Overview
Activism to reduce child welfare involvement in New York City has particularly focused on addressing the disparate impacts of the system on Black families. While Black and Latino families are similarly likely to be investigated, Black children have been far more likely to enter foster care, remain in foster care and have their legal bonds with their families permanently terminated.
Overall, child welfare involvement in NYC has fallen in recent years. Child protective cases fell 10%, court supervision dropped almost 50% and foster care entries were 12% lower in 2024 than in 2019. This brief uses ACS data from 2019 and 2023 to examine the impact of these reductions by race and ethnicity.
It’s not surprising that entrenched disparities remain extremely high:
- Black children were 6.5 times more likely than white children to experience ACS cases in 2023, and Latino children were 5.7 times more likely.
- Foster care disparities also increased slightly because reductions in white foster care entries outpaced those for Black and Latino children. In 2023, Black children were 13 times more likely to enter foster care than white children and Latino children were 8 times more likely.
However, these disparity numbers mask significant reductions in rates of ACS involvement for Black and Latino families and communities, especially for Black families. While disparity didn’t decrease, burden did. Notably:
- ACS cases fell most in the city’s high-poverty and majority-Black and Latino neighborhoods where child welfare involvement is most common.
- Indicated investigations impacted almost 10,000 fewer Black and Latino children and court supervision impacted 3,700 fewer Black and Latino children.
- Black children comprised most of the reduction in foster care entries, with 510 fewer Black children entering foster care out of 633 fewer children overall.
While white or Asian children benefited most from some decreases, others significantly benefited Black children and families. Impacts on Latino children were muddied by the influx of more than 175,000 migrants to NYC beginning in 2022. Approximately 130 migrant children entered foster care in 2023.
Advocates and scholars have documented the many ways beyond decision-making bias that racism contributes to child welfare involvement. Historical trauma and intergenerational family separation leave lasting marks, while our weak safety net penalizes single motherhood and
locks in the wealth gap. The legacy of redlining and disinvestment in neighborhood basics like schools, sidewalks, grocery stores and greenspaces undermines family well-being. “Weathering” and the chronic stress of everyday racism erode health. Policies aligned with racialized stereotypes, like drug testing, increase family precarity. And child welfare itself compounds inequality with policies that have emphasized family separation, not support, for Black families for more than 100 years.
Advocacy groups including Rise, YouthNPower, Black Families Love and Unite and the Narrowing the Front Door Work Group have shared visions for the city to acknowledge harm and implement reparative policy shifts and investments. A report on the New York child welfare system’s impact on Black children and families by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recommended comprehensive community-based supports and investments, delinked from child welfare, as well as statutory and court reforms to better protect families’ rights.
Some policy shifts already have passed, including ending drug testing at birth, eliminating anonymous reporting and instituting free legal defense during an investigation. Current state legislation would address key drivers of child welfare involvement and disparity, including poverty, community disinvestment and punitive policies. These include a package of reforms to cut child poverty and provide a guaranteed income at birth; the Child and Family Well-Being Fund to invest in grassroots community groups in impacted neighborhoods; the Supporting Families Together Act to end penalties for not reporting; two bills to track and enhance screening of hotline calls; and the “family Miranda” bill to inform parents of their rights in an investigation. At the city level, advocates are seeking a new Accountability Council and Office of Family Well-Being.
This brief begins by sharing current disparities in ACS involvement, broken out by race. Then it examines the recent citywide reductions through the lens of racial equity. Lastly it looks at child welfare involvement by race and ethnicity within the context of neighborhoods and poverty, examining how current efforts can further reduce child welfare involvement and impact disparity.
Data analysis by Cat Pisciotta, data modeling by Dr. Frank Edwards and text by Nora McCarthy, with thanks to Mahima Golani. Data provided by the NYC Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) unless otherwise noted.
