased since 2011/2012 because of the implementation of full-day
kindergarten, and amendments to the Child Care Subsidy Regulation to reduce subsidy rates and
income thresholds for kindergarten aged children, to align with the rates and thresholds for older
children who attend all-day classes.
The number of children and families receiving subsidies experienced a further decrease in
2014/2015. Approximately half of the caseload decrease came from the loss of preschool age
children accessing subsidy, and another 25% came from the loss of Infant/Toddler accessing
subsidy. The beginning of the decrease in 2014/2015 coincided with the teacher strike, when
parents may have made other care arrangements that did not require subsidy.
1 SDA boundaries are determined using child care facility postal codes. In a small number of cases there are facilities where the
SDA cannot be determined; these facilities’ child care spaces are presented in the BC average count, but not the SDA average counts. Because of this, SDA average counts may not sum to the BC average count.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
Apr-05 Apr-06 Apr-07 Apr-08 Apr-09 Apr-10 Apr-11 Apr-12 Apr-13 Apr-14 Apr-15
Families
Children
12
In total close to 42,000 children in more than 29,000 families received child care subsidy in
2014/2015.
Contracted Group & Family Child Care Spaces, 2014/2015 and 2013/2014, Monthly Average
In total over 5,000 licensed group and family child care facilities in BC received operation funding throughout the year, representing a total number of approximately 111,200 licensed child care spaces in 2014/2015.
The monthly average number of child care spaces receiving funding from the Child Care Operating Funding Program increased by 1.6% in 2014/2015:
Service Delivery Area1 2014/2015 2013/2014 Change
BC 100,004 98,432 1.6%
Kootenay 2,436 2,450 -0.6% Okanagan 7,164 7,176 -0.2% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 5,086 5,160 -1.4% East Fraser 5,609 5,619 -0.2% North Fraser 15,341 15,103 1.6% South Fraser 15,305 14,143 8.2% Vancouver Richmond 16,298 16,026 1.7% Coast / North Shore 6,720 6,814 -1.4% South Vancouver Island 11,318 11,232 0.8% North Vancouver Island 8,329 8,146 2.2% Northwest 1,782 1,741 2.4% North Central 3,464 3,576 -3.1% Northeast 943 941 0.2%
The largest increase, 8%, occurred in the South Fraser SDA. Conversely contracted spaces
declined in the North Central by 3%.
As shown in the following graph, the monthly average CCOF contracted child care spaces has
been steadily increasing since 2005, driven by the increase of group spaces.
1 SDA boundaries are determined using child care facility postal codes. In a small number of cases there are facilities where the
SDA cannot be determined; these facilities’ child care spaces are presented in the BC average count, but not the SDA average counts. Because of this, SDA average counts may not sum to the BC average count.
13
Monthly Child Care Operating Funding Program (CCOF) Contracted Child Care Spaces, April 2005 to March 2015
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 1.01 Spare Capacity in Licensed Child Care Spaces1,2
Rationale: A child care facility’s Utilization Rate is determined by dividing its total enrollments for the month
by the number of times a child care space can be used in a month. Two part-time enrollments are
assumed to be equivalent to one full-time enrollment; 100% utilization of one child care space is
assumed to be 22 full-time equivalent enrollments in a month.
For example, a child care facility with one child enrolled full-time in each child care space, for 22
days in a month will have a utilization rate of 100% (as will a facility with two children enrolled
part-time in each child care space, for 22 days in a month).
For the calculations of utilization rates by group age cohorts, facilities with ‘Group Multi-Age’
spaces have been excluded as it cannot be determined which spaces a facility’s reported
enrollments are utilized.
Child care space utilization rates offer a proxy for the appropriateness of the amount and
combination of types of child care spaces available in the province. Efficient use of child care
spaces will be reflected in high utilization rates. However, at very high utilization rates, in excess
of 80 to 85%, finding child care becomes progressively more challenging, potentially impacting
the time taken to find a space and fees.
Trend in Child Care Space Utilization Rates by Space, Monthly Average, 2003/2004 to 2014/2015
1 Licensed child care spaces are spaces from Child Care Operating Funding Program (CCOF) contracted facilities and include both
group and family facilities. 2 Licensed ‘preschool’ child care spaces have been excluded from these calculations as preschool facilities may be open on a part-
time basis both with morning and/or afternoon sessions, and from one to five days per week.
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Apr-05 Apr-06 Apr-07 Apr-08 Apr-09 Apr-10 Apr-11 Apr-12 Apr-13 Apr-14
Total Spaces
Group Spaces
Family Spaces
14
Trend in Child Care Space Utilization Rates by Type of Providers, Monthly Average, 2003/2004 to
2014/2015
Analysis:
Even though the number of group spaces for Infant/Toddler is more than double from 10 years
ago, the utilization rate for group Infant/Toddler has been in an upward trend since 2003/2004,
which shows the capacity pressure that this cohort faces. The growth from group Infant/Toddler
enrollments picked up speed in 2013/2014 (9%), and slowed down in 2014/2015 (6%).
The graph below further demonstrates the capacity pressure that the group Infant/Toddler cohort
faces by showing the gaps between child care spaces available and spaces utilized. The number
of child care spaces utilized is estimated by dividing the total full-time equivalent enrollments by
22 (100% utilization of one child care space is assumed to be 22 full-time equivalent enrollments
in a month). This allows comparison between spaces available and enrollments in the same scale.
The gaps between spaces available and spaces utilized for Infant/Toddler have always been
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
Group Infant/Toddler Group Age 3 to 5 Group School Age
62%
63%
64%
65%
66%
67%
68%
69%
70%
71%
Total Group Family Group and Family
15
small, which means even though spaces have been growing, so are enrollments. Because the
growth of enrollments outpaces the creation of spaces, the utilization rate for group
Infant/Toddler spaces continues to increase. On the other hand, the gap between spaces
available and spaces utilized for children Age 3 to 5 has become much larger in the last five
years.
Group Infant/Toddler Spaces Available vs. Spaces Utilized
Group Age 3 to 5 Spaces Available vs. Spaces Utilized
The number of Group Age 3 to 5 spaces has been increasing steadily at an annual rate of 6%,
yet the growth in spaces have always surpassed the growth in enrollments for this cohort since
2007/2008, except 2013/2014. Therefore, the utilization rate for Group Age 3 to 5 has been
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
Group Infant/Toddler Spaces Available Group Infant/Toddler Spaces Utilized
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
22,000
24,000
26,000
28,000
Group Age 3 to 5 Spaces Available Group Age 3 to 5 Spaces Utilized
16
decreasing since 2007/2008. The decline in utilization rate suggests that the growth in Group
Age 3 to 5 spaces has helped relieve some of the capacity pressure.
Utilization rate for group school age has remained relatively stable in the past 10 years. Group
school age spaces are only being utilized outside of regular school hours.
Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates, 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area
Group Infant / Toddler1
Group Age 3 to 51
Group School Age1
Total Group1 Family
Group and
Family
BC 82.5% 70.6% 45.5% 67.0% 69.1% 68.2%
Kootenays 77.7% 57.0% 31.3% 50.0% 61.5% 55.3% Okanagan 79.5% 72.7% 39.5% 57.3% 69.3% 63.7% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 79.9% 65.8% 41.1% 59.6% 65.0% 62.8% East Fraser 67.2% 68.6% 40.6% 54.7% 67.9% 62.3% North Fraser 90.4% 79.2% 58.4% 75.0% 70.9% 74.1% South Fraser 76.3% 69.9% 52.3% 68.0% 69.7% 70.3% Vancouver/Richmond 88.2% 77.0% 47.0% 76.8% 72.8% 75.5% Coast/North Shore 80.8% 66.5% 43.1% 68.6% 67.4% 68.9% South Vancouver Island 82.9% 65.7% 41.2% 62.2% 68.2% 65.5% North Vancouver Island 82.9% 61.5% 36.5% 59.6% 66.3% 61.3% Northwest 84.1% 64.1% 40.6% 62.9% 72.8% 66.5% North Central 68.8% 64.1% 37.1% 51.6% 68.6% 63.1% Northeast 72.3% 67.4% 29.6% 48.2% 70.6% 59.8%
A symptom of higher rates of utilization, above approximately 80%, is progressive difficulty in
finding a child care space to suit individual needs.
Group Infant/Toddler spaces have the highest utilization rates, with Group 3 to 5 child care
spaces close behind (although, there are three times more CCOF contracted Group 3 to 5 child
care spaces in the province than Infant/Toddler spaces). Infant/Toddler utilization rates of
approximately 90% in North Fraser and Vancouver/Richmond indicate significant unmet demand
for Infant/Toddler child care.
1 For utilization rates by individual Group age cohorts, facilities with 'Group Multi-Age' child care spaces are excluded.
17
Difference in Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates, 2014/2015 from 2013/2014
Service Deliver Area
Group Infant / Toddler1
Group Age 3 to 51
Group School Age1
Total Group1 Family
Group and
Family
BC -0.8% -0.6% 0.0% -0.2% 1.5% 0.6%
Kootenay -3.1% -0.4% 2.4% -0.7% 1.6% 0.5% Okanagan -4.0% -0.5% 2.4% -0.3% 2.1% 0.8% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap -0.1% 1.5% 2.3% 1.3% 0.1% 0.4% East Fraser -0.9% 0.1% 1.5% 0.0% 1.1% 0.1% North Fraser 0.1% -0.7% -0.4% -0.8% 3.2% 1.8% South Fraser -6.3% -2.2% 0.1% -1.2% 1.2% 0.0% Vancouver/Richmond 0.2% -1.4% -1.8% -0.8% 1.0% -0.1% Coast / North Shore 0.4% 2.1% 0.2% 2.9% 1.2% 2.5% South Vancouver Island 0.5% -2.9% -3.6% -1.9% 1.2% -0.3% North Vancouver Island 0.4% -0.4% 0.2% -0.1% 1.2% 0.2% Northwest 13.8% -1.8% -12.5% -6.8% -2.3% -3.1% North Central -9.5% 2.7% 0.5% 0.7% 1.0% 0.7% Northeast 1.1% 2.4% -3.3% -2.8% 6.0% 2.1%
Northwest and North Central show noticeable changes in Infant/Toddler utilization. With few
facilities (approximately 106 and 135 Infant/Toddler spaces on average every month) providing
the base for these two SDAs respectively, the utilization rates are sensitive to facilities being
included or excluded from the indicator. While the facilities in Northwest that are included in the
utilization rate calculation this year have seen higher enrollments since last year, the swing in
utilization rates is exaggerated by the result of low utilization rate facilities dropping out of the
measure. On the other hand, the facilities in North Central have seen lower enrollments since last
year.
Even though its average monthly enrollments have increased by 19%, South Fraser still shows a
decrease of 6% in Infant/Toddler utilization in 2014/2015. This is the second year in a row that
this SDA has experienced a decrease in Infant/Toddler utilization, because the growth of its
average monthly enrollments was surpassed by the growth of its average monthly number of
spaces. On average, every month there were 1,261 Infant/Toddler spaces in South Fraser in
2014/2015, which was a 34% increase from 2013/2014.
18
Per Cent of Infant/Toddler Facilities by Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization, 2014/2015
While Infant/Toddler average facility utilization rates were 83% in 2014/2015, there was a
wide range of utilization rates. Of all Infant/Toddler facilities, 65% of them had utilization rates
of 80% or more, representing 62% of Infant/Toddler child care spaces. Burnaby, for example, a
community with a relatively large number of group Infant/Toddler spaces (527), showed an
average monthly utilization rate of over 90%.
There is clustering of high utilization rates in Infant/Toddler care and a wider range of utilization
rates in each of the other care types, resulting in average utilization rates of less than 100% for
the province. The wide range in utilization is also noticeable across types of communities.
Average Monthly Child Care Space Utilization Rates, by Community Size, 2014/2015
Group Infant / Toddler1
Group Age 3 to 51
Group School Age1
Total Group1 Family
Group and
Family
Communities of 10,000+ Population
84.0% 72.5% 47.2% 68.9% 69.9% 69.9%
Communities of Less Than 10,000 Population
71.9% 58.5% 34.1% 51.2% 63.7% 56.4%
Difference 12.1% 14.0% 13.1% 17.7% 6.1% 13.5%
There is a significant difference in the average facility utilization rates of facilities in communities
of more than 10,000 population compared to communities of less than 10,000 population where
there is from ten to 20 percentage point differences in the utilization rates of group child care.
This may be an indication that the mix in the types of child care in less populated areas is not
optimal, rather than that there is an excess supply of child care.
The tables below show a selection of large communities with the highest utilization and small
communities with highest utilization. While the utilization rates at the top end are higher for the
smaller communities, the child care space counts are quite small. Utilization rates for smaller
communities also tend to be clustered around 25 to 70%.
1 For utilization rates by individual Group age cohorts, facilities with 'Group Multi-Age' child care spaces are excluded.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
19
Tables of the lowest utilization communities are also presented for both large and small
communities. The range in utilization rates for larger communities starts above 36% utilization,
while smaller communities reach as low as single digits.
Large Communities with Highest Overall Utilization Rates, 2014/2015
10,000+ Population Group and Family
Community Service Delivery Area Utilization Rate
Average Monthly CCOF Child Care
Spaces
Burnaby North Fraser 78.9% 3,611 Vancouver Vancouver/Richmond 76.8% 8,255 Port Coquitlam North Fraser 74.4% 1,651 North Vancouver Coast/North Shore 73.1% 3,026 Coquitlam North Fraser 73.0% 3,093
Small Communities with Highest Overall Utilization Rates, 2014/2015
<10,000 Population Group and Family
Community Service Delivery Area Utilization Rate
Average Monthly CCOF Child Care
Spaces
Vedder Crossing East Fraser 93.9% 28 Gitanyow Northwest 90.5% 26 Lumby Okanagan 88.1% 32 Keremeos Okanagan 87.2% 20 Kitimat Northwest 86.4% 56
Large Communities with Lowest Overall Utilization Rates, 2014/2015
10,000+ Population Group and Family
Community Service Delivery Area Utilization Rate
Average Monthly CCOF Child Care
Spaces
Nelson Kootenays 58.9% 295 Cranbrook Kootenays 56.0% 395 Saanich South Vancouver Island 55.7% 153 Comox North Vancouver Island 52.4% 353 Summerland Okanagan 39.8% 152
Small Communities with Lowest Overall Utilization Rates, 2014/2015
<10,000 Population Group and Family
Community Service Delivery Area Utilization Rate
Average Monthly CCOF Child Care
Spaces
Bella Bella Coast/North Shore 13.7% 20 Fraser Lake North Central 13.5% 36 Sorrento Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 8.7% 20 Nitinaht Lake North Vancouver Island 8.4% 41 Wells North Central 6.1% 20
20
Average Monthly CCOF Contracted Child Care Spaces to Child Population (Ages 0 to 12), 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area Average Monthly CCOF
Contracted Child Care Spaces
0 to 12 Population
(2014)
CCOF Spaces per 0 to 12 Population
BC 100,004 583,890 17.1%
Kootenay 2,436 19,076 12.8% Okanagan 7,164 40,126 17.9% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 5,086 27,049 18.8% East Fraser 5,609 44,497 12.6% North Fraser 15,341 81,339 18.9% South Fraser 15,305 113,812 13.4% Vancouver/ Richmond 16,298 91,488 17.8% Coast / North Shore 6,720 35,375 19.0% South Vancouver Island 11,318 49,638 22.8% North Vancouver Island 8,329 36,218 23.0% Northwest 1,782 11,550 15.4% North Central 3,464 21,036 16.5% Northeast 943 12,686 7.4%
The above table compares the average monthly CCOF contracted child care spaces with the child
population. While there are CCOF contracted child care spaces for 17% of the 0 to 12
population, not all children may need a child care space. Some families may choose to use
unlicensed child care or family options to provide care for their children. A child care space may
also be utilized by more than one child (at different times of the day).
When comparing the available spaces to the child population, it is not clear that areas with a low
CCOF space to child ratio are associated with high utilization rates. While South Fraser does
reflect this pattern, Coast/North Shore shows a similar overall utilization rate, but much higher
CCOF space to child ratio.
Utilization Rates for Group Facilities by Size, 2003/2004 to 2014/2015
A child care facility’s utilization rate is determined by dividing its total enrollments for the month
by the number of times a child care space can be used a month. In general, smaller Group
facilities tend to have higher utilization rates as there would be fewer spaces to enrol, as shown in
the graph above. The number of Group spaces used in this calculation is the sum of Group spaces
for all care types, excluding preschool spaces, (preschool facilities may be open on a part-time
62%
64%
66%
68%
70%
72%
74%
76%
78%
80%
2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15
Group facilities with more than 40 spaces Group facilities with 11 to 39 spaces Group facilities with 10 or less spaces
21
basis both with morning and/or afternoon sessions, and from one to five days per week). In
2014/2015, 728 Group facilities had more than 40 spaces, 1,030 Group facilities had between
11 and 39 spaces, and 334 Group facilities had 10 or less spaces.
