1 / 43

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (NRCOI)

Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare: (1) Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/State to Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and Families AND (2) Creating and Implementing a Resource and Capacity Development Plan.

garson
Download Presentation

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (NRCOI)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare:(1)Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/Stateto Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and FamiliesAND(2) Creating and Implementing a Resource and Capacity Development Plan National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (NRCOI) National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data and Technology (NRCCWDT) A Service of the Children’s Bureau/Training and Technical Assistance Network Administration for Children and Families U. S. Department of Health and Human Services April 28, 2008

  2. Two Main Goalsof This Service Array Process: • To assess a jurisdiction’s service array: Does the jurisdiction’s service array have the capacity to achieve positive outcomes for children and families? Four elements of the jurisdiction’s service array capacity are assessed: • Child welfare practice. • Child welfare leadership and culture. • Current services. • Needed new services. 2. To create and implement a Resource and Capacity Development Plan to enhance the jurisdiction’s capacity to serve children and families through an appropriate and flexible child and family service array that will achieve positive outcomes. 2 2

  3. This Service Array ProcessIs DESIGNED to: • Engage the state’s leaders as active stakeholders in the development and provision of outcomes-based services for children and families in the child welfare system (state leaders include: agency leadership, community leadership, funding resources, providers, multiple stakeholders). • Enhance relationships across the various child- and family-serving systems. • Clarify for leaders (state leadership, community leadership, funding sources, providers, and other supports for families) the importance of their participation in improving the child welfare system which will also benefit them and their work. • Enhance working relationships across the various child- and family-serving systems. 3 3

  4. This Service Array Process Is DESIGNED to (continued): • Assist internal and external community stakeholders in formulating the core values and principles that need to guide the work of the child welfare system. • Address practice at both the casework and system levels. • Provide a mechanism through which a jurisdiction at the local level can continually assess and enhance its capacity to address the individualized needs of children, youth, and families. • Build the state’s/tribe’s/stakeholders’ capacity at the system level to assess and enhance the service array on an on-going basis. • Incorporate information from already existing needs assessments previously conducted and build on existing planning processes. 4 4

  5. The REQUIREMENTS for this Service Array Process are: • Built on the fact that jurisdictions must meet the individualized needs of children, youth, and families in the child welfare system. • Predicated on the establishment of a child welfare practice model that is based on the practice principles of the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR): family-centered, community-based, individualized services, and enhanced parental capacity. 5 5

  6. The REQUIREMENTS for this Service Array Process are (continued): • Data driven so that jurisdictions and states can assess and improve performance utilizing outcome measurements in the CFSR. • Collaborative in nature and necessitates the building, strengthening, and maintaining of a Stakeholder Collaborative in the jurisdiction as well as community partnerships in the delivery of services. • Built on the recognition that state, tribal, and community stakeholders, along with the state and/or local child welfare program, hold ownership of the outcomes for children and families and consequently share responsibility for ensuring that services and resources are available for families when they are needed.

  7. The CFSR and the Service Array • Item 35: The State has in place an array of services that assess the strengths and needs of children and families and determine other service needs, address the needs of families in addition to individual children in order to create a safe home environment, enable children to remain safe with their parents when reasonable, and help children in foster and adoptive placement achieve permanency. • Item 36: The services in item 35 are accessible to families and children in all political jurisdictions covered in the State’s Child and Family Services Plan. • Item 37: The services in item 35 can be individualized to meet the unique needs of children and families served by the agency. 7 7

  8. A Seven-Step Process • Creation of the State Service Array Steering Committee. • Creation of the Community Service Array Steering Committee AND the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. • The Assessment Process (Four Assessments) and Writing the Consolidated Assessment Report. • Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. • Consolidation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. • Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. • Implementation of the Plan and Monitoring Progress. 10 10

  9. Step 1: Creation of the State Service Array Steering Committee • Initial Membership: • Child Welfare Leadership Team • Child Welfare Program Staff • Contract Management Staff • Financial Staff • Data and Technology Staff • QA/CQI Staff 11 11

  10. Step 1: Creation of the State Steering Committee (continued) • Develop a work plan and timeline to implement the service array process in the state, including: • The selection/recruitment of a pilot jurisdiction to begin the process. • Technical assistance for pilot jurisdiction. • Train the trainer for rest of the state. • Create a Child and Family Snapshot template for utilization by jurisdictions with assistance from NRCCWDT. 12 12

  11. Child and Family Snapshot • Template for incorporating data and information available about each jurisdiction involved. • Portray children and families entering the child welfare system and their overall well-being. • Inform processes of assessing capacities and developing Resource and Capacity Development Plan.

