children's services management reportdss.mo.gov/re/pdf/csmr/1102childrens-services-management... ·...

Department of Social Services Children's Division

Children's Services Management Report

February 2011

Missouri Department of Social Services Research & Evaluation

221 W. High Street Jefferson City, MO 65101

Children’s Services Management Report Research and Evaluation February 2011

I

State of Missouri Department of Social Services Mission Statement: “To maintain or improve the quality of life for Missouri citizens." The Department of Social Services is an equal opportunity employer. Services provided by the Department of Social Services are offered on a non-discriminatory basis.

Children’s Services Management ReportResearch and Evaluation

February 2011II

Table of Contents

Unless otherwise indicated, information contained in this publication is intended for monthly use only. Although the information presented is the best available at the time of publication, because of delays in processing, data may be incomplete. Accordingly, data should NOT simply be summed from one month to the next to obtain 3 month, 6 month or 12 month (etc.) values. Figure 1. Map – Department of Social Services Regions ............................................................. V Child Abuse and Neglect (CA/N) Table 1. Incidents and Children Reported During the Month Compared to Those Reported for the Same Month Last Year ..................................................................... 2 Table 2. Status of Children by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments Completed During the Month ..................................................................................... 4 Table 3. Status of Incidents by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments Completed by Conclusion During the Month ................................................................ 6 Table 4. Time From Receipt of a Report to the Initial Child Contact, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments Completed in the Month ................................. 8 Table 5. Number of Days Required to Complete Investigations/Assessments, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments Completed in the Month ............................... 10 Table 6. CA/N Hotline Unit Reports and Referrals During the Month ........................................ 12 Figure 2. CA/N Reports for Four Years Through the Current Month ........................................... 14 Figure 3. CA/N Reports Comparing the Last Two Years ............................................................ 14 Figure 4. Percentage Change in CA/N Reports Made Twelve Months Apart ................................ 15 Figure 5. CA/N Investigations/Assessments Completed During the Month by Conclusion ............. 15 Figure 6. CA/N Investigations/Assessments Completed During the Month by Conclusion ............. 16 Figure 7. Time Between Report and Child Contact for Investigations/Assessments Completed in the Month .......................................................................................... 16 Figure 8. Percentage of Investigations/Assessments Completed Within Thirty Days .................... 17 Notes Child Abuse and Neglect Tables and Figures ............................................................. 18 Family-Centered Services (FCS) Table 7. FCS Cases Open at the End of the Month by Reason for Opening ............................... 21 Table 8. FCS Cases Active During the Month by Reason for Opening ....................................... 23 Table 9. Persons in Family-Centered Services During the Month .............................................. 25 Table 10. FCS Cases Opened During the Month by Reason for Opening ..................................... 27


February 2011III

Table 11. FCS Cases Closed During the Month by Close Reason ................................................ 29 Table 12. FCS Cases Active During the Month Which Have Had Court Involvement ..................... 31 Table 13. FCS Cases Active During the Month Which Have Had No Court Involvement ................ 33 Figure 9. FCS Cases Active as of the End of the Month Over the Previous Four Years ................. 35 Figure 10. Percentage Change in FCS Cases Active as of the End of the Month, Twelve Months Apart .............................................................................................. 35 Figure 11. FCS Cases Opened During the Month by Reason for Opening ..................................... 36 Figure 12. FCS Cases Opened During the Month by Reason for Opening ..................................... 36 Figure 13. FCS Cases Closed During the Month by Reason for Closing ........................................ 37 Figure 14. FCS Cases Active During the Month With Court Involvement By Number of Months Open .................................................................................... 37 Figure 15. FCS Cases Active During the Month With No Court Involvement By Number of Months Open .................................................................................... 38 Notes Family-Centered Services Tables and Figures ............................................................ 39 Out-of-Home Placement Table 14. Children Entering Children’s Division Custody for the First Time During the Month By Case Manager County and Most Recent Placement Category ................................. 42 Table 15. Children Re-Entering Children’s Division Custody During the Month by Case Manager County and Most Recent Placement Category .............................................. 44 Table 16. Children (Re)Entering Children’s Division Custody During the Last Two Years .............. 46 Table 17. Children Exiting Children’s Division Custody During the Month Grouped by Length of Stay and Region ...................................................................................... 47 Table 18. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month By Length of Stay and Case Manager County ............................................................ 48 Table 19. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month by Case Manager County and Placement Category ................................................................. 50 Table 20. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month by Case Manager County and Placement Type ...................................................................... 52 Table 21. Children Exiting Children’s Division Custody During the Month Grouped by Placement Category and Case Manager County ......................................................... 62 Table 22. Children Closed from the Alternative Care System During the Month Grouped by Reason for Case Closing ........................................................................ 64


February 2011IV

Table 23. Children in Alternative Care on the Last Day of the Month With a Goal of Adoption or in Adoptive Custody .............................................................................. 66 Table 24. Currently Licensed Children’s Division Foster Homes by Vendor Type .......................... 68 Table 25. Children in Alternative Care on the Last Day of the Month Grouped By Case Manager County and Legal Status ............................................................... 70 Table 26. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month Grouped By Case Manager County and Goal........................................................................... 72 Table 27. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month Grouped By Case Manager County and Number of Previous Placements ................................... 74 Table 28. Adoptions Finalized by Fiscal Year ............................................................................ 76 Figure 16. Children (Re)Entering Children’s Division Custody During the Month ........................... 78 Figure 17. Children in Children’s Division Custody on the Last Day of the Month During the Last Two Years ................................................................................................. 78 Figure 18. Children Closing from Alternative Care During the Month by Reason for Case Closing and Region .................................................................................... 79 Figure 19. Adoptions Finalized During the Last Two Years ......................................................... 79 Figure 20. Children in Children’s Division Custody as of the Last of the Month by Age and Placement Type ......................................................................................... 80 Figure 21. Children in Children’s Division Custody as of the Last Day of the Month By Placement Category for Four Years ...................................................................... 80 Figure 22. Children Exiting Children’s Division Custody by Quarter and Subsequent Disposition ........................................................................................... 81 Notes Out-of-Home Placement Tables and Figures ............................................................. 82 Intensive In-Home Services (IIS) Table 29. Families Referred to IIS During the Month Grouped by Referral County ....................... 88 Table 30. Families and Children Accepted in IIS During the Month Grouped by Household County .............................................................................................. 90 Table 31. Exit Status of Families Exiting IIS During the Month .................................................. 92 Table 32. Six Month Follow-Up Status of Families Exiting IIS .................................................... 94 Table 33. Twelve Month Follow-Up Status of Families Exiting IIS .............................................. 96 Notes Intensive In-Home Services Tables ......................................................................... 98

Children’s Services Management Report

Research and EvaluationFebruary 2011

V

Figure 1. Department of Social Services Regions

Child Abuse and Neglect

Table 1. Incidents and Children Reported During February 2011

Compared to Those Reported During February 2010

Current Incidents Current ChildrenMonth One Year Percentage Month One Year Percentage

Incidents Prior Change Children Prior ChangeNorthwest Andrew 8 9 -11.11% 11 14 -21.43% Atchison 5 1 400.00% 9 2 350.00% Buchanan 72 86 -16.28% 117 116 0.86% Caldwell 4 13 -69.23% 7 19 -63.16% Carroll 5 5 0.00% 9 7 28.57% Cass 74 54 37.04% 127 83 53.01% Chariton 5 4 25.00% 13 5 160.00% Clay 123 132 -6.82% 186 193 -3.63% Clinton 23 10 130.00% 32 13 146.15% Cooper 15 22 -31.82% 19 29 -34.48% Daviess 7 7 0.00% 11 15 -26.67% De Kalb 4 5 -20.00% 6 8 -25.00% Gentry 8 6 33.33% 16 10 60.00% Grundy 4 14 -71.43% 4 23 -82.61% Harrison 2 4 -50.00% 2 6 -66.67% Holt 3 5 -40.00% 7 6 16.67% Johnson 22 24 -8.33% 35 32 9.38% Lafayette 16 17 -5.88% 23 19 21.05% Linn 14 14 0.00% 17 21 -19.05% Livingston 19 11 72.73% 28 12 133.33% Mercer 4 1 300.00% 5 1 400.00% Nodaway 9 5 80.00% 11 10 10.00% Pettis 32 47 -31.92% 45 71 -36.62% Platte 30 24 25.00% 38 34 11.77% Putnam 11 4 175.00% 16 4 300.00% Ray 15 17 -11.77% 20 20 0.00% Saline 21 19 10.53% 33 23 43.48% Sullivan 7 8 -12.50% 12 12 0.00% Worth 3 1 200.00% 5 1 400.00% * Region Total * 565 569 -0.70% 864 809 6.80%Northeast Adair 18 10 80.00% 26 16 62.50% Audrain 18 21 -14.29% 22 29 -24.14% Boone 81 82 -1.22% 120 108 11.11% Callaway 45 44 2.27% 68 56 21.43% Clark 3 4 -25.00% 3 4 -25.00% Cole 51 54 -5.56% 72 77 -6.49% Franklin 66 46 43.48% 93 56 66.07% Gasconade 12 11 9.09% 21 14 50.00% Howard 6 3 100.00% 7 4 75.00% Jefferson 131 122 7.38% 185 158 17.09% Knox 3 3 0.00% 6 3 100.00% Lewis 4 6 -33.33% 6 7 -14.29% Lincoln 49 30 63.33% 76 44 72.73% Macon 10 8 25.00% 12 10 20.00% Marion 37 29 27.59% 48 39 23.08% Monroe 7 6 16.67% 8 13 -38.46% Montgomery 5 4 25.00% 9 7 28.57% Osage 9 4 125.00% 18 5 260.00% Pike 10 9 11.11% 14 15 -6.67% Ralls 7 3 133.33% 7 3 133.33% Randolph 21 16 31.25% 42 27 55.56% Schuyler 3 4 -25.00% 8 8 0.00% Scotland 4 1 300.00% 7 1 600.00% Shelby 4 2 100.00% 6 3 100.00% St Charles 146 133 9.77% 214 180 18.89% Warren 27 15 80.00% 41 20 105.00% * Region Total * 777 670 15.97% 1,139 907 25.58%Southeast Bollinger 5 6 -16.67% 8 12 -33.33% Butler 54 55 -1.82% 89 78 14.10% Cape Girardeau 47 51 -7.84% 78 75 4.00% Carter 8 6 33.33% 10 11 -9.09% Crawford 21 19 10.53% 38 26 46.15% Dent 17 13 30.77% 27 26 3.85%