Average Monthly Proportion of Facilities with Child Care Space Utilization of 60% or Higher, BC, 2003/2004 to 2014/2015
At a provincial level, the proportion of facilities in a fiscal year with a utilization of 60% or higher
has increased annually in the six years to 2008/2009 before flattening out and averaging 61%
since then.
52%
54%
56%
58%
60%
62%
64%
66%
22
Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type and Age Cohort – Child Care Operating Funding Program Group Facilities – 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area
Infant 0 to 18
Months
Toddler 19 to 35 Months
30 Months
to 5 Years
Licensed Preschool School Age
Care Kindergarten (Full-day K1)
School Age Care (Grade 1+)2
3 Days/ Week
5 Days/Week
BC $995 $925 $750 $175 $310 $400 $304
Kootenay $964 $940 $740 $165 $291 $440 $310 Okanagan $950 $930 $735 $165 $300 $350 $272 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap $898 $827 $675 $175 $293 $400 $305 East Fraser $825 $730 $650 $143 $245 $380 $270 North Fraser $1,075 $1,000 $750 $183 $320 $420 $370 South Fraser $950 $880 $700 $175 $292 $430 $350 Vancouver/Richmond $1,215 $1,150 $850 $209 $395 $375 $335 Coast / North Shore $1,220 $1,150 $877 $270 $500 $500 $350 South Vancouver Island $1,000 $950 $790 $180 $310 $375 $270 North Vancouver Island $863 $750 $650 $170 $275 $333 $255 Northwest $768 $780 $700 $168 $280 $400 $300 North Central $800 $800 $663 $150 $228 $350 $300 Northeast $1,200 $1,200 $800 $160 $380 $372 $345
Median Monthly Parent Fees by Care Type and Age Cohort – Child Care Operating Funding Program Family Facilities – 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area
Infant 0 to 18
Months
Toddler 19 to 35 Months
3 to 5 Years Old
School Age Care
Kindergarten (Before &
After) – Full-Day K1
School Age Care (Grade 1+)
Before After Before & After
BC $800 $800 $750 $400 $250 $300 $400
Kootenay $800 $760 $760 $330 $200 $225 $300 Okanagan $745 $738 $700 $390 $200 $300 $370 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap $740 $735 $700 $400 $280 $300 $400 East Fraser $728 $700 $700 $420 $300 $300 $400 North Fraser $850 $800 $750 $400 $250 $285 $400 South Fraser $800 $800 $720 $432 $250 $300 $420 Vancouver Richmond $1,000 $1,000 $900 $500 $300 $390 $450 Coast / North Shore $1,000 $975 $900 $510 $200 $300 $500 South Vancouver Island $800 $800 $750 $400 $200 $238 $350 North Vancouver Island $750 $750 $700 $350 $225 $290 $350 Northwest $750 $760 $745 $400 $275 $263 $400 North Central $700 $700 $700 $400 $200 $300 $350 Northeast $800 $800 $800 $200 $200 $300 $400
1 School Age Care Kindergarten (Full-day K) – for children in full-day kindergarten, reflects the parent fees for child care
surrounding a full-day of kindergarten. 2 School Age Care (Grade 1+) reflects fees for out of school care including before school, after school and before &after school
child care.
23
Expenditure Data:
Early Childhood Development (ECD)
Service Delivery Area Expenditures1,2 ($ Millions)
As at March 31, 2015
BC $29.334
Kootenays 0.755 Okanagan 1.243 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 1.842 East Fraser 0.363 North Fraser 1.307 South Fraser 1.818 Vancouver/Richmond 1.392 Coast/North Shore 0.741 South Vancouver Island 1.439 North Vancouver Island 2.184 Northwest 1.934 North Central 1.515 Northeast 1.283 Early Years & Aboriginal Early Years Provincial Office3 11.512 Other 0.007
The budget for this line of service is $31.679 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. 2 ECD Programs are aimed at helping parents, families and service providers provide the best possible start for BC’s children
(aged 0 to 6) and support their healthy development. Examples of ECD programs and initiatives include: Success by Six funding, the Roots and Seeds of Empathy Programs, Children’s First Initiatives, Building Blocks, Family Resource Programs & Aboriginal Early Childhood Development. These services are provided at the SDA and Provincial Office level.
24
Child Care Services
Service Delivery Area
Expenditures1,2 As at March 31, 2015
Child Care Subsidy
Child Care Operating
Fund (CCOF) Child Care
Other3
Total Expenditures ($ Millions)
BC $115.862 $79.438 $24.646 $219.947
Kootenays 0.808 0.808
Okanagan 0.528 0.528 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 0.736 0.736 East Fraser 0.775 0.775 North Fraser 0.906 0.906 South Fraser 1.154 1.154 Vancouver/Richmond 0.827 0.827 Coast/North Shore 0.807 0.807 South Vancouver Island 0.770 0.770 North Vancouver Island 0.668 0.668 Northwest 0.629 0.629 North Central 0.438 0.438 Northeast 0.232 0.232 Service Delivery Operations4 0.115 0.115 Early Childhood Development Policy & Support 0.123 0.123 Child Care Operations 115.862 79.438 15.131 210.431
The budget for this line of service is $235.932 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. 2 Services provided include child care subsidies to parents and organizations that provide, or support, child care services and Child
Care Resource and Referral centres. It provides for administration of the Child Care BC Act and the Child Care Subsidy Act. It also includes staffing costs for direct service delivery for these programs.
3 'Child Care Other' includes Referral Supports in SDA’s, child care administration and Child Care Capital Fund in Child Care Operations.
25
Service for Children and Youth with Special Needs (CYSN)
Summary:
This report provides data linked to family support files for children and youth with special needs.
Case Data and Trends:
Open CYSN Family Service Cases, March 2015
Service Delivery Area Open CYSN Family Service Cases,
March 2015
BC 15,210
Kootenays 568 Okanagan 1,318 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 936 East Fraser 1,085 North Fraser 2,156 South Fraser 2,545 Vancouver/Richmond 2,109 Coast/North Shore 755 South Vancouver Island 1,520 North Vancouver Island 1,265 Northwest 241 North Central 480 Northeast 232
Trend in Monthly Number of CYSN Family Service Cases, September 2012 to March 2015
12,700
13,200
13,700
14,200
14,700
15,200
15,700
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
26
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 2.01 Median Cost per Child and Youth in Care with Special Needs
Rationale: The median cost per case gives the median cost of each year spent in a residential placement by
a child or youth in Care with special needs. Cost pressures often stem from a shortage of skilled
foster parents, which translates into a higher usage of more expensive contracted resources.
Other factors that can impact costs per case include the use of exceptional payments to service
providers and the level of care required by the current caseload composition.
Annual Cost, Children and Youth in Care with Special Needs, 12 Month Period Ending March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area Total Number of Placement Days
Median Annual Cost per Placement
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 196,623 $50,998 $33,423 $59,417
Kootenays 7,387 53,367 54,343 53,367 Okanagan 23,799 32,921 29,347 33,804 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 13,394 34,479 30,517 44,934 East Fraser 13,484 68,314 196,848 64,654 North Fraser 18,708 59,417 62,497 59,417 South Fraser 29,067 76,264 31,815 92,389 Vancouver/Richmond 14,750 85,940 42,229 92,193 Coast/North Shore 6,429 47,054 58,267 44,482 South Vancouver Island 26,712 35,902 45,796 35,758 North Vancouver Island 28,295 35,427 30,125 45,660 Northwest 3,176 35,982 33,486 50,347 North Central 7,474 94,141 33,098 131,500 Northeast 3,948 81,327 80,212 86,136
Analysis: Over the period of April 2014 to March 2015 (12 months), 693 children identified as having
special needs were cared for in an MCFD paid residential resource. This compares to 828 at the
September 2012 reporting period. The median cost to provide residential services this period
was $51K, an increase of almost 33% since the baseline.
27
Trend in Annual Cost per Placement, Children and Youth in Care with Special Needs, September 2012 to March 2015
Costs have been increasing steadily since the February 2014 reporting period. All of the increase
since the baseline came from the contracted, staffed resources. The values of this indicator in the
current volume of this report are slightly lower than in previous volumes. This reflects the capture
of more CYSN clients now, by using the Integrated Case Management System for an improved,
comprehensive indicator of costs for CYSN clients.
Age of Children and Youth in Care with Special Needs, April 2014 to March 2015
Age Group Total Days Total Costs Median
Cost/Day Median
Cost/Case/Year
0 to 5 12,772 $1,893,780 $74.96 $27,379 6 to 11 45,599 $8,416,020 $92.13 $33,649 12 to 15 54,373 $13,923,088 $165.80 $60,560 16 to 18 82,649 $23,224,098 $181.94 $66,453 Over 18 1,230 $420,817 $200.74 $73,318 All CYIC w SN 196,623 $47,883,040 $139.63 $50,998
More than 60% of the CYIC with special needs in residential care were in Care for the entire
year indicating that they tend to remain in Care longer than non-CYSN CYIC (40%). This, in turn,
is reflected in their age: almost three quarters of the residential care provided went to CYIC
aged 12 or more. For non-CYSN children, this proportion was less than half.
The median cost of residential resources for CYIC with special needs is positively correlated to the
age of the children. This is possibly related to the child’s age. As children age, their needs
increase, and they are more likely to be cared for through a contracted, staffed resource: while
only 21% of the bed days used for the children under the age of 12 were in contracted
resources, almost half of the bed days for their older counterparts were in these more expensive
contracted residential placements.
$35K
$37K
$39K
$41K
$43K
$45K
$47K
$49K
$51K
$53K
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
28
And while the overall use of residential care dropped by 17% since the baseline (Sept. 2012),
the use of the staffed resources increased by 10%. This paired with a cost increase of more than
25% for contracted resources, largely accounts for the recent cost increases.
Cumulative Percentage of Children and Youth in Care with Special Needs, by Residential Cost/Day
Most of the cost increases occurred in the mid range CYIC. The table above shows how the lower
and higher cost children remained unchanged; the mid range cost children saw most of the
increase.
Median Annual Residential Cost of Children and Youth in Care with Special Needs by Child’s Aboriginal Status
The median cost increase impacted only Non-Aboriginal CYIC. This is becuase Aboriginal CYIC
account for 20% of the bed days used in contracted resources, and only 20% of the time in Care
for these Aboriginal CYIC was spent in contracted resources (compared to 35% for Non-
Aboriginal youth). The relatively greater use of foster care versus contracted resources for
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%50
10
0
15
0
20
0
25
0
30
0
35
0
40
0
45
0
50
0
55
0
60
0
65
0
70
0
75
0
80
0
85
0
90
0
95
0
10
00
10
50
11
00
11
50
12
00
12
50
13
00
% o
f C
YIC
with S
peci
al N
eed
s
Cost/Day
Baseline - Sep-12 Mar-15
Baseline Median: $110/dayCurrent Median: $139.96/day
$33,423
$59,417
$50,998
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal Total
Sep-12
Mar-15
29
Aboriginal CYIC reflects slight differences in appropriate types of placement for the care
required.
MCFD Specialized Provincial Services – Number of Clients Served March 2014 and March 2015
Program1 March 2014 March 2015
Autism Funding Unit 9,809 10,823 Under Six 1,507 1,637 Six and Over 8,302 9,186 Provincial Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services (PDHHS) Victory Hill Residential Program 21 25 Family and Community Services2,3 196 120 Through PDHHS Contracts Early Intervention (Deaf) 254 345 Early Intervention (Deaf/Blind) 26 28 Early Intervention (Blind) 137 145 Parent Support and Education (Blind)4 151 167
Mental Health and Addictions5 436 306 Deaf/Blind Intervener Services 63 48 Deaf Youth Development6 181 215
Medical Benefits7 3,053 3,237
At Home Respite Cases As of March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area Open Respite Cases, March 2015
BC 1,682
Kootenays 58 Okanagan 124 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 56 East Fraser 178 North Fraser 321 South Fraser 298 Vancouver/Richmond 177 Coast/North Shore 94 South Vancouver Island 162 North Vancouver Island 145 Northwest 41 North Central 64 Northeast 32
1 Nursing Support Services was moved to the Ministry of Health 2 Family and Community Services statistics reflect all clients receiving services – children, youth and family. 3 In 2013, Family and Community Services merged to include the Youth Transition Program. 4 Parent Support and Education (Blind) statistics reflect number of children attending camps and family seminars. Some children
may be double counted as their families attended multiple camps and seminars through the year. 5 Mental Health and Addictions statistics reflect unique client numbers – some clients receive multiple services. Clients can be
children, youth, adults and family members. 6 Deaf Youth Development statistics reflect total number of children/youth attending camps during 2013 and 2014 summer
programming. Some children/youth may be double counted as they attended multiple camps. 7 Estimate does not include children in Care because all children in Care are eligible for dental and optical at any time during the
year.
30
Expenditure Data:
Services for Children &Youth with Special Needs (CYSN)
Service Delivery Area Expenditures1,2 ($ Millions)
As at March 31, 2015
BC $307.301
Kootenays 7.204 Okanagan 15.714 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 11.542 East Fraser 14.052 North Fraser 26.707 South Fraser 28.230 Vancouver/Richmond 26.729 Coast/North Shore 12.463 South Vancouver Island 17.953 North Vancouver Island 19.695 Northwest 6.174 North Central 10.378 Northeast 4.559 Provincial Deaf & Hard of Hearing Services - Provincial Services 5.930 Autism - Provincial Services 63.229 Medical Benefits - Provincial Services 22.949 Nursing Support - Provincial Services 17.153 Aboriginal Infant Development Program3 0.350 Other 0.043 Recoveries3 (3.754)
The budget for this line of service is $301.477 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. 2 CYSN services include: foundational programs (e.g., Early Intervention Therapy, Infant Development, and Supported Child
Development), Family Support programs (e.g., respite services) and services for Special Needs Children in Care. These programs and interventions are intended to support children's healthy development, maximize quality of life and assist families in their role as primary care givers.
31
Child and Youth Mental Health (CYMH)
Summary:
This section provides data on case levels and expenditures and client satisfaction levels. More
data sets will be added as MCFD progresses with the key action on strengthening child and youth
mental health services.
Case Data and Trends:
CYMH Referrals in 2014/2015, with At Least One Presenting Issue, by Proportion of Types of Presenting Issue
CYMH Referrals in 2014/2015, with At Least One Presenting Issue, by Number of Presenting Issues
8.6%
20.0%
26.8%
39.3%
51.0%
82.8%
Other
Physical Function Issues
School Functioning
Social Relationship Issues
Behaviour Concerns
Mental Health Concerns
22%
20%
17%
12%
8%
5%4%
3%2% 2%
5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11+
32
CYMH Referrals in 2014/2015, with At Least One Presenting Issue, Ten Most Frequent Presenting Issues
Presenting Issue Proportion of Clients with
Presenting Issue
Fears or Anxieties 56.9% Depressed Mood 40.8% Relations with Family 22.1% Relations with Peers 18.6% Suicidal Thoughts 17.4% Attentional Problems 15.6% Sleeping Problems 14.8% Oppositional 11.7% Excessive Anger 11.5% School Avoidance 10.9%
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 3.01 Child and Youth Mental Health Services Client Service Satisfaction
Client satisfaction with services is an important indicator of quality. Quality of CYMH services is
measured using the CYMH Service Survey. The CYMH Service Survey includes nine service
satisfaction questions. Clients are able to score CYMH services on a five point scale from poor to
excellent based on the following categories:
The convenience of the location where they received service
How long they were on the waiting list for service
The time of day when services were scheduled
The courtesy and respectfulness of staff
Information they were given to help them understand their child
Ways they learned to help their child
Opportunities to help make decisions about services
The helpfulness of the service they received
Overall, how would they rate the quality of the service they received
Similar to the baseline data, Fiscal Year 2014/2015 data shows the greatest satisfaction scores
are for “Overall Quality of Service”, as well as “Courtesy and Respectfulness of Staff” (97%
rated these items as good, very good or excellent). The area of least satisfaction continues to be
“Wait Time” (16% rated this as poor or fair, an improvement of 5% from Fiscal Year
2013/2014), as well as “Convenience of Location” (16% rated this as poor or fair).
33
Child and Youth Mental Health Service Satisfaction for Fiscal Year 2014/2015
FY 2014/2015 data is based on 115 surveys collected between April 1, 2014 and March 31, 2015.
Child and Youth Mental Health Service Satisfaction Fiscal Year 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 (Baseline)
Convenience of Location
Wait Times
Time of Day of Service
Courtesy/Respect
Information Provided
Coping Skills
Learned
Inclusive Decision Making
Helpfulness of Service
Overall Quality
of Service
1) Poor 3% 5% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2) Fair 7% 16% 5% 1% 3% 5% 4% 2% 2% 3) Good 38% 26% 30% 16% 28% 31% 34% 26% 21% 4) Very good 21% 21% 28% 22% 22% 23% 28% 27% 23% 5) Excellent 31% 31% 36% 61% 46% 39% 33% 44% 53%
The baseline is based on 232 Surveys collected between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2013.