Please note that data in FPP’s previous brief on racial disparities, using 2019 data, cannot be directly compared to the 2023 data presented here because of differences in unique vs duplicate counts. (See technical definitions here.) Please be in touch with any questions or support using this data: nora@familypolicynyc.org
DISPARITIES
1 in 16 Black Children and 1 in 19 Latino Children Experienced an ACS Case in 2023
For white children, 1 in 107 experienced an ACS case. 1 in 71 Asian children experienced an ACS case.
Citywide, 1 in 26 children—and 1 in 20 families—experienced an ACS case in 2023.
1 in 10 Black children experienced an ACS case in approximately 44 zip codes in 2023. 1 in 10 Latino children experienced an ACS case in approximately 14 zip codes. For white children, only 4 zip codes had rates this high, and for Asian children, it was 7 zip codes.
The citywide investigation rate in NYC was 38.8 investigations per 1,000 children, which is slightly below the national average of 42.4 per 1,000 children. The investigation rate for Black children was above the national average in 122 out of 166 zip codes with data, which is 73% of these zip codes. For Latino children, the investigation rate was above the national average in 103 out of 179 zip codes with data, or 58%.
Download: Image 1, Image 2, Image 3 and Image 4
Note: “Total ACS cases” data reflects unique children for both CARES cases and investigations, separately. However, some children may experience both a CARES case and an investigation in the same year and may be counted twice. Citywide rates reflect aggregates, not averages. Citywide, 61 out of 1,000 Black children; 53 out of every 1,000 Latino children; 9 out of every 1,000 white children; and 14 out of every 1,000 AAPI children experienced an ACS case in 2023. All values below 6 are redacted in data provided by ACS. Therefore, average redactions by borough are substituted in calculations throughout this brief.
Black and Latino Children Were Over-Represented at Every Stage of ACS Involvement
Black and Latino children were over-represented in child welfare involvement while white and Asian children were under-represented.
Note: This brief uses Census child race and ethnicity data for analysis and therefore refers to children, not families, in most data. Prevalence rates reflect aggregates, not averages. “Foster care entries” includes ACS removals as well as voluntary placements, PINS, abandonment, or other placements. Data for non-NYC zip codes is excluded, which can lead to differences in citywide numbers reported by ACS.
Black Children Entered Foster Care at 13 Times the Rate of White Children, and Latino Children at 8 Times the Rate of White Children
Black children entered foster care in 5.1% of ACS cases; Latino children in 3.7% of ACS cases; white children in 2.5% of ACS cases; and Asian children in 2% of ACS cases.
In 2019, these numbers were 5.8% for Black children; 3.6% for Latino children; 3.1% for white children; and 2.2% for Asian children.
Note: These data reflect unique children in both 2019 and 2023.
REDUCTIONS 2019-2023
White and Asian Children and Families Benefited Most From Reductions in ACS Cases
Rates of ACS cases (investigations and CARES cases) fell 14% for all children but 23% for AAPI children and 27% for white children compared to 13% for Black children and 5% for Latino children.
Approximately 5,400 fewer Black children, 2,000 fewer Latino children, 1,500 white children and 700 fewer Asian children experienced an ACS case in 2023 compared to 2019.
Declines in ACS cases since 2019 likely reflect efforts to re-train mandated reporters to “support, not report” families when children are not in danger and a city policy shift to end the practice of drug testing pregnant patients without their consent. For Black mothers of newborns, cases alleging substance use fell nearly 90%.
Note: Reductions reflect rates per 1,000 children by racial/ethnic group in 2019 vs 2023, not raw numbers, while the chart reflects raw numbers. Data reflects unique children for both years.
Indicated Investigations Fell Most for Black Children and White Children
Rates of indicated investigations fell 43% for Black children, 34% for Latino children, 50% for white children and 36% for AAPI children between 2019 and 2023. That means that 5,500 fewer Black children, 4,500 fewer Latino children, 900 fewer white children and 300 fewer AAPI children experienced indicated investigations.
