The following documents are attachments to the 2008 Dept of Children and Families Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR). The report can be obtained from: http://centerforchildwelfare.fmhi.usf.edu/kb/flres/DCF_APSR_June2 008.pdf
Florida Department of Children and Families
Strategic Intent 2008 - 2010
January 17, 2008
Charlie Crist Bob Butterworth Governor Secretary
, 2008
Strategic Intent for 2008 - 2010
The Secretary’s Strategic Intent gives guidance and summarizes the Department’s major initiatives for 2008 - 2010. This document provides the Secretary’s intent on what the Department and its partners must accomplish during this year. The Secretary’s guidance drives the development of the Department’s Strategic Plan, which depicts how the Department will achieve these initiatives, when they will be accomplished and the metrics used to measure progress.
Major Accomplishments in 2007
Over the past year the professional and caring people of the Department of Children and Families along with our partners have achieved much. Before we identify key initiatives for 2008, it’s important to reflect on some of these major accomplishments. (See Appendix A for a more detailed list of accomplishments.)
DEPARTMENT
• Implemented various cultural change initiatives; Secretary’s Six Guiding Principles, Common Sense and Sense of Urgency; Transparency and Open Government; and Plain Language. • Reorganized the Department by establishing Regions and Circuits, restructuring DCF Legal Services, and adding a Criminal Justice Director and Regional Criminal Justice Coordinators.
MENTAL HEALTH / SUBSTANCE ABUSE
• Reduced the adult forensic wait list to zero • Expanded competency restoration services both in-jail and in the community • Eliminated the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed waiting list for community competency services
CHILD WELFARE
• Finalized 3,229 adoptions • Promulgated written Rights of Foster Care Children • Refocused Department attention on prevention • Implemented Florida’s child abuse prevention (IV-E) waiver
ACCESS
• Won the Innovation in Government Award • Significantly reduced the Food Stamp error rate • Redesigned Call Centers ______
1 Updated January 17, 2008
Governor’s Intent
Governor Crist’s leadership has established an environment in which his administration will serve the people. The Governor has pledged to “establish an ethical and hard working administration that will reflect Florida’s diversity, that will listen to your ideas, and that will fight for you, the people of Florida.” Governor Crist firmly believes that leaders in administration demonstrate integrity and “work hard with me everyday to provide hope, safety, and opportunity for every Floridian.”
Governor Crist has provided guidance to the Department through public statements, Executive Orders, the General Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2007-08, and in conversations with the Secretary. The key Executive Orders and Budget are summarized below. The Department will continue to implement the tasks specified in these documents during 2008.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS
1. Executive Order 07-01: Continue to implement Code of Ethics, Plain Language and Customer Services tasks as outlined in Executive Order 07-01. See Appendix B for tasks.
2. Executive Order 07-126: Continue to implement actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as delineated in Executive Order 07-126.
BUDGET SUMMARY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-08: Continue to implement tasks associated with the Fiscal Year 2007-2008 budget. See Appendix C for a more detailed listing of tasks.
______
DCF Mission
Protect the vulnerable
Promote strong and economically self-sufficient families
Advance personal and family recovery and resiliency
______
2 Updated January 17, 2008
Secretary’s Guidance
The Department of Children and Families serves the most vulnerable people and families in Florida. We must constantly keep our focus on these needy Floridians. Whether it’s an abused child or vulnerable adult who needs to be protected, a homeless veteran who needs a place to live, a single mother who needs welfare assistance to feed her children, a parent with a substance abuse problem who needs treatment, a person with a mental illness who needs medication, or other needy people who rely on our services; when these Floridians need our services, they need them NOW. Therefore, during 2008 we shall streamline our processes and deliver services to customers quicker. We will embrace a sense of urgency in all that we do.
Not only do our customers need services quicker, many of them require more than one service to address their needs. However, in the past, the Department frequently thought about and delivered services from a single-program perspective. We can no longer do work this way. Our customers need services provided in an integrated and complementary approach. So, we shall integrate child welfare, domestic violence, substance abuse, mental health, homelessness, and other services provided by the Department into both the development of policy and delivery of services. This year we must refocus our efforts to integrate Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services into local Circuit operations.
We shall broaden the use of common sense throughout the Department, including our partners, contractors and stakeholders. During 2008, we must aggressively reduce regulatory and administrative burdens on the public, our partners and staff. Additionally, we shall continue to assure compliance with the Plain Language Initiative so our correspondence with the public is clear and concise.
An important feature of common sense government is customer service. As we mentioned above, serving vulnerable people and families is why the Department exists. Therefore, we shall provide extraordinary customer service to these needy people. To this end we will ask customers to determine how they define good service; develop, publish and distribute customer service standards; survey customers to find out how well we are living up to those standards and use responses to improve service; and compare operations and results to “world-class” organizations.
Last year was a noteworthy year for the Department. We shall continue to build on our efforts from 2007 in gaining and maintaining the public’s trust and confidence. Every action we take, every service we deliver, and every impression we make has the potential to increase or decrease people’s perception of both our competence, and the efficiency and effectiveness in which the Department delivers services.
In 2007 we will continue to gain the public’s trust by –
• Demonstrating that we are building an action-oriented agency focused on helping communities pursue opportunities and resolve issues; • broadening the public’s knowledge of the program and services provided by the Department;
3 Updated January 17, 2008
• improving accountability by developing meaningful performance measures, focusing on priority outcomes, enhancing quality assurance, and increasing local control of operations.
To maintain the trust of the people they must believe we are open and transparent. This year we shall continue to educate the leadership of the Department to assure full and expeditious compliance with Florida’s open government and public records laws. We shall also seek legislative changes to further make the Department more open and transparent.
Finally, we must change the Department’s governance model to align with one of our key principles – pushing decisions to the lowest appropriate level. Department field staff along with our partners have extensive knowledge on how to deliver efficient and effective services. We must tap into this expertise. Therefore, we shall increase the use of workgroups, teams, etc. with representation from the field to implement a “push up” model of policy development.
Workforce . . .
______
Key Department Initiatives
The Secretary has determined that the successful execution of the initiatives outlined below is critical to the overall success of the Department. Therefore the Secretary will be personally involved in planning, implementing and overseeing these key strategic areas.
Actions to protect the vulnerable
CHILD WELFARE
1. Independent Living: Enable children in foster care and young adults who were formerly in foster care to develop the skills necessary for successful transition to adulthood and self-sufficiency.
(a) Increase the number of youth graduating from high school and post-secondary education.
(1) Increase the educational stability of children in foster care by increasing the number of foster children remaining in their same school, when feasible, or improve the transition between schools and school districts when school moves occur.
(2) Facilitate youth having supports to enter into, and complete high school and post- secondary education.
(3) Balance Road to Independence stipends with the number of young adult seeking post- secondary education.
4 Updated January 17, 2008
(b) Enhance opportunities and supports for youth to fully participate in all aspects of the primary and secondary school experience as well as activities to enhance normalcy.
(c) Increase the number of youth who obtain a job that provides a living wage by implementing “Operation Full Employment” to employ 100 youth in foster care in the Department; and challenging statewide employer / agency collaborations that help first- time workers enter and advance in the workplace.
(d) Continue to support the development and implementation of a transitional living or subsidized independent living housing experience for those youth aging out of foster care at age 17 who will not have the option of remaining in a foster care family home or group home.
(e) Support the development of transitional housing programs and scattered site apartments with support services for youth ages 18-23.
(f) Continue to establish and implement measureable outcome measures for youth aging out of foster care focusing on education, employment, housing, financial stability, and permanency.
(g) Improve the consistency of services’ provision throughout Florida by establishing clear Independent Living Services policies, procedures and standards of service; and insuring that life skills trainings, education planning, career path development, financial literacy training and other services are of the same quality regardless of the placement of the youth in Florida.
(h) Increase youth involvement in developing all aspects of their case plans.
(i) Implement the Independent Living Services Advisory Council’s 2007 Report of Independent Living Services for Florida’s Foster Youth.
2. Foster Care: Decrease the time for a child in foster care to achieve permanency.
(a) Increase in-home intervention and support so that more children can remain safely in their homes rather than enter out-of-home care.
(b) Reduce the time of reunifications for foster children who are placed in and outside of Florida: Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC).
(c) Improve the permanency of reunifications.
(d) Improve the timeliness of adoptions.
(e) Decrease the number of children discharged from foster care due to emancipation or reaching their 18th birthday.
5 Updated January 17, 2008
3. Foster Care: Improve the stability of children in foster care.
(a) Reduce the number of placement settings that a child will have in foster care.
(b) Decrease the number of schools that a child in foster care attends.
4. Foster Care: Improve key aspects of child well-being and safety in the foster care system.
(a) Engage the family, especially the father, in determining a child’s well-being.
(b) Improve the use of professional assessment information case plans and providing services.
(c) Increase a child’s access to services focusing on pre-pay mental health plans.
(d) Stabilize the workforce in child welfare.
(e) Improve in-service training.
5. Adoptions: Adopt a minimum of 2,751 children.
(a) Support the Governor’s Office of Adoption and Child Abuse Protection’s initiatives encouraging the adoption of Florida’s children in foster care and supporting a statewide public service campaign to let all Floridians know the value of adoption and how it can promote a culture of life in our state.
(b) Increase adoptions of African-American children by enhancing the One Church One Child initiative.
6. Child Safety: Reduce the number of child deaths in Florida.
(a) In coordination with the Department of Health and other organizations, educate the public to the dangers of the most likely causes of child deaths.
(b) In coordination with the Department of Health and other organizations, educate mandatory reporters to the behaviors associated with perpetrators of child abuse.
7. Child Safety: Increase the use of technology to improve child safety.
8. Child Safety: Implement the approved recommendations from the Child Protection Task Force and Courtney Clark Quality Assurance Reports.
6 Updated January 17, 2008
9. Children’s Legal Services: Create a professional law firm within the Department.
(a) Build a Children’s Legal Services leadership team.
(b) Improve the image Judges have of Children’s Legal Services’ lawyers; competent/good litigators, child-focused, well-prepared, professional, and collaborative.
(c) Adopt the “prosecutor” model for legal representation in the child welfare system.
Actions to promote strong and economically self-sufficient families
HOMELESSNESS
10. Reduce homelessness among at-risk families and vulnerable adults.
(a) Educate the public on homelessness.
(b) Increase affordable housing for persons with mental illness, young adults transitioning out of foster care, and veterans.
(c) Target veterans who are homeless or at-risk of being homeless with Department services (mental health, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.).
(d) Assist low income individuals and families to remain in their homes.
(e) Enhance the capacity of the Office on Homelessness.
ACCESS
11. Public Assistance: Decrease the time required for eligible families to receive benefits.
(a) Expedite the processing of food stamps requests.
(b) Provide access to benefits for families eligible for expedited food stamps within 24 hours.
(c) Distribute work statewide: use technology to move work where production is more effective and efficient.
12. Public Assistance: Continue to reduce the food stamp error rate not only avoiding federal penalty but putting Florida in position to qualify for federal bonus funding.
13. Increase access to health insurance.
7 Updated January 17, 2008
(a) Through multi-agency action, increase the number of eligible children enrolled in Kidcare through Medicaid or Healthy Kids.
(b) Reduce the adverse impact of federal administrative requirements on enrollment of eligible children and adults in Medicaid.
Actions to advance personal and family recovery and resiliency
MENTAL HEALTH / SUBSTANCE ABUSE
14. Adult Forensics: Maintain the adult forensic 15-day waiting list at zero.
15. Juvenile Forensics: Eliminate the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed wait lists.
16. Mental Health System: Implement the approved recommendations from the Steering Committee on Families and Children in the Court Report.
17. Mental Health System: Evaluate managing entities as a service delivery system in all or selected Department regions.
18. Co-occurring Disorders: Assist Department-funded providers of Substance Abuse and Mental Health in becoming dually-diagnosed capable.
REFUGEE SERVICES
19. Implement approved recommendations from the Refugee Services Working Group.
ADULT SERVICES
20. Implement approved recommendations from the Adult Services Task Force.
21. Streamline and improve interagency processes to establish a single entry point to Medicaid Waiver programs for eligible disabled adults.
Areas of Risk
8 Updated January 17, 2008
Appendices
9 Updated January 17, 2008
This page intentionally left blank
10 Updated January 17, 2008
APPENDIX A: Department of Children and Families 2007 Accomplishments
Governor and Secretary Directives
1. Implemented Culture Change Initiatives: (a) Secretary’s Six guiding Principles (b) Common Sense / Sense of Urgency (c) Transparency and Open Government (d) Plain Language
2. Reorganized Department: (a) Established Regions and Circuit-based delivery of services (b) Restructured DCF Legal Services (Statewide law firm) (c) Added Criminal Justice Director and Region Criminal Justice Coordinators
3. Established Task Force for Child Protection: (a) Published preliminary report that includes initial recommendations (b) Assigned workgroups to monitor, implement, and make further recommendations
4. Established Adult Protective Services Advisory Panel
5. Launched One Church One Child pilot in Hillsborough and Duval counties to promote adoptions.
6. Granted access for investigators to National Crime and Information Center
7. Finalized 3,229 Adoptions during the calendar year
8. Changed the Department’s legal philosophy regarding lawsuits
9. Played an active role in the development and implementation of the Children and Youth Cabinet
10. Promulgated written Rights of Foster Care Children
11. Refocused Departmental attention on prevention
12. Focused Legislative Budget Requests on the real Departmental needs
11 Updated January 17, 2008
13. Assured credibility of budget reduction preparatory efforts
14. Increased interaction with and involvement of advocates with Departmental initiatives
15. Launched the Department’s Leadership Institute which provides a structure for the systematic development of leadership talent and serves as a change agent Department-wide (a) Implemented the Florida Youth Leadership Academy as the result of a Child Welfare Leadership class project (b) Initiated three levels of leadership development Executive Leadership (24 participants); Managing for Excellence/Certified Public Manager (172 participants); and Supervising for Excellence (330 participants)
ACCESS
1. Boosted KidCare enrollment statewide by 30% during the first six months of FY 2007 compared to the same time period in FY 2006
2. Redesigned Call Centers
3. Implemented statewide electronic/paperless case file system, using document imaging technology
4. Reduced the Food Stamp error rate
5. Enhance the focus on quality of life
6. Won the Government Innovations Award
7. Developed plans for pilot projects in Duval and Broward Counties to reinstate Medicaid eligibility of prisoners receiving medications for mental illness prior to their release
Mental Health
1. Reduced Forensic Waiting List to zero by May 2007. Progress has been sustained: (a) Expanded competency restoration services both in-jail and in the community (b) Expanded Comprehensive Community Service Teams (c) Opened 318 designated forensic treatment facility beds and 70 community forensic beds (d) Established additional Mental Health Courts in several areas throughout the state
12 Updated January 17, 2008
2. Eliminated the JITP (Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed) waiting list for community competency services while managing number of children on the waiting list for secure programs despite increases
3. Development of the Transforming Florida’s Mental Health System Report
4. Expanded the Crisis Intervention Team training in Northwest Florida
5. Began the process to require substance abuse/mental health providers to be dually-diagnosed capable
6. Renewed evaluation of the role of managing entities in providing substance abuse/mental health services
7. Resolved maintenance of effort inquiry from SAMHSA
Child Welfare
1. Implement Florida’s child abuse prevention (IV-E) waiver, effective October 2006
2. Launched first phase of Florida Safe Families Network (FSFN)
3. Transitioned Citrus County Child Protective Investigations to the Sheriff’s Office on July 1, 2007
4. Conducted youth aging-out-foster-care survey
5. Amended childcare licensing rules
6. Began the Home for the Holidays initiative
7. Increased emphasis on CBC performance measures, outcomes, and accountability
8. Began shifting the organizational culture toward keeping children in the home and on supporting families
9. Granted access to FLORIDA System to protective investigators
13 Updated January 17, 2008
10. Conducted the Annual Dependency Summit
11. Conducted a detailed review of the Courtney Clark case and implemented a number of system enhancements
12. Established housing in Broward County for youth aging-out of foster care
13. Implemented quarterly Regional Family Safety events
14. Instituted a number of CBC grant activities, such as the DCF/KCI Demonstration Project for Quality Assurance and Performance-Based Contracting
15. Implemented a number of mediation projects throughout the State and, at the Dependency Summit, recognized former Governor MacKay for his leadership role in these efforts
Homelessness: Awarded grants of $1,1 million to build housing units in Jacksonville and Tampa specifically for Independent Living Youth to occupy.
Refugee Programs: Received $453,600 in general revenue funding to contract for the development of training materials for child protective investigators on the recognition of and services available to human trafficking victims
Relationships
1. Engaged Board Chairs and Chief Executive Officers of the Community Based Care Lead Agencies in active meetings and dialogue
2. Worked on enhancing relationships and communications with other social service agencies, including the Department of Juvenile Justice, the Agency for Persons with Disabilities, the Agency for Health Care Administration, and the Department of Health, regarding the response to and placement of children
3. Focused on enhancing relationships with the criminal justice system, including the courts, state attorneys, and public defenders
4. Expanded the Department’s efforts at public recognition
14 Updated January 17, 2008
APPENDIX B: Governor’s Executive Orders
1. Executive Order 07-01
(a) Code of Ethics
(1) Continue to train employees on the subjects of ethics, public records, open meetings, records retention, equal opportunity and proper personnel procedures annually.
(2) Continue to assure that the Department maintains and effectively enforces the highest ethical standards for state officials and employees, and promotes consistency of State agency policies on ethics, public records, open meetings, and personnel matters.
(b) Plain Language: Assure continued compliance with the Plain Language Initiative to ensure that announcements, publications, and other documents sent by the Department contain clear and concise instructions and information.
(c) Customer Service: Continue to review of how each of the Department’s employees can better serve the people. The purpose of the review shall be to: install performance-based incentives to improve service; install best practices relating to customer service; enhance procedures for soliciting, receiving and managing new ideas and from the people we serve; and put in place a world-class training and review program to ensure that our public employees maintain their focus on service.
2. Executive Order 07-126: Immediate Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Florida State Government.
(a) Do not enter into new leasing agreements for office space that does not meet Energy Star building standards, except when certified by the Secretary that no other viable alternative exists.
(b) Be prepared to implement energy conservation measures and guidelines developed by the Department of Management Services (DMS) for new and existing office space where the Department occupies more than 20,000 square feet.
(c) Effective January 1, 2008, do not contract for meeting and conference space with hotels or conference facilities that have not received the “Green Lodging” certification, except when certified to the Governor by the Secretary that no other viable alternative exists.
(d) Continue assure that all vehicles are meeting minimum maintenance schedules shown to reduce fuel consumption.
(e) Use ethanol and biodiesel fuels when locally available.
15 Updated January 17, 2008
APPENDIX C: Governor’s Highlights of Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Budget for the Department
1. Mental Health and Substance Abuse Programs
(a) Forensic Mental Health Program – Annualize 353 additional secure and step-down beds to eliminate the forensic wait list.
(b) Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed – Reduce the wait list for competency restoration services to 73 juveniles.
(c) South Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center Bed Capacity – Operate the expanded bed capacity approved in FY 2006-2007 for South Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center.
(d) Public Safety, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Local Matching Grants – Expand or add services that promote jail diversion by focusing on individuals with serious mental illness or substance abuse disorder.
(e) Outpatient Baker Act Pilot Program – Develop community mental health services to promote the use of outpatient treatment services in lieu of more costly inpatient treatment.
2. Family Safety Program
(a) Healthy Families Program Expansion – Expand the prevention services to the fourteen counties that not currently being served by the Healthy Families Program.
(b) Child Protective Investigations – Citrus County Sheriff to assume full responsibility for child abuse investigations.
(c) Independent Living Program – Fund Road to Independence aftercare and transition stipends to youths age 18 and over who are phasing out of foster care.
(d) Community-Based Care Equity – Provides additional funding to achieve a more equitable distribution of child protection resources among community based care lead agencies.
(e) State Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS) – Provides funds to continue development of the SACWIS project by a system integrator.
3. Domestic Violence Program: Domestic Violence Awareness and Education – Prevent domestic violence.
4. Refugee Services Program: Immigrant Survivors of Human Trafficking – Pay for basic benefits such as food and medical care for survivors of human trafficking until they are determined eligible for federal benefits.
16 Updated January 17, 2008
APPENDIX D: Department’s 2008 Legislative Package
1. Complete Organizational Redesign. Proposal will complete the process of organizational redesign that began in the 2007 session. The proposal will amend Chapter 20.19, F. S. to align the Department's regions and circuits with the recommendations of the Department's workgroup that were approved by the Secretary. The proposal will also incorporate other statutory changes consistent with the comprehensive recommendations of the workgroup.
2. Comprehensive Reform of Child Protection. On August 3, a Task Force on Child Protection, appointed by Secretary Butterworth began work on a comprehensive review of child welfare in Florida. The following series of proposals are among the issues the task force will review.
• Dependency Proceedings and Non-Offending Parents. This proposal will facilitate more rapid attainment of permanency in dependency or termination of parental rights proceedings where one parent is responsible for the abuse, neglect, or abandonment, and the other parent in not part of the household and can provide an appropriate and safe placement for the child(ren).
• Child-on-Child Investigations. This proposal changes the statute in Chapter 39 for child-on-child investigations. The use of term "alleged juvenile sexual offender" to describe toddlers and young children under a service referral for treatment and services due to an alleged sexual act, is not appropriate. The proposal changes the statute to describe these dependency service referrals, and the label to these children as “child with sexual behavior problem” versus the term “alleged juvenile sexual offender”. The courts should be left with labeling children and adults as sex offenders not child protective investigators.
• Exceptions to 60 Day Closure Requirement. This proposal would provide specific exceptions to the 60 Day Closure requirement in cases related to child deaths, missing children and criminal prosecutions.
• Background Screening Requirements. This proposal would align provisions related to background screening requirements for relatives, non-relatives, foster parents, and other potential caregivers.
• Non-Relative Placements. Clarify requirements for judicial approval of non-relative care placements, to include limitations on placement based on age of child and permanent guardianship or foster care licensure expectations (ss. 39.401, 409.175, and 39.0138, F.S.)
• Notice of Proceedings. Clarify that notice of proceedings pursuant to s. 39.502, F.S. to include verbal and written notice to foster and pre-adoptive parents.
17 Updated January 17, 2008
• Strengthen Child Welfare Injunction Provision. Amend Section 39.504, F.S. (child welfare injunction statute) to strengthen its provisions so that it is more useful for child welfare cases when domestic violence is involved. This is a program integration effort that will result in more effective working relationships between child welfare workers and domestic violence advocates, as well as, potentially increase both child and adult safety. Due to the limitations of the current injunction language, child welfare workers often tell a domestic violence victim that they need to get a 741 injunction. This proposal would address those limitations.
• Exceptions to Pre-Disposition Studies. Propose exceptions to the required filing of the Pre-disposition Study that enables judicial determination for waiver upon determination that a court case record contains all information located in companion documents that replicates PDS requirements for informed decision-making.
• Child Location Reports. Require law enforcement to take missing child reports from DCF and the CBC's and require the Department to maintain open investigations of specified child deaths and missing children cases.
• Guardianship Procedures for Vulnerable Children. Establish a clear procedure for appointing a guardian for vulnerable children receiving services from the State of Florida to ensure access to appropriate Medicaid and Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD) services.
• Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC). The proposed changes to Chapter 409, F.S. are: (1) Addition of definitions for “timely interstate home study”; “home evaluation”; “full home studies”; (2) Time frames for ensuring for ensuring that homes studies are expeditiously completed and thoroughly evaluated the home environment of in terms of safety and well-being of the child(ren) to be placed; and (3) Include rulemaking authority to establish processes, procedures for implementation of the statutes related to ICPC to effectuate timely processing of home studies.
• Statutory Authority for Lead Agency Failures. This proposal would amend section 409.1671, Florida Statutes, to: (1) Provide for alternatives for addressing potential lead agency failures other than receivership, which is now the only option in statute that allows the Department to direct the operations of a failing CBC; and (2) Strengthen and add progressive intervention language to statutory authority.
• Outsourcing of Programmatic and Financial Monitoring. This proposal would address inconsistencies in current statute regarding outsourcing of programmatic and financial monitoring and clarify that the Department is responsible for the integrity of all aspects of the monitoring process. This amendment would also clarify the responsibility of the Department to require corrective action identified as needed by an independent monitor.
18 Updated January 17, 2008
• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Data Access. Add language to s.322.142(4),FS to allow the Family Safety Program to access pictures and signatures in DHSMV database (DAVE) for purposes of identifying persons with regard to protective investigations.
• Child Care Training Exemptions. Align the training requirements of family day care home and large family child care home operators with those of child facility personnel.
• Recruitment. This proposal would provide an incentive for retiring law enforcement personnel to transition into protective investigation positions by waiving the requirement that retirees leave state services for 12 months before being allowed to work and draw retirement. Requisite educational and pre-service certification mandates remain.
• Recruitment and Retention. Authorize a Student Loan Reimbursement Program to be used for recruitment and retention of Child Welfare employees in the Department of Children and Families and Community Based Care lead agencies.
3. Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reform. The Secretary has appointed the Assistant Secretary for Substance Abuse and Mental Health to coordinate with Judge Steven Leifman. Judge Leifman has been appointed by the Chief Justice to serve as a Special Advisor on Criminal Justice and Mental Health. The following proposals will be coordinated with the work that Judge Leifman is coordinating.
• Mental Health and Criminal Justice Systems Alignment. Proposes alignment of mental health service delivery system with criminal justice initiatives including infrastructure investment, and realignment; identifies policies to suspend entitlements upon incarceration with reinstatement immediately upon release; establishes statewide standards for screening, evaluation, and discharge planning; requires judges, case managers, and guardian ad litems to receive medication and mental health training; reorganizes current juvenile competency restoration program; requires comprehensive and periodic evaluation of all children; emphasizes prevention, comprehensive care, and seamless movement of children at risk or involved in the criminal justice system as they are involved with mental health services; recommends financing strategies, forensic mental health procedures, performance outcomes, and workforce issues; and proposes an interagency task force to develop strategies for implementation of the concepts.
• Forensic Examiner Registry: This proposal revises ss 916.111, F.S., which pertains to mental health experts who are employed to conduct evaluations of defendants for competency to proceed or for sanity at the time of the commission of an offense. The proposal further clarified the Department's role in the training of such experts and the recommended standardization of their evaluations.
• Timely Transport and Hearings for Forensic Residents: The proposed addition to Chapter 916, F.S., establishes the time frame for an individual to be returned to jail and
19 Updated January 17, 2008
have a hearing scheduled when restoration of competency is reported to the court, or the court is notified that an individual no longer meets commitment criteria.
• Placement and Treatment of Department of Corrections Inmates: This proposed change to Chapter 916, F.S., would clarify that the Department of Corrections (DC) is responsible for providing treatment and/or training to DC inmates who are determined incompetent to proceed or not guilty by reason of insanity on new charges applied since admission to the DC facility, and DC inmates who have been sentenced to death and are determined to be mentally incompetent pursuant to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.851(g).
• Secure Mental Health Treatment Facilities: Provides for department enforcement of the building code relating to the construction of secure mental health facilities, consistent with juvenile justice and corrections facilities.
• Stakeholder Recommendations. The proposal amends Chapter 394 to align language on provider accreditation in Chapter 397. Changes to Chapter 397 are recommendations from the Department and stakeholders to standardize definitions concerning substance abuse treatment using the Treatment Improvement Protocols published nationally; to define substance abuse medication treatments in addition to methadone detoxification and maintenance services; to revise licensing from locations to programs which will reduce overall licenses by 25%; and to identify ways to provide administrative relief to enhance the quantity and quality of treatment services.
• Part IV Chapter 394, F.S. Revision. This proposal amends Part IV, Chapter 394, Florida Statutes to authorize the Department to formally enroll persons who meet clinical and financial eligibility criteria that currently exists. This change better aligns the population served by the Department with those served by the Agency for Health Care Administration through MEDICAID funding. Currently, there are significant overlaps which results in providers billing the Department for clients who are MEDICAID eligible. The proposal also strengthens the enrollment process which will result in better accountability, treatment placements, and determination of financial eligibility. The Department will have a defined treatment population to serve which will not lessen the current capability.
4. Improved Coordination Among Agencies. The following proposals would improve coordination among agencies and improve services to citizens.
• Criminal and Juvenile Justice Information Systems Council. This proposal would amend sec. 943.06, F.S. and sec. 943.08, F.S. to add the Secretary of the Department of Children and Families or designee to the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Information Systems Council.
• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Data (DHSMV). Amend 322.142(4), F.S., to allow Department staff access to the driver image and signature data
20 Updated January 17, 2008
managed by the DHSMV for the purpose of establishing ACCESS Program eligibility. The Medicaid and Food Stamp Programs require proof of identity as a factor of eligibility. Additionally, the Medicaid Program requires proof of citizenship as a factor of eligibility. DHSMV requires applicants for a driver’s license and a state issued identification card verify citizenship (or lawful non-citizen status). Therefore, a driver’s license or a state issued identification card may be used to meet the requirement of the Medicaid and Food Stamp Programs. Electronic access to the driver’s license image and signature will shorten the time it takes to determine eligibility.
5. Adult Protection
• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Data. Amend s. 322.142(4). F.S., to allow the Department (Adult Services) access to the driver image and signature data in the DHSMV database (DAVE) for the purpose of establishing the individual's identity with regard to adult protective investigations.
• Repeal of Fee. OPPAGA recommended in FY 2003-04, that the fee for services for the Community Care for Disabled Adult program be repealed due to the low income status of individuals being served by this program.
• Rule Making Authority for Adult Protective Services. The current statute contains general rule development authority in s. 415.112, F.S. There is no current statutory language for specific rule development. Specific rule development authority is need for the efficient and effective management of all programs and functions necessary for implementing the Adult Protective Services Program.
• Community Care for Disabled Adults (Priority for services). With the divestiture of programs from the department, Section 410.604(2), F.S. should be amended to clarify the provisions regarding “priority” of service provision.
• Initiation of Guardianship Proceedings for Incapacitated Adults: Establish the department's authority to initiate a petition for determination of incapacity and/or a petition for guardianship in those cases where the provision of temporary services under chapter 415, Florida Statutes, will not adequately ensure a client's safety. The proposed language will clarify that the department and department employees cannot be appointed as guardian, and will otherwise define the limits of department involvement in the guardianship proceeding.
• Merge Homeless Prevention Grants. There is a great and continually increasing demand for homeless prevention services across the state of Florida. In the 2006-2007 fiscal year, the Department received over 16,500 applications from families with minor children facing eviction. The existing statewide prevention program is administered without linkage to local resources. To maximize assistance and avoid duplication of service to the growing number of Florida families in need, it is proposed that two existing funding sources (the federal emergency shelter grant and the state emergency housing
21 Updated January 17, 2008
program) be combined into one locally administered homeless prevention grant. No additional funding would be necessary to implement the new program and there would be a savings of $200,000 or more per year in state administrative costs. This proposal would require revision of the authorizing statute in Section 414.16 to convert the state administered direct assistance program into a local grant program.
• Summary Guardianship Proceedings for the Mentally Ill: Amendment to F.S. 394 Mental Health Statute to incorporate summary guardianship proceedings for the mentally ill, in order to (1) expand beyond the temporary, intermittent and under used provisions of the existing guardian advocacy provisions, to (2) eliminate or reduce the costs (attorney and filing fees and procedural costs) and the rigorous reporting requirements of formal guardianship for this sector of the population, which is faced with indigency, burgeoning treatment needs, an incapacity to understand those needs and a dearth of agencies and individuals who are willing to assist the mentally ill in meeting their special needs for education, medical, and mental health treatment, application for government benefits, and management of their benefits.
6. Commission on Open Government. Statutory revisions necessary to implement the recommendation of the Commission on Open Government.
• Facilitate Release of Child Abuse Investigation Records. Allows for public release of child abuse investigation records where abuse, neglect, or abandonment has been verified. The amendment would require that information that would identify the victim or any other minor named in the report to remain confidential.
• Release of Records to Former Foster Care Clients. Provides a clear process for former foster care clients to follow when denied access to their own records.
• Sharing information with Community-Based Care Agencies. Clarifies that CBC's and their subcontracted providers are to have access to records relating investigation of child abuse, abandonment, and neglect and to ensure that CBC's and their subcontractors share these records with any other individual who is entitled to access.
• Facilitate Release of Adult Abuse Investigation Records. Gives the Department greater authority to release adult investigation records where abuse, neglect, or abandonment has been verified.
• Release of Records to Adult Services Clients and/or their Guardian, Caregiver, or Legal Council. Provides a clear process for vulnerable adults, and/or their guardian, caregiver, or legal counsel to follow when denied access to their own records.
• Information-Sharing Between Agencies. Creates a general law relating to information- sharing between agencies.
22 Updated January 17, 2008
APPENDIX E: Legislative Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2008 - 2009
1. Critical Needs
INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES PROGRAM WORKLOAD $16,829,507 INCREASE
$14.3 million for 18-23 year olds • Road to Independence payments • Transition services • Aftercare services • Staff to provide case coordination and support
$2.5 million for 13-17 year olds for additional staff to ensure that assessments are completed and appropriate services provided
YOUTH AGING OUT – FOSTER CARE HOUSING ASSISTANCE $2,000,000 • Current year Homeless Housing Assistance grants received close to $3 million in applications for this population but we were only able to award less than $1 million.
MAINTENANCE ADOPTION SUBSIDIES $14,993,681
• To continue new subsidies at new annual amount appropriated by the Legislature in prior year and to allow some funds for increase to existing subsidies for increased needs.
TECHNOLOGY TO DOCUMENT VISITS WITH CHILD AND ADULT $1,711,432 VICTIMS
• This is a technology issue to better document visits with children and to ensure that information is available more quickly.
ACCESS FLORIDA PROGRAM INCREASE IN DIRECT CLIENT $12,669,922 SERVICES – ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION WORKLOAD
• 300 full time equivalent (FTE) positions and the reclassification of 78 clerical positions to support the workload associated with the increased number of applicants. Since Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the number of eligible clients increased more than 16% and the number of applications processed increased more than 34%. Total number of direct services staff has been reduced by more than 43%.
23 Updated January 17, 2008
CHILDREN’S MENTAL HEALTH JUVENILE INCOMPETENT TO $3,577,680 PROCEED – SECURE ADDITIONAL BEDS
• Increase the capacity of the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed (JITP) secure residential treatment program by 24 beds in order to help eliminate the current waiting list. The Department is required by Section 985.19, F.S., to provide competency training in a secure residential facility for juveniles charged with a felony and found incompetent to proceed due to mental illness, mental retardation, or autism.
CHILDREN’S MENTAL HEALTH JUVENILE INCOMPETENT TO PROCEED – COMMUNITY-BASED PROGRAM $110,560
• To eliminate the community waitlist for competency restoration services. Current waitlist is zero as a result of funds appropriated last year, but we need these funds to ensure that we remain there.
VIOLENT SEXUAL PREDATOR PROGRAM $4,328,384 • $1,939,001 for operations of the facility • $300,000 for litigation costs • $1,464,383 for file review, file screening, evaluation, and records management functions. • $600,000 for Utility Costs • $25,000 for the DeSoto County Jail for the cost of medications for FCCC residents while being held in custody.
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF $500,000 HOUSING ADVOCATES FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS
• This is a recommendation from the statewide needs assessment to establish “housing advocates” to serve the clients of the certified domestic violence centers in the project areas by both identifying and developing affordable housing resources. Two areas of the state, one rural and one urban, will be identified for this pilot.
24 Updated January 17, 2008
2. Other Department Priorities
MENTAL HEALTH/CRIMINAL JUSTICE
• Adult Mental Health Housing Rental Supplement Program $14,418,720
• Adult Mental Health Criminal Justice Re-Entry Aftercare Support $3,464,227
• Adult Mental Health Community Based Intervention Expansion and $3,325,000 Development
• Florida Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) Expansion $3,129,675
• Florida Sequential Intercept and Redirection Program $21,620,000
CHILD WELFARE
• Workforce Investment to Reduce Caseload, Turnover, and to Enhance $16,592,500 Permanency, Safety, and Well-Being
• Rate Increase for the Relative Caregiver Program $9,579,492
• Children's Mental Health Community Action Teams $5,550,000
• Substance Abuse Treatment Access For Child Welfare Clients $5,450,720
• Child Welfare Legal Services Workload $4,654,675
• Children's Mental Health Intensive Prevention/Early Intervention Services $2,275,840
• Child Welfare Employees Advanced Training And Instruction $1,483,420
• Post Adoption Stabilization Services $1,375,000
• Increased Adoption Benefits for State Employees $585,285
• Children's Mental Health Early Childhood Consultation $222,479
• One Church One Child $150,000
• Increase Child Welfare Practice Oversight And Technical Assistance $100,290
25 Updated January 17, 2008
ADULT SERVICES
• Reduce Waitlists- Disabled Adults home and community based, $4,999,276 community care for the disabled, and home care for the disabled
• Adult Protective Investigators Workload Increase $4,813,128
• Victims Of Human Trafficking - Detection And Education Initiative $1,513,836
• Adult Protection Quality Assurance $377,701
• Adult Protection Home And Community Based Services Waiver $341,500 Utilization Review
SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH
• Infrastructure Development For Co-occurring Disorders And Medication 5,767,044 Assisted Therapies
• Enhanced Security Staff For Forensic Mental Health Treatment Facilities $4,957,047
• Special Risk Retirement $3,121,209
• Adult Mental Health Orange County Central Receiving Center System $3,000,000
• Adult Mental Health Self-directed Care Expansion $2,370,140
• Children's Mental Health Juvenile Incompetent To Proceed Secure Per $2,032,320 Diem Rate Increase
• Establish Circuit Peer Specialist Positions For Mental Health $1,178,629
• Convert Other Personal Services (OPS) Staff Within The Mental Health $769,871 Program To Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)
• Adult Mental Health Preadmission Screening And Resident Review $317,250 Workload Increase
• Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (fasd) Resource And Networking $239,663 Center
26 Updated January 17, 2008
WORKLOAD INCREASE ISSUES
• Sheriff Workload Increase $6,667,296
• Florida Abuse Hotline Counselor Reports Workload $1,654,149
• Emergency Financial Assistance For Housing Workload $1,304,094
• Florida Abuse Hotline Crime Intelligence Unit Workload $891,966
• Background Screening Workload Increase $323,091
• Establish Positions To Address Workload Increase for The Office of $316,466 Appeals Hearings
• Training In The Office of The General Counsel And District $209,052 Administration And Increase To Base Rate Of Pay For Paralegal Staff
• Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Workload Increase $116,348
• Enhance role of attorneys in procurement, negotiation, and review of $509,117 contracts
• Child Care Licensing Workload $1,003,174
ACCESS
• Automated Community Connection To Economic Self-sufficiency $5,800,271 Increase To The Base Rate Of Pay For Eligibility Staff
27 Updated January 17, 2008
NON-RECURRING ISSUES
• Expansion Of Services For Community Mental Health $16,210,895
• Maintenance And Repair (Fixed Capital Outlay) $11,853,482
• ACCESS Technology Needs $9,080,377
• Agency Technology Refresh $3,336,660
• Fixed Capital Outlay for Domestic Violence Centers 3,000,000
• Enterprise Imaging Management System $2,867,500
• Vehicle Replacement $2,163,759
• Substance Abuse And Mental Health Information System $1,789,105
• Strategic Investment In Determining Treatment Needs And Establish $1,500,000 Cost Of Substance Abuse Services
• Improve Server Management And Capacity Planning $725,000
• Emergency Generators For The Access Call Centers $478,500
• Children's Mental Health Family-to-family Support Network $440,000 Demonstration Project
• Licensing Information System And Training Curriculum $103,000
28 Updated January 17, 2008
Notes
29 Updated January 17, 2008
Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, and Neglect: July 2005 through June 2010
Together, we have the power to prevent child abuse.
2007 Progress Report Submitted by The Florida Interprogram Task Force October 2007
Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Table of Contents
Background …………………………………………………………….. 3
Vision, Mission, Goals………………………………………………….. 4
Primary Outcomes……………………………………………………... 5
State Task Force………………………………………………………… 6
Local Planning Teams………………………………………………….. 6
Major Activities During FY 2006-07…………………………………... 7
Challenges and Opportunities for the Future…………………………. 8
Highlights of Objectives Organized by Functional Area……………. 9
Health…………………………………………………………….. 9
Safety……………………………………………………………... 11
Education & Child Care………………………………………… 12
Substance Abuse & Mental Health…………………………….. 14
Housing & Economic Stability…………………………………. 14
Statewide & Local Collaboration………………………………. 15
Funding & Accountability………………………………………. 16
2 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Background
Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, and Neglect: July 2005 through June 2010 is a family-centered and community-based plan which takes a broad view of the factors that impact child abandonment, abuse, and neglect. The Plan emphasizes primary prevention strategies: factors and strategies that sustain children and families in supportive, nurturing, safe and stable environments. Collaboration with the communities ultimately responsible for implementing and assuring the success of this planning effort is essential.
The Inter-program Task Force on Child Abuse Prevention is a state level planning, technical assistance and policy support workgroup made up of representatives from child serving agencies, organizations and programs, advocates, consumers, and community facilitators. Designated in the fall of 2004, the Task Force works to develop Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, and Neglect: July 2005 through June 2010 (the Plan) and coordinate local planning efforts. The Task Force established seven (7) subcommittees to address the functional areas into which the Plan’s objectives were grouped: Health, Safety, Education/Child Care, Substance Abuse/Mental Health, Housing and Economic Security, State-Local Collaboration, and Funding/Accountability.
The Task Force met quarterly since its first meeting in the fall of 2004 and subcommittees have met periodically to work on assigned objectives. Bi-monthly conference calls have been held between Task Force members and the local planning coordinators to facilitate local planning activities.
In 2007, the Child Abuse Prevention and Permanency Advisory Council was established under the auspices of the newly created Office of Adoption and Child Protection within the Executive Office of the Governor. As the Advisory Council will assume responsibilities for child abuse prevention planning at the state level, the Inter-Program Task Force on Child Abuse Prevention held its final meeting in June 2007, and submits this final progress report on the goals and objectives of the Plan.
3 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Vision: Florida’s highest priority is that children are raised in healthy, safe, stable, and nurturing families.
Mission: To serve as a blueprint that will be implemented to provide for the care, safety, and protection of all of Florida’s children in an environment that fosters healthy social, emotional, intellectual, and physical development.
Goals:
1. All families and communities ensure that children are safe and nurtured and live in stable environments that promote well-being.
2. State, local, and community resources comprise a collaborative, responsive, family-centered service delivery system that promotes the well- being and safety of children, families, and communities.
3. The prevention continuum has the capacity to ensure the needs of children and families will be addressed competently, collaboratively, and effectively.
4. The prevention continuum’s accountability system ensures the evidence- based effectiveness of planning and resource utilization.
4 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Primary Outcomes
By June 30, 2010, the child abuse rate will be reduced from the fiscal year 2003-04 statewide rate of 29.4 to 15.0 per 1,000 children.
Child Abuse Rate (Per 1,000)
35 30.4 30.5 29.4 29.6 30.4 29 30 25 20 15.0 15 Rate 10 5 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 D 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 es 0- 1-0 2-0 3- 4- 5-0 6-0 ire 01 2 3 04 05 6 7 d Ou tco me 20 10
By June 30, 2010, the re-abuse rate (within six months of initial abuse) will be reduced from the 2003 statewide rate of 9.2% to 4.0%.
Child Re-Abuse Rate
12 10.8 11.1 10.82 9.6 10 9.2 7.8 7.6 8 6 4.0
Percent 4 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 D 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 es 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ire d O utc ome 20 10 Year
These data show that, despite current efforts to reduce abuse and re-abuse rates, Florida’s children are in increasing jeopardy for abuse and neglect. There needs to be a refocus of efforts to effectively address the risks in our communities that contribute to rising levels of abuse and neglect and to promote protective factors for children and families.
5 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
State Task Force
The Interprogram Task Force is co-chaired by the Department of Children and Families and the Department of Health. Representation from other agencies and groups include: Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Agency for Workforce Innovation, Community Alliances, Community Based Care, Department of Community Affairs, Department of Education, Department of Elder Affairs, Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of Law Enforcement, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Healthy Families Florida, Parents, Prevent Child Abuse Florida, Redlands Christian Migrant Association, and the United Way. The Task Force met three times during the 2006-07 fiscal year.
The seven Task Force subcommittees meet on a periodic basis to track and report statewide progress on the sixty-plus Plan Objectives. Subcommittee participation extends beyond the members of the Task Force; other individuals participate based on their interest and expertise is specific topical areas. This has afforded the Task Force input from a wide array of individuals, programs, and agencies.
Local Planning Teams
Local planning and implementation teams consist of members from local organizations that are comparable to the members of the statewide Task Force. Local teams needed assistance in including all the desired stakeholders, and the Florida Interprogram Task Force assisted by providing local planning team leaders with lists of local contacts for the various organization and agencies that need to be included. These lists make it possible for local planning team leaders to know who to contact to ensure broad representation. In addition, some include representatives from news media, advocacy groups, courts, faith- based organizations, funding organizations, and Children’s Services Councils.
A minimum of one local team exists for each Department of Children and Families district, however because of the diverse nature of each district, some formed county- based teams. Many local teams have also formed subcommittees to address objectives in particular domains. Membership on local teams, based on the most current information available to the Task Force is available on the web at: www.dcf.state.fl.us/childabuseprevention/ 6 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Major Activities During FY 2006-07 Implementation activities include actions at the state and local levels: • Bimonthly conference calls between Task Force subcommittee members and local planning team members addressed a variety of issues and concerns that helped improve both statewide and local planning and implementation efforts.
