Program Improvement Plan

Transcription

1 Polk County Minnesota Child and Family Service Review Program Improvement Plan I. General Information County/Tribal Agency: Polk County Social Services Address: 612 N. Broadway, Room 302 Telephone Number: Primary Person Responsible for PIP: Karen Warmack Address: Telephone Number: DHS Quality Assurance Contact: Lori Munsterman Address: Telephone Number: (651) To be completed by DHS: Date of Agency/DHS PIP Meeting: 5/18/12 Date PIP Approved: 10/31/12 Due Dates for PIP Updates: Update January 15, 2013 (Oct Dec 12 activities) Update April 15, 2013 (Jan March 13 activities) Update July 15, 2013 (April June 13 activities) Update October 15, 2013 (July Sept. 13 activities) Date PIP Progress Reviews Received/Occurred: PIP Completion Date: 1

2 II. MnCFSR PIP Recommendations (as identified in the Exit Conference) PIP RECOMMENDATIONS Safety: Ensure timely contacts with children in response to maltreatment reports Permanency Safely reduce foster care re-entry Increase placement stability Improve rate of timely adoptions Improve practices related to siblings of children in foster care Ensure inquiry and identification of American Indian heritage Improve relative search and placement practices Well-being: Improve casework practices with non-resident parents Systemic factors: Improve foster care resources Develop/enhance/maintain quality assurance process for ongoing evaluation of child welfare practices and systems. 2

3 Goal # Improve timely contact with children in response to maltreatment reports. Barriers identified in the review: Attempts were not consistent with DHS guidance; workers scheduled initial interviews beyond the timelines Agency identified barriers: Law Enforcement request the agency to delay the initial contact with alleged victim due to active criminal investigations or the alleged victim is not at an immediate threat of safety. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 1 (Timeliness of response): 71.4% (5/7) cases were rated as a Strength Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) Timeliness of Contact in Maltreatment Assessments & Investigations (Source: CW Data Dashboard) SCE NSCE- Inv NSCE- FA Baseline PIP Updates Q3, 11 Q4, 11 Q3, 12 Q4, 12 Q1, 13 Q2, % (8/12) 0% (0/3) 71.2% (84/118) 54.5% (6/11) 0% (0/4) 66.7% (40/60) 90% of children will have face-to-face contact within statutory timelines, using the MN CW Data Dashboard as the method of measurement. Action Steps (include persons responsible) a. Supervisor will review SSIS initial contact to victim report monthly and when needed will request quarterly data (names) from the Children s Research and Planning Unit at DHS. b. Educate Child Protection Assessment workers on DHS guidelines for contact. Supervisor will work with SW on an individual basis to meet Date Completed 3 Updates

4 requirements. c. Social Service Supervisor will discuss with Law Enforcement required time frames for completing child maltreatment reports and identify situations that warrant delaying an interview. 4

5 Goal # Safely reduce foster care re-entry Barriers identified in the review: Stakeholders identified: LE places for reasons other than safety; inconsistencies in the level of services provided to parent of children in residential treatment Agency identified barriers: Older youth re-enter care under Correction supervision and youth who have high mental health needs re-enter the foster care system. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) County Performance on Federal Data Indicators: Nat l Standard 2011 (Baseline) 2012 (Update) NA C1.4 (Re-entry) 9.9% 34.2% (13/38) Performance goal: 24.0%; Method of measurement is SSIS Charting and Analysis (C1.4). Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates a. Supervisor will work with community partners to work on increasing supports/services for parents while children are in treatment. SW will include expectations for parents in recommendations and/or in treatment plans. b. Supervisor will review re-entry data with Director to analyze information and make changes as needed. c. PCSS will discuss with County Attorney s office the obstacles in getting trial home visits with 5

6 Children Mental Health/Child Welfare cases. Agency will recommend the use of THV for court dispositions. d. Agency will work with Corrections to complete relative searches on delinquency cases when youth lack a supportive home environment. e. Social Service Supervisor will discuss with Crookston Law Enforcement placing children for reasons unrelated to safety at RRVJC for 72 hour holds. 6

7 Goal # Increase foster care stability Barriers identified in the review: Foster parent request couldn t meet emotional/behavioral needs; foster parents insisted on immediate removal without opportunities for transition; foster parent training needs related to permanency Agency identified barriers : Changes in placement are primarily due to youth s repeated chemical dependency, mental health issues and corrections placements. Placements are more stable after child has been in placement over 6 months. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 6 (Placement stability): 50% (3/6) of cases were rated as a Strength Internal case review findings. Review/monitor monthly progress reports from the foster parents. Children in foster care will have placement stability in 90% of cases. Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) County Performance on Federal Data Indicators: Nat l Standard C4.1 (> 12 months) 86.0% C4.2 (12-24 mos) 65.4% C4.3 (< 12 months) 41.8% 2011 (Baseline) Not available Not available Not available NA 2012 (Update) Action Steps (include persons responsible) a. Foster Care Licensing SW will discuss placement stability at the time of licensing. Foster Care licensing SW will work with foster home on giving two weeks notice if foster parents request a child be removed unless removal is due to an immediate safety issue. Ongoing support services will be provided within hours to help foster parents resolve the conflict. Date Completed Updates 7

