Table 6.

Factors Associated With CPS Involvement After Study Entry for Families (n = 252)

	Any Referral		Any Investigation		Any Substantiationb		Any Child Removalb
Family Characteristica	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Previous CPS involvement:
Was referred	3.51**	[1.88, 6.56]
Was investigated			2.64**	[1.36, 5.13]
Had child neglect or abuse substantiated					1.39	[0.37, 5.18]
Had a child removed							8.41**	[2.55, 27.77]
Was previously in shelter	2.84**	[1.30, 6.19]	2.11†	[0.98, 4.52]	1.61	[0.54, 4.82]	2.16	[0.68, 6.84]
CalWORKs during or after study entry year	4.10*	[1.08, 15.67]	3.88†	[0.84, 17.97]	5.34	[0.44, 65.53]	3.53	[0.28, 45.40]
Race/ethnicity:
Hispanic (reference = “Black”)	1.08	[0.50, 2.33]	0.88	[0.39, 1.96]	1.11	[0.32, 3.79]	0.50	[0.08, 2.99]
White (reference = “Black”)	0.32†	[0.10, 1.03]	0.42	[0.13, 1.44]	0.76	[0.14, 4.09]	2.19	[0.45, 10.63]
Otherc (reference = “Black”)	0.74	[0.29, 1.88]	1.12	[0.44, 2.87]	1.77	[0.53, 5.94]	0.72	[0.15, 3.52]
Age of head of household	0.98	[0.93, 1.02]	0.98	[0.94, 1.02]	0.98	[0.92, 1.05]	0.98	[0.92, 1.05]
Present with child between ages 0 and 5	1.32	[0.54, 3.20]	1.19	[0.46, 3.08]	0.78	[0.22, 2.86]	0.70	[0.19, 2.65]
Annual household income < $5,000	1.18	[0.58, 2.40]	1.07	[0.51, 2.25]	1.95	[0.75, 5.12]	2.21	[0.72, 6.75]
Unemployed throughout the past 12 months	1.87*	[1.02, 3.43]	1.85†	[0.97, 3.52]	0.97	[0.39, 2.42]	1.45	[0.49, 4.29]
Had a past eviction or problem with landlord	0.98	[0.53, 1.84]	0.87	[0.45, 1.66]	2.45†	[0.99, 6.09]	1.29	[0.45, 3.67]
Psychosocial challenges indexd	1.08	[0.91, 1.27]	1.07	[0.90, 1.28]	0.98	[0.75, 1.27]	1.11	[0.83, 1.49]

Note. OR = odds ratio. Outcome variables are limited to less than 984 days after study entry.

^aAs part of the Family Options study, families were randomly assigned to housing and service interventions (Gubits et al., 2013). The models in this table control for intervention assignment. However, interpretations of intervention effects are only valid when calculated from pairwise contrasts of certain subsets of families. Thus, we do not show these results. None of the odds ratios associated with the interventions were statistically significant in any model.

^bSome combinations of variables were so predictive that a quasi-complete separation of data points prevented model convergence under the standard method of maximum likelihood estimation. To correct this, we applied Firth’s (1993) method of penalized maximum likelihood estimation to calculate odds ratios for the substantiated neglect/abuse model. See Heinze and Schemper (2002) for a justification of this approach.

^cDue to low counts, the “Asian/Pacific Islander” category was consolidated into the preexisting “Other” category.

^dThe psychosocial challenges index is a count of nine indicators: recent alcohol or drug use, post-traumatic stress disorder, psychological distress, foster care in childhood, any felony, any concrete reported health issue, disability that limits ability to work, any child with disability, and previous experience with intimate partner violence.

^†p<.10.

^*p<.05.

^**p<.01.