P4 Child Welfare Business Plan - NCACDSS · Review of NC FAST Project 4 Business System Functions (BSFs) Review of As Is Business Processes and technology used Completion of Lessons

North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services

Child Welfare Committee Business Plan

June 2015


Page 2 of 36

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................... 3

2. CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE ACTIVITY TIMELINE ........................................... 5 3. NCACDSS IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS (NEEDS) REVIEW ............... 7 4. REVIEW OF PROJECT 4 BUSINESS SYSTEM FUNCTIONS (BSFS) ................... 8

4.1 Review Process .................................................................................................... 8 4.1.1 Reviewing the BSFs .............................................................................................. 9 4.1.2 Development of Mobile BSFs ...............................................................................10 4.1.3 Finalized BSFs .....................................................................................................10

5. AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS REVIEW & TECHNOLOGY SURVEY .................... 12 5.1 Participants and Review Schedule .......................................................................12 5.2 Technology Survey ..............................................................................................14 5.3 State System and Support Observations .............................................................15

6. STATE IMPLEMENTATION LESSONS LEARNED CALLS .................................. 17 7. PRE-IMPLEMENTATION NEEDS AND IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 19

7.1 Significant Pre-implementation Activities ..............................................................19 7.2 Recommended Implementation Approach ...........................................................20

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... 23 9. APPENDIX A: IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS DETAIL ........................ 24

10. APPENDIX B: BSF DETAIL ................................................................................... 25 Development of Mobile BSFs .............................................................................................25 Mobile Workshop ...............................................................................................................25 User Types and Platforms ..................................................................................................25 BSFs For Fundamental Mobile Capabilities........................................................................26 Candidates for Mobile from Detail BSF Review ..................................................................27 Establishing Consensus on the BSFs.................................................................................29 Standardization of County-Specific Documents ..................................................................29

11. APPENDIX C: AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS FLOWS ........................................... 32

12. APPENDIX D: AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS REVIEW FINDINGS ....................... 33 13. APPENDIX E: TECHNOLOGY SURVEY RESPONSES ........................................ 34 14. APPENDIX F: STATE LESSONS LEARNED QUESTIONNAIRE ......................... 35

15. APPENDIX G: STATE LESSONS LEARNED ....................................................... 36


Page 3 of 36

1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Child Welfare Business Plan is a comprehensive summary of the work completed by the Child Welfare Committee, formed in conjunction with representatives from the North Carolina Association of County Directors of Social Services (NCACDSS), the North Carolina Division of Social Services (NC DSS), and the Office of North Carolina Families Accessing Services through Technology (NC FAST). The Child Welfare Committee was created to inform the implementation approach for NC FAST Project 4: Child Services.

The North Carolina Association of County Directors of Social Services (NCACDSS) is a non-profit association representing the social service directors from each of North Carolina’s 100 counties. The Association’s mission is to inform, educate, and empower its members in order to strengthen agencies, programs and the delivery of social services to families and individuals. The Association formed the Child Welfare Committee to focus on the system and implementation needs for Child Welfare based on lessons learned with the roll-out of Income Support in NC FAST. The committee is composed of representatives from:

Nine member counties: Buncombe, Carteret, Catawba, Cleveland, Dare, Johnston, Orange, Richmond, Rowan

State Division of Social Services

NC FAST

Overall, approximately 200 people participated during the five month process. The group’s activities are detailed in this business plan and its appendices.

The Business Plan summarizes the approach, findings and recommendations from the Committee’s efforts made through the following activities:

Analyzing the case management functions necessary to support Child Welfare in North Carolina through review of over 5,100 business system functions (BSFs).

Documenting current state business practices and areas of opportunity or concern with onsite, weeklong sessions at four counties with varied implementation and size considerations as well as statewide surveys.

Gathering lessons learned from discussions with four other States based upon their case management system implementations.

The Business Plan provides guidance and will inform the approach used in NC FAST Project 4: Child Services. It is not intended to replace more detailed project documents, such as the Implementation or Conversion Plans.

Based upon all of the activities and work products detailed here, the Child Welfare Committee makes these key recommendations:

Several critical pre-implementation activities are not directly included in the scope of NC FAST Project 4: Child Services and are critical for its successful implementation.

o Cleanup of Services Information System (SIS) identification numbers and legacy data to support cross-county tracking of case members.

o Enablement of document management within NC FAST and establishing statewide standards for usage.


Page 4 of 36

o Where needed, increase staffing and fill vacant positions so that counties can adequately support services during the rollout and burn-in period.

o Determine mobile needs statewide, including evaluation of network coverage, identification of acceptable devices, implementation of required policies, and budget requests where needed.

o Implement identified practice model statewide.

The recommended implementation approach should include:

o Use of IBM Cúram software.

o Inclusion of county representatives in all phases of the project.

o Pilot of functionality across a small, targeted group of counties.

o Entry of new cases in NC FAST upon county implementation.

o Manual conversion of existing cases into NC FAST at specified points in the case.

o Deployment of system functionality in waves, with consideration for mobile based on findings of pre-implementation activities.

Significant detail on the Child Welfare Committee’s activities and findings is provided in the Business Plan. Additional details on the pre-implementation activities and implementation recommendations are located in section 7.


Page 5 of 36

2. CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE ACTIVITY TIMELINE

The development of the Business Plan and its recommendations required the completion of a number of key activities by the Child Welfare Committee:

Review of NC FAST Project 4 Business System Functions (BSFs) Review of As Is Business Processes and technology used Completion of Lessons Learned conference calls with other States

The timeline below outlines the major activities that were completed by the Child Welfare Committee to develop the Business Plan.

Figure 1 - Child Welfare Committee Activity Timeline

The above activities were completed in a coordinated manner so that all findings could be incorporated collectively into the Business Plan. Each activity informed the development of the Business Plan, which also includes a number of implementation considerations and dependencies. Figure 2 depicts how the Committee’s activities were linked and how they feed into the Business Plan.

