Robert David Steele #unrig Jason Goodman day 235

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMJoAO5OZY8 at 40:08

Robert David Steele says Peter Thiel admits to taking young blood - says elites have been drinking adrenalized baby blood.

Excellent catch. This is a perfect example of how the system works: connected globalists use one of their pet non-profits to produce the right kind of 'independent' research showing that obviously Child Welfare needs more money and resources. Of course we know only too well why they're doing it and the list of usual suspects involved is entirely unsurprising.

RAND’s Recently Released Child Welfare System Simulation: Revisions Are Needed

By Guest Writer(s)

Last week, the RAND Corporation published a report on the child welfare system that controverts peer-reviewed research and common sense. The widely known and influential non-profit research firm created a simulation model that dramatically underestimates lifetime rates of child maltreatment reports, substantiations and entries into foster care.

The numbers published by RAND are troubling because data can and should drive programs and policies. Such a gross underestimate of the real extent of child maltreatment in the United States can make the plight of children suffering from abuse appear marginal, when in fact it is a significant problem.

Because of our concern for accurate data and the problem of child maltreatment, we 34 researchers, representing multiple disciplines including, social work, medicine, public health, epidemiology, sociology and economics, call for RAND to retract their report.

While our discussion below focuses on RAND’s estimates of baseline rates, we also have concerns about several other aspects of RAND’s model and the conclusions drawn.

Serious Problems with Maltreatment Estimates in RAND Report

Recently, researchers at the RAND Corporation released a report describing a model they created as a simulation of how children flow through the child welfare system (CWS) system.

RAND’s simulation model was designed to estimate what would happen if we were to increase spending on maltreatment prevention, family preservation, and placements with kin caregivers. The RAND model predicted that increased investments in preventative services and kin placements would lead to savings of over $12 billion in direct costs to the child welfare system. RAND publicized their effort in various media outlets. The research team suggested that their model be adopted as a policy tool both nationally, and following adaptation, at the state level.

We were pleased to see RAND publish a report advocating prevention as a means of proactively addressing the problem of child maltreatment. A better understanding of the opportunities and benefits, both human and financial, associated with improved prevention policies and practices would be a significant contribution to the field; but we are concerned with the inaccuracy of several statistics presented in the report.

Simulation models are complex, but compared to the real world, they are simplistic and inherently imperfect. There are many ways to make a good model, and an infinite number of ways to make a bad one. What happens when a model is fundamentally wrong? And not just a little bit wrong as in “I am not sure that assumption holds” or “that estimate seems a bit low,” but off by a factor of ten? The results can become meaningless, and sometimes dangerous.

Unfortunately, the RAND model includes basic assumptions that are, in fact, off by at least a factor of ten. These are not peripheral assumptions – they are the most important pieces of the puzzle in understanding the CWS system.

In generating their lifetime estimates, from birth through age 18, RAND has severely underestimated how many children are reported to CWS, how many are substantiated as victims, and how many children ever spend time in foster care.

How do we know that the RAND estimates are wrong? How can we confidently say that RAND’s estimates are inaccurate and other data are right?

We know that the RAND estimates are wrong because we can compare them not to other estimates, but to actual counts of known reports, substantiations and foster care entries.

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) warehouses child maltreatment data at the National Data Archive for Child Abuse and Neglect, including the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS). These data consist of “Child Files” containing de-identified data on nearly every child who is reported and screened-in by the child welfare system. Every year DHHS publishes a new annual report summarizing these data – the most recent being “Child Maltreatment 2015”.

So let us compare numbers. We will use RAND’s figures and compare them to commonly reported and publically available DHHS counts (based on reports from the states and the District of Columbia), while also folding in a few other studies from the peer-reviewed scientific literature as they apply.

How many children receive a screened-in report for maltreatment from birth to age 18?

RAND’s model estimates the lifetime rate of children reported and screened-in for a CWS investigation/alternative response (hereafter referred to as “reported”) is 32/1000 from birth to age 18. DHHS data indicate that 45.1/1000 children were reported during 2015 alone. A study published analysis by Kim et. al., (2017) in the American Journal of Public Health used multiple years of NCANDS data and estimated that between birth and age 18, 375/1000 children receive a CWS investigation. RAND’s lifetime estimate is lower than the known yearly estimate and more than ten times lower than a peer-reviewed and published estimate.

How many children are substantiated as victims of maltreatment from birth to age 18?

RAND’s model estimates the lifetime substantiation rate is 9/1000 children. DHHS reports that during 2015 alone, 9.2/1000 children were substantiated as victims. A study published by Wildeman et al., (2014) in The Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics, linked together multiple years of NCANDS data and reported that 125/1000 children were substantiated for maltreatment prior to turning 18. RAND’s lifetime estimate is close to the known yearly rate and is more than ten times lower than a peer-reviewed and published lifetime estimate.

How many children enter foster care from birth to age 18?

RAND asserts that 3/1000 children are ever removed and placed in out-of-home foster care during their lifetimes. DHHS, using the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) documents that 269,509 children entered foster care in 2015, a rate of 3.6/1000. Wildeman and Emanuel (2014) used AFCARS data and estimated that over their lifetimes, 59/1000 children are removed and placed in foster care. One caveat is worth mentioning. The national foster care statistics should be slightly higher than the RAND estimates, as all children in the RAND sample are presumed to be in foster care due to child maltreatment, while some children are actually in foster care for reasons other than abuse or neglect. However, most foster children enter for reasons of maltreatment. Child neglect alone was a reason for removal for 61% of all foster children entering care in 2015. Again, we see that the RAND lifetime estimate is very close to the known single year statistic, and at least ten times lower than a peer-reviewed and published lifetime statistic. It is more difficult to address RAND’s assertion that 40/1000 children experience maltreatment in their lifetimes, because there are no national count data on the lifetime prevalence of maltreatment. Moreover, since most maltreatment happens in private and is never known to anyone but the victim and perpetrator, the national count data on annual maltreatment represent only the tip of the maltreatment iceberg.

There are a series of peer-reviewed published estimates, however, both yearly and lifetime (e.g. Finkelhor et. al., 2005; Hussey, Chang & Kotch, 2006; Finkelhor, Turner, Shattuck, & Hamby, 2013). These estimates suggest lifetime rates of maltreatment exposure in the range of about 300-400/1000 children. Again, the RAND estimates appear to be low by a factor of ten. It is also difficult to address RAND’s assertion that 46/1000 children receive a referral during their lifetimes, either screened-in or screened-out. In 2015, 4 million referrals were made that included 7.2 million children, a rate of approximately 96 child-level referrals per 1000 children. This number, however, is an overestimate, as some children appear in multiple referrals (duplicates). Since we already know that 45.1/1000 children had referrals that were screened in as reports in 2015 (see above), then the number of unique children referred in that single year must be between 45.1/1000 and 96/1000 children, almost certainly higher than the RAND lifetime estimate.

Conclusion:

The lifetime maltreatment estimates developed from RAND’s simulation model are simply wrong. RAND underestimates involvement with child protective services in the United States by at least a factor of ten. This makes the integrity of the whole model questionable.

We believe that RAND should retract their report, review their assumptions carefully, and should not re-release or publicize their findings and recommendations until such time as the basic estimates produced by the model can be brought into correspondence with known national counts of reports, substantiations and foster care entries.

Guest Writers: