The Challenges and Opportunities to Save Families Using the Drug Court Model for the 0-3 Families

1. The Challenges and Opportunities to Save Families Using the Drug Court Model for the 0-3 Families Dependency Drug Treatment Courts Philadelphia July 25, 2013 Three Branch Institute on Child Social and Emotional Well-Being

2. Children are sacred and entitled to be cherished in a safe and nurturing environment with strong family, community and cultural connections. Their happiness and well-being includes nourishment of mind, body and spirit in order to fulfill their dreams throughout their journey toward becoming a healthy Elder. NRC 4 Tribes Philosophy- 12

3. The Three Take Aways: • Importance of collaboration between court, community based organizations and government agencies • Turning crisis into opportunity with 0-3 Family Drug Courts: A view from the Bench/Lessons Learned • The influence of judicial leadership

4. Realignment of Thinking….. • If we insist that families and children meet the needs of the institutions then we are telling folks that we value our institutions. • If we insist that the institutions meet the needs of our families and children then we are telling folks that we value children and families.

5. Family Wellness Court Success:Children Remained at home (never were removed) (8% vs. 1% in the comparison group) Had custody rights returned to at least one parent (74% vs. 44% in the comparison group) Less time in foster care (186 days vs. 429 days in the comparison group) Reunified with their parents in less than 12 months (57% vs. 40% in the comparison group) Connected to supportive services, including a developmental assessment, home visitation, therapeutic services, and health insurance.

6. Parents • Received access to timely substance abuse assessment (45 days vs. 160 days for the comparison group) • Received access to timely substance abuse treatment (65 days vs. 245 days for the comparison group) • Decreased substance use at program entry (58%) to the most recent follow-up (20%) • Increased housing status at program entry (55%) to the most recent follow-up (75%) • Increased employment status at program entry (16%) to the most recent follow-up (25%) • Increased access to health insurance at program entry (51%) to the most recent follow-up (69%).

7. Obstacles: • 22% Parents dropped out, incarcerated or were whereabouts unknown. • Many incarcerated parents could not participate and the 6 month “fast-track” made the possibility even more daunting. • Not enough residential treatment beds. • Housing issues that prevented stability for participation in programs.

8. Collaborative Climate * Lessons Learned:Judicial Perspective

9. Collaboration as a State of Mind to Transformation and SustainabilityChild Welfare Courts Require A Different Approach- The work is complex – • From pre-petition services to parent engagement and mobilization of resources • A range of professional levels—from policy makers to front line staff.

10. Obstacles and Challenges to Collaboration • Turn Over of Staff and Leadership • Civil Service Rules that prevent people from staying in their positions when there are layoffs and people get “bumped” • Budget cuts & reminders to policy makers • Confidentiality • Silos of funding streams • Chronicity of social issues presented • Attitude is Everything!

11. Principles that have worked in Santa Clara County to form the collaborative? A Clear and Elevating Goal (Vision)

12. If you don’t know where you’re going … Any path will get you there.

13. Results–Driven Structure w/ a Unified Commitment

14. Unified CommitmentTeam Spirit- • A unified commitment can also be characterized by a belief among team members that they are a part of something special and that they are sharing something that is very important with other people. As such, a unified commitment can evoke strong emotions among those involved, as well as an unusual sense of connectedness among individuals from different agencies and disciplines.

15. “Quality is impossible if people are afraid to discover and tell the truth” • W. Edwards Deming Father of the Quality Improvement Movement

16. FWC and Systems Change Stakeholder Interviews to assess political will Sustainability Planning Grant Seeking Legislative solutions SIP and CIP priorities Examples of Success: 100 vouchers awarded Dental Association Early Start/Head Start Treatment beds and faith-based communities Mental Health Access Child Centered F5 Collaborative Courts

17. Standards of Excellence

18. Principle Leadership

19. Judicial leadership Key to any systemic change where Courts are involved -Directing Traffic -Shifting Gears

20. Judicial Leadership cont. • When the Judge calls a meeting, people attend. • Court can begin making orders that reflect systems change even without stakeholder agreement, therefore, the investment for the stakeholder is self evident. • Collaboration is a higher road that requires the vision and direction of the Judge • Family Drug Court should be the mainstay of Child-welfare Courts, not a boutique project.

21. Challenges of Dependency Court vs. Adult Criminal Drug Courts • ASFA Timelines • Substance Abuse Treatment Resources • Mental Health Overlap • Family Violence Issues and Child Safety • Treating a family vs. Treating an Individual • Interest in long term fix significant due to what is at stake re: Termination of PR

22. The 10 Principles As Applied to Families and Children Drug Courts • Key Component #1Revision: • Family Drug Courts must closely partner with the jurisdiction’s alcohol and drug treatment agency in order to share confidential background information that is generally not available from one discipline to the other and partner in an integrative model which allows for cross training and cross assessments.

23. Key Component #2 Re-visioned Using a nonadversarial approach, attorneys for parents, the state and the child promote child safety while first keeping the child at home with the parent in treatment and if unable to keep the child with the parent, they work together to get the child home at the earliest possible time while setting up services to preserve the parent/child bond and at the same time protecting each party’s due process rights.

24. Key Component #3 Revision: • All parents who have come to the attention of the Child Welfare Court System primarily due to substance abuse shall be directed into the Family Treatment Court model on the first day of court.

25. Key Component #4 Revision: • Family Drug Courts provide access to a continuum of family centered and trauma informed resources including alcohol, drugs and other related treatment rehabilitation services as well as mental health, family violence and other family centered services.

26. Key Component #5 Revision: • A drug and alcohol free lifestyle is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing and court reviews to make sure that the parent is also in compliance with their substance abuse focused child welfare case plan.

27. Key Component #6 Revision: • It is critical that the court team work together to develop a coordinated response to a parent’s compliance with the case plan and the treatment mandates.

28. Key Component #7 Revision: • Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential with a judge who is well trained on trauma informed treatment modalities and makes at least a three year commitment to stay in the Family Drug Court assignment.

29. Key Component #8 Revision: • Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and tracks reentry rates into foster care, reasons for reentry if any, and commitment to problem solving and self correction of systems in order to reduce family instability.

30. Key Component #9 Revision: • Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation and operations and promotes team building for better services to the parent and child.

31. Key Component #10 Revision: • Forging partnerships with criminal drug courts, public agencies, and community based organizations generates local, statewide and federal support which guarantees the sustainability of the collaboration and leads to structural changes that improve systems and service delivery to child welfare court families.

32. External Support and Recognition

33. Sustainable Shifts in Culture • Long-term planning and meeting • All money streams must be explored • Each primary stakeholder must be educated and have a stake in the game • “Failure is Impossible” • Systems Change vs. Boutique Projects • Parents as experts regarding their own children • Reward reunification and healing families

34. The Paradigm Shift for All Time