1/1/2015 6/30/2015

2/1/2015 3/1/2015 4/1/2015 5/1/2015 6/1/2015

1/5/2015

Needs Feedback Received from NCACDSS

1/16/2015

Needs Review Meeting

2/12/2015Child Welfare Committee

presents at NCACDSS Board Meeting

6/5/2015

Business Plan Finalized

6/10/2015Present at Children's Services Committee

6/11/2015Present Business Plan at NCACDSS Board Meeting

1/26/2015 - 5/14/2015

Business System Function (BSF) Review

2/16/2015 - 5/8/2015

State Surveys, Process Reviews and Product Demos

5/14/2015

BSF Review Complete


Page 6 of 36

Figure 2 - Child Welfare Committee Business Plan Development Diagram

Needs

Review

BSF Review

Business Model

Basis of

Estimate

Update

Business

Process

Review

Implementation

Options

Implementation

Dependencies

Business

Plan

Industry

Surveys

and

Lessons

Learned


Page 7 of 36

3. NCACDSS IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS (NEEDS) REVIEW

On January 5, 2015, NCACDSS provided the NC FAST team with a list of 102 implementation ideas and considerations (often referred to as “the needs”) that should be considered when planning and implementing NC FAST Project 4. The NC FAST team reviewed and began responding to how these ideas could be addressed.

The 102 implementation ideas were broadly categorized as follows:

Implementation Child Welfare Requirements

o General o Mobile o Document Management o IV-E o Persons and Relationships o Caseload o Interfaces o Software o Reporting o Security o User Interface o Daysheets / Monitoring / Notifications o Providers and Placements

Adult Requirements On January 16th, 2015 the Child Welfare Committee conducted a day long working session to review the 102 items. The meeting was used to gather additional information and come to a common understanding of the items, in particular those that were unclear or required additional conversation. Using this common understanding, the ideas and information from the document were incorporated into the planned BSF review activity and into the broader Child Welfare implementation approach identified in this Business Plan.

The full listing, initial research, and responses to those items are included in Appendix A.


Page 8 of 36

4. REVIEW OF PROJECT 4 BUSINESS SYSTEM FUNCTIONS (BSFS)

The review of the existing Business System Functions (BSFs) established for Project 4 was one of the major activities identified for the development of the Business Plan; BSFs reflect the various functions that the Child Welfare System within NC FAST should support. The BSFs were originally established in 2006 by a team of county and State Division of Social Services representatives. This list of BSFs was reviewed and updated by a smaller team in 2012. As part of the Child Welfare Committee’s activities, the BSFs were reviewed to address:

the increased need of considering mobile requirements that were not included as part of the original BSF development

the need to update the BSFs with recent policy and practice changes that have been introduced

the incorporation of lessons learned with the deployment of NC FAST for income support capabilities (i.e., Food and Nutrition Services, Medicaid, Cash Assistance, Special Assistance, and Refugee Assistance)

This section of the Business Plan documents the method used to review and finalize the list of BSFs that NC FAST should address when moving to the design, development, training, and deployment of the Child Welfare application. The list of finalized BSFs is included in Appendix B.

4.1 Review Process

Members of the Child Welfare Committee provided personnel from their counties and from the State Division to participate in reviews of over 5,100 BSFs over a sixteen week period.

Twice-weekly checkpoint calls were held with the team members to assess the status of the reviews, resolve issues with the review process, answer questions on the BSFs, and gain consensus on the answers to questions that were used in the review process.

The BSFs were divided into major groupings of related BSFs to facilitate the review process. These groupings were derived from the original categories and subcategories assigned to the BSFs when they were initially developed. The BSFs were then divided into one of two “swimlanes” (known as Group 1 and Group 2) to be reviewed simultaneously to meet the necessary BSF review pace. The BSFs in swimlane 1 were focused primarily on Child Protective Services (CPS) functionality and the BSFs in swimlane 2 were focused primarily on Adoption Services and Licensure. All counties and the State Division were represented in both swimlanes, which ensured that a broad perspective was gained. The groups and sequence of BSF review is shown in Figure 3, which also indicates the number of BSFs within the category when the groups were originally established.


Page 9 of 36

Figure 3 - Child Welfare BSF Review Swimlanes (Group 1 and Group 2)

4.1.1 Reviewing the BSFs

The goal was to make certain that all BSFs were accounted for and that they were clearly stated, understood by the teams, and would be understandable by future designers of the application. To meet this objective, a series of questions were considered by the team when reviewing the BSFs. The questions were:

Is the BSF clearly stated? If not, propose new language. Is this BSF still valid for Project 4 (Child Welfare)? If not, classify it as Obsolete, or to be

covered by Project 3 (Energy/Child Care) or Project 5 (Aging and Adult Services) If the BSF was already obsoleted by prior NC FAST projects, should it remain classified

this way? If not, put it back in the BSF list as in scope for Project 4. Is there a BSF missing from the functional area being reviewed? If so, propose language

for the new BSF and assign a unique number. Is this BSF supporting a capability that has to be available Day 1 for the functional area

independent of the overall implementation schedule or can this be phased in? Is this BSF supporting a function where county variability exists and that variability needs

to be accounted for in the system, or should we consider standardization? Should this BSF be considered as a candidate to be supported via mobile capabilities? Have we covered the identified “needs” within the BSFs?

The original BSFs were solution agnostic, in that the specific way a particular business function was to be met (the “how”) was not prescribed. Instead, the BSFs concentrated on the functions needed to support Child Welfare in North Carolina (the “what”). The review process retained this

CPS (752)

Adoption (1006)Licensure / Providers /

Placements (691)

Payments /

Funds / Fiscal(665)

Eligibility (345)

Courts / Law

Enforcement (346)

Reporting (63)

ICPC / ICWA (328)

QA and

Reviews (98)

Technical / Security /

UI (24)

Assessments (96)

Services (437)

Appeals (53)

Interfaces (14)

Swimlane 1

Swimlane 2

JointMobile (*)

Process

Support (220)


Page 10 of 36

standard of how the BSFs were to be viewed and new ones created. The design of the application will identify “the how” and was outside the scope of the BSF review.

4.1.2 Development of Mobile BSFs

Mobile capabilities were not envisioned when the original list of BSFs was developed. The Committee identified mobile enablement as one of the needs for the deployment of Child Welfare functions within NC FAST. Subsequently, a joint four-day workshop was held at the NC FAST project site to develop the mobile BSFs. The groups identified existing BSFs that were candidates for mobile enablement as a part of their review prior to the workshop. This information was used to group the BSFs as “mobile candidates” or “outside mobile” for discussion during the workshop. Information from this workshop and the BSF review led to the identification of 1,169 BSFs that were candidates for mobile enablement. These initial candidates were used to develop the final list of 722 mobile BSFs.

4.1.3 Finalized BSFs

At the end of the review and the mobile workshop, the full list of BSFs was finalized. From the original list of 5,139 BSFs, items were removed or added from consideration as detailed in Figure 4 below. Based on the full review, 5,323 BSFs are within the scope of the Child Welfare application.

