July 26, 20061 Improving Child Welfare Outcomes Through Systems of Care Grant Cluster – An Overview Children’s Bureau “All-Hands” Meeting Wednesday, July

July 26, 2006 1

Improving Child Welfare Outcomes Through Systems of Care Grant Cluster – An Overview

Children’s Bureau “All-Hands” Meeting

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

July 26, 2006

Children's Bureau/ACYF1250 Maryland Avenue, SW, 8th Fl

Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618

Email: [email protected] 2

Presentation Goals To gain a greater understanding of

systems of care for children and families involved with child welfare

To hear lessons learned from the NC grantee on development of their SoC planning and infrastructure development

To learn information gleaned from the base-line evaluation and technical assistance support to grantees

National Technical Assistance and Evaluation Center on Systems of Care: Building Integrated Service Systems for Child Welfare

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



National Context for the Improving Child Welfare:

Outcomes Through Systems of Care Demonstration Initiative

Change in focus on results and outcomes of child and family services in state child welfare systems

Clear indication of needed change from first round of Child and Family Service Reviews Many states had difficulty achieving consistently

positive outcomes in areas of safety, permanency, and child and family well-being

Emphasis on system change and accountability for state child welfare and its partner agencies

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Prime Objective of the Improving Child Welfare Outcomes

Through Systems of Care Demonstration Grant Program

This demonstration program seeks to answer one central question –

Does a system of care approach have merit in helping achieve positive outcomes for children and families involved with child welfare and its partner agencies?

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Grantee Overview

In FY2003 the Children’s Bureau funded nine (9) grants through the Improving Child Welfare Outcomes Through Systems of Care Demonstration Grant Initiative

Sites are awarded up to $500,000/yr for five years Grantees were funded to do a year of strategic

planning Grant applicants focused on developing

intra-/inter-agency infrastructure to support and maintain a local system of care for children and families in child welfare

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Family-to-FamilySystem of Care

Contra Costa, CA

Connecting Communities for KidsJefferson County,

CO

Family-Centered Systems of Care

KS(multi-county site)

Caring Communities Demonstration

ProjectClark County, NV

The Community Taking Responsibility

for Assisting in Developing Life and

EmpowermentBedford Stuyvesant,

Brooklyn, NY

Improving Child Welfare Outcomes

Through SoCNC

(multi-county site)

Medicine Moon Initiative (MMI) to Improve Tribal Child Welfare Outcomes

Through Systems of Care

ND (multi-tribal site)

Improving Permanency

Outcomes ProjectOR (multi-county

site)

Locally Organized Systems of Care for

Children in Pennsylvania

PA (multi-county site)

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Defining a System of Care“A system of care approach is based on

the development of a strong infrastructure of interagency collaboration, individualized care practices, culturally competent services and supports, child and family involvement in all aspects of the system and measures of accountability.” Stroul, 2001

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



System of Care Guiding Principles/CFSR Practice Principles

Family Involvement Community-Based

Resources Individualized Strengths-

Based Care Cultural Competence Interagency

Collaboration Accountability

Family-Centered Practice Strengthen and empower families to protect and nurture their children

Community-Based Practice Support the needs of children within the context of their families and communities

Individualizing Services Tailor interventions to meet specific needs of children & families served

Strengthening Parental Capacity Promote parent’ strengths and self-esteem by emphasizing partnership with service providers

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



System of Care Concept

Philosophy

Infrastructure

Services

&Support

s

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


National Technical Assistance and Evaluation Center on Systems of Care: Building Integrated

Service Systems for Child Welfare

Infrastructure Components Planning Governance System Management Coordination of Services and Service

Array Communication Policy Finance Continuous Quality Improvement Human Resources and Staff Development

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Alamance County, NC Child and Family Team

One Family, One Team, One Plan

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


Reorganization of Alamance Child-Serving Committees

Children’s Executive Oversight Committee

School CFT Support Team

Community Collaborate

Juvenile Crime Prevention Council

Partnership for Children

Com Child

Protection

Care ReviewSubcommittees

Education Publicity Events

Monitoring

Needs Assessment

Membership

Funding



July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


Lessons Learned in Alamance County, NC IV-B Training funds do not support SOC

framework Have to have dedicated staff Creating a culture of family centered practice is a

long term accomplishment Must get it “right” in own agency before moving

into community Cannot be another “initiative” has to be a change

in philosophy Use data and be clear on outcomes



July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


Lessons Learned Continued…

Waivers like IV-E Waiver provide flexible funding that supports SOC culture

Engage schools early, they are a key partner

Child and Family Teams are such a positive vehicle for families

Must work on all four levels in the system: State, within local agency, interagency collaboration, and family level