Convenienceof Location
Wait TimesTime of Dayof Service
Courtesy /Respect
InformationProvided
Coping SkillsLearned
InclusiveDecisionMaking
Helpfulness ofService
OverallQuality of
Service
1) Poor 3% 7% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1%
2) Fair 12% 9% 4% 3% 4% 7% 10% 5% 2%
3) Good 36% 32% 39% 19% 31% 29% 29% 27% 24%
4) Very good 15% 20% 23% 18% 24% 22% 23% 21% 20%
5) Excellent 34% 33% 32% 60% 42% 43% 37% 47% 53%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
34
Expenditure Data:
Child & Youth Mental Health (CYMH) Services
Service Delivery Area
Expenditures1,2 As at March 31, 2015
Maples Other Services3
Total Expenditures ($
Millions)
BC $9.330 $68.178 $77.508
Kootenays 2.762 2.762 Okanagan 5.378 5.378 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 4.636 4.636 East Fraser 4.210 4.210 North Fraser 6.338 6.338 South Fraser 8.496 8.496 Vancouver/Richmond 9.122 9.122 Coast/North Shore 4.112 4.112 South Vancouver Island 7.394 7.394 North Vancouver Island 6.190 6.190 Northwest 2.411 2.411 North Central 4.472 4.472 Northeast 1.845 1.845 Service Delivery Operations4 0.571 0.571 Maples 10.154 10.154 Other Centralized Payments 2.334 2.334 Recoveries5 (0.824) (2.094) (2.918)
The budget for this line of service is $78.831 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. This figure does not include costs for mental
health services for young offenders in the community or in custody and substance abuse treatment in the youth justice system, which if included would bring Mental Health spending to approximately $93 Million annually.
2 Provide services to children and youth who are experiencing mental, emotional and behavioral disorders. Also includes staffing costs for direct service delivery for these programs.
3 'Other Services' includes Sessional Services, Support Services, Specialized Services, and Program Delivery.
35
Child Safety, Family, Youth and Children in Care Services
Child Safety Services: Investigations and Family Development Response
Summary:
A response to a Child Protection report may include a Family Development Response (FDR), an
investigation, a Youth Service Response, or a non-protective response such as offer of support
services or referral to community agency. Over the past several years MCFD has increasingly
focused on using the Family Development Response by working in collaboration with families to
address child protection concerns and using investigations for situations when evidence is required
to determine if a child needs protection. This report presents data and outcome indicators that
support the appropriate use of FDR as an alternative to investigation.
MCFD receives approximately 37,000 protection reports annually. All protection reports are
assessed and the outcome of which is one of:
A Family Development Response (FDR);
A Child Protection investigation;
Provision of or referral to support services; or
No intervention required by the ministry.
For many families, providing appropriate access to community-based support services as needs
arise has been necessary to reduce the risk of harm to children and youth. FDR is the preferred
approach to working with families where a time-consuming and intrusive investigation is
unnecessary. It is designed to keep children safe within their families through a collaborative and
supportive process. FDR is intended to serve low-risk families who need community-based services
quickly without the need for an investigation (the majority of families working with the ministry).
Better prevention through the use of safe alternatives to being brought into Care has helped to
lower the children and youth in Care (CYIC) caseload. Compared with September 2007 there are
over 1,700 (19%) fewer children and youth in Care.
36
Case Data and Trends:
Families, Children and Adults Receiving Child Protection Services, March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Open Family Service and Child Service Cases March 20151
Total Children2 Total Adults Total Open
Files
BC3 24,025 27,966 18,535
Kootenays 852 1,041 686 Okanagan 1,616 1,768 1,341 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 2,794 3,670 2,240 East Fraser 2,078 2,188 1,641 North Fraser 1,516 1,806 1,164 South Fraser 2,969 3,494 2,298 Vancouver/Richmond 2,601 3,183 1,916 Coast/North Shore 904 1,022 695 South Vancouver Island 2,280 2,466 1,856 North Vancouver Island 2,665 2,914 2,073 Northwest 2,347 2,894 795 North Central 1,362 1,552 1,557 Northeast 418 416 271
Response to Protection Reports, FDR and Investigation, April 2007 to November 20144
1 A child service case is opened when a child or youth is in care or the subject of a Youth Agreement or some other child specific
service. 2 The count of total children is the unique count of children appearing on Child Service cases and/or Family Service cases. There
are some children that appear on both case types. 3 The total number of open cases and adults on open cases do not match the provincial totals because there were some cases that
could not be associated to an SDA and some adults have open cases in more than one SDA. 4 Data for March 2012 to May 2012 are unavailable due to the transition from MIS to ICM information systems.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Apr-07 Apr-08 Apr-09 Apr-10 Apr-11 Apr-12 Apr-13 Apr-14
% of protection reports responded through Family Development Response
% of protection reports responded throughinvestigation
37
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 4.02 Ratio of Family Development Response to Investigations
Rationale: A number of families need extra support to provide safe and nurturing care for their children.
Under the Child, Family and Community Service Act (CFCSA), child welfare workers assess every
report about a child’s need for protection and respond through the Child Protection Response
Model with a variety of approaches including: Family Development Response (FDR), Child
Protection Investigation Response and Youth Services Response. Family Development Response is
the preferred response when the circumstances do not involve severe abuse or neglect and
families are able and willing to participate in collaborative assessment and planning. FDR,
through building on the family’s strengths, focuses on how to keep children safe while the family
stays together and works through challenges.
By building upon their inherent strengths, families can increase their capacity to safely care for
their children. FDR is used as an alternative to investigation. FDR is an approach that focuses on
keeping a child safe while living in the family home and, through the provision of services, works
to address safety issues by building on the family’s strengths and support system. This response
does not include determining findings of abuse or neglect but does involve an assessment of
safety.
This performance indicator compares the use of FDR to the use of investigations. The ratio rises as
the use of FDR increases and the use of investigations decreases. For example, a ratio of 0.5
means that the number of completed FDRs was half the number of completed investigations. A
ratio of 2.0 means that as twice as many FDRs were completed relative to the number of
completed investigations.
38
Ratio of FDR to Investigations, October 2014 to March 2015 by SDA
Service Delivery Area
Completed Family Development
Responses (FDR), October 2014 to
March 2015
Completed Investigations, October 2014 to March 2015
Ratio of FDR to Investigation, October 2014 to March 2015
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC1 7,936 1,934 4.1 3.1 4.9
Kootenays 292 69 4.2 4.8 4.0 Okanagan 394 128 3.1 2.6 3.4 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 908 214 4.2 3.4 5.4 East Fraser 505 199 2.5 2.2 2.7 North Fraser 629 153 4.1 3.3 4.4 South Fraser 1,096 341 3.2 2.1 3.9 Vancouver/Richmond 850 135 6.3 2.7 11.4 Coast/North Shore 375 60 6.3 5.8 6.5 South Vancouver Island 775 175 4.4 1.8 7.3 North Vancouver Island 889 175 5.1 4.0 6.4 Northwest 302 54 5.6 5.4 6.2 North Central 722 197 3.7 3.1 4.4 Northeast 198 32 6.2 5.6 6.8
Analysis:
Trend in Ratio of FDR to Investigations, September 2012 to March 2015
1 The counts for BC might exceed the total counts as some cases are not associated to an SDA but included with the provincial
figure.
-
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
39
Trend in Ratio of FDR to Investigations, by Aboriginal Identity, September 2012 to March 2015
The strong upward trend, the result of the introduction of the new Child Protection Response
Model in April 2012, continues. Under the new response model, FDR is the primary pathway that
the ministry uses to address child protection concerns. All SDAs have experienced a significant
increase in the use of FDR over time. North Vancouver Island and Northwest have increased their
FDRs by three per investigation; Vancouver/Richmond has led the way with an increase of almost
five FDRs per investigation and also had the highest per cent change since the September 2012
baseline.
The ratio of FDR to Investigation is lower for Aboriginal families at the provincial level but has
almost doubled within one year to slightly reduce the gap with Non-Aboriginal families.
Performance Indicator 4.01 Proportion of Families with a Closed Family Development Response with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months
Rationale: Family Development Response (FDR) is an approach to responding to Child Protection reports
where an investigation is not required. Based on strong evidence, FDR is a shift from an over-
reliance on investigation and removing children from their families to a range of responses and
community based options intended to keep children safe within their families and communities. This
is an indicator of safety for children and youth involved in FDR.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
40
Families with Closed Family Development Response between April 2013 and March 2014 That had an Investigation Resulting in a Protection Finding within the Next 12 Months, by SDA
Service Delivery Area
Families with Closed Family Development Response between
April 2013 and March 2014
Families Subsequently Investigated with a Protection Finding within Next 12
Months (%)
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 13,834 4.6% 9.2% 3.1%
Kootenays 534 4.1% 4.5% 4.0% Okanagan 791 4.4% 12.8% 2.2% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 967 5.6% 8.7% 3.6% East Fraser 829 4.8% 7.0% 4.4% North Fraser 1,304 4.5% 11.6% 3.4% South Fraser 2,330 4.7% 9.1% 3.9% Vancouver/Richmond 1,579 3.7% 10.3% 1.9% Coast/North Shore 664 3.6% 8.1% 2.6% South Vancouver Island 1,320 4.8% 14.8% 3.0% North Vancouver Island 1,276 5.6% 10.6% 3.6% Northwest 688 4.7% 6.8% 0.4% North Central 1,145 4.8% 8.4% 2.6% Northeast 407 3.2% 5.2% 2.4%
Analysis:
Trend in Families with Closed Family Development Response That had an Investigation Resulting in a Protection Finding within the Next 12 Months, September 2012 to March 2015
The overall trend continues to be gradually downwards. This is the case for both Aboriginal and
Non-Aboriginal families (see below) but the trend is stronger for Aboriginal families. This is a
positive sign indicating the strong and improving effectiveness of FDR in these situations for
keeping children safe while keeping families together.
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
41
Trend in Families with Closed Family Development Response That had an Investigation Resulting in a Protection Finding within the Next 12 Months, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal, September 2012 to March 2015
Overall, the number of Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal families with a closed FDR 12 to 24
months ago has more than tripled between September 2012 and March 2015. Interestingly it is
Aboriginal families that now have the stronger trend (between 2010 and 2013 Non-Aboriginal
families had a much stronger trend). Greater use of FDR relative to investigation combined with
lower rates of former FDR families that later receive a Child Protection investigation is an
encouraging sign that more Aboriginal children are prevented from coming into Care and can live
at home safely.
Performance Indicator 4.11 Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection Finding with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months
A key outcome indicator for any Child Protection system is recidivism: further maltreatment in a
family subsequent to MCFD intervention.
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
13%
14%
15%
16%
17%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
42
Rationale:
A Child Protection investigation is opened when a social worker has established a child’s safety or
health may be in immediate danger or may be vulnerable to serious harm. When it has been
established that a child is at risk, the ministry works with the family to ensure child safety and
reduce the risk of future harm by providing services that will address the needs of the child and
their family. One of the ministry’s core objectives is to protect children who have been victims of
abuse or neglect from further maltreatment. This is an indicator of keeping children safe with
families whose children have been found by an investigation as in need of protection through
quantifying how many of these families have subsequently been reinvestigated.
Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection Finding between April 2013 to March 2014 with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months, by SDA
Service Delivery Area
Families Investigated with a Protection
Finding in between April 2013 and
March 2014
Families Subsequently Investigated with a Protection Finding within Next 12
Months (%)
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 1,958 13.3% 15.6% 11.2%
Kootenays 81 17.3% 13.3% 18.2% Okanagan 138 5.8% 5.1% 6.3% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 139 10.1% 9.6% 10.7% East Fraser 217 17.5% 18.0% 16.9% North Fraser 146 19.9% 27.5% 17.0% South Fraser 364 15.1% 23.5% 10.3% Vancouver/Richmond 151 9.3% 12.0% 6.6% Coast/North Shore 75 21.3% 25.0% 18.6% South Vancouver Island 232 10.8% 17.2% 6.0% North Vancouver Island 194 8.8% 9.6% 7.5% Northwest 66 16.7% 16.9% * North Central 135 14.1% 14.1% 14.0% Northeast 20 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
1 SDA data suppressed where family counts are less than 10
43
Trend in Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection Finding with a Subsequent Investigation and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months, September 2012 to March 2015
Analysis:
The positive, strong downward trend continues; the likelihood of a family being reinvestigated by
these criteria is now one third less than in September 2012. Over the report period, the number
of distinct families investigated with a protection finding decreased by 47%, while the number of
families with a subsequent investigation and protection finding decreased by 64%.
The range across SDAs is between 0% in the Northeast to 21% in the Coast/North Shore.
Provincially and for most of the SDAs this indicator is relatively high for Aboriginal families.
Trends were similar for both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal families (see below). Similar to
experiences of families with a recent closed FDR (indicator 4.01 above), this trend is stronger for
Aboriginal families, reducing the gap with Non-Aboriginal families from over 10 percentage
points in September 2012 to four percentage points.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
44
Trend in Proportion of Families Investigated with a Protection Finding with a Subsequent Investigation
and Protection Finding in the Next 12 Months, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal, September 2012 to
March 2015
Family, Child and Youth Support and Care Services
Summary:
This report provides case data and a set of outcome indicators that focus on a number of the key
areas identified in the MCFD/Federation Review on Family Support/Extended Family
Care/Children in Care/Youth Services:
1. The use of Out-of-Care placements such as through the Extended Family Program Agreements as an alternative to coming into Care.
2. The issues of permanency and placement stability for children and youth in Care. 3. Cultural connection for Aboriginal children and youth in Care. 4. Educational attainment for children and youth in Care and in receipt of youth services. 5. Transitioning to post majority independence.
6. Per Diem costs and placement utilization.
Over time, this outcome indicator data set will be expanded and refined to measure progress on
the strategic key action to significantly improve services and outcomes in this area. In the first
section on case data and trends, two areas are highlighted. For higher-risk families, one outcome
to an investigation is the use of an ‘Out-of-Care option’ (either the use of extended family
agreements as a safe family based alternative to bringing children into Care or a court order
allowing children to be placed with extended family members). Evidence shows that ‘Out-of-Care’
type arrangements with extended family can be a much better alternative than coming into Care
in providing for the long-term well-being of children who cannot live with their parents.
Youth between 16 and 18 whose safety is at risk if they live at home and who do not have a
caregiver willing and able to provide care are eligible for a Youth Agreement. Such agreements
allow youth to receive financial assistance and support without being brought into Care. As noted
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
45
above, youth support and improved support for young adults who have been on agreements or in
Care is a key action focus for MCFD in 2013/2014.
Case Data and Trends:
Children and Youth in Care (CYIC), Out-of-Care Caseloads, April 2007 to July 20151
Children and Youth in Care (CYIC) by Aboriginal Status, BC, April 2007 to July 20151 (CYIC)
1 Please refer to the note at the end of the Service Line Index for explanation of the drop in caseload in July 2015.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
7,200
7,700
8,200
8,700
9,200
9,700
Apr-07 Oct-07 Apr-08 Oct-08 Apr-09 Oct-09 Apr-10 Oct-10 Apr-11 Oct-11 Apr-12 Oct-12 Apr-13 Oct-13 Apr-14 Oct-14 Apr-15
CYIC Caseload
Out of Care Caseload
2,500
3,500
4,500
5,500
6,500
7,500
8,500
9,500
10,500
Apr-07 Oct-07 Apr-08 Oct-08 Apr-09 Oct-09 Apr-10 Oct-10 Apr-11 Oct-11 Apr-12 Oct-12 Apr-13 Oct-13 Apr-14 Oct-14 Apr-15
Total
Aboriginal
Non-Aboriginal
46
Children and Youth in Care, BC, July 31, 2015 by SDA (CYIC)
Service Delivery Area Children and Youth in Care
July 31, 2015 % of Aboriginal Children and Youth in Care July 31, 2015
BC 7,210 60.6%
Kootenays 197 51.3% Okanagan 536 51.7% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 728 62.9% East Fraser 745 56.0% North Fraser 416 36.8% South Fraser 960 55.1% Vancouver/Richmond 707 66.8% Coast/North Shore 285 70.9% South Vancouver Island 827 52.2% North Vancouver Island 902 65.2% Northwest 276 93.5% North Central 524 78.4% Northeast 107 68.2%
Youth on Youth Agreements, BC, April 2007 to July 2015
Performance Indicators:
Extended Family
Performance Indicator 4.06 Children and Youth Admitted into Care That Previously Had a Recent Out-of-Care Placement
Rationale:
Permanent, stable relationships are a major determinant of whether children feel safe and secure
and therefore, of well-being overall. If a child or youth has to leave their parental home, the
ministry or delegated Aboriginal agency strives to place the child or youth with people who know
the child or youth and will maintain a positive, lifelong relationship with them, their families and
communities, thereby minimizing disruptions to children, youth and their families.
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
Apr-07 Oct-07 Apr-08 Oct-08 Apr-09 Oct-09 Apr-10 Oct-10 Apr-11 Oct-11 Apr-12 Oct-12 Apr-13 Oct-13 Apr-14 Oct-14 Apr-15
Total
Aboriginal
Non-Aboriginal
47
When a child or youth needs to leave their parental home because they are at risk of abuse or
neglect or are temporarily unable to live with their parents, the ministry or delegated Aboriginal
agency can, if appropriate, arrange for an Out-of-Care placement with extended family or close
friends, which is an alternate care arrangement to foster care. This indicates how effective Out-
of-Care placements are at keeping children and youth from further involvement in the child
welfare system by examining the proportion of children and youth who come into Care after
leaving an Out-of-Care placement.