8 b. Foster parents are asked to provide monthly updates on foster children behaviors, educational concerns, medical/therapy appointments, visitation issues and other wellbeing issues. This form is completed by foster parents monthly and is submitted with their voucher. SW reviews the monthly form and when there are issues the SW will follow up with the foster family and foster child. A copy of the form is given to the Foster Care licensing SW as needed. This form provides good communication from the foster family to the SW in addition to other SW contacts made during the month. Case Aide will request monthly progress report from foster parents if they are not submitted regularly. This form helps to promote placement stability and provides ongoing communication from the foster parents to communicate both positive and negative concerns they may have as well as updating the SW on child s behaviors and appointments. c. Permanency information will be shared/reviewed at an informational meeting/training for existing foster care providers. It will also be highlighted and discussed at length with new providers and also highlighted in the new child foster care manual. d. SW will work with Probation Agent to help complete thorough assessments of child needs and match a placement facility to meet the child needs. 8

9 Goal # Increase rate of timely adoptions Barriers identified in the review: Lack of concurrent planning; court continuances and extensions; locating families for sibling groups, older youth, and children with emotional/behavioral needs; no PPAI agency in the area Agency identified barriers: Same as above. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) NA Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) County Performance on Federal Data Indicators: C % Nat l Standard 2011 (Baseline) 0% (0/14) C months 37 months C % C % 0% (0/3) 50% (2/4) 2012 (Update) Charting & Analysis reports and Internal agency tracking sheet C2.1 Goal: 36.6% C2.2 Goal: 27.3 months C2.4 Goal: 10.9% C2.5 Goal: 60% Action Steps (include persons responsible) a. Supervisor will assess the patterns and the reasons for delays regarding the adoption process by using SSIS reports and worker documentation. Following assessment, additional action steps will be developed to Date Completed 9 Updates

10 address identified delays. If the delay is related to a court continuance the Social Service Supervisor will review the case with the Judge, County Attorney s office and other stakeholders describing the impact the delay had on the child. b. Supervisor and SW team leader will review concurrent permanency plan requirements and update CCP forms due to the 2012 legislation. More focus will be spent on discussing plan B at staff meetings and during individual case consults. c. An adoption worker will be assigned to the case prior to the TPR hearing when a pre-adopt home has not been identified prior to filing the TPR petition. Adoption worker will seek out PPAI agency on children who are difficult to place an adoption home. d. Adoption SW will receive training on the changes with SSIS adoption process and forms resulting from 2012 legislative changes. 10

11 Goal #5: Improve practices related to siblings of children in foster care Barriers identified in the review: No worker visits with some siblings with children placed in foster care; insufficient efforts to arrange or provide visitation and other forms of contact for children and their siblings; adult siblings were not always considered as placement options for children in foster care Agency identified barriers: Some parents are not supportive of sibling visitation. Some youth refuse to see their siblings even with therapeutic support to improve their sibling relationship. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 4 (Assessing risk and managing safety): 77.8% (7/9) cases were rated as a Strength Item13 (Visits with siblings): 66.7% (2/6) cases were rated as a Strength Item 14 (Preserving connections): 50% (3/6) cases were rated as Strength Item 15 (Relative placement): 25% (1/4) cases were rated as a Strength Internal case reviews: Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) NA Item 4 (Assessing risk and managing safety): 85% Item13 (Visits with siblings): 85% Item 14 (Preserving connections): 70% Item 15 (Relative placement): 75% Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates a. Social Service Supervisor will meet with staff to discuss agency expectation to make sure visitation is provided with siblings who remain in the home. SW will develop a sibling visitation plan when the OHP is developed. If the parent 11

12 refuses to allow sibling visitation the SW will address the request and plan in Court. b. When parents refuse to allow sibling visits to occur, the SW will address the issue during court proceedings. c. SW will consistently consider adult sibling as a placement option at the onset of the placement and reviewed throughout the life of the case. Supervisor will review the completed relative search to make sure all family members have been considered and contact has been followed up on if relatives expressed an interest. The SW will submit the relative search findings that has the adult sibling listed on the form to the Judge and request the Court make a finding the relative search is completed. 12