2

Children's Services Management ReportResearch and Evaluation

February 2011

Table 1. Incidents and Children Reported During February 2011

Compared to Those Reported During February 2010

Current Incidents Current ChildrenMonth One Year Percentage Month One Year Percentage

Incidents Prior Change Children Prior ChangeSoutheast Dunklin 27 31 -12.90% 44 43 2.33% Howell 46 58 -20.69% 71 91 -21.98% Iron 14 2 600.00% 26 3 766.67% Madison 11 10 10.00% 22 14 57.14% Maries 5 8 -37.50% 11 13 -15.39% Mississippi 19 11 72.73% 28 14 100.00% New Madrid 25 16 56.25% 37 23 60.87% Oregon 15 13 15.39% 26 20 30.00% Pemiscot 18 25 -28.00% 29 38 -23.68% Perry 8 17 -52.94% 14 28 -50.00% Phelps 43 28 53.57% 56 38 47.37% Pulaski 39 35 11.43% 54 47 14.89% Reynolds 5 11 -54.55% 9 15 -40.00% Ripley 19 11 72.73% 29 20 45.00% Scott 28 33 -15.15% 41 52 -21.15% Shannon 9 9 0.00% 19 12 58.33% St Francois 46 48 -4.17% 75 84 -10.71% Ste Genevieve 10 9 11.11% 16 11 45.46% Stoddard 21 24 -12.50% 32 28 14.29% Texas 24 21 14.29% 35 29 20.69% Washington 16 22 -27.27% 23 41 -43.90% Wayne 8 10 -20.00% 9 17 -47.06% * Region Total * 608 602 1.00% 956 909 5.17%Southwest Barry 20 27 -25.93% 32 33 -3.03% Barton 10 10 0.00% 14 17 -17.65% Bates 10 19 -47.37% 19 27 -29.63% Benton 10 18 -44.44% 14 22 -36.36% Camden 34 31 9.68% 53 39 35.90% Cedar 12 14 -14.29% 17 24 -29.17% Christian 58 62 -6.45% 76 82 -7.32% Dade 2 5 -60.00% 5 10 -50.00% Dallas 23 20 15.00% 30 32 -6.25% Douglas 11 10 10.00% 17 14 21.43% Greene 293 261 12.26% 404 375 7.73% Henry 19 14 35.71% 24 18 33.33% Hickory 7 1 600.00% 14 1 1300.00% Jasper 101 106 -4.72% 154 150 2.67% Laclede 44 48 -8.33% 63 64 -1.56% Lawrence 23 38 -39.47% 34 47 -27.66% Mcdonald 23 21 9.52% 28 37 -24.32% Miller 37 21 76.19% 56 25 124.00% Moniteau 15 15 0.00% 22 23 -4.35% Morgan 19 13 46.15% 31 19 63.16% Newton 36 48 -25.00% 49 74 -33.78% Ozark 5 7 -28.57% 6 9 -33.33% Polk 29 24 20.83% 43 28 53.57% St Clair 9 5 80.00% 11 9 22.22% Stone 33 14 135.71% 43 17 152.94% Taney 45 55 -18.18% 68 75 -9.33% Vernon 23 11 109.09% 36 11 227.27% Webster 42 36 16.67% 73 60 21.67% Wright 16 22 -27.27% 23 28 -17.86% * Region Total * 1,009 976 3.38% 1,459 1,370 6.50%Kansas City Jackson 472 453 4.19% 725 643 12.75% * Region Total * 472 453 4.19% 725 643 12.75%St. Louis St Louis City 250 269 -7.06% 398 386 3.11% St Louis County 412 412 0.00% 595 542 9.78% * Region Total * 662 681 -2.79% 993 928 7.00%Other Out Home Inv 134 136 -1.47% 188 194 -3.09% Out Of State 6 8 -25.00% 7 13 -46.15% * Region Total * 140 144 -2.78% 195 207 -5.80%State Total 4,233 4,095 3.37% 6,331 5,773 9.67%

3


February 2011

Table 2. Status of Children by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments

Completed During February 2011

Substan- Totaltiated Children

Substan- Unsubstan- Unsubstan- Family Children Per Pertiated tiated PSI tiated Assessment Other Total Thousand Thousand

Northwest Andrew 0 0 12 7 0 19 0.00 4.37 Atchison 0 2 0 5 0 7 0.00 4.52 Buchanan 16 20 50 79 5 170 0.76 8.12 Caldwell 3 0 2 3 0 8 1.24 3.29 Carroll 1 2 0 5 0 8 0.39 3.09 Cass 17 4 25 47 1 94 0.73 4.03 Chariton 0 0 1 2 0 3 0.00 1.50 Clay 8 4 61 84 2 159 0.17 3.35 Clinton 1 0 4 16 2 23 0.20 4.53 Cooper 1 1 5 8 0 15 0.26 3.95 Daviess 1 0 1 0 0 2 0.46 0.93 De Kalb 0 0 4 0 0 4 0.00 1.66 Gentry 1 0 1 3 0 5 0.56 2.81 Grundy 3 1 5 7 0 16 1.24 6.60 Harrison 0 0 0 7 0 7 0.00 3.33 Holt 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.00 0.79 Johnson 4 0 20 17 0 41 0.33 3.38 Lafayette 0 0 13 38 2 53 0.00 6.14 Linn 4 1 4 14 0 23 1.15 6.59 Livingston 0 8 5 21 1 35 0.00 9.85 Mercer 0 0 1 3 0 4 0.00 4.63 Nodaway 1 0 4 10 0 15 0.24 3.53 Pettis 4 2 24 48 0 78 0.39 7.52 Platte 2 0 12 16 0 30 0.11 1.58 Putnam 0 1 1 8 0 10 0.00 7.97 Ray 1 0 23 19 0 43 0.16 6.68 Saline 0 0 10 4 3 17 0.00 2.94 Sullivan 0 2 4 2 0 8 0.00 4.43 Worth 0 0 0 3 0 3 0.00 5.18 * Region Total * 68 48 292 477 16 901 0.33 4.42Northeast Adair 8 2 0 7 0 17 1.67 3.54 Audrain 0 0 7 30 0 37 0.00 5.82 Boone 10 12 62 57 4 145 0.32 4.69 Callaway 6 3 11 31 0 51 0.58 4.92 Clark 0 0 8 0 0 8 0.00 4.32 Cole 0 10 19 22 0 51 0.00 2.95 Franklin 7 9 48 47 0 111 0.27 4.33 Gasconade 0 0 5 16 0 21 0.00 5.53 Howard 0 0 5 9 0 14 0.00 5.71 Jefferson 12 18 15 98 0 143 0.22 2.59 Knox 0 0 0 6 1 7 0.00 6.44 Lewis 1 2 0 10 0 13 0.38 4.95 Lincoln 5 3 26 27 0 61 0.43 5.22 Macon 4 0 0 0 0 4 1.05 1.05 Marion 10 4 9 33 0 56 1.38 7.70 Monroe 2 0 1 10 0 13 0.83 5.39 Montgomery 2 4 4 6 0 16 0.65 5.19 Osage 3 0 8 10 1 22 0.87 6.40 Pike 1 3 6 6 0 16 0.23 3.73 Ralls 1 1 0 2 1 5 0.41 2.06 Randolph 0 0 10 25 0 35 0.00 5.96 Schuyler 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.00 0.97 Scotland 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.00 1.41 Shelby 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.00 1.16 St Charles 17 6 64 97 4 188 0.21 2.29 Warren 4 0 7 21 0 32 0.61 4.86 * Region Total * 93 77 315 575 11 1,071 0.31 3.57Southeast Bollinger 5 0 1 3 0 9 1.59 2.86 Butler 5 17 21 40 3 86 0.51 8.70 Cape Girardeau 4 1 26 39 4 74 0.25 4.60 Carter 0 2 5 3 0 10 0.00 6.70 Crawford 1 8 7 21 0 37 0.17 6.18 Dent 3 6 5 6 1 21 0.81 5.65

4


February 2011

Table 2. Status of Children by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments

Completed During February 2011

Substan- Totaltiated Children

Substan- Unsubstan- Unsubstan- Family Children Per Pertiated tiated PSI tiated Assessment Other Total Thousand Thousand