Figure 4 - Final BSF profile for NC FAST Project 4- Child Welfare

The majority of the BSFs in the Duplicates/Obsoletes line are functions that supported “prompts” and “alerts” to be sent to workers as action reminders. Based on experience with Income Support in NC FAST, the prompts and alerts BSFs were refined to include those that the teams felt were critical, identified functions that are sometimes missed by case workers, or needed to be flagged at case closure if not completed. BSFs were also obsoleted that were no longer

Original BSFs -- P4 4712

Changes from 2012 Review and Moves 427

BSFs at start of 2015 Review 5139

Duplicates / Obsoletes (1029)

P4 Scope 113

Moved Into P4 Scope 128

Moved Out of P4 Scope (15)

Moved to Other Projects (54)

Moved to P3 (2)

Moved to P5 (43)

Moved to Both P3/P5 (9)

New BSFs Identified 432

New Mobile BSFs - Fundamental From Mobile Workshop 99

New Mobile BSFs - Derived from Original / New 623

Total Functional BSFs 5323

Impact on BSFs at Start of Review

New BSFs


Page 11 of 36

applicable because of changes in policy. Multiple references to similar capabilities were consolidated into single BSFs (e.g., the ability to reference current state and county-level policies were consolidated into 2 BSFs instead of having multiple BSFs that referred to specific policies). BSFs not originally created to support the licensing functions performed by State Division personnel based in Black Mountain were added.

Figure 5 below depicts the overall profile of the BSFs that have been retained for Project 4:

Percentage Of BSFs

BSFs that are Non-Mobile Specific 86%

Needed to support county-unique functions 3%

Capability needed Day-1 when the functional area being addressed is implemented, independent of overall implementation schedule

93%

Original and newly identified BSFs that are mobile candidates

25%

Mobile BSFs 14%

Total BSFs 5,323

Figure 5 - Final BSF profile for NC FAST Project 4- Child Welfare

Additional detail on the process followed to review the existing BSFs and develop the mobile BSFs is included in Appendix B.


Page 12 of 36

5. AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS REVIEW & TECHNOLOGY SURVEY

Members of the Child Welfare Committee (including county staff, state DSS staff, and NC FAST staff) participated in week-long visits to a number of counties to observe and document day to day Child Welfare business processes. The selected counties varied in size, approach to automation/case management, use of document management and practice model followed. This supported findings that would be more representative of the entire state. Attendees met with county leadership, including Directors, Program Managers and Supervisors, as well as front line staff. Time was spent discussing business processes and also included some shadowing. Each county also demonstrated the use of any technology used by their agency to support Child Welfare.

5.1 Participants and Review Schedule

The following counties were visited:

Buncombe County (large, case management, Signs of Safety practice model) Gaston County (large, paper based) Moore County (medium, paper based with document management) Franklin County (small, paper based)

The visits followed a general schedule that mimics the case lifecycle beginning with Intake and ending with Adoption as depicted in Figure 6.

First Day of Visit Last Day of Visit

Intake

CPS

CPS In home Services

Foster Care Licensure and Placement

Foster Care Case Management

Foster Care Financial Management

Adoption Case Management

Other Topics

Figure 6 - General Schedule for County Child Welfare As Is Business Process Review Visits

The complete list of areas and topics discussed during the visits is below. Process flow diagrams were created to depict an overall general process for the major business process areas identified with an asterisk (*). These detailed process flows are included in Appendix C.

CPS Intake* CPS Assessments* CPS In-Home* Case Decision Making/Models Foster Care Licensure* Foster Care Placement* Foster Care Financial Management Foster Care Case Management* Adoption Services* LINKS


Page 13 of 36

Legal Quality Assurance Signs of Safety Practice Model

Additional observations, findings and considerations from the As Is Business Process review meetings were documented for four primary areas: People and Organization, Process, Technology and Best Practices. The As Is findings were used to develop consolidated considerations for implementation of NC FAST Project 4- Child Services as well as recommendations for those areas, summarized below. Further detail gathered from the As Is Business Process Review meetings can be found in Appendix D.

Area of Concern/Opportunity Considerations Recommendations

Standardization • Counties currently use forms they developed themselves (i.e., face sheets)

• Counties currently use amended versions of State forms (i.e., modified to make them user friendly)

• Services Information System (SIS) #s currently differ from county to county

• Case heads - child v. mother (or primary caregiver)

• Recommend establishment of work group to develop set of standardized forms to be used statewide based on what will be required with NC FAST deployment

• Expand SIS de-duplication across county lines

• Recommend establishment of standard case head to be used statewide in NC FAST

Mobile Accessibility, Equipment & Support

• 3G/4G coverage across the State (i.e., rural areas)

• Counties may not have resources to purchase tablets (State bulk purchase? Grant?)

• Policy/governance of mobile device usage

• Availability of technical support for mobile component

• Recommend evaluation of network coverage statewide and determine plan to purchase and maintain devices prior to committing to build mobile functionality

• Recommend development of mobile device usage policies and governance structures

Case History and Conversion

• Cases exist primarily on paper, not in a legacy system

• How much history do we bring into NC FAST?

• What history do we bring into NC FAST?

• How do we bring history into NC FAST?

• When do we bring history into NC FAST?

• Recommend point in time manual conversion approach for active cases that includes rekeying recent case information and scanning in appropriate case history.

• Develop timeline for counties to scan or move necessary paper files for historical cases into NC FAST.


Page 14 of 36

Area of Concern/Opportunity Considerations Recommendations

Document Management • County Social Workers lack the time to scan all existing docs

• Ability to interface with other doc management (e.g., Compass)

• Counties may not have resources to contract vendors, hire temp staff or purchase scanners

• Recommend evaluation of contract to assist counties in scanning historical files/storing & shredding paper documents

• Recommend development of plan to assist counties without budget for scanning equipment

Staffing • Pre-service training may not adequately prepare new social workers for initial job responsibilities

• Social worker expectations are not aligned with job duties

• Losing qualified staff to other counties with higher pay scale is a challenge for certain counties

• Maintaining optimal caseloads and worker to supervisor ratios is challenging

• Recommend evaluation and potential overhaul of Pre-service training curriculum

• Recommend State work directly with counties where staffing issues are present to resolve concerns prior to implementation

• Recommend State review job classifications and work with counties to standardize pay ranges

Figure 7– Primary Areas of Concern/Opportunity and Implementation Considerations

5.2 Technology Survey

The technology currently in use to support Child Welfare business functions varies widely across counties and at the State Division. An electronic survey was prepared to capture basic information on the technology counties are currently using to inform the overall Business Plan to account for these differences.

