children and family futures › files › aadcp_fdc best practices pt. 2... · children and family...

1

Research Updates on Family Drug CourtsOverview of Best Practices – Part 2

Phil Breitenbucher, MSW

Children and Family Futures

This presentation is supported by:

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Office of Justice Programs

(2013-DC-BX-K002)

Points of view or opinions expressed in this presentation are those ofthe presenter(s) and do not necessarily represent the official positionor policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice.

Acknowledgement

A permanent shift in doing business that relies on relationships across systems and within the

community to secure needed resources to

achieve better results and outcomes for all children

and families

Systems Change

3RsRelationships

Resources

Results

Outcomes5Rs for more families

Values – Why Are We Doing This?

A Framework for Systems ChangeRecovery

Remain in home

Reunification

Recidivism

Re-entry

FDC

Common

Ingredients –

What works…

Structural Supports

1. Relationships

2. Resources

3. Results

Leadership at

all levels

Inclusion of

stakeholders

Sustainability based

on outcomes and

results

Shared information

about institutional

barriers

Key Components of Meaningful Systems Change

Oversight/Executive

Committee

Director Level

Quarterly

Ensure long-term sustainability and final approval of practice and policy changes

Steering

Committee

Management Level

Monthly or Bi-Weekly

Remove barriers to ensure program

success and achieve project’s goals

FDC Team

Front-line staff

Weekly

Staff cases; ensuring client success

Membership

Meets

Primary Functions:

The Collaborative Structure for Leading Change

Mobilizing Resources

Building Relationships

Prioritizing Results

Information flow is the lifeblood, the fuel of an effective collaborative.

Leadership consists of encouraging that flow, analyzing its meaning, and framing decisions

that the team needs to make together.

Information flow

FDC Team

Membership Primary Function

Frequency

FDC Coordinator vs. FDC Case Manager

Key FDC Case Management Functions

Assessment

Planning

Linkage

Monitoring

Advocacy

Provide case management

Garnering community support

Prepare and manage FDC docket

Oversee budget and resources

Contract management

Grant Writing

FDC Coordinator Roles & Functions

Maintain individual client files

The FDC Coordinator - The Realities Often work under limited direction of a manager

Responsibility – YES; Authority – MAYBE

No choice in team members

Dynamics constantly changing due to new staff, politics, funding

May involve frequent and relatively independent working relationships

May assume leadership at various points of development process or life

span of FDC

Oftentimes grant-funded positions and are cut due to budgetary issues

Partners’ resource limitations

May oversee other collaborative court programs

One person expecting to be all things to all people

Oversight/Executive

Committee

Director Level

Quarterly


Steering

Committee

Management Level




FDC Team

Front-line staff

Weekly


Membership

Meets

Primary Functions:


Information Flow

Steering Committee


Frequency

Effective Steering Committees is more than reporting about what agencies did last month—it’s about whether clients are doing better.

Busting barriers for improved outcomes

Effective leaders approach barrier-busting as a norm; they don’t take barriers for granted

They know the difference between barriers and excuses

- Confidentiality won’t let us share information- Other agencies don’t understand our clients- Our funders won’t let us do it- We don’t have the funding to take our efforts to scale

Barrier Busters

Innovative

@ the table means:- More than signing an MOU- Key agencies are not just “sending

somebody;” they are actively engaged- Involved in policy and operation

decisions- Knows where the money is going

Who’s Missing @ the Table

Develop Interagency Partnerships#2

Key Component 1: Integrate treatment services with justice system case processing

Key Component 2: Using a collaborative approach

Key Component 10: Forging partnerships

FDCs bring together the legal framework of court, child welfare system, and treatment services in a collaborative relationship with a common goal: to restore families. To best achieve this goal; however, they must collaborate with other agencies to provide the range of services and support required to ensure family stability, recovery of parents, and the permanent placement, safety, and well-being of children. These partners should include mental health, domestic violence, primary health care, child development, and other agencies.