Indications have fallen because a new law raised the standard of evidence to substantiate an investigation and because ACS began routing far more lower-risk cases to CARES. When an investigation is “indicated,” parents can be barred from employment in childcare, schools, or home care, which can have serious economic consequences, particularly for women of color, who are more likely to be employed as care workers.
Note: Reductions reflect rates per 1,000 children by racial/ethnic group in 2019 vs 2023, not raw numbers, while the chart reflects raw numbers. Data reflects unique children for both years.
Court-Ordered Supervision Fell by About 50% Across All Racial and Ethnic Groups
Rates of court supervision cases fell 53% for all children between 2019 and 2023, with reductions of 55% for Black children, 49% for Latino children, 54% for white children and 58% for AAPI children.
That translates to 1,850 fewer Black children, 1,850 fewer Latino children, 215 fewer white children and 160 fewer Latino children under court-ordered supervision.
Even so, Black and Latino children made up 80% of court supervision cases.
ACS has filed far fewer court supervision petitions since the pandemic, when the family court limited court supervision. Free early legal representation also may be playing a role in reduced court filings, and a 2025 court ruling barring some supervision cases may further reduce court supervision.
Note: Reductions reflect rates per 1,000 children by racial/ethnic group in 2019 vs 2023, not raw numbers, while the chart reflects raw numbers. Data reflects unique children for both years.
Black Children Accounted for the Majority of the Reduction in Foster Care Entries
In 2023, 633 fewer children entered foster care compared to 2019. For Black children, 510 fewer children entered foster care, accounting for more than 80% of the reduction. Foster care entry rates fell by 24% for Black children (510 children), 1% for Latino children (35 children), 41% for white children (75 children) and 30% for AAPI children (21 children).
However, Black and Latino children still accounted for 90% of children entering foster care.
Drug testing policies may have played a role in reducing foster care. Newborn foster care entries fell by 37% between 2019-2023, and, for infants, entries declined by 23%.
Note: Reductions reflect rates per 1,000 children by racial/ethnic group in 2019 vs 2023, not raw numbers, while the chart reflects raw numbers. “Foster care entries” includes ACS removals as well as voluntary placements, PINS, abandonment, or other placements.
POVERTY AND GEOGRAPHY
Neighborhood Child Poverty and ACS Involvement Are Highly Correlated
Dozens of studies have found that economic hardship and setbacks predict child welfare involvement, and that policies that protect against setbacks reduce investigations, maltreatment and family separation. In NYC, neighborhood child poverty rates are highly correlated with rates of ACS cases and foster care entry.
Policy shifts to increase the accessibility of cash support can particularly benefit Black and Latino children, who experience the highest rates of poverty. New York State has committed to cutting child poverty in half. The Child Poverty Reduction Advisory Council recommends doubling cash assistance benefits and strengthening tax credits, among other proposals. In addition, NYC’s mayor has committed to universal childcare, which can also reduce child welfare involvement.
However, poverty alone does not explain racial disparities in child welfare involvement in NYC. Child poverty rates would suggest that Black and Latino children experience investigations and removals at approximately 1.5 or 2 times the rate of white and Asian children.
However, Black children were 6.5 times more likely to experience an investigation than white children and 13 times more likely to be separated from their families than white children. Latino children were 5.7 times more likely to experience an investigation than white children and 8 times more likely to be separated from their families. Additionally, child poverty rates and ACS case rates do not align in some zip codes.
Note: Correlations for ACS cases and foster care entries by child poverty by zip code were .61 for ACS cases and .5 for foster care entries. Zip codes with significant migrant populations in 2023 were excluded from the analysis. Prevalence rates reflect aggregates, not averages.
Child Welfare in NYC Is Highly Concentrated and Segregated
Citywide, Black, white, Latino and Asian children tend to live in a relatively small number of distinct zip codes (about 20-28 zip codes for each group), and child welfare impacts for each group are also highly concentrated.
For each of these groups, about 25% of investigations take place in just 9 zip codes (11 for Latino children and 8 for AAPI children), across 33 total zip codes.
