Changing DCF A Presentation for Regional Advisory Council Members

Allon Kalisher, MSW

DCF Regional Administrator, Region III

Middletown, Willimantic and Norwich

DCF Mission and Transformation of the Department

All children and youth served by the Department will grow up healthy, safe and learning, and will experience success in and out of school.  The Department will advance the special talents of the children it serves and will make opportunities for them to give back to the community.

Six Cross-Cutting Themes

A family-centered approach to all service delivery, reflected in development and implementation of a Strengthening Families Practice Model and the Differential Response System;

Trauma-informed practice as related to children and families but also to the workforce that serves them;

Application of the neuroscience of child and adolescent development to agency policy, practice and programs;

Development of stronger community partnerships;

Improvements in leadership, management, supervision and accountability; and

Establishment of a Department culture as a learning organization.

Shifting the Culture: 6 Principles of Partnership

Everyone desires respectEveryone needs to be heardEveryone has strengthsJudgments can waitPartners share powerPartnership is a process

Inter-related policy initiatives

Strengthening Families Practice ModelDifferential Response SystemAnnounced visits whenever possible;Reducing the number of children placed out

of state;Reducing our reliance on congregate care

for children and youth in the care and custody of the Department, beginning with children ages 12 and younger;

Inter-related policy initiatives

Increasing supports for foster families, with special attention to relative foster parents;

Increasing the Department's use of evidence-based in-home and community programs, and implementation of performance-based contracting for our provider agencies;

Improving case planning as a means to meeting children and families' needs.

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Some important data indicators

Strengthening Families Practice Model & DRS Implementation

Our Agenda

Practice Model ImplementationTrainingCoaching

DRS ImplementationModel / Framework Implementation Update

Implementation Strategy and Supports

Practice Model Implementation

Phase 1: Family Engagement Purposeful Visits Family Centered Assessment Supervision and Management

Phase 2: Ongoing Assessments Individualizing Services Case Planning Other strategies?

Practice Model Implementation

Training: 106 managers and supervisors in regions 1 and 3 (75%) have

been trained in PIC. 82 managers and supervisors in regions 1 and 3 (58%) have

attended Purposeful Visits and Family Centered Assessments 54 managers/supervisors from other regions have been

trained in PIC and 43 have been trained in PV and FCA As of July 2011, 488 staff (78.21%) in regions 1 and 3 have

been trained in PIC. 179 staff in regions 1 and 3 (28.69%) have attended PV and

FCA

Coaching Management Training

Practice Model Implementation:Expected practice changes

Announced VisitsRelative PlacementNo young children in congregate careFewer children placed out of stateIncreased supports to families – both

relatives and foster families

Differential Response System

Intake – no change in acceptance criteria Dual-track system

Family Assessment Forensic Investigations

Assessment Dispositions Transfer to Investigations (during Assessment) Close with referral to services Close with referral to Community Partner Agency Transfer to Ongoing Services

Implementing Practice Models

1. Commit to practice model

2. Pace implementation and be flexible

3. Be inclusive and transparent

4. Train managers, supervisors, staff and stakeholders

5. Provide experience and coaching

Implementing Practice Models

6. Designate staff and support champions

7. Align staff selection and evaluation systems

8. Evaluate progress and outcomes through quality improvement

9. Use feedback loops

10. Revise policy/procedures and create tools that support the practice model

The relevance of Neuroscience & Trauma-informed practice…

Differential Response: A promising approach for serving Connecticut's Children, Families, and Communities

Conn

ectic

ut

Dep

artm

ent o

f Chi

ldre

n an

d Fa

mili

es

Changing How We Work with Families

Differential Response is a change in the way DCF responds to, works with and supports families to ensure the safety and well-being of Connecticut’s children.

Changing How We Work with Families

Nationally, there is a growing consensus that child welfare

agencies must improve how they engage families in safely meeting the needs of children.

DRS in Other Jurisdictions

DRS began in the mid-1990s in jurisdictions located in Missouri and Washington.

According to a 2009 survey, 18 states had implemented DRS – 11 of these were state-wide. Eight states are planning for DRS.

DRS Outcomes in Other Jurisdictions

Families are more likely to get services that are preventive, including counseling and therapeutic services, and family support services responding to personal, household, or financial needs (food, utilities, furniture, home repairs, etc.).

In Minnesota, services most often went to families in poverty, and these families experienced a significant increase in income following services (income increased from approximately $22,000 to $32,000 in the 30 months after DRS case closed).

Long term costs associated with the implementation of DRS were lower due to fewer removals and re-reports.

Why Differential Response?

Driven by the desire to: be more flexible in the response to child abuse and neglect

reports; recognize that an adversarial focus is neither needed nor

helpful in all cases; better understand the family issues that lie beneath

maltreatment reports; engage parents more effectively to use services that

address their specific needs; and increase sharing responsibility and accountability for

families and communities.

