Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Differential Response System Update
Presentation to: Georgia Child Welfare Reform Council
Presenter: Jo Ann Lamm, MSW Date: August 5, 2014
2
What is the status nationally of Differential Response (DR)?
The Georgia Experience with Differential Response since 2004- (Analysis in 2010)
The impact, benefits and challenges of Differential Response
Recommendations Successes/challenges/opportunities ahead?
Updates Include:
3
DR is an approach that allows for more than one way to respond to screened–in CPS reports of child maltreatment
Typically recognizes two tracks/responses - “Investigative or IR” and “Family Assessment or Alternative Response (AR)”
Assignment is based on an array of factors( type and severity of alleged maltreatment, number and sources of prior reports, age of child, risk and safety levels)
DR is a well organized CPS system that is supported by legislation, and/or State policies, procedures and protocols
What is Differential Response?
4
Focus on child safety is paramount Promotes family engagement when possible Recognizes CPS authority to make decisions
about risk and safety, removal, out of home placement and service provision
Recognition that other community partners may be the more appropriate service providers
Similarities Between the Two Responses…
5
19 States and DC are using DR statewide At least 7 additional States, tribes or
jurisdictions are considering planning implementation of DR
Multiple evaluations have been conducted Most recent evaluation by QIC-DR on Illinois,
Colorado and Ohio July 2014
National Differential Response Implementation…
6
7
Child safety is paramount and not compromised with either response
Improved family engagement Rate of subsequent repeat CPS reports have
decreased Enhanced family and CPS staff satisfaction Increased community involvement Prompt services delivery Family participation in decision making
increased Cost effectiveness
Themes/Findings from Multiple Evaluations …
8
Are children as safe or safer in AR than children in investigative response (IR)?
How is AR different in terms of family engagement, caseworker practice and services provided from IR?
What are the costs to implement DR?
QIC-DR Evaluation: Posed Three Questions…
9
In 2 of the 3 sites, AR families were less likely to be re-referred
Fewer than 5% of children either AR or IR were removed during the 1 year study
AR families were more likely to receive services such as social support, educational, parenting and other services while IR families more likely to receive substance abuse services
In 1 site AR families received services more rapidly In 2 sites AR parents felt 1st meeting was more positive; IR
families worried more at 1st meeting In 1 site AR families were satisfied with treatment by CPS, the
level of help received and likelihood of contacting caseworker in the future
Costs varied
QIC-DR Findings…
10
Lack of statewide policy; lack of consistent or uniform criteria of practice- unknown expectations of what is acceptable Diversion/Family Support practice
Data Integrity Issues Distrust of Agency Varying use of the word Diversion/criteria
for assignment to Diversion
Georgia’s DR Experience from 2004 to 2010 : Themes from Practice Analysis…
11
Impact, Benefits and Challenges…
Differential Response restructures the entire CPS system: from casework foundation, training,
supervision, coaching and practice
12
DR influences how all aspects of CPS are implemented and delivered
It is difficult to determine the sole impact of DR due to states implementing other practice reforms simultaneously
Family engagement practice strategies influence how all CPS staff approach families
National Impact and Benefits …
13
Improved assessments Absence of labeling may positively impact
the relationship between CPS, partners and families
Substantiation rates increase ACF guidance emphasizes family
engagement Innovative approaches-a third prevention
track and community providers assume case responsibility
National Impact and Benefits…
14
Leadership Influence Buy-in and ownership by Drivers Agreement on Vision, Mission and Values Need strong practice foundation prior to DR DR Design: Systemic Re-structuring of
Infrastructure- statewide policy, training, technical assistance, on-going consultation, local supervision and casework practice
Challenges…
15
Implementation Variability Implementation Inconsistencies Communication Plan Examine Caseloads Limited Resources Identify training needs for CPS staff,
supervisors, agency leadership and community partners
Challenges…
16
Ensure efficient use of DR and model fidelity Allow for switching tracks/responses Track and explain changes in data On-going need for coaching, assessing and
revisions based on observations/data CQI/Evaluation
Challenges…
17
Recommendations…Positive Steps and Actions…
18
Development of statewide DR/Family Support policy and guidance
Centralized Intake Statewide Intake Policy Work in past with ACCWIC and NRCCPS to
address safety- implemented Safety Response System
2 Pilot sites are using Family Functioning Assessment process
Other?
Positive Steps DFCS has taken…
19
Clarity of Vision, Mission and Values that supports a strong CPS casework foundation
Develop strategic plan that addresses what needs to be accomplished to ensure good case work practice
Address the core concerns of child safety and risk
Recommendations…
20
Assess and address caseload size for success
Ensure appropriate resources Streamline DR model and Safety Response
System- Is there consensus on the use and how DR/Family Support and Safety Response System “fit’ together?
Fully implement DR and ensure accountability to model
Recommendations…
21
Family Support Policy must be followed and implemented consistently across the state
Was policy developed with counties and partners?
Ensure adequate and on-going training that supports foundation first and holds true to DR model fidelity for caseworkers, supervisors and agency leadership
Recommendations…
22
Determine role of State DFCS in accountability
Develop communication strategies to keep counties and partners informed of practice
Build an infrastructure to guarantee sustainability from the beginning
Build in a CQI process and an Evaluation
Recommendations…
23
What are the desired outcomes? How do you get there? What are the gains and losses? What’s working well? What are the
successes/challenges/opportunities ahead?
Questions…
24
National Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response in Child Protective Services. (2014, July).Final Report: QIC-DR Cross Site Evaluation.
www.differentialresponseqic.org Center for Child and Family Policy(2006,June).
Multiple Response System Evaluation report to NCDSS, Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University. www.ncdhhs.gov/dss/publications
Child Welfare Information 242424Gateway. www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/issue_briefs/differential_response.
References