• The Task Force provided technical assistance to local planning teams based on specific requests.
• Local planning groups reported their progress to the Task Force.
• Congruence between Local and State-level planning efforts has been measured based on a comparison of the relationship of Local Plan objectives to State Plan objectives. This past year, there was an 88% congruence of Local and State-level objectives.
• Six state agencies and several state level advocacy groups continued to provide support for Task Force activities.
• The Task Force, through subcommittee reports, and an annual progress report, regularly reviews progress in actions taken to implement The Plan. The Task Force evaluates both the process of implementation and the values of indicators for major outcomes and for each objective.
• Representatives from the Task Force participated in a federal Centers for Disease Control PREVENT project and developed a methodology for reviewing and locating programs along the prevention continuum.
• Representatives of the Task Force conducted ongoing comparisons to other prevention and intervention plans, and worked to incorporate child abuse and neglect prevention goals and objectives across the spectrum of prevention planning. Child abuse prevention goals and objectives are currently being addressed in the following plans and reports: o Department of Children and Families Five Year Plan o Department of Health’s Long Range Program Plan o Office of Drug Control Drug Control Strategy o Child Abuse Death Review Committee o Drug Endangered Children Alliance o Substance Abuse Advisory Council
7 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Challenges and Opportunities for the Future
The Task Force has sustained a 4-year continuous and evolving planning and implementation effort across several state agencies, advocacy groups and local teams. The continuity of this initiative has been possible because of the commitment of the leadership of the involved state agencies. Agency staff committed time and effort to ensure that activities were undertaken and that the Task Force through its subcommittees was aware of progress and barriers toward achieving the identified objectives. Staff worked diligently to ensure that there was cross integration of objectives in various state plans. This integration is an important component of addressing the fundamental issues that contribute to the prevention of child maltreatment.
Progress on several of the infrastructure objectives that were considered essential to the development of an effective and efficient system was hindered for lack of resources to support the needed research and investigative efforts, primarily around identifying evidence-based programs and outcomes. This is a quickly emerging arena of study that will be instrumental in future planning and implementation efforts.
The 2007 Legislature created the Office of Adoption and Child Protection in the Executive Office of the Governor. This Office was assigned much of the same responsibilities that the Task Force had undertaken in development and implementation of Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, and Neglect: July 2005 through June 2010. In addition, the 2007 Legislature created the Florida Children and Youth Cabinet which is charged with developing and implementing a “shared and cohesive vision using integrated services to improve child, youth and family outcomes…”
The Florida Inter-Program Task Force for the Prevention of Child Abuse is passing on all of its data, work products, information and support to the new Office of Adoption and Child Protection. We look forward, individually and collectively, to the opportunity to work with the Office in any capacity to continue efforts to ensure that all Florida’s children are raised in health, safe, stable and nurturing families and communities.
8 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Highlights of Objectives Organized by Functional Areas
The original Plan had over sixty-one discrete objectives. Over the past three years as the Task Force and the Subcommittees have worked, some objectives have been revised to coincide with agency plans, some objectives have been put on hold because additional resources were not available to pursue the work needed to establish indicators or collect baseline data. Reported here is just a sampling of some of the objectives for which there has been progress over the past three years.
Health Poor child and family health are risk factors for child maltreatment. Therefore, The Plan includes several objectives related to health promotion including the prevention of low birth weight babies, the expansion of provision of well-child care including immunization, the expansion of health insurance coverage, and maximizing the likelihood that children are raised by two mature parents with access to support services.
Preventing childhood abuse has been found to have empirically sound proven health benefits for individuals and for the communities in which they reside. Primary and secondary prevention programs that promote child and family health reduce the likelihood of child maltreatment and are important to long-term health outcomes for children. Quality child abuse prevention programs can play a large part in reducing short and long-term health costs.
Indicator Chart Status/Comment
Objective 1.1: By Percent of live births The 2007 Legislature Low Birth weight Rate June 30, 2010, the with birth weights of appropriated an additional low birth weight rate less than 5.5 pounds. $2 million targeted to will be reduced from 10 reduce low birth weight 8.0 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.8 8.7 the 2003 statewide 8 and preterm births in the rate of 8.5% to 5.0%. State. 6 5.0 The Department of Health 4 sponsored trainings on 2 “Promoting Maternal Mental Health” that helps 0 pregnant women with the 2000 2001 20 200 200 200 2006 2010 Objective 02 3 4 5 emotional and psychological adjustment to pregnancy and new motherhood. Training on maternal depression was provided to Healthy Start staff and numerous venues. 9 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
There has been a slight
reduction in the child
death rate since 2000.
Objective 1.2: By Number of children Child unintentional injury June 30, 2010, the that die before their Child Mortality Rate death rates are lower in child death rate will fifth birthday, per the 31 Safe Kids counties. be reduced from the 1,000 children under (Per 1,000 Children under 5) 2001 statewide rate five years of age. Department of Health has a of 1.8 to 1.0 per child drowning prevention
1,000 children. campaign, “Keep Your Eyes 2 1.80 1.80 1.88 1.85 1.73 1.80 on the Kids” to reduce 1.60 swimming pools deaths of 1.5 the 1-4 year olds. Nearly 1.00 1 two-thirds of the drowning
Rate deaths of this age group 0.5 occur in swimming pools. 0 Training for Healthy Start 200 2 2 2 2004 200 200 2 0 002 003 0 0 1 and child care providers was 0 1 5 6 0 O b provided on safe sleeping for ject infants. i ve There are 12 Fetal-Infant Mortality Review Projects
covering 29 counties that conduct reviews and parent interviews to identify risk factors for infant deaths. Objective 1.3: By Number of children (0- In 2007 legislation passed Children with BMI’s in the Normal Range (5th – June 30, 2010, the 18) with a BMI requiring that elementary 84th percentile) percent of children between the 5th and schools provide at least 30 th with BMIs (Body 84 percentile (normal 75 70.0 minutes of physical Mass Index) scores range) for their age, 70 63.3 63.5 63.8 64.4 63.9 activity daily for tudents. between the 5th and divided by the total 65 60 th The Departments of Health the 84 percentile number of children 55 and Education continue to will be increased screened times 100. 2 2002-03 2 2004-05 2 2010 Ob 0 0 0 0 0 0 work with schools and other 1 3 5 from the 2003-2004 -2 -0 -0 0 4 6 groups to promote children school year 02 ... to be active and to make statewide level of nutritious food choices. 63.8% to 70.0%.
10 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.9: By Number of births to The rate of births to teen June 30, 2010, the girls ages 10-18 per Births to Girls Under 19/1,000 mothers has had a steady teen pregnancy rate 1,000 girls ages 10-18. 20 17.8 16.5 decline over the past six 15.2 14.5 14.3 14.3 13.7 will be reduced from 15 13.0 years. the 2000 statewide 10 Nineteen Abstinence rate of 16.5 to 13.0 5 Education Programs serve per 1,000 teens. 0 47 counties. 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 1 0 O bje In 2006/2007 the Abstinence ct ive Education Program served 86,036 youth. This is a 20% increase over the number of youth served in 2005-06.
Percent of Children Covered The percent of by Health Insurance There is no sustained trend Objective 1.17A: By children under 18 with respect to the percent June 30, 2010, the covered by some form of children covered by health insurance 100.0 of health insurance. 95.0 health insurance. The rate (i.e., private and/or 95.0 has hovered in the low 80%s public) coverage rate 90.0 85.5 since 2001. There was a for children under 18 84.1 84.5 84.9 85.0 82.4 81.1 decline in coverage in 2006. will be increased Percent 80.0 This can be attributed to from the 2003 75.0 limitations in the KidCare statewide level of Program. 84% to 95%. 70.0 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 01 02 03 04 06 1 0 O Florida has the lowest rate bje ct ive of health insurance coverage for children for states in the Southeast. Twenty seven of the fifty US states have coverage for over 90% of their children.
11 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.19: By The percent of
June 30, 2010, the children in 2006/2007 results for the kindergarten kindergarten whose Percent of Children Immunized in Kindergarten Kindergarten and Seventh immunization rate immunization records Grade Immunization Status will be increased were surveyed by the Report (for all kindergarten from the 2003 Department of Health students in Florida) statewide level of whose records indicate 94.7 94.5 97.2 94.7 97.0 indicate: 94.5% to 97.0%. they received all 100 93.6 92.5 93.7 immunizations 90 *94.6% of kindergarten recommended by the 80 students reported full Percent Advisory Committee 70 immunization for school 2000 2001 2 2 2004 2005 2006 2010 O on Immunization 0 0 entry/ attendance 0 03 Practices (ACIP) for 2 b je This is a slight reduction their age group. ct ive from the 2005-2006 immunization rate.
Safety
To promote the well-being of children it is essential they have the opportunity to experience healthy, safe and nurturing environments within their home, family, community, and society. Indicator Chart Status/Comment
Juvenile Referral Rates Objective 1.12: Rate of juvenile Juvenile referral rates have been per 1,000 At-Risk Youth By June 30, 2010, referrals for felonies, consistently falling since 2000. The juvenile referrals for misdemeanors, and referral rate for 2005 of 51.1 has nearly misdemeanors, 80 1.2 .9 .5 .8 .2 other delinquent 6 58 56 55 56 1.1 1.0 achieved the 2010 rate of 51.0. felonies, and other 60 5 5 offenses per 1,000 40
delinquent offences Rate youth at risk as 20 will be reduced from determined by 0 the 2003-04 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Department of 99 00 00 00 00 00 01 9- 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 0 statewide rate of 20 01 02 03 04 05 Ob Juvenile Justice. 00 je ct 56.2 to 51.0 per ive 1,000 youth.
12 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.13: Number of domestic Domestic Violence Reports The Domestic Violence crimes rate has been By June 30, 2010, violence reports per per 100,000 People reduced by 20% since 2000. the reported 100,000 population. domestic violence 8 1000 9. 9.4 .7 0 The Florida Department of Law Enforcement 77 5 30 7. .8 .9 7 7 70 83 71 7.7 rate will be 800 6 6 62 reports that domestic violence crimes reduced from the 600 5.0 declined from 1996 through 2005 at a rate 36 2002 statewide Rate 400 of 3.4% annually. If this decline continues rate of 730.7 to 200 there will be a total reduction of 45% in 365.0 per 100,000 0 incidents from 1996 to 2010. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 population. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 O bje ct ive
Objective 1.14: By Number of deaths The steady decline in the violent death rate Child Violence Related Injury Death Rate June 30, 2010, child from violence related for children saw an increase in 2005. This (per 100,000 Children) deaths from violence injury (homicide or increase was due largely to a 48% rise in related injury suicide) per 100,000 suicides. The Suicide Prevention Workgroup 5 4.2 4.0 3.91 3.99 3.5 3.5 3.35 (homicide or suicide) ages 0 to 18. 4 3.1 2.93 in the Department of Health continues to will be reduced from 3 address issues related to the prevention of 2 Rate 1.0 the 2002 statewide 1 child suicide. level of 3.5 to 1.0 per 0 1998 1999 2000 2 2 2003 2004 2005 2006 2010 O 0 0 100,000 children. 0 02 1 b jec...
13 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.16: By The number of counties with a collaborative Number of counties Number of Counties with June 30, 2010, the unintentional injury partnership continues with collaborative Unintentional Injury Partnerships number of state-local to increase. The 2010 Objective was collaborative state- 31 achieved in 2003 and has risen since then unintentional injury 35 28 28 local unintentional partnerships, such 30 to 31 counties involved in partnerships. injury partnerships, 25 20 20 16 such as SAFEKIDS as SAFE KIDS local 20 14 coalitions and 15 10 local coalitions and Number 10 chapters, will chapters. 5 0 increase from the 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 2005 statewide level 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 1 0 O bje of 16 to 20. ct ive
Objective 2.9: By Percent of youth who The most recent data available is for June 30, 2010, the received delinquency Percent of Youth Who Remain the 2003-04 state fiscal year. There is a percent of youth who prevention services Crime Free For small upward trend in youth who received delinquency and remain crime free One Year After Receiving remain crime free for a year post prevention services for at least one year Delinquency Prevention Services services. that remain crime free for at least one 100 86 87 88 91 year will increase 80 from the 2002-2003 60 statewide value of 40
87% to 91%. Percent 20 0 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2009-10 Objective Year
14 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Education & Child Care
Education serves as primary prevention to child abuse and neglect by helping youth develop and enhance critical life management skills necessary to make sound decisions and take positive actions for healthy and effective living.
High quality child care, including Head Start programs, serves as primary prevention of child abuse and neglect for several reasons. These programs: Provide parents with regular or occasional, safe out-of-home care for their children; Serve as resources to improve parenting skills and reduce inappropriate interactions between parents and children; Provide opportunities for children to learn basic social skills.
Status/Comment Indicator Chart
Percent of children Objective 1.7: By Percent of Kindergarteners The Office of Early Learning began entering June 30, 2010, the Ready to Learn implementing changes to the statewide kindergarten percent of kindergarten program for the 2006-07 evaluated as ready 100 kindergarten 95 school year. School Readiness Uniform to learn. 95 Screening System has been replaced and children ready to 90 the new statewide kindergarten program is learn will be 84 84 84 85 83 82 82 the Florida Kindergarten Readiness increased from the Screener (FLKRS). 2003-2004 Percent 80 statewide level of 75 84% to 95%. 70 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 01 02 03 04 06 1 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 O 1 2 3 4 5 bje ct ive
15 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.8: By The gradual increase in the Graduation rate Percent of students June 30, 2010, Percent of Students Graduating From experienced a bump in 2005-06 with a slight graduating high school Florida’s graduation High School decrease. This is not sufficient data to within four years of rate will be increased determine a change in the overall upward entering ninth grade. 100 from the 2002-2003 85.0 trend for graduation rates. 71.9 statewide rate of 80 67.9 69.0 71.6 71 63.8 This objective has been aligned with the goals 69.0% to 85.0%. 60 of the Florida Department of Education High 40
Percent School Reform Task Force. 20
0 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2009-10 Objective Year
Objective 1.17C: Increased health No Chart The State Network of Association By June 30, 2010, and mental health Presidents (SNAP) developed a draft of children enrolled services to students Student Support Services Guidelines in in public schools in public schools, Spring 2007. The Guidelines address will have increased which result in provision of school-based health and mental health services. SNAP will meet again in access to health decreased ESE November 2007 to review issues related to and mental health placements, the provision of related services, including services. decreased discipline mental health services, to eligible students referrals, and in K12 public education increased student attendance.
16 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Objective 1.21: Objective 1.21Completed Children under By July 1, 2008, Percentage of Percent of Children under Protective Supervision protective supervision receive priority school readiness children under served through School Readiness Funds placement. Therefore, 100% of children funds to access investigation or under protective supervision will be served 97 100 100 protective 100 child care services Baseline established 6/06 of 24,863 children supervision of the will be available 80 in protective supervision were being served for all children at Department of statewide. risk of abuse or Children and 60 06/07: 26,178 children statewide in neglect as defined Families who were Percent 40 protective supervision were being served served by school by the Agency for 20 Workforce readiness funds as Innovation’s Office of June 30 each 0 year. 2005 2006 2009-10 of Early Learning. Objective
No Chart Objective 1.23: Percentage of The Office of Early Learning continues the By June 30, 2010, licensed or license- development of a statewide, uniform there will be a exempt programs Quality Rating System (QRS) for Florida. statewide increase that have licensing QRS criteria are a priority for the Early in availability of complaints or Learning Advisory Committee. As the QRS higher-quality health/safety pilot House and Senate bills did not pass licensed or license- violations. during the 2007 legislative session, AWI- exempt early OEL will continue work in this area Percentages of learning programs. through subcommittee recommendations. accredited early learning programs statewide (Gold Seal).
No Chart Objective 1.26: The percent of Based on the 2006 High School Reform By June 30, 2008, public middle and legislation, health education as a stand determine the high schools that alone course (LMS) is no longer appropriateness, deliver course required. Health is integrated into the feasibility and offerings that one credit Physical Education methods of address prevention requirement “1 credit physical expanding Florida of unintentional education to include the integration of 17 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect public school injuries, violence, health.” The elimination of the health curricula to suicide, tobacco use education requirement poses a setback include course and addiction, for efforts to expand the information offerings that alcohol and other provided to students on various address prevention drug use, health-related topics. of: unintentional unintended Objective 1.26 Completed----Results: injuries, violence, pregnancy, Human Based on the 2006 School Health Profiles suicide, tobacco Immunodeficiency Report (weighted data), the percentage of use and addiction, Virus (HIV)/ Florida Middle Schools that require health alcohol and other Acquired education for students: 57%; the percentage drug use, Immunodeficiency of Junior/Senior High School Combined that unintended Syndrome (AIDS), require health education for students: 65%, pregnancy, Human Sexually and the percentage of Florida High Schools Deficiency Transmitted that require health education for students: 95%. Syndrome Diseases (STD) (HIV),/Acquired infection, unhealthy Immune diet, inadequate Deficiency physical activity, Syndrome (AIDS), and environmental Sexually health. Transmitted Disease (STD) infection, unhealthy diet, inadequate physical activity, and environmental health.
18 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Percent of public high Objective 1.27: The Department of Education has a schools in Florida By June 30, 2008, Percent of High Schools Offering mechanism to determine what courses are offering courses that develop and Parenting Classes offered by Middle and High schools. address parenting implement a skills. method to The 2006 High School Reform Act 100% determine the eliminated the requirement for Life percent of public 80% Management classes; thus the percent of high schools offering such course work may high schools in 60% Florida offering decline. courses that 40% In 2004-05 Life Management Skills was address parenting 20% offered in 147 of 431 high schools (34%); in skills 0% 2005-06 it was offered in164 of 630 high schools (26%). 2004-05 2005-06 2010 Objective In 2004-2005 Parenting Skills (an elective course) was offered in 127 of 431 public high schools (29.5%); in 2005-06 it was offered in 129 of 630 high schools (20%)
Objective 2.16: Existence of written No Chart Objective 2.16: Completed By June 30, 2007, policies in each school each Florida public district for reporting child abuse. HB 7173 amending section 39.01 (48), school district will F.S. passed during the 2006 legislative establish a written session providing language that would policy for the require school districts to report suspected immediate report abuse on the part of school system of suspected or employees. known child abuse by an individual who is employed or otherwise contracted by a public school.
19 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Substance Abuse & Mental Health
Substance abuse and mental health are critical components of a full-system of child abuse prevention. Most children entering Florida’s child welfare system were exposed to familial substance abuse, domestic violence or mental illness. Substance abuse is recognized as a presenting problem in no less than half of all children known to the child welfare system. Providing effective, efficient and easily accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services is required in order to substantially reduce instances of child maltreatment. Moreover, substance abuse prevention and treatment span the entire child maltreatment prevention continuum. Mental health issues often correspond to child welfare issues when gone untreated. Many children with mental illness/emotional disturbance often present difficulties for parents to adequately handle. When children with these emotional/behavioral issues do not have sufficient services and supports, additional stress is placed on the family system. Situations involving infants and toddlers that lack necessary services and supports often experience problems with attachment, which lead to a multitude of other problems. Behavioral health integration with child welfare services is critical to resolving issues that brought the child into care and developing positive child well-being and permanency outcome. Further, early identification and intervention to meet behavioral health needs of both parents and children are essential for adequate prevention of child maltreatment and instances of re-abuse.
Indicator Chart Status/Comment
The percent of Florida Objective 2.7: By The percent of Percent of Youth reporting June 30, 2010, the middle and high Current Use of Alcohol or Illicit Drugs youth who reported percent of Florida school youth having used alcohol or youth who use reporting alcohol or 40 any illicit drug in the 37.1 previous 30 days was alcohol or any illicit drug use in 36.1 35.2 illicit drug will the past 30 days on 36 36.0% in 2006. This is decrease from the the Florida Youth 33.4 down by 1.1 percentage point since the 2004 statewide 2004 Substance Abuse Percent 32 baseline, but a slight level of 37.1 to Survey. increase of 0.8 33.4. 28 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2009-10 percentage points since Year Objective 2005. The rate is driven largely by underage drinking. 20 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Illicit Drug Use Among Florida continues to Objective 2.8: By Percent of adults 18 to 25-Year Old Adults experience higher rates June 30, 2010, adult reporting use of any of illicit drug abuse and illicit drug in the past illicit drug use and 23.55 binge alcohol use than 25 21.32 21.34 binge alcohol use 30 days. 20.08 21.20 national averages. 20 among adults will Percent of adults decrease by 10% reporting binge alcohol 15 There has been a slight from 2002 statewide use in the past 30 days. 10 decrease in Illicit Drug Percent levels. 5 Use in Florida since 0 2002. 2002 2004 2010 Objective Year
Illicit Drug Use Among 26 Years and Older Adults
25 20 15
10 6.31 6.58 5.64 6.08 5.68
Percent 5
0 2002 2004 2010 Objective Year
Source for the 4 tables: 2005 State Estimates of Substance Use & Mental Health, SAMHSA
21 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Binge Drinking in Adults 18 to 25 Years of Age
50 39.28 39.02 38.96 38.69 40 35.35 The Binge Drinking 30 rate has remained 20
Percent 10 virtually unchanged for 0 the past 4 years.
2 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 tive 2 2003 2 2 jec b
2010 O Year
Binge Drinking Among 26 Years and Older Adults
50 40 30 21.76 20.76 19.99 20.44 19.58 20
Percent 10 0
2 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 tive 2 2003 2 2 jec b
2010 O Year
Source for the 4 tables: 2005 State Estimates of Substance Use & Mental Health, SAMHSA
22 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Housing & Economic Stability Poverty and lack of other resources, such as adequate housing, are strongly associated with child maltreatment, particularly neglect. Extremely low incomes and overcrowded or insecure housing conditions put a tremendous amount of stress on family systems. Therefore, an adequate infrastructure that supports career development and full employment for parents so that they earn sufficient wages to support their families; provides a safety net for families threatened with loss of their homes due to natural disasters or a downturn in the family support system; and provides individualized support and services that maintain family integrity for families who are temporarily homeless is essential to ensuring the protective factors that prevent child abuse and neglect. Indicator Chart Status/Comment Objective 1.4: By The percent of June 30, 2010, the Percent of Children Living in Poverty Based on US Census children under 18 percent of children estimates the percent of living in poverty. living in poverty will children in Florida be reduced from the 25 16.1 18.8 16.5 19.2 17.0 20 15.3 14.3 living in poverty 2003 statewide level 15 10.0 10 peaked in 2003 and has of 19.2% to 10%. 5 Percent 0 shown a steady decline 2 2 2001 2 2 2004 2005 200 0 in the past 3 years. 00 00 00 10 0 2 3 6 Obj ...
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Statistics
Objective 1.5: By Current US Census June 30, 2010, the The percent of estimates indicate that percent of families families below the Percent of Families Living in Poverty the percent of Florida living in poverty poverty level. families living in 12 9.0 9.7 9.0 9.1 will be reduced 10 8.4 8.0 poverty (below 100% of 8 from the 2003 6 the Federal Poverty 4 statewide level of Percent 2 Level) continues to 0 9.7% to 8.0%. slowly decline. 20 20 20 20 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 5 6 10 O b je c ti ve
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Statistics 23 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Homeless Children Rate (per 1,000 children) Five of the fourteen Objective 1.6: By Number of children 6 4.95 4.67 5.20 4.43 DCF districts report 5 4.23 June 30, 2010, the (under age 18) that 4 2.98 attaining this objective. children’s 3 2.00
are homeless per Rate 2 The dramatic decrease 1 homelessness rate 1,000 children. 0 reflected in 2006 may will be reduced 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 be partially related to a 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 from the 2003 O change in methodology b je statewide rate of c .. used. 4.57 to 2.00 per . 1,000 children.
Statewide & Local Collaboration A successful statewide effort to reduce child maltreatment requires actions both on a statewide and a local level; it also requires that the local and statewide efforts be closely coordinated. Local communities are taking more ownership in addressing the needs of their residents, resulting in a variety of innovative and effective practices in the area of child abuse prevention and intervention being developed and implemented across the state. The Plan requires collaboration between statewide and local organizations and a broad spectrum of local organizations. Statewide collaboration is needed to develop uniform processes and strategies for identifying gaps in services, assessing the capacity for prevention services, the components of the prevention continuum, sharing best and effective practices, and evaluating the impact of prevention efforts. Indicator Chart Status/Comment Objective 2.4: By Percent of counties Percent of Counties with Access to a Web-based June 30, 2010, all with access to 211, a As of June 2007, 55 Comprehensive List of Community Resources Florida citizens web-based counties were included and service comprehensive list 100.0 in the 2-1-1 Network. 100 82 providers will have of community 80 68.7 2-1-1 is the health and access to a well- resources. human service 60 42.3 maintained, easy- 38.8 equivalent of 9-1-1. The 40 Percent 17.9 to-use database 20 Florida 2-1-1 Network 0.0 4.5 that provides 0 was created by authorization of the information about 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 0 0 0 0 04 05 06 1 0 1 2 3 0 O Florida Legislature in services, programs, bje ct and providers in ive 2002. the prevention The Network is a 24 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect continuum. system of collaborative relationships between many 2-1--1centers, specialized information and referral providers and other human service organizations. The Florida Alliance of Information and Referral Services (FLAIRS) provides leadership and a governance structure for the Network.
Reference above Chart.
Objective 3.5: By Percent of counties I&R programs help June 30, 2010, with a individuals, families, 100% of Florida’s comprehensive and and communities communities will well-maintained list identify, understand, establish and of community and effectively use the maintain a single resources meeting programs that comprise telephone the specifications of the human service accessible 2-1-1. delivery system. I&R comprehensive providers today have inventory of expanded means for community bringing people and resources. services together, and they are serving a wider range of inquirers.
25 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Funding & Accountability
The Plan identified an increased need for child abuse prevention resources. However, before requesting additional resources, the Task Force identified a need to ensure accountability for currently funded programs and to develop strategies for primary prevention across agencies and programs that can collaborate, better leveraging limited resources.
Indicator Chart Status/Comment
Objective 3.3: By Percent of service No Chart Representatives of the June 30, 2009, providers surveyed Task Force participated 100% of service that are aware of in a federal Centers for providers can the list of Disease Control identify and access community support PREVENT Project in the array of systems. 2006-07. The Florida traditional and Project resulted in the non-traditional development of a supports necessary method to review and to meet the needs locate programs along of the families they the prevention service serve. continuum. This will assist state and local planners in determining service capacity and gaps.
26 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
Vision
Florida’s highest priority is that children are raised in healthy, safe, stable, and nurturing families.
27 4/1/09 Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect
28 4/1/09 Attachment
SERVICING CHILD WELFARE CLIENT NEEDS: Emergency and Disaster Preparedness Activities
Developing a Plan:
1. Identify all possible disasters that can impact protection of children and delivery of child welfare services that may be unique to your geographical locale and would require specific planning and response. This would also include foreseeable and unforeseeable threats. 2. Establish a process that involves consultation with all child welfare partners in plan development (local courts, Guardian Ad Litem, Child Protection Teams, law enforcement, etc.) and reaches out to common partners in times of emergency (Department of Health, hospitals, emergency management agencies, shelters, food banks, courts, volunteers, etc.). 3. Establish a procedure for all caregivers of children under supervision to provide evacuation plans (include in-home, relative, non-relative, foster and adoptive). For licensed placements, ensure that the evacuation plans are reviewed at each re-licensure. 4. Identify a single individual responsible for coordination of child welfare disaster planning and response. This individual will also be a lead responsible for communication with local media, assigning tasks, serving as liaison to other jurisdictions and central office, and communication of expectations to staff. Identify other key staff and duties and how overall provider communications will be sustained during a threat. 5. Identify location for operations in case of serious damage to the work centers, the reporting mechanism for provider staff and methods of communication (phone trees, web-sites, cell phones, toll-free phone numbers, etc.). 6. Identify how to complete contacts with caregivers for all children under Department supervision prior to a known threat to ensure that they are following the submitted disaster plan. 7. Have a plan to secure all electronic and hard copy records (to include back-up servers in safe locations and proper care of electronic equipment). The plan should take into account emergencies and disasters that may present without warning. 8. Maintain a supply of emergency cash on hand in response to possible power outages in order to purchase emergency items for children or families. 9. Provide each staff member with a copy of the emergency and disaster plan and procedures and conduct training, test exercises and drills as appropriate. 10. Ensure provider training includes assisting children to handle and cope with disasters and possible relocation. 11. Ensure that providers who evacuate have critical demographic, health and service needs information with them for children in their care. 12. Update the plan regularly.
i
Attachment
Managing Disaster:
1. Assess the availability of staff and condition of facilities and equipment. Reassign staff as demanded by conditions. 2. Ensure that provider staff and their families are provided assistance as needed. 3. Determine the essential functions that must be carried out and in what areas waivers or flexibility may be appropriate. Ensure that staff is aware of changes in functions. 4. The plan should address how providers will conduct an immediate, initial assessment of the location and needs of children under supervision, their parents and caregivers. 5. Plan to conduct an immediate assessment of changes in the needs of children, families, and caregivers (in-home, relative, non-relative and foster/adopt) served by the child welfare system resulting from the disaster. Consider the need to provide new, additional services to impacted children and families. Ensure that needed services, both pre-existing and new, are available and provided at their location. Consider the following typical needs after a traumatic event: • Immediate trauma services for children and families; • Assistance for medically fragile children and their caregivers; • More time for service visits; • Connection to other programs that provide benefit resources (e.g., rebuilding housing and Food for Florida); • Child care for families while they seek assistance.
ii
Attachment
Rebuilding
1. Indicate what steps the provider will take to ensure that there is the capacity to respond to potential increases in investigations, service needs and overall workload. This may include investigating and opening new cases or providing services to children and families that may have relocated from within state or from out of state. The workload management plan should address the following considerations: • Identification of new cases of children who are abused or neglected, or separated from their family due to the disaster, and provision of appropriate services; • Provision of services to children and families evacuated from other states to Florida or relocated from other jurisdictions within Florida; • Working through the Florida Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children Office to coordinate services and share information with other states about relocated children and families; • Identification of emergency placement slots in the event a foster or biological family cannot find temporary housing suitable for children; • Ensure that messages about services and provision of services are sensitive to the trauma that families have experienced and that they continue to be culturally competent given the stress already on families that may have cultural and language considerations; • Procedures for reporting information on children and families that may have been separated during the event so that they are reunified or able to communicate as quickly as possible. 2. Address emotional needs of staff to help them deal with the added stress and trauma of a disaster as related to child welfare work and their own family’s situation. 3. Describe a debriefing process for staff and key stakeholders. 4. Fortify areas of strength and redesign areas that require improvement. 5. Update plans based on lessons learned, not just by providers, but by all partners in the child welfare community. 6. Ensure that staff and clients are educated and trained in emergency procedures after each plan update.
iii
CharlieGrist Stateof Florida Governor Departmentof Childrenand Families Robert A. Buttenrorth Secretary
June10,2008
Ana MariaPozo. Executive Director FosterCare Review. lnc. 155South MiamiAvenue, Suite 601 Miami,Florida 33130
Re:The 2007 Annual Citizen Review Report
DearMs. Pozo:
Thankyou for yourcontinuous commitment to improvingFlorida's child protection system. Pleaselet your board and panel members know that the work you do providescritical insightsinto the systemof carein Miami-Dade/Monroe,as well as childprotection trends acrossFlorida.
Thisis to acknowledgereceipt of the 2007Foster Care Review annual report that you sent. I willshare this report with Department of Childrenand Families(DCF) Southern RegionDirector, DCF Circuits 11 and 16 Circuit Administrator and Our Kids of Miami- Dade/Monroe,lnc's Chief Executive Officer.
Again,I appreciateyour analysis and input, and look fonruard to continuedcollaboration. lf you haveany questions,please feel free to contactMukweso Mwenene at (850)922-0510 or Mu kweso_Mwenene@dcf. state.fl .us.
Sincerelv, Affi^P*!t) PatriciaBadland Director Officeof FamilySafety cc: AlanAbramowitz, Region Director, Southern Region GifdaFerradaz, Circuit Administrator, DCF Circuit 11 and 16 FrancesAllegra, CEO, Our Kids of Miami-Dade/Monroe,Inc
131 7 \MnewoodBoulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700
Mission:Protect the Vulnerable, Promote Strong and Economically Self-Sufficient Families, and AdvancePersonal and Family Recovery and Resiliency
Annual Report 2007
His Name is Today
We are guilty of many errors and many faults But our worst crime is abandoning the children, Neglecting the fountain of life. Many of the things we need can wait, The child cannot. Right now is the time his bones are being formed, His blood is being made, And his senses are being developed. To him we cannot answer 'Tomorrow.' His name is 'Today.'
- Gabriela Mistral, Poet Laureate, Chile
Foster Care Review, Inc. 155 South Miami Avenue Suite 601 Miami, FL 33130 (305) 573 6665 www.fostercarereview.org
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 5
From the Executive Director
Fiscal year 2006-7 was another great year of extraordinary efforts by FCR staff and citizen review panel volunteers. Since our founding in 1989, the panels have monitored the lives of over 40,000 children and contributed 111,751 hours of community service on behalf of children from our community. Their dedication is truly admirable: more than 20% have served over 5 years.
This year Foster Care Review started reviewing cases of children in relative care. We are also continuing to hold reviews for independent living youth 16 and 17 years of age to ensure that they are prepared for adult living when they age out of the system. The data collected on the status of older youth tells a grim story. There were 534 children reviewed between the ages of 13 and 17—about 75% of all children reviewed by our citizen review panels. Of these, 76% have special education needs, 40% have a history of delinquency, 11% are in living in juvenile or adult facilities and 12% are on runaway status. Those who aged out of the system when they turned 18 years—131 youth—also had serious issues. After having spent over four years in foster care, the majority did not have plans for housing or school, nor an adult relationship that could assist them during their transition to adulthood. These findings reinforce the need for accountability from those responsible for the children’s day-to-day care. Another lesson learned from the reviews is the importance to reach out to them at an earlier age.
This year was also the first full year of Miami-Dade’s community based care initiative. Some of the successes are becoming evident at the reviews: more adoptions, less resets. Our community worked hard to address the upheavals caused by the transition. FCR is committed to work with our partners to use our citizen reviews and our data to identify issues in need of improvement. With grant funds from Miami Dade’s Children’s Trust, FCR is making significant upgrades to our database. When the project is completed at the end of 2008, we will be able to provide better outcome data on the status of children reviewed and their progress towards permanency. Also, as we review cases of children in relative care, FCR’s data will more accurately represent the dependency population in Miami Dade.
We thank the Juvenile Court for its support of our work and for allowing us to be of service to the community. We are also eternally grateful to our friends, supporters, system partners and especially our volunteers, for their continued dedication to children in the foster care system.
Ana Maria Pozo, J.D. Executive Director (305) 573-6665 ext. 11 [email protected]
“There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way it treats its children." — Nelson Mandela
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Mission 8
II. Achievements 9
III. Citizen review hearings 10
IV. The children reviewed 14
V. Independent Living Reviews 20
VI. System Barriers 23
VII. 2007 Citizen review panel recommendations 27
VIII. History and program description 28
IX. Board of Directors 32
X. Volunteers 33
XI. Organizational Chart 34
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 7 I. MISSION
. FCR Vision
A world where children are safe, live in permanent homes and grow up in communities that promote their well-being.
FCR Mission
Foster Care Review promotes prompt, positive and permanent outcomes for dependent children through case review and advocacy. FCR’s mission is achieved by:
¾ Providing independent, third-party oversight to monitor the safety and wellbeing of children in the foster care system
¾ Assessing agency compliance with mandated time frames, statutory requirements, and accepted best practice standards in child welfare
¾ Making recommendations to the judiciary, community based care agencies and other concerned parties
¾ Facilitating action toward each child and family’s permanency goal
¾ Engaging the participation of all concerned parties
¾ Tracking, analyzing and sharing impact and outcome data with our community partners
¾ Educating the public about the needs of foster children
¾ Involving the community in the lives of foster children
¾ Advocating for system change
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 8 II. ACHIEVEMENTS
Over the past 18 years, FCR has monitored the safety, wellbeing and permanency of over 40,000 foster children in Miami-Dade.
¾ FCR’s citizen review panels reviewed the cases of 1293 children in FY 2007, monitoring their safety, wellbeing and progress towards permanency.
¾ Our citizen review panels contributed 4916 hours of service.
¾ FCR presented a symposium on Brain Development in the Early Years funded by the Children’s Trust that was attended by 175 persons.
¾ The SAIL pilot project (System Accountability for Independent Living) was implemented with funds from the Children’s Trust. Five specialized panels reviewed the cases of 278 youth ages 16 and over, monitoring their preparation for adult living.
¾ FCR expanded the scope of reviews by reviewing cases of children in relative care—in addition to those in out of home care. Staff and panels were trained.
¾ Octavio Verdeja received the 2007 Doug Halsey Award for Volunteer Service at a reception sponsored by Mellon Bank.
¾ Out of 110 volunteers, five (5) volunteers completed 15 years of service; 10 completed 10 years of service; and 30 completed 5 years of service.
¾ FCR sponsored several events with the goal of expanding its volunteer and donor base: a luncheon at Joe’s Stone Crab, a Broadway musical evening, and a Friendraiser reception at Mellon Bank.
¾ FCR entered into a 3-year contract with Chapin Hall Center for Children, University of Chicago, to provide program monitoring services for the community based care pilot project in Miami-Dade, Monroe and Broward counties.
¾ FCR received an endowment of $740,000 from North Dade Medical Foundation that provides an annual grant of approximately $25,000; the fund is managed by the Dade Community Foundation.
¾ The FCR database is undergoing major upgrades as a result of a $400,000 grant from the Children’s Trust.
¾ FCR started using a new logo with a more child-friendly look.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 9 III. CITIZEN REVIEW HEARINGS
During the past 18 years, FCR’s citizen review program has monitored the safety and wellbeing of more than 40,000 children living in Miami- Dade’s foster care system.
¾ In FY 2007, Foster Care Review’s citizen review panels reviewed the cases of 709 children—approximately 20% of the children under 18 years of age living in Miami-Dade’s foster care system. As many of the children were reviewed twice in one year, the duplicate number of children reviewed is 1293.
¾ The agencies with the largest number of children reviewed were CHARLEE (29%), CFCE (19%) and KHU (19%). Most of the cases came from the following 3 circuit courts: division 8 (29%), division 9 (25%) and division 3 (25%).
¾ There were 1733 participants at the reviews (866), an average of 2 participants per review. Panel recommendations are based on the information provided at reviews; therefore it is important for persons who know about the child to attend the review. Those most likely to participate were case managers, the DCF attorney, foster parents and Guardians Ad Litem.
¾ As the result of efforts to encourage foster youth to attend their reviews, child participation increased by 36%, from 188 in 2006 to 196 in 2007.
¾ As in prior years, attorney representation for parents was discouraging. Most parents who go reviews do not have a lawyer present. When parents choose not to proceed without their lawyer, the case must be rescheduled.
¾ FCR’s 110 volunteers contributed a total of 4916 hours of their time by serving in one of our 18 citizen review panels. Joined by four of their peers, volunteers dedicate one full day per month to attend review hearings conducted at the Miami Dade Juvenile Justice Center. Some volunteer twice a month. They systematically examine the documents provided, inquire as to the child’s placement, school, health, sibling and parent visitation, and make recommendations to the court.
¾ Our volunteers’ commitment is unparalleled: more than 20% of our volunteers have served over 5 years and 10% have served 10 years or more. The 2007 recipient of the Doug Halsey Award for Volunteer Service was Octavio Verdeja Sr., a well known community leader and child advocate who served on a citizen review panel for 10 years.
¾ FCR expanded the scope of reviews by hearing the cases of dependent children who are placed with relatives, or “relative care”. Generally, there is a concern that children placed with relatives need more oversight. Although relative placements are considered less restrictive and more family-like than a foster home, many of the children end up back in foster care. Finding permanency in a relative placement can be as difficult as placement in a
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 10 foster home: some relatives do not want to adopt, some are in denial about the families’ problems—believing that the child will return to the parent and others are simply unable to care for the child for various reasons.
¾ Issues of concern in relative care cases include: qualifying for and receiving stipends, Medicaid eligibility for the child, and services for the child. Data will be available in next year’s report.
¾ Finally, a pilot project started at the request of Judge Cindy Lederman ended in December of 2006. The SAIL project—System Accountability for Independent Living—involves special reviews of youth 16 and over, with the goal of ensuring that youth are being prepared for adult living. Based on findings from the reviews, all children ages 13 to 17 will be reviewed by our IL panels.
¾ FY 2007 was the first full year of community based care, and many of the court-related problems resulting from the transition—lack of proper notice, attendance at review—have improved somewhat. Although issues with case management remain, there were 173 case managers who were recognized for their excellent handling of cases.
Challenges for FY 2008
¾ Increase FCR caseload and volunteer corps. ¾ Seek funding to continue SAIL project. Plans include increasing the IL panels to 8; lowering IL reviews to age 13; training staff and volunteers, data collection, and developing a youth outreach program. ¾ Collect data on relative care cases.
CITIZEN REVIEW STATISTICS
FY 2006 FY 2007 Review hearings 889 866 Children reviewed (single count) 745 709 Children scheduled for review (duplicates) 1915 1887
Children reviewed (duplicates) 1338 1293
Children JRSSRs pre-filed 517 582 Cases reviewed (single count) 477 461 Cases reviewed (duplicates) 890 854 Children whose cases were reset 866 331 Volunteer hours 5816 4916
Case Manager Commendations 76 173
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 11
Children reviewed – by agency and judicial division
Children Reviewed by Agency and Division – (duplicate count) 001 002 003 008 009 Total CFCE 18 41 85 24 74 242
CHARLEE 50 31 94 116 89 380 CHS 10 23 47 58 51 189
FRC 2 0 18 13 5 38 HHCH 5 3 1 35 5 59
KHU 10 36 77 61 65 249
NTF 6 33 6 62 29 136 Total 101 167 328 369 318 1293 (7%) (14%) (25%) (29%) (25%) (100%)
Children reviewed – by agency and age of child
Children Reviewed by Agency and Age Ranges - (single count) # child 0-5 6-12 13-17 % CFCE 131 15 17 99 (19%)
CHARLEE 201 14 31 156 (29%) CHS 101 8 20 73 (14%)
FRC 23 4 3 16 (3%) HHCH 33 5 10 18 (4%)
KHU 133 10 19 104 (19%) NTF 87 7 12 68 (12%) Total 709 63 112 534 (9%) (16%) (75%) (100%)
Community based care agencies
CFCE Center for Family and Child Enrichment CHARLEE Children have all rights, legal, educational and emotional CHS Children’s Home Society FCR Family Resource Center HHCH His House Children’s Home KHU Kids Hope United NTF Neighbor to Family
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 12 Participation at reviews
Total Spkr. Written Participants Scheduled Total Present Phone Reports Participation Notices Atty. for Child 112 49 5 0 54 Atty. For Father 95 11 3 0 14
Atty. For Mother 136 13 3 0 16
DCF 15 14 0 0 14 Private Agency 914 898 9 0 907
Child 0 188 7 1 196
Foster Parent 393 129 14 3 146 GAL 285 168 3 6 177 GAL Rep 73 50 1 1 52
Father 72 8 0 0 8 Mother 181 15 0 0 15 Pre-Adoptive Parent 2 2 0 0 2
Agency Superv. 2 1 1 0 2 Other (therapist, etc.) 345 187 19 0 206
TOTAL 2842 1733 65 11 1809
Case managers commendations - 173
Agency Case Management Commendations # children Commend % CFCE 131 31 (24%) CHARLEE 201 57 (28%) CHS 101 38 (37%) FRC 23 2 (8%) HHCH 33 14 (42%) KHU 133 16 (12%) NTF 87 15 (17%) Total 709 173 (24%)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 13 IV. THE CHILDREN REVIEWED
The typical child reviewed by our citizen review panels is an African American male or female teenager who has learning issues, a history of delinquency and has lived in a foster home over three years.
¾ There were almost as many female (47%) as male (53%) foster children reviewed.
¾ A majority (75%) of the children reviewed are ages 13 to 17; 23% are 6 to 12. This break down is not representative of the general foster care population. Since the start of FCR’s independent living project, many older children are being referred by the courts to the citizen review panels. It is because so many of the children reviewed are older that FCR panels are so keenly concerned of their needs. In response, FCR is making efforts to strengthen reviews for foster youth.
¾ About as many children came into care as the result of neglect (43%) as physical abuse, or the risk of abuse (42%).
¾ Half (50%) of the children are placed in foster homes and a smaller number (21%) live in more specialized facilities that can address their medical or mental health needs.
¾ For a small percentage (15%) of the children, the review panels expressed concerns about the placements, either because of safety issues such as running away, delinquent behavior or placements that do not lead to permanency.
¾ In FY 2007 there were 61 children reviewed who were on runaway status.
¾ As the children come into care, a case plan is developed that outlines the course of action required for each child. For 55% of the children the goal is adoption; for 27% it is “another planned permanent living arrangement,” or APPLA—a goal used specifically for older youth who will most likely age out of foster care.
¾ Of children with a plan of adoption or APPLA, 79% spent four or more years in foster care. This is too long to spend in a temporary placement. Only 4% of all children reviewed spent less than two years in care.