July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


North Carolina is Building a SOC Infrastructure

Mental Health has committed a full time person for each office dedicated solely to SOC

Social Services has implemented Multiple Response which incorporates CFT’s statewide

State Legislative Study Commission has identified seven Legislative Responsibility Goals concerning SOC and child safety, permanence and well being

Governor has developed and implemented a School-based Child and Family Team Initiative in 100 schools



July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618


Center – combines technical assistance and evaluation Provides “full service” support for

grantees Evaluation and TA inform each other Strengthens ability to learn and

disseminate Presentation draws on both



July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Evaluation framework

SoC activities:

• Collaborative partnership

• Practice, policies & procedures

• Case management

Changes in the safety, permanency & well-

being of the child welfare population

Changes in case planning for the

target population

Changes in service receipt for the target

population

Changes in the safety,

permanency & well-being of the target population

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline data collection Site visits conducted at the

conclusion of the sites’ planning phase

Baseline findings based on Collaborative member interviews Supervisor interviews Focus groups with child welfare and

partner agency staff

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Interagency collaboration

Key stakeholders Grantees (Project Director,

Project Coordinators) Local Evaluators Family Partners System Partners Community Partners Youth

Locally Organized Systems of Care (Dauphin County, PA)

Awakening a sleeping giant in the community – bringing the faith-based community to the table.

The faith-based sub-committee raised money to support a summer youth camp. Local school system and local organizations support the summer camp.

Co-chair of the youth sub-committee is on the implementation team.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Interagency collaboration

Needs Divergent philosophies makes

collaboration challenging Large caseloads and

administrative duties are barriers to being able to collaborate (lack of resources)

Key decision-makers at the table

Assets Prior SoC Experience Pre-Existing Collaborations

and History of Interagency Collaboration

Committed and Motivated Staff

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Interagency collaborationCross-site Activities Strategic Planning: An

Interagency Effort Collecting county-wide

statistics to better understand the needs of the target population

Conducting needs assessments to evaluate project progress, identify emerging trends, gaps in service delivery

Extending Outreach Social Marketing (KS) Engaging Public Officials

Connecting Communities for Kids (CO)

Data-driven service integration using geo-mapping technology to map service providers and foster home families to see if they correspond with the high need areas. Maps to be shared with agency partners.

Spring 2006 Resource Fair: 45 different child and family serving agencies/organizations presented. Enhanced relationships among agency partners.

SoC grant funds have helped to offset the

costs of this service to better identify the

needs of families involved in the child welfare system.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Family involvement

Needs Workers felt that family

involvement was sometimes token and not always appropriate in certain cases

Sustainability of family involvement in collaborative work

Training for family members

Assets Family involvement at the

case planning level Parent partners help

families negotiate the system

Engagement of extended and non-traditional family members

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Family involvement

Cross-site Activities Family involvement

in collaborative committees and workgroups

Expanded role of parent partners and advocates

Family Involvement Summit

Improving Permanency Outcomes Project (OR)

Parent partners are key leaders and role models for parents involved in the system.

The Improving Permanency Outcomes Project (IPOP) offers parent leadership training and the family’s guide to CW training. These trainings provide parents with the tools to be able to communicate more effectively with professionals from other partner agencies.

Family partners are co-presenting with project team members at professional conferences and PIP trainings.

SoC grant funds have helped to offset the costs ofthese trainings and conferences as well as

highlightsthe importance of the family voice in such system-change initiatives.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Cultural competency

Needs Language barriers Staff culturally reflective

of community served Multiple underserved

communities Link training to practice

Assets Introductory Training Leadership recognition

of cultural competence needs and willingness to address them

Recruitment methods for new staff

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Cultural competency

The CRADLE (NY)

Partnership with the NY chapter of the National Association of Social Workers and the People’s Institute to provide TA and develop training

Training will focus on cultural competency and racism

Training designed to develop more analytical, culturally-rooted and effective community organizers

Goal is to provide quarterly training for all child welfare staff

SoC grant funds have helped to offset the costs of these trainings and provide an incentive for key partnering agencies.