Southeast Dunklin 0 2 7 16 1 26 0.00 3.02 Howell 4 9 4 38 1 56 0.41 5.79 Iron 0 3 6 16 0 25 0.00 9.35 Madison 2 0 3 16 0 21 0.69 7.23 Maries 0 4 5 3 0 12 0.00 5.18 Mississippi 4 1 5 13 0 23 1.13 6.51 New Madrid 5 2 7 13 0 27 0.96 5.17 Oregon 0 0 0 3 0 3 0.00 1.19 Pemiscot 4 10 18 17 3 52 0.67 8.65 Perry 0 0 4 16 0 20 0.00 4.24 Phelps 6 18 8 25 1 58 0.64 6.14 Pulaski 10 10 17 32 1 70 0.88 6.17 Reynolds 0 5 6 7 0 18 0.00 11.19 Ripley 6 3 7 10 1 27 1.79 8.05 Scott 8 8 22 24 2 64 0.72 5.77 Shannon 0 1 3 4 0 8 0.00 3.64 St Francois 12 10 32 34 2 90 0.90 6.75 Ste Genevieve 3 0 6 8 0 17 0.63 3.58 Stoddard 5 5 3 17 1 31 0.70 4.37 Texas 3 1 14 13 0 31 0.52 5.41 Washington 4 3 30 15 0 52 0.64 8.38 Wayne 0 5 6 14 5 30 0.00 9.74 * Region Total * 94 134 278 466 26 998 0.56 5.95Southwest Barry 1 1 15 26 1 44 0.11 4.96 Barton 2 0 4 14 0 20 0.58 5.81 Bates 0 0 3 6 0 9 0.00 2.04 Benton 0 2 2 8 0 12 0.00 3.41 Camden 1 1 19 29 0 50 0.13 6.66 Cedar 2 0 5 3 1 11 0.59 3.25 Christian 2 9 32 28 1 72 0.13 4.76 Dade 0 0 2 6 0 8 0.00 4.15 Dallas 2 11 13 26 4 56 0.46 13.02 Douglas 1 0 5 3 0 9 0.30 2.66 Greene 37 18 105 164 3 327 0.69 6.11 Henry 3 4 7 69 0 83 0.57 15.90 Hickory 0 0 8 2 0 10 0.00 5.61 Jasper 5 8 51 48 2 114 0.19 4.23 Laclede 21 21 32 41 0 115 2.42 13.26 Lawrence 4 2 28 33 1 68 0.42 7.10 Mcdonald 0 1 16 15 0 32 0.00 5.11 Miller 7 12 7 18 2 46 1.13 7.42 Moniteau 0 1 4 6 1 12 0.00 3.13 Morgan 5 0 7 12 0 24 1.09 5.22 Newton 1 5 13 21 2 42 0.07 3.04 Ozark 1 2 6 1 0 10 0.47 4.75 Polk 2 10 11 16 0 39 0.29 5.61 St Clair 0 0 0 4 0 4 0.00 1.80 Stone 5 0 12 30 0 47 0.81 7.66 Taney 3 13 13 25 0 54 0.34 6.06 Vernon 3 0 9 22 2 36 0.55 6.62 Webster 5 0 26 30 0 61 0.56 6.81 Wright 8 5 11 6 1 31 1.64 6.36 * Region Total * 121 126 466 712 21 1,446 0.50 5.98Kansas City Jackson 47 22 205 264 17 555 0.28 3.29 * Region Total * 47 22 205 264 17 555 0.28 3.29St. Louis St Louis City 10 14 98 100 11 233 0.11 2.60 St Louis County 43 29 166 237 22 497 0.17 1.94 * Region Total * 53 43 264 337 33 730 0.15 2.11Other Out Home Inv 9 0 148 0 1 158 0.00 0.00 * Region Total * 9 0 148 0 1 158 0.00 0.00State Total 485 450 1,968 2,831 125 5,859 0.34 4.10

5


February 2011

Table 3. Status of Incidents by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments

Completed by Conclusion During February 2011

Substantiated Unsubstantiated-PSI Unsubstantiated Family Assessment OtherNumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

Northwest Andrew 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 53.85% 6 46.15% 0 0.00% 13 Atchison 0 0.00% 1 33.33% 0 0.00% 2 66.67% 0 0.00% 3 Buchanan 9 8.65% 13 12.50% 36 34.62% 44 42.31% 2 1.92% 104 Caldwell 1 25.00% 0 0.00% 1 25.00% 2 50.00% 0 0.00% 4 Carroll 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 5 71.43% 0 0.00% 7 Cass 9 16.36% 2 3.64% 16 29.09% 27 49.09% 1 1.82% 55 Chariton 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 50.00% 1 50.00% 0 0.00% 2 Clay 5 5.21% 2 2.08% 39 40.63% 49 51.04% 1 1.04% 96 Clinton 1 6.67% 0 0.00% 3 20.00% 9 60.00% 2 13.33% 15 Cooper 1 7.69% 1 7.69% 3 23.08% 8 61.54% 0 0.00% 13 Daviess 1 50.00% 0 0.00% 1 50.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 De Kalb 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Gentry 1 33.33% 0 0.00% 1 33.33% 1 33.33% 0 0.00% 3 Grundy 1 10.00% 1 10.00% 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 0 0.00% 10 Harrison 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 5 Holt 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 Johnson 3 9.38% 0 0.00% 16 50.00% 13 40.63% 0 0.00% 32 Lafayette 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 9 28.13% 21 65.63% 2 6.25% 32 Linn 2 14.29% 1 7.14% 4 28.57% 7 50.00% 0 0.00% 14 Livingston 0 0.00% 4 19.05% 4 19.05% 12 57.14% 1 4.76% 21 Mercer 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 33.33% 2 66.67% 0 0.00% 3 Nodaway 1 10.00% 0 0.00% 3 30.00% 6 60.00% 0 0.00% 10 Pettis 1 2.63% 2 5.26% 16 42.11% 19 50.00% 0 0.00% 38 Platte 2 7.14% 0 0.00% 10 35.71% 16 57.14% 0 0.00% 28 Putnam 0 0.00% 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 5 71.43% 0 0.00% 7 Ray 1 3.45% 0 0.00% 15 51.72% 13 44.83% 0 0.00% 29 Saline 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 66.67% 2 22.22% 1 11.11% 9 Sullivan 0 0.00% 1 20.00% 2 40.00% 2 40.00% 0 0.00% 5 Worth 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2 * Region Total * 40 7.07% 30 5.30% 200 35.34% 286 50.53% 10 1.77% 566Northeast Adair 4 30.77% 2 15.39% 0 0.00% 6 46.15% 1 7.69% 13 Audrain 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 19.05% 17 80.95% 0 0.00% 21 Boone 9 8.33% 9 8.33% 49 45.37% 38 35.19% 3 2.78% 108 Callaway 3 9.38% 2 6.25% 9 28.13% 18 56.25% 0 0.00% 32 Clark 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 Cole 0 0.00% 6 14.63% 16 39.02% 19 46.34% 0 0.00% 41 Franklin 5 6.10% 5 6.10% 37 45.12% 35 42.68% 0 0.00% 82 Gasconade 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 30.77% 9 69.23% 0 0.00% 13 Howard 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 40.00% 6 60.00% 0 0.00% 10 Jefferson 10 10.53% 10 10.53% 12 12.63% 63 66.32% 0 0.00% 95 Knox 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 66.67% 1 33.33% 3 Lewis 1 9.09% 2 18.18% 0 0.00% 8 72.73% 0 0.00% 11 Lincoln 3 8.33% 3 8.33% 15 41.67% 14 38.89% 1 2.78% 36 Macon 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 Marion 4 10.53% 4 10.53% 6 15.79% 24 63.16% 0 0.00% 38 Monroe 1 10.00% 0 0.00% 1 10.00% 8 80.00% 0 0.00% 10 Montgomery 1 8.33% 1 8.33% 4 33.33% 6 50.00% 0 0.00% 12 Osage 2 18.18% 0 0.00% 5 45.46% 3 27.27% 1 9.09% 11 Pike 1 7.14% 3 21.43% 4 28.57% 6 42.86% 0 0.00% 14 Ralls 1 20.00% 1 20.00% 0 0.00% 2 40.00% 1 20.00% 5 Randolph 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 31.82% 15 68.18% 0 0.00% 22 Schuyler 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 Scotland 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2 Shelby 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 St Charles 14 10.37% 5 3.70% 43 31.85% 69 51.11% 4 2.96% 135 Warren 3 12.00% 0 0.00% 7 28.00% 15 60.00% 0 0.00% 25 * Region Total * 64 8.57% 53 7.10% 231 30.92% 387 51.81% 12 1.61% 747Southeast Bollinger 2 33.33% 0 0.00% 1 16.67% 3 50.00% 0 0.00% 6 Butler 3 5.46% 8 14.55% 13 23.64% 27 49.09% 4 7.27% 55 Cape Girardeau 3 5.56% 1 1.85% 17 31.48% 31 57.41% 2 3.70% 54 Carter 0 0.00% 1 25.00% 1 25.00% 2 50.00% 0 0.00% 4 Crawford 1 4.55% 5 22.73% 3 13.64% 13 59.09% 0 0.00% 22 Dent 3 23.08% 1 7.69% 4 30.77% 5 38.46% 0 0.00% 13

6


February 2011

Table 3. Status of Incidents by County, Based Upon Investigations/Assessments

Completed by Conclusion During February 2011

Substantiated Unsubstantiated-PSI Unsubstantiated Family Assessment OtherNumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