¾ 162 children reviewed achieved permanency through adoption or emancipation. Of these, 131 aged out of the foster care system and 31 were adopted. The children adopted are always a morale boost for our volunteers, especially when the child has been in care a long time. Of the children adopted, 19 (61%) were in care over four years.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 14 ¾ Of those who aged out, 110 (84%) were also in care over four years. It’s the latter group that causes the most concern, as once they leave the system many must depend on themselves for food and housing.
¾ Nearly half of the children have special education needs, with the two most common classifications being emotional handicaps (12%) and severe emotional disturbance (11%). Older children have more serious issues, with 76% having learning disabilities and 40% a history of delinquency. Many of these children came into care with handicaps that are not always addressed in foster care; others develop problems while in care.
¾ While Miami-Dade’s population is 66% Hispanic, 22% Black and 12% White, its foster care population is 22% Hispanic, 76% Black and 5% White. This disproportionality of minority children in foster care is an issue being addressed nationwide by child welfare professionals. Research indicates that children of color are not at higher risk of abuse and neglect than Caucasian children. Why then are there more children of color in foster care? Nationally, African-American children are about 3.5 times as likely as white children to be in state protective custody.
¾ FCR’s citizen review panels are committed to ensure that the child’s journey through foster care is a safe one. At every review, they ask about the child’s placement, school, health, sibling and parental visits and many other issues related to their wellbeing. By closely and consistently monitoring service provision and encouraging case progress, FCR panels make every effort to give children an opportunity to have a safe and healthy future.
Children reviewed - by case plan goal and age group (n= 709)
# Children By Age 0-5 6-12 13-17+ Total % Adoption 51 93 194 338 (55%) Another Planned Perm Living Arrangement 0 8 180 188 (27%) Independent Living 0 0 3 3 (.2%) Reunification 11 8 22 41 (5.7% Long Term Licensed Custody 0 2 115 117 (16.5%) Long Term Relative Custody 0 1 7 8 (1%) None 0 0 2 2 (.2%) Permanent Guardianship 1 0 3 4 (.5%) Permanent Placement w/relative 0 0 1 1 (0%) Other 0 0 7 7 (.5%) Total 63 112 534 709 100% (9%) (16%) (75%)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 15
Length of stay in foster care
By case plan goal (n = 709)
# Children by Length of Stay (months) 13-24 25-36 37-48 48+ Total % Adoption 8 33 29 268 338 (55%) Another Planned Perm Living Arrangement 7 12 8 161 188 (27%) Independent Living 0 0 1 2 3 (.2%) Reunification 11 16 1 13 41 (5.7%) Long Term Licensed Custody 1 9 6 101 117 (16.5%) Long Term Relative Custody 1 1 1 5 8 (1%) None 0 0 0 2 2 (.2%) Permanent Guardianship 1 1 0 2 4 (.5%) Permanent Placement w/relative 0 0 0 1 1 (0%) Other 0 0 0 7 7 (.5%) Total 29 72 46 562 709 100% (%) (4%) (10%) (7%) (79%)
Length of stay for children achieving permanency
Adoption – by gender and length of stay
LENGTH OF STAY- ADOPTION (in months) Gender 13-24 25-36 37-48 48 Total Female 2 1 10 13 Male 4 5 9 18 Total 2 4 6 19 31
Emancipation – By gender and length of stay
YOUTHS - LENGTH OF STAY (in months) Gender 13-24 25-36 37-48 48 Total Female 1 8 1 60 70 Male 2 5 4 50 61 Total 3 13 5 110 131
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 16
Race of children reviewed
Native American Black Hispanic Multi-Racial 1% 2% 1% Unknown Non-His panic White 1% 5%
White Hispanic 22%
Non-Hispanic Black 68%
Delinquency history for children reviewed Children Reviewed = 709 Children with history RACE FEMALE MALE TOTAL of delinquency = 288 (40%) Non-Hispanic Black 95 116 211 Non-Hispanic White 3 13 16 Black Hispanic 3 6 9 White Hispanic 17 28 45 Multi-Racial 5 2 7 TOTAL 123 165 288 (%) 17% 23% 40%
Entry into foster care (n = 709)
Abuse- Physical Abandonment Abuse-Sexual 11% 12% 3%
Ne gle ct 43%
Ris k of Har m 31%
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 17
CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS (n = 709)
Special Education Type 0-5 6-12 13-17+ Sum Autistic 0 3 6 9 Developmentally delayed 0 2 0 2 Dual sensory impaired 0 0 1 1 Educable mentally handicapped 0 5 23 28 Emotionally handicapped 2 18 66 86 Gifted 0 0 1 1 Health impaired 0 1 0 1 Language impaired 0 1 0 1 None 0 2 0 2 Orthopeadically impaired 0 1 4 5 Other 0 1 2 3 Profoundly mentally handicapped 1 2 17 19 Severely emotionally disturbed 0 17 61 78 Specific learning disabled 0 13 47 60 Speech therapy 1 3 1 5 Trainable mentally handicapped 0 1 3 4 Unknown 0 1 0 1 Visually impaired 0 0 1 1 TOTAL 3 71 233 307 (1%) (23%) (76%) (43%)
Children living in inappropriate placements
For 2007, 15% of the children reviewed (108), were found to be in placements with issues that affected their safety, well being and permanency.
Placement concerns Placement Not Appropriate AGENCY ¾ Safety of child cannot be assured (includes 745 Children 709 Children 61 runaway children) (67 children) Reviewed Reviewed ¾ Placement is not a step towards 2006 % 2007 % permanency (32 children) CFCE 33 (4%) 18 (3%) ¾ Placement does not meet emotional needs CHARLEE 55 (7%) 36 (5%) (23 children) CHS 25 (3%) 14 (2%) ¾ Placement does not meet educational needs FRC 18 (2%) 2 (2%) (13 children) ¾ Placement does not meet physical needs (7 HHCH 19 (3%) 11 (2%) children) 23 (3%) 15 (2%) KHU ¾ Placement is interfering with permanency NTF 17 (2%) 12 (2%) (2 children) TOTAL 173 (19%) 108 (15%) ¾ Child is subject to abuse by another child in the placement (3 children)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 18
Child Placement
2006 Type of Placement 2007 Children % Children % Adult Jail 1 (0.1%) 3 (0.2%) Detention 17 (1.2%) 9 (1.0%) Foster Home 731 (54.6%) 656 (50.0%) Group Home or Therapeutic Group Home 205 (15.3%) 190 (14.0%) Juvenile Justice Facility 4(0.3%) 9 (1.0%) Medical Foster Home 87 (7.0%) 90 (7.0%) Non-relative custodian (Not Licensed) 3 (0.2%) 2 (0.2%) Other 0(0%) 14 (1.0%) Pre-adoptive Parent 15 (1.1%) 40 (3.0%) Psychiatric Residential Treatment Facility 21 (1.5%) 22 (2.0%) Relative - Licensed Foster Home 2 (0.1%) 1 (0.1%) Relative (Not Licensed) 4(0.3%) 3 (0.1%) Relative Caregiver Program 0 (0%) 2 (0.1%) Residential Facility 32 (2.3%) 38 (3.0%) Runaway Status 49 (3.6%) 61 (5.0%) Shelter 43 (3.2%) 43 (3.0%) Subsidized Ind. Living under 18 yrs of age2 (0.1%) 5 (0.3%) Therapeutic Foster Home 122 (9.1%) 113 (9.0%)
1338 (100%) 1301 (100%)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 19
V. THE END OF THE JOURNEY: INDEPENDENT LIVING
The key to a successful transition to adulthood is ensuring that the
child has an education, housing, health and mental health services,
the resources to maintain an adequate lifestyle and a connection to
responsible adults committed to support him or her during the
transition.
¾ As stated previously, the great majority of children reviewed (75%) are ages 13 to 17. Since the reality of these children is that many will age out of the system without getting adopted, it is critical that they receive the preparation they need for a successful transition to adulthood.
¾ The SAIL project – System Accountability for Independent Living—monitors agency compliance with IL requirements of youth 16 and over. Five panels were trained and designated to hear IL reviews, which were extended to one hour each. The FCR database was upgraded to allow the collection of data regarding IL issues. Each youth was represented by a Guardian or Attorney ad litem, and special efforts were made to encourage youth participation.
¾ FCR’s IL panels reviewed 278 youth ages 16 and 17—a total of 39% of all children reviewed in FY 2007. The panels found that the majority of youth were being referred and assessed for independent living services. Compliance with other requirements, however, was extremely poor. This includes youth participation in required case staffings and in independent living classes, information on extended jurisdiction, and others.
¾ In addition to monitoring the provision of services, the panels inquired as to the youths’ plans after foster care: Where will you live? Go to school? Who do you know that can give you a hand? Sadly, sixty percent (65%) did not have housing plans; 70% did not have plans for secondary education; and 80% did not have an adult relationship that could help them during their transition.
¾ The need for mental health treatment is another concern. Of the youth about to age out, 60% needed mental health treatment yet only 27% were receiving the services.
¾ As a way to have a stronger impact on service provision, FCR is expanding the SAIL project to include all children ages 13 to 17, with the intent of allowing additional time for the youth to receive the appropriate services and for the agencies to make additional efforts to find the youth a permanent home or personal connections to support their transition.
¾ An increase in the youths’ participation at reviews was encouraging. Their attendance improved by 36%, from 188 in 2006 to 196 in 2007. This was due to major efforts of FCR staff as well as Guardians ad litem to notify youth of their independent living reviews, a major objective of the SAIL project.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 20 According to national judicial and bar associations involved in juvenile justice, participation at court hearings gives youth a sense of control over their life and helps them to understand the court process. It also makes the case more real for the participants as well as the panels, and provides better information to the court.
¾ Without doubt, our community can do a better job of preparing foster youth. Youth who spend four or more years of their lives in foster care, have learning disabilities, experience multiple moves, delinquency, and suffer from emotional and behavior problems will also have a hard time as adults. To give foster youth a chance to succeed, it requires thoughtful, deliberate planning, sufficient time to execute the plan and, most importantly, the combined efforts of foster care agencies and the entire community.
Challenges for FY 2008
¾ Share with system partners FCR data reports on IL reviews, with the goal of identifying ways to improve the independent living program. ¾ Develop a youth outreach program to encourage youth to attend reviews. ¾ Explore the feasibility of conducting administrative reviews of foster youth ages 18 to 23 as a way to assess the effectiveness of the independent living program. ¾ Include all youth ages 13 to 17 in IL reviews.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 21 Compliance with IL services
Independent Living (IL) Services 2006 % 2007 % Total Youths (16+) Reviewed 262 278 Youth referred for Independent Living 204 78% 235 (85%) Youth assessed for Independent Living 197 75% 223 (80%) IL assessment filed with the Court 150 57% 181 (65%) Required Staffing held 178 (64%) Youth participates in the Staffing 161 (58%) IL Transitional Case Plan filed in Court 1 .4% 75 (27%) IL Services provided in accord. w/ Case Plan 91 (33%) 90-day JR for 17 year old has taken place 45 (16%) Post 18 placement identified 1 .4% 78 (28%) RTI application submitted 18 (23%) RTI application approved 11 (4%) Informed on Extended Jurisdiction 61 (22%) Received completed copy of Needs Assessmnt 20 (7%) Has Medicaid 150 (54%) Has Social Security 183 (66%) Has Birth Certificate 200 (72%) Has a Florida ID 134 (48%) Transitional (IEP) 41 (15%) DS Client 30 (11%)
Status of transitioning youth
Children with Children with Children Youths reviewed = adult plans for with plans 278 relationship secondary for housing for support at education at 18 at 18 years 18 years years Biological Parent 3 (1%) 0 (%) Need mental Receiving Special Foster Parent 18 (7%) 40 (14%) health mental health educational treatment? treatment? needs? Mentor/GAL 12 (4%) 0 (%) (#Yes) (#Yes) (#Yes) Relative 22 (8%) 15 (5%) 79 (60%) 35 (27%) 68 (52%) Independent 42 (15%) College 45 (16%) Vocational Training 20 (7%) High School 6 (2%) Other 15 (5%) 55 86 (31%) 97 (20%) (35%)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 22 VI. SYSTEM BARRIERS
Federal law provides for strict timelines to permanency. Due to multiple and complex reasons, however, children in Miami-Dade’s foster care system wait longer than most. Obstacles to their permanency may . relate to legal issues, gaps in services or issues related to the child himself.
Compliance with Adoption and Safe Families Act
¾ For FY 2007, the agencies’ compliance with case plan and reasonable efforts requirements under the Adoption and Safe Families Act was 78%. The most significant reasons for noncompliance include not completing tasks from previous orders; not making reasonable efforts toward permanency; and inadequate case management.
Judicial Review Social Study Report (JRSSR)
¾ Reviews are required by federal and state law at least every six months during the child’s stay in foster care. Noncompliance with this requirement may result in loss of federal funds. Most importantly, it delays the case for everyone involved, especially the child.
¾ FCR review specialists prepare for reviews by examining the history of the case and the information available regarding the child since the last review. Most of this information is included in social study reports that are required to be filed with the court 72 hours before the review. Compliance with the pre-filing requirement, however, is a challenge for most agencies. In FY 2007, social study reports were pre-filed for only 50% of the children reviewed.
¾ It is important to note that panels will disregard the 72-hour requirement as long as the report is filed with the Clerk’s office before the review hearing. This is done so that cases are not delayed, and to assist the state’s compliance with timeliness of reviews. In spite of this flexibility, 137 children had their cases rescheduled due to the case manager’s failure to file a social study report.
Reset of cases
¾ While 1887 children were scheduled for review, only 1293 children were actually reviewed by FCR panels. Some cases of children are taken off the docket when the child is returned home; others are kept by the judges, who may have particular reasons for keeping the case and then fail to re-set the case before the panels.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 23 ¾ Of the children reviewed, 25% (331) had their cases reset for various reasons: 12% was due to lack of proper notification by the Clerk’s Office; 21% was due to the case manager’s failure to appear; and 41% was due to the failure to file a JRSSR. As in past years, this was a great frustration for our citizen review panels, which sometimes spend hours in court waiting for the next hearing. The children of course also wait.
¾ The encouraging news, however, is that resets decreased from the previous year—866 to 331. The high rate of resets in FY 2006 was due to the transition to community based care.
Barriers to adoption
¾ According to FCR data, the main obstacles to adoption are related to the child’s wellbeing and the lack of families willing to adopt. Another significant obstacle is the lack of information about adoption given to foster parents, relatives or even the child himself.
¾ Sometimes the children are the obstacle: they do not want to be adopted for fear of betraying their families. There are other fears: a name change, maintaining contact with siblings, or the fear no one will want to adopt him or her. This “fear” is not always explored with the child.
¾ Older youth, especially if they have learning, medical, mental health issues or a history of delinquency, have difficulty getting adopted. Also, the longer the stay in foster care the greater the problem, as emotional issues may worsen as the children get older.
¾ Sometimes, when efforts are made to place children with relatives, such as grandparents, the relatives are too frail to care for the children, resulting in their return to foster care. Sometimes the siblings have to be separated— one goes home and the other stays. Others run away.
¾ Clear communication about adoption is critical. Some caretakers are afraid to adopt for fear of the child losing benefits; others are never approached.
“After having stated that she didn’t want to be adopted for the past several years, Jennifer, 15, reported to the panel that she was being adopted. Jennifer recruited her own adoptive parent. Her mother’s best friend was more than thrilled to take her as her own, but no one had ever asked her, and she did not know it was an option.”
Issues with case management
¾ Many of the case managers who come to reviews are new and have not had time to study their cases. Some do not know how to prepare for the review. Back-up documentation from health, mental health or education professionals is often missing.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 24 ¾ When cases managers have not had training related to judicial review, it is important that supervisors come to the reviews so that panels have the information necessary to make sound recommendations to the court.
¾ Turnover of case managers also has an impact on a child’s permanency. Sometimes in the transition important issues suffer from lack of attention:
“In one of our cases, the agency had been court-ordered to ensure that the child receive treatment for a hernia. The surgery was delayed for two years because of the turnover of case managers: the information just did not trickle down. In the same case, a sibling had been with a foster parent for two years. The foster parents, who had filled out an application to adopt, never heard back from the case manager about the adoption.”
Gaps in services
¾ Adoptive families. There are more children waiting to be adopted than there are pre- adoptive families. This is truer for teens. While 55% of the children reviewed had a goal of adoption, only 4% were living in pre-adoptive homes and only 31 were actually adopted.
¾ Dental care. One of the most frequent recommended orders this past year was dental services. Case managers report having significant issues with the new insurance provider ADI. They report that there is a delay in authorizing services if the child moves to a different home and in locating dentists in the area that accept ADI.
¾ Tutoring. Panels consistently order tutoring for children that are struggling academically in school. Yet this is a panel recommendation that is often disregarded. Many foster children fail the FCAT; many are held back in school. Some children who do receive tutoring still have problems in school. There is no doubt that education is critical to a successful outcome for most of these children. Educational evaluation and services to foster children should remain a top priority.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 25 SYSTEM BARRIERS
Agency compliance with Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) = 78%
Reasons for ASFA noncompliance: ASFA Compliance ¾ No case plan was in effect (42); ¾ Tasks from previous orders were not ASFA completed (84); Agency Children Comp- ¾ No reasonable efforts were made to reunify reviewed liance the family (3); ¾ No reasonable efforts to place the child % into a permanent placement (75); CFCE 131 101 77% ¾ Did not make reasonable efforts to assure CHARLEE 201 167 83% all court order visitation occurs (7), CHS 101 82 81% ¾ Case management was inadequate (73); FRC 23 18 78% ¾ Case manager did not perform tasks as HHCH 33 28 85% stated in the case plan (38). KHU 133 98 74% NTF 87 61 70% Note: More than one reason may be selected Total/Ave. 709 555 78% for each child.
Children for whom a social study report (JRSSR) was timely filed = 50%
COMPLIANCE - JRSSR Prefiling 2006 2007
# Child # Yes % # Child # Yes % CFCE 237 79 34% 242 138 58% CHARLEE 345 134 39% 380 188 50% CHS 209 59 29% 189 67 36% FRC 24 12 50% 38 14 37% HHCH 93 34 37% 59 34 58% KHU 288 104 37% 249 81 33% NTF 136 48 36% 136 125 92% Total/Ave. 1332 470 35% 1293 647 50%
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 26
Children whose cases were reset (by judicial division) = 47%
Children whose cases were reset (by agency) = 47%
Children’s cases reset
# children Resets % CFCE 131 50 (38%) CHARLEE 201 104 (52%)
CHS 101 45 (42%) FRC 23 7 (30%)
HHCH 33 11 (33%)
KHU 133 72 (54%)
NTF 87 42 (48%)
Total 709 331 (47%)
Reasons for Resets
REASONS FOR RESETS
A. Failure to notify B. Case Mgr did not appear C. No JRSSR
D. Case Mgr refused to proceed w/o DCF C. E. Parent refused to proceed 137 w/o attorney B. F. Provider agency requested A. 70 I. G. Scheduling error 40 41 H. Scheduling conflict D.1 E.3 F.38 G.3 H.8 I. Reset - other
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 27 VII. 2007 CITIZEN REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS
A. JRSSR. Community based care agencies should enforce the requirement to file the social study report at least 72 hours before the review. In 2007, social study reports were timely filed for only 50% of the children reviewed. This often results in case delays and lack of progress in a case.
B. Resets. Community based care agencies should have a central point for monitoring court hearings and ensuring the attendance of case managers. For 2007, 137 children had their cases rescheduled due to the case manager’s failure to appear.
C. Supervision of cases. When case managers are not familiar with the case, their supervisor should attend the review. Many cases must be rescheduled when the case manager is not prepared and cannot present information to the panels. In addition, there should be better supervision regarding compliance with case plans. Compliance with orders from previous reviews is also an issue.
D. Youth participation at reviews. Community based care agencies should notify foster youth of reviews, and encourage their attendance. Youth attendance is also encouraged by the courts. Many youth however, do not attend due to lack of notice or lack of transportation to reviews.
E. Disproportionality of Black children in foster care. As before- mentioned, this is national issue that is receiving much attention and about which there are recent studies. There should be more awareness and training provided on this issue.
F. Independent Living services. Only 33% of youth reviewed participated in Il services in accordance with their case plan. Given the findings from our reviews, these services should be a priority. Youth need to be involved in their case plans and encouraged to participate in IL services.
G. Reviews of youth ages 18 to 23. Once a youth reaches 18, he is outside the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court. Consequently, there are no reviews and there’s little information available regarding their status and the effectiveness of the independent living program. The Department should explore ways to monitor youth who have aged out of care.
H. Adoption. It is important to talk to foster parents, relatives and children about adoption. More than once. Children and youth need to be prepared for adoption. Older youth who do not want to be adopted often change their mind when adoption is explained. Adoption is not about babies or about adoptive parents replacing birth parents.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 28 VIII. HISTORY AND PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Our History
In 1988, the United Way of Miami spearheaded a unique initiative to address the problems in the foster care system. A task force of 150 civic leaders, mobilized to explore strategies for long-term improvements to the system, recommended the implementation of citizen review of foster care cases—a program in which citizens are trained to serve as independent, third-party reviewers and advocates for youth in the foster care system. The concept combines the need to help the courts with system oversight and the need for community involvement in the foster care system. Florida Foster Care Review Project, Inc. was created in 1989. The next year, the Florida Legislature enacted legislation that authorized citizen review panels to participate in the review process.
The name of the organization was changed in 1998 to Foster Care Review, Inc. (FCR). FCR, one of three existing programs in the State, has grown into an organization of 23 staff and 110+ volunteers. FCR’s $1.6 million budget (2007) comes from the State of Florida, The Children’s Trust, North Dade Medical Foundation, United Way of Miami-Dade, and private grants and contributions.
Statutory authority
In 1980, Congress enacted Public Law 96-272, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act. This landmark legislation, the foundation for the current child welfare system, placed significant responsibility on the courts to review child welfare cases on a regular basis, and required States to make reasonable efforts towards permanency. Since then, many States have elected to implement citizen review panels to assist the courts with the increasing demands in monitoring of children.
Almost 20 years later, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) made even more progressive changes by shortening timeframes for permanency and focusing on safety, wellbeing of the child and adoption. ASFA also established performance standards and a state accountability system, whereby states face financial penalties for failure to demonstrate improvements in child outcomes. FCR assists the State’s compliance with these federal statutes by conducting case reviews of children, making judicial determinations of reasonable efforts, and by tracking agency compliance with ASFA.
The Florida citizen review enabling legislation is found at F. S. 39.701 and 39.702. Section 701 provides the requirements for conducting a judicial review by a court or citizen review panel, and section 702 outlines the requirements for administering the program.
Judicial Reviews of Children by Citizen Review Panels
F.S. 39.701 requires a judicial review at least every six month for each child in the dependency system. The purpose of the review is to monitor the child’s safety, wellbeing and progress towards permanency. After each review, the
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 29 panels make recommendations to the Juvenile Court based on the information provided at the review. By law, these are limited to the dispositional options available to the court: to return the child to the parent, continue the child in out of home care for a specified period of time, or initiate termination of parental rights for subsequent placement in an adoptive home. Any party objecting to the panel’s findings and recommended orders may request an exception hearing before the court.
Review hearings are set by the Clerk of the 11th Judicial Circuit Court on the fifth and tenth month after the child enters foster care. A permanency hearing is scheduled on the twelfth month before the Court. Each of FCR’s 18 citizen review panels meets one day per month to conduct 10 to 12 reviews, which generally take approximately 40 minutes, depending on the number of children in a case. Hearings are held 18 days out of the month at the Citizen Review Courtroom located on the grounds of the Juvenile Justice Center. Staff support is provided by FCR review specialists, who compile the documentation for review, facilitate the review process, enter individual case information into the FCR database, and prepare the findings and recommendations submitted to the Court for approval.
In 2005, FCR began to hold special reviews of youth ages 16 and over to ensure that they were being prepared for independent living. Five panels were trained to hear these reviews, which can last one hour or more. Starting in 2008, all children ages 13 and over will be included in this project.
The review serves as a barometer of case management, continually stimulating progress and improvements to ensure that needed services are provided, that the child is appropriately and safely placed and that the tasks identified in the case plan are being performed. Upon suspicion of risk to a child, or in the event of serious noncompliance with orders, the citizen review panels request a post- judicial review before the Court for immediate judicial action.
Data Collection and Reporting
FCR’s database was designed in 1999 and developed with input from child welfare system partners. It serves multiple functions: the tracking of individual case information, the production of reports and recommended orders on each case, and the production of summary reports with aggregate data. With assistance from the Children’s Trust, FCR’s database will be upgraded in 2008.
The review process provides a unique source for quantitative and qualitative information regarding children in foster care—information not readily available through any other mechanism. Review data can assist in identifying the needs of children as well as critical information in making sound policy, funding, and planning decisions for individual children and groups of children.
Once customized to perform system level tracking, FCR reports can be used as quality assurance tools by public and private child welfare agencies, the Juvenile Courts, the Legislature and others to improve practice and develop responsive policies and budgets. The results are better decisions, better compliance with
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 30 federal and state laws and improved outcomes for children in the foster care system. FCR data reports can:
• Monitor the extent to which policy and practice are being implemented according to laws, regulations and expectations in a timely fashion; • Determine compliance with the requirements of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), monitoring case by case the safety and well being of children in care, their progress toward permanency, and timeframes for permanency decision-making; • Monitor casework performance to determine if reasonable efforts and critical casework activities are occurring timely and in accordance with federal and state laws and local standards and expectations; • Inform decision-makers about potential case and systemic problems; and • Hold agencies and professionals accountable for the care and treatment of children by monitoring quality and delivery of services.
Volunteer Training
Quality citizen reviews depend on FCR volunteers that are highly knowledgeable of the foster care system and statutory requirements, including areas of child development, substance abuse, mental health, case management, court process, and community resources. Volunteers must also be culturally responsive during their work at review hearings, and must know how to build trust and engage the meaningful participation of foster children and their families.
FCR volunteers are required to attend 25 hours of pre-service training before they can participate in a citizen review panel. In addition, all volunteers must attend a minimum of 10 hours of continuing education. Training of volunteers is a collaborative effort that involves FCR staff, local child abuse experts, foster parents, DCF, the Guardian ad Litem Program, and private child welfare agencies.
Florida’s Citizen Review Programs
One of the statutory mandates in the citizen review legislation is “to ensure consistency of operations of citizen review programs throughout the State.” To that end, the Florida Association of Citizen Review for Dependent Children (FACRDC), a nonprofit organization, was created in the year 2000 by the directors of the different programs throughout the State.
The role of the state association is to promote citizen review statewide, to ensure consistency of operations, and to provide technical assistance to developing programs. The association has developed uniform standards of operation and data collection.
From the creation of FCR in 1989, Florida’s citizen review programs experienced significant growth. In 1999, a report written by the Office of the State Courts Administrator to the House Committee on Family Law and Children reported 10 programs that were either operating or in the start-up process: Charlotte,
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 31 Collier, Miami-Dade, Duval, Hernando, Lee, Manatee, Marion, Palm Beach, and Polk Counties. Six of these programs received funds from the Florida Legislature in FY 2000-2001: Duval, Hernando, Manatee, Marion, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties. Since that time, several of the programs closed due to lack of support from their community, the legislature or the judiciary. The only programs currently operating are in Miami-Dade, Manatee and Collier counties.
National Foster Care Review Coalition
A national association of citizen review programs, National Foster Care Review Coalition, was created in 2006 to promote the use of citizen review programs nationwide. The association is working on a uniform data collection tool and training materials for programs. In addition, they are working with the Children’s Bureau and national child advocacy foundations to explore ways that the program can assist the Child and Families Services Reviews (CFSR).
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 32
IX. BOARD OF DIRECTORS – January 2007
President of the Board Christopher M. Hutchins, CPA - David S. Mandel, Esq. - Partner, Mandel Certified Public Accountant, Berenfeld, & Mandel LLP (1997) Spritzer, Shechter & Sheer, P.A. Adoptive Parent. (2001) Barbara Rostov - Retired Social Worker. FCR volunteer since 1990 Past President (2003) Michael A. Samway, Esq. – Deputy General Counsel, YAHOO! Inc. (1998) Stephanie A. Russo, Esq. – Attorney, Broad and Cassel (2007) Vice President Katherine W. Exell, Esq. – Attorney, Dannaliz Segrera. – Owner, Photo Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg Eaton Offset an Impressions of Miami (2007) Meadow Olin & Perwin, P.A. Child advocate (2002) Barbara Thomlison, Ph.D. - Professor, School of Social Work, & Director, Treasurer Institute for Children & Families at Risk, Brian F. Misiunas – Certified Public Florida International University (2002) Accountant for Pinchasik, Strongin, Muskat, Stein & Co (2005) Shari A. Witkoff, M.D.M. – Dentist; community volunteer (2004) Secretary Mayda Prego, Esq. Attorney, Chevron Products Company (2004)
Allen Benowitz – President, Worldwide Executive Director Videoconferencing (2004) Ana Maria Pozo, JD - (2001) Abby Cynamon, Esq. – Attorney, Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court (2007)
David A. Duckenfield – The Balsera Communications Group (2001)
Marlin Ebbert – Community Volunteer (2007)
Markenzy Lapointe – Attorney, Boies, Schiller & Flexner (2003)
Jason Liberty. – Vice President, Audit, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines (2007)
MaryAnne Lukacs – General Magistrate, Family Court. FCR volunteer for 10 years. (2005)
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 33 X. VOLUNTEERS
Linda Abrams Magaly Alvarez Laura Lazopoulous Alexandra Baena Essie Lee Winda Baldwin Maritza Lera Barbara Bargman Daniel Lomoriello Jorge Bargman Pauline Lowe Betty Barrios Patricia Marx Judy Bash Gloria McDaniel Thelma Berg Genovev Mendoza Carol Burnstein Michael Milton Wendy Bolz Brandhilda Moore Fredericka Brown Frances Moore Steven Butler Gail Nansen Doris Capri Ines Neuhaus Caridad Castro Dulce Noguera Sol Center Zoila Perez Chanquet Billie Diamond Dianne Peterson Walter Dorfman Lisa Pittman Jan Draper Camilla Ponticorvo Roberta Ehrenreich Cathy Praiser Maria Fletcher Jonathan Reidi Peter Forrest Oscar Resek Martha Garcia Ronald Rivers Judy Genao Robert Rosen Bruce Giles Barbara Rostov Evelyn Grey Judith Salazar Amy Halsey Sue Samuels Claudia Hauri Barbara Sangetti Denise Haye Sheree Savar Linda Hertz Michael Scher Alberta Horton Wendy Sejour Edith Hudson Danielle Selem Peggy Hudson Joan Smith Andrea Hueson Nancy Spencer Dorothy Isriel Mark Steel Ruby Jacob Ann Swaner Mary Jessie Irene Thaw Nadine Johnson Nita Thomas Renee Jones Betty Tibbetts Robert Jones Jiska Timmer Sharon Jones Claire Warren Claire Jordi Madge Warren Ellen Kanner Antonette Washington Nancy Katzoff Judy Webb Herman Klemick Glenda Whatley Priscilla Klomparens Anita Youngkin Margaret Kunitz Stanley Zamor
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 34
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 35 WE PRAY FOR CHILDREN
We pray for children And we pray for those who sneak popsicles before supper, whose nightmares come in the daytime, who erase holes in math workbooks, who will eat anything, who can never find their shoes. who have never seen a dentist, who aren't spoiled by anybody, And we pray for those who go to bed hungry and cry themselves who stare at photographers from behind to sleep, who live and move, but have no barbed wire, who can't bounce down the being. street in a new pair of sneakers, who never "counted potatoes," We pray for children who want to be who are born in places we wouldn't be carried and for those who must, for those caught dead, who never go to the circus, we never give up on and for those who who live in an X-rated world. don't get a second chance.
We pray for children For those we smother with love, who bring us sticky kisses and fistfuls of and for those who will grab the hand of dandelions, who hug us in a hurry and anybody kind enough to offer it. forget their lunch money. (Anonymous) And we pray for those who never get dessert, who have no safe blanket to drag behind them, who watch their parents watch them die, who can't find any bread to steal, who don't have any rooms to clean up, whose pictures aren't on anybody's dresser, whose monsters are real.
We pray for children who spend all their allowance before Tuesday, who throw tantrums in the grocery store and pick at their food, who like ghost stories, who shove dirty clothes under the bed, and never rinse out the tub, who get visits from the tooth fairy, who don't like to be kissed in front of the carpool, who squirm in church and scream in the phone, whose tears we sometimes laugh at and whose smiles can make us cry.
FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 36 CharlieGrist State of Florida Governor Departmentof Childrenand Families Robert A. Buttenrorth Secretary
June10,2008
JudyGroos, Executive Director Citizen'sFoster Care Review Board lnc. CollierCounty Courthouse 3301Tamiami Trail East, Bldg L Naples,Florida 34112
Re:The 2007Annual Citizen Review Report
DearMs. Groos:
Thankyou foi yourcontinuous commitment to improvingFlorida's child protection system. Pleaselet your board and panel members know that the work you do providescritical insightsinto the systemof carein Colliercounty, as wellas childprotection trends across Florida.
I am in receiptof the 2007Citizens Foster Care Review Board annual report and will share thisreport with Department of Childrenand Families (DCF) Suncoast Regional Administrator,Circuit 20 CircuitAdministrator, and the ChiefExecutive Officer for Children'sNetwork of SouthwestFlorida.
I lookfonruard to continuedcollaboration. lf you haveany questions, please feel free to contactMukweso Mwenene at (850)922-0510 or [email protected].
Sincerely, (rn^tU,tt; PatriciaA. Badland Director Officeof FamilySafety cc: NickCox, Region Director, Suncoast Region CookieColeman, Circuit Administrator, DCF Circuit 20 Naderehsalim, cEo, children'sNetwork of southwestFrorida's
1317Winewood Boulevard, Tattahassee, Florida 32399-0700
Mission:Protect the Vulnerable, Promote Strong and Economically Self-Sufficient Families, and AdvancePersonal and Family Recovery and Resiliency Citizen'sFoster Care Review Board Inc.
Collier Countv Florida
Board of Directors
Annual Meeting
Februarv28. 2008
3301E. TamiamiTrail - NaplesFL 34112 (239)2s2-2740 (239)774-9654 fax [email protected] March,2008
EXECUTIVESUMMARY CaseActivitv: Therewere no significantdifferences between the cases in 2007and in recentyears. . Thenumber of casesheard by CFCRBwas down for thefourth straight year o Substanceabuse remains the primary reason for children entering the dependencysystem o Judicialreviews were well attended by all parties . Guardiansad Litem(GALs) were assigned on a greaterpercentage of cases . Continuanceswererequired onTo/o of cases . Threeobjections were filed to recommendationsof the panel(less than 1%)
Gommunicationsand Coordination: Our ExecutiveDirector (ED) and several board members spent a greatdeal of time workingto improvecommunications. Quarterly Dependency Group meetings were scheduled,attended by, and memorializedin writingby our ED. All partieswere solicitedfor agenda items and issues were discussed with input freely given by all. Thesemeetings were held January 23, May 3, August30, and November 8, andhave continuedinto 2008. ln early2007, separate meetings were scheduled with Radha Srinivasan, DCF/Child WelfareLegal Services; MaryAnn Savage, Family Preservation Services/Program Director;and George Glatt, DCF/Collier Operations Program Administrator to workon improvingthe coordination between all parties. We, along with other representatives fromthe Collier Dependency Group met with Nick Cox, DCF Regional Director/SuncoastRegion and Cookie Coleman, District 8 Administratoron 1119107 to makethem aware of theCitizen Review Panel in CollierCounty and to express concernsabout problems with DCF and its partners. Throughout the year, Judge Keith Kyleprovided encouragement to all partiesto attendmeetings and work together to solveproblems.
Schedulinq: Petitionsand cite sheets have not been consistently submitted in a timelymanner, resultingin partiesnot being properly noticed and causing last minute docket changes. Thiswas a majorfrustration during 2007 and continues into 2008. These documents needto be inthe handsof theCollier County Clerk of Courtsno laterthan 10 days beforethe scheduled Judicial Review. In addition,when a futureJR date is established at thecurrent JR, and parties are given notice, it is imperativethat the case be heardon thatday and not rescheduled. lt appears that coordination between FPS and DCF Legal needsimprovement. We arehopeful that the issue has been raised and is nowfully understoodby all,so that this can be resolved. Volunteers: Duringcalendar 2007 in-service training was offered on thefollowing subjects: February- Professionalism March- DCF/QualityAssurance Management April- DependencyLaw (Parent Counsel made presentation. DCF Counsel was unwillingto participate) May- UnderstandingComprehensive Behavioral Health Assessments October- The HotlineProcess November- Updatewith panel members on taking notes and formulating recommendations
Panelmembers must attend at leastfour in-servicetraining sessions per year (6 hours minimum)to maintaintheir status as activepanel members. We welcomedfour new panefmembers in 2007and another four in early2008. Newmembers were sworn in on February1,2008 by the Honorable Keith Kyle. Total volunteers now number 26. Ghallenqes:
1.)Expenses: We are toldthat all Floridaagencies will be forcedto maintainor reduceexpenses. We playan importantrole in maintainingexpenses with our nearlyall-volunteer organization.lt is impossibleto estimatewhat the cost might be for additionaljudges or magistratesif notfor the CFCRB.We conservativelyestimate the valueof thesein-kind volunteerhours at $40,000to $50,000per year.
Withour volunteers we arealso able to spendas muchtime reviewing a caseas is dictatedby thefacts and testimony. Volunteers read the socialstudi6s and GAL reportsin advance.Updates and testimony of the partiesare heard during the judicial review.ln 2007the averagereview lasted 23 minutes.The most time consuming case took62 minutes,and some cases took as litileas five minutes. 2.) GaseManaqement Recommendations: Frequentturnover and fragmented communications with DCF and its partner agencies c€usesdelays in gettingcase plans approved and parents commencing work on tasks. We areoften conducting the five month judicial review with asses*r"nls notcompleted, recommendationsnot available, and very little progress to report.We believethat a greater senseof urgencymust be conveyedto allparties. Piompt development of case planswith clearly defined tasks and measurements are needed, so thatparents understandwhat they must do to successfullycomplete their case. We alsoneed prompt, effectivereferrals and timely follow-up to be surethe partiesare in compliance.
Sinceso manycases involve substance abuse, we mustget assessments done with treatmentcommencing as quicklyas possible.we alsoneed to start earlyin thecase withrandom screens at leasttwice monthly so that relapses can be carghtearly in the casewith interventions occurring well before the case approaches permanency. We believethat delays and continuances can also be reducedif DCFand/or its partners couldverify and document that parents are notifiedof theirright to counselearly in the case,allowing eligible parents to maketimely application for courtappointed counsel. Apparentmisunderstandings areoften the cause of delaysand continuances.
3.) Reductionin Numberof Gases: In the ExecutiveSummary that accompanied last year's (2006) annual report, we expressedconcern about the apparent number of complaintsthat resulted in DCF offeringvoluntary services with no follow-up.Unless there are subsequent complaints thatwarrant intervention, no caseis evercreated. Conceptually, it is a goodthing for familiesto solvetheir problems without becoming part of the "system".However, we wouldrecommend that "preventive" services be offeredrather than "voluntary". In this way,follow-up could be builtinto the systemso thata reviewis madeafter a reasonable periodof time(three to sixmonths) to be surethat referrals are acted upon and that all reasonablesteps have been taken to assurethe safetyof thechildren. 4.) IndependentLivinq: Teenagersoften languish in the system,then age out with little preparation for the future. Chifdrenwho are not in licensedfoster care arenot eliqiblerg for servicesto preparethem for adulthood. In CollierCounty most teenagers who are not medically needylive with relatives or non-relativesin unlicensed care. As a result,they rr. not eligiblefor independentliving training classes, scholarships, or subsidized living expenses.A collaborationof concernedcitizens from CFCRB, GAL, Foster Care Councilof SW Florida,Children's Home Society, Children's Network, and Voices for Kidswas assembled in 20OTto lookfor ways to provideassistance to theseyoungsters. We areseeking private funding and hope to makelimited services avaitable in 2008. 5.) Politics: fn late2007 and continuing into 2008 we havebeen "under attack" by DCF. Collieris theonly county in thecircuit to havea citizenreview board and this may be the reason thatDCF would prefer that we notexist. We havebeen criticized and some panel membersridiculed in an apparentattempt to discreditthe CFCRB.We believeon- balancethe children in CollierCounty benefit from having involved, committed citizens reviewingthe work of Stateagencies and their partners. DCF and its contracted agencieshave undergone tremendous changes in the past three years. Turnover of casemanagers, protective investigators and child welfare legaf representatives remains a majorconcern. we havea commoninterest in protectingtne children of collier Countyand we willcontinue to workon communicationsand coordination with all parties.
6.) Diversitv: We havebeen criticized because the racialor ethnicmake-up of ourvolunteer panels is not representativeof the.community. Currently only two of ourtwenty-six volunteers are membersof racialminority groups. We acknowledgethis as a problemand welcome inputand suggestions. In 2005 we establishedan informalspeaker's bureau and we havesought opportunities to improve community awareness and recruit new volunteers. We willcontinue these efforts. Volunteers must be availablefor fourto fivehours on oneor moreWednesdays per month. Additional time is neededto preparefor judicial reviewsand to attendin-service training. Unfortunately, this eliminates many working peopleand reduces the poolfrom which we canattract new volunteers. 7.) GonflictGounsel: Thechange from appointed private attorneys to representationthrough the public Defender'soffice has just taken place as of January,2008. Currenl/thisis seenas a challgngeonly because it is onemore change in a systemthat has had very litle stabilityin the pastthree years. We arealso aware inat an appealhas been filed and, dependingon theresult, additional organizational and/or operational changes may occur.
99TT-"lts regardinglhis reportshould be directedto JudyGroos, Executive Director, CFCRB by mailat 3301Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FLg4112, by pnon" to 23g-252- 2740,or byemail to [email protected] 2007- 2008CFCRB Board of Directors
FranKieselhorst President
EdwardFerguson, Ph.D. Vice President
RaquelGonzales, M.S.W., L.C.S.W Treasurer
WillieWest , BS.,MSN Secretary
StanleyAppelbaum Director
RussellW. Groos Director
SuzanneLanier, JD Director
Kath4mLieb Hunter, B.S.W., C.D.V.F. Director
VeoraLittle, CRNA Director 2OO7- 2OO8 STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Member Appointment Order to Rotate Date
StanAppelbaum 9t15t05 J Bob Bosle 9trst05 4 Ed Bransilver I/1t07 7 Jan Eustis r0t18/07 l0 LizHayes 9/2003 I Fran Kieselhorst 4n9/07 9 RichardMeadows n/2004 2 Rob Nossen L/t/07 8 SusanRutherford 10/2006 6 Willie West 9t15tjs 5 00002
DR-14 Consumer'sCertificate of Exemption R.04/05 02127107 lssuedPursuant to Chapter212, Florida Statutes DEPARTMENT Of REVENUE 85-8012541482C-4 CertificateNumber Effective
This certifiesthat
CITIZENSFOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD INC 33O I TAMIAMI TRL E BLDG L NAPLES FL 341 12-3974
llEtlrilr lmportantInformation DR-14 for ExemptOrganizations R.04/05 l\)i '{/zt
\f I/ 3i'A,i''iis.)I
provide Youmust all vendorsand suppliers with an exemptioncertificate before making tax-exempt purchases. SeeRule 12A-1.038, Ftorida Administrative Code (FAC). 2. YourConsumer's ceftificateof Exemptionis to be usedsolely by yourorganization for yourorganization,s customarynonprof it activities.
3. Purchasesmade by an individualon behalfof theorganization are taxable, even if theindividual will be reimbursedby theorganization.
Thisexemption applies onlyto purchasesyour organization makes. The sale or leaseto othersby your organization of tangiblepersonal property, sleeping accommodations or otherreal property is taxabie.your organizationmust register, andcollect and remit siles and usetax on suchtaxable transactions. Note: Churcnes areexempt from this requirement exceptwhen they are the lessorof realproperty (Rule 12A-1.070, FAc). 5. It is a criminalotfense to fraudulentlypresent this certificate to evadethe paymentof satestax. underno circumstancesshould this certificate be usedfor the personal benefit of anyindividual. Violators will be liablefor paymentof thesales tax plus penalty a of 200%of the tax, and may be subjectto convictionof a thirddegree felony.Any violationwill necessitate the revocationof thiscenificate. 6. lf youhave questions regarding yourexemption cedificate, please contacl the ExemptionUnit of Central Registrationat 850-487'4130.The mailing address is POBOX 64g0, Tallahassee, FL 32314-6480. Citizen'sFoster Care Review Board Board Of DirectorsAnnual Meetins
February28,2008
CALL TO ORDER
MINUTES
OLD BUSINESS
1) Generalupdate on CollierDependency System
2) FinancialUpdate
NEW BUSINESS
1) Statistics/FinancialReview
2) TeenTask Force
3) Resignationof SuzanneLanier
4) Election of New Officers -
Citizen's Foster Care Review Board General Membership Meeting Minutes February 14, 2008
.he generalmembership meeting was calledto orderby Fran Kieselhorstat 5:30
Present: Ed Bransilver,Louise Dowd, JanEustis, Jean Gasvoda, David Goldstein,Russ Groos, Liz Hayes,Fran Kieselhorst,Richard Meadows, Susan Nordbeck, Rob Nossen,Joan Reynolds, Sue Rutherford, tisa Ware, JenniferWeidenbruch, Willie West,Don White, EileenWhite
Proxy voteshave been received by: Bob Bogle
Absent: Terry Abraham-Whalley, StanAppelbaum, Bob Bogle, SuzanneMeiners-Levy, Meryl Rorer, Jennifer Schell
Leave of Absence:Kay Jasso,Milt Sokoll
CurrentMembership total is 26 PanelVolunteers - 2 thoughare on leaveof absencefor medical reasons we had 18 voting membersin attendance,plus 1 proxy vote, which representecia quorum.