Cross-site Activities Training Agency-wide

cultural competence assessments

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Individualized strengths-based care

Needs Staff report the approach can be

challenging with some cases Balancing strengths-based

approaches with child safety Modeling strengths-based

approaches at all levels within the agency

Limitations of strengths-based assessment tools

Assets Staff have experience providing

services from a strengths-based approach

Staff assignments based on staff strengths

Dialogue with clients begins with a discussion of strengths

Data systems and assessment tools focus on strengths

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Individualized strengths-based care

Cross-site Activities Forms updated to

capture family strengths

New assessment tools

Training

Caring Communities (NV)

DFS hired a consultant who has been working with the Child and Family Teams and DFS caseworkers to develop strengths-based case plans.

The consultant also models strengths-based approaches that are both hands-on and skills-based.

Trainings at joint collaborative meetings are organized around individualized-strengths-based approaches.

The SoC initiative has been linked to a culture change within DFS toward more strengths-based approaches in how staff work with each other and with families.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Community-based resources

Needs Community-based resources

often lacking, particularly in neediest areas

Need centralized and comprehensive effort to identify community-based resources

Inconsistency in knowledge among frontline workers

Assets Relationships with

community providers More community-based

resources available in some areas

Existing practices for identifying community-based resources

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Community-based resources

Cross-site Activities Increased interagency

collaboration has helped identify community-based resources

Presentations to agency staff

Development of resource guides

SoC in Mecklenburg County (NC)

Development of an on-line resource tool focusing on grassroots and non-traditional services.

Community social workers identifying gaps in services and working with communities to fill the gaps.

Open houses held with agency staff to orient them to community partners and services available.

Interagency collaboration with non-traditional partners may help identify more community-based resources.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Accountability

Needs Balancing performance-

based indicators with spending quality time with families

Information feedback from data collection is lacking

More knowledge of the “value added” from data collection needed

Assets Data used to develop new

policies and address deficiencies

Data provide information on placements, resources and meetings with multidisciplinary partners

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Accountability

Cross-site Activities Local evaluation plans mapped to project goals Plans to develop an online documentation system Local evaluation involvement with strategic

planning and implementation activities

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Family-to-Family SoC (CA) Multidisciplinary

evaluation committee Evaluation activities

mapped to each project goal and implementation activity and continuously updated

Local evaluation data regularly presented to county districts and key stakeholders

Local evaluation activities provide regular

updates to monitor progress and re-evaluate

initiative priorities and activities where

indicated.

Medicine Moon Initiative (ND) Primary Goal: All ND

Tribal child welfare agencies will have an adequate management information system (MIS) to automate case filing.

Local ND SoC staff have been involved in all stages of implementation of this MIS with the four participating tribal child welfare agencies

Trouble-shooting Training Sustainability

The local evaluator provides training and

support as well as provides a booster training to

tribal child welfare staff during theimplementation of the MIS system.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Baseline evaluation findings: Implications for ongoing work in the demonstration communities

Strategic planning and needs assessment activities have helped guide planning and implementation in many sites.

Previous collaborative work has established strong practices around family involvement, strengths-based approaches and cultural competency in several demonstration sites.

Fewer accountability activities were identified at baseline as compared to other SoC principles and some sites identified gaps in community-based approaches and cultural competency.

A key finding across sites was the perceived gap between frontline workers and supervisors/administrators and challenges to effective collaboration.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



Information Dissemination: Sharing Lessons and Innovations with the Child Welfare

Field NTAEC on Systems of Care is in the process of finalizing a

three-booklet Systems of Care for Child Welfare Toolkit* based on lessons learned from the demonstration sites. It includes:

1. Improving Child Welfare Outcomes Through Systems of Care: A Strategic Planning Guide

2. Building the Infrastructure to Support Systems of Care in Child Welfare and

3. The Good Fit: Selecting the Best Evaluation Partner for Your Program

NTAEC is sharing this work with the CB TTA network, the Federal Interagency Workgroup Systems of Care Subcommittee, and other entities connected to the Children’s Bureau to get this knowledge out to the field.

*Documents will be available for download through the Child Welfare Information Gateway.

July 26, 2006


Washington, DC 20024202-205-8618



So, w

hat n

ow?

Next steps

Where to go

from here?

How can I learn

more?

I’d like to hear more about…

What does it all

mean?