Foster care entries for Black and Latino children are even more concentrated than investigations, with half of all foster care entries for Black children concentrated in 18 zip codes and, for Latino children, in 17 zip codes.
Advocates have put forward two interrelated proposals to build investment in neighborhoods where child welfare impacts are concentrated. A proposed state Child and Family Wellbeing Fund would direct $30 million in new investments to 10 communities with high rates of investigations and removals in NYC and upstate. A proposed new city Office of Family Well-Being, similarly, would support community-led planning and investments in grassroots community groups to strengthen family support.
Download: Image 1 and Data 1, Image 2 and Data 2, Image 3 and Data 3, Image 4 and Data 4
Note: Because data below 6 is redacted, foster care calculations by zip codes cannot be done for white or Asian children.
Most Children Experiencing ACS Involvement Live in Higher-Poverty Majority Black/Latino Neighborhoods
Almost half of all children who experience an ACS case live in majority Black/Latino neighborhoods that are typically high in poverty, even though only about one-third of all children in the city live in these neighborhoods. The opposite is true of majority white/Asian neighborhoods. Even though almost one-quarter of all children live in these neighborhoods, they comprise only 12% of all ACS cases.
The number of children in majority Black/Latino neighborhoods who had an ACS case dropped significantly between 2019 and 2023, with approximately 5,550 fewer children experiencing an ACS case in these neighborhoods (13% fewer) compared to 500 fewer children (6% fewer) experiencing an ACS case in majority white/Asian neighborhoods. However, ACS involvement remains concentrated in these communities.
Research confirms that everyday surroundings can offer significant advantages to children, even if their own family is struggling. Yet decades of redlining and structurally racist disinvestment have resulted in vastly inequitable conditions. Community assets like safe play spaces and greenery; density of nonprofits and civic events; convenient access to critical family resources, like grocery stores and childcare; and a vibrant social fabric enhance children’s health, cognitive development, social mobility and lifelong earnings.
Note: Majority Black/Latino neighborhoods are 75% or more Black/Latino residents; n=44. Majority White/Asian neighborhoods are 75% or more White/Asian residents; n=58. Majority Black/Latino neighborhoods had child poverty rates that were twice as high as White/Asian neighborhoods–31% compared to 16%. Out of 44 majority Black/Latino zip codes, 34 had child poverty rates above 20 percent. Among 58 majority White/Asian zip codes, 8 had child poverty rates above 20 percent. All other neighborhoods (n=78) had aggregate child poverty rates of 21%.
These High-Poverty, Majority Black/Latino Neighborhoods Also Accounted for the Sharpest Reductions in ACS Involvement
In addition to policies and programming that strengthen families, child welfare involvement can be reduced through reforms that constrain over-reporting.
Here we show that Black and Latino children are reported at high rates in every neighborhood, regardless of child poverty, and that the small number of Black children who live in low-poverty and predominantly white and Asian neighborhoods experience the highest exposure to ACS involvement.
We also show that, compared to 2019, high-poverty Black and Latino neighborhoods saw a significant reduction in ACS cases for Black children. Other zip codes did not show significantly different results in 2023 compared to 2019. (See the 2019 data here.)
More significant reductions in investigations may require reforms to the State Central Register (SCR), which receives hotline calls reporting neglect and abuse. As a 2024 FPP report documented, New York’s SCR screens out far fewer hotline calls than most other states, screening out only 25% of hotline calls, compared to a national average of 50%.
At a State Assembly hearing on the SCR in October 2024, the Office of Children and Families (OCFS) commissioner confirmed that the SCR uses no standardized screening tool but the agency has not yet committed to addressing the problem. Bills in the 2026 legislative session would require data transparency, enhance screening options and end criminal and civil penalties for not making a report.