The survey asked:

Do you currently use a case management system/tool to manage Child Welfare in your county and if so, which one?

Do you currently use a document management solution and if so, which one? Do you have mobile access to Child Welfare case related information and if so, how?

The detailed results of the survey by county are provided in Appendix E. Figure 8 provides a summary of what is in place today:


Page 15 of 36

Figure 8- Profile of Current Technology Supporting Child Welfare

5.3 State System and Support Observations

Support for Child Welfare capabilities at the state-wide level is also fragmented. Functions are supported through a series of legacy systems that are targeted to support specific purposes and are not fully integrated. These legacy systems are all targeted to be replaced by NC FAST, primarily at the completion of implementation of Project 4- Child Services. Other legacy systems that support both child and adult services will not be fully replaced until the implementation of Project 5- Aging and Adult Services. As part of the BSF review, BSFs were flagged as required to support existing functionality provided by these systems; this is noted for each BSF in Appendix B. Figure 9 shows the legacy systems and associated project whose implementation would allow for retirement.

System Description Targeted

Retirement

AIMS – Adoptions Indexing Management System

System used to satisfy State and Federal reporting requirements that provides an index of all adoptions processed in the State of North Carolina and tracks the progress of every adoption from legal documents sent to the Division of Social Services

Project 4

CRCAN - Central Registry Child Abuse and Neglect

System used to allocate Child Protective Services funds and track all investigations of abuse and/or neglect, including type of abuse/neglect reported, type of abuse or neglect found, names of victims, and names of perpetrators

Project 4

FAT- Central Registry Fatalities

A system that collects and provides information regarding certain child fatalities, and provides information to counties to assist in the investigations of reports of alleged child abuse and neglect in order to meet State and Federal reporting requirements

Project 4

T e chno lo g y Co untie s

Ca se Ma na g e me nt

No/paper based 76

ISSI 3

Northwoods 11

One Case 8

Other 2

Total 100

Do cume nt Ma na g e me nt

No 63

Northwoods 16

Laserfiche 15

Onbase 3

Other 3

Total 100

Mo b ile Acce ss

No 69

Northwoods Co-Pilot Application 10

Secured Laptop Connection 21

Total 100


Page 16 of 36

System Description Targeted

Retirement

CPPS - Child Placement and Payment System

System used to make payments for Adoption Assistance; Child Caring Institutions; Division of Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities and Substance Abuse Services; foster parents; adoptive parents; Vendors for services provided; and county DSS

Project 4

FCFL - Foster Care Facility Licensing

A system that issues licenses and collects information related to the licensing of Foster Homes and/or facilities by the State. The system also maintains home and/or facility information that is used in the Child Placement Payment System payment process.

Project 4

ICPC - Interstate Compact on Placement of Children

A system that tracks the agreements between the State DSS Children’s Services Section and other States’ agencies in the placement of children across State lines

Project 4

MRS - Multiple Response System

A system that enables county DSS employees in various county offices across the State to record investigative and case management data for children at risk in North Carolina

Project 4

Daysheets Collects county worker information related to the amount of time that a worker spends providing assistance to NC DHHS clients for certain programs and services

Project 5

Services Information System

An online system designed to provide basic demographic information about clients who receive social services

Project 5

Figure 9 - Existing Legacy Systems Supporting Child Welfare Targeted for Replacement


Page 17 of 36

6. STATE IMPLEMENTATION LESSONS LEARNED CALLS

The Child Welfare Committee conducted four conference calls with other States that have implemented a case management system for Child Welfare and that operate in a State supervised and County administered way in order to gather information and lessons learned to inform the implementation approach for North Carolina. Several States currently using a non-IBM Cúram based SACWIS (Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System) were suggested by members of the Child Welfare Committee, and contacted by the State Division. The following States agreed to answer questions and discuss lessons learned:

Colorado Ohio Virginia Wisconsin

A list of high-level questions covering topics such as caseload sizes, staffing, case management/automation, implementation timelines and approaches, document management and mobile access were provided to the other States in advance of the calls, which lasted approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes. The questionnaire provided to the other States in advance of the conference calls is included in Appendix F.

Information gathered during the State calls was organized by topic area. Figure 10 outlines the primary lessons learned and recommendations gathered from the other States. The detailed document of lessons learned is included in Appendix G.

Topic Lessons Learned Recommendation

Change Management/ Training

Basic system navigation ability is very beneficial to have prior to diving into more focused training scenarios.

Require pre-requisite, web-based training prior to any classroom courses.

Ongoing training needs were significantly underestimated.

Establish a plan for ongoing training needs upfront.

Knowledge of the system is just as important as knowledge of policy & practice.

After initial training waves, embed NC FAST training as part of pre-service training.

Having a point of contact in the county to provide supplemental training and troubleshooting help is invaluable.

Identify County Super Users to be trained prior to designated training timeframe for each county.

User input at all levels is imperative. Involve counties in the project during analysis, design, testing - involvement should be maintained when considering future updates to functionality.

Establishing user groups that include frontline workers, IT staff, and program representatives is helpful to minimize impacts from new system on current workload.

Meet frequently with members of the Child Welfare Committee or other user groups to share ideas and voice concerns.


Page 18 of 36

Topic Lessons Learned Recommendation

Conversion Conversion of all data leads to duplication and time consuming data cleanup on the back end.

Convert a minimal amount of data needed to reference/maintain the case.

Allowing individual counties to choose what to convert led to significant confusion and difficulty with reporting (insufficient data to compare).

Standardize conversion approach across all counties.

Most case information requires some manual effort (scanning paper document, manually keying case information into system).

Prepare in advance for initial increased workload due to required manual data entry to maintain cases.

Pilot/Schedule Having one county or a small group of counties pilot functionality helps to identify and fix issues prior to larger, statewide implementation.

Pilot during initial implementation as well as prior to new major functionality being implemented statewide where possible.

Aggressive schedule for training and implementation is not realistic. Timeframe for implementation in other States has ranged from 3-5 years.

Develop conservative statewide implementation schedule; revise as needed within reason.

Mobile capabilities are desirable. Initial ability to access the back-end system remotely is beneficial but not ideal; one state investigating tuning appearance of screens on the mobile device. Communications coverage will affect usability.

Address capabilities that can be provided remotely given communications coverage in NC.

Other Performance issues impacted system usability and rollout schedules.