Roll Call was calledby ExecutiveDirector, Judy Groos
The minuteswere readby SecretaryWillie West. there were no reports from committees
The primary purposeof the generalmembership meeting was to reaffirm membersto the Board of Ballots were circulatedto eachvoting Directors. memberpresent. Fran announcedthat Suzanne submitted her resignation, Lanier recen'y so her name was stricken from the ballot.
Fran Kieselhorst StanAppelbaum ph.D. Edward Ferguson, RussellGroos Raquel Gonzalez,MSW, LMSW Suzanne+anierr=p Willie WestBS., MSN KathrynLieb-Hunter, BSW, CDVF VeoraLittle, CRNA
The vote was as follows:
Fran Kieselhorst(19) StanAppelbaum (17) Edward Ferguson,ph.D. (lg) RussellGroos (1g) Raquel Gonzalez,Msw, LMSW (lg) Suanne+anie++g Willie WestBS., MSN (tg) Kathryn Lieb-Hunter,BSW, CDVF (16) VeoraLittle, CRNA (lg)
Additionally, 3 voteswere case for RobNossen,1 vote for Bob Bogle, 1 vote fro Sue Rutherford for RichardMeadows and I vote
Electionof officerswill beheld at theannual boardof directorsmeeting on February 2g,200g. Next GeneralMembership Meeting _ February 19,2009 We adjoumedat 5:40PM.
).espectfullysubmitted,
Willie West, Secretary Citizen's Foster Care Review Board GeneralMembership Meeting Minutes February lS, 2007
The general membershipmeeting was calledto order by Fran Kieselhorstat 5:35
Present: Terry Abraham-Whalley,Stan Ap1 Dowd, Leon Droll, JanEustis, Jean Gasvod LizHayes, Fran Kieselhorst, Dennis Leffert Gil Rashbaum,Sue Rutherford, Lisa Ware.
Proxy voteshave peter beenreceived by: Kraley and Milt Sokoll
Absent:Bob Bogle, Fd Bransilver,peter Kraley, SusanNordbeck, Ralph Segall,James Smith, Milton Sokoll, Lee yosha
current Active Membershiptotal is 32 panervolunteers.
we had 23 Yotingmembers in attendance,plus 2 proxy votes, quorum. which representeda
The primary purposeof the generalmembership meetingwas to electmembers to Boardof Directors. Ballots the were circuratedto ,u.r, uoiirrg-"-u"r present. The vote was unanimousto electthe nomineesto the Board of Directors. Fran Kieselhorst StanAppelbaum EdwardFerguson, ph.D. RussellGroos Raquel Gowalez,Msw, LMSW SuzanneLanier. JD Willie WestBS., MSN KathrynLieb_Hunter, BSW, CDVF VeoraLittle, CRNA
Election of Officers will be held at the annualboard of directors 2007. meetingon February22-
Next General MembershipMeeting _ February 21,200g.
We adjournedat 5:40 pM.
Respectfullysubmitted.
Willie West, Secretarv CFCRB Annual Board of DirectorsMeeting March 8,2007 Minutes
Present:Stan Appelbaum,Ed Ferguson, Raquel Gonzalez,RussGroos, Fran Kieselhorst,Veora Little Absent: SuzanneLanier, Kathryr Lieb-Hunter,Willie West Guest:Judy Groos
Call to Order 9:05Fran. Approval of minutesfrom (Ed/Veora)
Update on Meeting with Fran gave an updateo" D. Monaco. o Schedulingissue appears to be resolved. o Thereis now a processto senda caseto thejudge with panelrepresentation o We have had a meeting with the chairs to discuJsabou" pror.r, o specialcases will be_"red-flagged" *o uro,rgti;-M;;"* savage,s attentionimmediately. Judy will iollow up in one week for resolution service held 2 / 15 / 07 to stressincreased professionalism ;#T'"ffi?fn- by Board Members Stanwill get info formulatea specific list of questions.-sJa.,stanwill arranoanansep A rnecrinn,,;+Lrr^^-- qlu;;*"dJtffit:".ilHt":ueshons' ameeting with George Veora will contactC- fil"j';J::T,'."ii:::::::: yiy::' ylll .,.^*l ;; il*"nth as been stagn anr f,."r"ffi;;:;,:,*."se,nodecrease.#;;rilffi ;#T:lilTi,:.il:ffi ffi:
Russwill rp"uk
and Stan hu"'" will m""twitt C"o 9!g!qop-{- dilier5aF
ExecutiveSummary Board"tStH Nl.mb"t -anrl input soon,so the final can bg oa"rr"r.rl co-++^ r-+ a r_--. andsent to Ct. A{min andihe i ve bylawsas reuisid: (V Election of Officeri Motion to acceptslate;a;ffi;.s asfollows:(Stan/Russ) FranKieselhorst - president Ed Ferguson- Vice president Raquel Gonzalez- Treasurer Xrillie West- Sec Translation of will contactM to seehow thisis CitizensFoster Care ReviewBoard ExecutiveCommittee Meeting May 10,2007 9:30AM
Ed Ferguson,Judy Groos, Fran Kieselhorst, Wiltie West
This was a specialmeeting called to discuss the recentnew bill HB 70g3 from the Fl. Legislaturethat proposesa change in the way parentsare represented in dependency :tedby January, the public defendersoffice
are concernedthe effect this may have on
gefenderhas the authority to determinewhat is ft:'":::ilij:^rT:"r_llandhas the ability:|!,0,J.0.,1. to assign ;;il;;;ffi;"#;HT:; bestfor practice.:T:,i:r"rtr regrstryor private
The clerk of courts will determineindigency. Judy checked a new application with the clerk of courts for but they do not have-anyinformationuitt i, time. Judy will monitor this situation,get a continueto finar oraft of bil, unJ[..p'** *ro.*.a. Ed announcedthat Children,sNetwork receiveda one-time mentarhearth $400,000allotment to fill :i,illffi:lltr orwhich thev wlr move izoo,ooo
Judy also announcedthat "l':1*:tT';::#lt a new ChiefJudgehas been appointed duties in Julv. and will assumehis
we hada lengthy discussionabout the In{eneldentLiving program. utilizedby qualifying It is not being children This may ui ouea .*.ru-r beingmade aware problems:children arenot ofth" progru*,--rtird."n do no *""i," of gettingto meetings: orend: childrenhave no way ciilJren n"Jlnr"ntives to g;.--w. Salimthat there ;+ir.. havealso been told by Ms is little fundingf"; Roadto tni"p.no"n..,,program stipendfor thosewho arein "dster whichpays a and.ontinu"'*iii their education. relativeand non-relative.carg "are"qualify chirdrenin !o-1ot for ilri, .rilr"rgr, theycan attend offeredprior to agingout at r 8. w'rie theclasses rrii tn"ric#;i.=" b:Flq inro thesech'dren with theseand o*to waysof helping ftourgms, E^J*"**^*"t LAc had this andstan may havea report. (aicording donea studyon ," st"r, wasever "i#;a generated). list to Judvof lastmonths children's Nerwork Fir:#iff:.a statisticsof kidsin careand Ed announcedthat the DCF building on Airport road will be closing. It is not known wherethey will move.
Judy will alsostart keepingstatistics on the 15-18year old children,tracking licensed care,relative andnon-relative care,and protectivesupervision for independJntliving status.
Judy will starttracking l5-18 yearolds.
We adjournedat l0:45 pM. CFCRB Boardof DirectorsMeeting October4,2007 Minutes Present:Ed Ferguson,Russ Groos, Fran Kieselhorst, Veora Little, Willie West Absent: StanAppelbaum, Raquel Gonzalez, suzanne Lanier, Kathryn Lieb-Hunter ExecutiveDirerctor: Judy Groos
Call to Order 9:10AM (Fran Ed/Willie
Financialreport Judy reportedthat we haveabout $ havebeen minimal at about$260 for this year. It is felt that our goal shouldbe $2,000at all times in the treasur Fundraising In view of our limited funds,*, h J-"dI that.the^Community 3:..::::1 1:Tl :enortef Foundationwi'' give grants forsp eci fi c p rrpt, we c o ul d qu uri ry"rol"# ilil;lffiH"Xl: :ffi l# and recorderwhen "r. needed. fi we do not want to rely-oncourt smartfor recording of reviews. we have 3r volunteersbut it was rettitratthey stroulanot be solicited for funds. It was agreedthat we would : o Do 50/50 lottery ticketsat annualdinner o Ask steeringcommittee to look into communityresources such as Staplesto solicit the supplieswe need. . y:tli: fromrrinity by the coveto seewhat wevv v mightrrrrSlrL beug ablel::iT:*:ito request from theirgranting prtgru-. (Judyemailed susan i0/4/07 and calledhef I2/l g/07and left nisri".t Mission Statement Itwasdecidedthaiffi needto be revie New Meetingwith Nick Cox (Sun.ou, DCF/Collier - JudgeKyle,,Stan {or! Appelbaum(LAC); LorrieMoore and Lori Tomaselri Dependency (GAL), Betsycard (Juvenite clerk), l.ii.o virale andcary cliff (attorneys),and Franand Judy (GFCRB) to discusscontinuing urru, oi"oncem identifiedby CFCRBin drp.nd.n.y (fortr..are system)issues. Dependency Quarterly This group continuesto meet t" Meeting Report dependencycourt. Fran reported that arthoughr.rotution orproblem areas agreedupon, we find are tha11!eyare rarery implement"a- rn... is a major disconnectbetween legal (DiF) preservatrorr. andFamily prunand Judy will the Some Nov. *..iinn. Suggestionsto Problemsat Judicial*"" AddressJR Concems scheduledand cancelled becausereports are not completed; rapid casemanagers who turn over in arenot properlytrained and lack prop"i rupr*ision preparedfor reviews; arenot legalerrors/omissions are ,;;;Jq inaccurate, incompletesocial studies reportsare submitted; Fl. statuiesare not foilowed. It wasdecided that the panels wouldbegin to list theareas of concernin recomrnendation a s:,:i:ffT:ll:r^*e form.This *'iu. discussedatour Novemberin-service for paner members. we w'r "n"o*urJ"u"i",*Xrl# nini. CN senttheir trainers to observea JR but we have 'een had no feedback from thern Task Force strumentalin organizing a task force to old who are in relative or non-relative ependentLiving program.The goal is to ,e adults. Judy and Fran have actedas Volunteer Recruitment b)r word o{mouth. Fran will ask at G. Contacts Theret'asueenffio1liertod.ependencyissuesbythemedia. we feel that statelegislative supportwould arsobe usefur. veora knows Burt Saunders. use of media must be cautionary but a guestcommentary, which cannotbe altered,might be attempted to bring someattention to areasof concern. Willie will make an attemptat gettingsomething written.
Adjourned 10:30AM Citizen'sFoster Care Review Board Recordof Income/Expenses
January1, 2007- December31, 2007
OpeningCheckbook Balance: (1t1to7) $2,647.39
Deposits: BingoProceeds $2s4.00 Misc.(Encore Group) $50.00 Total Deposits: $304.00
Expenses: AccountingFees $160.00 AnnualFilings $71.25 AnnualRecognition Night (2006) Calendars $650.00 Meetings $167.41 Misc. $57.16 Office Supplies/Expenses Training/Education $383.77 Total Expenses $239.16 $1,728.75
Balanceas of 12t31t07 $1,222.64 # of Gases/#of Ghildren
I 538
tl # of Cases ,/ I # of children ,"I This chart representsall cases/children heard at Panel JudicialReviells in 2007 (3 I9 Cases/538 Children)
# of Judicial Reviews # of Children Involved 2007 319(3.6% Decreaset 538 2006 331 (21% decrease) 564 2005 419(109% decrease) 764 2004 470 (5.7%decrease) 811 2003 498 915
Information obtained from Children's Network of SouthwestFlorida reflect an casesfrom Jluarv _ Decembet 2007 for coflier co,rnry. However,f:::::.:-"1.11 :1u. ]r our figures once again reflect a decrease(3.6%). w" thesenumbers but will continue ".. "rluL"tl'll.orr.il. to track the trends to be sure that casesproceed as agreedwith the first two Judicial Reviews being referred to the CFCRB and the third review being conductedby the DependencyCourt Judge. I # of Months in Gare 132 140 ; i 120 100 80 60 E- - 12r\,r";rht 40 2t ir 13- 24trlbnths 20 r:25 - 36 lvlonths d tr 37 - 48 lVbnths IVlonthsin Care a 49 - 60 filbnths g0 - 12 fVbnths 132 tr 61+ lr/lonths r 13- 24ltlonths 79 tr 25 - 36lrbnths 24 U 37 - 48 Sionths 18 a 49 - 60 ltbnths 5 Et61+ lr/lonths 20
We compared the 2007 experiencewith the last severalyears. There was a significant increase(l l 3%) in casesopen twelve monthsor less. ihir ir consistentwith our belief that the number of new casesincreased this year.
Another trend we are seeing is that casesare being closed soonerthan in the past. Since the goal is permanency,this appearsto be a very positive trend. we are somewhatconcerned that it may partially be a result of caseplans that are less rigorous than in the past. We will continue to follow the numbersof casesopening and closing and will also note casesthat re-openwithin a year of closure. o Primary Reason for Entry into Gare 250
2()()
15()
1()()
5(,
o 2(J07
Abandonment t8
Ahre-Sexul t3
Cbild Elehavior
DeeedP{ent Domestic Wrolence
I Incu@rated Ptrent
E Mental Health (Ptrent)
I Neglect
I Srbstmce Ahse
Other Combo
As in previous years! substanceabuse is the overwhelming factor in children entering the dependencysystem. There was a decreasein the number of children entering the systemdue to domestic violence. We've been told that families involved in domestic violence are being referred to altemative programs. There was a disturbing increasein the number of children entering the systemdue to physical abuse. Goal
"l +97-'-'"--'
113
105 100
100
80 c E P ()t E 60 EfReunification t+ IAdoption I EContinued gCancelled 40 34 IPGDC EPPFWR IAP P LA 20 ESAMP I lconcurrent 1 0
Goal EtReunification 105 lA doption 100 tfContinued 39 []Cancelled IPG DC 9 E PPFW R n I A PPLA 34 ESA MP 137 lConcurrent
Although the numbers are relatively small, the goal of APPLA (Another planned permanent Living Arrangement) experiencedthe greatestpercentage increase. We want to be certain that this goal judiciously, is used where a rcalpermanencyplan is in place for the child. Age of Ghildren
20,{U^
150 I'3 - 5 if 100 E'6 - 10 i '1 ri 50 Et 1- 151i ll'16+ 1i o Age of Children
No notable differences were reflectedin the ases I of children in the dependencysystem in Agell-15 2007
Gender
;
ini Male i
I Again. genderdid not appearto be a factor for
l children entering the dependencysystem. Female
I
i
I Attendanceat Panel Judicial Reviews
- E*,; -, lfatner A i , CtFatherB L loct;ro l ] lCaregiver l ] Etrherapist i llenr- l I E GALReport 'lGALAtry I ] oo.*",, 1l ll I Interpr€ter I' Cl MomAlly I i aOadA Ally I ]ro"canrty ] i tlcase Manaser I i lf CaseSupervisor t: DcFAtty 1 i l Et Wr i il en s atement
iEli!''-' - -i 45
Mom Dad Dad Chrld Care l her GAL GAL GAL t0terp GAI Mour Dad Dad Case Case DCF Writ ot- B Giver aprsl Rept Attj tder Staff Attv B Mgr sup AttY Stnt her Att! 157 104 28 20 1 ll5 44 69 58 -19 146 80 .104 l7,s ll9 4 45 l4'l 86 29 5 30 l5 -16 21 25 I 83 319 4',7 ll9 37 222 l7l II 4o 59 l7 IJ )7 t0 99 12 '71 '7 t78 99 t0'7 404 l6 I52 b 8.3 l0 38 28 l-r I 39 2l ll6 4 I 147 463 an 273 t76 57 H.l ll0 2ti l-15 57 240 r68 l'1 .16C, t69 478 -11 55
An important increase occurred in the number of casesupervisors attending judicial reviews in 200i . This was welcome and necessarybecause of the frequent turnover of casemanagers. Goal Changed by CFCRE] 24
Goal chanses 2007 2006 2005 CFCRB 24 26 t6 4.46Yo 4.6vo 2.1%
Parentand ParentAttorney Attendance
390 400 300 cr#oip.i;GeiigiuG to attenajn- i i 200 I # of Parents who attended JR I i tr # of Attorneysrepresenting parents 100 =tlltgTe)s whoattended JR i 0
Parents Parents Attorneys Attorneys Aftended lnvolved Attended Assisned 2007 390 261 249 2W 67.69% 83,94% 2006 4t4 265 271 227 6101% 83 03% 2005 { 7_' 404 376 297 70 38% 7899% 2004 614 J /f 462 351 61 07% -@-7597% 2003 671 462 506 68.85% 79.81% Although modest,rhe.e *asi did attend. Numerousscheduling elTors were madethroushout out the vearve'r reqrrlrinorecrrlrinoi-ih i'"ufficient noticegiven to someparties. The GFCRBCFCRR has continuedcnnrinrrerr torn work',n.L wrur.,, uunr uwr: Legatanorne."r.t"""r.-."t noticing problems. il;ttffiJ:"t:ffi,Ht # of Judicial Reviews for Gasee witfr no Case Plans I I i I I I I I l l I 319 t_I
# of Reviews without case
The CFCRB is concernedthere has been an increasein casescoming before the court with no approvedcase plans. We have no ability to move this processalong, but will advise DCF, Family Preservationand the DefenseAttorneys of our observationsand concerns.
# of ObjectionsFiled 3
Less than 1o/oof the casesheard by the panel in 2007 resultedin objections being filed.
Task Force on Child Protection
Preliminary Report
July-October 2007
Robert A. Butterworth Secretary TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction...... 1
Task Force Membership...... 1
Charge for Secretary Butterworth ...... 2
Meetings of the Task Force...... 4
Background of this Task Force Report...... 4
Charge 1: Review the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Office of Inspector General to determine specific individual, agency, and system deficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark ...... 7
Charge 2: Review the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determine the Department’s continued compliance with the recommendations of these reports...... 9
Charge 3: Conduct public hearings as necessary to gain further input from individuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved in the child welfare and criminal justice systems in the State of Florida...... 11
Charge 4: Review and make recommendations regarding deficiencies and issues identified in the reports regarding the case of Courtney Clark including reunification, stabilization, and permanency during foster care, courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and other critical child welfare and protection issues ...... 12
Charge 5: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any legislative actions necessary to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing ...... 13
Charge 6: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any policy, procedure, administrative, or contractual actions needed to be taken by the Department of Children and Families and by Community- Based Care Lead Agency providers or their sub-contractors to better protect our children and to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing...... 15
Charge 7: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any education or training efforts which should be undertaken to enhance the ability of agencies within the State’s child welfare and criminal justice systems to protect Florida’s children...... 17
Charge 8: Make any other substantive recommendations which will enhance the State’s child welfare and protection system ...... 18
Additional Task Force Activity...... 21
Future Activities of the Task Force on Child Protection ...... 21
Appendix A: Task Force Appointment Letter Appendix B: Agenda, minutes, and speakers at each meeting Appendix C: Reports relating to the case of Courtney Clark Appendix D: Compliance reports relating to the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection and Operation SafeKids
PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON CHILD PROTECTION
Introduction
As a result of issues which specifically arose in a parental abduction case involving a child named Courtney Clark, but which were also reflected in other historical and more recent cases, Secretary Robert A. Butterworth established the Task Force on Child Protection to examine the gaps currently existing in Florida’s child protection system, including efforts at reunification, stabilization and permanency during foster care, and supervision. Further, to correct recurring problems evidenced by these cases and suggested by on-going feedback from those involved in the system, the Task Force was specifically tasked with identifying administrative, policy, legislative, education, and training efforts which must be undertaken to ensure the safety of Florida’s children. Appendix A includes a copy of Secretary Butterworth’s appointment letter to State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair of the Task Force.
Task Force Membership
The Task Force appointed by Secretary Butterworth included a number of individuals involved in the state’s criminal justice and child welfare systems:
• State Attorney Barry Krischer, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Chairman • Circuit Court Judge David M. Gooding, Fourth Judicial Circuit, Vice Chairman • Major Connie Shingledecker, Manatee County Sheriff’s Office • Director Donna Uzzell, Florida Department of Law Enforcement
1 • Glen Casel, Executive Director, Community-Based Care of Seminole, Inc. • Tana Ebbole, Children Services Council, Palm Beach County • Adam M. Goldstein, Board of Trustees, Our Kids of Miami- Dade/Monroe, Inc. • Jim Kallinger, Chief Child Advocate, Office of the Governor • Richard Komando, Program Director, Guardian Ad Litem, Fourth Judicial Circuit • Devan Coffman, Youth Advisory Board President, District 1 • Rochelle Hooke, Florida Youth Shine Representative • Patricia Badland, Director, DCF Office of Family Safety
• Circuit Administrator Alan Abramowitz, 15th Judicial Circuit, Department of Children and Families
Staff support for the Task Force was provided by personnel from the Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Operations, and Office of the Assistant Secretary for Programs within the Department of Children and Families.
Charge from Secretary Butterworth
Secretary B utterworth specifically charged the Task Force with: • Reviewing the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Office of Inspector General to determine specific individual, agency, and system deficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark; • Reviewing the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determine the Department’s continued compliance with the recommendations of these reports;
2 • Conducting public hearings as necessary to gain further input from individuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved in the child welfare and criminal justice systems in Florida; • Reviewing and making recommendations regarding deficiencies and issues identified in the reports regarding the case of Courtney Clark including reunification, stabilization and permanency during foster care, courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and other critical child welfare and protection issues; • Identifying specific concerns and making recommendations regarding any legislative actions necessary to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing; • Identifying specific concerns and making recommendations regarding any policy, procedure, administrative, or contractual actions needed to be taken by the Department of Children and Families and by Community-Based Care Lead Agency providers or their sub-contractors to better protect our children and to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing;
• Identifying specific concerns and making recommendations regarding any educational or training efforts which should be undertaken to enhance the ability of agencies within the State’s child welfare and criminal justice systems to protect Florida’s children; • Making any other substantive recommendations which will enhance the State’s child welfare and protection system.
In accomplishing this effort, the Task Force was also directed to provide a preliminary report of its activities, findings, and recommendations to Secretary Butterworth by October 1, 2007.
3
Meetings of the Task Force
The first meeting of the Task Force was held on August 3, 2007, at Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus. Subsequent meetings were held on: • August 16 at Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus • September 5 in Orlando as part of the State Dependency Summit • September 20 in Ft. Lauderdale at Nova Southeastern University • October 10 in Jacksonville in the Jacksonville City Council Chambers
The agenda and minutes for each of these meetings are provided as Appendix B of this Preliminary Task Force Report.
Background to this Task Force Report
Throughout its meetings, a number of issues surfaced and guided both Task Force discussions and recommendations. First, in the case which resulted in the creation of this body, we each have been struck by the human errors and failures in information sharing and exchange that prevented our child welfare system from effectively protecting this child. Such errors are inexcusable, particularly the over-reliance on electronic rather than personal contact between child protection staff from several agencies. We concur with Secretary Butterworth that it is the Department of Children and Families, not any outside agency, who must take the lead in assuring that corrective measures are in place and that those measures function now and in the future. Yet each agency, organization, and individual involved in this State’s child protection system plays a critical role in its day-to-day success and in our response to Florida’s children. Individuals throughout the system, both in public and private agencies, must understand their responsibilities and be held accountable for their actions. We
4 must ensure that all necessary elements are in place to protect Florida’s most vulnerable children; we must each recognize that, when individuals fail, our system of child protection must not.
Second, by the nature of our work, no element of the child protection system—the Department of Children and Families, our Community-Based Care agencies, other providers, advocates, or law enforcement—can afford to adopt an insensitive bureaucratic response to the needs of Florida’s vulnerable children. Our statutes, administrative codes, policies, and operating procedures cannot be so complex and burdensome that they prevent the effective, sensitive, and timely response of the system to the needs of our vulnerable children. Our actions must reflect the sense of urgency that such issues demand, and all elements of the system, at every level of service, must recognize that they are held accountable for our successes as well as our failures.
Third, we recognize that leadership cannot be designed simply through regulations, policies, and procedures. It is the culture of the Department of Children and Families and its partner agencies that is of critical importance and which must support a comprehensive and action-oriented approach to the needs of Florida’s children. This culture must be established by the leadership of each organization and must be manifested throughout each of the involved agencies at every point of leadership and with every involved member of staff. A culture that accepts and encourages only high expectations, high performance, high accountability, and maximum transparency is fundamental to the success of not only our individual organizations, but, through them, to Florida’s entire Child Protection System.
Fourth, this State must operate and promulgate a data driven system of care which integrates information and best practices from the myriad affected agencies and organizations. That system must support knowing what the most
5 current research indicates and what best practices are applicable, what data within our own system indicate, and how we can best effect continuous improvement of the individuals served by the system, as well as of the system itself. We must define and drive our measurements in such a manner that we— and those we serve—understand what constitutes success.
Fifth, we live in a state in which crisis is the norm and band-aid solutions to complex problems a common approach. In protecting the lives and health of our children, Florida can no longer react to individual incidents, nor ineffectively and incompletely implement necessary changes and improvements to our system. Instead, we must institutionalize and assure a comprehensive, effective, consistent system of protection and care that is adequately funded, staffed, and professionally competent to deal with the changing and complex needs of our children and society.
Finally, as we have heard repeatedly in testimony and in our own discussion, success in our child protection system must rest on the core principle that all agencies and individuals involved in prevention, protection, and treatment services for Florida’s children must effectively communicate and collaborate. The safety of our children is too important to allow petty grievances, personal agendas, and turf wars to interfere.
6 CHARGE 1:1 Review the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Office of Inspector General to determine specific individual, agency, and system deficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark.
The Task Force received and reviewed these reports and heard presentations from appropriate Departmental staff in its early deliberations. Copies of these reports, a timeline of key events, and a monitoring instrument for actions already taken by the Department are included in Appendix C.
Findings: It is clear that, in the case of Courtney Clark, a number of critical elements of the system and individuals charged with her protection did not perform up to standard. The Department and the Community-Based Care Agency failed to adequately provide for the care, safety, and protection of this child and only through exceptional efforts by personnel within law enforcement assigned to the missing child case was further tragedy avoided. As noted in the reports, failures throughout the system could be attributed to: - poorly established protocols within contract provisions - lack of proper contract oversight by the Department - weak internal controls by the Community-Based Care Agency
- poor documentation - ineffective communication by all parties - ineffective quality assurance reviews by the department and the Community-Based Care Agency - the lack of a sense of urgency on the part of many individuals involved in the case
Recommen d ations: • The Department has already developed a series of required actions as a result of this case which are included in Appendix C. The Task
7 Force endorses these actions, particularly the effort to reduce the review time period for children not seen by a caseworker to 31 days. However, we recognize that, to be effective, the implementation of these steps requires a sense of urgency on the part of both the Department and the Community-Based Care agencies. Further, the corrective actions must be monitored, compliance assured, and personnel at all levels held accountable for their actions.
• The Task Force recommends that the Department, utilizing information compiled from law enforcement and Community-Based Care Lead Agencies provide a report on the status of these corrective actions at each of its upcoming meetings.
8 CHARGE 2:2 Review the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determine the Department’s continued compliance with the recommendations of these reports.
The Task Force reviewed these reports and heard presentations from appropriate Departmental staff early in its deliberations. An updated compliance report regarding the recommendations of these reports is included in Appendix D.
Findings: Each of these reports provided specific recommendations to deal with deficiencies identified in Florida’s child location system. Unfortunately, in a number of cases, these necessary and appropriate enhancements have not been permanently incorporated into the Department or system response through policy, procedures, or training.
The Blue Ribbon Panel recommended that case files contain a current photograph, fingerprints, and birth verification of every dependent child, and State statute and Departmental rule now address this requirement. This Report additionally recommended that the Department review the feasibility of a DNA swab for every dependent child. Operation SafeKids also recommended that the Department collect and store DNA samples without analysis for all children under school age. Although the Department collects DNA samples when there is a question of paternity, it has indicated that there are no plans to expand this practice. This Task Force on Child Protection has noted that DNA is a more thorough and, under certain circumstances, successful technology for positively identifying a person than is the use of fingerprints.
9 Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department review the individual recommendations included in the most current compliance reports for the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel and Operation SafeKids to determine their current need, viability, applicability, and alternative practices; identify those that are not currently being systematically implemented but remain necessary, and identify any barriers for implementation; and take action to assure complete implementation in a timely fashion, on-going monitoring, and accountability of assigned personnel. • The Task Force recommends that the Department provide this Task Force with an on-going report on the status of such implementation, using information compiled from law enforcement and Community-Based Care Lead Agencies, at each of its upcoming meetings. • The Task Force recommends that a workgroup including the Department of Children and Families, local law enforcement, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the Chief Child Advocate in the Office of the Governor, and appropriate legal and children’s advocates, be created to determine the feasibility of collecting DNA from children that are in the custody of the Department and recommends to this Task Force procedures regarding DNA collection, storage, testing, destruction, and privacy issues for consideration in preparation for its next report.
10 CHARGE 3:3 Conduct public hearings as necessary to gain further input from individuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved in the child welfare and criminal justice systems in Florida.
The Task Force offered an opportunity for public presentations and comments at its meetings on August 16, September 5, September 20, and October 10. A total of 41 individuals presented at the request of the Task Force or offered public comments. Among those who addressed the Task Force were former Governor Buddy MacKay; Senator Ronda Storms, Chair of the Children, Families, and Elder Affairs Committee; Senator Nan Rich, Vice Chair of the Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee; and Representative Bill Galvano, Chair of the Healthy Families Committee. A list of all those who appeared before the Task Force, including presenters and members of the community, is included in Appendix B.
11 CHARGE 4:4 Review and make recommendations regarding deficiencies and issues identified in the reports regarding the case of Courtney Clark including reunification, stabilization and permanency during foster care, courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and other critical child welfare and protection issues.
Findings: Current statutory language governing the background screening requirements for relatives, non-relatives, foster parents, and other potential caregivers for children who are the subjects of Chapter 39 proceedings are inconsistent and at times contradictory. As a result, adequate screening prior to placement of a child may not occur. Additionally, judicial approval of and licensing requirements for non-relative placement are insufficient. It is important for the Task Force to reaffirm that the ultimate goal of screening is to ensure that children are placed with safe and nurturing caregivers and that permanency is achieved for children who are not reunified with their families, placed with relatives, or adopted.
Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department develop and propose legislation which will strengthen and standardize background screening requirements for all potential caregivers for children who are subject to Chapter 39 proceedings, as well as others residing in the home; enhance judicial oversight of children in non-relative placement; and explore the impact of licensing requirements for non-relative caregivers.
12 CHARGE 5:5 Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any legislative actions necessary to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing.
Findings: The Florida Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs has taken as an interim project a review of laws and procedures governing the reporting of missing children. The staff report is due on October 2, and this Task Force looks forward to reviewing those recommendations.
As evidenced by this case, there is a lack of statutory clarity regarding the taking of missing children reports by law enforcement when a child is alleged to be in the company of a biological parent who flees during an open child abuse investigation or open protective supervision case.
Once reported, missing children are routinely entered into the Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC) and the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). However, as this Task Force has heard, absent a specific criminal violation, the parent or guardian who has removed them may not automatically be entered into either of these law enforcement information-sharing systems.
Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department and appropriate law enforcement entities provide support to the Senate interim project on the development of legislation requiring law enforcement to accept a missing child report when that child is in the legal custody of the Department and is alleged to be in the custody of a biological parent who flees during an open child abuse or open protective supervision case. • The Task Force recommends that, in conjunction with a workgroup of Community-Based care providers, law enforcement, state
13 attorneys, youth, and other appropriate stakeholders, the Department develop appropriate administrative rules governing child location procedures and practices, including procedures for reporting missing children in the custody of the Department or Community-Based care provider agencies and a standard protocol for efforts to locate the missing child. • The Task Force recommends that the Department develop and propose statutory language which clarifies the violation of removing a child from the state or concealing a child during dependency proceedings or abuse or neglect investigations contrary to state agency instruction or court order. • The Task Force recommends that, in conjunction with a workgroup of law enforcement, the Department of Children and Families, and other involved stakeholders, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement develop appropriate legislation, rule, or other needed administrative action that would allow the linking of adult “persons of interest” and their vehicles with a missing child in the FCIC/NCIC systems.
14 CHARGE 6:6 Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any policy, procedure, administrative, or contractual actions needed to be taken by the Department of Children and Families and by Community-Based Care Lead Agency providers or their sub-contractors to better protect our children and to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing.
Findings: The relationship among the Department, Community-Based Care agencies, and law enforcement is particularly critical in cases involving children who are reported to be missing or abused. Written agreements and protocols based on best practices must be worked out and exist among all agencies involved in any aspect of the response to ensure clarity of roles, responsibilities, and actions when the situation occurs.
Many children who are reported as missing are runaways, frequently repeating this behavior. Efforts to identify and correct the causative factors behind this repeated behavior are inconsistent and sporadic, and a significant portion of Florida’s missing juveniles are chronic runaways.
Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunction with representatives from Community-Based Care agencies, the Florida Sheriffs Association, and the Florida Police Chiefs Association, develop a model memorandum of understanding for use by agencies throughout the state and governing law enforcement and social service response during and after normal business hours. • The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunction with the Community-Based Care agencies, Florida Network for Youth and Family Services, and local law enforcement, undertake a
15 coordinated effort to identify and target for improvement shelters which reflect a high incidence of runaways; develop a protocol for debriefing chronic runaways; and conduct intervention assessments in an effort to reduce the initial as well as the chronic incidence of runaways.
16 CHARGE 7:7 Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regarding any educational or training efforts which should be undertaken to enhance the ability of agencies within the State’s child welfare and criminal justice systems to protect Florida’s children.
Findings: The Courtney Clark case and other issues involving missing, abused, and exploited children have shown a need for both a closer working relationship with law enforcement and enhanced training for law enforcement and social service personnel.
Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunction with the State’s Community-Based Care Lead Agencies and the Florida Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, undertake a review of the training available for criminal justice and social service personnel in order to develop a coordinated, comprehensive approach to professional education. Such joint training efforts should include sharing of information and coordination of efforts between law enforcement and protective investigators.
17 CHARGE 8:8 Make any other substantive recommendations which will enhance the State’s child welfare and protection system.
Findings: Current statutory language requires the Department and sheriff offices to complete a child protective investigation within 60 days regardless of the disposition of the case. The requirement can be problematic in three situations: in child death cases, where it routinely takes more than 60 days to receive a final medical examiner’s report on the case of death; in investigations involving missing children in which the child is not located within the 60 day timeframe; and in reports that involve an on-going concurrent criminal investigation and in which the closing of the abuse case and release of information would jeopardize the other criminal case.
The decision-making process to remove a child from his/her family and place that child in foster care must balance a number of considerations: diligent efforts to prevent removal, impact of placement on safety/risk factors, and availability of services to remediate the problem for the family. The trauma of separation and placement in foster care presents its own set of safety/risk factors. Prevention of removal and intensive in-home services must be thoroughly explored by the entire child welfare system.
The Task Force heard testimony from child advocates concerning the all- too-common practice of moving children between different foster homes for a variety of reasons, including lack of sufficient foster home placement choices for appropriate matches for children and caretakers. Youth representatives on the Task Force echoed these concerns, relating their personal experiences with such disruptions that negatively impacted their school life, social life, and contact with siblings. The Task Force was also made aware that Federal audits of placement stability indicate a downward trend on this performance measure that places Florida at risk for financial penalties. We recognize that improvements in the
18 availability of front end services will result in additional reductions in placements in foster care and damage associated with repeated placements.
Children within the system of care frequently need additional “eyes” protecting their interests. Legal assistance, however, is not available for all children in need. It is our responsibility to ensure that children have the opportunity to appear in court when their cases are heard; that children are heard during those hearings; and that children have necessary representation during the legal process.
Existing Florida laws at times thwart the necessary exchange of information between social service agencies and at times impede the effectiveness of service delivery. Additionally, in a number of cases discussed with the Task Force, information which should be made public or at least shared with involved individuals, including the child or his/her legal representative, is restricted by statute. In other situations, foster and adoptive parents have not had access to full and complete information concerning the children in their care.
Recommendations: • The Task Force recommends that the Department draft and propose language to amend Section 39.301, F.S., to allow for an extension of the investigatory timeframe in certain clearly defined circumstances. • The Task Force recommends that the Department and Community- Based Care Lead Agencies explore the promise of the IV-E waiver implemented in October 2006 and the opportunity to use available funds to prevent removal by providing intensive and effective home services. • The Task Force recommends that the Department and Community- Based Care Lead Agencies work with the Youth Law Center to develop strategies for recruitment and retention of foster care and
19 adoptive placements. The Task Force requests an update on the results of current discussions between the Youth Law Center and the Department’s executive management on this issue at its meeting in January 2008. • The Task Force recommends that the State assure adequate funding and support for the Guardian Ad Litem program. • The Task Force recommends that the Department expand its efforts to assure that a guardian ad litem or attorney is appointed for each child within the State’s child protection system. • The Task Force recommends that the Department propose such legislative changes and administrative rules as are necessary to ensure that a child aging out of foster care has full access to his/her files and records; • The Task Force recommends that the Department develop and implement a strategy to enforce current statutes and rules that require caregivers to be provided all background information, including medical and psychiatric reports, for the children in their care. • The Task Force recommends that the Department develop and propose legislation to update statutes regarding confidentiality practices, privacy protection, and information sharing between agencies involved in child protection and welfare, especially in regard to: o Child welfare and child protection records o Educational records o Medical and behavioral health records o Juvenile justice records o Specialized services
20 Additional Task Force Activity
In defining its mission and organizing its work, the Task Force has established six workgroups to conduct independent review of current child protection processes and laws/rules, identify deficiencies, and develop recommendations and proposed action plans for further consideration by the Task Force in the following areas: • Home study form/process and implementation • Out of county services • Child protective investigation to services transition • Systems of care • Stabilization and permanency • Child recovery and Operation SafeKids follow-up
Future Activities of the Task Force on Child Protection
With the hearings conducted thus far and with the submission of this Preliminary Report, it is clear to the Task Force that our work has just begun and that, to fully review and recommend long-term improvements to Florida’s Child Protection System, we must continue to commit appropriate time, effort, and energy. In addition to the suggestions for on-going activities included throughout this Report, we anticipate future discussions and recommendations concerning:
• The structure, measures and guiding principles of our Community- Based Care Lead Agencies; • Clarification of the roles, responsibilities, and interactions of the Department, the Community Alliances, and the CBCs; • The development of an accountability system, including clearly defined outcome performance measures and quality assurance/quality improvement processes, that guides the entire
21 Child Protection System from the Department through the subcontracted agencies; • A standardized and consistent methodology for payment to the Community-Based Care Lead Agencies; • Certification of Community-Based Care Lead Agencies;
• Turnover rates of personnel within the child welfare system and strategies for enhanced personnel retention; • The establishment of an on-going estimating conference to regularly analyze system demand and cost of care; • The complexity of the statutes, administrative rules, and operating procedures governing child protection within the State of Florida; • Mediation and its role in the initial development of a case plan; • Child on child sexual abuse; • Identification of minimum standards of care, model programs, and best practices for our child welfare and protection system; • Strategies to successfully implement and institutionalize necessary changes throughout the child welfare and protection system.
This Task Force has focused its preliminary efforts primarily on issues related to missing children and on specific points which can be readily addressed in the upcoming session of the Legislature. However, in order to make comprehensive recommendations concerning the overall child welfare system, to pursue the critical issues which must be examined, and to avoid distraction by other concerns, we anticipate that the full Task Force will meet on a bi-monthly basis through September 2008. We believe that this will allow us to effectively use our committee structure to more fully explore the issues which we have identified and, at the same time, provide for on-going monitoring of the efforts of the Department, our Community-Based Care Lead Agencies, our social service and criminal justice partners, and the Florida Legislature to address these preliminary recommendations.
22
23 CharlieGrist State of Florida Governor Departmentof Ghildrenand Families Robert A. Butterworth Secretary
July17,2007
Mr. BarryKrischer, State Attorney FifteenthJudicial Circuit 401 NorthDixie Highway WestPalm Beach, FL 33401
DearMr. Krischer:
As I havereviewed the issueswe haveseen in the caseinvolving Courtney Clark, I have beenstruck by the humanerrors and failures in informationsharing and exchange that preventedoui childwelfare system from effectively protecting this child.lt is my position ihat sucherrors are inexcusable and that this Department, not any outside agency, must takethe leadin assuringthat correctivemeasures are in place,and that those measures functionnow and in thefuture. Individualsthroughout the systemmust understand their responsibilitiesand be heldaccountable for theiractions. We mustensure that all elementsare in placeto protectFlorida's most vulnerable children; when individuals fail, oursystem of childprotection cannot.
Whilethe caseof CourtneyClark has brought these issues to a head,it is clearfrom other historicaland more recent cases that we mustfix, once and for all,the recurringproblems in ourchild protection system. To thisend, I haveestablished a TaskForce on Child protectionto examinetne gapscurrently existing in our system,including in our effortsat reunification,stabilization JnO permanency during foster care, and supervision, and to identifyadministrative, policy, legislative, education, and training efforts which must be undertakento ensurethe safetyof FtoriOa'schildren. I haveasked a numberof prominent individualsinvolved in ourcriminaljustice and child welfare systems to joinyou in serving on thisgroup:
. CircuitCourt Judge David M. Gooding, Fourth Judicial Circuit^ . MajorConnie Shingledecker, Manatee County Sheriffs Offic{ o DirectorDonna Uzzell, Florida Department of Law Enforcement . GtenCasel, Executive Director, Community Based Care of Seminole,Inc. o TanaEbbole, children services council, Palm Beach county
1317Winewood Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700
Mission:protect the Vulnerable, Promote Strong and EconomicallySelf-Sufficient Families, and AdvancePersonal and Family Recovery and Resiliency Mr.Barry Krischer PageTwo July17,2007
o AdamM. Goldstein,Board of Trustees,Our Kids of Miami-Dade/Monroe, Inc. o Jim Kallinger,Chief Child Advocate, Office of the Governor o RichardKomando, Program Director, Guardian Ad Litem,Fourth Judicial Circuit . DevanCoffman, Youth Advisory Board President, District 1 o RochelleHooke, Florida Youth Shine Representative o DirectorPatricia Badland, Department of Childrenand FamiliesFamily ServiceProgram o CircuitAdministrator Alan AbramowiZ, 15th Judicial Circuit, Department of Childrenand Families
I am specificallycharging this Task Force with:
o Reviewingthe reportsof the Officeof QualityAssurance and Officeof InspectorGeneralto determine specific individual, agency, and system deficienciesin the caseof CourtneyClark; Reviewingthe reportsof the Governor'sBlue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection(2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determinethe Department'scontinued compliance with the recommendationsof these reports; Conductingpublic hearings as necessaryto gainfurther input from individuals,including parents, children, and advocates, involved in the child welfareand criminaljustice systems in thisState; Reviewingand making recommendations regarding deficiencies and issues identifiedin the reportsregarding the caseof CourtneyClark including reunification,stabilization and permanency during foster care, courtesy supervision,non-relative care, and othercriticalchild welfare and protection issues; ldentifyingspecific concerns and making recommendations regarding any legislativeactions necessary to enhancethe reportingand recovery of childrendetermined to be missing; ldentifyingspecific concerns and making recommendations regarding any policy,procedure, administrative, or contractualactions needed to be taken by the Departmentof Childrenand Familiesand by CommunityBased Care LeadAgency providers or theirsub-contractors to betterprotect our children andto enhancethe reportingand recovery of childrendetermined to be missing; Mr.Barry Krischer PageThree July17 ,2007
o ldentifyingspecific concerns and making recommendations regarding any educationalor trainingefforts which should be undertakento enhancethe abilityof agencieswithin the State'schild welfare and criminaljustice systemsto protectFlorida's children; o Makingany other substantive recommendations which will enhance the State'schild welfare and protectionsystem.
t appreciateyour willingness to serveas Chairmanof thisvital Task Force. I wouldask thatyou conduct your first meeting no laterthan August4,2007, and provide a preliminary reportto me by October1,2007. AssistantSecretary George Sheldon will assure that you and yourTask Forceare providedstaff assistance necessary to performyour tasks in a timelyfashion, and the Department'sExecutive Leadership will provide support as requested.
Thankyou for youron-going service to the citizensof the Stateof Florida.