Southeast Dunklin 0 0.00% 2 9.09% 7 31.82% 12 54.55% 1 4.55% 22 Howell 2 5.88% 6 17.65% 4 11.77% 20 58.82% 2 5.88% 34 Iron 0 0.00% 2 12.50% 5 31.25% 9 56.25% 0 0.00% 16 Madison 1 8.33% 0 0.00% 2 16.67% 9 75.00% 0 0.00% 12 Maries 0 0.00% 1 20.00% 2 40.00% 2 40.00% 0 0.00% 5 Mississippi 2 14.29% 1 7.14% 4 28.57% 7 50.00% 0 0.00% 14 New Madrid 4 19.05% 2 9.52% 4 19.05% 11 52.38% 0 0.00% 21 Oregon 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 75.00% 1 25.00% 4 Pemiscot 4 12.50% 6 18.75% 10 31.25% 11 34.38% 1 3.13% 32 Perry 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 30.77% 9 69.23% 0 0.00% 13 Phelps 4 9.09% 10 22.73% 6 13.64% 22 50.00% 2 4.55% 44 Pulaski 6 15.00% 5 12.50% 12 30.00% 16 40.00% 1 2.50% 40 Reynolds 0 0.00% 4 36.36% 3 27.27% 4 36.36% 0 0.00% 11 Ripley 5 25.00% 1 5.00% 6 30.00% 8 40.00% 0 0.00% 20 Scott 3 6.52% 4 8.70% 16 34.78% 21 45.65% 2 4.35% 46 Shannon 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 42.86% 3 42.86% 1 14.29% 7 St Francois 7 11.48% 5 8.20% 25 40.98% 21 34.43% 3 4.92% 61 Ste Genevieve 3 25.00% 0 0.00% 3 25.00% 6 50.00% 0 0.00% 12 Stoddard 3 14.29% 3 14.29% 3 14.29% 11 52.38% 1 4.76% 21 Texas 3 13.64% 1 4.55% 9 40.91% 9 40.91% 0 0.00% 22 Washington 2 8.70% 1 4.35% 12 52.17% 8 34.78% 0 0.00% 23 Wayne 0 0.00% 2 9.52% 6 28.57% 12 57.14% 1 4.76% 21 * Region Total * 61 9.31% 72 10.99% 185 28.24% 315 48.09% 22 3.36% 655Southwest Barry 1 3.33% 1 3.33% 11 36.67% 15 50.00% 2 6.67% 30 Barton 2 15.39% 0 0.00% 3 23.08% 8 61.54% 0 0.00% 13 Bates 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 28.57% 5 71.43% 0 0.00% 7 Benton 0 0.00% 2 20.00% 1 10.00% 7 70.00% 0 0.00% 10 Camden 1 2.94% 1 2.94% 14 41.18% 18 52.94% 0 0.00% 34 Cedar 1 12.50% 0 0.00% 3 37.50% 3 37.50% 1 12.50% 8 Christian 2 3.51% 6 10.53% 21 36.84% 26 45.61% 2 3.51% 57 Dade 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 50.00% 2 50.00% 0 0.00% 4 Dallas 2 8.33% 2 8.33% 6 25.00% 12 50.00% 2 8.33% 24 Douglas 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 3 42.86% 3 42.86% 0 0.00% 7 Greene 28 11.57% 15 6.20% 75 30.99% 119 49.17% 5 2.07% 242 Henry 3 6.12% 2 4.08% 5 10.20% 38 77.55% 1 2.04% 49 Hickory 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 66.67% 2 33.33% 0 0.00% 6 Jasper 4 4.40% 7 7.69% 40 43.96% 37 40.66% 3 3.30% 91 Laclede 11 15.07% 12 16.44% 20 27.40% 30 41.10% 0 0.00% 73 Lawrence 3 7.50% 1 2.50% 14 35.00% 21 52.50% 1 2.50% 40 Mcdonald 0 0.00% 1 3.70% 12 44.44% 14 51.85% 0 0.00% 27 Miller 4 15.39% 6 23.08% 3 11.54% 12 46.15% 1 3.85% 26 Moniteau 0 0.00% 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 4 57.14% 1 14.29% 7 Morgan 2 12.50% 0 0.00% 5 31.25% 9 56.25% 0 0.00% 16 Newton 1 3.33% 2 6.67% 9 30.00% 16 53.33% 2 6.67% 30 Ozark 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 4 57.14% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 7 Polk 2 8.33% 3 12.50% 5 20.83% 14 58.33% 0 0.00% 24 St Clair 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3 Stone 2 5.71% 0 0.00% 9 25.71% 24 68.57% 0 0.00% 35 Taney 2 6.25% 8 25.00% 7 21.88% 15 46.88% 0 0.00% 32 Vernon 2 10.00% 0 0.00% 3 15.00% 14 70.00% 1 5.00% 20 Webster 3 7.69% 0 0.00% 17 43.59% 19 48.72% 0 0.00% 39 Wright 4 18.18% 3 13.64% 9 40.91% 5 22.73% 1 4.55% 22 * Region Total * 82 8.34% 74 7.53% 308 31.33% 496 50.46% 23 2.34% 983Kansas City Jackson 32 8.79% 16 4.40% 125 34.34% 178 48.90% 13 3.57% 364 * Region Total * 32 8.79% 16 4.40% 125 34.34% 178 48.90% 13 3.57% 364St. Louis St Louis City 7 4.43% 13 8.23% 64 40.51% 68 43.04% 6 3.80% 158 St Louis County 25 7.49% 23 6.89% 108 32.34% 165 49.40% 13 3.89% 334 * Region Total * 32 6.50% 36 7.32% 172 34.96% 233 47.36% 19 3.86% 492Other Out Home Inv 7 6.54% 0 0.00% 99 92.52% 0 0.00% 1 0.94% 107 * Region Total * 7 6.54% 0 0.00% 99 92.52% 0 0.00% 1 0.94% 107State Total 318 8.13% 281 7.18% 1,320 33.73% 1,895 48.42% 100 2.56% 3,914

7


February 2011

Table 4. Time From Receipt of a Report to the Initial Child Contact

Based Upon Investigations/Assessments Completed During February 2011

0 - 24 Hours Over 24 Hours No ContactNumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

Northwest Andrew 13 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 13 Atchison 2 66.67% 1 33.33% 0 0.00% 3 Buchanan 88 86.28% 14 13.73% 0 0.00% 102 Caldwell 3 75.00% 1 25.00% 0 0.00% 4 Carroll 7 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 Cass 43 81.13% 10 18.87% 0 0.00% 53 Chariton 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 Clay 79 89.77% 9 10.23% 0 0.00% 88 Clinton 11 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 11 Cooper 7 87.50% 1 12.50% 0 0.00% 8 Daviess 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 De Kalb 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Gentry 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Grundy 8 88.89% 1 11.11% 0 0.00% 9 Harrison 3 60.00% 2 40.00% 0 0.00% 5 Holt 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 Johnson 26 89.66% 3 10.35% 0 0.00% 29 Lafayette 26 83.87% 5 16.13% 0 0.00% 31 Linn 14 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 14 Livingston 18 90.00% 2 10.00% 0 0.00% 20 Mercer 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Nodaway 9 90.00% 1 10.00% 0 0.00% 10 Pettis 34 94.44% 2 5.56% 0 0.00% 36 Platte 23 88.46% 3 11.54% 0 0.00% 26 Putnam 6 85.71% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 7 Ray 25 96.15% 1 3.85% 0 0.00% 26 Saline 8 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 8 Sullivan 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 Worth 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 * Region Total * 474 89.27% 57 10.73% 0 0.00% 531Northeast Adair 12 92.31% 1 7.69% 0 0.00% 13 Audrain 16 88.89% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 18 Boone 86 85.15% 15 14.85% 0 0.00% 101 Callaway 25 89.29% 3 10.71% 0 0.00% 28 Clark 4 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 Cole 34 89.47% 4 10.53% 0 0.00% 38 Franklin 67 84.81% 12 15.19% 0 0.00% 79 Gasconade 11 91.67% 1 8.33% 0 0.00% 12 Howard 10 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 10 Jefferson 81 89.01% 10 10.99% 0 0.00% 91 Knox 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 Lewis 8 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 8 Lincoln 28 82.35% 6 17.65% 0 0.00% 34 Macon 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 Marion 30 83.33% 6 16.67% 0 0.00% 36 Monroe 7 77.78% 2 22.22% 0 0.00% 9 Montgomery 12 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 12 Osage 7 63.64% 4 36.36% 0 0.00% 11 Pike 12 92.31% 1 7.69% 0 0.00% 13 Ralls 4 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 Randolph 20 95.24% 1 4.76% 0 0.00% 21 Schuyler 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 Scotland 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 Shelby 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 St Charles 109 90.83% 11 9.17% 0 0.00% 120 Warren 21 87.50% 3 12.50% 0 0.00% 24 * Region Total * 612 88.18% 82 11.82% 0 0.00% 694Southeast Bollinger 6 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 Butler 50 94.34% 3 5.66% 0 0.00% 53 Cape Girardeau 46 95.83% 2 4.17% 0 0.00% 48 Carter 3 75.00% 1 25.00% 0 0.00% 4 Crawford 20 90.91% 2 9.09% 0 0.00% 22 Dent 12 92.31% 1 7.69% 0 0.00% 13

8


February 2011

Table 4. Time From Receipt of a Report to the Initial Child Contact


0 - 24 Hours Over 24 Hours No ContactNumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