Children Admitted into Care with a Recent Out-of-Care Placement, March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Children and Youth Coming
into Care within 6 Months of
Exiting an Out-of-Care
Placement (Up to March 2015)
Children and Youth Exiting From Out-of-
Care Placements,
October 2013 to September
2014
Children and Youth Coming into Care within 6 Months of Exiting an Out-of-Care
Option (%)
All Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 247 1,348 18.3% 19.3% 17.6%
Kootenays 9 41 22.0% * 23.7% Okanagan 13 83 15.7% 12.1% 18.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 17 99 17.2% 27.3% 4.5% East Fraser 22 121 18.2% 14.6% 20.0% North Fraser 24 124 19.4% 24.6% 14.9% South Fraser 58 265 21.9% 20.0% 22.9% Vancouver/Richmond 15 83 18.1% 26.2% 9.8% Coast/North Shore 11 57 19.3% 21.1% 15.8% South Vancouver Island 16 86 18.6% 6.7% 21.1% North Vancouver Island 31 143 21.7% 25.7% 17.8% Northwest 11 95 11.6% 11.1% 13.0% North Central 17 138 12.3% 16.4% 7.7% Northeast 3 13 23.1% * *
1 SDA data suppressed where the CYIC exiting Care is less than 10.
48
Analysis:
Trend in Children Admitted into Care with a Recent Out-of-Care Placement, September 2012 to March 2015
The rate shows no change between the baseline month, September 2012, and March 2015,
although it has fluctuated within a five percentage point range, within this period.
Discharges from Out-of-Care have increased by 44% since September 2012, while the numbers
of in Care admissions after these discharges have increased by 40%.
Trend in Children Admitted into Care with a Recent Out-of-Care Placement, September 2012 to March 2015, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal
12%
13%
14%
15%
16%
17%
18%
19%
20%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
49
At 26% of the province’s increase in admissions into Care after Out-of-Care discharges (since the
September 2012 baseline), North Vancouver Island showed the largest increase in admissions into
Care.
Performance Indicator 4.16 Relative Use of Admissions into Care and Admissions to Out-of-Care Controlling for Protection Reports
Rationale: When appropriate, Out-of-Care options (OCO) are a best practice. The well-being of children
and youth is, overall, better when children and youth can continue to live with their extended
families. Sometimes children and youth can be placed in Out-of-Care options as a substitute for
admission into Care.
Out-of-Care includes the following agreements and court orders: Extended Family Program
Agreements; Interim Custody with Other under Director’s Supervision – s. 35(2)(d); Interim Custody
with Other under Director’s Supervision – s. 35(2)(d) - Consent; Temporary Custody with Other
under Director’s Supervision – s. 41(1)(b), 42.2(4)(c), 49(7)(b), 54.01(9)(b); Temporary Custody
with Other under Director’s Supervision – s. 41(1)(b), 42.2(4)(c), 49(7)(b), 54.01(9)(b) - Consent;
Extension to Temporary Custody with Other under Director’s Supervision – s. 44(3)(b); and
Extension to Temporary Custody with Other under Director’s Supervision – s. 44(3)(b) - Consent.
Relative Use of Admissions into Care and Admissions to Out-of-Care Controlling for Protection Reports, March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Admissions into Out-of-Care
Placements per 1,000 Closed
Protection Reports, October 2014 to March
2015
Admissions into In Care
Placements per 1,000 Closed
Protection Reports,
October 2014 to March 2015
Admissions into Out-of-Care Placements per 1,000 Admissions into In Care Placements, October
2014 to March 2015
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 61.0 119.8 508.6 652.6 414.2
Kootenays 88.8 145.9 608.7 500.0 674.4 Okanagan 63.4 146.9 431.3 492.3 389.5 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 81.8 167.8 487.6 693.2 327.4 East Fraser 86.1 125.2 687.9 779.7 622.0 North Fraser 50.3 61.5 818.2 800.0 828.6 South Fraser 57.1 112.7 506.8 672.1 443.0 Vancouver/Richmond 37.0 93.5 395.5 520.0 321.4 Coast/North Shore 26.7 66.7 400.0 476.2 352.9 South Vancouver Island 32.6 164.0 198.8 255.8 178.0 North Vancouver Island 61.9 202.2 305.9 448.3 212.1 Northwest 81.6 90.6 900.0 937.5 750.0 North Central 99.1 96.2 1,030.6 1,294.1 744.7 Northeast 48.8 140.9 346.2 461.5 230.8
The slightly upward, positive trend in this indicator continues and applies to both Aboriginal and
Non-Aboriginal children and youth. Since September 2014, this performance indicator increased
significantly from 361 in September 2014 to 509 in March 2015.
50
Trend in Admissions into Out-of-Care Placements per 1,000 Admissions into In Care Placements, September 2012 to March 2015
Trend in Admissions into Out-of-Care Placements per 1,000 Admissions into In Care Placements, by Aboriginal Identity, September 2012 to March 2015
Over that period, both admissions into Care and Out-of-Care options per 1,000 protection
reports (based on a rolling six month period) have increased. The positive change in this measure
is due to the fact that fewer children and youth are coming into the care of the Ministry compared
to alternative care options.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
51
For the province and all SDAs (except Kootenays and North Fraser), there was relatively greater
use of Out-of-Care options for Aboriginal children than for Non-Aboriginal children in March
2015.
The chart below shows the relationship between Out-of-Care admissions and in Care admissions
per 1,000 protection reports in March 2015. The chart is centered on the values for the province.
In March 2015, there were 61 Out-of-Care admissions per 1,000 closed protection reports
(vertical axis) and 120 in Care admissions per 1,000 closed protection reports (horizontal axis).
Relative Use of Admission into Care and Admission to Out-of-Care Controlling for Protection Report, October 2013 to March 2015
The chart is divided into four quadrants (defined by the province at the centre, e.g., horizontal
and vertical dividing lines pass through the provincial data point):
1. High use of Out-of-Care, low use of in Care (compared with the province) 2. Low use of Out-of-Care and in Care (compared with the province) 3. High use of Out-of-Care and in Care (compared with the province)
4. Low use of Out-of-Care and high use of in Care (compared with the province)
Over time it is anticipated that SDAs will shift to the left of the province baseline. This is
happening for the province overall, which, on the graph, the current provincial value is to the left
of the provincial baseline (September 2012).
Currently a protection report is least likely to become an admission into Care in North Fraser
(probability 6%), and most likely in North Vancouver Island (20%). North Central SDA (10%) is
the most likely to utilize admissions into OCO as a response to a protection report, while
Coast/North Shore
East Fraser
Vanc./Richmond
S. Fraser
N. FraserNortheast
Northwest
N Central
Kootenays
Okanagan
Thmpsn Car Shuswap
N. Van. Island
S. Van. Island
Province
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 50 100 150 200 250
Adm
issi
on
s in
to O
ut of
Care
per
1,0
00 C
lose
d Inci
dents
Admissions into Care per 1,000 Closed Incidents
3. High use of out of care, high use of in care
1. High use of out-of-care, low use of in care
2. Low use of out-of-care, low use of in-care
4. Low use of out-of-care, high use of in-care
Province Baseline
Greater probability of incident becoming admission into Care
52
Coast/North Shore SDA (3%) is the least likely to utilize an OCO admission as a response to a
protection report.
Children and Youth in Care
Performance Indicator 5.06 Recurrence of Maltreatment of Former Children and Youth in Care1
Rationale: One of the ministry’s core objectives is to protect children that have been victims of abuse or
neglect from further maltreatment. The maltreatment recurrence rate measures how often children
that had to leave their homes because of abuse or neglect fell victim to further suspected abuse
or neglect after reunification with their family. A lower maltreatment recurrence rate means that,
of the children that returned home, more did so safely.
Recurrence of Maltreatment, March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Children and Youth
Living Away From Home
Due to Abuse or Neglect
That Returned
Home between
April 2013 and March
2014
Children and Youth
That Returned
Home and Were the Subject of
an FDR within 12 Months (Up to March
2015)(%)
Children and Youth
That Returned
Home and Were the Subject of
an Investigation
within 12 Months (Up to March 2015)(%)
Children and Youth That Returned Home and were the Subject of Either a
FDR or an Investigation within 12 Months (Up to March 2015)(%)
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 1,687 10.7% 5.5% 15.0% 16.7% 13.7%
Kootenays 61 11.5% 6.6% 13.1% 13.3% 13.0% Okanagan 171 8.8% 3.5% 12.3% 15.0% 10.8% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 134 12.7% 10.4% 18.7% 20.8% 16.1% East Fraser 164 9.8% 5.5% 14.0% 19.7% 10.2% North Fraser 123 8.1% 4.1% 11.4% 12.8% 10.5% South Fraser 285 8.8% 4.6% 13.0% 11.9% 13.6% Vancouver/Richmond 156 9.6% 2.6% 10.3% 16.0% 4.0% Coast/North Shore 73 12.3% 2.7% 15.1% 14.8% 15.2% South Vancouver Island 108 9.3% 2.8% 12.0% 4.0% 14.5% North Vancouver Island 178 19.1% 8.4% 26.4% 28.6% 24.5% Northwest 90 6.7% 10.0% 16.7% 17.1% 15.0% North Central 111 9.9% 4.5% 12.6% 8.1% 18.4% Northeast 33 15.2% 12.1% 27.3% 35.7% 21.1%
Analysis: Overall, since September 2012 there is no discernible trend in the recurrence of maltreatment.
The increase in 2013 is related to more comprehensive identification of recurrence provided by
1 Children 16 years or older are excluded from the base data as they may not be available for the measure’s full cycle.
53
the newly implemented Integrated Case Management (ICM) system, the subsequent decline in
2014 represents the gradual removal of pre-ICM data from the indicator.
The range among SDAs is from 10% in Vancouver/Richmond SDA to 27% in the Northeast SDA.
North Vancouver Island and the Northeast have significantly higher rates of recurrence of
maltreatment than the other SDAs. The percentage also varied widely for Aboriginal and Non-
Aboriginal children and youth.
Trend in Recurrence of Maltreatment of Former Children and Youth in Care, September 2012 to March 2015
There is a change over the period and trend in the type of protection response to the recurrence
of maltreatment. In contrast with September 2012 – July 2013 the response since October 2013
is increasingly more likely to be FDR rather than investigation. The use of a Child Protection
investigation has halved over the period.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Sep-12 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Mar-15
Aboriginal CYIC Non-Aboriginal CYIC All CYIC
54
The Trend in the Proportion of Children and Youth That Returned Home and the Subject of a FDR and the Trend in the Proportion of Children and Youth That Returned Home and the Subject of an INV
Performance Indicator 5.01 Children and Youth in Care Who Exited to Permanency
Rationale: Permanent, stable relationships are a major determinant of whether children feel safe and secure
and therefore, of well-being overall. Permanence is achieved by leaving the care of the Director
of Child Welfare through family reunification, adoption or permanent transfer of custody under
the CFCSA.
Since it is possible for a CYIC to re-enter Care after achieving permanency, whether a former
CYIC has achieved permanency can only be measured over a span of time. This indicator is
calculated using CYIC that achieved permanency over the six month period ending March 2015.
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Children and Youth that Returned Home and the Subject of an INV within 12 Months (%)
Children and Youth that Returned Home and the Subject of an FDR within 12 Months (%)
55
Discharges from Care to Permanency, March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Children Who
Exited From Care between October
2014 and March
2015 for Reasons
Other Than Aging Out
Children Who Had Been in
Care for More Than
Two Months on September 30, 2014
Children Who Exited to Permanency (%) Median Time to
Permanency (Months)
Median Duration For CYIC That
Remained in Care
(Months) All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 1,096 7,465 14.7% 10.7% 19.1% 15 47
Kootenays 63 252 25.0% 15.6% 30.2% 12.0 38.0 Okanagan 99 618 16.0% 9.4% 20.3% 15.0 51.0 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 117 797 14.7% 12.6% 17.6% 15.0 40.0 East Fraser 105 760 13.8% 14.3% 13.3% 20.0 52.0 North Fraser 54 396 13.6% 9.5% 15.1% 16.5 39.0 South Fraser 113 915 12.3% 8.2% 16.4% 15.0 49.0 Vancouver/Richmond 73 748 9.8% 6.1% 16.5% 17.0 60.0 Coast/North Shore 58 294 19.7% 9.0% 36.2% 20.0 59.0 South Vancouver Island 95 847 11.2% 6.3% 14.5% 16.0 40.0 North Vancouver Island 175 943 18.6% 16.0% 22.0% 14.0 37.0 Northwest 65 272 23.9% 17.0% 51.9% 10.0 66.0 North Central 53 533 9.9% 6.1% 19.5% 17.5 50.0 Northeast 26 89 29.2% 20.9% 37.0% 8.0 28.0
Analysis: Over the six month period October 2014 to March 2015 1,096 CYIC (15% of all CYIC) found
permanency1. This is a substantial increase over the same six month period one year earlier (839
CYIC, 11% of the total). This continues an upward trend evident since September 2012.
1 For fiscal year 2014/2015 as a whole 2,813 CYIC found permanency, 89% of which were reunifications with family.
56
Trend in Discharges from Care to Permanency, September 2012 to March 2015
Trend in Discharges from Care to Permanency, by Aboriginal Identity, September 2012 to March 2015
A positive implication of higher permanency rates is fewer CYIC becoming continuing wards of the
province; children under Continuing Custody Orders (CCOs). CCOs, as a proportion of all CYIC,
have been declining since 2004. Since September 2012, the per cent of CYIC who have been in
Care for more than 2 months and under a CCO has declined by six percentage points from 61%
to 55% in March 2015.
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
13%
14%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
13%
14%
15%
16%
17%
18%
19%
20%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal
57
Per Cent of CYIC Who Have Been in Care for More Than Two Months under a CCO
Per Cent of CYIC Who Have been in Care for More Than Two Months under a CCO, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal, September 2012 to March 2015
As the CYIC caseload is increasingly made up of non-CCO CYIC, and since non-CCO CYIC are
more likely to achieve permanency, the percentage of CYIC achieving permanency is increasing.
Across the province, except in East Fraser SDA, discharges to permanency were lower for
Aboriginal children and youth compared to Non-Aboriginal children and youth. Aboriginal
children and youth are less likely to be discharged from Care to permanency in six months since a
higher proportion of them were under a CCO (66%) compared to Non-Aboriginal children and
youth (42%) in September 2014.
Over time most children admitted into Care do find permanency. By way of illustration, the
following graph looks at the cohort of admissions into Care in 2009 and the percentage of them
that found permanency over time. Of this cohort, 56% had found permanency within two years
and 65% within five years. For the Aboriginal CYIC within this cohort, the proportions are similar
but lower than for their Non-Aboriginal counterparts. Reasons for this include Aboriginal CYIC
slightly more likely to be readmitted into Care (e.g., the permanency arrangement breakdown)
54%
55%
56%
57%
58%
59%
60%
61%
62%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
58
and Aboriginal CCOs are only half as likely to be adopted (more likely to be siblings and need
placing together and the need to ensure cultural appropriateness).
Percentage of CYIC Admitted in 2009 That Attained Permanency Over Time
Performance Indicator 5.11 Placement Stability
Rationale: Placement stability is essential for children and youth to develop secure attachment to a caregiver
(a fundamental determinant of their well-being) and sense of belonging. Some placement
changes are necessary and can be beneficial in terms of ensuring the right fit for the child or
youth, but generally avoiding or minimizing moves while in Care is an important goal. Evidence
shows that attachment to a caregiver for children under six can occur within as little as two to
three months, and takes only slightly longer for older children and youth. Additionally, most moves
occur within the first year of care.
The following set of six tables present the count and percentage of CYIC who move zero times,
one time, and two or more times within the previous six months and within their current episode of
care.