RobertA. Butterworth Secretary Task Force on Child Protection Presenters and Public Testimony July-October 2007
Jim Adams, CEO, Family Support Services Stan Appelbaum, Local Advisory Council Laurie Blades, DCF Senior Management Analyst Supervisor Dave Bundy, Children’s Home Society President and CEO Kathleen Bushong, Former Foster Parent Mary Cagle, Director, DCF Children’s Legal Services Chris Card, Providence Cooperation John Cooper, DCF Regional Director, Northeast Region Charlie Cox, Florida Baptist Children’s Home, Inc. Nick Cox, DCF Regional Director, Suncoast Region Darby Dickerson, Dean, Stetson University College of Law Pete Digre, Child Welfare Consultant with the Youth Law Center Nancy Dreicer, DCF Regional Director, Northeast Region Gay Frizzell, Chief of Services & Training Bill Frye, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranches, Inc. The Honorable Bill Galvano, House of Representatives Tiffany Jackson, Parent Gordon Johnson, President and CEO, Neighbor to Family, Inc. Colonel Loving, Former Foster Parent Susan Loving, Former Foster Parent Governor Buddy MacKay Andrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida Children First Mindy Murphy, Board of Directors Steven Murphy, Partnership for Strong Families CEO William Navas, Assistant Attorney General, DCF Children’s Legal Services Melissa Page-Bailie, President, Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association, Inc. Jossefina Perez, Mother & Grandmother of children involved in the system Jeff Rainey, Hillsborough Kids CEO
Appendix B The Honorable Nan Rich, Senator Steve Rios, Educate Tomorrow William Robinson, Youth Advocate Program Nadereh Salim, Children’s Network of Southwest Florida Dr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D. Amy Simpson, Girls and Boys Town, Inc. Hans Soder, DCF Child Location Specialist The Honorable Ronda Storms, Chair, Senate CFE Committee Jim Stringfellow, Board of Directors Roland Thomas, Parent Rick Wallace, Family Services Representative Delores Wilson, Former Foster Parent Ron Zychowski, Community Partnership for Children
Appendix B Task Force on Child Protection
Final Meeting Summary Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus August 3, 2007
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair • Request for Circuit Court Judge David Gooding as Vice Chair, which was accepted • Acknowledged the importance of the topic and commitment of the group • The first priority will be to address the Secretary’s concerns and then consider other issues • Agree to meet every three weeks in order to produce meaningful results
Welcome to Stetson University College of Law - Dean Darby Dickerson • The work of this committee is extremely significant, children are our future • Offered the expertise of the staff at Stetson as well as the facilities for this purpose
Charge to the Task Force - Secretary Robert A. Butterworth: Summary **Secretary Butterworth’s Address to the Task Force is available as a handout Summary of Address • Thanked the Task Force for their eagerness to take on this important task. This work will define the future of Florida’s Child Welfare System. • When we are called to act, will we make the right decision or wrong decision? • When we are removing children, we don’t want to just trade one bad place for another. • Will the programs now in place, and our policies and procedures keep the children safe? • Our system is not broken, in serious need for repair. We must act now! • You are the leaders in this area, everyone here is a visionary, you see the future. • Good work was conducted by previous task forces that have realigned to deliver services in a more effective, efficient way. • Today, it is your charge to research and review every aspect of the system of care with the hope of producing results for the future of the children. • The Courtney Clark case reminds us that we need change. This case exposed problems with the reporting of missing children, home studies, placement, supervision, and training to protective investigators and case managers. • We must enhance investigative processes • A need to improve oversight by the Department of Children and Families of community based care lead agencies. Just because we contract out these services, doesn’t mean we contract out our responsibility. We all must be accountable. • We know that the Department, Sarasota YMCA and others share the responsibility of the Courtney Clark case. Poor communication and weak procedures contributed to the failure. Review the P&P and performance of Sarasota Y. The YMCA South is highest paid per child, but among the lowest in performance. Y is reviewing their own policies and procedures. • Announcement of a review team to look at the YMCA’s operations and procedures in order to bring the CBC in compliance with performance. **Press Release regarding Review Team available as handout • We’d like to have better oversight of community based case agencies. Community based case agency Board members and subcontract Boards are concerned, want the oversight since they do not have the time.
1 • Re-write the community based care laws to allow us to intervene when the lives of children demand it. • The Department of Children and Families Inspector General identified failure to follow policies and procedures. • Encouraged review of the Inspector General’s report, as well as the Department of Children and Families Quality Assurance Review of the Clark case. • This case brought us here, but it is not the only issue. Go below the surface of this case and make comprehensive and creative recommendations on our entire system of child protection, especially reunification, use of non-relative placements, stabilization and permanency during foster care, and communication and interaction between public and private agencies. • Review reports from the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection in 2002 and Operation SafeKids in 2003, and other reports that our staff will furnish. Does the Department comply with recommendations made by those groups? Are we following the road map they provided? • We want to be the gold standard for the nation for child protection. We are committed to the community-based model for child welfare, as is Governor Crist. Government alone cannot fix all the problems of our society, we need the support of community agencies, our non-profits, faith based organizations, and our business community to help us fill in the funding gaps and provide services and programs that the taxpayers can’t afford to subsidize. Governor Crist has stated that we must bring the children to the table, because very soon it will be their table. Children issues are a top priority in his office. We need community solutions to community problems. • Decisions need not be made in Tallahassee, unless they need to be made in Tallahassee. It is better to have decision making at Regional Director level. Substance Abuse and Mental Health, Homelessness, Legal have been in Tallahassee rather than local…that is changing. • We are like firefighters, we rush in when all others are rushing out. Like an ER nurse, we are assessing the injuries. However social service agencies do not receive the same respect. • The term of this committee is not set, you may stay in existence as long as you like. We may need an ongoing committee to keep watch of the different issues. Although this is not an easy task and the team is very busy, you were all willing to accept this task. You have already made a difference. As you review, you will note communities with best practices, we need this success statewide. • Vowed to lead the transformation from a troubled agency to an action agency. The Governor does not want any child not to be safe. Your findings will allow us to fix the system once and for all. For the sake of the children, we cannot fail. • Thank you for your willingness to give of yourselves to protect the children.
Introductions by Task Force members • The group introduced themselves, described their experience and then explained what they brought to this group, which included; experience in the field, practical solutions, advocate for access of information between child protection and law enforcement, currently in foster care, recognition that the most important work to raise children to be safe, acknowledging that children are 30% of the population and 100% of our future, legislative experience, a fresh look, and working together with law enforcement.
2 Discussion of Administrative Issues-Assistant Secretary George Sheldon • A lot of thought went into the panel individuals. • Learned a lot from discussion with the youth, therefore two individuals on panel to represent that perspective • Two additional members not present-Glen Casel and Adam Goldstein • If policies and procedures and protocols from previous panels had been followed, the Clark case would not have happened. • Panel should look at the policies and procedures, but also a method to ensure that they are followed • Introduction of staff available to assist (Laurie Blades, Hans Soder, Anthony Glover) • Although budget is limited, team members will be reimbursed for travel expenses • Discussion of public nature of the meetings. Committee members should send e-mail correspondence through George Sheldon to be distributed as public record. The web link will be updated daily.
Overview of the Florida Child Welfare System - Assistant Attorney General Bill Navas (Bureau Chief in Tampa and Manatee counties).
Summary of PowerPoint Presentation Opening Comments: The child protection process has evolved significantly. Look deeply into the child protection process-review the basics and the entire process: the problem may be with the process itself Overview of child welfare process • Call is reported to abuse hotline (1-800-96-ABUSE) • Mandatory reporters include doctors, nurses, teachers, and law enforcement • The reporter will remain anonymous • Initial response to a call from the Hotline • Protective Investigator receives case assignment • Includes criminal records and abuse history checks • Protective Investigator will: • Complete Child Safety Assessment (Office of Attorney General) has access to read only) • Provide mandated referrals to Child Protection Team • Conduct collateral contacts (teachers, neighbors, relatives) • As a result of investigation, the Protective Investigator has the following options: • No further action required, referrals for community services • Offer of voluntary protective supervision • Judicial intervention and/or removal. The Office of the Attorney General reviews case for probable cause for removal…health and safety of the child is at risk and services in the home will not ameliorate the risk • If the child is removed the investigator will consult with the child welfare legal services to prepare a shelter petition. • A shelter hearing must be held within 24 hours (occur 24/7/365), at which time the judge will: • Grant or not grant temporary custody to the Department • Appoint an attorney to represent the parent • Appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to represent the child • Judge will also approve the placement of the child…may be to the Department 3 • Options for placement of a child: • An approved adult relative • A licensed shelter/foster home • An approved non-relative Should be the least disruptive as possible…same school, familiar, etc. • Prior to approving relative or non-relative placement, a homestudy is required to evaluate each caregiver’s capacity to provide a safe, stable and supportive home environment for the child, and background checks are required (including fingerprints, local law enforcement, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, National Crime Information Center, Department of Juvenile Justice, and abuse reports). • Placement Supervision Requirements. The caseworker must visit with the child and the caregiver in the home: • Prior to disposition, every 7 days, • After disposition, every 30 days. • Frequency of caseworker visits can be increased if the situation warrants. • If parents do not appear for the arraignment, child will be deemed dependent. • Early Services Intervention staffing • If parent admits or consents to the allegations in the Dependency Petition, the child is adjudicated dependent. If the parent denies the allegation the case is set for trial, and a Disposition Hearing is held. • Case Plan tasks must be aligned with the allegations of the Petition. • Court listens to the Disposition and Case Plan to determine the best placement of the child. • Before a child can not be placed out of state without complying with Interstate Compact for Placement of Children. • Court can terminate supervision and jurisdiction of the case at this time, but this is rare. • Judicial Reviews: • Held to review the child’s status and the parent’s progress towards the goal, objectives and tasks of the case plan. • Held at least every six months until the court terminates supervision, or • Held every 90 days if the child is in residential treatment. • The foster child has the opportunity to address the court at every Judicial Review. • Permanency Review Hearing. • Is held no later than 12 months after the date the child was sheltered. • At this hearing, the court makes a determination of the child’s permanency goal, in order of priority. • If the parent’s are not in substantial compliance with case plan tasks, the court can recommend Termination of Parental Rights. • Permanency Goals. In order of priority are: • Reunification. Every family has dysfunction. Is the dysfunction safe for the child? • Adoption. If reunification is not possible, then adoption is the next best option. • Permanent Guardianship • Child must live in the home for six months • Supervision is not needed • Custodial agrees that the child will not be returned to the parent without court approval • Court always retains jurisdiction. • Each step has rules, regulations, federal regulations, standard operating procedures to guide the process. 4 • The best interest of the child is of paramount concern. • All of this work takes a myriad of people. For many this is a vocation, given their lives for this mission…to protect children. • We welcome this change, need this change, and the children need this change.
Panel Comments: • Recommendation for permanency for the staff performing the service…we need to look at the salaries, many are over worked and under paid. • Guardians Ad Litem are not available for every child. • Is Permanent Guardianship appropriate for young children when adoption could be considered? • Recommendation for Permanency Review at six months has been successful for move to reunification faster and safer. • Mandatory reporter does not include family member, therefore same issues as with domestic violence. • Question regarding teachers as mandatory reporters…public vs. private school, appropriate form to report.
Remarks - Senator Ronda Storms • Her hope is that the team’s intent is to use their skills and their experience to impact the system to help children. • She is troubled by children being abused by parents, but even more troubled by those that are abused by the system. Give them a future and hope. • Encouraged team to look outside of the box. • Consider business solutions….why haven’t we done secret shoppers? • Exploit the strengths of the Guardian Ad Litem program. The Guardians Ad Litem are different than the people that get paid to do their jobs. • Look at what other states are doing. • She stated that she will be an advocate for the team and wants them to do well. This will be more than a report; this is an opportunity for a change, to make a difference. Encouraged the team to make recommendations that can be done and that is something real, something meaningful.
Overview of Florida’s Approach to Locating Missing Children-Laurie Blades/Hans Soder
Summary of Power Point Presentation
The current system for reporting, tracking, and locating missing children in general works Debrief teen runaways upon return to determine what occurred… • Recommendation for law enforcement to be involved in order to prosecute individuals that are exploiting children (prostituting/drugs/etc). • Determine why kids are running away. Why would they rather do drugs or be in a bad environment than be in their foster home? • Returning a child to the same foster home after running without doing anything differently, expect to run again. • Running is not the problem…what is causing the running? • Run because of the trauma of being removed and put into a placement, then upon return put into an environment that is too structured, then to a group home. It’s a vicious cycle.
5 • Some run to get out of the “system” and keep people out of their business. In foster care, complete strangers are telling you how to live your life. • Habitual runners are sometimes punished for running rather than be counseled or talked to, which made him want to run more, hate the system more. • Recommendation from Operation SafeKids to debrief…why isn’t this happening? Better assessments… • Look at assessment centers to promote better placement decisions. • Once a child has run, chances increase that he will run again. Making good assessments up front is key to prevent it in the first place. • Are the numbers prohibitive to ask the child to come before the Judge again to look at the initial placement? • Assessment is critical, but so is to follow up. • Other resources include the Comprehensive Behavioral Health Assessment (CBHA) that is required for kids coming into foster care. It is a comprehensive assessment of needs. • Great in theory, but CBHA are not being done consistently. For habitual runners, they are not scheduled for a CBHA because don’t know how long before the child will run again. Representation of the child… • Transportation is an issue for getting kids in the court. The more you engage children in their case plan, running reduces. • Difference between children represented by GAL and legal representation. • TALK TO THE CHILD!! Need to spend time at the front end. How effective are we in making assessment? Engaging the child? Engaging the parent? Great plan, but need to follow through. • Recommendation for GAL to be able to spend time with the child, take them places away from the placement. Behavior Analysts… • Community based care agencies determine who the Behavioral Analysts (BA) will work with, based on the priorities they have with the children they serve and are not required to use Behavior Analysts to address runaway issues. • Just like the Child Protection Team, couldn’t we require a B.A. in cases that meet specific criteria? • Cannot allow privacy/confidential laws to be obstacle for B.A. reports to be done and available. Laurie Blades will clarify if there are confidentiality issues related to the Department, FDLE and local law enforcement receiving debriefings completed by the Behavior Analysts to assist in the efforts to locate the child. Other ideas… • Need to re-evaluate relative caregiver options. The obstacles that prevented these from happening at removal may not still exist. • None of this is new. How do we move from theory of best practice to practice of best practice? • Look at the recommendations from Blue Ribbon Panel and Operation Safe ids and re-evaluate what was implemented and still in compliance. • CBCs are not implementing the Independent Living normalcy rule. • We have a lot of checkers and not a lot of doers. • Are we charged to ensure CBC works or Child Welfare works? Butterworth stated that we never contract out our accountability, responsibility. • Every child has the right to live a normal life….hang out with friends, go to prom, etc. not ride around in a 12 passenger van that has the name of the residential provider on it. • Before the next meeting, a current status of Operation SafeKids and the Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations will be provided to the team. Process that is required to report a child is missing • Identify the child is missing 6 • Report to law enforcement---tool is the Missing Child Report • Document the event in Missing Child Tracking System---must also have a corresponding Missing Child Report • Need to link an adult with a vehicle to that child • Getting the adult in system is difficult without a warrant. One option is to report adults as missing. Can Judge order? Maybe not a missing person, maybe an alert. Create something else that creates an alert. The key is the vehicle. Statute is very vague on when a parent leaves. Need an alert to do safety checks. A pick up order does not have the authority to allow law enforcement to work the case, need the missing child report. • Locate the child. Local law enforcement takes the lead with assistance and support from the caseworker. • Recover-also tracked in Missing Child Tracking System • Stabilize • Prevent (prevention of the 1st episode is critical) Recommendation: System that law enforcement can access for children similar to the injunction system that will alert law enforcement that the child has been removed and current status. In Palm Beach County, they have created a database that includes three years of Protective Investigation calls with significant information. Law enforcement is not using the information. Train law enforcement to partner with the protective investigators.
Brainstorming Session Facilitator: George Sheldon Participants: Pat Badland, Connie Shingledecker, Rochelle Hooke, Jim Kallinger, David Gooding, Gaps and Issues Identified and Discussed: 1. Prevention • Avoid removals by providing services where parent can receive services and maintain child with them (ex: Healthy Families-in home parenting, drug treatment facility). These programs allow service provider to watch the interaction between parent/child • Would like to hear about programs that provide services with the children • Access to services before Department intervention 2. Relative/Non-relative placements • Criteria for parent decision on where children will be placed at removal • The ability of parent to make decision of where children are placed is more likely when children are being removed because parent is being incarcerated rather than due to abuse. • Best decision needs to be based on age. A 16-year-old can have input in decision more than a 2-year-old. • If removed, first priority is to place with relative caregiver and/or recommendation of parent. Need to educate caregiver on the rules and responsibilities when placing child with them. • Task Pat Badland to bring data on use of non-relative caregivers • Establish criteria that guides placement decisions • Drivers for non-relative placements: Not enough foster care placements and these placements are not funded 3. Removal • Top reasons for removals are substance abuse, domestic violence, mental health 7 4. Placement • Court makes decision on type of placement (relative, licensed home, non-relative placement) • Licensed placements require unannounced visits, capacity requirements, regulations to follow. • Placement is the most critical decision at removal. Caregiver will facilitate communication, help reunification, etc. 5. Assessment • Assessment should be different with different ages (toddlers vs. teenagers) • Assessments are necessary because Judge is not a Licensed Mental Health Counselor, uses this information to make decisions. • Comprehensive Behavioral Health Assessment is not required when child is placed with relative or non-relative caregivers • Panel needs to hear debate regarding Assessment Centers • One Stop Center---Advocacy Center may be a better approach. Child friendly, access child at one location (Child Protection Team, etc.) 6. In-Home Service Provision • Access and timeliness (prevention and post placement) 7. Evaluation of caseworker quality of service • People do what you inspect, not what you expect • Need for multiple review • Lack of documentation of services. • Quality, ongoing assessment. Caseworkers not talking with the children, focus is just to see the child. • Develop a redundant system where if one thing fails that something else will be there. Discussion about sending different caseworkers to visit children, lack of continuity, Guardians Ad Litem, need check and balance. • Oversight by supervisors. Move from office to into the field. • Second party review. • Department exploring a tickler system for children not seen. Alert goes higher up the chain as the length of time child not seen increases 8. Permanency for our children/workers/Judges (skill set and desire) 9. Representation (GAL and attorney-different perspectives) • Who speaks for the child? 10. Hear more from the child 11. Relationship between law enforcement and DCF, joint investigations • How do we set up a training session for counties that we recognize don’t have good working relationships. • In addition, to investigations this also applies to runaways. • Establish criteria/guidelines for law enforcement to respond on certain kinds of reports (runaways, domestic violence). 12. Recruitment of foster homes/adoptive homes • (sibling groups, limited resources prevent good matches, reach out to faith-based organizations) 13. Homes/Adoptive relative caregivers disruptions when child turns 13. • Need post placement services, open adoptions rather than Termination of Parental Rights. Why happening, how to prevent 14. Training for community based care agency Boards • Recruitment and application process 8 • Job descriptions and expectations • Diversity of Board (expertise in multiple areas such as fiscal, operations, etc.) • Management report standards
Additional Information Requested and Possible Speakers Identified: 1. Operation SafeKids-current status update 2. Presentations from others that have had success (Best Practices from other states) 3. Use FDLE system to identify/flag (make information accessible) 4. Presentation by programs that provide prevention services (example: Healthy Families – in home parenting one-on-one instruction) 5. CBC Lead Agencies perspective on service provision challenges 6. Foster parents, relatives, non-relative caregivers perspective 7. Human Resources from DCF and CBC to talk about retention
Discussion: • We are always going to have child abuse, we need to focus on not abusing them within our system. • Use the wealth of information/data available • Also need to be concerned with families that run prior to the completion of investigations. Recognize pattern. • Multi-state issue-when parent takes children across state line.
Brainstorming Session Facilitator: Jim Sewell Participants: Alan Abramowitz, Richard Komondo, Devan Coffman, Tana Ebbole, Barry Krischer, Donna Uzzell
Gaps and Issues Identified and Discussed: • First need to get a good picture of the current system. Where do the reports that have been issued fit into our current system? Look at what worked or didn’t work. What was or wasn’t implemented and why? Are obstacles real and do they still exist? Step away from specific case and look at system • When do we shelter? • Age appropriate recommendations…cannot cookie cutter responses • Normalcy in system…what should the systems normal response be? • Look at as a business…Welfare of the children is our profit/bottom line, our investment • More than just see the kid…issue is to consider child’s welfare. • What is the theory of intervention • Increase the involvement of children in their outcomes • Front end assessment • Accountability of CBCs • Is this a system or a series of services? • Rewarding the right things
Additional Information Team would like: • A good example of a child welfare system • Corporate mentoring-business
Next meeting—Recommendation for Aug. 15/16/17 at same location 9
Public Comments - Chairman Krischer • Accomplished more than expected today. • Next meeting, we will get a visual of current system as a starting point for findings and recommendations.
Adjournment-Chairman Krischer at 3:12 pm
10 Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Agenda
Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Law Center
August 16, 2007 9:00 – 3:00
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
Review and Approval of 8/03/07 Minutes State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
Remarks Representative Bill Galvano
Wire Diagram Dr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D. Overview of the Blue Ribbon Panel Gay Frizzell, Chief of Services & Recommendations and current status Training
Wire Diagram Dr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D. Overview of Operations SafeKids Laurie Blades Senior Management Recommendations and current status Analyst Supervisor Hans Soder, Child Location Specialist
Discussion Chairman Krischer Schedule Future Meetings Agenda for next meeting Assignments for Task Force Members Dependency Summit Pat Badland, Director, Office of Family Safety
Public Comments Chairman Krischer
Adjournment Chairman Krischer
Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Summary Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus August 16, 2007
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
• Task Force Member Attendance: Devan Coffman, Alan Abramowitz, Glen Casel, Major Connie Shingledecker, Circuit Court Judge David Gooding, State Attorney Barry Krischer, Tana Ebbole, Rochelle Hooke, Pat Badland, Richard Kommando, Adam Goldstein • The Chair made the following comments to recap Secretary Butterworth’s address to the Task Force and discussions that occurred during the August 3, 2007 meeting. A need to improve oversight by the DCF of community-based care lead agencies. Just because we contract out these services, does not mean that we contract out our responsibility. We all must be accountable. There has been a perception that because services are contracted out that the department has no accountability, but Secretary Butterworth clearly indicated that this is not the case. Although the C.C. case brought you here, go below the surface of this case and make comprehensive and creative recommendations on our entire system of child protection, especially reunification, use of non-relative placements, stabilization and permanency during foster care, and communication and interaction between agencies. This would include shortening the time in out of home care and additional services up-front. Suggestion to take the meetings on the road to capture the best practices from around the state. In one of the brainstorming sessions, they indicated a need to get a good picture of the current system. Palm Beach County has taken a lot of time to build a wire diagram of the process. In the previous meeting, an overview of the process was presented verbally. Today we’d like to present a visual overview, then see how recommendations from the Blue Ribbon Panel and Operation SafeKids fit into that diagram (what is in place/why it worked or not), with the goal of getting a good picture of where we are.
Review and Approval of 8/03/07 Minutes - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
• Motion, second, and approval of 8/03/07 meeting minutes.
Remarks - Representative Bill Galvano
• The issue has gone on far too long. The easy solution is funding, which is a challenge we face every year…. there are too many important things that need to be funded. • After observing the Hotline to understand the system, it was apparent that the significance of the task and the environment do not match. • Community-based care is a good idea, but we need to keep our hand on it. Having community-based care lead agencies does not relinquish the department’s responsibility. • The hard work that is being done here is not in vain. He will listen. We can make adjustments to the law. • The underlying goal is to cut through the red tape and make it more streamlined. Committed to making Florida’s Child Welfare System the best it can be. • This is a good atmosphere for change with Governor Crist and Secretary Butterworth. 1 • Looking forward to recommendations of Task Force
Comments : • Across the board cuts is not acceptable. How can we communicate this to the Legislature? Cannot reduce the funds to at risk children and adults and expect them to be protected. Response: Agree with you. Ask the House and Senate not to take the cleaver approach and really look at the needs. • Cuts to other programs like DJJ, APD, and mental health has a greater impact on the Child Welfare program. When they have no capacity to serve the children within those systems, they will fall into the Child Welfare system.
Wire Diagram - Dr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D. Wire Diagram available as a handout • The Wire Diagram allows you to identify the different parties across the page to show ownership, overlap, or sequence • Each agency can be identified by a color (Hotline=Yellow, DCF=Blue, Lead Agency=Aqua, Subcontractor=Purple) • A double bar on a box indicates another entire system that is not being reviewed at this time • First Page=Report to Hotline • Second Page=Decision point where PI is assessing the safety of the child as well as the needs of the family If no safety issues, four options (no legal services): 1. Close, no referrals 2. Close, some referrals (voluntary-up to family to follow up) 3. Referral to service (day care, SA, DV) 4. Formal referral to diversion service • Page10=If child is in immediate danger • Page 11=24-hour shelter hearing • Page 12=How a hand-off can work. In this example, the Protective Investigator is more involved in services • Other pages=Solutions that have been put in place
Diagramming the process for Palm Beach County, identified the following disconnects in the system (Gaps labeled on the diagram with a red circle with a line through it): • When the child is removed, the Department of Revenue money doesn’t always follow • No Memorandum of Understanding in Palm Beach County---Lead Agency needs to hold subcontractors accountable. • Board needs to also have some responsibility • Defined protocol…to ensure that things get done • Protective Investigators making quality decisions • Lack of check/balance or communication up-front • Threats from Substance Abuse agency if non-compliance with informal referrals • Direct files tend to get dropped. If child not removed, but supervision is needed, legal may not occur for a couple of weeks. No case management before arraignment. • Lines of communication/timeliness of communication • Time line for direct files…PI refers to services, not a clear cohesive case plan at the early part of crisis, missed opportunity of diversion when more likely to have an impact. • Court liaison is in courtroom to represent the case, not the case manager. Disconnect in communication between the case manager and liaison 2 • Duplication of effort between the Department/PI and Lead Agency at hand off---where it begins and where it ends is significant • DCF legal is in the courtroom at multiple times, Lead Agency legal not in court
Discussion/Lessons Learned/Recommendations: • We need written protocols to guide the process. However, we need to be clear on what systemic statewide issues are and what are unique to local areas. We do not want to burden other areas that do not have issues with broad scope recommendations. Identify key functionalities that apply to everyone, that are valuable anywhere. Be sensitive to a framework that allows local areas to solve unique problems. • Need for an active rather than passive referral system. • In Palm Beach County, the Lead Agency is responsible for case plan. Nobody is required to do it prior to court hearing. • In some areas, despite the system, they are implementing good referrals….change structure. • These are working in smaller systems. • It is in how we set up the design and expectations. • Another option is to encourage court to do non-shelter earlier with shelter hearings. • Parking Lot: Non-shelter petition/rules committee issue—timely • Set up a Guardian Ad Litem /Court Appointed Special Advocate early in the process, as early as investigation (independent investigation simultaneously). • Focus on system rather than personality recommendations • Has payment been authorized for referred services? Has appointment been made? • Parents are less motivated further in the process • Be careful with unfunded mandates • Question regarding authority, would it require legislative action to make change? • Two critical functions of protective investigations: Investigation and intervention (proactive to connect family with service needs-pass to crisis response team or lead agency) • GAL attends all shelter hearing and prioritizes representation based on severity of needs • Important to have clearly defined roles and responsibilities between investigations and service • Documentation often drives the process. System is not as user friendly as it could/should be. Untimely receipt of reports (ex: toxicology results) can impact findings of investigations
Gay Frizzell - Overview of the Blue Ribbon Panel (Recommendations and current status)
Powerpoint and Status Update available as handouts Contact with children • Two main recommendations regarding contact with children: Monthly contact and credible tracking system • Policy (Florida Administrative Code) requires children to be seen every 30 days • Reports are available to track….compliance currently at 99% • New focus is on the quality of visit/contact---are these visits effective? • Good description about visit is clear indication that visit occurred • Florida is the best state in the nation at making contact with children, can be attributed to Blue Ribbon Panel • Secretary has required a report of kids not seen for more than 55 days with effort to return to 32 days. At the time, approximately 50 children were on this list. Many were data entry errors, runaways, etc. • Policy change (May 2006) requiring contact every 30 days rather than monthly
3 • Each Region is responsible to review list of kids not seen for more than 55 days (review three times per week)-community-based care providers have access to this system as well. • The Secretary has directed Florida Safe Families Network developers to establish a tickler system to alert supervisor and executive leadership of agency of kids not seen for more than 33 days • Local system should already be alert of kids not seen, long before Central Office notification • In addition to the data, also focus on documentation • Why are not all parties involved notified when a child is not seen? (Guardian Ad Litem, court, etc…..may be someone has seen the child) Sharing the responsibility. • Sharing information is an excellent opportunity for a check and balance to identify problems….example is falsification case that was identified by Guardian Ad Litem where case manager documented a visit when the Guardian Ad Litem knew the family had moved. • In the C.C. case, falsification was not the issue, documentation was not the issue, communication occurred, but the appropriate action did not occur. • New York case where foster parent had kids, but they weren’t the right kids. How do we know we’re seeing the right kids? Fingerprints and photos. • In addition to face to face visit every 30 days for safety, also need to focus on the serving the needs of the child/family. Focus is checking the box that the child was seen. • Data begins to be the focus rather than the mission • No where in these documents is there anything about having the Lead Agency holding the agencies accountable for seeing the parents? • Brevard tracks number of visits between parents and children, directly related to success of permanency • Anticipate changes with DCF quality assurance, consulting with Peter DiGre. Acknowledge that DCF can do better in this area. New quality assurance plan due to Secretary Butterworth by 9/30. • Can we assume that the recommendations that were implemented in 2003 are still being done? Yes & No…Still can be improvements, checks and balances. • The emphasis on quality was not the intent of the Blue Ribbon Panel, their primary concern was safety.
Assessment and Supporting Foster Parents, Relative/Non-Relative Caregivers • Screening of caregivers, study caregivers when making placements, etc. • Policies are in place, however there are gaps in practice • In the C.C. case, it was the quality of home studies • Comment on #29-fingerprinting of all adult household members for Florida Bureau of Investigations comparison…funding not always available and of the hundreds of them that have been done in Manatee, they have not had any come back, revisit the financial burden • Comment on #27-not enough emphasis on medical….biggest challenge for community-based care Lead Agencies is that the medical information is not being relayed to the foster parents and medical professionals to ensure that the children get the appropriate medical care. Why is this information in a paper file that is being passed from person to person? Need for a common information system. Everyone is segregated and nothing to integrate. Create an infrastructure/common database that allows interested parties (Guardians Ad Litem, foster parents) to access. Florida Safe Families Network enhancements will include this. Senator Storms has identified the Florida Safe Families Network file as the official record. Multiple users should be able to enter as well as inquiry. Appropriate access and security. Palm Beach County has an effective system with the courts. • Comment on #47: Share information with other states regarding kids that have been in care in another state. Issue for the Congress to look at. • Comment #14: Recommendation to change a local hotline to the hotline when child not seen in 30 days.
4 Quality Assurance • Accreditation was a recommendation from the Blue Ribbon Panel for all Lead Agencies. All are moving toward this, but at different stages of the process. • What about the subcontractors? Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendation did not address this • Need for revision of policies to clarify, condense • Family Team Conference Model has been successful…Places that have implemented Family Teaming have struggled to function within the Rules, need to address the Rules, make recommendations for changes to Rules…focus on compliance and timeframes which is difficult to balance with Family Teaming. • In addition, recommendation for the facilitator of the Family Team Conference be a neutral party/mediator. Leave the meeting with a family case plan that everyone has agreed to…contract compliance with case plan and case plan tasks • Comment on #31: Performance measures for lead agencies as well as the department? Yes. Always looking at the best way to measure performance that is meaningful that gets the results that we are looking for. • Concern that this team is working on recommendations and then another team is working on making changes to performance measures, etc. Pat Badland will provide overview of what the Florida Safe Families Network is working on. • Caution what other studies/reports have offered on performance measures. Manatee County Sheriff’s Office has found that their experience is alerting them to things that have impact…those are the things that need to be measured. • What is the main thing that impacts service?….caseload size and retention • Caseload is significant for burnout, ability to manage work, no more than 18. Well supported that caseloads are too high in Florida. • Suggestion that we have a blend of performance measures and other indicative measures (caseload size, length of experience, salary, turnover rate—impact performance). What we should hold the Lead Agency to is developing and managing an effective organization. Did community-based care accomplish what it was intended to do….ownership within the community, additional resources and services? • Study from Wisconsin, for every change in caseworker, five months longer to permanency • Recommendation for certification for lead agencies to establish minimum standards. Hesitant to have another hoop for community-based care to jump through without taking away another that is not working. • Comments on #32-District 11 was pilot for waiver of funding restrictions, Florida is now under the IV-E waiver effective 10/1/06. • Community-based care (CBC) has moved to a Quality Assurance for their Board-good example of CBC that has a system to review their own structure • Certification rather than an accreditation-Lead Agency as an agency effective in managing a subcontracting system • We have created a fear-driven, check box system that is not focused on a normal, healthy activities that will allow children to thrive. • When we enter social work back into our system, then we will begin to make change. Create enthusiasm to do this work.
Representation of Children: Guardian Ad Litem • Larger cities have less represented • Not always for the life of case…may or may not be assigned during critical periods • Try to manage caseload. Staff work on 85-125 children.
5 • What is the quality assurance system for Guardian Ad Litem? Volunteer retention rate, audits/accuracy rate, trends, etc. • Needs: funding, marketing for need for volunteers • Similar funding to Child Welfare Legal Services….may need to review structure to ensure no duplication, to use resources most efficiently…is this model still the most effective? Are roles clearly defined, consistent, and working with others? • Lay persons have passion, their heart is in it to serve the child, many become foster parents, cannot pay for that experience • What are the obstacles?…mileage, parking at court house, etc.
Technology Enhancements (Laptops, cameras, data systems) • Success in Legislative Budget Request at that time to purchase laptops, cameras, LiveScan….where are we now? • We expect our care managers to do quality visits, they need to be equipped to do this • How does this trickle down to the care managers? Contract language? • Do they have laptops? Not all. What are the issues? Air cards, access, speed of network, etc. • Manatee County Sheriff’s Office has built that into their budget. They have the technology, but complain about access or slow. Phase in technology, may take years, but need to make that investment. • Who makes the decision? Is this the team recommendation/DCF, or lead agency? Best practice, kudos to those that recognize it as efficient. • How is the technology working for you? Ask if people have what they need, are they using, working, access, speed, etc. Task Force needs input on this.
Collaboration with education and school readiness • Usefulness of collaboration with schools, both for education and seeing children to be extra set of eyes. • This requires 4 year olds to be registered in day care, but infants and toddlers are more at risk. • Children in foster care and under supervision are required to be in day care. May not be practiced/enforced statewide. • Follow up implementation of the rule.
Staff Recruitment, Training and Retention • Loan reimbursement is not available at this time, we have the student stipend program • Contracts in place to address Supervising for Excellence, Leadership Institute, and curriculum development/training academy/Center for Advancement Recommendations about pay and full-time positions—experience with this in Palm Beach County, turnover is the key factor for success. We all need to be on board on how reported to ensure consistency…with caseload, turnover, pay (Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability report from June 2006 regarding turnover, pay, etc.) • Turnover really has to do with expectations at the front-end. Manatee is careful with who is hired, do ride alongs, watch video of abuse from least to worst, educate applicant on what the job entails in order to make a decision if it is the right job for them. • Has a lot to do with supervision…some supervisors have a lot of turnover, others have none, become like a family. • Recommendation: Definition of caseload and retention so they can be measured. • Culture Plan-recruitment/retention plan in Seminole County • Fundamental issue that has not been addressed, those with a big heart will seek this work, but they need to feel fulfilled in order to stay. 6 • How are we moving back into social work, value-based and culture-based to support this work? • Sterling has two key elements: technology skills and culture of the organization-leadership establishes the culture. How are we developing the leadership? Fundamental flaw. • Energize the business community to provide more expertise to these non-profit agencies. • Culture Club in Miami – need mutual respect • As more agencies come on board, we will run ourselves out of business if our salaries do not stay in line…multiple counties vying for the same people to do the same job at various salary levels. People are jumping from position to position to follow the salary increases.
Overview of Operations SafeKids (Recommendations and current status
Laurie Blades, Senior Management Analyst Supervisor, and Hans Soder, Child Location Specialist Operation Safekids Status Update and Applied Behavior Analysis Program Information Paper available as handouts Reporting & Investigating Missing Children Cases • In general, the recommendations have been implemented, but still some concerns • Critical thing: Need to establish structures and linkages between protective investigations, services provided by community-based care agencies and law enforcement. • Law Enforcement is more likely to cooperate if they see value, not just dropping the case on them, working together • Five Region-Level Child Location Coordinator positions--in process of hiring • How are other states notified when child is missing? How do we notify other social service agencies?
Public Awareness & Outreach • Locator system-no longer useful if the other agencies don’t have it • Manatee County Sheriff’s Office-media alert when there is a concern that doesn’t meet the criteria for Amber Alert. Media is the first to criticize; this includes them in the process. • Needs to be a partnership among law enforcement, protective investigators and community base care providers---include law enforcement/the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to do presentation at pre-service training • Joint training of protective investigators and law enforcement, most impact from including dispatchers • Meet with Florida Sheriffs Association---encourage to foster joint training at the local level, some Sheriffs are more cooperative than others
Prevention • Photos and fingerprints to assist Law Enforcement – improved from 28% photos to 75% • Photos applies to all children, in home and out of home, some are doing very well and some are not • Fingerprints only apply to out of home (98%) • Hard copy fingerprints is a burden---working toward the electronic to ensure timely access • Any examples of fingerprints assisting to find a child---no • Fingerprints are routinely matched to missing, crime scene, and unidentified remains… • Fingerprints or DNA is valuable when child is too young to identify who they are and the person that has them is not willing to share who they are • The Florida Department of Law Enforcement requires dental records to be entered for those that are missing for three months • Is there a normalcy, for what parents do for their children? Child safety kits available to have hair samples, fingerprints, and photos on file. • Suggestion: DNA at birth with Healthy Kids 7 • We require health screening with dependency. Can this be incorporated? • Duplicative systems doing the same thing---DJJ, school, etc. But, some systems are not efficient in entering the information so it is available. • There has to be a better way…a lot of energy spent getting fingerprints with little return. • We have a responsibility when we remove a child to have the ability to positively identify a child if they go missing. • Issues with fingerprints….accessible, reliability of prints for small children, kids involved with the Department of Juvenile Justice may already have them, feeling like a criminal getting prints done when they are removed…. • What about DNA? Most reliable, may never be utilized, cost only when processed • Paranoia that DNA reveals more than fingerprints, privacy issues • Recommendation: Bring this issue to law enforcement for their input. What do they need? • Not an argument for or against fingerprints
Stabilization, Recovery, Legislative Action • Concern stated at previous meeting that reports from Behavior Analysts who talk to kids when they return from runaway are not made available –no reason that information cannot be shared • Community-based care agencies decide how they will use Behavior Analysts…this makes sense, based on their agency’s needs. Handout includes chart of what community-based care agencies have identified as their priorities. • Does this team want to make a recommendation to have Behavior Analysts work with kids that are running to assess/evaluate what they are running from, if they have substance abuse or mental health needs? • If child has not been identified as having mental health needs, beneficial services may not be available to them • Running away is a status offense rather than a criminal offense, cannot detain them • Runaways are a real concern…if not addressed by this group, it should be by another • What is best practice for use of Behavior Analysts? Include interviews on what best practices are out there to deal with runaways…if not Behavior Analyst, it may be another position • 65C-30, FAC requires case manager to talk with the child within 24 hours, does not have to be face- to-face • Have we looked at the data for those that use Behavior Analysts to work with runaways, have they seen impact? • Orlando has a system in place, using tool…seen results (total # of runaways and repeat running--- success is measured in length of time, frequency, and less risky behavior while away) • Team may want to get more information on how community-based care agencies see their system of care and continuous improvement (in Quality Assurance Plan) • Support having a conversation with runaway to determine why they ran, why they are unhappy, what are they running from, normalcy-to have fun with friends, running to be with an older boyfriend • Look at return from runaway as serious as when they were removed---services, attention • If we only focus on the teens, we are just seeing a sliver of the system • Focus back on permanency
Discussion-Chairman Krischer Chairman asked that all team members give their perspective of the task and to identify priorities: • Steering committee of a giant project, unable to do all the work ourselves, assign expertise from around the state to identify the issues, and this group to determine priorities and recommendations • Communication is key–both technology and personal. Interested in which state is doing the best, and how they are doing it 8 • Responsible for policy for the Department. Will bring update on where the Family Safety Program office/DCF is headed and ask for team to comment and make recommendations • Determine the five or six major issues that impact all of the others---get some action instead of sitting around just talking about it • Looking at the previous groups, what else can we add, it’s already been said. What are the linchpins that could really change the system? Has the Department already identified these? • Support smaller groups that report back. Looking at the charges from the Secretary, we’ve done some, but need to get additional information from stakeholders on education, training, and recommendations. Personally-what can the courts do to make things better? • We need to maximize the potential of this group. Child Welfare has changed since the previous task force…more Sheriffs are now doing Protective Investigations, community-based care lead agencies are doing services, Child Welfare has come so far, but it is still evolving. There was some great ideas from the first meeting (person of interest), impressed with the discussion, excited about making recommendations that are far reaching. Support smaller groups reporting back to this group. Continue this process, even after this group. • Believe that Florida can be the leader in Child Welfare…we need to do that, we have to do that. Excited to be a part of this. We forget to look back and see what we have already accomplished. • Shift the resources up front for diversion, we always spend more money dealing with it once it becomes a crisis. What are communities doing to improve quality of life? • Really concerned and focused on how we can get all of this done. Great recommendations, but it doesn’t matter if it doesn’t change things. • Move kids through the process faster. Intent of looking at wire diagrams, see what is working and to identify gaps. If nothing else, just streamline system.
Schedule Future Meetings • Dependency Summit at Ritz Carlton in Orlando • Wednesday 9/5/07 in the morning • Secretary will Chair • Good opportunity to get public comment from community-based care lead agencies, Judges, DCF, Guardians Ad Litem, etc.
Assignments for Task Force Members Will use summary from these meetings and summary from the Family Safety Program Office/DCF of current projects
Dependency Summit-Pat Badland Director, Office of Family Safety • Orlando, September 5-7, 2007 • Three distinct forums—basic and advanced workshops, professional development session, convene by judicial circuit • No greater opportunity to be exposed to the true child welfare work from local court community perspective • Ask that a Task Force Member be represented in each circuit in order to get comments from all areas • Suggestion to complete a worksheet on key issues with specific information gathered…
ISSUE Key Events Improvement Who is What will When? Did it needed lead? be done? work? Court Dockets Children at Hearings 9 Home Study Process Reunification Focus on Children Permanency Access to Care Technology
Public Comments-Chairman Krischer Delores Wilson-Foster Parent for 10 years • Re-wrote the Foster Parent Bill of Rights…Unless we have foster parents that are respected, we are losing the good ones and maintaining others. Working with Senator Ronda Storms on a bill. It says that we are all working as a team. • Not given sufficient information about foster children (foster child placed with previous history of domestic violence toward foster parent) • Put her family and foster family at risk • Treated unfairly due to a death caused by this foster child (her grandchildren removed and license revoked after being cleared by Child Protective Services) • Had to be persistent to get court information • Weed out the bad foster parents by conducting more surprise visits
Adjournment - Chairman Krischer at 3:15 pm
10 Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Agenda
JW Marriott, Orlando Room: Marbella 4
September 5, 2007 9:00 – 12:00
9:00 – 9:30 Judge David Gooding, Vice Chair Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks • Review and Approval of 8/16/07 Minutes • Task Force Accomplishments • Introduction of Judge Dawson and Child Justice Act • Schedule future meetings
9:30 – 10:00 Governor Buddy MacKay Dependency Mediation
10:00 – 10:30 Pat Badland, Director Department Initiatives Office of Family Safety
10:30 – 11:00 Pete Digre, Quality Assurance California-based Youth Law Center
11:00 – 12:00 Public Comments
12:00 Adjournment
Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Summary JW Marriot, Orlando September 5, 2007
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks • Judge David Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force provided opening remarks and welcomed everyone. • Judge Gooding introduced Judge Dawson and thanked him for his work on the Children’s Justice Act and the planning of the 2007 Dependency Summit. • Judge Gooding introduced Secretary Butterworth.
Secretary Butterworth’s Opening Remarks Secretary Butterworth thanked the Task Force for their work and introduced former Governor Buddy MacKay, listing his many accomplishments: State Representative, State Senator, Congressman, two term Lieutenant Governor, Governor. Secretary Butterworth stated Florida is fortunate to have many great people serving the state and Buddy MacKay is one of the finest.
Dependency Mediation
Governor Buddy MacKay Governor MacKay introduced himself and stated he and John Cooper, Central Regional Director would present on a pilot project in the 5th circuit. Governor MacKay stated he provides an outsiders view of child welfare and the system and made the following observations: • Sometimes, the adult’s life is out of control, someone calls the abuse hotline, an investigator comes out, the child is removed, and there is a hearing where the burden of proof is a preponderance of evidence. Thirty days after the shelter hearing, there is an arraignment when the Judge has to determine if the child is at risk, 30 more days to develop a case plan, then judge hears both sides. • The goal is trying to get someone to change their life, attitudes and used 60 days in the system before efforts really began. • Case plans are all alike. There are only about five options of services to choose from, for example, drug rehab, psychosocial evaluation, anger management and parenting. • Parent’s attitudes change more quickly when they are treated with respect. In mediation, we say to them, everyone makes mistakes and we are not assuming that you are a bad person.
How the Pilot Project Got Started • Governor Mackay stated he practiced law for 30 years, mostly corporate, property and probate law and had no experience with dependency law.