Southeast Dunklin 21 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 21 Howell 31 96.88% 1 3.13% 0 0.00% 32 Iron 14 87.50% 2 12.50% 0 0.00% 16 Madison 9 75.00% 3 25.00% 0 0.00% 12 Maries 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 Mississippi 14 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 14 New Madrid 16 84.21% 3 15.79% 0 0.00% 19 Oregon 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Pemiscot 29 93.55% 2 6.45% 0 0.00% 31 Perry 13 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 13 Phelps 37 90.24% 4 9.76% 0 0.00% 41 Pulaski 32 80.00% 8 20.00% 0 0.00% 40 Reynolds 10 90.91% 1 9.09% 0 0.00% 11 Ripley 17 89.47% 2 10.53% 0 0.00% 19 Scott 42 93.33% 3 6.67% 0 0.00% 45 Shannon 5 83.33% 1 16.67% 0 0.00% 6 St Francois 50 84.75% 9 15.25% 0 0.00% 59 Ste Genevieve 10 90.91% 1 9.09% 0 0.00% 11 Stoddard 15 83.33% 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 18 Texas 21 95.46% 1 4.55% 0 0.00% 22 Washington 15 65.22% 8 34.78% 0 0.00% 23 Wayne 15 78.95% 4 21.05% 0 0.00% 19 * Region Total * 561 89.62% 65 10.38% 0 0.00% 626Southwest Barry 22 84.62% 4 15.39% 0 0.00% 26 Barton 12 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 12 Bates 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 0 0.00% 7 Benton 8 80.00% 2 20.00% 0 0.00% 10 Camden 31 93.94% 2 6.06% 0 0.00% 33 Cedar 6 85.71% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 7 Christian 44 83.02% 9 16.98% 0 0.00% 53 Dade 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Dallas 13 81.25% 3 18.75% 0 0.00% 16 Douglas 6 85.71% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 7 Greene 194 83.62% 38 16.38% 0 0.00% 232 Henry 41 87.23% 6 12.77% 0 0.00% 47 Hickory 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 Jasper 78 90.70% 8 9.30% 0 0.00% 86 Laclede 62 92.54% 5 7.46% 0 0.00% 67 Lawrence 35 92.11% 3 7.90% 0 0.00% 38 Mcdonald 23 95.83% 1 4.17% 0 0.00% 24 Miller 20 86.96% 3 13.04% 0 0.00% 23 Moniteau 4 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 Morgan 14 87.50% 2 12.50% 0 0.00% 16 Newton 26 96.30% 1 3.70% 0 0.00% 27 Ozark 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 0 0.00% 7 Polk 21 87.50% 3 12.50% 0 0.00% 24 St Clair 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 Stone 19 70.37% 8 29.63% 0 0.00% 27 Taney 31 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 31 Vernon 18 94.74% 1 5.26% 0 0.00% 19 Webster 33 84.62% 6 15.39% 0 0.00% 39 Wright 17 85.00% 3 15.00% 0 0.00% 20 * Region Total * 799 87.51% 114 12.49% 0 0.00% 913Kansas City Jackson 282 83.19% 57 16.81% 0 0.00% 339 * Region Total * 282 83.19% 57 16.81% 0 0.00% 339St. Louis St Louis City 114 79.72% 29 20.28% 0 0.00% 143 St Louis County 257 85.38% 44 14.62% 0 0.00% 301 * Region Total * 371 83.56% 73 16.44% 0 0.00% 444Other Out Home Inv 107 50.00% 0 0.00% 107 50.00% 214 * Region Total * 107 50.00% 0 0.00% 107 50.00% 214State Total 3,206 85.24% 448 11.91% 107 2.85% 3,761

9


February 2011

Table 5. The Number of Days Required to Complete Investigations/Assessments,


0 - 30 Days Over 30 DaysNumber Percent Number Percent Total

Northwest Andrew 12 92.31% 1 7.69% 13 Atchison 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3 Buchanan 91 87.50% 13 12.50% 104 Caldwell 2 50.00% 2 50.00% 4 Carroll 7 100.00% 0 0.00% 7 Cass 12 21.82% 43 78.18% 55 Chariton 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2 Clay 78 81.25% 18 18.75% 96 Clinton 11 73.33% 4 26.67% 15 Cooper 2 15.39% 11 84.62% 13 Daviess 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2 De Kalb 2 66.67% 1 33.33% 3 Gentry 2 66.67% 1 33.33% 3 Grundy 9 90.00% 1 10.00% 10 Harrison 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 5 Holt 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 Johnson 16 50.00% 16 50.00% 32 Lafayette 11 34.38% 21 65.63% 32 Linn 12 85.71% 2 14.29% 14 Livingston 13 61.91% 8 38.10% 21 Mercer 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3 Nodaway 9 90.00% 1 10.00% 10 Pettis 31 81.58% 7 18.42% 38 Platte 26 92.86% 2 7.14% 28 Putnam 7 100.00% 0 0.00% 7 Ray 21 72.41% 8 27.59% 29 Saline 7 77.78% 2 22.22% 9 Sullivan 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 5 Worth 1 50.00% 1 50.00% 2 * Region Total * 403 71.20% 163 28.80% 566Northeast Adair 12 92.31% 1 7.69% 13 Audrain 20 95.24% 1 4.76% 21 Boone 72 66.67% 36 33.33% 108 Callaway 21 65.63% 11 34.38% 32 Clark 4 100.00% 0 0.00% 4 Cole 23 56.10% 18 43.90% 41 Franklin 21 25.61% 61 74.39% 82 Gasconade 2 15.39% 11 84.62% 13 Howard 6 60.00% 4 40.00% 10 Jefferson 24 25.26% 71 74.74% 95 Knox 2 66.67% 1 33.33% 3 Lewis 7 63.64% 4 36.36% 11 Lincoln 20 55.56% 16 44.44% 36 Macon 1 50.00% 1 50.00% 2 Marion 18 47.37% 20 52.63% 38 Monroe 10 100.00% 0 0.00% 10 Montgomery 7 58.33% 5 41.67% 12 Osage 1 9.09% 10 90.91% 11 Pike 10 71.43% 4 28.57% 14 Ralls 3 60.00% 2 40.00% 5 Randolph 22 100.00% 0 0.00% 22 Schuyler 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 Scotland 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2 Shelby 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1 St Charles 76 56.30% 59 43.70% 135 Warren 16 64.00% 9 36.00% 25 * Region Total * 402 53.82% 345 46.19% 747Southeast Bollinger 3 50.00% 3 50.00% 6 Butler 35 63.64% 20 36.36% 55 Cape Girardeau 22 40.74% 32 59.26% 54 Carter 1 25.00% 3 75.00% 4 Crawford 15 68.18% 7 31.82% 22 Dent 1 7.69% 12 92.31% 13

10


February 2011

Table 5. The Number of Days Required to Complete Investigations/Assessments,


0 - 30 Days Over 30 DaysNumber Percent Number Percent Total

Southeast Dunklin 12 54.55% 10 45.46% 22 Howell 30 88.24% 4 11.77% 34 Iron 5 31.25% 11 68.75% 16 Madison 8 66.67% 4 33.33% 12 Maries 4 80.00% 1 20.00% 5 Mississippi 11 78.57% 3 21.43% 14 New Madrid 7 33.33% 14 66.67% 21 Oregon 2 50.00% 2 50.00% 4 Pemiscot 8 25.00% 24 75.00% 32 Perry 2 15.39% 11 84.62% 13 Phelps 28 63.64% 16 36.36% 44 Pulaski 22 55.00% 18 45.00% 40 Reynolds 2 18.18% 9 81.82% 11 Ripley 12 60.00% 8 40.00% 20 Scott 42 91.30% 4 8.70% 46 Shannon 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 7 St Francois 31 50.82% 30 49.18% 61 Ste Genevieve 9 75.00% 3 25.00% 12 Stoddard 3 14.29% 18 85.71% 21 Texas 16 72.73% 6 27.27% 22 Washington 16 69.57% 7 30.44% 23 Wayne 5 23.81% 16 76.19% 21 * Region Total * 357 54.50% 298 45.50% 655Southwest Barry 16 53.33% 14 46.67% 30 Barton 4 30.77% 9 69.23% 13 Bates 2 28.57% 5 71.43% 7 Benton 9 90.00% 1 10.00% 10 Camden 14 41.18% 20 58.82% 34 Cedar 5 62.50% 3 37.50% 8 Christian 40 70.18% 17 29.83% 57 Dade 3 75.00% 1 25.00% 4 Dallas 12 50.00% 12 50.00% 24 Douglas 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 7 Greene 169 69.84% 73 30.17% 242 Henry 2 4.08% 47 95.92% 49 Hickory 6 100.00% 0 0.00% 6 Jasper 42 46.15% 49 53.85% 91 Laclede 42 57.53% 31 42.47% 73 Lawrence 26 65.00% 14 35.00% 40 Mcdonald 16 59.26% 11 40.74% 27 Miller 14 53.85% 12 46.15% 26 Moniteau 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 7 Morgan 8 50.00% 8 50.00% 16 Newton 24 80.00% 6 20.00% 30 Ozark 4 57.14% 3 42.86% 7 Polk 19 79.17% 5 20.83% 24 St Clair 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3 Stone 24 68.57% 11 31.43% 35 Taney 19 59.38% 13 40.63% 32 Vernon 13 65.00% 7 35.00% 20 Webster 23 58.97% 16 41.03% 39 Wright 20 90.91% 2 9.09% 22 * Region Total * 589 59.92% 394 40.08% 983Kansas City Jackson 144 39.56% 220 60.44% 364 * Region Total * 144 39.56% 220 60.44% 364St. Louis St Louis City 42 26.58% 116 73.42% 158 St Louis County 182 54.49% 152 45.51% 334 * Region Total * 224 45.53% 268 54.47% 492Other Out Home Inv 90 84.11% 17 15.89% 107 * Region Total * 90 84.11% 17 15.89% 107State Total 2,209 56.44% 1,705 43.56% 3,914