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
June 2010 June 2011 June 2012 June 2013 June 2014
All CYIC
Aboriginal CYIC only
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Only
59
CYIC with Zero Placement Changes during the Previous Six Months, Children and Youth in Care CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) by Province and Service Delivery Area, Period Ending March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Did Not Move in the Previous Six Months (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 77.4% 76.4% 78.3%
Kootenays 72 86.1% 100.0% 75.6% Okanagan 146 84.9% 80.4% 87.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 80.4% 78.6% 82.5% East Fraser 144 76.4% 79.1% 74.0% North Fraser 132 68.2% 73.1% 65.0% South Fraser 270 75.2% 68.4% 78.9% Vancouver/Richmond 142 76.1% 72.9% 78.3% Coast/North Shore 52 69.2% 80.0% 59.3% South Vancouver Island 209 71.3% 70.2% 72.0% North Vancouver Island 280 84.6% 83.2% 86.1% Northwest 51 72.5% 68.2% 100.0% North Central 101 78.2% 75.0% 84.8% Northeast 44 65.9% 59.1% 72.7%
CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) with Zero Placement Changes in Current Episode of Care
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Did Not Move (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 68.5% 66.7% 70.1%
Kootenays 72 81.9% 96.8% 70.7% Okanagan 146 76.0% 76.1% 76.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 70.4% 65.6% 76.2% East Fraser 144 73.6% 77.6% 70.1% North Fraser 132 59.8% 59.6% 60.0% South Fraser 270 65.6% 57.9% 69.7% Vancouver/Richmond 142 71.1% 69.5% 72.3% Coast/North Shore 52 59.6% 64.0% 55.6% South Vancouver Island 209 64.1% 65.5% 63.2% North Vancouver Island 280 69.3% 65.0% 73.7% Northwest 51 62.7% 59.1% 85.7% North Central 101 69.3% 67.6% 72.7% Northeast 44 61.4% 59.1% 63.6%
60
CYIC with One Placement Change during the Previous Six Months
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Moved Once in the Previous Six Months (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 17.8% 18.8% 16.9%
Kootenays 72 9.7% 0.0% 17.1% Okanagan 146 11.6% 13.0% 11.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 13.2% 13.6% 12.7% East Fraser 144 19.4% 17.9% 20.8% North Fraser 132 27.3% 23.1% 30.0% South Fraser 270 18.1% 21.1% 16.6% Vancouver/Richmond 142 19.7% 25.4% 15.7% Coast/North Shore 52 25.0% 20.0% 29.6% South Vancouver Island 209 25.4% 29.8% 22.4% North Vancouver Island 280 12.5% 15.4% 9.5% Northwest 51 9.8% 11.4% 0.0% North Central 101 19.8% 23.5% 12.1% Northeast 44 31.8% 36.4% 27.3%
CYIC with One Placement Changes in Current Episode of Care
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Moved Once (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 22.5% 23.6% 21.5%
Kootenays 72 11.1% 3.2% 17.1% Okanagan 146 17.8% 17.4% 18.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 16.4% 17.5% 15.1% East Fraser 144 20.8% 17.9% 23.4% North Fraser 132 31.1% 30.8% 31.3% South Fraser 270 25.2% 30.5% 22.3% Vancouver/Richmond 142 23.2% 25.4% 21.7% Coast/North Shore 52 34.6% 36.0% 33.3% South Vancouver Island 209 26.3% 28.6% 24.8% North Vancouver Island 280 23.9% 29.4% 18.2% Northwest 51 11.8% 11.4% 14.3% North Central 101 22.8% 26.5% 15.2% Northeast 44 25.0% 18.2% 31.8%
61
CYIC with Two or More Placement Change during the Previous Six Months
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Moved Two or More Times in the Previous Six Months (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 4.8% 4.8% 4.7%
Kootenays 72 4.2% 0.0% 7.3% Okanagan 146 3.4% 6.5% 2.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 6.4% 7.8% 4.8% East Fraser 144 4.2% 3.0% 5.2% North Fraser 132 4.5% 3.8% 5.0% South Fraser 270 6.7% 10.5% 4.6% Vancouver/Richmond 142 4.2% 1.7% 6.0% Coast/North Shore 52 5.8% 0.0% 11.1% South Vancouver Island 209 3.3% 0.0% 5.6% North Vancouver Island 280 2.9% 1.4% 4.4% Northwest 51 17.6% 20.5% 0.0% North Central 101 2.0% 1.5% 3.0% Northeast 44 2.3% 4.5% 0.0%
CYIC with Two or More Placement Change during the Current Episodes of Care
Service Delivery Area
CYIC in 1 to 12 Months of Their
Current Episode of Care in March 2015
CYIC That Moved Two or More Times (%)
All Aboriginal Non -
Aboriginal
BC 1,923 9.0% 9.7% 8.4%
Kootenays 72 6.9% 0.0% 12.2% Okanagan 146 6.2% 6.5% 6.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 280 13.2% 16.9% 8.7% East Fraser 144 5.6% 4.5% 6.5% North Fraser 132 9.1% 9.6% 8.8% South Fraser 270 9.3% 11.6% 8.0% Vancouver/Richmond 142 5.6% 5.1% 6.0% Coast/North Shore 52 5.8% 0.0% 11.1% South Vancouver Island 209 9.6% 6.0% 12.0% North Vancouver Island 280 6.8% 5.6% 8.0% Northwest 51 25.5% 29.5% 0.0% North Central 101 7.9% 5.9% 12.1% Northeast 44 13.6% 22.7% 4.5%
62
Analysis:
Trend in CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) with Zero Placement Changes during the Previous Six Months, September 2012 to March 2015
Trend in CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) with Zero Placement Changes in Current Episode of Care, September 2012 to March 2015
The slight upward trend for both of these stability indicators continues.
Older children are more likely to experience a placement change. In fact, the chances of having a
placement change for both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal children increases with age.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
63
Aboriginal children are more likely to have a placement change than Non-Aboriginal children
even after accounting for age differences. This is clear from the higher proportion of Aboriginal
children that move and the fact that, on the whole, Aboriginal CYIC are younger (median age for
Aboriginal children was seven compared to eight for Non-Aboriginal children).
Age Distribution of CYIC between September 2012 and March 2015 by Aboriginal and Non-
Aboriginal
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal
64
Trend in CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) with No Placement Changes during the Previous Six Months, by Aboriginal identity, September 2012 to March 2015
Trend in CYIC (1 to 12 Months Duration) with No Placement Changes in Current Episode of Care, by Aboriginal identity, September 2012 to March 2015
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
65
Performance Indicator 5.61 Aboriginal Children and Youth Cared for By Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers
Rationale: Aboriginal children and youth, who have had to leave their parental home, need cultural safety
through an Aboriginal service system that strongly connects them to their culture and traditions.
This connection is important to identity and belonging and consequently overall well-being.
The Aboriginal Children and Youth Cared for By Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers
performance indicator is calculated as the count of distinct Aboriginal children and youth younger
than 17 years of age who were placed with a Delegated Aboriginal Agency (DAA), or were
placed in an MCFD office and had an Aboriginal caregiver (either a foster parent or an
extended family caregiver).
Per Cent of Aboriginal CYIC between October 2014 and March 2015 Who Receive Services Delivered by Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers
Service Delivery Area
Aboriginal Children Cared for Through
Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers, October 2014 to
March 2015
Aboriginal Children Having to Leave Their Parental Home,
October 2014 to March 2015
Aboriginal Children Cared for Through
Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers, October 2014 to March 2015 (%)
BC 2,659 4,523 58.8%
Kootenays 45 82 54.9% Okanagan 81 284 28.5% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 324 514 63.0% East Fraser 376 421 89.3% North Fraser 45 166 27.1% South Fraser 256 535 47.9% Vancouver/Richmond 397 474 83.8% Coast/North Shore 117 198 59.1% South Vancouver Island 227 402 56.5% North Vancouver Island 341 630 54.1% Northwest 137 262 52.3% North Central 291 469 62.0% Northeast 22 85 25.9%
66
Analysis:
Trend in Aboriginal CYIC Who Receive Services Delivered by Aboriginal Communities and Service Providers, September 2012 to March 2015
As of March 2015, this performance indicator is about the same as in September 2012 due to an
increase in the number of identified Aboriginal children and youth in Care.
The following chart shows how the 4,523 Aboriginal children and youth who had to leave their
parental home between October 2014 and March 2015 were cared for by Aboriginal
communities and service providers.
Aboriginal CYIC by Type of Aboriginal Service Provider, October 2014 to March 2015
The majority (41%) of Aboriginal children and youth who were supported by the Aboriginal
community received services through a DAA.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
41%
9% 9%
41%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Placed with DAA Placed with MCFD, withAboriginal Foster parents
Placed with MCFD , with Out-of-Care Caregiver
Placed with MCFD, with non-Aboriginal Caregiver
67
The number of children and youth placed with a DAA over time is the main driver behind
improvements in performance for this measure. At the SDA level, performance ranges from a few
SDAs in the 20 percentile (Okanagan, North Fraser and Northeast), to a high of 89% in the East
Fraser. This difference largely results from whether a DAA is located within the SDA. The Fraser
Valley Aboriginal Children and Family Services agency, one of the largest DAAs in the province,
is located in East Fraser while there is no DAA located in the Northeast SDA.
Performance Indicator 5.36 Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming Income Assistance (IA): Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out
Rationale: The ministry assists and supports the transition to adulthood for any child in Care who turns 19
years old. Among desired transitions is employment, further education or training. Moving to
Income Assistance when “Expected to Work” is not a desired outcome (this differs to receiving
entitled disability benefits ‘PWD’). This is an indicator of how effectively the ministry prepares
youth to transition to adulthood.
Of All Children in Care Who Turned 19 Years Old between April and September 2014, the Proportion That Went on to Claim ‘Income Assistance: Expected to Work’ within Six Months (Up to March 2015)
Service Delivery Area
CYIC That Aged Out between
April 2014 and September 20141
Accessing 'Income Assistance:
Expected to Work' within Six Months
(Up to March 2015)’c Aboriginal1
Non-Aboriginal1
BC 397 14.9% 18.7% 11.4%
Kootenays 13 23.1% * * Okanagan 27 18.5% 16.7% 20.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 42 14.3% 23.8% 4.8% East Fraser 40 7.5% 8.3% 6.3% North Fraser 22 22.7% * 23.5% South Fraser 57 12.3% 21.7% 5.9% Vancouver/Richmond 56 16.1% 16.0% 16.1% Coast/North Shore 18 0.0% * 0.0% South Vancouver Island 43 16.3% 31.3% 7.4% North Vancouver Island 41 19.5% 25.0% 14.3% Northwest 10 20.0% * * North Central 19 15.8% 25.0% * Northeast * * * *
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of youth aging out of Youth Agreements is less than 10
68
Analysis:
Trend in Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, September 2012 to March 2015
The trend appears to be declining but is not statistically significant and so we determine that
there has been no change in performance over this time. Over the 30 months, the range of this
rate is 13% to 19%; the rate at March 2015 of 15%. Across Service Delivery Areas the rates
range from 0% to 23%.
The trends by Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal are provided below. As per the overall rate,
neither group shows a statistically significant change since September 2012.
10%
13%
15%
18%
20%
Sep-12 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Mar-15
69
Trend in Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal, September 2012 to March 2015
Of All Children in Care Who Turned 19 Years Old between April and September 2014, the Proportion That Went on to Claim Income Assistance or Persons with Disabilities within Six Months (Up to March 2015)
CYIC That Aged Out between April 2014 and September
2014
BC 397 100.0%
IA: Expected to Work (ETW) 59 14.9% IA: Expected to Work - Medical Condition 9 2.3% IA: Persistent Multiple Barriers (PPMB) 0 0.0% IA: Temporarily Excused from Work 28 7.1% Persons with Disabilities (PWD) 139 35.0%
Did not Access IA or PWD 208 52.4%
While the percentage of youth that age out and access IA: Expected to Work is an indication of
youth that have not effectively transitioned to adulthood, the former youth in Care may also
access other income supports from the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation’s BC
Employment and Assistance programs. Of the 48% youth that accessed any IA or PWD supports
within six months of aging out (they may access more than one type of support in the six months
from aging out) almost 74% of the youth accessed PWD assistance. PWD assistance is an income
and asset tested income support program for adults with severe mental or physical impairment
that is likely to continue for two or more years, which significantly restricts daily living activities
continuously or periodically for extended periods resulting in the need for assistance/supervision.
5%
8%
10%
13%
15%
18%
20%
23%
25%
Sep-12 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aborignal
70
Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming IA or PWD within Six Months, by Type, March 2008 to March 2015
While the rate of youth accessing IA: Expected to Work within six months of aging out has
remained fairly constant, the rate of youth accessing PWD assistance has increased by 10% over
the same time frame.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Mar-08 Mar-09 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15
ETW Temporarily Excused from Work PWD PPMB ETW - Medical Condition
71
Youth Discharged from Care and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, within 7 to 12 Months, and within 19 to 24 Months
The above graph shows the rates of accessing IA: Expected to Work within six months, 7 to12
months, and 19 to 24 months of aging out. The rates for a specific month display the rates on IA:
Expected to Work at the various time periods for the same group of children in Care age outs.
For example, the rates at March 2011 show for youth that aged Out-of-Care between April and
September 2010 the rate of youth that accessed IA: Expected to Work within the next six months
(up to March 2011); the rate the same group of April to September 2010 age outs accessed IA:
Expected to Work within 7 to 12 months after aging out (up to September 2011); and the rate
the same group of April to September 2010 age outs accessed IA: Expected to Work within 19
to 24 months after aging out (up to September 2012).
While the per cent of youth aging out from Care and accessing IA: Expected to Work within six
months has hovered around 17% in recent years, the rate of youth accessing IA: Expected to
Work from 7 to12 months after aging out falls by approximately six percentage points and the
rate two years later falls by another two percentage points, an indication that the youth are
finding other sources of income.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13
On IA: ETW within 6 Months On IA: ETW within 7-12 Months On IA: ETW within 19-24 Months
72
Youth Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, but not within 7 to 12 Months
Youth Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, but not within 19 to 24 Months
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13 Mar-14 Sep-14
No IA/PWD Temporarily Excused From Work PWD PPMB ETW: Medical Condition
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13
No IA/PWD Temporarily Excused From Work PWD PPMB ETW: Medical Condition
73
Performance Indicator 5.66 Cost per Child and Youth in Care Excluding CYIC with Special Needs
Rationale: The cost per case gives the average cost for CYIC for each year spent by a child in a residential
placement. Cost pressures often stem from a shortage of skilled foster parents, which translates
into a higher usage of more expensive contracted resources. Other factors that can impact costs
per case include the use of exceptional payments to service providers and the level of care
required by the current caseload composition.
Cost per Child and Youth in Care Excluding CYIC with Special Needs, 12 Month Period Ending March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area Total Number of Placement Days
Average Annual Cost per Placement
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 1,433,688 33,933 29,961 37,131
Kootenays 41,426 35,704 39,134 34,346 Okanagan 140,026 27,706 27,819 27,598 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 142,515 31,713 30,854 32,443 East Fraser 97,134 40,258 25,477 42,311 North Fraser 106,576 39,263 40,825 38,277 South Fraser 208,668 38,984 30,722 45,482 Vancouver/Richmond 96,125 40,158 39,181 40,547 Coast/North Shore 60,743 27,525 23,006 35,854 South Vancouver Island 189,365 32,976 26,618 36,588 North Vancouver Island 184,899 24,602 22,527 27,383 Northwest 49,122 23,702 24,000 21,617 North Central 93,514 42,228 38,678 49,034 Northeast 23,575 42,670 46,295 33,735
74
Analysis:
Trend in Cost per Child and Youth in Care Excluding CYIC with Special Needs, September 2012 to March 2015
The average cost per child increased by 8% since the baseline period. At the same time, there
was a drop of 77,000 bed days (the equivalent of 211 full-time CYIC). Some of this drop in bed
days can be expected as Aboriginal CYIC moved to the care of Delegated Aboriginal Agencies,
which are excluded from this measure.
A total of 6,269 distinct children and youth were cared for through paid MCFD residential
resources over the 12 month period ending March 31, 2015. These CYIC stayed in Care an
average of 229 days. During the baseline period, 6,410 came into the care of the ministry, and
remained in Care for an average of 235 days.
At 45%, the proportion of bed days used to provide residential care for Aboriginal children
remained unchanged from the baseline period. Meanwhile, Aboriginal children continued to cost
less to care for than their Non-Aboriginal counterparts, but the cost of caring for them continued
to increase faster than for Non-Aboriginal children (10% vs. 7%), thus slowly narrowing the gap.
$30,600
$30,800
$31,000
$31,200
$31,400
$31,600
$31,800
$32,000
$32,200
$32,400
$32,600
$32,800
$33,000
$33,200
$33,400
$33,600
$33,800
$34,000
$34,200
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
75
Trend in Average Residential Cost per Child and Youth in Care Excluding CYIC with Special Needs, by Child’s Aboriginal Status
The age distribution of the CYIC was not a driver of the cost increase: the proportion of bed
days used this period to care for children under the age of 12 rose by four percentage points,
while the more expensive youth aged 12 and older saw their bed day usage go down by the
same percentage. And while all age groups saw increases in their residential costs this period, the
older children saw their costs increase three times more than their younger counterparts.
The type of service provider used to care for the CYIC has a direct impact on the overall costs.
Notably, the likelihood of CYIC to be cared for by a contracted, staffed resource has increased
by 13% since the baseline period. These resources are typically used to care for higher needs
children and youth, and can cost more than five times the cost of foster homes. Most of the
residential cost increase since the baseline came from the contracted resources while the cost of
foster homes remained relatively unchanged. Differences in cost per case for Aboriginal and non-
Aboriginal CYIC reflects slight differences in the proportions of placement type (foster care v
contracted resources) used to provide the appropriate care required.
The North Central and Northeast SDAs had the highest cost per case, due to a higher use of
contracted staffed resources, followed by the Greater Vancouver area.
Performance Indicator 5.71 Children and Youth in Care Funded Bed Utilization Rate
Rationale: In order to ensure sufficient quantities of appropriate homes for children and youth that come into
Care the ministry needs to fund some empty beds. Foster parents with specialized skills are
provided with a monthly fixed payment regardless of whether a child is living in the home.