Address impact of adding CW capabilities to the existing NC FAST system and county networks. Continue to conduct performance tests and provide required standards to leadership and technical personnel.

Users need full functionality available at all times.

Determine approach to maximize system uptime and availability with options communicated for maintenance/required downtime.

Figure 10 – Primary Lessons Learned from Other States’ Implementations of Case Management Systems to Support Child Welfare


Page 19 of 36

7. PRE-IMPLEMENTATION NEEDS AND IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS

The Child Welfare Committee developed a number of recommendations and considerations for the implementation approach, the success of which depends on the completion of several pre-implemenation intiatives. The recommended implementation approach outlined here will be updated and refined as part of the project activities, but the identified pre-implementation activities are critical to consider as part of the whole.

7.1 Significant Pre-implementation Activities

In order to prepare for the implementation, the Child Welfare Committee identified a number of critical activities that should be completed prior to implementation.

Cleanup SIS identification numbers and legacy data – Efforts have been made to clean up and eliminate duplicate SIS identification numbers within specific counties; however, it is estimated that a significant portion of duplication still exists across county lines. The existence of duplicate SIS identification numbers will make conversion of legacy data extremely challenging and potentially unusable if not cleaned up prior to conversion.

Enable document management within NC FAST and establish statewide standards for usage – As the results of the technology survey indicated, the Child Welfare practice in North Carolina is still heavily paper based both in terms of the amount of overall paperwork required as well as the number of counties that do not currently use electronic document management. The paper processing is a primary cause of delayed service delivery as well as lost or misfiled records. The document management functionality of NC FAST needs to be enabled and counties that do not currently have a document management system should budget for the appropriate equipment and software in order to use the NC FAST solution. Counties that currently have a document management solution should evaluate if a migration to NC FAST is possible.

Address county and state staffing – To prepare the counties and state offices for the implementation, the Committee recommends that the necessary steps are taken to fill vacant positions as well as budget for new or possible temporary positions to assist with the rollout. This includes the possible need for temporary staff to assist with conversion-related tasks, such as scannning historical records or setting up active cases in NC FAST. Additionally, the State should evaluate if current staffing levels will allow for Division staff to assist counties during the implementation, including onsite consultation and assistance if necessary.

Determine mobile solution – To provide for a usable mobile solution, the committee recommends that a number of activities take place before the mobile application development begins:

o Evaluation of network coverage across the State o Determination of necessary technical specifications, including which devices

will be supported o Determination of cost ownership o Determination of mobile device management and technical support


Page 20 of 36

governance o Documentation of necessary policies for the use of mobile devices

Prepare cases for conversion – To prepare for the migration of active cases into NC

FAST, a recommended case organizational method, including the standardization of case heads, should be established. Maintaining cases in the same organizational fashion will allow for easier conversion as well as allow the possible use of temporary staff to move case documentation into NC FAST. It will also allow for consistent access to information by all necessary parties, such as attorneys, during the implementation preparation and rollout.

Determine and adopt practice model – A determination of whether or not North Carolina is going to fully adopt a new statewide practice model, such as Signs of Safety, needs to be made and completed either prior to system implementation or delayed until after system implementation. The timeline, expectations and process for the adoption of the new practice model should be clearly defined well in advance of the expected rollout date and progress should be monitored closely.

Address other program development actions – To best prepare counties for the implementation, each county should address all negative performance indicators based upon State and Federal reviews and guidelines prior to system implementation.

7.2 Recommended Implementation Approach

The following summarizes the recommended implementation approach for NC FAST Project 4 as agreed upon by the Child Welfare Committee:

Use IBM Cúram software as the case management system Pilot new functionality in one small, one medium and one large sized county Use contiguous geographic phases for Statewide rollout Complete the functional system design for all capabilities identified in the BSFs at the

beginning of the project Deploy system functionality at the county level in two primary waves Designate county resources to assist with system design, testing and training material

review Handle new CPS reports and subsequent assessments and cases in NC FAST when a

county implements Manually convert active cases via a combination of rekeying certain information and

scanning in the appropriate historical case information at applicable case milestones still to be defined

Provide training via a combination of web-based and classroom courses

The Child Welfare Committee reached general agreement that a Pilot, followed by a contiguous geographic rollout is the preferred method of deploying the system functionality. For the selection of Pilot counties, it was agreed that a combination of one small, one medium and one large sized county participate in the Pilot so that the Pilot is representative of all counties in the State. In addition to size, it was recommended that the Pilot counties be located relatively close to the NC FAST project site if possible to accomodate travel and collaboration by various parties between NC FAST staff and the county offices.


Page 21 of 36

In addition to a contiguous geographic rollout, the Committee was in agreement that deploying the functionality in two primary waves would be beneficial and allow for a smoother transition to the new system over a longer period of time.

After evaluating the BSFs and IBM Cúram system dependencies in conjunction with the As Is Business Processes, the two waves of functionality are outlined in Figure 11. This represents the non-mobile BSFs identified as ”Needed Day 1” (93%) for the functional area. BSFs identified as ”not needed Day 1” (7%) will be implemented on a separate schedule.

Functionality Wave 1

(49% of BSFs)

Functionality Wave 2

(44% of BSFs)

CPS

Process Support

Assessments

Payments and Fiscal Processes

Reporting

Eligibility

Services

Placements

Program Review

ICWA

Compliance

Courts and Law Enforcement

Providers

Interfaces

Technical / Security / UI

Adoption (and associated functions from Courts, Program Review, Eligibility, Licensure and Payments / Fiscal, ICWA, Reporting processes tied to Adoption)

Licensure

Funds (and program review processes related to funds)

Daysheets

ICPC

Appeals

Figure 11– Functionality Deployment Waves for Project 4

During the implementation of the functional waves and contiguous geographic rollout, certain capabilities will need to be created (e.g., report consolidation for counties that are implemented with those that are not for combined state-level reporting, bridges to existing legacy system functionality for licensing information).

There are additional considerations for the rollout and timing of mobile capabilities based on progress made in the recommended pre-implementation activity.

Remote access of functionality will be available at the time the functionality is rolled out. Workers will have the ability to access the Child Welfare application remotely in accordance with their County access policies.

Expansion of mobile into additional areas will be part of the design process to determine contents and timing of functionality. This is dependent upon the functionality provided within the IBM Cúram case management system. Based on feedback from the review teams during the mobile workshop, areas targeted for mobile functionality would be phased similarly to the wave approach outlined above for the back-office application and would include:

Tailored Presentation: Updates of select web pages within the application to react to the change in screen size for mobile devices. Provides limited views of the same pages available in the full application and assumes that communications connectivity exists.