11


February 2011

Table 6. CA/N Hotline Unit Reports and Referrals During February 2011

Newborn Non- Preventive Non CA/NCA/N Crisis Caretaker Service Fatality

Reports Assessment Referral Referral Referral TotalNorthwest Andrew 8 0 0 0 0 8 Atchison 5 0 1 0 0 6 Buchanan 72 7 8 5 0 92 Caldwell 4 1 0 0 0 5 Carroll 5 0 1 1 0 7 Cass 74 4 7 6 0 91 Chariton 5 0 0 0 0 5 Clay 123 7 8 2 0 140 Clinton 23 0 1 0 0 24 Cooper 15 0 2 3 0 20 Daviess 7 0 0 0 0 7 De Kalb 4 0 0 0 0 4 Gentry 8 1 0 0 0 9 Grundy 4 0 1 0 0 5 Harrison 2 0 0 0 0 2 Holt 3 0 0 0 0 3 Johnson 22 3 1 2 0 28 Lafayette 16 1 4 2 0 23 Linn 14 0 1 2 0 17 Livingston 19 0 1 0 0 20 Mercer 4 0 0 0 0 4 Nodaway 9 2 1 1 0 13 Pettis 32 0 2 0 0 34 Platte 30 6 2 0 0 38 Putnam 11 0 1 0 0 12 Ray 15 1 4 2 0 22 Saline 21 0 2 2 0 25 Sullivan 7 1 1 1 0 10 Worth 3 0 0 1 0 4 * Region Total * 565 34 49 30 0 678Northeast Adair 18 2 3 2 0 25 Audrain 18 0 1 0 0 19 Boone 81 2 10 6 0 99 Callaway 45 0 4 5 0 54 Clark 3 1 0 0 0 4 Cole 51 3 0 1 0 55 Franklin 66 6 5 3 0 80 Gasconade 12 0 2 1 0 15 Howard 6 0 0 0 0 6 Jefferson 131 4 8 15 0 158 Knox 3 0 0 0 0 3 Lewis 4 0 1 1 0 6 Lincoln 49 1 5 5 0 60 Macon 10 0 0 0 0 10 Marion 37 0 1 1 0 39 Monroe 7 1 1 1 0 10 Montgomery 5 1 0 1 0 7 Osage 9 0 0 1 0 10 Pike 10 3 0 1 0 14 Ralls 7 0 0 0 0 7 Randolph 21 0 0 1 0 22 Schuyler 3 0 0 0 0 3 Scotland 4 0 0 0 0 4 Shelby 4 0 1 0 0 5 St Charles 146 3 17 10 0 176 Warren 27 0 3 0 0 30 * Region Total * 777 27 62 55 0 921Southeast Bollinger 5 0 0 0 0 5 Butler 54 1 0 2 0 57 Cape Girardeau 47 2 6 1 0 56 Carter 8 1 0 1 0 10 Crawford 21 0 2 4 0 27 Dent 17 1 0 1 0 19

12


February 2011

Table 6. CA/N Hotline Unit Reports and Referrals During February 2011

Newborn Non- Preventive Non CA/NCA/N Crisis Caretaker Service Fatality

Reports Assessment Referral Referral Referral TotalSoutheast Dunklin 27 5 4 4 0 40 Howell 46 1 5 12 0 64 Iron 14 1 1 1 0 17 Madison 11 0 0 1 0 12 Maries 5 1 0 0 0 6 Mississippi 19 1 1 1 0 22 New Madrid 25 1 2 1 0 29 Oregon 15 1 0 2 0 18 Pemiscot 18 1 2 2 0 23 Perry 8 1 0 2 0 11 Phelps 43 2 5 3 0 53 Pulaski 39 1 1 2 0 43 Reynolds 5 0 1 0 0 6 Ripley 19 1 0 0 0 20 Scott 28 4 4 1 0 37 Shannon 9 0 0 2 0 11 St Francois 46 2 6 6 0 60 Ste Genevieve 10 0 0 0 0 10 Stoddard 21 1 4 6 0 32 Texas 24 0 0 6 0 30 Washington 16 1 1 1 0 19 Wayne 8 0 0 0 0 8 * Region Total * 608 30 45 62 0 745Southwest Barry 20 5 2 3 0 30 Barton 10 0 0 1 0 11 Bates 10 0 0 1 0 11 Benton 10 0 1 0 0 11 Camden 34 0 3 1 0 38 Cedar 12 1 1 1 0 15 Christian 58 1 8 3 0 70 Dade 2 0 0 2 0 4 Dallas 23 1 0 1 0 25 Douglas 11 2 3 1 0 17 Greene 293 19 29 35 0 376 Henry 19 2 1 1 0 23 Hickory 7 1 0 0 0 8 Jasper 101 9 9 5 0 124 Laclede 44 2 9 8 0 63 Lawrence 23 4 2 3 0 32 Mcdonald 23 1 1 2 0 27 Miller 37 0 3 4 0 44 Moniteau 15 0 1 1 0 17 Morgan 19 1 2 1 0 23 Newton 36 4 5 5 0 50 Ozark 5 0 0 1 0 6 Polk 29 1 2 5 0 37 St Clair 9 1 2 0 0 12 Stone 33 0 4 1 0 38 Taney 45 5 5 5 0 60 Vernon 23 0 1 2 0 26 Webster 42 0 1 2 0 45 Wright 16 0 1 4 0 21 * Region Total * 1,009 60 96 99 0 1,264Kansas City Jackson 472 54 51 53 0 630 * Region Total * 472 54 51 53 0 630St. Louis St Louis City 250 16 18 19 0 303 St Louis County 412 34 36 37 0 519 * Region Total * 662 50 54 56 0 822Other Out Home Inv 134 0 0 0 0 134 Out Of State 6 0 0 0 0 6 Stat Unit 0 0 0 0 70 70 * Region Total * 140 0 0 0 70 210State Total 4,233 255 357 355 70 5,270

13


February 2011

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

Feb-

07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov

-07

Feb-

08

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov

-08

Feb-

09

May

-09

Aug-

09

Nov

-09

Feb-

10

May

-10

Aug-

10

Nov

-10

Feb-

11

Figure 2.Child Abuse & Neglect Reports

For 4 Years Through February 2011

6,000

Figure 3.Child Abuse & Neglect Reports

From March 2009 Through February 2011

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec Jan

Feb

2009-2010 2010-2011

14


February 2011

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Northwest Northeast Southeast Southwest Kansas City St. Louis

Figure 4.Percentage Change in CA/N Reports

Made Twelve Months ApartFebruary 2010 and February 2011

100%

Figure 5.CA/N Investigations/Assessments Completed

During February 2011 by Conclusion

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%


Substantiated Unsubstantiated-PSI Unsubstianted Family Assessment Other

15


February 2011

Substantiated8%

UnsubstantiatedP S I4%

Unsubstantiated32%

Family Assessment50%

Other3%

Figure 6.CA/N Investigations/Assessments Completed

During February 2011 by Conclusion

100%

Figure 7.Time Between Report and Child Contact

For Investigations/Assessments Completed in February 2011

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%


Within 24 Hours After 24 Hours No Contact

16


February 2011

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Figure 8.Percentage of Investigations/Assessments

Completed Within 30 Days During February 2011

Within 30 Days More Than 30 Days

17


February 2011


February 201118

Notes: Child Abuse and Neglect Tables and Figures

Table 1. • Based upon incidents and children reported during the month. • Counts of children may be duplicated (i.e., children may be victims on multiple incidents during

any given month).

Table 2. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month. • Counts of children may be duplicated (i.e., children may be victims on multiple incidents during

any given month). • Conclusions are as follows:

Substantiated -> Court Adjudicated and Preponderance of Evidence Unsubstantiated-PSI -> Unsubstantiated-Preventive Services Indicated Unsubstantiated -> Unsubstantiated Family Assessment -> Family Assessment-Services Needed, Family Assessment-Services Not

Needed, and Family Assessment-Non-cooperative/Child Safe Assessment-Services Needed-Linked Initial 30 Days Assessment-Services Needed-Family Declined Other -> Unable to Locate, Inappropriate Report, Located Out of State, Home

Schooling, Unsubstantiated (School Investigation), Substantiated (School Investigation), and Unresolved (School Investigation)

• Population data is based upon the Total Population Under Age 18, Mapping Census 2000: The

Geography of U.S. Diversity, U.S. Census Bureau, released December 7, 2001.

Table 3. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month. • Conclusions are as follows:




Table 4. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month. Does not include information

on expunged reports and reports where the only alleged category of abuse/neglect was educational neglect, or reports concluded as E- Unable to Locate, G- Inappropriate report or H- Located out of state.


February 201119

Table 5. • Based upon incidents concluded during the month. Table 6. • Based upon incidents and referrals reported during the month.

Figure 2. and Figure 3. • Based upon incidents reported during the month.

Figure 4. • Based upon incidents reported during the month compared to incidents reported during the same

month of the previous year.

Figure 5. and Figure 6. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month. • Conclusions are as follows:




• Figures do not include Out-of-Home Investigation, STAT Unit, or Out of State categories.

Figure 7. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month. Does not include information

on expunged reports and reports where the only alleged category of abuse/neglect was educational neglect, or reports concluded as E- Unable to Locate, G- Inappropriate report or H- Located out of state.

Figure 8. • Based upon investigations/assessments completed during the month.

Family-Centered Services

Table 7. Family-Centered Services Cases Open at the End of February 2011

by Reason for Opening

Preponderance Court Newborn Totalof Preventive Order Crisis Family Cases

Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveNorthwest Andrew 0 1 0 0 3 4 Atchison 2 2 0 0 1 5 Buchanan 7 21 1 5 54 88 Caldwell 3 1 0 1 3 8 Carroll 0 2 0 1 3 6 Cass 32 31 15 6 113 197 Chariton 0 2 1 0 5 8 Clay 16 16 3 4 33 72 Clinton 7 2 0 1 8 18 Cooper 0 6 0 0 10 16 Daviess 6 2 0 0 1 9 De Kalb 0 1 1 0 3 5 Gentry 1 0 0 0 3 4 Grundy 3 8 0 0 1 12 Harrison 3 4 0 0 6 13 Holt 1 0 3 0 1 5 Johnson 8 15 16 4 23 66 Lafayette 4 12 0 4 4 24 Linn 4 12 0 2 21 39 Livingston 6 6 0 1 10 23 Mercer 0 1 0 0 0 1 Nodaway 2 4 0 1 20 27 Pettis 8 10 3 2 14 37 Platte 2 7 0 0 9 18 Putnam 5 1 0 1 5 12 Ray 1 1 0 4 4 10 Saline 7 10 1 1 6 25 Sullivan 2 2 0 1 7 12 Worth 0 1 0 0 1 2 * Region Total * 130 181 44 39 372 766Northeast Adair 8 14 5 1 19 47 Audrain 6 8 0 0 17 31 Boone 25 60 24 6 56 171 Callaway 16 29 1 3 30 79 Clark 4 7 3 1 11 26 Cole 6 25 8 1 57 97 Franklin 41 72 3 10 70 196 Gasconade 1 6 0 3 4 14 Howard 3 0 0 0 5 8 Jefferson 72 52 10 1 305 440 Knox 0 2 1 0 3 6 Lewis 3 11 1 0 5 20 Lincoln 10 18 4 0 37 69 Macon 7 10 0 1 11 29 Marion 18 6 7 4 12 47 Monroe 1 1 0 1 3 6 Montgomery 6 11 0 0 9 26 Osage 1 3 0 0 3 7 Pike 5 2 1 1 21 30 Ralls 2 1 0 1 5 9 Randolph 11 10 12 2 25 60 Schuyler 0 2 0 0 3 5 Scotland 0 0 0 0 4 4 Shelby 1 5 0 0 5 11 St Charles 23 28 16 4 97 168 Warren 21 8 1 3 16 49 * Region Total * 291 391 97 43 833 1,655Southeast Bollinger 4 1 1 0 11 17 Butler 5 21 9 2 33 70 Cape Girardeau 13 15 0 5 65 98 Carter 1 3 0 0 2 6 Crawford 1 20 2 1 44 68 Dent 6 4 0 0 23 33