This is an indicator of the ministry’s ability to manage its contracts with foster care providers in
order to optimize resources. Generally, a higher utilization rate (with sufficient capacity) is
associated with more efficient use of foster home capacity.
$25,000
$27,000
$29,000
$31,000
$33,000
$35,000
$37,000
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
Aboriginal
Non-Aboriginal
76
Funded Bed Utilization Rate, 12 Month Period Ending March 2015
Service Delivery Area1 Funded Bed Days Funded Bed Day Utilization
Rate
BC 1,846,211 91.1%
Kootenay 56,479 85.6% Okanagan 191,339 86.1% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 166,922 92.0% East Fraser 131,319 91.2% North Fraser 134,715 93.1% South Fraser 273,134 94.3% Vancouver/Richmond 136,241 87.6% Coast/North Shore 75,010 93.7% South Vancouver Island 253,587 89.8% North Vancouver Island 226,781 93.2% Northwest 59,694 93.7% North Central 110,376 90.5% Northeast 30,614 89.1%
Analysis:
Trend in Funded Bed Utilization Rate, September 2012 to March 2015
Since the baseline period of September 2012, there has been little change in the performance of
this indicator, with a decline of less than 0.1 percentage points. During the same period the
number of bed days available and the number of bed days used have decreased slightly.
Use of level 2 and level 3 foster homes is increasing, while contracted resources show little signs
of changing. Over time this will have a positive impact on the performance of the indicator as the
combined number of level 2 and level 3 available and used bed days is higher than the number
of available and used bed days for contracted resources.
1 Table excludes Lower Mainland facilities.
90.5%
90.7%
90.9%
91.1%
91.3%
91.5%
91.7%
91.9%
92.1%
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
77
Per Cent of Capacity and Service Providers by Utilization Levels
64% of service providers were fully utilized at 100%, and account for 49% of the days utilized.
10% of the service providers have 50% or less utilization and account for 10% of the days
utilized.
The makeup of foster homes in an SDA impacts the utilization rate. Level 2 foster homes have a
wider range of utilization rates between the SDA’s than level 3 or contracted resources. All SDAs
have level 3 home utilization rates over 81%, and contracted resource utilization rates by SDA
ranging between 74% and 100% utilization.
Almost half of the SDAs have decreases in their utilization rates since the base period. Over the
past 12 months, the number of SDAs with declining utilization rates has gone up slightly.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
0% >0%-25% >25%-50% >50% to 75% >75 to <100% 100%
Per Cent of Service Providers
Per Cent of Days
78
Educational Performance
Performance Indicator 5.21 Age-Appropriate Grade of Children and Youth in Care (CYIC)
Rationale: MCFD and the Ministry of Education work together towards keeping CYIC in school and their
learning progress at school. That CYIC are learning and progressing in school is an important
outcome for the present and future well-being of CYIC. But it is also symptomatic of other aspects
of the well-being and is a useful indicator to the ministry in its planning and service provision for
each CYIC.
Age-Appropriate Grade by SDA, September 30, 2014
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between October
2013 and September
2014
Current or Former CYIC in School
September 2014
Proportion of CYIC in School on
September 30, 2014
(%)
Proportion in Their Age-Appropriate Grade (%)
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 8,561 6,709 78.4% 85.0% 85.9% 84.2%
Kootenays 318 219 68.9% 85.4% 87.4% 84.1% Okanagan 732 540 73.8% 84.3% 83.3% 84.8% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 912 686 75.2% 85.3% 84.6% 86.0% East Fraser 821 654 79.7% 81.7% 82.0% 81.3% North Fraser 514 399 77.6% 84.0% 85.0% 83.6% South Fraser 1,071 852 79.6% 88.4% 89.1% 87.7% Vancouver/Richmond 846 647 76.5% 80.5% 86.1% 71.2% Coast/North Shore 337 268 79.5% 87.7% 89.5% 85.2% South Vancouver Island 936 765 81.7% 83.9% 83.2% 84.4% North Vancouver Island 1,034 825 79.8% 87.0% 87.2% 86.8% Northwest 310 266 85.8% 89.1% 87.6% 95.9% North Central 590 485 82.2% 87.0% 86.8% 87.5% Northeast 139 102 73.4% 78.4% 81.6% 75.5%
79
Age-Appropriate Grade of CYIC by School Year
Female CYIC are in their age-appropriate grade at higher proportions than their male counterparts.
Analysis:
The 2.1 percentage point increase since September 2012 is a significant improvement. This
improvement applies to both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal CYIC. In fact, the trend has been
upward since 2000 and has strengthened slightly since 2010.
Aboriginal CYIC are in Their Age-Appropriate Grade at Higher Proportions than Non-Aboriginal CYIC
Typically children are much more likely to repeat a grade from grade 9 onwards so those aged
14 to 17 are far less likely to be in age-appropriate grade. Since 2000, this performance
indicator has improved across all age groups and for both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal CYIC.
Especially positive is that the greatest improvement is in the most challenging 14 to 17 age
groups for both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal CYIC.
82.9% 83.4% 85.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Sept-12 Sept-13 Sept-14
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
80
CYIC aged 14 to 17 years old improved the most from 57% in 2000 compared to 80% in 2014.
All other age groups were in their age-appropriate grade 90 to 96% of the time, between 2000
and 2014.
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Aged 5 to 13 Aboriginal CYIC Aged 5 to 13
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Aged 14 to 17 Aboriginal CYIC Aged 14 to 17
Since 2000, Aboriginal CYIC has a higher proportion of students at the age-appropriate grade;
86% in the 2014 school year vs. 84% for their Non-Aboriginal counterpart. However, the
performance gap has been shrinking as the proportions of male and female Non-Aboriginal CYIC
in their appropriate grade have improved by 10 percentage points vs. six percentage points for
their Aboriginal counterparts.
Overall, female CYIC students are more likely to be attending school in their age-appropriate
grade than male CYIC students. However, since 2010 there has been a rapid reduction in the gap
between performance of the male and female age-appropriate performance indicator for
Aboriginal CYIC.
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
81
Performance Indicator 5.16 Grade Progression of Children and Youth in Care
Rationale: Although some CYIC are not in an age-appropriate grade they are progressing in their learning
and move up to the next grade level the following September. Grade progression is an indicator
of learning and educational progress.
Grade Progression for CYIC by SDA, 2013/2014
Service Delivery Area
Children and Youth in Care on September 30, 2013 and September
30, 2014 Inclusive and In School
Children and Youth in Care on September 30, 2014 That Showed
Grade Progression (%)
All Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 4,724 89.8% 91.7% 87.4%
Kootenays 118 86.4% 92.9% 84.4% Okanagan 378 91.8% 94.6% 89.6% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 340 90.0% 94.7% 87.1% East Fraser 258 86.8% 90.9% 85.7% North Fraser 254 86.6% 83.1% 88.1% South Fraser 460 93.0% 95.5% 91.5% Vancouver/Richmond 225 79.6% 88.7% 76.1% Coast/North Shore 144 89.6% 96.2% 81.5% South Vancouver Island 447 87.9% 88.6% 87.7% North Vancouver Island 407 91.4% 91.8% 91.1% Northwest 129 92.2% 91.2% 100.0% North Central 228 90.8% 90.3% 91.5% Northeast 55 83.6% 87.1% 79.2%
Grade Progression of CYIC by School Year
Between 2000 and 2014, a greater proportion of Aboriginal CYIC transitioned to a higher
grade than Non-Aboriginal CYIC every year.
88.5% 88.7% 89.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Sept-12 Sept-13 Sept-14
82
Analysis:
Vancouver/Richmond lags the province due to Non-Aboriginal CYIC not progressing while South
Fraser leads the province due to high progression in both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal CYIC.
Trend in Grade Progression of CYIC Over Time, Non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal
Since 2000, CYIC increasingly progressed to a higher grade (83% in 2000 compared to 89% in
2014). This performance is due to the consistent improvement in grade progression across
Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal CYIC and across all age groups (sees charts below).
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Aged 5 to 13 Aboriginal CYIC Aged 5 to 13
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Aged 14 to 17 Aboriginal CYIC Aged 14 to 17
80%
82%
84%
86%
88%
90%
92%
94%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Non-Aboriginal CYIC Aboriginal CYIC All CYIC
67%
72%
77%
82%
87%
92%
97%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 201467%
72%
77%
82%
87%
92%
97%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
67%
72%
77%
82%
87%
92%
97%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 201467%
72%
77%
82%
87%
92%
97%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
83
Performance Indicator 5.26 Children and Youth in Care Who Finish School with a High School Credential
Rationale: There is strong evidence that completing high school is conducive to general well-being throughout
life. Furthermore, it is a good barometer of current general well-being for that particular cohort.
MCFD works to maximize the educational attainment of CYIC.
Children and Youth in Care Who Finish School with a High School Credential, 2013/2014
Service Delivery Area
CYIC Who Turned 19
during Fiscal Year
2013/2013
CYIC Who Turned 19 Matched to BC School Records
Per Cent CYIC Who Turned 19 with a High School Credential (%)
All Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 694 688 48.1% 46.8% 49.1%
Kootenays 27 27 40.7% 53.8% 28.6% Okanagan 75 75 65.3% 75.0% 58.1% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 65 64 60.0% 50.0% 69.7% East Fraser 71 71 56.3% 58.8% 54.1% North Fraser 52 51 48.1% 42.9% 50.0% South Fraser 92 92 53.3% 30.0% 64.5% Vancouver/Richmond 78 75 30.8% 35.5% 27.7% Coast/North Shore 19 18 42.1% * 53.3% South Vancouver Island 70 70 37.1% 37.0% 37.2% North Vancouver Island 62 62 50.0% 48.5% 51.7% Northwest 24 24 45.8% 41.2% * North Central 45 45 40.0% 44.4% 33.3% Northeast 14 14 21.4% * *
Analysis: BC offers students several options for students to show that they completed their K to 12
education. This performance measure combines two certificates (Certificate of Graduation –
Dogwood Diploma and Adult Graduation Diploma Program) and one alternative credential
(School Completion certificate).
For 2013/2014, 27% of CYIC turned 19 with a Dogwood Diploma, 16% with a Completion
Certificate, and 5% with an Adult Graduation Diploma2.
Over the past 14 years between fiscal year 2000/2001 and 2013/2014 steadily more CYIC
and CCO turned 19 with a high school credential. In 2000/2001 28% of CYIC turned 19 with a
high school credential whereas the proportion in 2013/2014 was 48%.
This trend in indicator is largely due to the introduction of the Completion Certificate. The Ministry
of Education introduced Completion Certificates for students who successfully completed their
education goals outlined in their Individualized Education Plan. The first CYIC turned 19 with a
completion certificate in 2005/2006 (2.1%). In 2013/2014, 110 (16%) CYIC turned 19 with a
Completion Certificate.
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC turning 19 is less than 10. 2 Data extracted directly from Ministry of Education webpage http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/reporting/province.php
84
The proportion of CYIC turning 19 with a Dogwood Diploma increased from 22% in 2000/2001
to 27% in 2013/2014. Female CYIC turn 19 with a Dogwood Diploma at higher proportions than
male CYIC regardless of Aboriginal identity. All groupings of male/female and Aboriginal/Non-
Aboriginal CYIC turned 19 with a Dogwood Diploma at a higher proportion in 2013/2014 than
2000/2001. The proportion of male Aboriginal CYIC showed the largest increase since
2000/2001 (11% to 24%).
Young people that were formerly in Care or had a youth agreement are eligible for financial
assistance with education expenses. The Youth Education Assistance Fund provides bursaries for
former youth in permanent care between 19 and 23 years of age who are attending university,
college, a university/college, an institute, or designated private school. Support is also available
through the Agreement with a Young Adult program which may provide assistance for living
expenses as well as tuition costs while participating in educational, vocational or rehabilitation
programs.
Youth Education Assistance Fund, Fiscal Year 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area1
Young Adults Who Received a YEAF
Bursary from April 2014 to March
20152
Expenditures on YEAF
Bursary from April 2014 to March 2015
Per Cent of Young Adult Recipients of a YEAF
Bursary (%)
Aboriginal2,3 Non-
Aboriginal2
BC4 253 $1,386,671 34% 66%
Kootenays * * * * Okanagan 18 99,000 39% 61% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap
26 143,000 50% 50%
East Fraser 11 60,500 55% 45% North Fraser 20 110,000 35% 65% South Fraser 46 248,171 31% 69% Vancouver/Richmond 48 264,000 21% 79% Coast/North Shore * * * * South Vancouver Island 35 192,500 14% 86% North Vancouver Island 13 71,500 54% 46% Northwest * * * * North Central 10 55,000 56% 44% Northeast * * * *
1 The mapping of the Service Delivery Area is based on the office a YEAF recipient aged out 2 SDA data suppressed where the number of Young Adults who receive YEAF is less than 10.
3 18 YEAF recipients were not linked to any Aboriginal information 4 The Provincial total includes 16 cases that were not linked to any SDA
85
Agreements with Young Adults, Fiscal Year 2014/2015
Service Delivery Area
Young Adults Receiving
AYA Support during Fiscal
Year 2014/20151
AYA Expenditures during Fiscal
Year 2014/2015
Per Cent of Young Adults Receiving AYA
Support (%)2
Aboriginal Non-
Aboriginal
BC 582 $3,200,710 29% 71%
Kootenays 16 70,496 50% 50% Okanagan 44 188,686 26% 74% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 40 219,095 43% 58% North Fraser 51 252,119 35% 65% Fraser (East and South)3 116 741,826 25% 75% Vancouver (Vancouver/Richmond and Coast/North Shore)3 131 627,612 20% 80% Vancouver Island (North and South)3 112 643,950 21% 79% Northwest 36 202,233 74% 26% North Central 36 216,296 31% 69% Northeast 5 38,399 60% 40%
Performance Indicator 5.31 Foundation Skills Assessment (FSA) for Reading, Writing and Numeracy, Grade Four and Grade Seven
Rationale:
Gauging the learning of CYIC provides MCFD with insight into their educational progress as well
as some of their broader needs. FSA scores (even as early as Grade Four) have a high predictive
power of high school completion. This is the proportion of CYIC from September to February of
their grade four year and their grade seven year who meet or exceed expectations for reading,
writing and numeracy.
The following set of six tables presents the count and percentage of CYIC meeting or exceeding
expectations in the areas of reading, writing, and numeracy in grades four and seven.
1 The AYA count across SDAs exceeds BC count as some AYA payments overlap 2 The AYA Aboriginal information is estimated based on linking case files to expenditure data 3 A majority (or all) AYA transactions for both SDA's are processed in the same location
86
Grade Four Numeracy: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations by SDA
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between Sept 2013 and February 2014 in Grade 41
Numeracy: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 286 30.8% 30.6% 31.0%
Kootenays * * * * Okanagan 17 41.2% 41.7% * Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 26 30.8% 20.0% 45.5% East Fraser 34 26.5% 31.8% 16.7% North Fraser * * * * South Fraser 37 35.1% 39.1% 28.6% Vancouver/Richmond 40 30.0% 25.8% * Coast/North Shore 10 30.0% 28.6% 33.3% South Vancouver Island 24 33.3% 45.5% 23.1% North Vancouver Island 38 36.8% 30.4% 46.7% Northwest 11 9.1% 10.0% * North Central 28 21.4% 24.0% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Four Numeracy Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10.
39%
32%
36%
30%
35%33%
31%
43%
35%
38% 38%
44%
36%
31%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
87
Grade Four Reading: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations by SDA
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between Sept 2013 and February 2014 in Grade 41
Reading: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 286 40.2% 39.2% 42.0%
Kootenays * * * * Okanagan 17 70.6% 83.3% * Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 26 46.2% 33.3% 63.6% East Fraser 34 47.1% 50.0% 41.7% North Fraser * * * * South Fraser 37 48.6% 52.2% 42.9% Vancouver/Richmond 40 25.0% 25.8% * Coast/North Shore 10 30.0% 28.6% 33.3% South Vancouver Island 24 29.2% 36.4% 23.1% North Vancouver Island 38 52.6% 43.5% 66.7% Northwest 11 18.2% 10.0% * North Central 28 28.6% 28.0% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Four Reading Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10
44%
38%
44%
34%
42%
46%
39%
52%
45% 45%
50%
55%
45%42%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
88
Grade Four Writing: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations by SDA
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between September 2013 and February 2014 in
Grade 41
Writing: Per Cent meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 286 40.6% 41.4% 39.0%
Kootenays * * * * Okanagan 17 70.6% 75.0% * Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 26 34.6% 26.7% 45.5% East Fraser 34 55.9% 63.6% 41.7% North Fraser * * * * South Fraser 37 51.4% 56.5% 42.9% Vancouver/Richmond 40 27.5% 22.6% * Coast/North Shore 10 50.0% 57.1% 33.3% South Vancouver Island 24 25.0% 27.3% 23.1% North Vancouver Island 38 36.8% 39.1% 33.3% Northwest 11 9.1% 10.0% * North Central 28 35.7% 36.0% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Four Writing Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
Analysis: Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal CYIC meet or exceed expectations in Grade Four FSA at similar
proportions since 2012/2013. Both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Female CYIC meet or exceed
expectations in Grade Four Writing at higher proportions than Male CYIC every year MCFD has
FSA results (2007/2008 to 2013/2014). In 2013/2014, Female CYIC met or exceeded
expectations in Writing, almost 20 percentage points higher than Male CYIC (50% to 32%).