Page 22 of 36

Mobile Application: True mobile application deployed on a tablet platform that supports targeted functions performed out of the office. Provides targeted capabilities when connected and disconnected from communications.

Counties will provide staff to assist with system design, testing and training material reviews in order to confirm that the end user perspective is taken into account throughout the project and that interpretation of the BSFs stays consistent over time. Although the system functionality will be deployed in two primary waves, the design for all functions will be completed before the first wave of functionality is deployed in order to account for any system interdependencies. Where necessary, the design for Project 4 will take into consideration BSFs that are also applicable to Project 5 so that the design will support functionality that overlaps both projects.

Upon a County’s implementation, new cases will begin being entered and managed in NC FAST. Active cases will be converted based upon the type of case and its status. The Committee agreed that in general, when a case reaches a significant milestone or a significant event occurrs, such as a child being placed in a new foster home or a court decision being made, the case move into NC FAST. The case would be created manually in NC FAST, with entry of the most recent case activities and associated historical information. The case would then be managed in NC FAST until it is closed. This process will be further defined during project activities, as well as a determination of what components could be done programatically.


Page 23 of 36

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A significant number of people from the counties and the State Division contributed time and resources to support the BSF review process. The review could not have been conducted and completed within our planned schedule without the dedication of the following:

Aisha Shepherd Alicia Kester Alison Clark Alycia Gaither Amanda Sumner Amelia Lance Amy Clarke Amy Herman Angie Garner Anika Copney Annette Atwater Antonia Zimmer Arlette Lambert Autumn Dockins Bernard Miles Beth Ramsey Beverly Dupree Bobbie Sigmon Bunny Critcher Carla McNeill Charlene Timmons Charlotte Willis Christina McEntee Chuck Lycett Crystal Mitchell Dan Pizzo Danielle McConaga David Crowder David D. Richmond Dean Griffin Debbie Hawkins Denise Boyette Denise Shaffer Drew Shelfer Duston Lowell Elaine Patterson Elizabeth Clore

Eric Zechman Erin Conner Gina Warren Gregory Grier Hank Bowers Heather Ball Heather Bohanan Heather Israel Jamie Bazemore Jamie Willard Jason Hughes Jean Vacanti Jeff Olson Jennifer Chilton Jennifer Miller Jennifer Oshnock Jessica Reitzel John E. Hudson John O'Connor Johnna Wiseman Julia Hairr Julia Hoffart Karen Ellis Karen Lewis Katherine Cox Kathy Sommese Kelli Bowman Kelly Cobb Kelly Johnson Kendra Jenkins Kim Best Kimberly H. Goodwin Kristy Dillard Lakecia Knight Leigh Ann Vaughn Linda Smith Lineta Bostian

Lisa Lane Lisa Melton Lori Davis Marcie Bland-Boughman Mary Morrison Melissa Ammons Melissa Burton-Moore Myra Dixon Nadean Quarterman Nicole Allen Nicole Jensen Pam Bookhart Pam Bright Pam Clarkson Pam Stewart Phil Lassiter Randy Cress Rebecca Smith Rebekah E Richmond Rhonda Ashley Rita Bland Robin Sams Sarah Shumate Sherrie Thomas Stephanie Sonzogni Suzanne Avett Teresa Strom Tina Bumgarner Tisha Warren Tracy Goodwin Trisha Moser Tyran Lennon Vanessa Schaller Whitney Peterson William Butler

In addition, the Committee would like to thank the Directors and staff from the following counties who hosted the As Is Business Process Review Meetings:

Buncombe County Franklin County Gaston County Moore County


Page 24 of 36

9. APPENDIX A: IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS DETAIL

The NCACDSS provided the Child Welfare Committee with an initial set of ideas and considerations for the implementation of NC FAST Project 4. This document is commonly referred to as “the needs” document and was reviewed by the Committee to gain common understanding of the 102 items included in the list. Please reference the file titled Appendix A- Meeting 1-16-2015 Needs Grouping.


Page 25 of 36

10. APPENDIX B: BSF DETAIL

For the list of finalized BSFs, please reference the file titled Appendix B- Final BSF Review Sent to Review Teams.

Development of Mobile BSFs

Mobile capabilities were not envisioned when the original list of BSFs were developed. The Committee identified mobile enablement as one of the needs for the deployment of Child Welfare functions within NC FAST. Several counties had also implemented or were in the process of implementing mobile support for their social workers based on offerings from their document management vendor (e.g., Northwoods CoPilot).

Mobile Workshop

Instead of identifying new mobile BSFs in individual swimlanes, a joint four-day workshop was held at the NC FAST project site to develop the mobile BSFs. The groups identified existing BSFs that were candidates for mobile enablement as a part of their review prior to the workshop. This information was used to group the BSFs as “mobile candidates” or “outside mobile” for discussion during the workshop. The mobile workshop was held in week 7 of the 16-week review schedule since three major BSF groups that were identified to have high-potential for mobile candidates would have been reviewed by the teams (CPS, Adoption, and Process Support).

During the workshop, the teams reviewed the basics of mobile applications and heard a presentation on experience in other jurisdictions of enabling child welfare workers with mobile technology. From this orientation, the team:

Identified the types of users expected to access NC FAST Child Welfare capabilities and target environments appropriate for them (e.g. back office functions, web-based portals, or mobile devices)

Defined fundamental mobile capabilities and developed BSFs to support them Established which capabilities are to be available when connected to a network and

those that need to be supported even when disconnected, given that connectivity is an issue in rural NC counties

Established functions to support on different mobile device form factors, with tablet as overall directional preference

Reviewed existing BSFs tagged as candidates for mobile support and gained consensus for the CPS, Adoption, and Process Support categories

Set direction for mobile support for BSF groups yet to be reviewed in detail (weeks 8-16 of the review process)

Established priority for mobile components

User Types and Platforms

Specific security roles and the capabilities associated with each of these roles will be established during the design of the Child Welfare application components, which was outside the scope of the BSF review. However, the workshop did identify the major types of users expected to access the Child Welfare application when it is implemented. Figure 12 identifies the primary target platform for each user or user group to access the system. The platforms considered were:

Back Office: Using the NC FAST desktop application, whether in the office or connected


Page 26 of 36

at a remote site via a browser. The user may be accessing the system via a desktop or laptop.

Web-Enabled Portal: Using a defined set of functions via web access, which would potentially be implemented as extensions to the ePASS capabilities already deployed for NC FAST, or new portals with similar profiles.