13 Goal #6: Inquiries regarding American Indian heritage will be made in all cases Barriers identified in the review: Insufficient inquiries of heritage (in one case relied on past records); inquiries not documented on all cases. Agency identified barriers: SW needs to consistently obtain information from families. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 14 (Preserving Connections): 50% (3/6) cases were rated as Strength SW will complete the supplemental SSIS data form to obtain race/ethnicity. We will know this is happening because the Case Aide will monitor and obtain the form from the SW. SW Team Leader will review when case reviews are completed. Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) NA Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates a. SW will complete the supplemental SSIS data form on all cases during the assessment phase. This has been done on all CMH cases but will be implemented on other cases. This form includes a question to ask individuals about identifying their race/ethnicity. 13

14 Goal #7: Improve relative search and placement practices Barriers identified in the review: No additional steps if initial letters weren t responded to; people who expressed interest weren t contacted; known relatives were not sent letters; search letters were sent out once, but not at the time of permanency; in CMH cases, parents were unaware of how and when relative search letters would be sent Agency identified barriers: A barrier is the agency needs to consistently get back to relatives who have expressed an interest. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 15 (Relative placement): 25% (1/4) cases were rated as a Strength. Measurement will be made from internal case reviews. Relative searches will be completed on 90% of the cases. Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) NA Action Steps (include persons responsible) a. PCSS Supervisor will update agency protocols for the relative search process to meet statutory requirements. These protocols will address the barriers identified in goal 7. *initial letters, follow up letters and letters of permanency will be sent *parents will be given an explanation of the relative search process at the onset Date Completed Updates b. Relative searches will be completed at the onset of the case and at the time the permanency petitions are filed. Case Aides will monitor referral has been made for the relative search when the child s initial placement is entered in SSIS and prior to the permanency court hearing. 14

15 c. People who express an interest in caring for the foster child will be contacted within 30 days of when they responded to the agency. Supervisor will monitor this has occurred upon review of the completed relative search and when plan B is discussed with the SW. d. CMH SW will incorporate the use of SSIS form parents rights and responsibilities when a voluntary placement agreement is signed. This form helps explain the relative search process. Supervisor will review the SW has engaged parent(s) in identifying relatives, and notify parent(s) when relative search letters are going to be sent. 15

16 Goal #8: Improve casework practices with non-resident parents Barriers identified in the review: Lack of clear practice expectations (particularly around decisions to exclude non-resident parents); practices varied across workers; family court orders limiting parents access to their children Agency identified barriers: Court orders from family court and OFP hearings that prohibit visitation between the absent parent and the child causes difficulties to assess parent child needs and case planning with the absent parent. Baseline (Performance at the time of the review): 2012 Case Review Data (if applicable to PIP development) Item 13 (Parent/child visits): 66.7% (4/6) of cases were rated as a Strength Item 17 (Assessing needs and providing services): 55.6% (5/9) cases were rated as Strength Item 18 (Case planning): 55.6% (5/9) cases were rated as Strength Item 20 (Worker visits with parents) : 55.6% (5/9) cases were rated as Strength Internal Case Review: Annual/Quarterly Performance Data (if applicable to PIP development) NA Item 13 (Parent/child visits): 85% Item 17 (Assessing needs and providing services): 80% Item 18 (Case planning): 80% Item 20 (Worker visits with parents) : 80% Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates a. Supervisor will get best practice sheet on policies for working with fathers developed by Washington County. This will be reviewed with Social Workers to increase focus on working with non-resident parents. b. SW will discuss with the CAO options on an 16

17 individual case basis when a parent has an OFP or a family court order that limits contact with the non-resident parent. SW will request the CHIPS court to allow foster children to have contact with the non-resident parent under social service supervision. c. Social Worker will request a meeting with the non-resident parent to address strengths and needs of the parent and include the nonresident parent in developing the child s OHP plan. A home study will be completed as needed to determine if the child can physically reside in the non-resident parents home. d. Supervisor and social workers will review resources available from the MN Father s and Families Network website ( d= ), and discuss ways in which the information can be applied to casework, including but not limited to: Info Sheet 17: Gatekeeping: Mom as a Pathway to Healthy Father Involvement ments/infosheetgatekeeping.pdf Info Sheet 18: Talking with Moms about Engaging Dads ments/infosheettalkingwithmom%20color.p df 17