  12. Child and Family Snapshot (continued) • Utilize data and information available from child welfare agency (e.g., data* system, QA/CQI data, etc.) and other sources. • Each jurisdiction can then add to that information provided in the template. *Utility available from NRCCWDT to extract “core” data from NCANDS and AFCARS submissions and auto-populate an Excel workbook.

  13. Step 1: Creation of the State Steering Committee (continued) • Expand Steering Committee to incorporate key leaders from other areas, such as the courts, the tribes, child abuse prevention, family support and early childhood services, as well as the juvenile justice, education, domestic violence, health, mental health, and substance abuse systems at the state level, representatives of the business, faith, and labor communities and, importantly, birth parents, family caregivers, and youth. • Reach consensus on state-wide philosophy, values, and principles of child welfare system through facilitation and training provided by NRCOI (see handout on “Training Modules”). 15 15

  14. Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative • Creation of Community-Level Steering Committee in the pilot jurisdiction: • Multidisciplinary Membership. • Appointment of Point Person/Coordinator. • Completion of a Work Plan in conjunction with the State-Level Steering Committee that will lead the jurisdiction through the service array process. 16 16

  15. Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative (continued) Work Plan Entails: • Reviewing state-wide philosophy, values, and principles of the child welfare system • Tailored training (see “Training Modules”). • Reviewing existing needs assessments conducted in the jurisdiction. • Preparing the Child and Family Snapshot. • Recruiting and retaining a wide range of traditional and non-traditional stakeholders for the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. • Planning on how to involve birth parents, family caregivers, and youth. 17 17

  16. Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) • Rationale for the Community Stakeholder Collaborative: • No one individual knows all the services and supports in a jurisdiction: collective pooling of knowledge. • No one agency by itself can ensure child safety, permanency, and well-being. • Creating a constituency for child welfare. • Creating more effective community partnerships so services can be coordinated and integrated. 18 18

  17. Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE(continued) • Types of stakeholders needed: • Public and private sector providers of child welfare services. • Birth parents, family caregivers (resource, foster, kinship care, and adoptive families), and youth, who have experience with the child welfare system. • Court, legal, and law enforcement officials, including staff of the Administrative Office of the Court (AOC) and the Court Improvement Program (CIP), and CASA volunteers. 19 19

  18. Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE(continued) • Types of stakeholders needed (continued): • Tribal representatives. • Mental health, substance abuse, and domestic violence services providers. • Educators, health care providers, home visiting program staff. • Child abuse prevention advocates and staff. • Other key providers (e.g., housing, food resources, transportation, recreation.). 20 20

  19. Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE(continued) • Types of stakeholders needed (continued): • Elected officials and administrators, including legislators and legislative staff. • Representatives of the business, faith, labor, and media communities. • Other public sector employees, community-based organizations, and representatives of entities such as the United Way and local foundations.

  20. Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE(continued) • Work Plan includes: • Scheduling Meetings of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative: • 1st Meeting—Full Day • Engagement, training, and beginning • 2nd Meeting—Full Day • Reporting out strength and weaknesses in capacities • 3rd Meeting—Full Day • Finalization of Capacity and Resource Development Plan • Quarterly Meetings After 3rd Meeting • Monitoring Implementation 22 22

  21. Step 3: The Assessment Process (1st Meeting) • Training, Education, and Information • Establish Work Groups • Work Group 1: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Safety Outcomes 1 and 2. • Work Group 2: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Permanency Outcome 1. • Work Group 3: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Permanency Outcome 2. • Work Group 4: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Well-Being Outcome 1. • Work Group 5: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Well-Being Outcomes 2 and 3. 23 23

  22. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Capacities/Outcomes Work Group #1: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: • Make certain that children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect? (Safety Outcome 1) • Provide that children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate? (Safety Outcome 2) 24 24

  23. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #2: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: • Make sure that children have permanency and stability in their living situations? (Permanency Outcome 1) 25 25

  24. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #3: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: • Provide that continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children? (Permanency Outcome 2) 26

  25. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #4: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: • Make sure that families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children’s needs? (Well-Being Outcome 1) 27

  26. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #5: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: • Provide that children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs? (Well-Being Outcome 2) • Make sure that children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs? (Well-Being Outcome 3) 28

  27. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Work Group Roles • Roles in the Work Groups: • Chair/Co-Chair of Work Groups • Facilitating the meetings - Recorders in Work Groups • Provide notes of Work Group Meetings • Assist in producing typed documents 29 29

  28. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Four Assessments • Four Assessments: • First Assessment: Assessment of Current Practices in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. • Second Assessment: Assessment of Current Leadership and Systemic Culture in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed . • Third Assessment: Assessment of Current Services in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. • Fourth Assessment: Assessment of Any Needed Non-Existing Services in the Jurisdictions as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. 30 30