Mobile Application: Using a defined set of functions with an application that is specifically developed to support users on a mobile device.

Type of Enablement Potential NC FAST Users

Mobile Case Workers - Intake Dedicated (8-5)

Case Workers - Adoption

Case Workers - Ongoing Case

Case Workers - Foster Care

Investigators

Paralegals

Attorneys

Supervisors

Management

Directors

Licensing / Regulatory Workers

Division Workers

Administrative Workers (transportation, supervised visits, clerical)

Web Self Service Application (e.g. ePASS)

Paralegals

Attorneys

Foster / Adoptive Parents

Law Enforcement

District Attorney

Court Staff

Education / School Staff

Group Homes

Health Professionals

Other States

Other Providers

Teams (e.g., CPT, MDT)

Guardian Ad Litem

Client Representative

Client (longer term or limited – e.g., foster care)

Back Office Case Workers - Intake Dedicated (8-5)

Case Workers - Adoption

Case Workers - Ongoing Case

Case Workers - Foster Care

Investigators

Paralegals

Attorneys

Accounting

Supervisors

Management

Directors

Compliance Monitors / Reviewers

Division Workers

Division Supervisors

Licensing / Regulatory Workers

Administrative Workers (transportation, supervised visits, clerical)

No Access Collateral Contacts

Figure 12 - Potential NC FAST Child Welfare Application Users and Targeted Platform

A key point during this discussion identified that some counties have dedicated on-call teams, and others rotate on-call duties within the regular staff. The on-call users would need to have access to a variety of capabilities that may be different than their “everyday” assignments within the system. The ability to support on-call personnel will be critical for any mobile-enabled applications.

The remainder of the workshop concentrated on the functions for mobile enablement. Back office and additional ePASS capabilities are covered in the overall BSF review or will be addressed at a later time during design.

BSFs For Fundamental Mobile Capabilities

Fundamental capabilities provide support across the mobile application and are not targeted to a specific functional area. The groupings used by the team to develop these types of BSFs are


Page 27 of 36

shown in Figure 13. Ninety-nine (99) BSFs were defined to support these capabilities and are provided in the Appendix B spreadsheet.

Category Capabilities

Reference Contact Lists

Critical Policies, Procedures, Instructions

Maps and Directions

Calendaring and Activities Appointments

Daily Worklists

Milestones and Due Dates

Messaging and Communications Sending and Receiving Messages

Assistance and Reviews

Voice / Video Conversations

Security Authentication

Role-Based Function Access

Data Protection

Device Management

Display “Masking”

Safety Emergency Alerts

Worker Check In / Out

Document Management View and Create Documents

Capture Text, Audio, Video, Signatures

Geo Identification (GPS coordinates)

Case Management Basic Capabilities across all case activities

Targeted Functions (specific BSFs)

Figure 13 - Mobile Fundamental Capabilities

Candidates for Mobile from Detail BSF Review

After the fundamental BSFs were developed, the team reviewed the detailed BSFs that they had already flagged as candidates for mobile enablement. Each of the functional areas was reviewed to set a consensus of direction for groups that were under review.

The following items were discussed during the mobile workshop that will need to be considered during the development of the Child Welfare application. These items should be reviewed and solutions determined prior to initial rollout activities:

Policy on use of personal mobile devices – is “bring your own device” allowed, how are these devices to be administered, any restrictions on the types of functions that can be performed on these devices if not supplied by the State / County

Policy on use of current technologies like email, capture of audio and video and what should become a part of the case file that can be created / viewed on mobile devices

Policy on identification of / recording / sharing the location where information is captured if we geo-code – if this is captured, the social worker’s home location is identifiable and may need to be protected based on security profiles

Funding for tablets required for mobile During the mobile workshop, IBM and RedMane representatives presented a brief synopsis of what other jurisdictions have experienced when considering and implementing mobile capabilities in Child Welfare. This included direct experience with implementations as well as research they had performed. Jurisdictions highlighted included Saskatchewan, Alberta and


Page 28 of 36

Manitoba in Canada, and Minnesota, California, Delaware, New York, Massachusetts, and Texas in the United States. Information from initial mobile implementations (Northwoods CoPilot) in Alamance and Richmond Counties in North Carolina was also discussed. Much of the information in this presentation informed the creation of the “fundamental mobile capability” BSFs discussed in the Business Plan.

Other aspects of the presented material have more direct influence on the implementation of the technology. These are summarized in Figure 14.

Category Description

Users Enabled Most implementations started with frontline workers or on-call staff but moved to all services-based workers (e.g., Foster home coordinators, CPS Investigators, Permanency worker, Family-based safety services caseworkers, residential Child Care Licensing staff)

User Reaction Users generally felt the mobile devices and applications were user-friendly. It has helped them do their job more easily, quickly, efficiently, or conveniently. Workers generally came to accept the use of mobile devices.

Client Reaction Clients appreciated information being documented in their home. Many felt the approach was more transparent -- “they knew what was being documented about them.” The technology was a good engagement tool with children and teens since they are familiar and comfortable with technology.

Benefits Achieved More efficient and complete receipt of circumstance information and case data by on-call workers. All had access to greater amounts of important information while working out of the office. Access key data in case management systems in real time to make informed decisions.

Full system functionality supported by good connectivity enables worker to spend more time in the community of the children for whom they are responsible. The work experience becomes more immersive.

Some reported a reduction of case timeframes to closure of 3-5 days once mobile in place. Caseworkers felt the information they entered was far more accurate and information was available to their colleagues in more timely manner. Many expected to save 4-8 hours of week of administrative time, and a minimum of .5 hours/day on transcription and travel

Generally, jurisdictions viewed their mobile technology experiences positively, with the belief that gains in efficiency, effectiveness and economy were realized.

Approaches Rethought Several tried just deploying the back-office application on a laptop with remote access. Since the back-office applications typically require much more data, are not designed for remote use, and are not really mobile applications, the uptake of the application failed. Laptops did not work out as the preferred device. True mobile applications on tablet devices (e.g., iPad) are the direction for those rethinking the deployments.

Many factors influence measures of productivity and success, with mobility being just one of them; the level of connectivity, availability of mobile equipment, local management attitudes, and program policies and administrative practice have direct impact.


Page 29 of 36

Category Description

Other Implications May need to reorganize some business functions (e.g. personnel in office do research and “push” information to the investigator’s remote device) to make the remote worker productive.

Training and initial user uptake was viewed as a challenge, especially among older social workers. Effective management of cultural change is a must.