18 SYSTEMIC FACTOR Goal #9: Improve foster care resources Current process/practice(s): NA Barriers: Training needs related to permanency; unclear roles and expectations related to permanency Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates a. Placing SW will discuss with Foster Care Licensing SW concurrent placement foster homes to match children to a foster home that will best meet the child(ren s) needs. b. Foster Care Licensing SW will assess training needs of foster parents which will include their understanding of concurrent permanency planning process and their role in Concurrent Permanency Planning. The foster parent evaluation form is given to foster parents following each placement that provides foster parents an opportunity to identify other training opportunities. Placing SW will review goals of CCP when a child is placed in foster care. c. Foster Care Licensing SW will continue to train foster parents individually on CCP when initially licensed and add information on Concurrent Permanency Planning to the foster care orientation manual. d. Licensing Foster Care SW and Case Aide will update current foster home list with biographies and pictures of the foster parent family. This information will be shared with SW s who place children to potentially share with foster children prior to placement. 18

19 SYSTEMIC FACTOR Goal #10: Develop, enhance, and/or maintain an internal process for the ongoing evaluation of child welfare practices and systems, leading to program improvements. Current process/practice(s): NA Action Steps (include persons responsible) Date Completed Updates Establish and maintain a process that yields valid data: a. Case Aide will gather placement information and Concurrent Permanency Planning information from SSIS on all OHP children including Correction placements and maintain an excel spreadsheet on a monthly basis. Supervisor will review form monthly to monitor the number of months a child is in OHP and track the completion of relative search, CCP and request for a permanency court hearing. b. SW Team Leader and Case Aide will complete monthly qualitative case reviews a split between placement and in-home placement cases. The results will be reviewed with the SW at the completion of the review by SW Team Leader. Develop/implement a process for analyzing and learning from the data: c. Social Service Supervisor and Case Aide will review reports on SSIS to analyze data and review with SW monthly. Reports include assessments over 45 days, time to initial contact with victim report, monthly contact with children in OHP, MH screening report, charting and analysis re-entry, service plan reports and without service plan, workgroup needing contact report and adoption reports. 19

20 d. Wilder will analyze and prepare a report on OHP issues involved in our SAMSHA grant, effectiveness of current practices and trends. Social Service Supervisor and Director will review information from Wilder and SSIS reports to identify strengths and areas needing improvement with delivery of services. Use the data to effectively implement practice and system change: e. Supervisor will review SSIS reports and data, as well as internal case review trends, with Social Workers during monthly staff meetings and when needed on an individual basis with Social Workers. Other: f. Social Service Supervisor and Director will continue working with other Regional Directors, Tri-County Community Corrections, NW Mental Health Center and Wilder to look at OHP trends and practices. Polk County Social Services and community stakeholders will work with Wilder for further analysis of placement trends during

21 FEDERAL DATA INDICATORS C1.1 Of all children discharged from foster care to reunification in the year shown, and who had been in foster care for eight days or longer, what percent were reunified in less than 12 months from the time of the latest removal from home? C1.2 Median length of stay in foster care to reunification (months) C1.3 Of all children entering foster care for the first time in the six-month period just prior to the year shown, and who remained in foster care for eight days or longer, what percentage were reunified in less than 12 months? C1.4 Of all children discharged from care to reunification in the 12-month period prior to the year shown, what percentage re-entered foster care in less than 12 months from the date of discharge? C2.1 Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in the year shown, what percent were discharged in less than 24 months from the date of latest removal from home? C2.2 Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in the year shown, what was the median length of stay in foster care (in months) from the date of latest removed from home to the date of adoption? C2.3 Of all children in foster care on the first day of the year shown who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer (and who, by the last day of the year shown, were not discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of live with relative, reunify or guardianship), what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption by the last day of the year shown? C2.4 Of all children in foster care on the first day of the year shown who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, and were not legally free for adoption prior to that day, what percent become legally free for adoption during the first 6 months of the year shown? C2.5 Of all children who became legally free for adoption in the 12-month period prior to the year shown, what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in less than 12 months of becoming legally free? C3.1 Of all children in foster care for 24 months or longer on the first day of the year shown, what percent were discharged to a permanency home prior to their 18th birthday and by the end of the year (including adoption, guardianship, reunification or transfer of custody to a relative)? C3.2 Of all children who were discharged from foster care in the year shown, and who were legally free for adoption at the time of discharge, what percent was discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday (including adoption, guardianship, reunification or transfer of custody to a relative)? C3.3 Of all children who, during the year shown, either (1) were discharged from foster care prior to age 18 with a discharge reason of emancipation, or (2) reached their 18th birthday while in foster care, what percent were in foster care for three years or longer? C4.1 Of all children served in foster care during the year shown who were in foster care for at least eight days but less than 12 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? C4.2 Of all children served in foster care during the year shown who were in foster care for at least 12 months but less than 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? C4.3 Of all children served in foster care during the year shown who were in foster care for at least 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? 21