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10
48%
35%
50%
40%42%
47%
41%
47%
36%
42%
53% 53%
47%
39%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
89
Grade Seven Numeracy: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations by SDA
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between September 2013 and
February 2014 in Grade 71
Numeracy: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 303 23.8% 23.0% 25.2%
Kootenays 11 18.2% * * Okanagan 24 37.5% 27.3% 46.2% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 32 46.9% 39.1% * East Fraser 29 13.8% 13.6% * North Fraser 14 14.3% * * South Fraser 41 31.7% 39.3% 15.4% Vancouver/Richmond 35 20.0% 22.2% * Coast/North Shore 11 18.2% * * South Vancouver Island 35 14.3% 8.3% 17.4% North Vancouver Island 40 17.5% 17.2% 18.2% Northwest 11 18.2% 18.2% * North Central 16 12.5% 15.4% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Seven Numeracy Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10.
35%
28%
22%
28%
20%
27%
23%
28%
37%
26%
24%23%
28%
25%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
90
Grade Seven Reading: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between September 2013 and
February 2014 in Grade 71
Reading: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 303 31.4% 28.6% 36.4%
Kootenays 11 9.1% * * Okanagan 24 41.7% 36.4% 46.2% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 32 53.1% 43.5% * East Fraser 29 31.0% 31.8% * North Fraser 14 14.3% * * South Fraser 41 29.3% 32.1% 23.1% Vancouver/Richmond 35 14.3% 14.8% * Coast/North Shore 11 45.5% * * South Vancouver Island 35 37.1% 41.7% 34.8% North Vancouver Island 40 30.0% 20.7% 54.5% Northwest 11 27.3% 27.3% * North Central 16 25.0% 23.1% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Seven Reading Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10.
40%
36% 35%
38%
28%
31%
29%
39%
43%
40%
38% 38%39%
36%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
91
Grade Seven Writing: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations
Service Delivery Area
CYIC between September 2013 and
February 2014 in Grade 7
Writing: Meeting or Exceeding Expectations (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 303 38.0% 36.2% 41.1%
Kootenays 11 18.2% * * Okanagan 24 50.0% 45.5% 53.8% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 32 59.4% 47.8% * East Fraser 29 44.8% 50.0% * North Fraser 14 21.4% * * South Fraser 41 39.0% 42.9% 30.8% Vancouver/Richmond 35 25.7% 22.2% * Coast/North Shore 11 45.5% * * South Vancouver Island 35 34.3% 16.7% 43.5% North Vancouver Island 40 27.5% 24.1% 36.4% Northwest 11 18.2% 18.2% * North Central 16 56.3% 61.5% * Northeast * * * *
FSA Results for Grade Seven Writing Over Time by Aboriginal / Non-Aboriginal
Both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal female CYIC meet or exceed expectations in Grade Seven
Writing at higher proportions than male CYIC for every year that MCFD has FSA results
(2007/2008 to 2013/2014). In 2013/2014, the proportion of female CYIC that met or
exceeded expectations in Writing was approximately 20 percentage points higher than male
CYIC, 52% (Non-Aboriginal female) and 45% (Aboriginal female) compared to 32% (Non-
Aboriginal male) and 28% (Aboriginal male). All groups of Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal and
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of CYIC is less than 10.
45%
31%30%
48%
39%
50%
36%
43%41% 41%
45%
47%
43%41%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
92
male/female CYIC meet or exceed expectations at similar levels and trends over the other
Grade Seven FSA Tests (Numeracy and Reading).
Youth Services
Performance Indicator 5.56 Youth Who Claim Income Assistance (IA): Expected to Work within Six Months of Aging Out of Youth Agreements
Rationale: The ministry assists and supports the transition to adulthood for youth under a youth agreement
that turn 19 years old. Among desired transitions is employment, further education or training. An
undesired outcome is youth who turn 19 years old and claim income assistance benefits with the
expected to work designation. This is an indicator of how effectively the ministry prepares youth
to transition to adulthood.
Youth That Turned 19 While Under a Youth Agreement (between April and September 2014) and Claiming ‘Income Assistance: Expected to Work’ within Six Months by Service Delivery Area, As of March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area
Youth That Turned 19 While Under a Youth Agreement
between April 2014 and
September 20141
Accessing 'Income Assistance:
Expected to Work within 6 Months (Up to March 2015)1 Aboriginal1
Non-Aboriginal1
BC 224 17.0% 18.6% 16.4%
Kootenays 11 27.3% * 30.0% Okanagan 20 20.0% * 23.1% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 23 13.0% * 5.3% East Fraser 23 13.0% * 5.3% North Fraser 15 33.3% * 30.8% South Fraser 32 9.4% * 8.7% Vancouver/Richmond 36 22.2% 9.1% 28.0% Coast/North Shore 13 0.0% * * South Vancouver Island 22 13.6% * 12.5% North Vancouver Island 11 18.2% * * Northwest * * * * North Central 10 20.0% * * Northeast * * * *
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of youth aging out of Youth Agreements is less than 10
93
Analysis:
Trend in Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, September 2012 to March 2015
There is no trend in this indicator. Over the 30 months, this rate has ranged from 11% to 22%.
The trends by Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal are provided below. Neither groups show a
statistically significant change since September 2012.
10%
13%
15%
18%
20%
23%
Sep-12 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Mar-15
94
Trend in Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, by Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal, September 2012 to March 2015
Of All Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements between April and September 2014, the Proportion That Went on to Claim Income Assistance or Persons with Disabilities within Six Months (Up to March 2015)
YAG That Aged Out between April 2014 and September 2014
BC 224 100.0%
IA: ETW 38 17.0% IA: Expected to Work - Medical Condition 3 1.3% IA: PPMB 1 0.4% IA: Temporarily Excused from Work 24 10.7% PWD 15 6.7%
Did not Access IA or PWD 160 71.4%
While the percentage of YAG that age out and access IA: Expected to Work is an indication of
youth that have not effectively transitioned to adulthood, YAG may also access other income
supports from the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation’s BC Employment and
Assistance programs. Of the 29% youth that accessed any IA or PWD supports within six months
of aging out (they may access more than one type of support in the six months from aging out)
almost 40% accessed IA: Temporarily Excused from Work and almost one quarter of the youth
accessed PWD assistance.
PWD assistance is an income and asset tested income support program for adults with severe
mental or physical impairment that is likely to continue for two or more years, which significantly
5%
8%
10%
13%
15%
18%
20%
23%
25%
Sep-12 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Mar-15
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
95
restricts daily living activities continuously or periodically for extended periods resulting in the
need for assistance/supervision.
Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements and Subsequently Claiming IA or PWD within Six Months, by Type, March 2008 to March 2015
Since March 2008, the rate of youth aging out of Youth Agreements and claiming IA: Expected
to Work within six months has shown some variation, fluctuating within a 20 percentage point
range. Over the 2014/2015 fiscal year, this indicator reached its lowest point since March 2008
(11%) and averaged 14%.
While the rate of youth claiming PWD assistance has historically been fairly stable, averaging
6% to 7% over the last several fiscal years, the rate averaged just over 9% over the
2014/2015 fiscal year.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Mar-08 Mar-09 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15
ETW Temporarily Excused From Work PWD PPMB ETW - Medical Condition
96
Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements and Subsequently Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, within 7 to 12 Months, and within 19 to 24 Months
The rates on IA: ETW are for the same cohort of former youth with a YAG over different time
periods since aging out. For example, the rates at March 2011 show for youth that aged out of
Youth Agreements between April and September 2010 the rate of youth that accessed IA: ETW
within the next six months (up to March 2011); the rate the same group of April to September
2010 age outs accessed IA: ETW within 7 to 12 months after aging out (up to September 2011);
and the rate the same group of April to September 2010 age outs accessed IA: ETW within 19
to 24 months after aging out (up to September 2012).
From May 2010 to May 2012, the rate of accessing IA: Expected to Work by youth within six
months, 7 to 12 months, and from 19 to 24 months of aging out of Youth Agreements follows a
similar ordering as that of youth discharged from Care. The rate on IA: Expected to Work falls
by approximately three to four percentage points at 7 to12 months, and falls by a further three
percentage points two years later, an indication that the youth are finding other sources of
income.
The graph also shows some periods where the rates do not follow the same ordering (from
approximately March 2008 to October 2009). This is likely related to the 2008 to 2010
economic downturn and the graph shows higher rates of youth accessing IA: Expected to Work as
more time passes from aging out.
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13
On IA: ETW within 6 mths On IA: ETW within 7-12 mths On IA: ETW within 19-24 mths
97
There is also some evidence after May 2012 that youth aging out of Youth Agreements are
accessing IA: Expected to Work a few months longer where the rate of youth accessing IA within
7 to 12 months moves closely with the rate of youth accessing IA within six months.
Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, but not within 7 to 12 Months
Of the 30 to 40 youth that aged out of youth agreements each reporting period and accessed
IA: Expected to Work within six months, about 10 to 20 did not access the same IA program in
the latter part of their first year after aging out. Approximately 60% of those 10 to 20 youth did
not access any IA or PWD assistance during those months. A higher percentage of the youth that
no longer accessed IA: Expected to Work after another year (19 to 24 months after aging out)
did not access any IA or PWD assistance.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13 Mar-14 Sep-14
No IA/PWD Temporarily Excused From Work PWD PPMB ETW: Medical Condition
98
Youth Aging Out of Youth Agreements Claiming ‘IA: Expected to Work’ within Six Months, but not within 19 to 24 Months
Educational Performance
Performance Indicator 5.41 Age-Appropriate Grade for Youth on Youth Agreements
Rationale: Not only is education a determinant of healthy child development, long-term well-being and
social inclusion, it is also a good barometer of a youth’s current well-being. Youth may repeat a
grade or perhaps had delayed starting school for many reasons. However, youth on a YA are
more likely to fall behind in school because of their experiences both before and after they left
their parental home. Combined with grade progression and high school completion this indicator
provides insight into the educational progression of youth on a YA.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Mar-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13
No IA/PWD Temporarily Excused From Work PWD PPMB ETW: Medical Condition
99
Age-Appropriate Grade for Youth on Youth Agreements, October 2013 to September 2014
Service Delivery Area
Youth Under a Youth
Agreement between October
2013 and September
2014
Students on September 30, 2014 on a Youth Agreement1
Proportion of Youth on
Youth Agreements in School on September 30, 2014
(%)
Proportion in Their Age-Appropriate Grade (%)
All2 Aboriginal2 Non-
Aboriginal2
BC 1,205 534 44.3% 39.7% 35.8% 41.4%
Kootenays 76 37 48.7% 51.4% * 58.6% Okanagan 114 48 42.1% 35.4% 9.1% 43.2% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 133 55 41.4% 54.5% 45.8% 61.3% East Fraser 152 64 42.1% 28.1% 38.1% 23.3% North Fraser 89 44 49.4% 36.4% 30.8% 38.7% South Fraser 138 67 48.6% 38.8% 33.3% 40.8% Vancouver/Richmond 125 44 35.2% 29.5% 30.8% 29.0% Coast/North Shore 72 34 47.2% 58.8% * 57.7% South Vancouver Island 112 58 51.8% 31.0% 33.3% 30.0% North Vancouver Island 92 36 39.1% 47.2% * 42.9% Northwest 40 17 42.5% 35.3% * * North Central 51 25 49.0% 40.0% * 43.8% Northeast 11 * 45.5% * * *
Age-Appropriate Grade of Youth under Youth Agreement, by School Year
Analysis: YAGS aged 17 years old in 2005 were in their age-appropriate grade 34% compared to 66%
in 2014. YAGS aged 16 years old in 2005 were in their age-appropriate grade 44% compared
to 85% in 2014.
1 SDA data suppressed where the number of YAGs is less than 10. 2 SDA data suppressed where the number of YAGs in age-appropriate grades is less than 10.
36.6%34.2%
39.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
2012 2013 2014
100
YAGs are in their age-appropriate grade if they are, at most, 5 years older than their grade (16
years old in grade 11 and 17 years old in grade 12). This measure includes YAGs aged 18
years old as of September 30, 2014. These 18 year old YAGS make up 49.1% of the “Students
on September 30, 2014 on a Youth Agreement” who are in school but cannot be in their age-
appropriate grade due to their age.
Performance Indicator 5.46 Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement
Rationale: Although some youth are not in an age-appropriate grade they are progressing in their learning
and move up to the next grade level the following September. Grade progression is an indicator
of learning and educational progress.
Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement, by SDA
Service Delivery Area
Youth under a Youth Agreement on
September 30, 2013 and September 30,
2014 Inclusive1
Youth under a Youth Agreement on September 30, 2014 That Showed
Grade Progression (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 214 52.8% 60.0% 49.7%
Kootenays 13 69.2% * 70.0% Okanagan 19 63.2% * 60.0% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 26 53.8% 70.0% 43.8% East Fraser 24 58.3% * 46.7% North Fraser 19 47.4% * 53.8% South Fraser 24 54.2% * 52.9% Vancouver/Richmond 15 46.7% * 45.5% Coast/North Shore 17 64.7% * 61.5% South Vancouver Island 21 33.3% * 28.6% North Vancouver Island 15 46.7% * 50.0% Northwest * * * * North Central 12 50.0% * * Northeast * * * *
1 SDA data suppressed where the number off youth is less than 10.
101
Analysis:
Trend in Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement, Over Time
All groupings of male/female and Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal YAG have very similar trends and
levels of grade progression between 2006 and 2014. In 2014, all groupings of male/female
and Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal YAGs progressed to a higher grade from 48% (male Non-
Aboriginal) to 63% (female Aboriginal) of the time.
Grade Progression of Youth under a Youth Agreement, by Year, Gender, and Aboriginal/Non-Aboriginal
YAGs aged 17 years old showed grade progression of 81% in 2014, an improvement from 48%
in 2006. YAGs aged 18 years old showed grade progression of 42% in 2014, compared to
42% in 2006.
50.4%47.6%
52.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Sept-12 Sept-13 Sept-14
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Non-Aboriginal Female Non-Aboriginal Male
Aboriginal Female Aboriginal Male
102
Performance Indicator 5.51 Youth on a Youth Agreement Who Finish School with a High School Credential
Rationale: There is strong evidence that completing high school is conducive to general well-being throughout
life. Furthermore, it is a good barometer of current general well-being for that particular cohort.
MCFD works to maximize the educational attainment of youth on YA.
Youth on Youth Agreement Who Finished School with a High School Credential, 2013/2014
Service Delivery Area
Youth Under a Youth
Agreement Age Outs
Fiscal Year 2013/20141
Youth Under a Youth
Agreement Age Outs
Matched to BC School
Records1
Youth Under a Youth Agreement Age Outs with a High School Credential (%)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non-
Aboriginal1
BC 379 364 53.0% 45.5% 55.9%
Kootenays 13 13 38.5% * * Okanagan 21 20 30.0% * 23.1% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 38 35 65.7% 69.2% 63.6% East Fraser 51 48 54.2% 54.5% 54.1% North Fraser 30 30 73.3% * 82.6% South Fraser 46 46 56.5% 40.0% 64.5% Vancouver/Richmond 64 57 45.6% * 50.0% Coast/North Shore 21 20 50.0% * 46.2% South Vancouver Island 44 44 54.5% 41.7% 59.4% North Vancouver Island 19 19 52.6% * 43.8% Northwest 11 11 36.4% * * North Central 17 17 52.9% * 64.3% Northeast * * * * *
Youth on Youth Agreement Who Finish School with a High School Credential, by Fiscal Year
1 SDA data suppressed where YAG’s with high school credentials are under 10
52% 53%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
2012/2013 2013/2014
103
Analysis: Provincially, just over one half of youth on a Youth Agreement that turned 19 also had a BC high
school credential, which is slightly higher than the proportion of CYIC turning 19 with a BC high
school credential.
During 2013/2014, 57% of Non-Aboriginal female youth under a Youth Agreement (YAGs)
turned 19 with a credential, higher than every other group of YAGs who turned 19 with a
credential (42% for Aboriginal male YAGs, 47% for Aboriginal female YAGs, and 54% for Non-
Aboriginal male YAGs).
Since 2009/2010, the proportion of Non-Aboriginal male youth turning 19 with a credential
more than doubled from 25% to 54%.