21


February 2011

Table 7. Family-Centered Services Cases Open at the End of February 2011



Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveSoutheast Dunklin 4 7 3 6 44 64 Howell 14 20 1 4 78 117 Iron 3 6 0 0 15 24 Madison 9 4 0 1 11 25 Maries 1 3 1 0 7 12 Mississippi 1 5 0 1 8 15 New Madrid 8 12 1 13 38 72 Oregon 0 3 0 0 8 11 Pemiscot 6 8 0 11 55 80 Perry 3 4 0 1 11 19 Phelps 4 29 4 1 55 93 Pulaski 1 28 4 2 64 99 Reynolds 1 3 0 0 10 14 Ripley 2 1 4 1 9 17 Scott 12 26 3 8 33 82 Shannon 0 1 0 1 1 3 St Francois 20 36 0 4 49 109 Ste Genevieve 1 7 1 1 9 19 Stoddard 3 20 0 0 113 136 Texas 4 1 2 2 22 31 Washington 20 20 0 3 30 73 Wayne 1 3 0 0 15 19 * Region Total * 148 311 36 68 863 1,426Southwest Barry 13 33 1 2 64 113 Barton 3 2 2 1 17 25 Bates 6 7 4 1 21 39 Benton 0 4 0 0 4 8 Camden 11 4 1 0 38 54 Cedar 0 5 1 1 11 18 Christian 7 48 11 3 40 109 Dade 1 2 1 0 9 13 Dallas 7 3 1 0 8 19 Douglas 1 2 0 3 6 12 Greene 143 113 8 24 434 722 Henry 4 7 2 2 43 58 Hickory 2 4 0 0 9 15 Jasper 16 122 55 13 188 394 Laclede 36 18 4 1 61 120 Lawrence 12 21 2 3 51 89 Mcdonald 8 9 1 3 40 61 Miller 13 32 0 1 28 74 Moniteau 2 5 0 1 14 22 Morgan 2 3 0 0 26 31 Newton 25 29 6 4 69 133 Ozark 5 3 0 0 9 17 Polk 5 5 1 0 28 39 St Clair 0 4 2 1 9 16 Stone 8 12 2 1 45 68 Taney 14 30 20 7 99 170 Vernon 1 6 2 3 23 35 Webster 4 7 0 0 24 35 Wright 4 10 1 1 24 40 * Region Total * 353 550 128 76 1,442 2,549Kansas City Jackson 271 173 87 124 759 1,414 * Region Total * 271 173 87 124 759 1,414St. Louis St Louis City 134 86 7 42 280 549 St Louis County 302 256 52 72 385 1,067 * Region Total * 436 342 59 114 665 1,616State Total 1,629 1,948 451 464 4,934 9,426

22


February 2011

Table 8. Family-Centered Services Cases Active During February 2011



Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveNorthwest Andrew 0 1 0 0 3 4 Atchison 2 2 0 0 1 5 Buchanan 9 25 1 6 64 105 Caldwell 3 1 0 1 4 9 Carroll 0 2 0 1 3 6 Cass 34 32 15 6 114 201 Chariton 0 2 1 0 8 11 Clay 17 20 4 5 35 81 Clinton 8 3 0 1 11 23 Cooper 0 6 0 1 11 18 Daviess 6 2 0 0 2 10 De Kalb 0 1 1 0 4 6 Gentry 1 0 0 0 5 6 Grundy 3 8 1 0 2 14 Harrison 3 6 0 0 8 17 Holt 1 0 3 0 2 6 Johnson 8 17 17 4 26 72 Lafayette 4 13 0 4 4 25 Linn 4 12 0 2 23 41 Livingston 7 8 0 1 10 26 Mercer 0 1 0 0 0 1 Nodaway 2 4 1 1 21 29 Pettis 8 13 3 2 14 40 Platte 3 8 0 0 10 21 Putnam 5 1 0 1 5 12 Ray 1 1 0 4 5 11 Saline 7 11 1 1 10 30 Sullivan 2 2 0 1 7 12 Worth 0 1 0 0 1 2 * Region Total * 138 203 48 42 413 844Northeast Adair 8 18 5 1 21 53 Audrain 6 9 0 0 17 32 Boone 29 64 24 8 58 183 Callaway 16 30 1 3 31 81 Clark 5 7 3 1 12 28 Cole 7 29 8 1 62 107 Franklin 45 76 3 11 76 211 Gasconade 1 8 0 3 4 16 Howard 3 1 0 0 5 9 Jefferson 75 54 12 1 317 459 Knox 1 2 1 0 4 8 Lewis 3 11 2 0 5 21 Lincoln 10 18 4 1 38 71 Macon 7 10 1 1 11 30 Marion 18 6 8 4 12 48 Monroe 1 1 0 1 3 6 Montgomery 6 11 0 0 11 28 Osage 1 3 0 0 3 7 Pike 5 2 1 1 22 31 Ralls 2 1 0 1 5 9 Randolph 11 13 12 2 26 64 Schuyler 0 3 0 0 3 6 Scotland 0 0 0 0 6 6 Shelby 1 5 0 0 5 11 St Charles 23 33 16 5 102 179 Warren 21 10 1 3 17 52 * Region Total * 305 425 102 48 876 1,756Southeast Bollinger 4 1 1 0 12 18 Butler 7 23 9 2 40 81 Cape Girardeau 13 15 0 6 67 101 Carter 1 3 0 0 3 7 Crawford 1 23 2 1 50 77 Dent 6 4 0 0 24 34

23


February 2011

Table 8. Family-Centered Services Cases Active During February 2011



Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveSoutheast Dunklin 5 9 3 8 48 73 Howell 15 24 1 4 88 132 Iron 3 7 0 0 15 25 Madison 9 7 0 1 13 30 Maries 1 3 1 0 7 12 Mississippi 1 5 0 1 9 16 New Madrid 9 12 1 14 40 76 Oregon 0 3 0 0 12 15 Pemiscot 6 8 0 13 57 84 Perry 4 4 0 1 14 23 Phelps 4 33 5 1 59 102 Pulaski 1 29 4 2 72 108 Reynolds 1 3 0 0 11 15 Ripley 2 2 4 1 9 18 Scott 13 28 3 8 34 86 Shannon 0 1 0 1 2 4 St Francois 21 39 0 5 52 117 Ste Genevieve 2 12 1 1 10 26 Stoddard 3 21 0 0 123 147 Texas 4 4 2 2 24 36 Washington 20 22 0 3 31 76 Wayne 1 3 0 0 16 20 * Region Total * 157 348 37 75 942 1,559Southwest Barry 13 37 1 2 69 122 Barton 3 2 3 1 18 27 Bates 6 7 4 1 21 39 Benton 0 6 0 0 8 14 Camden 11 4 1 0 42 58 Cedar 0 5 2 1 12 20 Christian 7 53 11 3 42 116 Dade 1 4 1 0 11 17 Dallas 7 4 1 0 10 22 Douglas 1 3 0 3 10 17 Greene 146 118 9 27 450 750 Henry 4 7 2 2 47 62 Hickory 2 4 0 0 9 15 Jasper 16 129 56 14 194 409 Laclede 40 20 4 2 70 136 Lawrence 12 21 2 3 51 89 Mcdonald 8 10 1 3 41 63 Miller 13 36 1 1 31 82 Moniteau 2 6 0 1 14 23 Morgan 2 3 0 0 28 33 Newton 27 31 7 4 77 146 Ozark 5 3 0 0 9 17 Polk 6 6 1 0 30 43 St Clair 0 4 2 1 9 16 Stone 8 13 2 1 50 74 Taney 15 32 21 8 106 182 Vernon 1 6 3 3 25 38 Webster 4 9 0 0 25 38 Wright 4 11 2 1 28 46 * Region Total * 364 594 137 82 1,537 2,714Kansas City Jackson 277 178 90 128 796 1,469 * Region Total * 277 178 90 128 796 1,469St. Louis St Louis City 139 90 7 43 302 581 St Louis County 321 274 57 76 403 1,131 * Region Total * 460 364 64 119 705 1,712State Total 1,701 2,112 478 494 5,269 10,054