Note: This model considers how the racial composition of a neighborhood and its child poverty rate for ALL children relate to the rates at which children of different groups experience ACS involvement. We estimate expected levels of ACS investigations for each group of children in four typical NYC neighborhood types: 1) Low child poverty, predominantly white or AAPI, like the Upper West Side; 2) Low child poverty, predominantly Black or Latino, like Jamaica, Queens; 3) High child poverty, significantly white or AAPI, like Williamsburg, Brooklyn; 4) High child poverty, predominantly Black or Latino, like East Harlem.
Download: Image
Black Children’s Exposure to ACS Involvement Has Fallen in Some Neighborhoods
At all levels of neighborhood child poverty, ACS involvement for Black and Latino children is elevated above ACS case rates for white or Asian children.
In 2019, ACS cases were extraordinarily high in neighborhoods with both low and high Black child poverty. Surprisingly, in 2023, rates of ACS cases for Black children were highest in neighborhoods with lower Black child poverty rates and lower in neighborhoods with higher Black child poverty rates. In high-poverty neighborhoods, Black and Latino ACS case rates converged. (See the 2019 data here.)
This shift suggests that legislative, policy and practice remedies have reduced ACS involvement for Black children, but significant and sustained disparities remain.
Download: Image
Note: This chart uses modeling to evaluate the relationship between exposure to ACS cases and the child poverty rate for four racial and ethnic groups. The trend lines shown illustrate our model’s expectation for ACS investigation rates in NYC zip codes with different levels of child poverty across four racial and ethnic groups.
Look Up the ACS Case Numbers by Race in Your Zip Code
You can use this table to see the number and percent of ACS cases (investigations and CARES cases) by race in every zip code. Data is by numbers of children, not families, except for the number of investigations. Please note that rates for some zip codes reflect very low population numbers; therefore annual rates may be unstable, reflecting very small fluctuations, and should be interpreted with caution.
To explore: Click on the each label (such as “zip code” or “white”) to sort the sheet by that data type from the lowest number to the highest, and click again to show highest to lowest.
Note: A cell value of ** indicates that there were 5 or fewer investigations in the zip code 2019. Those data were provided with redactions to protect confidentiality.
No rates are provided in any case where the child census for the zip code is 0 (meaning either there is no data for that zip code in the census or the child population is actually 0). No rates are provided in any case where the child census for the zip code is larger than the number of children in investigations.
Look Up the Foster Care Entry Numbers by Race in Your Zip Code
You can use this table to see the number and percent of foster care entries by race in every zip code. Data is by numbers of children, not families.
To explore: Click on the each label (such as “zip code” or “white”) to sort the sheet by that data type from the lowest number to the highest, and click again to show highest to lowest. Please note that rates for some zip codes reflect very low population numbers; therefore annual rates may be unstable, reflecting very small fluctuations, and should be interpreted with caution.
Note: A cell value of ** indicates that there were 5 or fewer families with children entering foster care in the zip code 2019. Those data were provided with redactions to protect confidentiality.
No rates are provided in any case where the child census for the zip code is 0 (meaning either there is no data for that zip code in the census or the child population is actually 0). No rates are provided in any case where the child census for the zip code is larger than the number of children in investigations.
Methodological Notes
Census child race and ethnicity data comes from the American Community Survey 5 year estimates, 2022. (Census 2023 data was released after analysis began, but did not significantly shift.) In the available data, white children are white non-Hispanic/Latino and Latino children are Hispanic/Latino (any race). Black children include both Latino and non-Latino children in the census data, as do Asian/PI children.
Census population (all age residents) data comes from the American Community Survey 5 year estimates, 2022. Data include Black non-Latino, Latino (any race), White non-Latino, and Asian/PI non-Latino.
NYC Administration for Children’s Services data includes Black non-Latino, Latino (any race), white non-Latino, and Asian/PI non-Latino. Other race/ethnicity is not presented in the analyses here.
When calculating rates, zip codes are excluded if they do not have census data or if the total census (overall or for a given R/E group as applicable) is greater than the value in the CW stage of interest. For aggregate calculations, no zip codes were excluded.