Defining a Differential Response System

A differential response system allows DCF the flexibility to engage families coming to the agency's attention via allegations of abuse and neglect in a way that is best suited to the needs of the family.

Pervasiveness of Neglect in CT Child Welfare Cases

In Connecticut, and nationally, most reports involve neglect – not abuse.

Only 14.3 percent of reported allegations in Connecticut in SFY10 involved abuse.

The remainder involve forms of neglect, including physical, emotional, medical, and educational neglect – and they are correlated highly with issues surrounding poverty.

A Different Approach to Poverty and Neglect

According to a 1996 HHS study, families with annual incomes below $15,000 were 22 times more likely to experience an incident of child maltreatment than were families with incomes above $30,000.

What is DRS?

DRS is a system reform for supporting families, decreasing risks, and improving child well-being.

DRS changes the response to vulnerable families where children are safe and at low risk but potentially neglected.

Studies show that by working more collaboratively with families to address poverty and neglect issues, better outcomes for children result.

Why DRS?

Research indicates that traditional investigations are not as effective in engaging families where neglect is the identified issue.

In Connecticut, 80 percent of families investigated for abuse/neglect have been previously investigated.

Current research shows that the principle risk factor for future child maltreatment is previously coming to the attention of a child welfare agency.

DRS offers an alternative in cases involving low-risk families and neglect that does not entail the forensic approach appropriate in serious abuse cases.

Who is eligible?

For those accepted reports that: are given a 72-hour response time; are low risk or moderate risk; and do not have any one of the 15 exceptional circumstances, including:

Internal analysis suggests that approximately 42 percent of accepted reports will go to the Family Assessment Track.

Traditional CPS Investigation

Response involves gathering evidence and making formal determination of substantiated child abuse and neglect.

Forensic in nature, and generally used for reports of the most severe types of maltreatment or those that are potentially criminal.

Can be intrusive, adversarial, does not address underlying issues on behalf of frequently encountered families.

Family Assessment Response

Applied in low-risk cases Involves engaging the families as allies – “empowerment through

partnerships” – assessing the family’s strengths and needs. Offering services to meet the family’s needs at the family’s

discretion. No formal determination of substantiated child abuse and neglect.

Shared Principles of Traditional CPS and DRS

Focus on safety and well-being of the child. Promote permanency within the family through engaging kin and

community supports. Recognize the authority of CPS to make decisions about removal,

out-of-home placement, and court involvement when necessary. Acknowledge that other community services may be more

appropriate than CPS in some cases.

How does it work?

Report accepted at Hotline

Assigned to Investigation or Assessment track

Hotline sends report to Area Office

With Assessment track, Worker contacts family to schedule first face-to-face

Family planning, support networks, community involvement

Hotline

Assessment

Investigation

Area Office

Worker/Family Planning

PREVENTIONCommunity Providers

INTERVENTIONInformal/Formal

Supports

How DRS Will Work

Accepted Hotline reports that are assessed as low/ moderate risk are referred to the Family Assessment Response (FAR).

Social worker calls family to arrange home visit within five business days and uses standardized assessment tools to ensure child is safe.

If child is unsafe at any time, the case is moved to investigations track and/or the child is removed from the home.

How DRS Will Work

Social worker convenes family meeting to identify strengths and needs that can be addressed to ensure continued safety, increase family capacity and stability, and improve child well-being.

When service needs are identified by the family and social worker, the case is transferred to community service provider or remains open with DCF depending on risk level.

Connecticut Momentum

DCF piloted DRS in Hartford in 2004; however, insufficient planning and support impeded further implementation.

In 2006, with the creation of a Statewide Steering Committee consisting of community, consumer, and DCF representatives, initial planning began again toward statewide implementation.

Connecticut Momentum

Diverse stakeholders – internal and external to the Department – have been involved throughout the planning process.

Request for Information soliciting community input issued 2008.

Request for Quotations to spearhead community readiness process issued 2009.

Casey Family Services conducted a statewide community readiness planning process that resulted in five regionally-specific reports and a statewide executive report.

Connecticut Momentum

Region 3 (Norwich, Willimantic, Middletown) selected to implement DRS first*.

Policy development is near completion. Data system modifications are underway and

expected to be completed this winter. Staff from Region 3 traveled to MN supported by

Casey Family Programs TA. Training is underway for staff in Regions 1 and 3. Regional and Statewide implementation teams have

been meeting.

* Region 1 included later, and then remaining regions catching up for statewide implementation

Connecticut Momentum

Communication plan developed in partnership with Casey Family Services.

Funds re-allocated to support a community service delivery model.

Draft RFP in process for community service delivery model with target of issuing in February 2011.

Family Assessment staff to be identified by 2/1/11

Exploring grant opportunity in partnership with UCONN for evaluation funding.