1
• The pastor of his church and his wife are foster parents and has adopted children and they began to share their passion for these children. Governor MacKay decided something needed to be done to help them. • Met with Judge Sue Robbins and discovered there was only one certified dependency mediator that was inactive. There were only 142 certified mediators in the entire state. • Governor MacKay volunteered to become a certified mediator. During the next year, 25 mediators were certified. During the second year, 25 additional mediators were trained for a total of 50. • People with experience working with children and families were recruited, such as retired school teachers. Training for mediators was free and mediators provided services for free for a certain number of hours in return prior to receiving payment per a contract.
Process Used and Outcomes: • The pilot project began mediation two to three weeks after shelter. Present were investigator, guardian ad litem, parents/guardian, service worker/agency and no attorneys. • Goal was to arrive at an agreement of what brought them there and what had to change to reunite the family. Ninety-five percent of the cases were able to be mediated. • There was some selection of successful mediation participants. Those that were less successful were: 1. Families that had children previously removed in Florida. 2. Previous dependency involvement in other states. • Cases headed for termination of parental rights were excluded from the project. • The Judge was presented with an agreement that was non-binding until the lawyers had a chance to review. • Since the beginning of the pilot project, people have become less adversarial, resulting in more team work. In an adversarial environment, the interest of the child becomes secondary. • The mediation pilot reduced delay in the juvenile dependency process, saving time and reunifying families sooner. • The Dependency court process is not a criminal process; however, the way Chapter 39, F.S. is written and implemented appears to lean toward an adversarial process. • The 5th Circuit has many more mediation cases than any other part of the state. • Eighteen months ago, there were a total of 4,300 children in care and currently there are 2,800.
Barrier • Need for room or space to hold mediations.
Governor MacKay introduced John Cooper to present data related to the pilot project.
John Cooper, Regional Director, Central Region Mr. Cooper provided a powerpoint handout to the Task Force and made the following comments: • Secretary Butterworth requested that the 5th Circuit meet in Ocala to review the progress of the dependency mediation pilot project and consider possibility to expand the practice. A study of the pilot project was completed. • Mr. Cooper reviewed the charts contained in the powerpoint handout: 2
Page 15 entitled Circuit 5 Mediation Study: Children Receiving Services: Children Removed; 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006. • There were two groups in the study. Lake County was the control group that did not participate in the pilot project and Marion County was the target group that did.
Page 16 entitled Circuit 5 Mediation Study: Length of Stay in Average Days; 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006 and page 17 entitled Permanency Achieved in Average Days 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2005. • Children who received mediation had an average length of stay of 197.5 days less than children who did not receive mediation. • Children who received mediation gained permanency an average of 182.4 days sooner than children who did not receive mediation.
Page 18 entitled Project Savings: 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006: • Projected cost savings are based on assumptions: • an average of 197 day reduction; • 50% of children in licensed placements; • Savings based on minimum board payment of $429 • Does not include savings in the Relative Caregiver Program, administrative savings, court savings or case management savings. • Projected total savings are approximately three million dollars.
Governor Buddy MacKay: Closing Remarks and Recommendations • There are two risks children face: 1. What happens to them in the home 2. What happens when they move around in foster care and being separated from their families. • The University of South Florida has been contracted by the Supreme Court to assess possible side effects of the pilot not currently being measured. John Cooper will work with them. Recommendations: 1. Continue to implement the dependency pilot project of a more formal basis. 2. Keep the savings and reinvest in foster care to allow program to become self-funded. 3. The state should begin an accounting procedure to show cost savings. 4. DCF (possibly in conjunction with the courts) submit a legislative proposal or request assurances from the legislature to allow both to reinvest savings and not be taken back by the legislature. 5. The Department could set up a fund similar to Gov. Chiles Innovation Fund. Agencies submit proposals for improvements and the Department funds the top five.
Quality Assurance
Pete Digre from the California-based Youth Law Center introduced himself and provided the following opening remarks:
3
• Secretary Butterworth met with the Youth Law Center to get some new ideas and requested technical assistance. Pete Digre has provided the Department with recommendations related to quality management and continuous quality improvement. • There are indicators that should be tracked real-time that address outcomes (currently statistical in nature) and practice standards, based on research and experience. Recommendations address the best practice standards to be included. • Mr. Digre provided a brief overview of his recommendations to the Department:
1. Early Services Intervention Staffing: Community based care providers can work with the child abuse investigator to provide services to prevent removal or fast track to termination of parental rights. Community based care providers are too much on the receiving end and should be more involved in decisions of placement. Discussion of there currently being no metric for community based care providers to keep kids out of foster care.
2. Understand the child right up front: Screen the child for service and support needs, such as mental health, education, developmental, health, etc. Identify and consider the needs and status of the family, such as criminal history, income, child welfare involvement. Ensure the first place for the child is the right place. Consider the needs of children placed together.
3. Access of caregiver to emergency services: Immediate access to support and crisis intervention 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Will assist in maintaining placements of children.
4. Child Visitation by caseworkers: Currently, Florida’s performance is one of the best in the nation and tracking of this needs to continue.
5. Engagement of the family: Substantial and meaningful engagement of the family. Review progress toward goals at least monthly. New York has a good model.
6. Family Visitation: Children visit with parents and siblings.
7. Healthcare: Check-ups required medical care needs to be tracked. Children in foster care have more illnesses than children who are not in foster care.
8. Department of Education Agreement:
4
Agreements are good here in Florida. The community based care provider, Hillsborough Kids, Inc. was mentioned as a good model for collaboration with their local schools. The law promotes stability/same school attendance, Individual Education Plans and caregiver involvement. These are areas for continued improvement.
9. Services for teens (age 14 and above): Plans should be developed, reviewed and updated. Services/supports and assessments should address and plan for living place, income, healthcare, etc after the youth exits foster care.
10. Adoption Goals: Currently exceeding targets Need to track milestones of process from the time the child is free for adoption to finalization.
11. Recruitment and retention of foster homes: Targeted recruitment basis on data. Focus on the children the community based care providers have (medical, mental health, behavioral needs, age, etc.). Decrease foster home over capacity
• Mr. Digre provided a brief overview of what he thought Florida was doing well and opportunities for improvement: What we are doing well: 1. Sheriff offices doing protective investigations have a good peer review process. 2. Community based care has been fully implemented 3. The Department is taking quality assurance seriously and has 90 people doing QA work with a good infrastructure. 4. Everyone is on the same team committed to having the best child welfare system possible.
Opportunities for improvement 1. Reduce focus on some current indicators. Increase focus on best practice standards (for healthcare and child well-being) that drive good outcomes. 2. Increase focus on the family engagement and visitation of children with parents and siblings. 3. Understand the child’s needs and family structure right up front, as early as possible. Use team meetings with family and a variety relevant professionals to identify and address service and support needs and ensure the first placement is the right placement. Use Oakland, California Children’s Hospital as a model.
Discussion and Statements:
5
It was stated that there is a lot of time spent identifying problems/looking at things and less on changing them. Mr. Digree stated you have to use data and look at practice. The second tier of the Department’s current quality assurance process is where the changes should happen. Set targets, gather and review information from multiple sources and implement corrective action. Quality Assurance reports are not routinely taking a critical look at how/if child could have been kept with the family. Manatee County Sheriff office focuses a lot on the services within the community to prevent removal. Protective investigators are asked what services and supports are needed that are not available. A statement was made that collaboration is required across the system of care and at all levels. We should be solution focused versus problem dissecting. We should focus on what we could have done differently to get better results versus what did we/you do wrong.
Discussion of Task Force Workgroup Assignments • Judge Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force, discussed the Task Force workgroup assignments. The Department has assigned staff to provide support and assistance. Task Force members can add anyone to their workgroup they feel would be beneficial to their workgroup. • It was suggested that an additional workgroup be added related to child location and recovery. Task Force members Donna Uzzell and Connie Schingledecker were assigned to the child location and recovery workgroup.
Department Initiatives: Pat Badland, Director of Family Safety, Florida Department of Children and Families reviewed some of the Department’s current initiatives: 1. Second Party Review Training: Developing requirements and associated training for the completion of second party reviews by supervisors on cases internal to the Department. 2. Dependency Summit Action Plans: Circuits will have break-out sessions where they will complete actions plans of how they will address specific issues, such as home studies, children at hearing, and court dockets. 3. Quality Assurance: As a result of the Department’s reorganization, quality assurance staff are reporting to the Regional Director and not Tallahassee. The Department’s quality assurance plans is being reviewed and redesigned, based on recommendations from Pete DiGree. 4. Placement Stability: Florida has not done well on the performance measure associated with placement stability, is under a corrective action plan and is facing financial penalties of 2 to 3 million dollars a quarter. Florida, Texas and California are in the same situation and are discussing the financial penalties with the Administration for Children and Families, Health and Human Services. Taking money from states will not assist in solving this issue.
6
If Florida has to pay a financial penalty, it will impact the community based care providers in some way that is yet to be determined. 5. Florida Safe Families Network implementation: The first phase of the new Department electronic record system has been implemented. Phase two is under development. • Discussion: The relationship between community based care providers and the Department was discussed. The statement was made that the Department cannot stay fixed/unchanging and everything else change. In order for the community based care providers to achieve and maintain improvement over time, the Department need to transform as well.
Public Comments
1. Melissa Page-Bailie: President, Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association, Inc. presented to the Task Force on behalf of the Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association and provided the following information: • History of the Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association. The Florida State Foster Adoptive Parent Association was formed in 1986 to bring together parents in an effort to find support and resolutions to the problems that foster parents were struggling with. Today, there are over 9,200 foster parents in the state and are the voice for over 19,000 children in care. The Board members are volunteers. • Per the American Academy of Pediatrics: Abuse impacts a child’s physical health; Disabled children are two times more likely to be abused; More than 100,000 children are abused every year…what about their future? • Three Recommendations were made to the Task Force: Improve Services: ♦ Counselors and foster parents have to fight to obtain therapeutic services for children. ♦ Often time, adoptions are held up due to negotiations of medical board rates. Adoptive parents have to fight for every dime. ♦ Educational Support: children loose four months of educational progress with every move and 50% of children in foster care drop out of school prior to graduation. Standardize Reports, Forms, Processes: ♦ There are 22 community based care providers around the state and they all use their own forms, reports and processes for things such as licensing, training, adoption subsidy applications. ♦ The Florida State Foster Adoptive Parent Association would like to collaborate to assist in developing standard forms and reports. Normalcy: ♦ It is difficult to find funds to allow children to participate in sports, arts, etc. The benefit to children outweighs the cost. ♦ The board is barely enough to fund food, shelter and clothing. Recreational activities are so important, but there is little/no money to fund them.
7
• Discussion: The suggestion was made that we need to make sure we have a standard base/standards of practice and some flexibility. The statement was made that some communities have a tax required in statute for the purpose of providing after school activities to children in the community. The recommendation was made that there needs to be a basic standard and level of expectation for all children and youth in foster care across the state and after school activities should be included.
2. Ms. Perez, Parent: Ms. Perez is from Miami Dade and spoke to the Task Force as a parent and grandparent of children in the system. Ms. Perez made the following statements and recommendations: • Heard a lot of positive statements today about how the Department is improving the structure. The Department needs to improve starting at the bottom, with the staff that works directly with people. • Parents are failing because there is not enough money to access services to address issues such as domestic violence. In addition, there is not enough staff to oversee and assist with what is happening. Her grandchildren were moved around multiple times. • Main Concern: The Department and community based care agencies need to start listening to parents, families and children. No one listens to them. The old Department worked with us. • Children are medicated to make them compliant and address their behavior and pills are not the answer. Her own child was suicidal while on mediations. Doctors prescribe medication cocktails. • There are too many children in foster care and not enough services. The issue is not just bad parents. • Ms. Perez provided the Task Force with a DVD related to the negative side effects of medications for children and how to reduce the use. • There needs to be more focus on the family and resources.
Closing Remarks 1. The next Task Force meeting has been tentatively scheduled for September 20 in Broward County. 2. Next Steps for the Task Force Work Groups: • Staff assigned to provide support will contact the lead within the next week. • Task Force members assigned to the workgroups need to determine whom else from around the state they need to include. Can include anyone they feel would benefit. • The suggestions were made to add a sixth workgroup to address child location and recovery, specifically the possible use of DNA to identify children only if needed. Major Connie Schingledecker, Manatee County Sheriffs Office and Donna Uzzell, Florida Department of Law Enforcement will be assigned to this workgroup. Ms. Uzzell is assigned as the lead.
Adjournment Judge Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force thanked everyone for presenting and attending and adjourned the meeting. 8 Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Agenda
September 20, 2007 9:00 – 3:00
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
Review of Pending DCF Legislation Pat Badland, Director, Office of Family Safety • Comprehensive Reform of Child Protection • Community based care lead agency contingency plan
George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations • Public records
Jim Sewell • Human Service Information Systems Council
Discussion Community Based Care White Paper Dave Bundy, President/CEO, Children’s Home Society
Presentation Florida Children’s First Andrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida Children First
Status Brief by Workgroups Workgroup Leads 1. Home Study Form/Process and Implementation 2. Out of County Services 3. Child Protection Investigation to Services Transition 4. Systems of Care 5. Stabilization and Permanency 6. Child Recovery and Operation Safe Kids Follow-up
Discussion Jim Sewell Preliminary Report to Sec. Butterworth
2:00 – 3:00 Public Comments
Adjournment Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Summary Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale September 20, 2007
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks • State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chairman of the Task Force, opened the meeting and welcomed the participants • Chairman Krischer commented that he was not able to attend the previous meeting due to a family commitment but understood from Judge Gooding that the meeting was well attended and productive • Chairman Krischer shared the dates and locations of the next two meetings: October 10 in Jacksonville and November 2 in Ft. Myers • Chairman Krischer referred the members to the agenda for the first presentation
Review of Pending DCF Legislation Comprehensive Reform of Child Protection and Lead Agency Contingency Plan • Pat Badland, Director, Office of Family Safety commented on the highlights of the proposed legislation • For more detailed information, see handout entitled, “2008 Agency Proposal, Priority #2” • The following proposals were mentioned: 1. Requiring law enforcement to accept missing children reports 2. Tightening the judicial scrutiny of non-relative placements 3. Providing exceptions to the 60-day closure of child protective investigations 4. Providing proper notice of hearings for foster parents 5. Addressing discrepancies in background screening requirements for various caregivers 6. Broadening the opportunity for injunctions in domestic violence situations 7. Clarifying accountability for lead agencies
Secretary Butterworth’s Welcome and Introduction of Senator Nan Rich • Secretary Butterworth welcomed the Task Force and the meeting observers to Broward County • He commented that it was a great pleasure to recognize Senator Rich, a true friend of the Department and that she had sponsored legislation on behalf of the Department with tenacity and compassion • Senator Rich commented that she was glad the Task Force was meeting in her back yard and affirmed her tremendous commitment to services for children • She indicated that she was thrilled Secretary Butterworth had brought together this group of qualified, experienced people to look at child welfare • Senator Rich commented on the potential for across the board budget cuts and indicated that she was never a proponent especially in light of the compounded damage in Health and Human Services due to the additional loss of federal dollars • She indicated that Secretary Butterworth did a fabulous job of presenting the Department’s plan for cuts and that the most recent indications are that the cuts will be 212 million instead of 309 million dollars • Senator Rich further commented that she was being cautious; but believed direct services would be spared during the upcoming special session. However, a billion dollar cut will be addressed during the regular session for 2008 session • She concluded her remarks saying that she looked forward to working with the Secretary and the Task Force and would consider looking at new sources of revenue
Review of Pending DCF Legislation (continued) Public Records
1 • George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations thanked Senator Rich for her work on behalf of youth aging out of foster care and to the Secretary for his commitment to transparency at the Department • Mr. Sheldon referenced a Palm Beach Post article chastising the Legislature for considering across the board cuts and the newspaper comment that the Legislature should take guidance from the new Department on common sense • He commented on the huge transition that this story represented and how glad he was the terms, “troubled” and “beleaguered” were avoided by the press • Mr. Sheldon commented on the Secretary’s mantra of openness and referenced comments from the Secretary’s speech at the Dependency Summit, September 5, 2007, including that the Department has nothing to hide and that the Department will not hide behind confidentiality laws • He explained that the Department cannot correct inaccurate information without successfully petitioning the court to open up records, and that in a recent instance in Ft. Myers, the Department had requested that records be opened and the newspaper reviewed those records and reported the situation fairly with both positive and critical remarks • This resulted in skyrocketing staff morale • In the Courtney Clark case, the primary reason for this Task Force being appointed, the Department petitioned the court and released records in order for the Department and community-based care agencies (CBC) to learn and improve • As Secretary of the Department, Mr. Butterworth administers a 4 billion dollar budget, he must have the authority to make the judgment call to open up records • Mr. Sheldon explained that the Department recognizes the need for safeguards and is proposing a 5- day notice period prior to release He continued with the following bulleted comments: • The Guardian Ad Litem plays a key role in protecting the child’s rights to his/her records and ensuring proper release of records • The burden must be on openness • The Department also intends to add language to Chapter 985, Florida Statutes, to ensure appropriate record sharing with the Department of Juvenile Justice • The need is for the Department to share records with and receive records from the Departments of Education, Revenue - Child Support Enforcement, and the Agency for Persons with Disabilities • The burden should not be on the courts to determine the appropriate agency for services provision but instead on interagency collaboration for the most effective service delivery • The Department fully supports children’s rights to receive their own records when they age out of foster care and recognizes the need for records for insurance, employment, driver’s license, etc • Children must know who they are and how they got here • The Rights and Expectations of Children in Foster Care brochure recently published by the Department includes this right of a child to his/her own records • The Department supports strengthened statutory language holding agencies accountable when records are not shared appropriately • A proposal is being developed for the Governor’s Commission on Open Government to ensure community-based care agencies have equal access to records and are equally liable if records are not shared appropriately • The bottom line is that unless laws are changed, the Department will continue to be constrained in this matter • The Department is striving to improve quality of its services through a new spirit of openness and transparency • More has happened in recent months on this issue and the Department is committed to accomplishing more • A recent change in policy provides for the Hotline to take reports of abuse/neglect even when a location of the child is not known if there are other means to locate the child – the Department’s first commitment is child safety
2 • Mr. Sheldon concluded his remarks by saying the “them verses us” mentality must be eliminated – the Department must partner with community-based care agencies to accomplish these objectives • The entire child welfare service system must adopt a sense of urgency • The significant lesson in the Courtney Clark case is that staff must pick up the phone when emails are not being addressed and child safety is at stake • In response to some questions, Mr. Sheldon shared plans for the Child Location Specialists and the Director position at headquarters to coordinate the partnership with the Departments of Juvenile Justice, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Criminal Justice, etc.
Review of Pending DCF Legislation Human Services Information Systems Council • Dr. Jim Sewell, Special Consultant to Secretary Butterworth and DCF, explained that the issue of computers “not” talking to one another has been explored for the last 8 ½ months • The Department is proposing that this gap be bridged by instituting a strategy similar to the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) Council • This will allow the Departments of Corrections, Education, Juvenile Justice, Highway Safety, etc. to send/receive communication with the Department of Children and Families • The CJIS statute has served law enforcement agencies well • It is “silly” that agencies cannot crosswalk information and the inclusion with substance abuse, and mental health services is also needed • The Department intends to work with the Executive Office of the Governor to propose legislative changes
Presentation: Community-Based Care White Paper • The following were introduced: Dave Bundy, Children’s Home Society President and Chief Executive Officer Bill Frye, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranches, Inc. Charlie Cox, Florida Baptist Children’s Home, Inc. Amy Simpson, Girls and Boys Town, Inc. • Mr. Bundy indicated that he had heard that the white paper had stirred up some controversy and misinterpretation • He stated he wanted to clearly communicate that this was not a criticism of community-based care and went on to say they wanted to build on the successes of community-based care and to continue benefiting from the volunteers in our communities • The white paper is not an all or nothing proposition and that all do not embrace every recommendation • Mr. Bundy introduced Mr. Frye and asked him to continue • Mr. Frye explained that his agency, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranch does not provide case management services • He explained that the role of community-based care lead agencies is a limited role and that there should be limited instances when case management services are provided in-house • Mr. Frye continued that the community-based care system is one in which partnerships are managed to ensure a viable, diverse level of services to better meet the needs • He stated that the current direction is to bring services in-house and create 22 “Departments” rather than one large Department • Mr. Frye emphasized that the lead agency role is to manage and to avoid provision of in-house services • They propose protecting the existing four to five lead agencies that provide case management in- house • Mr. Frye shared the example of the Partnership for Strong Families lead agency as an excellent lead agency • He shared that the Partnership for Strong Families contracts out case management and this ensures a strong quality assurance role by the lead agency 3 • Mr. Frye commented that in the future, lead agencies should be prohibited from providing case management services in-house • He explained that legislation is necessary to ensure the community is represented not by one single board and that accountability is strengthened when lead agencies manage the system and other agencies provide case management • Mr. Bundy concluded the overall presentation by commenting that the spirit of dialogue helps to define the term, “community”, and stated that the statute should address a process for defining how a community structures its system of care • Mr. Frye added that community-based care agencies should not be allowed to raise funds with tax dollars • Mr. Cox commented on the accreditation status of his agency and the various monitoring processes conducted on his agencies • He shared that they experience difficulties with the current level of monitoring and monitoring efforts need to be coordinated and consistent • Mr. Frye added that a false sense of security exists when the correct balance of monitoring is not in place • There needs to be right balance between safety and documentation
Task Force comments or questions: • Why is legislation necessary • Why take away discretion from communities to choose own model? Why limit choice? Why set a precedent by prescribing a structure for community-based care • Who is accountable in the various models when lead agencies provide case management in-house or not • The community alliance should have the role of designing the system of care • The conversation should not be about ensuring non-profit agencies stay in business • What is the appropriate level of monitoring? Who monitors the lead agency when case management is delivered in-house • What prevents lead agencies from being “held hostage” by case management providers • If looking at the administrative services organization model, why limit choice • What is the appropriate distribution of risk? Financial risk • Why limit or restrict fund raising at the local level • The Department has the ultimate responsibility • The Administrative Services Organization must manage down • All models/aspects of privatization have not been thoroughly explored in terms of accountability, cost, and responsibility • The return to the state as the overall manager is not appropriate • The appropriate response to the question, “who is responsible” is that “we are responsible” • Lead agencies must provide the leadership and management role and provide the buffer to case management organizations • The contracts must contain specific criteria and expectations for accountability • The appropriate relationship between DCF and lead agencies is that of partner not vendor • Creativity and innovation is driven by the leadership of the Department • The culture of blame is persuasive • The lead agency and community need flexibility to structure the business of child welfare • Monitoring by a national organization is not sufficient
Presentation: Community-Based Care Lead Agencies • The following were introduced: Steven Murphy, Partnership for Strong Families CEO and Jim Stringfellow, Board of Directors Ron Zychowski, Community Partnership for Children Jeff Rainey, Hillsborough Kids CEO, and Mindy Murphy, Board of Directors
4 Nadereh Salim, Children’s Network of Southwest Florida and Stan Appelbaum, Local Advisory Council • Mr. Murphy commented that they wanted to set the record straight that eight of the workforce/early learning coalitions provide services directly and that Childnet is not reorganizing but has had a change in leadership • Mr. Murphy shared that his lead agency, Partnership for Strong Families is the first to be accredited followed by KCI, Inc. • Mr. Murphy commented that case management is the heart and soul of child welfare and that Florida is unique in contracting out case management • He added that in most states case management is a government responsibility and that there is strength in having partnerships • Mr. Murphy concluded his remarks with the remark that oversight of case management must be daily and hands on to be effective • Mr. Stringfellow described the forming of their board, the easing providers off of the board, and the inclusion of the finest minds and experience available to provide not for profit governance • Mr. Stringfellow commented on the big picture not being addressed by the Legislature and the need to do that • Ms. Murphy shared the process for planning the system of care in Hillsborough County • She commented on the improved locally designed system of care and the dramatic differences that have occurred • Ms. Murphy added that communities need to be continue to make decisions about system design at the local level • Mr. Applebaum commented on the success of children’s services councils • He added that all of us need to remember we are dealing with children’s lives at an individual level • Mr. Applebaum added that more community involvement is needed • He expressed concerns about the speed in which children are reunified and the need for safety to be the primary concern • Mr. Zychowski added that most of his comments have already been said • He wanted to acknowledge that community-based care would not have occurred if it were not for Children’s Home Society and Mr. Bundy • Mr. Zychowski indicated that there has been significant progress in consolidating and integrating effective monitoring • He added that the real problem is not the volume of monitoring but that it is not as effective as it needs to be – staff need to be trained to see early signs and to communicate effectively • Ms. Salim described the process for developing their system of care • She described success as whatever size best fits the community – not one size fits all • Ms. Salim described the successful network of dentists that are providing services in her community • She commented that this is not about the lead agency as a provider agency but about communities supporting the best possible care for its children • Written comments from the Brevard CBC Board of Directors were provided to the Chair of the Task Force
Task Force Comments and Questions • The work of this task force should not be about band-aid approaches but about legislative resources for proactive programming • Leadership cannot be designed through legislation • The focus should be on primary prevention and early intervention and the conversation should be about keeping children out of community-based care child welfare programs • There needs to be a balance in the return of children to their families – the rights of children and the rights of their parents must both be considered • The child’s sense of time must be considered
Presentation: Florida’s Children First, Inc.! 5 • Andrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida’s Children First, Inc. was introduced • Ms. Moore provided two documents for the Task Force: 1) Narrative remarks prepared (30 pages) and 2) Powerpoint presentation entitled, “Protecting Children and Improving Outcomes” • Ms. Moore used the powerpoint to focus her comments and proceeded through the slides
Task Force Comments: • Agreed with Ms. Moore’s presentation and challenged the collective “us” to work together for system change • Advocates and child welfare staff do not have to sit on different sides of the table and take adversarial roles but instead should collaborate for meaningful reform • The current comprehensive behavioral health assessment is not designed for young children • All assessments need to contain a stronger look at the families as well as the children • Requested Ms. Moore’s comment on holding community-based care agencies accountable and she responded, she does not recommend that the Department micromanage but does recommend that the Department implement measurable performance standards • A system needs to be designed to provide support and technical assistance with means for providers to learn from their mistakes • There needs to be consequences for overspending millions of dollars • The Department needs the support of good transaction attorneys and contracts need to be written in plain language
Status Brief by Workgroups • Home Study Workgroup report provided by Pat Badland • Group is focused on the document itself as well as the process for completion, review, and submission • They are using the work of groups convened for Florida Safe Families Network to standardize the process • They are also using the work of judicial circuit breakouts from the Dependency Summit 9/5-7/07 inform their recommendations • Next step – to develop a matrix of background screening requirements and to provide the template for review by stakeholders
• Out-of-County Services Workgroup report provided by Alan Abramowitz • Group is reviewing current policy and requesting input from circuit administrators and community- based care managers • Group plans a common sense approach • Permanency and Stabilization Workgroup report provided by Jim Kallinger • Group recognizes the contributions of guardians ad litem to the effort and advocates for their support • The group plans to build a plan around four major themes - prevention, diversion, reunification, targeted recruitment • The group aims to develop practical solutions for long term challenges both at the state and national level • Identify characteristics of successful foster parents • Recovery Workgroup provided by Connie Shingledecker • Group is reviewing Operations SafeKids recommendations to determine barriers to implementation • Group recommends developing a template for a memo of understanding between law enforcement and DCF • Group recommends a subcommittee be created of Florida Sheriff’s Association, Florida Police Chief’s Association, DCF, and FDLE to determine strategies for reporting missing children
• Workgroups focused on system of care/oversight issues and investigations to services hand-off to report next meeting
6
Discussion: Preliminary Report to Secretary Butterworth • Dr. Jim Sewell, Special Consultant to Secretary Butterworth and DCF, guided the discussion • The Department proposes a small group (Shingledecker, Ebbole, and Casel) of the Task Force develop a preliminary report • A draft to be ready for review by October 8 • Task Force members are asked to provide specific recommendations to Jim Sewell
Public Comment • Chris Card, Providence Corporation, thanked the Task Force for the good discussion • Commented that each child must be looked at individually as well as the systemic review • Mr. Card proposed one primary recommendation: to establish a child welfare estimating conference • He concluded that expectations cannot be met if the resources are not available to meet the need • Steve Rios, Educate Tomorrow, recommended increased attention to outcome analysis
Closing Remarks Judge Gooding thanked all for their attendance and reminded the group that the next Task Force on Child Protection meeting is scheduled for October 10 in Jacksonville
7 Task Force on Child Protection Jacksonville City Council Chambers
October 10, 2007 9:00 – 3:00
Agenda
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair
Model: Keeping Siblings Together Gordon Johnson, President and CEO Neighbor to Family, Inc.
Child Welfare Legal Services Mary Cagle, Director Children’s Legal Services, DCF
Concept Paper Nancy Dreicer, Regional Director A Radical Change In the Foster Care System Northeast Region
Education and Foster Care Children Jim Adams, CEO Collaboration with Community Advisory Panel Family Support Services
Lunch Break
Review and Discussion Jim Sewell Task Force Preliminary Report
2:00 – 3:00 Public Comments
Adjournment State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair Task Force on Child Protection
Meeting Summary Jacksonville City Council Chambers October 10, 2007
Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks ♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chairman, of the Task Force, opened the meeting and welcomed the participants.
PowerPoint Presentation: Model: Keeping Siblings Together ♦ Task Force member Alan Abramowitz, 18th Circuit Administrator introduced Gordon Johnson, President and CEO of the Neighbor to Family Program and provided the following information regarding his background: - He served for seven years as the Secretary of the child welfare agency in Illinois. - He was instrumental in the development of the One Church, One Child Program. - He has been recognized by Harvard University for innovation in keeping siblings together. He received an award for his work in keeping siblings together and subsequent awards are named in his honor.
♦ Mr. Johnson introduced himself. He thanked Secretary Butterworth and Assistant Secretary of Operations George Sheldon for the invitation to present to the Task Force. ♦ Mr. Johnson stated his presentation would include two biological parents who received services from the Neighbor to Family Program and a professional foster caregiver who works for Neighbor to Family. ♦ Mr. Johnson provided the following information regarding Neighbor to Family: • Neighbor to Family was developed because: - Of the 588,000 children in foster care in the United States, 55% - 69% have siblings. - 50% - 60% siblings in care are separated and not placed together - Percent of children placed in foster care with all siblings are as follows: 2 children – 54% 3 children – 38.7% 4 children – 27.1% 5 children – 17% 6 + children – 11.2%. - Children are cherry picked by some foster caregivers. Since resources are limited foster caregivers can be more selective about what children they will accept. - Research on the impact of sibling separation in foster care indicates: Siblings are more likely to remain in their first placement without disruption if they are placed together; If siblings are not placed together initially, the chance of reunion in a permanent placement is greatly diminished.
1 • Overview of Neighbor to Family: The program was created in 1994 by Gordon Johnson as a sibling foster care program at Jane Hull House Association in Chicago. The Neighbor to Family program came to Daytona Beach in 1998 via legislation championed by Senator Evelyn Lynn. Accredited by Council on Accreditation in September, 2005. Locations in Florida are Daytona Beach, Orlando and Miami-Dade. • Distinctive Features of the program: Foster parents are carefully selected and well trained (50 hours required training); they are considered professional foster parents; Neighbor to Family utilizes the team conferencing concept; They encourage biological families, including birth fathers, to actively participate with their children and the program; Intake into the program is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; No reject/no eject placements; The program encourages the empowerment of family development toward self-sufficiency and; Sibling adoptions.
- Prospective employees are given a series of tests to determine the best candidates for the job. Emotional-Social Intelligence Inventory is an example of the tests given. - - Unique program features: Siblings placed together with one family at a time; Foster parents are salaried members of the Service Delivery Team. They are provided with relevant training opportunities and 24/7 support from professional counselors; Biological families are provided with wrap around services and supports. They participate in monthly in the Family Team Meetings; • Outcomes: Average length of stay in Foster Care: • National: 33 months • Florida: 23.7 months • Neighbor to Family: Daytona Beach: 9.74 months Orlando: 4.9 months Miami: 6 months
- Outside Evaluations: Several evaluations have been done on the program with positive results. ♦ Mr. Gordon introduced professional foster parent Kathleen Bushong. ♦ Ms. Bushong introduced herself. She stated it was an honor for her to be here and to be able to speak on behalf of children and families. Ms. Bushong provided the Task Force with the following observations about her experience in being a foster parent with Neighbor to Family: - She has been with Neighbor to Family for 7 years and was previously a business owner.
2 - Children come into the system have done nothing wrong, yet they are the ones punished the most. - She spoke about Jane Adams’ work with poor families and her opening of the Hull House in the slums of Chicago in 1889. - She is a “professional” foster parent. She spoke about the hiring and training process for foster parents with the Neighbor to Family Program. She stated that anytime she sees a need for training, Mr. Johnson is open to providing it. - Foster parents get as much history on the child and family as is available in order to make their home more user friendly for them. - The foster parents keep the children safe while the parents complete their tasks. In the program parents come into their homes to visit with the children and are able to fix dinner for their children, for example. - The program feels it is important for the parents to give their children permission to stay with the foster parents. The foster and biological work together like a large family. - Life books are created for each child in the program. These life books contain pictures of the child’s life, such as their family. It gives kids something to physically hold on to while there are not with their family. - Ms. Bushong made the following closing statements: Please keep siblings together. We need to do what is best for the children. Children come with their belongings in trash bags and leave with suitcases. ♦ Mr. Gordon introduced Tiffany Jackson. She is a mother who completed the Neighbor to Family program. Ms. Jackson discussed her experience with the Neighbor to Family Program. - Neighbor to Family is just that. - Ms. Jackson stated her three children were very young when they came into state custody in 2001. Her children were separated until the Neighbor to Family Program brought them together in the same home. - She was able to contact workers when needed. The worker called daily just to check on her and see if she needed anything. Neighbor to Family has a team that works together to rebuild you. - She gained stability and was able to get her children back. She still maintains contact with her caseworker, the children’s foster mother and Neighbor to Family personnel three and a half years after her case was closed. - She stated that the Neighbor to Family Program helped her get her children back. They continue to work with her to keep them from coming back into care. - The best thing she felt the Neighbor to Family Program did was to focus on the children and her. They helped her become the best “Tiffany” she could be. ♦ Mr. Gordon introduced Roland Thomas: He is a parent who completed the Neighbor to Family Program. ♦ Mr. Thomas spoke his experience with the Neighbor to Family program.
3 - Mr. Thomas stated his four children entered state care in 2004. His children were placed in 3 different homes and they all could not attend the visits due to transportation issues. - His case plan was overwhelming and he never saw his caseworker. - In January, 2005 his children were placed with the Neighbor to Family program and he attended the first Team Meeting. - He met the whole team at the first meeting. He was offered services and most were available at the same location where the children were located. He had an advocate that assisted him with his case plan. He felt better about the foster parents and was able to interact with them as his mentors. - His children came back to his home in 2005 and they live in the same neighborhood as his children’s former foster parents. The foster parents are still very involved in his and the children’s lives in a supportive way. - He stated the Neighbor to Family staff gave him hope. He stated “I don’t think I would have gotten my children back without them”. Task Force Discussion/Questions: 1. One of the Task Force members stated he was shocked that he had not heard of the Neighbor to Family Program before. The question was asked about what happens when it is necessary to terminate parents’ right: Do foster parents adopt? - Mr. Gordon stated foster parents can adopt. Neighbor to Family does concurrent planning as a fall back. They know within the first few months if a parent will be able to complete their case plan and get their children back. Some parents realize they cannot care for their children and voluntarily relinquish their parental rights. 2. How does the cost of 24 months in care compare to what Neighbor to Family spends up front on services and supports for 9 – 12 months? - Mr. Gordon stated there is no way to isolate the cost of food, shelter, clothing etc. provided to children in addition to the room and board rate. The wide array of services provided to children and families are contracted through Neighbor to Family. 3. What is the case load size? - Twenty children for each caseworker; consistent with the Council on Accreditation standards. 4. What is the rate of recidivism beyond one year? - Hard to get. We follow-up with families six months after they complete the program. Recidivism is low at that termination. 5. What is the rate of children reunified versus those children whose parent’s rights are terminated? - 40% - 50% of children are reunified with parents. The rest are placed with relatives or adopted. 6. A Task Force member stated she was concerned we have to justify/compare a program, such as Neighbor to Family to current costs. Currently, money is spent on other programs that don’t work. 7. A Task Force member asked have there has been any safety issues with having parents so involved with the foster families? Have any parents tried to take their children? - There have been no incidents of parents taking their children. 8. How does Neighbor to Family find foster parents to do this work? - Neighbor to Family usually has a waiting list of potential foster parents. They have 85% - 95% retention of foster parents and are very selective.
4 9. Is there a type of family and/or circumstances Neighbor to Family is more successful with? - No difference, unless there are major criminal or egregious abuse issues. 10. Is the 50 hour required foster parent training annual? - Yes. Consultants are hired from the outside if necessary to provide training. Specialized training is offered to deal with current issues. 11. Have you managed to replicate a program of this kind? - Mr. Gordon responded: it is always something we have to work on. We always monitor and continuously evaluate. 12. A Task Force member commented that the beauty of the design we have in Florida with the Community Based Care and Medicaid models is that other lead agencies will follow with the Neighbor to Family model. It is good for kids and makes good business sense. 13. Comment: The Community Alliance drove the expansion of the program.
Child Welfare Legal Services ♦ George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations addressed the Task Force regarding the realignment of child welfare legal services and made the following statements: - The House and Senate gave the Department the flexibility to reorganize. - Secretary Butterworth early on identified the importance of lawyers in the mental health arena and how critical they are to child protection. - There are 400 lawyers for the Department statewide. - After some discussion, it became apparent that transferring legal services to the Attorney General and State Attorney offices would not happen statewide. - It was necessary for the Department to build a law firm and review how legal services were being delivered. - George Sheldon introduced Mary Cagle as the new State Director for Child Legal Services. Mrs. Cagle will report directly to George Sheldon.
♦ Mary Cagle thanked the Task Force for allowing her to present today and provided a brief overview of her background: - She worked for Janet Reno for 22 years in the Miami-Dade State Attorney General’s Office. She became Chief Assistant for Ms. Reno and was able to be involved in social service issues. - She served as the CEO for the CHARLEE program in Miami for the past four years. - She discussed the difficulties encounter during the “rolling out” of community based care in Miami. - She stated Secretary Butterworth contacted her and requested she come to work for the Department as the State Director of Child Legal Services. She accepted his offer. - She participated in the Legal Review Workgroup established by Secretary Butterworth to review how legal services are currently being delivered and make recommendations for improvement. A draft copy of the Report of the Department of Children and Families Legal Workgroup was provided to the Task Force.
5 The history of legal services was reviewed and it was found that not much has changed over the last five years. Legal services are working well in some areas and not as well in others. The places where legal services were outsourced seemed to be more effective, possibly because they recruit high quality attorneys and provide professional development. ♦ Mary Cagle outlined the following recommendations that will guide improvements: 1. Create a statewide Department of Children and Families law firm. Key components are training/professional development and recruitment. 2. Implement a prosecution model: Represent the Department in the best interest of children, including defining who is the client. Attorneys need to ask questions from case managers, who are the eyes and ears of the system to determine specific efforts made to prevent removal and ensure there is urgency in permanency planning. Task Force Discussion/Questions: 1. Task Force member asked where are the assurances this model will be funded when they never have in the past. - Mary Cagle responded that she cannot give assurances that funding from the legislature will be provided. - George Sheldon stated the Secretary and Legislature are committed to adequately funding children services. 2. A Task Force member statements: - The child welfare system has drastically changed over recent years, but the legal services have stayed the same. - Need to make sound recommendations and back with resources and funding. - The model proposed is good. Consistency across the state is needed on how cases are handled. Suggestion was made to craft language for the legislature to address problems if things don’t work. - Mary Cagle has many strengths and comes from a Community Based Care perspective and has the possibility of being creative. - They are excited to see change. Ethical obligations/prosecution versus client rights must have excellence in legal services because the stakes are so high. - They commend Secretary Butterworth and George Sheldon for their efforts and Mary Cagel for her enthusiasm.
Concept Paper A Radical Change in the Foster Care System ♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair, introduced Nancy Dreicer, Regional Director for the Northeast Zone. ♦ Ms. Dreicer thanked the Task Force members for their time. She came to the Department from the corporate world and has a unique perspective: if a process is broken, try to change it. If that doesn’t work, change it.
6 ♦ Ms. Dreicer provided the Task Force with a power point presentation of her concept paper “If it’s Broke, Fix It” as highlighted below. - Incremental versus radical change: There is a need to change our system. Ms. Dreicer proposed eliminating foster care as we know it. Change has been incremental for so long is has complicated the system. Radical change can result in better performance if done right. We have to consider the child at risk with family versus the risk they face by being removed. Studies show that at risk children with their family do better than children in foster care. • A study done by Chapin Hall showed that children in foster care have higher rates of delinquency, pregnancy, substance abuse, and levels of internalizing problems than children in the general population. - Workflow Investigative process would remain the same. As to services there would be three paths the family could follow. Path One would be if there is egregious abuse/neglect, the child would be removed and placed with a relative or in a pre-adoptive placement, pursue expedited termination of parental rights and case worker would work to get the child adopted within months. Path Two would be if there is non-egregious abuse/neglect, the family would get in-home services and a diversionary court order would be obtained. The parent would face court contempt charges if they did not comply with the case plan and child(ren) placed into Path One. Path Three would be respite care for 3-4 months. This path would be utilized in case such as some domestic violence situations where the child(ren) might need to be removed for safety reasons. - Funding: Other than start up funds, the Title IV-E Waiver would support the initiative.
- Marketing: The initiative would need to be marketed to the general public and media. This would allow the public to understand the concept and agree to take a risk. - Ms. Dreicer proposed an initial pilot program for Duval & Levy Counties. These two counties were chosen due to their size, with one large county and one small county to assess the program on both scales. - What is needed to proceed with a pilot in Duval and Levy counties: Ms. Dreicer outlined a plan to implement the initiative starting immediately, which includes the convening of a workgroup in Duval with local partners and support from Tallahassee. Task Force Discussion/Questions: 1. Suggestion from a Task Force member: Develop tools to decide which path a child should take. Use information gathered from the Child Death Review Team and include law enforcement. Donna Uzzell offered assistance on behalf of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Ms. Dreicer agreed that up-front assessment is critical to this approach.
7 2. Question from Task Force member: How do you measure success? Suggested an outside independent evaluation be done. 3. Comment from Task Force member: The pendulum for removing children has swung back and forth. Decisions should be made by getting the right information to make the right decision for the child. Decisions need to be data driven not anecdotally driven. 4. Comment from Task Force member: Short respite placements would transform the system. 5. A suggestion was made to look at children who have died, mostly under the age of five. These cases are complex. We need to look at what is truly risk and what already know. This is an opportunity to develop risk criteria that is age appropriate.
Education and Foster Care Children: Collaboration with Community Advisory Panel ♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair, introduced Jim Adams, CEO Family Support Services. ♦ Mr. Adams introduced two Independent Living students who spoke briefly about their educational goals. ♦ Mr. Adams presented to the Task Force on the importance of education stability for children in foster care. He outlined efforts they have made to ensure children’s educational needs are met. - Current situation: There are 3000 children in foster care and 32 new children come in every week 60% or more of children in foster care drop out of high school 11% continue their education after high school Students change schools four or more times and lose 1 year of education achievement. - Family Support Services of North Florida goals for children to be successful in school: 1. Child remains in school of origin 2. Child is guaranteed a seamless transition when a change is needed. This is done through working agreements 3. Children participate in non-academic activities 4. Stakeholders advocate on behalf of children to get them the services and supports they need to keep from dropping out. Also, the community gets involved, mentoring, etc. 5. Children have at least one adult involved. 6. Every child is given a backpack with essential school supplies. Task Force Discussion/Questions: 1. Question: Are these (educational) goals required in contract or do you choose to do them? - Mr. Adams: These are goals we chose to implement. This is a team approach. 2. Comment by Task Force member: We need clarification on what is required in statute, rule and contract for agencies addressing children’s education needs. 3. Question by Task Force member: How are the Comprehensive Behavioral Health Assessments being used? 4. Comment by Task Force member: This is a global issue.
8 5. Suggestion by Task Force member: Partner with computer stores to provide refurbished computers to foster homes and youth in Independent Living. 6. Comment by Task Force member: Palm Beach notifies schools the morning of when a parent gets arrested or a child removed so they can be aware when interacting with that child.
Review and Discussion: Task Force Preliminary Report ♦ Jim Sewell facilitated a discussion with the Task Force to review the preliminary draft report and provide feedback. - Mr. Sewell stated the report was drafted to provide information to those who will read it to make sure they know where the Task Force was coming from, that the critical issues were addressed, the charges from Secretary Butterworth were addressed, and these items were to be used as a blue print for improvement. - Minor suggestions were made by the Task Force members for revision. - Final draft will be submitted to the Task Force for approval at the November 2 meeting in Ft. Myers. ♦ The Task Force will continue to meet every other month in 2008. It will take time over the next year to achieve dynamic change. - Proposed 2008 Task Force meeting dates will be sent to the Task Force within the next couple of days for consideration.