24


February 2011

Table 9. Persons in Family-Centered Services During February 2011

Child Total Persons withAdults Children Caretakers Persons Court Action

Northwest Andrew 17 16 0 33 2 Atchison 9 14 0 23 9 Buchanan 228 245 1 474 58 Caldwell 19 23 0 42 13 Carroll 12 8 0 20 5 Cass 361 389 2 752 238 Chariton 22 30 0 52 12 Clay 163 181 0 344 75 Clinton 56 55 0 111 25 Cooper 37 42 0 79 22 Daviess 19 16 0 35 15 De Kalb 12 11 0 23 4 Gentry 12 18 0 30 16 Grundy 20 35 0 55 25 Harrison 29 29 0 58 8 Holt 10 15 0 25 13 Johnson 120 131 0 251 82 Lafayette 53 50 1 104 30 Linn 81 87 1 169 41 Livingston 58 60 0 118 25 Mercer 0 0 0 0 0 Nodaway 53 55 0 108 52 Pettis 73 92 0 165 59 Platte 38 44 0 82 17 Putnam 17 24 0 41 19 Ray 26 27 0 53 9 Saline 62 73 0 135 36 Sullivan 22 26 0 48 16 Worth 3 6 0 9 5 * Region Total * 1,632 1,802 5 3,439 931Northeast Adair 96 101 0 197 72 Audrain 66 66 1 133 36 Boone 366 408 3 777 183 Callaway 155 172 1 328 88 Clark 42 45 0 87 25 Cole 207 239 0 446 107 Franklin 444 447 0 891 226 Gasconade 28 36 0 64 12 Howard 16 14 0 30 11 Jefferson 867 799 4 1,670 612 Knox 11 13 0 24 10 Lewis 38 51 0 89 33 Lincoln 146 173 0 319 108 Macon 56 67 0 123 44 Marion 73 106 0 179 67 Monroe 15 15 0 30 6 Montgomery 44 57 1 102 36 Osage 15 10 0 25 10 Pike 59 69 0 128 32 Ralls 17 17 0 34 9 Randolph 112 137 0 249 88 Schuyler 8 7 0 15 7 Scotland 10 9 0 19 6 Shelby 18 28 0 46 17 St Charles 379 407 2 788 211 Warren 105 119 1 225 86 * Region Total * 3,393 3,612 13 7,018 2,142Southeast Bollinger 45 42 0 87 30 Butler 145 171 2 318 93 Cape Girardeau 200 213 1 414 98 Carter 16 21 0 37 4 Crawford 146 180 0 326 49 Dent 52 62 0 114 29

25


February 2011

Table 9. Persons in Family-Centered Services During February 2011

Child Total Persons withAdults Children Caretakers Persons Court Action

Southeast Dunklin 117 159 0 276 91 Howell 238 278 1 517 72 Iron 43 56 0 99 24 Madison 62 74 0 136 33 Maries 27 31 0 58 11 Mississippi 24 45 0 69 17 New Madrid 143 153 0 296 64 Oregon 29 29 0 58 6 Pemiscot 163 247 0 410 80 Perry 46 58 0 104 31 Phelps 204 222 0 426 95 Pulaski 224 223 0 447 105 Reynolds 36 34 0 70 9 Ripley 38 58 0 96 42 Scott 146 225 0 371 105 Shannon 5 10 0 15 1 St Francois 235 282 1 518 88 Ste Genevieve 55 59 0 114 18 Stoddard 242 268 0 510 195 Texas 66 86 0 152 57 Washington 134 175 1 310 130 Wayne 42 48 1 91 27 * Region Total * 2,923 3,509 7 6,439 1,604Southwest Barry 211 253 1 465 148 Barton 53 62 0 115 29 Bates 71 96 1 168 51 Benton 27 34 0 61 8 Camden 107 125 2 234 75 Cedar 36 52 0 88 14 Christian 211 245 1 457 157 Dade 29 36 1 66 11 Dallas 39 47 0 86 26 Douglas 35 27 0 62 14 Greene 1,296 1,295 3 2,594 973 Henry 140 110 1 251 86 Hickory 26 27 1 54 20 Jasper 794 850 7 1,651 608 Laclede 272 272 1 545 158 Lawrence 158 190 0 348 97 Mcdonald 115 123 2 240 96 Miller 169 161 3 333 85 Moniteau 45 49 0 94 19 Morgan 70 69 0 139 33 Newton 268 292 0 560 239 Ozark 39 34 0 73 21 Polk 79 77 0 156 41 St Clair 29 43 0 72 33 Stone 123 147 0 270 79 Taney 311 375 2 688 249 Vernon 54 90 0 144 45 Webster 85 85 0 170 42 Wright 85 110 0 195 55 * Region Total * 4,977 5,376 26 10,379 3,512Kansas City Jackson 2,563 3,150 10 5,723 2,405 * Region Total * 2,563 3,150 10 5,723 2,405St. Louis St Louis City 990 1,465 39 2,494 834 St Louis County 1,828 2,561 35 4,424 1,246 * Region Total * 2,818 4,026 74 6,918 2,080State Total 18,306 21,475 135 39,916 12,674

26


February 2011

Table 10. Family-Centered Services Cases Opened During February 2011



Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveNorthwest Andrew 0 0 0 0 0 0 Atchison 1 2 0 0 0 3 Buchanan 0 2 0 0 12 14 Caldwell 1 0 0 0 0 1 Carroll 0 0 0 0 1 1 Cass 0 0 2 1 9 12 Chariton 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clay 0 2 0 0 2 4 Clinton 0 0 0 0 3 3 Cooper 0 2 0 0 0 2 Daviess 0 0 0 0 0 0 De Kalb 0 0 0 0 1 1 Gentry 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grundy 0 0 0 0 0 0 Harrison 0 0 0 0 0 0 Holt 0 0 0 0 0 0 Johnson 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lafayette 0 0 0 0 1 1 Linn 0 1 0 0 1 2 Livingston 0 1 0 0 0 1 Mercer 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nodaway 1 0 0 0 1 2 Pettis 0 1 0 0 0 1 Platte 0 0 0 0 2 2 Putnam 0 0 0 0 3 3 Ray 0 0 0 0 1 1 Saline 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sullivan 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worth 0 0 0 0 1 1 * Region Total * 3 11 2 1 39 56Northeast Adair 0 3 0 0 3 6 Audrain 0 1 0 0 2 3 Boone 4 7 1 0 1 13 Callaway 3 2 0 0 4 9 Clark 0 1 1 0 0 2 Cole 1 4 0 0 13 18 Franklin 2 10 0 0 5 17 Gasconade 0 0 0 0 1 1 Howard 0 0 0 0 1 1 Jefferson 3 1 3 1 14 22 Knox 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lewis 1 1 0 0 0 2 Lincoln 1 3 0 0 8 12 Macon 2 0 0 0 1 3 Marion 2 1 0 0 1 4 Monroe 0 0 0 1 1 2 Montgomery 0 1 0 0 1 2 Osage 0 0 0 0 1 1 Pike 0 0 0 1 2 3 Ralls 1 0 0 0 0 1 Randolph 1 2 0 0 0 3 Schuyler 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scotland 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shelby 0 0 0 0 0 0 St Charles 1 0 1 1 14 17 Warren 2 1 0 0 2 5 * Region Total * 24 38 6 4 76 148Southeast Bollinger 0 0 0 0 1 1 Butler 0 4 1 0 2 7 Cape Girardeau 1 2 0 0 6 9 Carter 0 2 0 0 0 2 Crawford 0 0 1 0 5 6 Dent 0 1 0 0 1 2

27


February 2011

Table 10. Family-Centered Services Cases Opened During February 2011



Evidence Services Only Assessment Assessment ActiveSoutheast Dunklin 0 0 0 1 5 6 Howell 2 1 0 1 7 11 Iron 1 0 0 0 1 2 Madison 1 0 0 0 0 1 Maries 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mississippi 0 1 0 0 0 1 New Madrid 0 1 0 0 8 9 Oregon 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pemiscot 1 1 0 1 5 8 Perry 0 1 0 1 2 4 Phelps 0 4 1 0 9 14 Pulaski 0 2 0 0 4 6 Reynolds 0 0 0 0 1 1 Ripley 1 0 0 0 2 3 Scott 1 3 0 1 2 7 Shannon 0 0 0 0 1 1 St Francois 1 3 0 0 4 8 Ste Genevieve 0 1 0 0 1 2 Stoddard 0 2 0 0 20 22 Texas 0 1 1 0 3 5 Washington 1 0 0 0 0 1 Wayne 1 0 0 0 4 5 * Region Total * 11 30 4 5 94 144Southwest Barry 0 4 0 0 5 9 Barton 0 0 0 0 1 1 Bates 0 0 0 0 1 1 Benton 0 0 0 0 0 0 Camden 1 0 0 0 3 4 Cedar 0 0 0 1 1 2 Christian 1 1 0 1 6 9 Dade 1 1 0 0 0 2 Dallas 0 1 0 0 1 2 Douglas 0 0 0 1 1 2 Greene 12 3 0 1 40 56 Henry 0 2 0 0 7 9 Hickory 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jasper 0 2 0 0 14 16 Laclede 2 1 0 0 0 3 Lawrence 0 0 0 0 7 7 Mcdonald 1 2 0 0 2 5 Miller 1 2 0 0 1 4 Moniteau 0 0 0 0 2 2 Morgan 0 0 0 0 2 2 Newton 0 2 1 1 4 8 Ozark 1 0 0 0 1 2 Polk 0 1 0 0 3 4 St Clair 0 1 0 0 0 1 Stone 0 0 0 0 5 5 Taney 0 1 0 0 8 9 Vernon 0 0 0 0 1 1 Webster 0 0 0 0 2 2 Wright 0 2 0 0 4 6 * Region Total * 20 26 1 5 122 174Kansas City Jackson 9 3 3 4 40 59 * Region Total * 9 3 3 4 40 59St. Louis St Louis City 7 3 0 3 21 34 St Louis County 16 21 3 6 21 67 * Region Total * 23 24 3 9 42 101State Total 90 132 19 28 413 682

28


February 2011

Table 11. Family-Centered Services Cases Closed During February 2011

by Close Reason

Total Goal Achieved Other Cases

Number Percent Number Percent ClosedNorthwest Andrew 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 Atchison 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 Buchanan 15 88.24% 2 11.77% 17

children's services management reportdss.mo.gov/re/pdf/csmr/1102childrens-services-management... ·...

Documents