Concern of social workers’ use of mobile technology, especially laptops, whose screens could be perceived as a “barrier” between worker and those with whom the worker is conversing. Although this concern was not expressed by all jurisdictions, it is something that should be considered as part of any jurisdiction’s cultural change management process for introducing and using mobile technologies.

Figure 14 - Experience of Others Implementing Mobile Technology in Child Welfare

Establishing Consensus on the BSFs

The BSF review teams submitted spreadsheets twice per week to the NC FAST team. The spreadsheets provided feedback on each BSF to the following:

Should the BSF remain in the scope for Project 4 -- Include? (Y or N) In-scope for Mobile? (Y or N) County Unique? (Y or N) Needed At Day 1 for the functional area? (Y or N) Reword if Required to make corrections or to clarify meaning Clarifications/Additional Information to justify changes and / or ask questions County Review Complete? (Y or N or N/A)

These spreadsheets were posted to a consolidated workbook that tracked progress of the submissions and the answers each team provided for each individual BSF. The answers were consolidated so that consensus could be established. The rules for consensus agreed by the teams were:

If less than 67% of those that responded did not provide the same answer to the questions above on the BSF, consensus had not been reached (RED)

If 67%-80% of those that responded had the same answer, this was considered in “general agreement” (YELLOW)

If 81%-100% of those that responded had the same answer, this was considered “the answer” with consensus established (GREEN)

“RED” and “YELLOW” items were discussed either in a face-to-face session or resolved via email and checkpoint calls until the teams agreed on the assessment.

The workbooks also had a separate worksheet where teams could submit new BSFs if they felt that specific business functions had not been adequately addressed.

Standardization of County-Specific Documents

Several BSFs were flagged during the review that had county variability but could benefit from standardization if checklists, forms, or processes could be developed. The county review teams submitted “models” that their county used; these will be used as the starting points for


Page 30 of 36

developing state-wide standards primarily during the Project 4 design phase, but could be used to start the development of the standard forms now. The BSFs were therefore not flagged as “county unique,” which requires the application to tailor actions based on the county that they occurred; rather, they are assumed to be supported by state-wide standards.

Figure 15 shows the list of submitted documents and applicable BSFs.

BSF ID BSF Description Form Names

03.23.111 - 03.23.114

Provide a method to display / enter / maintain / generate information contained in the CPS Information Request Letter.

CPS Information Request Letter

03.32.008 Provide a method to generate any and all forms and documents included in the Placement Services Checklist (as part of a packet).

Placement Services Checklist

03.24.015 - 03.24.018

Provide a method to display / enter / maintain / generate information contained on the Subpoena List.

Subpoena List

Evidence list letterhead

03.32.024 – 03.32.028

Provide a method to display / enter / maintain / generate / maintain signature acknowledgements the Foster Child's Information Sheet Form.

Foster Child's Information Sheet Form

03.32.130 Provide a method to generate the Discipline Policy for Foster Parents Form.

Discipline Policy

03.32.149 Provide a method to display the Child Custody Letter.

Child Custody Letter

03.32.154 Provide a method to display the Child Custody Letter for Travel.

Child Custody Letter for Travel

NEW-GP1-ORG-013

Provide a method to display letters to Credit Agencies

Equifax Request

Experian Request

TransUnion Request

05.14.951 – 05.14.953

Provide a method to display / enter / maintain information contained on the Authorization/Receipt for Direct Payment (Voucher) Form (DSS-6852).

2014-15 General contract


Page 31 of 36

BSF ID BSF Description Form Names

03.16.074 - 03.16.077

Provide a method to display / enter / maintain / generate the CPS Family Assessment Notification of Findings to Parent / Caretaker / Perpetrator closure notices to inform recipients of case decision.

DME Forms

Disposition letter to family regarding family assessment

Disposition letter to

family regarding

Investigative assessment

Disposition letter to

reporter regarding family

assessment

Disposition letter to reporter regarding Investigative assessment

03.32.024 – 03.32.028

Provide a method to enter / maintain / generate / signature acknowledgements for information contained on the Foster Child's Information Sheet Form.

Child Placement Request

03.27.017 Provide a method to display a notification to birth parent(s) if the adoptive parent/petitioner on the Petition for Adoption of a Minor Child (Not Stepparent) Form (DSS-1800) is not the same as the designee on the Relinquishment of a Minor for Adoption by Parent or Guardian Form (DSS-1804).

Relinquishment Letter

03.28.170 – 03.28.171

Provide a method to display / generate the Collateral Contact/Reference Questionnaire in regards to obtaining references for foster care licensure.

Request for Reference Statement

03.08.007 - 03.08.011

Provide a method to generate / display / enter / maintain / maintain signature acknowledgements a Child and Family Team (CFT) Meeting Notification Form to all appropriate members of the Child and Family Team of scheduled CFT meetings according to policy and procedure.

CFT Letter

Figure 15 – BSFs and Examples Indicated as County Specific that Could Potentially Be Standardized


Page 32 of 36

11. APPENDIX C: AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS FLOWS

During the As Is Business Process Review meetings current Child Welfare business processes flows were documented. Please reference the file titled Appendix C- CW As-Is Process Flows Final.


Page 33 of 36

12. APPENDIX D: AS IS BUSINESS PROCESS REVIEW FINDINGS

During the As Is Business Process Review meetings a number of additional observations pertaining to the Child Welfare practices at the county level were documented. Please reference the file titled Appendix D- 20150506 CW As-Is Business Process Review_Final.


Page 34 of 36

13. APPENDIX E: TECHNOLOGY SURVEY RESPONSES

A survey was issued statewide to gather contact information for an individual in each county as well as capture what technology is currently in use in each county to support the Child Welfare program. Please reference the file titled Appendix E- 20150409 CW Contacts and Tech Survey Responses_Final.


Page 35 of 36

14. APPENDIX F: STATE LESSONS LEARNED QUESTIONNAIRE

In advance of the conference calls that were held with the four other States, the Child Welfare Committee provided each state with a preliminary set of questions in order to inform the other States of the type of information the Committee was looking to gather. Please reference the file named Appendix F- 20150320 CW Best Practices and Lessons Learned Questionnaire_Final.


Page 36 of 36

15. APPENDIX G: STATE LESSONS LEARNED

Lessons learned from the Child Welfare Committee’s conference calls with the four other States that have implemented a case management system were captured and consolidated into one final document. Please reference the file titled Appendix G- 20150520 CW State Outreach Findings_Final.