  29. Step 3: The Assessment Process—Producing Reports on Assessments, Consolidation into One Assessment Report • The work groups will produce four (4) reports for each capacity being assessed for the Stakeholder Collaborative and the Community Steering Committee: • Assessment of Practice. • Assessment of Leadership and Culture. • Assessment of Current Services. • Assessment of Needed New Services. • Four reports are consolidated into one Assessment Report. • See Tool Kit for suggested formats/templates. 31 31

  30. Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (2nd Meeting) • 2nd Meeting held 2 months after 1st Meeting. • Work groups present assessment of respective capacities: • Discussion, feedback, and recommendations. • Opportunity for entire Stakeholder Collaborative to provide input to the work groups. 32 32

  31. Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (continued) • The composite Resource and Capacity Development Plan entails: • Reforming current practices to enhance the capacities. • Improving systemic culture to enhance the capacities. • Enhancing current services that are important to building the jurisdiction’s capacities. • Establishing utilization estimates for new services that have been identified as needed to enhance the capacities. • Incorporating a continuous quality improvement process which evaluates the effects of changes on outcomes for children and families. 33 33

  32. Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan— Between 2nd and 3rd Meetings • Five (5) work groups meet to complete the development of their strategies for the Resource and Capacity Development Plan: • Goals of the Strategy. • Action Steps of the Strategy. • Tasks to Complete in the Strategy. • Timeframes for the Completion of the Strategy. • Intended Effects (specifically focusing on data) of the Strategy. • Continuous Quality Improvement Process Utilizing Data for the Strategy. • Persons/Groups Responsible for the Strategy. • Prepare to present strategies to the Stakeholder Collaborative at the 3rd Meeting. 34 34

  33. Step 5: Consolidation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (3rd Meeting) • 3rd Meeting held approximately 2 months after 2nd Meeting. • Each work group presents strategies for enhancing the group’s respective capacities. • Discrepancies are resolved and needed integrations are finalized in the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. 35 35

  34. Step 6: Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan • The Resource and Capacity Development Plan is reviewed by the State Steering Committee and the Community Steering Committee. • An implementation plan of selected priorities is created and agreed to by the two steering committees. 36 36

  35. Step 6: Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (continued) • For recommendations and priorities regarding services, changes required to implement the plan (for example, utilization estimates, costs, financing strategies, contracting methodologies, policies, procedures, etc.) are identified and pursued. • At the first quarterly implementation meeting (within 3 months of 3rd Meeting) the priorities and implementation plans are presented and the support and participation of the Community Stakeholder Members are enlisted. 37 37

  36. Step 7: Implementation of the Plan and Monitoring Progress • Continual monitoring and evaluation of the priorities and the implementation plan and its effects on child welfare outcomes. • Continual evaluation of funding strategies to support the priorities and implementation plan. • Implementation work groups can be used to assist in prioritized initiatives. • Barriers are addressed and successes are celebrated. 38 38

  37. State contacts CB Regional Office, NRC, forms State Steering Committee, recruits Local Steering Committee, completes work plan. Creation of the Local Steering Committee AND creation of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative in the pilot jurisdiction, Steering Committee develops work plan. First meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. Second Meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. Months 1 and 2. Months 2 and 3. Beginning of Month 4. Beginning of Month 6. Typical Timeline for the Full Process

  38. Third Meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. First Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Second Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Third Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Fourth Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Beginning of Month 8. Beginning of Month 11. Beginning of Month 14. Beginning of Month 17. Beginning of Month 20. Typical Timeline for the Full Process (continued)

  39. Creating Regional and State Assessments and Resource and Capacity Development Plans from County/Jurisdictional Assessments and Plans • Some States are beginning to experiment in developing regional and state assessments and plans after completion of county/jurisdictional assessments and plans. • For example, in Maryland, the Eastern Shore counties have all completed the assessments and plans and are now looking at region-wide trends and needs, with the goal of working with the region’s legislators (local and state) to increase resources. • Maryland is also planning on the completion of the process in all 24 jurisdictions and then looking at state-wide trends and needs. 41

  40. Adaptation of the Process • There may be jurisdictions that do not want or need to assess all the child welfare capacities listed in the accompanying document. • For example, a jurisdiction that has undergone the CFSR can decide to adapt this service array process as part of its Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to assess only those non-conforming outcomes/capacities and to create and implement a Resource and Capacity Development Plan to improve capacities in those areas. • For example, a jurisdiction that has identified the need to build capacities to support its efforts to impact portions of its system, such as reducing children in residential care, can choose to assess select capacities. 42

  41. Contact Information • Steven Preister, Associate Director, National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement • DC Office: 6824 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20012-1906, telephone/voice: 202.723.0320 fax (same, call first). spreister@usm.maine.edu

More Related