Public Comments
1. Susan and Colonial Long, former foster parents addressed the Task Force. They provided the panel with observations they had made while being foster parents. - The Longs had three foster children placed with them. - The Court reunified the children in the middle of the school semester and the children had to change schools. - The children came to them needing dental care. The little girl had head lice and the children had nothing except the clothes on their backs. - The system makes it too easy to get children back. The mother of these children completed a parenting class, but needed a lot more. - The children did not want to return to the mother. Task Force Discussion/Questions: 1. Comment by Task Force member: We have explored the issue of foster parents knowing all of the information about a child that is placed with them, including medical needs, etc. 2. Suggestion by Task Force member: Pro Bono services by the Florida Association of Dentist should be explored. 3. Ms. Long suggested that all Judges should talk to the children regardless of age.
2. Mr. William Robinson, Youth Advocate Program, addressed the Task Force. He provided the panel with what his program can do and how they can partner with child welfare agencies.
9 - They receive referrals from the substance abuse office and the Department of Juvenile Justice. - The program tries to bridge the gaps that exist in the child welfare programs due to high case loads and work with the child welfare case workers. It is a 24 hours a day/7 days a week program. - The Youth Advocate Program Parents sign an agreement to participate. The program provides services and supports to the family and child. They teach essential skills such as social and job. - Once in the program, the participants can remain and receive services for life.
3. Rick Wallace, Family Services, addressed the Task Force. He has been with the Community Based Care for eleven months. He wanted to provide a community based care prospective. - The average foster child is 1 to 2 years behind in school. They have limited skills due to the environments in which they lived. - We have to become as proactive as possible so they do not become dependent on the system. - Provides tutorial services. - Put systems and processes in place so if systems fail, people won’t.
Closing Remarks: George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations - The meeting in Ft. Myers will provide the opportunity for the public and other stakeholders to comment on issues and suggestions for improvement. - The community has taken a strong interest in child welfare. There have been a few high profile cases there that should have been handled differently and there has been a recent change in leadership in that area. - Secretary Butterworth and Mr. Sheldon met with the community to discuss their concerns and the Secretary is committed to working with them. - Secretary Butterworth requested a management review be completed and the results are pending. The review is assessing all aspects of the system there.
Adjournment
State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair thanked everyone for participating and adjourned the meeting.
10
Family Safety Quality Assurance Review of Courtney Alisa Clark Initial Findings
Introduction
On June 18, 2007, Secretary Bob Butterworth ordered a Quality Assurance review when he learned a missing Florida child had been located in the State of Wisconsin. He also directed the Office of the Inspector General to conduct an investigation.
The missing and now recovered child, Courtney Clark, was under the jurisdiction of the Sixth Judicial Circuit and was being served by the Sarasota Family YMCA. The Sarasota Family YMCA was conducting business as the Safe Children Coalition, the community-based care provider in Pinellas County, Florida.
This report of initial findings from the Office of Quality Management focuses on factual data as currently known through the review process.
Additional critical information is still under investigation by the Office of the Inspector General and will be addressed in an independent report at a later date.
Quality Management Overview
The Department of Children and Families Office of Quality Management is responsible for the ongoing review and assessment of the work being conducted within the state’s child welfare system. Quality Assurance staff, within the Office of Quality Management and posted throughout the state, monitor the quality of services provided to children and families. They are charged with determining compliance with Florida Statutes and federal requirements for the delivery of child welfare services. Quality Assurance Review Specialists are highly experienced, subject-matter-experts in child welfare case practice.
Quality Assurance functions include assessing local care systems, detecting trends for performance management, and conducting reviews of individual cases to determine the quality of the services provided either by the Department or its contracted providers. The information collected from these reviews helps ensure the Department and its contracted providers work in the best interest of children.
Child Protection System
The Florida Department of Children and Families is responsible for investigating allegations of abuse, neglect or abandonment. Through Florida’s Abuse Hotline, the Department receives reports of abuse allegations. Those reports are assigned to trained investigators responsible for investigating the allegations, visiting the child and the parents or caretakers, and determining if services or some type of court action is needed to make certain that a child is safe.
Child abuse investigations are conducted by professionals hired and trained by the Department or by Sheriff’s offices. The Department performs these duties in sixty- one counties and in the remaining six, Pinellas, Pasco, Manatee, Hillsborough, Broward, and Seminole counties, local law enforcement performs this function. When a child is removed from his or her home or the court determines protective services should be provided in the home, those services are provided by community-based care lead agencies under contract with the Department.
There are 20 community-based care lead agencies in the State of Florida, each with responsibility for foster care and related services in a given geographic area. The cornerstone of lead agency services is case management, which entails supervision of children and families under the jurisdiction of the Department of Children and Families. Lead agencies may provide case management services directly or may subcontract with another provider for this service.
The Sarasota Family YMCA, Inc., is a not-for-profit, community-based care lead agency whose geographic area includes Pinellas County. Case management for children 0 – 5 years of age in Pinellas County is subcontracted to Directions for Mental Health, Inc., a community mental health service provider. Regardless of whether the lead agency provides or subcontracts for case management services, the lead agency remains accountable for compliance with all terms and conditions of its contract with the Department.
Placement of Children
Florida law provides for several options to consider when removing children from the care of their parents and placing them outside the home. The court must approve all placement decisions for these children, and it is the Department’s responsibility to keep the court informed of any changes that may occur. Placement options include:
Emergency Shelter – a judge reviews initial evidence and decides if a child can be safely returned to parents. If a return to parents is not possible, the judge will order that the child be placed in emergency shelter status in the temporary custody of the state. The child can physically be placed either in a licensed foster care home or with approved relatives or non-relatives while in the custody of the state. Emergency shelter status of a child could only extend for several weeks while actions are taken to solve the problems that caused the removal. If the child cannot be safely returned home, the judge can keep the child in the custody of the state in licensed foster care, or place the child in the custody of relatives or non-relatives.
2 Relative Care – A judge can place children in the custody of relatives, such as aunts, uncles or grandparents. Prior to this placement, relatives must undergo a Home Study that includes criminal records checks and a thorough assessment of the type of home they are able to offer a child. Placement with relatives is the preferred option for children when they cannot remain with their parents.
Licensed Foster Care – If relative care is not appropriate, a judge can have a child remain in the custody of the state in a licensed foster care home. Licensed foster parents must also go through a Home Study and records checks. In addition, foster parents must successfully complete extensive training courses on caring for a very diverse variety of children who may be placed with them. Licensed foster homes also undergo thorough inspections at regular intervals and must meet strict regulations on home environments that are not required of relative and non-relative placements.
Non-Relative Care – As an alternative to relative care or licensed foster care, a judge can place children in the custody of family friends, referred to as “non-relatives.” As in placement with extended family members, non- relatives must go through a Home Study that includes criminal records checks and a thorough assessment of the type of home they are able to offer a child.
Of the children in out-of-home care in Florida, about 49 percent are in licensed foster care, about 43 percent are in approved relative placements and the remaining 8 percent are in approved non-relative placements.
Two documents filed with the court enable judges to make informed decisions about placing children and determining safety of children:
Case Plans – Written agreements between parents and social services agencies are developed outlining what parents need to do in order to ensure the safety of their children. Case plans are developed both when children remain with parents under supervision of case workers, and when children are removed from parents and placed with relatives, non-relatives or in licensed foster care homes. Case plans inform parents of what is expected of them and the support they will receive to achieve their goals.
Home Studies – Before a judge can place a child in the custody of a relative or non-relative, social services must carefully assess the background of potential caregivers. Home studies include local, state and national criminal records checks as well as Abuse Hotline checks. Home studies must be provided to judges for their review and approval for placement of a child. Home studies include details about the physical environment of a home, financial information, interviews regarding the
3 ability to ensure that a child’s medical, mental, educational and daily life needs can be met and a description of the type of support available from the state.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
Chapter 39, Florida Statutes, Proceedings Related to Children, is Florida’s child protection law. This chapter provides for the care, safety and protection of children.
Florida Administrative Code provides the administrative rules used by government agencies to carry out the laws enacted by the Legislature. Rules are the framework within which the child protection programs operate.
The rules in Chapter 65C of Florida Administrative Code relevant to this case are listed below:
Chapter 65C-28, Out-of-Home Care – The Out-of-Home Care rule provides guidance for implementing the provisions of Florida statutes that relate to children residing in out-of-home care.
Chapter 65C-29, Protective Investigations – The rule on Child Protective Investigations provides direction in implementing Florida’s statutory requirements for the centralized abuse hotline and child protective investigations functions.
Chapter 65C-30, General Child Welfare Provisions – The General Child Welfare Provisions rule provides a description of services, interventions, and case conduct expectations unique to the child protection system. It explains the scope of responsibilities attached to various child protection professionals at critical stages in a case.
The Department develops operating procedures to provide further guidelines on how to put the laws and rules into practice. Operating procedures delineate the requirements, responsibilities, and steps to follow. The contracts between the Department and community-based care lead agencies require that lead agencies comply with Department operating procedures or develop their own operating procedures approved by the Department.
Computer Systems Referenced
This report makes reference to several automated systems. The following summary is provided to assist the reader who may not be familiar with these systems.
4 HomeSafenet: This is a statewide computer system that includes information on all allegations of abuse or neglect as well as information on the outcomes of investigations and information regarding children in the child welfare system. State regulations require that information regarding all contacts or attempted contacts be documented in the case file within two working days. HomeSafenet is considered the primary case file record for each investigation and case.
Missing Child Tracking System: The Department’s internal missing child reporting system used by community-based care providers and the Department to document events related to children believed to be missing from the care and supervision of the state. The Missing Child Tracking System is linked to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement database and is updated daily.
Florida Crime Information Center/ National Crime Information Center: A law enforcement information database containing information collected by criminal justice agencies used to perform legally authorized, required functions. All missing child reports generated by local law enforcement are required to be entered into the database by the agency that took the report.
Other Organizations Referenced
Florida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children Information Clearinghouse: The Missing Children Information Clearinghouse is located within the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Division of Criminal Justice Information Services and is a central repository of information regarding missing children. The information is collected and disseminated to assist law enforcement agencies, public and private organizations and the citizens of Florida in locating missing children. The Missing Children Information Clearinghouse is utilized as a resource center and information exchange service, and complements the state and federal computerized missing persons files.
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children: The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s mission is to help prevent child abduction and sexual exploitation; help find missing children; and assist victims of child abduction and sexual exploitation, their families, and the professionals who serve them.
5 Methodology
A Quality Assurance review was conducted from June 18, 2007, through June 25, 2007, by headquarters Quality Assurance staff.
The scope of this review included review of prior child protective investigations conducted by the Department and Seminole and Pinellas County Sheriff’s Offices; HomeSafenet chronological case recordings; and the open case management services record provided by the Sarasota Family YMCA.
In addition, Quality Assurance reviewers accompanied investigators from the Office of the Inspector General during two interviews with staff. The results of interviews conducted by the Inspector General will be contained in their report.
Brief Background
The following is a listing of the organizations involved in providing protective services to Courtney Clark from February 2006 to present.
Department of Children and Families Responsible for child welfare services Tallahassee in the state of Florida
Department of Children and Families Responsible for child welfare services SunCoast Region in DeSoto, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas and Sarasota counties. Performs protective investigations for DeSoto and Sarasota counties
Sarasota Family YMCA Community-based care lead agency Safe Children Coalition providing child welfare services for Pinellas, Pasco, DeSoto, Manatee and Sarasota counties under contract with the Department of Children and Families
Directions for Mental Health Sub-contracted provider of the Pinellas County Sarasota Family YMCA, responsible for providing case management services
Lake County Sheriff’s Office Local law enforcement entity of Lake County, Florida
Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office Local law enforcement entity; also performs protective investigations function in Pinellas County
6 Seminole County Sheriff’s Office Local law enforcement entity; also performs protective investigations function in Seminole County
The Sarasota Family YMCA in Pinellas County began providing services to Candice Farris, aka Candice Clark, and her child, Courtney, in February 2006. Courtney was removed from her mother because Ms. Farris was incarcerated for identify theft and the child had been found living in hazardous conditions. During this separation a second child was born to Ms. Farris. Courtney was reunified with her mother, who was reportedly working on several activities required in her case plan. Ms. Farris and her daughters moved to Seminole County where Ms. Farris was arrested on a larceny charge. Case documentation indicates Ms. Farris asked that her children be placed with family friends, Cynthia and Mark Martell, in Lake County.
On September 23, 2006, Ms. Farris abducted Courtney and also took her younger sibling after reportedly telling the Martells that she had completed the activities in her case plan. The family’s whereabouts remained unknown until June 14, 2007, when the children were recovered in Portage, Wisconsin. The situation in the Wisconsin home presented a dangerous environment for the children; therefore the State of Wisconsin has assumed protective custody of the children. At this time, it is not in Courtney’s best interest to experience another change in placement. Therefore, a Motion to Transfer Jurisdiction to Wisconsin has been filed in Pinellas County.
Focus of Quality Assurance
The Quality Assurance review of this case revealed five areas with significant findings in how this family’s case was managed. Key finding areas include:
I. Reporting a Missing Child
II. Reunification
III. Assessment of New Child Born Into an Active Case
IV. Home Study
V. Courtesy Supervision
7 Findings
I. Reporting a Missing Child
Issue: There was a four-month gap from the time Courtney was taken from her court-ordered placement to notifying appropriate local law enforcement authorities for entry into the Florida Crime Information Center/ National Crime Information Center database.
Requirement: Administrative rule and state and local operating procedures require that any child that is believed to be missing from a placement should be immediately reported to local law enforcement so that the case can be entered by local law enforcement in the Florida Crime Information Center/ National Crime Information Center and the case can be forwarded and opened by Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse.
Chapter 65C-30.019, Florida Administrative Code, Department Operating Procedure 175-85, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy Number 100.009 provide the specific authority and direction related to missing children. The procedures require that as soon as it is determined that a child is missing, staff will begin making appropriate contacts in an effort to locate the child. The procedure for reporting missing children is attached.
Findings: Case documentation indicates that the Martells were informed via phone conversations with Judith McInerney, case manager for Directions for Mental Health, of the restrictions on releasing Courtney, and copied on the Order to Modify Custody issued by Judge Fleming dated August 23, 2006. The order clearly instructs the Martells to notify local law enforcement and the Department immediately if at any time the child is determined to be missing or if Courtney’s whereabouts become unknown. On September 23, 2006, Ms. Martell violated the court order and allowed Courtney to leave with her mother.
Case notes document that Ms. Martell did not tell her assigned case manager, Carmen Caballero with Directions for Mental Health, a sub-contracted provider for the Sarasota Family YMCA, what happened until October 4, 2006. Case notes indicate that Ms. Martell said “she made a big mistake” by returning Courtney to her mother.
According to documentation, Ms. Caballero did not instruct Ms. Martell to contact local law enforcement in accordance with requirements noted above, nor did Ms. Caballero notify local law enforcement officials within a timely manner as required in “all cases of missing children whose location is not determined” in accordance with the regulations in the Sarasota Family YMCA’s policy, the Department’s operating procedure and Florida Administrative Rule.
8
The only notification made on October 4, 2006, was to the Assistant State Attorney responsible for child welfare legal services in Pinellas County in order to request a pick-up order as Ms. Caballero thought that the mother and child might be in Colorado to appear at a scheduled court hearing.
The chronological notes documenting the October 4, 2006, telephone call from Ms. Martell to Ms. Caballero was entered into HomeSafenet on October 16, 2006. Administrative rules require such entry within two business days.
Documentation indicates a series of e-mails were exchanged between the Department of Children and Families’ SunCoast Region and the Sarasota Family YMCA pertaining to Courtney. The SunCoast Region’s Family Safety Program Specialist, Kathleen Matthews, contacted the Sarasota Family YMCA approximately nine times through e-mail from October 6 to December 28, 2006 (see Appendix 4). Included in the e-mails were alerts that Courtney had not been seen by her case manager as required and requests for status updates on her case. Documentation does not reflect that Ms. Matthews’ e-mails prompted the Sarasota Family YMCA to take appropriate action, nor does it reflect any actions were taken to comply with existing missing child policies as required. In addition, despite inclusion of administrators/managers from the SunCoast Region and the Sarasota Family YMCA in the distribution of e-mail correspondence, interventions were not taken by leadership to ensure compliance with the policy.
Despite prompts from the SunCoast Region to the Sarasota Family YMCA, along with numerous HomeSafenet entries pertaining to Courtney’s status as missing, the issue was not acted on by senior leaders at Sarasota Family YMCA or senior managers in the Department. Prompt, effective action to report the child as missing was not taken by either organization.
Major steps of the missing child protocol were not followed that included immediate reporting to local law enforcement that Courtney was missing, notification within four hours by the case manager once she knew Courtney was missing, and completion of the required Missing Child Reporting Form by the case manager within one day.
The Missing Child Reporting Form was not completed until December 29, 2006. The Sarasota Family YMCA Operating Procedure 100.009 requires reporting incidents within one working day upon learning that a child is missing.
As part of the Sarasota Family YMCA’s internal quality management plan, Courtney’s case was included in a sample pool of cases reviewed by Trish Adams, Missing Child Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA. Adams reviewed Courtney’s case on January 2, 2007, and noted deficiencies for general case practice requirements involving safety, placement stability,
9 reunification, case manager visitation, and case worker supervision. Also, Ms. Adams indicated that procedures were not followed pertaining to an abducted and missing child. Despite identifying these child safety concerns, their review did not result in any documented action on the part of the Sarasota Family YMCA.
Local law enforcement officials were not contacted for the purposes of issuing a missing child report until January 19, 2007, nearly four months after the child was known to be missing.
A review of the Department’s Missing Child Tracking System indicates that the Directions for Mental Health case manager, Carmen Caballero, was knowledgeable about the notification process for missing children. She had previously entered a total of ten missing child episodes prior to this report, of which nine had been reported to local law enforcement in a timely manner, and all but two had been entered in the Missing Child Tracking System within approximately one working day of learning of the event.
When the missing child report was made with the local law enforcement agency in Lake County, there was a delay in the case being entered into the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center by local law enforcement. After some collaboration between the SunCoast Region, Sarasota Family YMCA and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the child was finally listed in the appropriate databases on February 18, 2007.
Recommendations: Immediate action is recommended to:
Establish a zero tolerance policy for failure to follow procedures related to reporting and locating missing children.
Begin local review of cases where in-state children have not been seen by a caseworker for 55 days or more, and if a child is missing, immediately report that child to local law enforcement. Technical assistance and operational support shall be provided by region and headquarters staff. The goal is to reduce the review time period for children not seen by a caseworker to 31 days. Currently, caseworkers are required to see children in care every 30 days.
Further explore technology options to verify the whereabouts of children in the state’s care.
Direct the Department’s General Counsel to review standard community- based care contract language to make sure that all statutory and regulatory requirements are included.
10 II. Reunification
Issue: A reunification staffing (a meeting to consider progress toward reunifying Ms. Farris with her daughter) was held on March 6, 2006, with Ms Farris and Judith McInerney, Directions for Mental Health case manager, as well as Anita Sylvia, Supervisor, and Tanya Liebau, Assistant Director of Operations both with the Sarasota Family YMCA. The recommendation of the staffing team to reunify was not fully in accord with the Sarasota Family YMCA’s policy 100.018 or the Department’s procedure (CFOP 175-38), as described below.
Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating procedures define requirements in the reunification process. These include Chapters 65C- 28.006, 65C-30.008, 65C-30.013, and 65C30.014 of Florida Administrative Code, Departmental Operation Procedure 175-38, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy Number 100.018.
Findings: Courtney was removed from her mother on February 21, 2006, and placed in licensed foster care in Pinellas County. The placement became necessary when the mother was arrested for identity theft and the child was found living in hazardous conditions. From the period of February 21, 2006 through April 13, 2006, Courtney resided in four separate licensed foster homes. Courtney was reunified with her mother on April 13, 2006.
The Sarasota Family YMCA developed a case plan with Ms. Farris, approved by the court, which included several tasks to be completed while she was under court-ordered protective supervision. The case plan required Ms. Farris to: participate in a psycho-social assessment, complete a parenting program, enroll Courtney in Healthy Start, maintain contact with Sarasota Family YMCA case manager, have no further law violations, and secure stable housing and financial stability.
Ms. Farris completed a psycho-social assessment and was maintaining contact with the Sarasota Family YMCA. The tasks of no new law violations, stable income, stable housing, participating in Healthy Start and completing a parenting program were tasks listed as “in progress.” However, the staffing team determined Ms. Farris was in “substantial compliance” with her case plan.
There is minimal documentation to support Ms. Farris’ compliance with tasks. Case notes do not reflect the rationale for considering Ms. Farris in “substantial compliance,” nor is there documentation from other service agencies to indicate Ms. Farris’ participation in completing tasks.
In addition, no documentation was found that a risk assessment had been completed prior to reunification as required by local and state protocol. Nor
11 was documentation found that child care arrangements had been arranged prior to reunification as required by local protocol.
The safety plan, agreed to upon reunification, specified the case manager would conduct weekly visits for four weeks and risk was then to be “re- assessed.” Weekly visits occurred for the first four weeks, however, there is no documentation of a risk assessment or supervisory conference occurring.
One month after reunification, as required in her case plan, Ms. Farris stated Courtney was enrolled in daycare three times a week. No documentation was found to indicate the case manager verified through visits or contacts that the child was in attendance.
Recommendations: Review local operating procedures to ensure guidelines are in place to reflect the following:
Document key decision-making steps leading up to reunification, including supervisory and legal review and approval.
Document the determination of substantial compliance with case plans.
Meet all post-reunification supervision requirements.
III. Assessment of New Child Born Into an Active Case
Issue: Ms. Farris delivered a child on March 25, 2006, while there was an active dependency case involving her and Courtney. The newborn remained in her mother's custody. There is no documentation to indicate the Sarasota Family YMCA followed its own protocol as provided in Policy 100.045, “Children Born into Active Cases.”
Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating procedures define requirements for adding new children into an active case. These include Chapter 65C-30.016, Florida Administrative Code, Departmental Operating Procedure 175-72, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy 100.045. These procedures require the case manager to immediately report to the supervisor: a pending birth, a child born into a family, or any other circumstance involving a new child who is living in the home where all other children are currently in out- of-home care or under in-home protective supervision or post-placement supervision. Additionally, the case manager must visit the home and conduct an assessment to determine the safety of the child in the home.
Findings: The case record contains no documentation as to how Sarasota Family YMCA case management staff reached the decision to leave the newborn child in Ms. Farris’ custody without either court-ordered or voluntary
12 services in place. Given the recent removal and reunification, a newborn child increased the risks to family stability.
There is no documentation to indicate that a staffing was held by Sarasota Family YMCA with supervisors or legal services to assess the impact of a new child born into the family. The newborn was not entered into any automated tracking system such as HomeSafenet or the Sarasota Family YMCA’s database as per their Policy 100.045, “Children Born into Active Cases.” Contrary to a reported mechanism used by Sarasota Family YMCA of tracking “other children,” i.e., children who are not included in the dependency process, there is no documentation to support the newborn was “tracked.” Another opportunity was missed to add the newborn to the dependency process when placement became necessary again on July 22, 2006.
Recommendation: Direct appropriate legal staff to review all local operating procedures regarding active cases that involve additional children subsequent to the original pleadings for conformance with law and rule.
IV. Home Study
Issue: A Home Study, completed by the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office Child Protective Investigator, Traci Gritter, does not fully disclose the nature of the non-relative caregivers’ abuse history, nor does it provide enough descriptive detail for the Sarasota Family YMCA and/or the court to make an informed decision for placement.
Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating procedures define requirements for conducting home studies and background record checks. These include Chapters 65C-28.004, 65C-28.011, 65C-28.012, 65C- 29.009, and 65C-30.011, Florida Administrative Code.
Findings: As a result of Ms. Farris’ arrest on a larceny charge July 22, 2006, during which there was an open investigation alleging “environmental hazards,” Courtney and her sister went to stay with family friends, Cynthia and Mark Martell who reportedly had known the family for some time.
On July 26, 2006, Tracy Gritter, Child Protective Investigator with the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office learned Ms. Farris had been extradited to Colorado and that the children would remain with the Martells longer than anticipated.
On July 27, 2006, Judith McInerney, the Directions for Mental Health case manager, informed Ms. Gritter that Pinellas County had an open case on Courtney and that she needed a completed Home Study on the Martell’s residence in Lake County in order to do a modification of placement from Ms. Farris to the non-relative. Traci Gritter completed the Home Study on the
13 Martell home in Lake County on July 27, 2006, and it was approved by Kelly Roberts, Seminole County Sheriff’s Office supervisor.
The Home Study indicates Mark and Cynthia Martell were both caregivers in the home. Ms. Martell stated she had known “Candice Clark” (alias of Ms. Farris) for a year and saw the family on a daily basis.
The approved Home Study references an Abuse Hotline abuse report received on November 7, 2003, which was closed with “some indicators” of abuse and neglect. This report contained allegations of sexual battery, sexual molestation and mental injury. This report was closed with “some indicators” of sexual battery-abuse, sexual molestation-abuse, and mental injury-threatened harm. The Investigative Decision Summary indicates that local law enforcement was notified.
The approved Home Study also references another Abuse Hotline abuse report from 1995 alleging sexual molestation in the home. The case was closed by the Department with no indicators of abuse. However, there was information in the allegation that was potentially relevant to the Home Study.
Specific information regarding these allegations needed to be addressed in the Home Study which would have allowed the Sarasota Family YMCA and the presiding judge to more accurately assess whether this was an appropriate placement for the children.
Recommendation: Direct the Office of Family Safety to convene a workgroup to review current Home Study requirements and propose remedies to lack of clarification for informed decision-making. The workgroup shall consider legislative language for changes to our child protection laws that will clarify limitations for judicial approval of non-relative care placements of children.
V. Courtesy Supervision
Issue: There is no documentation Sarasota Family YMCA initiated a request for courtesy supervision in accordance with their Policy 100.007, “Courtesy Supervision,” which states that “case managers requesting services in another locale will follow the Department of Children and Families Operating Procedure 175-43.”
Requirement: Administrative rule, state and local operating procedures define requirements for courtesy supervision. These include Chapters 65C-30.007, 65C-30.008, 65C-30.011, 65C-30.018, Florida Administrative Code, Departmental Operation Procedure 175-43, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy 700.007.
14 Findings: Courtney Clark entered the state dependency system in Pinellas County and was under court-ordered supervision. Courtesy supervision of her well-being should have been requested if she moved to another county.
There is no documentation that reflects courtesy supervision was requested when Ms. Farris first moved Courtney to Seminole County, nor was any documentation found to indicate courtesy supervision was requested when the child was placed with the Martells in Lake County, even after a Modification of Placement was approved by the court.
Judith McInerney, Directions for Mental Health case manager, requested Lake County Department of Children and Families’ Child Protective Investigations do a wellness check on Courtney in the Martell home. The wellness check was conducted on August 30, 2006. This was the only time she was seen in that placement prior to her abduction by Ms. Farris.
Recommendations: Direct Regional Directors to convene a meeting with Department of Children and Families Circuit Administrators, Sheriff’s Offices and lead agencies to review the execution of statewide working agreement for transfer and acceptance of Courtesy Supervision cases, and determine if local processes conform to administrative rule requirements.
Continue the ongoing work to execute the statewide working agreement according to Chapter 65C-30.018, Florida Administrative Code.
Direct the Family Safety Program Office to develop training materials available through the Center for the Advancement of Child Welfare Practice.
Additional Recommended Actions
Require the Sarasota Family YMCA to develop a corrective action plan to address all issues cited in the findings of this report as well as the findings and recommendations of the pending Inspector General's report.
15 Appendices
1. Child Location Process
2. Listing of Professionals
3. Relative Care, Non-Relative Care, Licensed Care Matrix
4. Detailed Time Line
16 Appendix 1 Child Location Process Department Operating Procedure 175-85 Tasks in Bold are Required by Chapter 65C-30.019, Florida Administrative Code
1. The case manager or caregiver determines that a child is missing, i.e., the child’s whereabouts are unknown.
2. The case manager or caregiver determines under what conditions the child went missing and if immediate notification to local law enforcement is required.
• Immediate notification to local law enforcement is required when a child’s whereabouts are unknown and the child is under the age of thirteen, believed to be in an unsafe situation for their age and development, in a life threatening situation, in the company of others who could endanger their welfare.
• Notification to local law enforcement is required within four hours in all cases of missing children whose location is undetermined.
3. The case manager, the caregiver or community-based care Child Location Point of Contact reports the child as missing to local law enforcement and requests a police report number.
• If local law enforcement will not generate a missing child report, the case manager or the community-based care Child Location Point of Contact attempts to clarify the reason(s) why the report was not taken and address them in an effort to encourage local law enforcement to generate the missing child report.
• Available resources to assist the case manager and the community-based care Child Location Point of Contact are: the Watch Commander of the local law enforcement agency not accepting the report; the community- based care Child Location Point of Contact; the District/Region Department’s Child Location Point of Contact; the Department’s Child Location Unit/Tallahassee, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse.
4. Local Law enforcement enters the missing child report into the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center databases.
• Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center identifies the child as missing to all law enforcement agencies in Florida and throughout the country.
17 5. A missing child report is entered into the Department’s Missing Child Tracking System
• The entry of a missing child report in the Missing Child Tracking System allows for an alert to be activated in HomeSafenet and for the missing child case to be opened with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
Note: At this point:
• Notification that a child is believed to be missing has been provided to the Department, local law enforcement, and to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s Missing Children Information Clearinghouse. In addition, there is an active missing child report in Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center available to all law enforcement agencies throughout the country.
• Local law enforcement has an open case on their investigative case load and a Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Child Analyst has been assigned the case.
6. As soon as possible, the case manager shall notify the court that the child has been reported as missing.
7. In addition to the efforts of local law enforcement and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to locate the child, the case manager will attempt to locate the child at least once per week for the first three months, then monthly thereafter until the child is located.
18 Appendix 2 Listing of Professionals
Name Title/Role Agency Trish Adams Quality Management Compliance Sarasota Family YMCA/ Safe Specialist/Missing Child Point of Contact Childrens' Coalition Carmen Case Manager Directions for Mental Health Caballero Cindy Ennis Assistant State Attorney Pinellas County State Attorney's Office Marion Circuit Court Judge Sixth Judicial Circuit Fleming Traci Gritter Child Protective Investigator Seminole County Sheriff's Office Lee Johnson Executive Vice-President Sarasota Family YMCA
Christy Kane Senior Vice-President of Community- Sarasota Family YMCA Based Care Operations Melanie Missing Children's Information Florida Department of Law Laurella Clearinghouse Analyst Enforcement Tanya Liebau Assistant Director of Operations Safe Childrens' Coalition Kathleen SunCoast Region Family Safety Program Department of Children and Matthews Specialist Families Judith Case Manager Directions for Mental Health McInerney Melissa Remy Missing Children's Information Florida Department of Law Clearinghouse Analyst Enforcement Kelly Roberts Child Protective Investigator Supervisor Seminole County Sheriff's Office Barbara Senior Director of Community-Based Care Sarasota Family YMCA Simmons Data Services Anita Sylvia Case Manager Supervisor Directions for Mental Health Jim Vachon Detective Lake County Sheriff's Office
19 Appendix 3 Relative, Non-Relative and Licensed Care Matrix
Issue Relative Non-Relative Licensed Placements Placements Placements Background Needed, pursuant to Needed, pursuant Needed, pursuant Screening 65C-28.011 F.A.C. to to For all household 65C-28.011 65C-13.022 members and F.A.C. F.A.C.; also, civil frequent visitors to courts records home, age 12+ check. (city, county, FDLE/FCIC, Annual re- FAHIS, Out of screening for re- State Abuse licensure includes Checks, Arrest local criminal History, DJJ (age check, FAHIS 12-26), NCIC check and may name check and include call-outs Fingerprints (age and 911 calls; 18+). FDLE re-checked Best practice. every 5 years. Include injunctions Best practice. & police call-outs
Prior Court Not needed, but Not needed, but Not needed. Approval results of all results of all Court approval For emergency background screens background within 24 hours placements in (except fingerprints) screens (except after placement. exigent must be back prior fingerprints) must circumstances to making the be back prior to (placement to be placement. Court making the made within 72 approval is then placement. Court hours). needed within 24 approval is then hours. needed within 24 hours. Prior Court Needed, and results Needed, and Not needed, but Approval of background results of all as soon as For non- screens (including background practical after emergency, non- fingerprints) must be screens (including making the exigent (planned) reviewed prior to fingerprints) must decision to placements. recommending be reviewed prior change placement to court. to recommending placements. the placement to the court.
20 Issue Relative Non-Relative Licensed Placements Placements Placements Home Study Needed, pursuant to Needed, pursuant Needed, pursuant Including (at a 65C-28.012 F.A.C., to to minimum) an within 30 days 65C-28.012 65C-13.024(5); interview with the following the F.A.C., within 30 same info as proposed placement (but days following the others, plus: caregivers and an typically completed placement (but health dept. assessment of prior to the typically inspection of their ability to meet placement); also, completed prior to home; the child’s need for completed pursuant the placement); employment protection; to 39.521(2)(r) F.S., also, completed history and background and filed with the pursuant to income screening (as court as part of the 39.521(2)(r) F.S., verification; above); an PDS within 72 hours and filed with the medical history; assessment of the prior to the court as part of water safety; work home’s physical Disposition Hearing. the PDS within 72 and personal environment; a hours prior to the references; determination of Disposition school references caregiver’s Hearing. for children financial security already in the and ability to home; family provide child with strengths and long-term needs; permanency if background and needed; a marital history; determination of childhood childcare needs; experiences; counseling on the hobbies; dependency church/group process, and affiliations, etc. available Home Study community updated annually. support, etc. Preservation of Second only to non- Next placement Last placement Family Ties and custodial parent in priority (and next priority. Continuity in terms of out-of- in terms of least Relationships home placement restrictive), right (ASFA) priority and least after relative restrictive; placement. preserves family ties Non-relative may and connections; have prior child often knows relationship with the relative, thereby child (and reducing the trauma parents), thereby of out-of-home minimizing
21 Issue Relative Non-Relative Licensed Placements Placements Placements placement; child’s traumatic effect of visitation/contact out-of-home with parent may be placement. Child more easily sometimes handled. “chooses” non- relative (favorite teacher, friend’s parent, etc.). Remuneration Pursuant to Non-relative Receives foster 39.5085, F.S., can receives no care board receive Relative monetary benefit. payments Caregiver funds (monthly). (monthly) if eligible. Required While in shelter While in shelter While in shelter HomeVisits status, once every 7 status, once status, once every w/Children days for the first 30 every 7 days for 7 days until Face-to-face days after removal, the first 30 days disposition, and contacts with the then may be after removal, then no less child in the home, modified to no less then may be frequently than including both pre- frequently than once modified to no once every 30 disposition (shelter every 30 days until less frequently days thereafter. status) and post- disposition; no less than once every Once every 3 disposition visits. frequently than 30 days until months, the home Face to face every 30 days disposition; no visit is to be contacts shall thereafter. less frequently unannounced. occur more Once every 3 than every 30 frequently than months, the home days thereafter. every 30 days visit is to be Once every 3 when the child’s unannounced. months, the home situation dictates visit is to be more frequent unannounced. contact, per determination by the Supervisor or the court (per 65C- 30.007 F.A.C.). Service Referrals Made as needed. Made as needed. Made as needed. Made by CPIs and Caseworkers to ensure all needs of child and caregiver are met.
22 Issue Relative Non-Relative Licensed Placements Placements Placements Training None required. None required. MAPP (30-hour) Pre-Service/In- Pre-Service Service training is required as a condition of licensure; 8 hours of annual in- service training is required for re- licensure (per 65C-13.025 F.A.C).
23 Appendix 4 Detailed Time Line
Candice Farris aka Clark aka Sisk
02/21/2006 – Abuse report is received. Investigated by Pinellas County Sheriff child protective investigator. Courtney Clark is sheltered as a result of verified findings of “parent incarcerated” and some indications of environmental hazards.”
03/25/2006 – Ms. Farris gives birth to daughter—sister of Courtney. Child was not added to court petition and remained in the custody of Ms. Farris even though Courtney Clark was currently placed in out-of-home care.
03/29/2006 – Abuse report is received. Allegations that Courtney Clark was being abused by her foster parent while in care. Report is closed with no indicators of physical abuse to Courtney Clark while she is in foster care.
04/04/2006 – Chronological notes indicate a Home Study was completed on Ms. Farris for the purposes of reunification with Courtney.
04/07/2006 – Reunification case staffing held. Recommendations include unsupervised visits for Ms. Farris with Courtney. Case manager is required to visit home once per week for the first four weeks.
04/13/2006 – Motion to reunify Courtney with Ms. Farris is filed by case manager. Motion granted by the court and Courtney returned to Ms Farris’ care.
04/22/2006 – Home visit completed. HomeSafenet notes indicate home was “hazard free” and that Courtney’s ear infection and cold are “gone.” She has a rash on her buttocks.
04/28/2006 – Complaint filed with case manager alleging Ms. Farris is driving without placing the children in a car seat; the infant has a dirty diaper; and Ms. Farris is stealing complainant’s identity. Home visit completed same day by case manager. Courtney Clark is observed to have a scratch on the left side of her face and a bruise under her eye. Ms. Farris reports incident happened at Chuck E. Cheese when Courtney got into a fight with another child. Ms. Farris states she is taking child to doctor at 11 a.m. this date. Ms. Farris also reports to case manager that the child’s rash is getting better.
05/05/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Unidentified person is also in home with Ms. Farris, Courtney Clark, and Courtney’s sister. Courtney is observed to have pink eye. Ms. Farris stated she has medication for the child. Ms. Farris stated she is on waiting list for day care. Courtney’s sister is observed to have a scratch to her eyelid and Ms. Farris stated that Courtney inflicted the scratch.
24
05/12/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Ms. Farris’ unidentified friend remains in home. There is no documentation that background check was completed on the friend. Case notes reflect that Ms. Farris states her father is ill and that she needs to go to Kentucky from 05/16/2006 to 05/26/2006 with Courtney. Ms. Farris reports Courtney’s rash is healed and that child is attending day care three times per week.
05/26/2006 – Due to inconsistencies in the conditions regarding the maternal grandfather’s demise, case manager staffed case with Assistant State Attorney (Child Welfare Legal Services) who reports Ms. Farris is to verify reason for trip, provide information from the funeral home, or provide information for an individual with whom the child could be sheltered while Ms. Farris is traveling.
05/27/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Courtney’s sister is present along with Ms. Farris’ friend who appeared to be caring for the baby while mother was out of state. Ms. Farris reports Courtney Clark “ate several cigarettes and threw up.” She also states that Courtney gags herself after eating. Case manager also documented that home was messy and that baby (sister) smelled of vomit. Ms. Farris stated that Courtney’s sister had a “stomach bug.” When asked by case manager for paperwork regarding the funeral, mother states she does not have it, the maternal grandmother does and she will produce for case manager at a later time. Ms. Farris states she needs to return to Kentucky on 05/29/2006 and 05/30/2006.
06/02/2006 – Case manager checks with parenting class provider to confirm Ms. Farris’ attendance as required in her case plan. Provider states that Ms. Farris has never contacted them to initiate the program.
06/06/2006 – Initial Judicial Review Hearing held. Ms. Farris was found to be partially compliant with the tasks in her case plan. Ms. Farris reports during hearing that Courtney Clark has a staph infection in her foot and she was going to take Courtney to the emergency room.
06/29/2006 – HomeSafenet note indicates that Ms. Farris has moved to Seminole County. Courtney Clark was seen in the office with Ms. Farris. Ms. Farris reports that Courtney was recently seen at Seminole County General Care and is not currently enrolled in day care. Courtney was observed to have a scratch on the right side of her face. Ms. Farris states it was a scar “that she always had.” Courtney also had a cut on her forehead which was reportedly from the “Grandpa’s tooth.”
07/21/2006 – Abuse report received. Investigated by Seminole County Sheriff’s child protective investigator. Allegations are: conditions hazardous to a child; dirty home and allegations related to another family/child in the home. Candice Farris, Courtney Clark and her sister are reported to be living in the home.
25
07/22/2006 – Supplemental abuse report received alleging environmental hazards. Candice Farris was arrested for unknown reasons. Courtney and her sister’s whereabouts are unknown. Reporter later called back and provided information that Ms. Farris had been arrested for grand theft. Children are currently with a friend (believed to be Cynthia Martell, also spelled Martel.)
Child protective investigator from Seminole County Sheriff’s Office contacted Cynthia Martell via phone and obtained demographic information. Ms. Martell resides in Lake County. Ms. Martell reported she could take care of Courtney and Courtney’s sister while Ms. Farris was in jail. Seminole child protective investigator obtained background checks and approved Ms. Martell to care for the children.
07/26/2006 – Case manager receives telephone call from Cynthia Martell (current non-relative caregiver) who reports she had cared for the children while mother was out of state. Ms. Farris did not attend her father’s funeral in Kentucky, however, she did go to North Carolina with her paramour, Michael Sisk. Ms. Farris also forged a letter of compliance from Healthy Start and had forwarded to the case manager.
07/27/2006 – Abuse report received. Allegation: “There were concerns that the child, Courtney (DOB 12/18/2004) may have been sexually abused while in the care of her mother, Candice Farris, due to the number of men that the mother was involved with.” At the time of this report Courtney was found living in Seminole County in the home of the daughter of Cynthia Martell. Ms. Martell resided in Sorrento and the reason for the report being assigned to Lake County. DCF Lake County child protective investigator initiated contact to ensure the child victim was seen within 24 hours. There was also an open report in Seminole County initiated on 7/21/2006 which alleged conditions hazardous involving Courtney and two other children in the home. During the contact with Ms. Martell, the DCF child protective investigator was advised that Seminole County Sheriff child protective investigator had completed a Home Study on her residence in Lake County. Abuse report was closed on 7/31/2006, with no findings for the maltreatment.
08/08/2006 – Motion to modify custody of Courtney Clark to non-relatives, Cynthia and Mark Martell, filed with Pinellas County Juvenile Court.
08/10/2006 – Motion to modify custody of Courtney Clark to non-relatives, Cynthia and Mark Martell, granted by Pinellas County Juvenile Court.
08/14/2006 – Ms. Farris was informed by the case manager that her children are now in custody of non-relative caregiver. Ms. Farris indicates she will hire a private attorney and will get children back. Case manager documents that a reunification staffing would be held and Ms. Farris would need to provide proof of
26 compliance with case plan tasks in order to regain custody of her children. Ms. Farris was advised of terms of the case plan.
08/15/2006 – Staffing held with the Pinellas/Pasco Assistant State Attorney. Psychological assessment to be added to case plan tasks for Ms. Farris. Custody was changed to non-relative placement and Sarasota Family YMCA was not given the discretion to reunify the child.
08/15/2006 – Telephone call from a relative who reports being concerned Ms. Farris will abscond with children upon her return to Florida. (Ms. Farris was incarcerated in Colorado at this time).
08/16/2006 – Case manager called to verify that the two doctors that Ms. Farris stated she had taken the children to had in fact seen the children. One doctor did not exist and the other had not seen the children.
08/30/2006 – Child wellness check completed by Lake County child protective investigator during a home visit for case manager.
08/30/2006 – Abuse report received alleging that Courtney’s sister was noticed with bruises all over her body, bruises are dark blue in color, and are located on her hands and legs. The report further alleged that “it is unknown what happened to her, but she has been under the care of her maternal grandmother, Cynthia and Candice, her mother, does not live in the home and is not caring for (Courtney’s sister) because she (Candice) has liver problems and cancer.” Cynthia and Mark Martell were the caretakers for Courtney Clark and her sister at this time. Lake County child protective investigator observed the children on 08/30/2006 and noted no injuries to the children. The Lake County Sheriff’s Department also conducted a child wellness check for Pinellas County to ensure Courtney’s safety on the same day. The police report documented the child (Courtney) was seen and reflected no concerns. There were no visible injuries to the children in the home.
09/07/2006 – Abuse report was closed on 09/07/2006, with no findings of other physical injuries-threatened harm.
10/04/2006 – Case manager received a call from caregiver, Cynthia Martell, stating that she had “made a big mistake” and allowed Ms. Farris to leave with the children, Courtney Clark and her sister on 09/23/2006. Only Courtney Clark had an open court-ordered case plan at this time. Ms. Martell stated that Ms. Farris told her that at the court hearing that day, that the case was closed and that Courtney was to be returned to her. Ms. Martell stated to case manager, that she believed the mother, therefore did not question her or notify the case manager until 10/4/2006 [Entered into HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
27 10/04/2006 – Case manager contacted Assistant State Attorney Cindy Ennis to inform her of the situation. Ms. Ennis stated that she would issue a pick up order first thing in the morning [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/05/2006 – Case manager obtained pick up order on the child [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/05/2006 – Case manager contacted Grand Junction Police Department (Ms. Farris was believed to be in Colorado, where she had previous charges) to request assistance with the pick up order. Case manager spoke to Cindy at dispatch. She said that she would relay message to an officer and have them return case manager’s call [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/05/2006 – Case manager received call from an Officer Dixon of the Grand Junction Police Department. He requested that the case manager fax a copy of the pick up order. Records check by Officer Dixon indicated that Ms. Farris had a court appearance scheduled for the next day [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/06/2006 – SunCoast Region Family Safety Program Office Specialist Kathleen Matthews forwarded e-mail to Sarasota Family YMCA to advise that Courtney Clark had not been seen in 37 days.
10/06/2006 – Case manager faxed copy of pick up order to Officer Dixon. He went to the courthouse and called the case manager back stating he had just missed Ms. Farris as she left the courthouse a few minutes before he arrived. He offered to check the home address, if one was available [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/06/2006 – Case manager received call from Joseph Jueschke, Colorado child protective investigator. He requested that case manager mail a certified copy of the pick up order to him in Colorado [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/11/2006 – Case manager made a copy of the certified pick up order for file and provided original to office assistant to be mailed overnight [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].