104
Expenditure Data:
Child Safety, Family Support & Children in Care Services
Service Delivery Area Non
Residential1
Children & Youth In Care2
Out-of-Care
Options3
Youth Agreeme
nts
Post Majority Supports4
Program Delivery Child
Welfare5
Total Expenditures ($ Millions)
BC $133.172 $215.458 $21.986 $6.919 $5.700 $128.687 $511.922
Kootenays 4.532 8.630 0.630 0.345 0.070 4.446 18.654 Okanagan 7.753 18.374 1.508 0.448 0.189 10.132 38.404 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 9.336 21.491 1.167 0.572 0.261 8.863 41.690 East Fraser 6.625 31.674 0.976 0.885 6.960 47.120 North Fraser 9.377 14.592 1.161 0.597 0.251 10.618 36.596 South Fraser 13.610 36.531 2.321 0.913 0.742 15.807 69.924 Vancouver/Richmond 21.163 43.275 0.711 0.905 0.625 11.535 78.215 Coast/North Shore 5.007 7.041 0.689 0.538 5.375 18.649 South Vancouver Island 10.845 29.755 1.020 0.685 0.531 12.794 55.629 North Vancouver Island 9.728 20.377 1.202 0.510 0.111 11.764 43.691 Northwest 4.217 7.853 1.133 0.235 0.201 5.527 19.166 North Central 9.643 20.782 1.850 0.231 0.216 9.532 42.254 Northeast 2.773 4.798 0.334 0.055 0.038 3.044 11.042 Service Delivery Operations 2.798 0.841 10.240 13.878 After Hours Program 7.427 0.434 7.861 Aboriginal Services 7.931 2.349 10.281 Children in Home of Relative (CIHR) Program
7.090 0.002 7.092
Complex Needs Facility 1.402 1.402 Other Central Payments 0.409 1.241 0.194 2.465 2.550 6.860 Recoveries (55.984) (0.502) (56.486)
The budget for this line of service is $499.554 million.
1 Non-Residential expenditures primarily related to ministry family and youth support programs contracts. Includes $7.247M After
Hours Program staffing and operational costs. 2 Children and Youth in Care expenditures primarily related to payments for foster and group care, guardianship, supported
Independent Living and delegated Aboriginal services. Includes $1.402M Complex Need facility staffing and operational costs. 3 Out-of-Care Options expenditures include payments for the Extended Family (EFP) and Child in Home of a Relative (CIHR)
programs. 4 Includes Agreement with Young Adult (AYA) payments as well as funding for the Youth Education Assistance Fund (YEAF), Youth in
Care Education Fund, Learning Fund for Young Adults, Covenant House and YMCA STRIVE program. 5 Expenditures include costs for staffing and operational costs associated with direct service delivery.
105
Adoption Services
Summary:
MCFD’s strategic direction and ministry staff, service providers, and caregivers must organize and
focus the delivery of all forms of care under the CFCSA (kinship, foster, staffed and tertiary care).
An overarching aim is to achieve permanency – safe, stable and enduring family relationships for
children and youth through reunification, adoption, transfer of guardianship or other meaningful
lifelong connections. Planning for permanence is a priority that starts from the point of first
placement, with a focus on family reunification that at the same time includes consideration of
alternate legally permanent options such as adoption and transfer of guardianship. An important
consideration in adoption is to place siblings together. Typically these are more complex adoption
cases than children and youth without siblings in Care and consequently take longer to complete.
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 5.76 Per Cent of Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in Adoption Homes
Rationale: Evidence has shown that children require a stable and continuous relationship with a nurturing
caregiver to maximize physical, social emotional and cognitive development. If this relationship is
not possible with the birth family or other Out-of-Care options, then for children whom the ministry
has legal permanent guardianship, adoption is an alternative.
106
Per Cent of Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in Adoption Homes, 12 Month Period Ending March 20151
Service Delivery Area
Number of Adoption
Placements2
Per Cent of Eligible Children Placed
All2 Aboriginal2 Non -
Aboriginal2
BC 273 19.1% 13.3% 26.2%
Kootenays 15 28.3% 16.7% 31.7% Okanagan 47 27.3% 24.0% 31.9% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 19 18.3% 16.4% 20.4% East Fraser 32 23.7% 28.6% 21.5% North Fraser 18 18.6% 32.1% 13.0% South Fraser 32 16.0% 5.4% 29.6% Vancouver/Richmond 28 27.5% 18.0% 33.3% Coast/North Shore * * * * South Vancouver Island 27 13.3% 0.9% 27.1% North Vancouver Island 20 16.1% 8.5% 26.4% Northwest * * * * North Central 22 14.9% 14.5% 16.7% Northeast * * * *
Analysis: Trend in Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in Adoption Homes, September 2012 to March 2015
This indicator has trended sharply higher since the end of 2013. This is due to a strategic
initiative, with additional investment in April of 2014, to increase the number of CYIC that find
permanency. Trends in adoption rates for both Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal eligible CYIC are
both improving but the adoption rate for Aboriginal children is half that for Non-Aboriginal
1 This measure has been adjusted to remove children in their adoption residency period from the available for adoption count.
Both current and historical data was adjusted. 2 SDA data suppressed where there are less than 10 children available for adoption
14%
15%
16%
17%
18%
19%
20%
201209 201211 201301 201303 201305 201307 201309 201311 201401 201403 201405 201407 201409 201411 201501 201503
107
children. This, in part, is due to Aboriginal children being more likely to have siblings, requiring
common placement, as well as the importance of ensuring their cultural connectedness.
Trend in Children Eligible for Adoption Placed in Adoption Homes by Aboriginal/ Non-Aboriginal,
September 2012 to March 2015
The improvement in performance was driven mainly by an increase in placements as the number
of available children has remained relatively unchanged since September 2012. This was due in
part to an increase in the proportion of adoption eligible CYIC that are under the age of 12
(children who are under the age of 12 are much more likely to be adopted).
The Proportion of Children Eligible for Adoption Aged 12 or Older
6%
11%
16%
21%
26%
201209 201211 201301 201303 201305 201307 201309 201311 201401 201403 201405 201407 201409 201411 201501 201503
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal
22%
27%
32%
37%
42%
47%
108
Per Cent of Eligible Children Placed in Adoption Homes, by Age Group
Percentage of Eligible Children Placed in Adoption Homes
200
3/2
00
4
200
4/2
00
5
200
5/2
00
6
200
6/2
00
7
200
7/2
00
8
200
8/2
00
9
200
9/2
01
0
201
0/2
01
1
201
1/2
01
2
201
2/2
01
3
201
3/2
01
4
201
4/2
01
5
Under 12 Years 22% 24% 22% 20% 24% 23% 23% 24% 21% 22% 22% 27% 12 Years and Older 7% 7% 7% 4% 6% 4% 5% 4% 5% 5% 7% 6% All CYIC 19% 19% 17% 15% 18% 16% 16% 16% 15% 15% 16% 19%
The percentage of children eligible for adoption, under age 12, placed in adoption homes have
increased in 2014/2015 to its highest point in 12 years. The total number of eligible children
placed went up by 61 children between 2012/2013 and 2014/2015. Of the 61 children, only
two were over the age of 11.
Age of Children Placed for Adoption Over Time
The age group 5 to 11 is driving the increase in the number of CYIC placed for adoption, with an
increase of 33 placements since 2012/2013. During the past 12 years the total number of CYIC
placed for adoption was at its lowest point in 2012/2013.
Performance Indicator 5.81 Proportion of Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted to Aboriginal Families
Rationale: Aboriginal children are more likely to be culturally safe when living in Aboriginal families. The
ministry strives to place Aboriginal children that are eligible for adoption into Aboriginal families
whenever possible.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Under 12 12 and Over
109
Proportion of Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted to Aboriginal Families, 12 Month Period Ending March 2015
Service Delivery Area
Number of Aboriginal Children
Eligible for Adoption
Number of Aboriginal
Children Placed in Adoption
Homes1
Number of Children
Placed with Aboriginal Families1
Per Cent Placed in Aboriginal
Homes1
BC 774 104 53 51%
Kootenays 12 * * * Okanagan 98 24 14 58% Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 55 * * * East Fraser 37 12 * 33% North Fraser 26 * * * South Fraser 112 * * * Vancouver/Richmond 39 * * * Coast/North Shore 31 * * * South Vancouver Island 107 * * * North Vancouver Island 70 * * * Northwest 61 * * * North Central 124 18 * * Northeast 14 * * 100%
Analysis:
Trend in Percentage of Aboriginal Children and Youth Adopted by Aboriginal families, BC, September 2012 to March 2015
Historically, Aboriginal children take longer to place than Non-Aboriginal children. Since the
number of Aboriginal children placed in Aboriginal homes is small, large swings in the
performance of the indicator are caused by slight shifts in actual placements.
1 SDA data suppressed where there are less than 10 children available for adoption
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
201209 201211 201301 201303 201305 201307 201309 201311 201401 201403 201405 201407 201409 201411 201501 201503
110
Since the baseline period of September 2012, the number of Aboriginal children placed in
adoption homes has experienced a decline, with a small increase since December 2014. Starting
in December of 2013, the number of Aboriginal children placed in adoption homes began to
recover, but the number placed in Aboriginal homes continued to decline. This caused the
significant decline in the performance of this measure, with at 16 percentage point drop since the
baseline.
Since November 2014, the number of Aboriginal children placed in adoption homes has remained
relatively stable, and the number of those placed in Aboriginal adoption homes has increased
slightly. This accounts for all of the increase in performance for this measure since November
2014.
Performance Indicator 5.77 Time Taken for CYIC to Go from Permanent Status to Adoption Placement
Rationale:
For CYIC who are no longer able to return to their family, achieving permanency through
adoption is a desirable option. Research has found that a longer history in out of home care, as
well as a child’s age at time of adoption are risk factors strongly associated with an adoption
placement’s chances for success, meaning that once it is determined that adoption is the best
option for a child, it should take place without unnecessary delays.
Time Taken for CYIC to Go from Permanent Status to Adoption Placement, 12 Month Period Ending March 31, 2015
Service Delivery Area
Number of Adoption
Placements1
Median Time to Placement (Months)
All1 Aboriginal1 Non -
Aboriginal1
BC 273 21 29 17
Kootenays 15 * * * Okanagan 47 36 26 36 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 19 18 52 * East Fraser 32 32 80 21 North Fraser 18 19 20 18 South Fraser 32 14 26 11 Vancouver/Richmond 28 12 17 * Coast/North Shore * * * * South Vancouver Island 27 18 15 20 North Vancouver Island 20 16 16 21 Northwest * * * * North Central 22 29 39 21 Northeast * * * *
1 SDA data suppressed where there are less than 10 children available for adoption
111
Median Time from Permanent Ward Status to Adoption Placement
Time to Adoption Placement by Age at Placement Time
Analysis:
The median time from permanent ward to adoption placement has gone down by three months
since the baseline period, September 2012. This improvement in performance is partially driven
by a substantial decrease in the time from Permanent Ward status to adoption placement for
Aboriginal children. Non-Aboriginal CYIC still substantially outnumbers the Aboriginal CYIC in
terms of adoption placements, and their wait times continue to be lower.
Historically, it is easier to place younger children in adoption homes, than the older ones. Children
under the age of 12 currently experience a median wait time of 18 months, while children ages
12 and over, experience a median wait time of 32 months. Aboriginal children make up 38% of
the placements for children under age 12 and 38% of those for children ages 12 and over.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
6 12 18 24 36 42 48 More
% o
f A
do
ption
Pla
cem
en
ts
Months to Adoption Placement
Median: 21 Months
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Mon
ths
to A
do
ption
Pla
cem
en
t
Age at Start of Adoption Placement
112
Trend in Median Time (Months) from Permanent Ward Status to Adoption Placement, September 2012 to March 2015
The current performance trend for this indicator shows an improving performance since the
baseline period of September 2012.
Trend in Median Time (Months) from Permanent Ward Status to Adoption Placement by Child’s Aboriginal Status, September 2012 to March 2015
On average, Aboriginal children experience longer periods between being eligible for adoption
and being placed in an adoption home, but since the baseline period of September 2012 there
has been a significant decrease of 36% in the number of months waiting.
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
201209 201211 201301 201303 201305 201307 201309 201311 201401 201403 201405 201407 201409 201411 201501 201503
Aboriginal
Non-Aboriginal
113
Expenditure Data:
Adoption Services
Service Delivery Area Expenditures1,2 ($ Millions)
As at March 31, 2015
BC $29.136
Kootenays 0.948 Okanagan 2.717 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 1.762 East Fraser 3.655 North Fraser 1.560 South Fraser 2.785 Vancouver/Richmond 1.771 Coast/North Shore 0.636 South Vancouver Island 3.478 North Vancouver Island 3.533 Northeast 0.871 North Central 1.442 Northwest 0.730 Other Centralized Payments3 3.247
The budget for this line of service is $26.563 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. 2 Provides adoption programs including medical assessment and consultation, pre-placement visitation, adoption recruitment and
skills development, and post adoption services. 3 Other centralized payments include funding for Adoption Permanence initiatives.
114
Youth Justice
Summary:
This section establishes an initial set of performance indicators as the basis for future tracking and
analysis.
Case Data and Trends:
Community Youth Justice Monthly Average October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015 (36% Aboriginal)
Service Delivery Area
Monthly Average Oct 1, 2014 to
March 31, 2015
Monthly Average Oct 1, 2013 to
March 31, 2014
Change 2013/2014 to
2014/2015 YTD (%)
BC 1,387 1,600 -13.3%
Kootenays, Okanagan & Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 241 307 -21.5% East Fraser, North Fraser, South Fraser, Vancouver/Richmond, Coast/North Shore 636 724 -12.2% South Vancouver Island and North Vancouver Island 277 314 -11.8% Northwest, North Central and Northeast 234 255 -8.2%
Incarceration (Remand and Sentenced)
Daily Average, October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015: 65 (49% Aboriginal)
Daily Average, October 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014: 69 (47% Aboriginal)
Change 2013/2014 to 2014/2015: -5.8% (-2.1% Aboriginal)
Incarceration (Remand/Pretrial Detention Only)
Daily Average, October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015: 36 (47% Aboriginal)
Daily Average, October 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014: 37 (49% Aboriginal)
Change 2013/2014 to 2014/2015: -2.7% (-5.6% Aboriginal)
ISSP: Intensive Support and Supervision (One to One Supervision) (ISSP)
Daily Average, October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015: 95 (38% Aboriginal)
Daily Average, October 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014: 109 (36% Aboriginal)
Change 2013/2014 YTD to 2014/2015: -12.8% (-10.5% Aboriginal)
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicator 6.01 Clients Receiving Formal Diversion Services That Did Not Commit a New Offence
Rationale: Objectives of formal diversion include avoiding official labelling and processing, and providing
services that help prevent a youth from reoffending.
115
Number of Clients Receiving Formal Diversion Services
Year Number of Clients
Did Not Commit A New Offence In The Following 5 Years
Number Per Cent
2005 843 577 68.4% 2006 850 593 69.8% 2007 786 556 70.7% 2008 814 597 73.3% 2009 792 571 72.1%
Performance Indicator 6.06 Clients Receiving First Community Sentence Services That Did Not Commit a New Offence
Rationale:
One objective of a community sentence is to provide services that help prevent a youth from
reoffending.
Number of Clients Receiving First Community Sentence Services
Year Number of Clients
Did Not Commit A New Offence In The Following 5 Years
Number Per Cent
2005 1,255 703 56.0% 2006 1,196 587 49.1% 2007 1,253 618 49.3% 2008 1,290 639 49.5% 2009 1,289 632 49.0%
Performance Indicator 6.11 Clients Receiving First Custody Sentence Services That Did Not Commit a New Offence
Rationale: Recognizing that custody holds the highest risk population, one objective of custody services is to
provide services that help prevent a youth from reoffending.
Number of Clients Receiving First Custody Sentence Services
Year Number of Clients
Did Not Commit A New Offence In the Following 5 Years
Number Per Cent
2005 173 31 17.9% 2006 166 32 19.3% 2007 184 39 21.2% 2008 162 26 16.0% 2009 177 35 19.8%
116
Performance Indicator 6.16 Youth Court Cases per 10,000 Youth Population Youth Court Cases per 10,000 Youth Population, BC and Canada, 1997/1998 to 2011/20121
Performance Indicator 6.21 Youth in Custody per 10,000 Youth Youth in Custody per 10,000 Youth, BC and Canada, 2000/2001 to 2013/2014
1 Over the 14 year period this rate has declined for BC and Canada, but the rate of decline was faster in BC.
194
92
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Canada
BC
2
6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
BC
Canada
117
Expenditure Data:
Youth Justice Services
Service Delivery Area Expenditures1,2 ($ Millions)
As at March 31, 2015
BC $45.168
Kootenays 0.692 Okanagan 1.963 Thompson Cariboo Shuswap 1.608 East Fraser 1.481 North Fraser 2.264 South Fraser 3.249 Vancouver/Richmond 2.003 Coast/North Shore 0.427 South Vancouver Island 3.450 North Vancouver Island 3.035 Northwest 0.763 North Central 0.935 Northeast 0.472 Service Delivery Operations3 5.407 Youth Custody 24.553 Youth Forensic 11.466 Other 0.002 Recoveries4 (18.602)
The budget for this line of service is $46.200 million.
1 Expenditures include costs for staffing, contracts and other operational expenditures. 2 Provides operation of youth custody centres and youth forensic services as well as full-time residential programs; youth bail
hostels; day programs; intensive supervision programs; alternative measures; community services orders; and addictions programs in youth custody centres.
top related