10/30/2006 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews forwarded e-mail to Barbara Simmons at the Sarasota Family YMCA stating that Courtney Clark had not been seen for 61 days. Request is made that Sarasota Family YMCA update as to the reason Courtney has not been seen. Copied on the e-mail are Christy Kane and Lee Johnson of the Sarasota Family YMCA and several Administrators with the Department of Children and Families SunCoast Region.
28 10/30/2006 – Case manager contacted Officer Dixon of the Grand Junction Police Department to see if there were any updates as to the whereabouts of Ms. Farris or Courtney Clark. Officer Dixon stated that they have not been able to track her down yet and that Ms. Farris failed to appear in court three days ago. A warrant for her arrest had been issued. Her bond was set at $30,000. Ms. Farris’ paramour (Michael Sisk) also had a warrant out for his arrest with a bond of $15,000. The officer stated that they had a few addresses in the case file including one given in court during her last hearing. He stated law enforcement responded to these addresses but had not been able to locate the mother [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/31/2006].
11/06/2006 – An additional e-mail is sent to the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews stating that Courtney Clark has not been seen in 68 days. Request is made by SunCoast Family Safety Program Office that a missing child report be completed for Courtney Clark by the supervising agency. Administrators from the Sarasota Family YMCA and the Department of Children and Families Suncoast Region are among the recipients of this information.
11/08/2006 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews sends correspondence to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA, requesting an update on status of the case and the need for paperwork to be completed.
11/10/2006 – Case manager contacted Officer Dixon of the Grand Junction Police Department to ask for a report number for Ms. Farris’ case. Officer Dixon stated that they never took a report, but that they have been attempting to locate Ms. Farris. He said that the case was recorded with the dispatch when the case manager made the call requesting assistance. Officer Dixon stated that he believed that Ms. Farris, the paramour (Mr. Sisk) and her children are in Kentucky [Entered in HomeSafenet 11/10/2006].
11/28/2006 – E-mail sent, to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for Sarasota Family YMCA from the SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews asking why law enforcement had not taken a missing child report and for Sarasota Family YMCA to follow up immediately.
11/30/2006 – Case manager contacted Cynthia Martell (non-relative caregiver) to inquire if she had heard anything from Ms. Farris. Ms. Martell was not available and the case manager left a voicemail message requesting a return phone call [Entered in HomeSafenet 11/30/2006].
11/30/2006 – Case manager entered a note in HomeSafenet that the whereabouts of the mother and child were unknown. The reason a face-to-face visit was not attempted was – Absconded/Abducted [Entered in HomeSafenet 11/30/2006].
29 12/18/2006 – Memo to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for Sarasota Family YMCA, from the SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews requesting update on efforts to locate and recover child from State of Colorado. Requested due date of 12/19/2006.
12/19/2006 – Response received from Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA, with a timeline of the actions taken by the case manager since child was removed by Ms. Farris. Request for information re- sent as to status of the pick-up order being provided to law enforcement in Colorado, along with a request for a missing persons report so that Courtney could be placed in the National Crime Information Center database.
12/27/2006 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews stating that Courtney Clark was still not officially listed as a missing child in the Department’s Missing Child Tracking System due to additional information being needed.
12/28/2006 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews requesting an update on status of reporting Courtney Clark missing. Ms. Matthews offered assistance with this process if needed.
12/29/2006 – The Missing Child Reporting Form was completed by Sarasota Family YMCA and child entered into the DCF Missing Child Tracking System. Missing Child Alert for Courtney Clark is activated in HomeSafenet.
01/02/2007 – Courtney Clark case begins appearing on the Department’s Daily Missing Child Issue List as not having an active missing child case entered into the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center data systems.
01/02/2007 – A file review of Courtney Clark's case was completed by Trish Adams as part of a Sarasota YMCA Tier 1 quality assurance process. Findings of the review included deficits in general case practice requirements involving safety, placement stability, reunification, case manager visitation, case worker supervision and indicated procedures were not followed pertaining to an abducted child. The case file review did not result in an issuance of a Request for Assistance or other actions by the Sarasota YMCA.
01/03/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/03/2007 was forwarded.
01/04/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/04/2007 was forwarded.
30
01/08/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/08/2007 forwarded with comments on list stating “Provide status of obtaining p/u order and LE report to FSPO by Wed. 01/10/2007 COB.”
01/12/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/12/2007 forwarded with comments on list stating “Still no P/U order filed. Please provide status of obtaining p/u order and making LE report by Wed. 01/17/2007.”
01/16/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews. . Daily issues list dated 01/16/2007 forwarded with comments on list stating “What is status of P/U order and LE report? Provide status by 01/17/2007.”
01/17/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews with possible address information on potential family and non-relative resources for follow-up related to missing child efforts to locate.
01/19/2007 – HomeSafenet notes show that the case manager attempted to report Courtney Clark as missing to the Lake County Sheriff’s Office. Case manager is told according to internal policy of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office that a missing child report must be made in person. Lake County Sheriff’s Office refers case manager to the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office to collect the information needed for reporting purposes and to request that the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office fax the report back to the Lake County Sheriff’s Office for case opening [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].
01/19/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews received a response from Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA stating that the Sarasota Family YMCA had checked the address provided on 01/17/2007 indicating no one living at the address had any information on this case.
01/23/2007 – Case manager contacted Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office in an effort to report Courtney Clark as missing. An officer is dispatched to the case manager’s office and a missing child report is taken [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].
31 01/24/2007 – Case manager checks to make sure that the Lake County Sheriff’s Office has received the faxed report. Lake County Sheriff’s Office indicates that they had not received the report [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].
01/25/2007 – Case manager checks to make sure that the Lake County Sheriff’s Office has received the faxed report from the Pinellas County Sheriff’s office. Lake County Sheriff’s Office indicates that they had received the report from the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office and that the case manager should call back in the morning to receive the case number [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].
01/26/2007 – Detective Vachon* of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office provides the case manager with a missing child report case number (07-014081) *HomeSafenet note shows name as Dechon. Should be Vachon.
02/08/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews spoke with Melanie Laurella, a Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse Analyst, regarding Courtney Clark. Ms. Matthews told Ms. Laurella that Courtney is missing from a non-relative placement and that Lake County Sheriff’s Office has taken a report. Ms. Matthews further explained it is the impression of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office, as advised by the Assistant State Attorney’s Office in Lake County “it appears the child cannot be listed as missing in the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center databases because the mother’s rights were not terminated, she only violated a civil order.” Ms. Matthews advised the Lake County Sheriff’s Office that the mother was not supposed to have custody of Courtney. Ms. Laurella also noted that the Pinellas County pick-up order had not been entered into Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center databases.
02/09/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews sends correspondence to Melanie Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse Analyst, with six potential names, addresses and contact numbers on individuals who may have information on the whereabouts of Ms. Farris and Courtney Clark.
02/13/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews sends e-mail correspondence to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA, regarding the lack of a missing child report into the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center data systems.
02/13/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearing House Analyst, contacted the Lake County Sheriff’s Office. Ms. Laurella requested that Detective Vachon fax a copy of the pick-up order. The court documentation states that Ms. Farris is not to have custody of Courtney Clark and that law enforcement can take the child “into custody using whatever force necessary and/or by any means necessary.” Ms. Laurella spoke with the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office about the pick-up order.
32
02/14/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearing House Analyst, is advised by Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office that the warrant division does not enter pick-up orders into Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center. Pick-up orders are turned over to the Child Protection Unit so the determination can be made to enter the pick-up order into Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center. (From summary information provided by Ms. Laurella on 06/19/2007.)
02/16/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse Analyst, and Florida Department of Law Enforcement Special Agent Supervisor Condon spoke with Lake County Sheriff’s Office about the case. (From summary information provided by Ms. Laurella on 06/19/2007.)
02/18/2007 – Courtney Clark’s missing child case is entered into the Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center data systems by the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (Missing child report case number 07-014081).
02/19/2007 – Missing child case is transferred to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse for case opening. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children Information Clearinghouse transfers missing child case to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children for case opening.
04/18/2007 – Case manager receives case opening packet from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children [Entered in HomeSafenet 04/18/2007].
06/13/2007 – Melissa Remy, Florida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children Information Clearinghouse Analyst, identifies possible location for Michael Sisk in Wisconsin. Information is forwarded to Detective Vachon of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office.
06/14/2007 – Courtney Clark is recovered by the Portage, Wisconsin Police Department.
33 Executive Summary
On June 14, 2007, law enforcement officers found a missing Florida child, 2-year old Courtney Alisa Clark, in a Portage, Wisconsin home. A preliminary investigation that revealed Courtney had been missing from her court-ordered placement for four months before she was reported missing. As a result, Florida Department of Children and Families Secretary Bob Butterworth ordered a thorough review of the case. The review was conducted from June 18, 2007, through June 25, 2007, by headquarters Quality Assurance staff.
The scope of the review included an analysis of prior child protective investigations; HomeSafenet chronological case recordings; and the open case management services record provided by the Safe Children Coalition, the community-based care lead agency in Pinellas County that is operated by the Sarasota Family YMCA.
The review uncovered significant problems and concerns in five areas: Reporting a Missing Child, Reunification, Assessment of New Child Born into an Active Case, Home Study, and Courtesy Supervision.
The review also revealed that despite prompts from the SunCoast Region to the Sarasota Family YMCA, along with numerous HomeSafenet entries pertaining to Courtney’s status as missing, the issue was not acted on by senior leaders at the Sarasota Family YMCA or senior managers at the Department of Children and Families. Prompt, effective action to report the child as missing was not taken by either organization.
In response to these findings the Department is proposing changes and improvements that include the following:
• Establish a zero tolerance policy for failure to follow missing children procedures related to reporting and locating missing children.
• Direct Department senior management to review cases where in-state children have not been seen according to policy. If a child is identified as missing as a result of these reviews, immediately follow procedures to report that child as missing to local law enforcement.
• Further explore technology options to assist in locating children in care.
• Require the Sarasota Family YMCA to specifically address the deficiencies outlined in this report.
The health and safety of children in the care of our community-based care agencies and contract providers are the responsibility of the Department of Children and Families.
Due to the serious nature of the findings outlined in the Quality Assurance Review, many of the recommendations will be implemented immediately.
### Operation SafeKids Status Update August 13, 2007
Finding Action Taken Additional Action Pending/Needed
Reporting & Investigating Missing Children Cases
1. Definition of Missing Child not clear Has been addressed in both Department policy No additional action needed. (Operating Procedure 175-85 issued in October of 2002 and Florida Administrative Rule 65C30.019 (promulgated in June of 2006)
The Department’s Missing Child Tracking System The current system is functioning. However, 2. Reporting and documenting missing child was developed and deployed statewide in the there are plans to integrate the Department’s episodes was burdensome and error prone spring of 2003. The system has demonstrated an Missing Child Tracking System into the ability to manage over 2000 missing child Florida Safe Families Network an effort to transactions (episodes opened and resolved) on a streamline the interaction between the monthly basis while allowing for timely Missing Child Tracking System and the documentation of missing child episodes and easy Florida Safe Families Network. identification of potential reporting and data discrepancies across multiple data systems on a daily basis (HomeSafenet/Florida Safe Families Network, Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC)/National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Florida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children Information Clearinghouse data system)
3. Better coordination between the One FTE remains locate at the Florida No additional action required. Department and local and state law Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children enforcement was needed. Information Clearinghouse on a full time basis and Data in all reporting systems need to be assists in synchronizing missing child data across in sync all of the data systems while ensuring that any questions that FDLE/MCIC may have on a specific missing child case are forwarded to the 1 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) proper individual for resolution. In addition, local CBC Child Location Point of Contacts are in place throughout the state to proved assistance to local and state law enforcement.
4. Some children who were categorized as Addressed, but not completely. Note: CFOP 175-85 includes specific missing could have been located with a efforts to locate, but CBCs are not required simple data check. Clarification in definition of when to report a child to follow it. 65C-30.019 includes very basic Some children reported missing by the as missing and the inclusion of basic initial child efforts to locate the child, but do not specify Department were receiving public location efforts that should be conducted by the what internal data checks should be done to assistance from the agency and could caregiver or case manger in Operating Procedure locate children. have been located prior to being reporting 175-85 and Florida Administrative Rule as missing 65C30.019 has greatly reduce the number of cases where the location of a child could have Action to be taken: been identified through a simple database check. Revision of 65C-30.019 to specify what minimum data search requirement shall be conducted within a specific time frame for children reported missing.
Note: The Department in partnership with 5. Adults that have absconded with a child FDLE training memo sent in the fall of 2002 FDLE submitted draft language to modify are not in the FCIC/NCIC system. CH. 39 to the Florida Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs that requires local law enforcement to accept missing children reports from the Department, CBCs and Sheriffs office providing child investigative services to the department and the reports shall include when available, identifying information regarding any adults who may be accompanying or accompanying or abducting the missing child.
How to enter an adult into FCIC/NCIC to allow linking to a child has been discussed with FDLE and Connie Schingledecker, but the best way for local law enforcement to do this has not been determined. 2 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)
Action to be taken The workgroup related to reviewing the Operation SafeKids recommendations should investigate options and propose options on how to address this.
6. Dual entry of children that have been • FDLE received authorization from the National adjudicated delinquent or have outstanding Criminal Justice Information System working No additional action required warrants group for dual entry of children who were categorized as both missing and wanted into the FCIC/NCIC system in the fall of 2002. • An extremely small number of children who are categorized as missing from the care or supervision of the state still appear as wanted within the FCIC/NCIC system. However, these children usually have felony criminal warrants entered into the FCIC/NCIC system, which makes the entry of a missing child case into the FCIC/NCIC system a possible officer safety issue.
Additional child location resources are being 7. Lack of communication between The Department established local Child Location added within the Department with a primary Department staff and local law enforcement Points of Contacts for each DCF District in the focus on coordination with law enforcement: during the location and recovery of the child. spring of 2003. These positions have since been • five Region level Child Location transferred to the community based care provider Coordinator positions with an agencies. While the expectation that these expectation that these individuals will positions will work with local law enforcement on a place a priority on improving the routine basis remains, issues related to the frequency and quality of communication frequency and effectiveness of communication between contracted service providers between social service providers and local law and local law enforcement in an effort to enforcement remain enhance child location efforts. • Director of Justice Services to facilitate coordination and communication at the state level.
8. Validation of efforts The Missing Child Reporting and Location Guide 3 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) Case workers not routinely updating local was distributed in the winter of 2006 and further law enforcement on helpful info. emphasized this issue. Department needed timely access to local police reports to evaluate the effectiveness of the reporting process FSFN has a chrono note case type for missing child effort to locate.
9. Pertinent information was not accessible to • 2003: DCF agreed to maintain a centralized Action to be taken: anyone other than the caseworker. file to allow access to information 24/7. • Will be addressed in training and by the • The discretion on how to best manage the Regional Child Location Specialist at the case files of missing children was given to the local level if it is a problem. CBC lead agency providers when case • Revised 65C-30.019 will require case management services were transferred. workers to provide local law enforcement access to the child’s file.
• Train the trainer was developed by DCF and In-Process : 10. Law enforcement and DCF could benefit FDLE and delivered in the Spring of 2003. • Currently developing training as part of from mulit-disciplinary training that focused the C. Clarke action to be delivered to on roles and responsibilities of each. key parties (law enforcement, CBC providers, DCF staff).
• CFOP 175-85 and Administrative Rule 65C- Note: Information received from debriefing 11. Information received from debriefing 30.019 require that a child will be interviewed runways upon their return is used in a runaway children when recovered provided by the caseworker within 24 hours of the variety of ways or not used at all, as there is valuable insight and information that required child’s return to determine service and no requirement related to this. additional investigation. placement needs. • A referral for a mental health evaluation must be made if it is determined that the child ran Action to be taken: away. Revision of 65C30.019 to address minimum • A behavioral review of Comprehensive requirements for preventing and intervening Behavioral assessment will be completed by with youth who run from care, to include the the Behavior Analyst Services Project and the minimum requirements for debriefing. Analyst will provide assistance in developing an individualized prevention plan. • The Behavior Analyst Services Project (BASP) meet at least annually to develop a Memorandum of Understanding that identifies 4 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) priorities for project, based on their local needs. • The importance and requirement for debriefing has been discussed several times during quarterly conference calls with child location points of contact and a variety of debriefing tools have been provided.
12. Overuse of pickup orders • 2004: Workgroup formed to review use of No additional action needed at this time. pick-up orders, resulting in directives regarding use. • Directive was given by General Counsel not to pursue pick-up orders on children in care unless required by local law enforcement to accept a child report or ordered by the court (Miami and Palm Beach). • Current policy is to request pick-up orders if required by local law enforcement to make a missing child report. Currently addressing issues through work 13. Two scenarios apply to the concealment On 4/23/07, the General Counsel’s sent an email with the Children Families and Elder Affairs of missing children aided by parents, family, to all child welfare legal staff requesting they use Senate Committee. friends. the language below in all custody orders to permit Legal custodians, parents are not local law enforcement to generate missing child appraised by the Judge or the caseworker reports. that leaving or removing the child from the The language states: state is in violation of the court order; or The parent or parents who have custody Legal custodians, parents are aware they pursuant to this order must notify the case are in violation of court orders. However, manager within two (2) days of any changes no criminal reports are filed allowing law with regards to where the child resides, attends enforcement to seek arrest warrants for school or daycare, or any other changes in the child’s location of care. The parent/parents the perpetrators. are prohibited from removing the child from the court’s judicial circuit without prior approval of the court and entry of an order authorizing them to do so. Should the parents fail to comply with these requirements or the child be unable to be located, the Department may, at the department’s discretion, notify local law enforcement and submit a missing child report. 5 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) This language is designed to allow law enforcement to proceed with all missing child protocols including the commencement of a complete investigation. • Admin. Rule 65C-29.013 outlines reasonable efforts to locate family • CPI to inform parents not to move without notification. • No requirement that the State Attorney. Office must pursue warrants for parents. The checking of missing children within the DJJ 14. A number of runaways were located in system proved to be of limit value and is no longer Director of Justice Services and Regional DJJ facilities. part of he DCF intake process Child Location Specialists will address if it is identified as a problem. Currently, it is not. In place of the centralized check DJJ has been give access to Florida Safe Families Network system. DCF and DJJ MOU: • Share information on jointly served youth Standing committees at the local level in many areas
• Expectation that CBC providers will address Regional Child Location Specialist will 15. Officers who recovered children had to this as part of their working relationship with monitor and address at the local level if wait for extended periods of time to for the local law enforcement and provide contact identified as an issue. caseworker to respond. information 24/7. • Last week, sent email reminder to child Action to be taken: location points of contact to ensure they have Revision of 65C-30.019 will require a 24/7 addressed with local law enforcement. contact information to be provided to local law enforcement. • Plan to integrate into HSN didn’t happen due • Currently meeting with FSFN to integrate 16. Case activity entries into HomeSafenet to higher priority HomeSafetnet builds. the MCTS. were not consistently being documented • Efforts were not required to be entered into the • Regional Child Location staff will provide throughout the state. Missing Child Tracking System because the monitoring and training related to plan was to integrate into HSN. documenting efforts to located. • Efforts are entered into Florida Safe Family Network (FSFN) as chrono notes. In some areas, they are good about documenting and 6 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) monitoring efforts and other areas, they are not.
17. Some children (ages 14 – 18) gave birth 65C-30.016 requires: while missing/on runaway and there was no The services worker to promptly conduct a home policy to automatically afford DCF visit and assess the safety of the new born and responsibility for the baby and mother’s care. staff with Child Welfare Legal Services if regarding the filing of a petition.
18. Policies for sheriff’s offices and policy • In general, this has been addressed. departments accepting reports from DCF vary This has been addressed by SB 1454. Although issues related to children who across the state; go missing while under an abuse Some police departments will not accept investigation or protective supervision reports of children who ran from shelters remain. and will refer DCF to the home • Additional clarification may be needed to jurisdiction. allow law enforcement to close a missing child case based on information provided by the Department or community based care provider, while complying with accreditation requirements in this area. • Letters/forms were sent to local law 19. DCF closes their case on a youth who enforcement from central office. Stopped Action to be taken: turns 18 and notifies law enforcement. In because the field wanted to be responsible to Revision of 65C-30.019 will address case some cases, DCF notifies law enforcement touch base with local law enforcement. This closure procedures, to include offering local the case is closed, but fails to notify that the is best done at the local level. law enforcement a complete copy of the child has been located. • Requirement per CFOP 175-85, the youth’s file. caseworker is to notify local law enforcement that the youth has turned 18 and to provide a copy/or access to a copy of the youth’s file. • When the child is reported as missing, local 20. In some cases, DCF determines that a law enforcement should be notified of who to recovered child should be returned to a contact upon recovery of a child. placement, but fails to notify law enforcement. • Identification of a placement for law enforcement to place a child is not the best option, since circumstances of the recovery are not known and a placement may not have been identified/approved/available. • Communication and working relationship with local law enforcement and community based 7 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) care providers and DCF.
Public Awareness & Outreach • Flyers are currently available within 1. The ability to exchange information and • Locator system provided to the Department to Florida via the FDLE web site and at the photographs between states would help communicate to other states. National Center for Missing and locate and recover children from other states • Federal funding to introduce the Locator Exploited Children (NCMEC) for those System in other states was never made cases that meet NCMEC posting available. standards.
2. Photos on children reported as missing • During Operations SafeKids, took pictures of Actions to be taken: help make public aware and leads from the all children in care. Revision of 65C-30.019 will address the public are the best sources for locating and • Legislation was passed in 2001 – 2002 sharing of photos of children reported recovering children. modifying confidentiality restrictions to allow missing to local law enforcement. Recommendation: DCF is pursuing the Department to post information for children avenues for posting information and reported as missing from state care. photos of their missing children (non-profit groups, community groups, civic organizations, schools, are potential options for assistance in distributing flyers.
Recovery
1. Some children are located out of state or 2003: Child location points of contact were The Regional child location position will out of the country. Persons involved in these established at the district and central office levels be trained to assist and provide cases must be aware of the Uniform Child within the Department. technical assistance on these issues. Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act and international treaties. This is out of the scope of the day to day operations of most caseworkers.
2. Several children reported missing were Currently coordinate recovery efforts through National believed to be outside of the United States, Center for Missing and Exploited Children for these investigators were unable to gain cooperation types of cases. from authorities. FBI, U.S. Customs, and the
8 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) National Center for Missing and Exploited Children assisted with some.
3. Orlando PD responded to 17 calls from Actions to be taken: DCF to take reports on children who ran from their offices. Revision of 65C-30.019 will address the Recommendation: establish a supervised minimum requirements related to the location within each facility that is suitable prevention and stabilization of youth to place runaways when recovered. that run from care.
• This is a challenge. • These youth cannot be detained in secure placements to stop them from running. Children placed in secure placements (residential mental health treatment, juvenile justice) must meet certain eligibility criteria. • The community based care providers, the Department and stakeholders need to address this issue at the local and state level. • Best Practice: therapeutic foster home placements with intensive and individualized wrap around services have been successful in stabilizing runaways. • Jacksonville BASP has a pilot project in process.
Prevention
9 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) Florida Administrative Rule 65C-30.004 requires: 1. The lack of photographs has been a ♦ All children entering an in-home or out-of-home Actions to be taken: problem for investigators trying to locate care placement have their photo taken. In-home Revision of 65C-30.019 will address the children. Only 28% of the DCF children placement requirements are that a photo be taken sharing of photos of children reported featured on the FDLE web site have photos. of a child within 15 days of case being staffed and missing to local law enforcement. transferred to a service unit; ♦ Out-of-home placement requirements are that a photo be taken of a child within 72 hours of the • Up to 80% of children open with removal episode; FDLE have photos posted on FDLE ♦ Children age 0 to 59 months need to have photos web site/transferred to FDLE with updated every six months until the child reaches 60 photos. months of age and that children age 60 months • HomeSafenet report shows 75% of and older need to have photos updated annually children have photos. until they reach the age of18; • A document was sent to child ♦ Any child reported as missing who is subsequently location points of contact providing located needs to have his/her photo taken information on the requirement and immediately unless the child’s appearance has not specific instructions. This has been changed significantly since their last photograph. an going discussion of every Please review the entire Florida Administrative quarterly conference call for the last Rule for any further requirements (i.e. children 2 years. placed out of state).
• Best practice, per the Reporting Guide, quarterly This remains a challenge. 2. The majority of missing children cases are state wide conference calls, CFOP 175-85 and the runaways and many habitual. Proactive Runaway Workshop suggest: preparation of individual placements is • Placement options be explored while the Actions to be taken: needed to promote the stability of runaway child is on runaway to determine best children upon their return. options based on need and to plan for Revision of 65C-30.019 will address the return; minimum requirements related to the • Upon return, assess needs for additional prevention and stabilization of youth placement and services. that run from care. • The existence and availability of placements for these youth vary across the state. • Challenge is youth who run frequently and limited ability to intervene when the youth’s location is known.
3. Several runaway children were debriefed This would require statutory change to add physical by DCF and local law enforcement after they abuse and remove age parameters currently in place. 10 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) were located and it seemed a lot of these children were running to family, relatives to find their own alternative placements. Recommendation: The hotline should accept all reports related to child on child physical/sexual abuse and jointly investigate with local law enforcement.
4. At times, fingerprints or DNA is needed to June 2003: The Department collects DNA samples Action to be taken: positively identify a missing child. when there is a question of paternity. There are no The Child Protection Task Force Recommendation: Law enforcement plans to expand this practice. workgroup on missing children will work suggests DCF collect and store DNA with DCF to explore the possibility of samples without analysis for children collecting and storing DNA. under school age.
5. Some districts noted a routine placement Finding: pattern of children leaving from a non-secure • The Missing Child Tracking System was updated to Current data indicates that children facility, without the prior knowledge or allow analysis of data related to these children. being transferred for case opening to approval of the caregiver, only to return a few • 65C-30.019 and CFOP 175-85 provides the FDLE have generally been missing hours later. instructions to caregivers on their efforts to locate for over one day. Therefore, this is not Recommendation: Review policy related (up to four hours for non-exigent circumstances) a major issue at this time. to the reporting of children over the next prior to reporting the child missing to local law year after data on these children can be enforcement. Actions to be taken: reviewed. • The number of these children is down in comparison to 2003. Revision of 65C-30.019 will address the • Recent legislation 409.1451(3)(a)3. F.S. minimum requirements related to the outlines requirements for the prevention and stabilization of youth development and implementation of normalcy that run from care. plans.
6. Of the 393 children missing, 121 (35%) • During Operations SafeKids, there was emphasis were 17 or older and 41 emancipated during placed on the increased use of subsidized the course of Operation SafeKids. independent living placements. Recommendation: • 2114SB –effective in July 1: all children at age 16 DCF to explore early emancipation or must have a formal assessment for subsidized IL. transition to IL for runaways who are within a year of turning 18.
Legislative Action 11 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)
1. Runaways comprise the majority of all • Comprehensive residential group care lost state missing children, including those missing funding. Action to be taken: from DCF care. While the state has some • There is a comprehensive array of community excellent programs and facilities that deal behavioral health services and mental health CBC lead agencies should, in with runaway children, it appears that there residential treatment services for eligible collaboration with other community needs to be more options and resources for children/youth. partners, conduct an assessment of these children who are running away from • However, assessing needs for services and their system of care as it relates to the DCF placement. supports and obtaining services and supports in needs of teens in out of home care to the short window of time when the youth is in determine if current resources can be physical custody is extremely challenging used more effectively and to identify (procedures for approval, waiting lists) gaps and actions to address.
39.301(23): If CPI makes contact with a parent and Addressing through work with the 2. Parents who are being investigated for informs them to notify them of a change of address or Senate staff: when/if to close abuse are not required to report to DCF if placement status of a child within 2 business days the investigation and under what they move or relocate. Consequently, there CPI may report the child missing to LLE. circumstances will be clarified. are no sanctions in place to insure that the abuse complaint is fully investigated and the child is not further abused. • There is no universal SACWIS computer system to 3. There were a few instances in which the allow the checking of records from other states. child (and/or absconding adult) was located in • National Crime Information Center access to social another state. The other state agency was service agencies is allowed under federal not aware that the child was missing from guidelines but is universally available throughout Florida and has no knowledge of any pending the country. abuse allegations against the family.
12 Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003) Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 The Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection Status Update June 2007
Recommendations: Actions Taken Current Status Immediate 1a. Notify law enforcement Completed The locally based Missing Children Points of Contact immediately when there is reason to Training provided to law enforcement, function was moved to Community Base Care believe a child is missing. FDLE, DCF providers. Caregivers, case workers and providers DCF established Child Location Specialist positions in 1b. Law enforcement immediately instructed to report children missing each region. The Department’s Missing Children Unit enter information into the Missing CFOP 175-85: Prevention, Reporting and works directly with the CBC Missing Children Points of Child Information Tracking System Services to Missing Children finalized Contact on a daily basis to ensure children are 10/17/02 that defines “missing children” and reported correctly and provide technical assistance provides instruction on how to report and related to the reporting process, working with local law recover missing children and prevent enforcement, and the prevention and stabilization of children from running from out of home care runways. and stabilize them when they are return. The DCF Missing Children Unit developed a reporting Developed of a web based Missing Child and recovery handbook, with input from the local Tracking System (MCTS) in September Missing Children Points of Contact and FDLE, that 2002, which allows the department to track provides step by step instructions on: the number of children reported as missing How and when caregivers report a child missing; from care in real time and to electronically How case workers are to report a child missing to report missing children to state law local law enforcement and via the MCTS; enforcement. How to work with local law enforcement to recover Created locally based Missing Children a child. Points of Contact that collaborate with local DCF promulgated Administrative Rule 65C-30.019, law enforcement to report and locate effective May 4, 2006, that outlines requirements missing children; related to the reporting and recovery of missing Created a Missing Children Unit within the children and interviewing upon their return. department located in Tallahassee that: Co-locates a Missing Child Unit staff person at the Florida Department of Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 Law Enforcement (FDLE) to ensure children are reported correctly to state and local law enforcement and that child-specific information is provided timely to assist in the rapid recovery of the child; • Works directly with state and local law enforcement and the Missing Children Points of Contact on a daily basis to ensure children are reported timely and correctly as missing and as recovered; • Works with FDLE to identify issues related to the reporting and recovery of missing children, to problem solve reporting and recovery issues at the local level and to identify and to disseminate effective practice information related to the reporting and recovery of missing children; Instituted policy that establishes a uniform procedure related to the timely reporting and recovery, stabilization and prevention efforts; Established internal reports within the department that are sent to the Missing Children Points of Contact on a routine basis (daily, weekly, monthly) to ensure children are reported correctly; Established and monitors a missing children performance measure for the average number of children who are missing per 1,000 children in home and out of home care. 2. Notify foster parents they can lose Completed their license if they falsify records or sign blank visitation forms. DCF and CBC lead agencies distributed a letter in June 2002 to notify foster parents and Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 posted on the foster parent web site. 3a. Visit each child under DCF Completed Department of Health and Human Services Inspector supervision each month. Defined “face-to-face contact” and “who General report entitled State Standards and Ability to completes the visits” in administrative code. Track Frequency of Caseworker Visits with Children in 3b.Develop a credible verification Foster Care (12/05) ranked Florida second best in system to ensure each child is under Amended provider contracts to include nation at tracking visits, but noted an opportunity to DCF supervision is visited every performance standard for face-to-face visits. improve the content of visits. month. Admin. Rule 65C-30.007 was revised effective May 4, Provided statewide training via video- 2006 to specify the requirements and standards for teleconferencing on quality child visits. visitation (assess health, permanency, etc.) Performance measure for visitation in CBC provider Provided statewide training on 2006 changes to contracts. Chapter 39 and administrative code changes. Visitation requirement recently changed in Admin. Rule 65C-28.002 from every month to every 30 days to Implemented new pre-service training better ensure frequency of visitation. curriculum for investigative and case Visitation requirement is core element in 3-Tier QA management services. process, which is monitored internally by CBC provider and externally by QA. Visitation lists of children not seen for 55 days with required child-specific follow-up by district and CBC providers. New federal requirements, Child and Family Services Act of 2006, to draw down IV-B funding (effective in September) will monitor child visitation on two items: % of assigned case worker visiting child each month and; % of visits taking place in the home/place where the child lives. The quality child visits training focused on clinical supervision and what quality visits/contacts means. Visiting is how casework staff ensure children are safe and that their needs are being met. Visits allow casework staff to continually assess a child’s emotional, physical and social well-being, as well as gives quality one-on-one time between the case worker and the child. Reporting on contact with children was included in Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 Release 1 that went live July 30, 2007. Release 2 of the Florida Safe Families Network begins August 20, 2007. A credible verification system for caseworker contact with children is a key element of Release 2. 4. Revise guidelines for the handling Completed Missing Children’s Unit identifies issues related to and of runaways that require immediate DCF General Counsel Office instructed discusses the use of pick-up orders with the local notification of law enforcement, Child Welfare Legal Services not to use Missing Children Points of Contact on-going basis. followed by a pick-up order. pick-up order unless it was the only means Issues related to the use of pick-up orders do not to get local law enforcement to accept a seem to be frequent. missing child report. CF Operating Procedure 175-85: Prevention, Chapter 39 revised in 2006 (39.301(23)) to Reporting and Services to Missing Children addresses clarify the reporting of children (including the reporting of runaways and requires those thought runaways) under protective supervision as to be a danger to themselves or others be classified as missing. endangered and reported immediately to local law enforcement. 5. Implement a foster Care Mediation Completed Board in District 11. 6. Conduct criminal history checks on Completed Chapter 39, F.S. revised effective July 1, 2006 to all new non-relative, relative and address this (section 39.0138). foster care placement. Administrative Rule 65C-28.011 effective May 4, 2006 provides detailed descriptions of the required criminal, delinquency and abuse/neglect history checks for placements with relative and non-relatives in both exigent and planned circumstances. Administrative Rule 65C-30.018 (7) also provides guidelines for continuation of investigative activities or supervision services when a family relocates to a new county or when supervision services are needed in another county for a case participant. Criminal, delinquency and abuse history checks are to be completed by the provider in the receiving county prior to placement of the child unless the agreed upon protocol allows the sending provider to perform this function. The final placement recommendation to the court is to be made by the services worker or supervisor in the receiving county. 7a. Support GAL in reporting the Completed Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 resources needed to have GAL representation for every child in every dependency case in D 11.
7b. Support GAL to determine what resources are necessary to support administrative, supervisory, space and other infrastructure requirement. 8. Determine and prepare an LBR on Completed cost of equipping every caseworker with a laptop. 9. Conduct a GAL-district retreat to Completed identify issues and establish mechanisms for conflict resolution. 10a. Purchase and install Live Scan Completed All Live Scan machines were turned over to the CBC machines. 19 Live Scan 1000s machines originally providers for their use. purchased Need to determine current use and functioning and 10b. FDLE to train users. 34 additional purchased and allocated need for maintenance. based on population 10c. Obtain legislative funding to Staff trained to use maintain Live Scan equipment and to ensure its availability in each district. 11. Conduct an independent system Completed of care review in D 11. 12. Support expansion of the Miami- Completed Dade CBC Alliance. 13. Complete entering of placement Completed and home visitation information for all children in Home Safenet. 14. Provide foster parents, and Completed relative and non-relative caregivers a hotline number to call if they do not receive a home visit every 30 days. 15a. Case files will contain a current Completed CBC contract requirement photograph, fingerprints and birth Monitoring of current photograph, fingerprints and birth verification of every dependent child. verification was done. Element moved to Child and Family Services Review (CFSR). As a core element, Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 15b. Recommend feasibility of DNA 15b: University of Miami Ethics program current photograph, fingerprints and birth verification swab for every dependent child. conducted research, hosted and facilitated will be monitored in all levels of the 3-Tier quality meetings to explore option and prepared a final assurance review process. report that did not recommend the collection of Section 39.304, F.S., and 65C-30.004 effective May 4, DNA swabs due to concerns regarding 2006 address photographs, fingerprints for children in protection of banked DNA and implications of care, as well as the timeframe for obtaining and such. updating them. 16. Streamline pick-up orders and Completed Standardized reporting process for reporting children ensure missing persons divisions in missing alleviate the need for pick-up orders. law enforcement knows of all such Department advised to notify courts pick-up orders are children. not necessary as a missing children report will be taken by local law enforcement. Pick-up orders only used when local law enforcement requires to one accept missing person reports, which is very infrequent. 17a. Support Miami-Dade public Completed schools in developing notification procedures for children who miss three consecutive days or is not regularly attending school.
17b. Support Miami-Dade Public Schools in developing an electronic method for sharing school information consistent with legal requirements. 18a. Provide caseworkers access to Completed 65C-30.004, F.A.C., effective May 4, 2006, requires cameras with date stamp capability. children under five be photographed every 6 months DCF and CBC staff provided with digital and children over five be photographed annually. 18b. Photograph every child cameras. District 14 system for maintaining Missing child staff located at FDLE identifies children quarterly. photos with child’s HomeSafenet ID was without photos and searches HomeSafenet. If one implemented statewide. cannot be found, he contacts the case worker to request a photo be provided. 2,961 cameras purchased. Currently, 80% of the children on the FDLE web site have photos. 19. Recommend how to expand Completed Draft Florida Mental Health Institute evaluation reports “Family Case Conferencing” in on overall increase in use of Family Team Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 District 11. Statewide training provided on how to do Conferencing, Family Services Planning Teams, and family case conferencing. DCF and Family Group Decision Making. Without exception, community based care staff were trained lead agencies reported using multiple strategies to and encouraged to use as a best practice. engage caregivers. 20. Conduct a study to understand Completed why D11 has a lower rate of employee dismissals than other districts and what, if anything should be done about that. 21. Convene a Children and Families Completed Summit in Miami-Dade. September 18, 2002. Completed. 22. Develop a plan to achieve accreditation in core functions. CBCs are accredited or will be within 3 – 4 years of start-up. 23a. Compare the performance and 23 a complete longevity of child welfare staff with degrees in social work or other behavioral sciences vis-à-vis other degreed staff.
23b. Determine if caseworker job 23b: workgroup looking at workload standards descriptions are in keeping with and job descriptions. national standards for social and child-welfare work.
23c. Work with Florida universities 23c: Issuing RFP for training. 23c. DCF contracts with Florida Atlantic University to toward a program where graduates administer the statewide student stipend program at most could receive certification as a child public universities with schools of social work. Students welfare specialist. commit to work in child welfare in exchange for financial support.
Student Loan Program was discontinued due to lack of legislative authority July 2007. 24. Convene a series of local Completed conferences to teach private Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 providers how to use the Home Five local conferences held with frontline HSn Safenet system. users. 25a. Determine the effectiveness of Completed D11 human resources operations.
25b. Ensure that employees terminated for cause are never rehired within DCF.
25c. Ensure employees who resign in lieu of termination are indicated in the system so as not to be eligible for rehire.
25d. Accredit the DCF Human Resources staff by the Society of Human Resource Management. 26. Develop a plan to arrange Completed almost-instant Hotline access for calling in English, Spanish and Creole. 27. Provide and update relevant Language proposed as part of rule revision to 65C-30.011 (4), F.A.C., effective May 4, 2006, addresses medical information to foster parent, specify what medical information is required. child’s resource record. The child’s resource record must relative and non-relative placements. contain information on the child’s medical, dental, psychological, psychiatric, and behavioral history.
Section 39.6012(2), F.S., effective July 1, 2006, also addresses relevant medical information under case plan tasks. 28. A task force reviews DCF policies Present contract with MAXIMUS and Child Program Office promulgated four new administrative rules and procedures to streamline, Welfare League of America to review and that provide guidance for implementing provisions of condense and consolidate policies. streamline procedures Florida Statutes that relate to children residing in out of home care, child protective investigations, services, interventions and case conduct expectations related to child protection system. These include: 65C-28, 29, 30, and 31. Program Office currently promulgating 65C-13 and 15, Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 addressing licensing requirements for foster and group homes. 29. Develop policies around the Completed Chapter 39, F.S. revised to addresses this (section issue of placements with relatives 39.0138, and 39.401(3). and non-relatives who have a Admin Rule 65C-28.011 and 65C-30.009 address checks “positive” criminal background check. for relatives and non-relatives. Specifically requires that an on-site check for safety and appropriateness of the caregiver’s home, and initial criminal, delinquency, and abuse history checks must be performed, followed by fingerprinting of all adult household members, prior to placement. It further directs that if a suitable relative or non-relative is not located, then the court should be petitioned to place the child in foster care. 30. Complete background checks on Chapter 39, F.S. revised to addresses this (section all existing relative and non-relative 39.0138). caregivers. Admin Rule 65C-28.011 provides detailed descriptions of the required criminal, delinquency and abuse/neglect history checks for placements with relatives and non-relatives. 31. Develop performance measures Completed Missing child performance measure addresses rate of that accurately reflect those children missing per 1,000 children in out of home outcomes that are reasonably within care. the control of DCF. Related measure are placement stability Performance dashboard and leaderboard developed to report performance. 32. Make D11 a national model Not addressed in 11/03 final report. New IVE waiver and Chapin Hall contract addresses program in which federal-state the intent of this recommendation. funding restrictions can be waived to IVE Waiver implemented 10/1/06. This federal pursue innovative approaches to demonstration waiver allows federal IV-E foster care child welfare. funds to be used for any child welfare purpose.
33. Support Foster Care Review DCF working with foster care review panels Chapter 39 was rewritten to comply with the Adoptions panels. and recommending changes to judicial review and Safe Families Act during the 2006 Legislative language in statute so activities will be eligible session. for federal funding. Section 39.702 describes the requirements for citizen review panels. Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 Admin rule 65C-30.013 describes the statutory timeframe for scheduling judicial review hearings and the court’s standard for content and submission of the Judicial Review Social Study Report. addresses judicial reviews. IV-E Foster Care waiver on funding flexibility went into effect October 1, 2006. 34. Recruit more pro bono attorneys Completed for children in DCF's custody. Gov. Bush sent letter to President of Florida Bar requesting recruitment of more pro bono attorneys.
35. Expand additional co-location Completed (Recommendation specific to District 11) and shared responsibilities of child Local offices and local law enforcement have local welfare staff and law enforcement Established 5 locations in D 11. working arrangements in place in other areas of the officers. state.
36. Fully fund the Guardian Ad Litem Legislative recommendation GAL received substantial increase in funding during the program. 2006 Legislative session. 37. Fully fund Healthy Families within Legislative recommendation Need input from FSPO on current status and relevance Miami-Dade County. 38. Establish an estimating Legislative recommendation conference that delineates funding streams and provides budget projections and requisite FTEs. 39. Analyze DCF capacity to support 11/03 final report (page 12- 14) discuss 3- 2003 Florida Legislature funded additional FTE to field operations and community care Tier QA system as it was designed then. conduct quality assurance and oversight of child providers with quality-assurance, Oversight and Accountability workgroup welfare. As a result a 3 tier QA system was quality-monitoring and fiscal staff. looking at contract oversight activities and implemented. Currently, the QA system is being functional relationship with various other reviewed and revised so as to provide better oversight QA activities performed by DCF. and improved accountability. As of 7/07, nationally recognized consultant(s) have been tapped to facilitate and provide expertise. Department contracts for fiscal monitoring for CBC lead agencies.
Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 40. Provide a quick-response Legislative recommendation mechanism to allow the Agency Secretaries to shift appropriated funds from one program to another to meet emergency needs. 41. Pay caseworkers and 2003-2004 Appropriations Act included $30 supervisors better based on million for pay raises for front-line staff. meritorious performance. Pay increases were comparable to CWLA national averages. 42. Make all DCF employees Recommendation made to Legislature. All selected-exempt under the Service career services positions that met criteria for First initiative. SES were transferred in July 2001. 43a. Address high staff turnover 1,150 CBC and DCF supervisors trained Currently offer Supervising for Excellence, Managing during a series of managers retention for Excellence, Executive Leadership Program, and 43b. Fund supervisory management conferences. the Leadership Institute. course to ensure outstanding Supervisory Effectiveness Training and management. Quality Case Management Training are provided by department. 44. Determine how dependent Legislative recommendation Section 39.604, F.S. requires children ages 3 to school children at age 5 can be enrolled in entry under protective supervision or custody of kindergarten. Department be enrolled in licensed early education program or licensed child care program. Reporting requirements for children who are absent also included.
Section 411.01(6), F. S. provides priority for participation in the school readiness program to children served by the Family Safety Program. 45. Develop an expedited rule- Legislative recommendation Administrative Procedures Act describes instances for making process. emergency or expedited rulemaking. 46. Amend "mandatory reporter" Legislative recommendation Chapter 39.201, F.S., defines mandatory reporters as statute to include all individuals, anyone in Florida who knows or has reasonable cause to including clergy, who volunteer with suspect… Certain professions that are mandatory children. reporters are required to leave their names. 47. Amend foster parent licensing Legislative recommendation Statewide workgroup met in 2006 to review licensing requirements. and make recommendations for rule revisions. 65C-13 and 15 are currently in rule promulgation process. The rules detail licensing and re-licensing Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations. Updated 6/20/07 Updated 8/14/07 criteria for foster homes and group homes. Next step is filing final rules for adoption. Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 implemented. It requires an abuse/neglect check from other states for prospective foster/adoptive parents when they lived in another state(s) within the five year period preceding their application to foster/adopt. 48. Fund a supervisory-management Completed Currently offer Supervising for Excellence, Managing for course to ensure outstanding Excellence, Executive Leadership Program, and the managers. Leadership Institute.