Develop Interagency Partnerships

Routinely Assess for Rates of

Referrals, Completions & Barriers

Somewhat

Agree

Agree

Responses (n = 19)

Disagree

Don’t Know:

10.53%

Opportunities for Growth in the Partnership

• More involvement from all departments on a weekly basis

• More cross-training on the limitations of each person’s

position(s)

• Collaboration and communication: meetings

• More transparency between different agencies between

the teams. Training from one agency to the next, such as the

treatment providers training CW staff and vice versa.

• More involvement from outside parties.

• More collaboration with the direct substance providers.


• Better communication

• Communication and clear goal setting

• More communication on all ends.

• Further improving communication between team

members.

• Everyone having an opportunity to have a voice at the

table.

Drug Courts That Required

All Team Members to Attend Staffings

Had 50% Greater Reductions in Recidivism

and 20% Greater Savings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

All team members attend staffingsN=31

All team does NOT attend staffingsN=28

42%

28%

Pe

rce

nt

red

uct

ion

in r

eci

div

ism

Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05Note 2: “Team Members” = Judge, Both Attorneys, Treatment Provider, Coordinator

Note: Difference is significant at p<.10

Drug Courts Where a Representative

from Treatment Attends Court Sessions

Had 81% Higher Cost Savings

Yes (N=55) No (N=9)

29%

16%

A Representative from Treatment Attends Court Sessions

% in

cre

ase

in c

ost

sav

ing

0%

10%

20%

30%

Defense attorney attends staffingsN=59

Defense Attorney does NOT attend staffingsN=11

29%

15%

Pe

rce

nt

Incr

eas

e in

Co

st S

avin

gs

28

Drug Courts Where the Defense Attorney Attends

Drug Court Team Meetings (Staffings) had

a 93% Higher Cost Savings


Create Effective Communication

Protocols for Information Sharing#3

Key Component 1: Integrate treatment services with justice system case processing

Key Component 2: Using a collaborative approach

Key Component 6: Responses to behavior

Key Component 7: Judicial Interaction

Effective, timely, and efficient communication is required to

monitor cases, gauge FDC effectiveness, ensure joint

accountability, promote child safety, and engage and retain

parents in recovery.

Create Effective Communication Protocols for Sharing Information

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Not Sure

Responses (n = 19)

WHO needs to

know WHAT,

WHEN?

The FDC has developed the capacity

to automate data about the

outcomes of the participants

compared to the larger systems

The FDC utilizes community-wide

accountability systems to monitor child

welfare issues with specific indicators

Somewhat

AgreeAgree

Responses (n = 19)

Disagree

Don’t Know:

21.1 %

Create Effective Communication Protocols for

Sharing Information

Don’t Know:

26.3 %

Create Effective Communication Protocols for Sharing Information

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


Responses (n = 19)


• Sharing more opinions in a factual way and not in an

opinionated manner.

• More cross-training on the limitations of each person’s position(s)

• Review what information is appropriate to share with the team

and what shouldn’t be.

• Better communication.

• Communication and clear goal setting.

• *How to manage when there are many professionals working

with one client/participant.

• More communication on all ends.

• Further improving communication between team members.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Program usespaper files

N=8

Program haselectronic database

N=3

20%

33%

Pe

rce

nt

incr

eas

e in

co

st s

avin

gs

Drug Courts That Used Paper Files

Rather Than Electronic Databases Had

65% LESS Savings



Drug Courts where all team members attended staffings had

50% greater reductions in recidivism

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

All team members attend staffingsN=31

All team does NOT attend staffingsN=28

42%

28%

Pe

rce

nt

red

uct

ion

in r

eci

div

ism


Drug Courts Where Treatment Communicates with

the Court via Email had

119% greater reductions in recidivism

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

YesN=31

NoN=14

0.46

0.21

% r

ed

uct

ion

in #

of

rear

rest

s

Treatment communicates with court via email


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Drug tests are back within48 hours

N=21

Drug testsare back in

LONGER THAN48 hours

N=16

32%

19%

Pe

rce

nt

incr

eas

e in

co

st s

avin

gs

Drug Courts Where Drug Test Results are

Back in 48 Hours or Less had

68% Higher Cost Savings

Ensure Cross-Systems Knowledge

Ongoing cross‐training of FDC team members and

stakeholders at all levels is essential for ensuring

collaboration and consistent, effective practice.

#4

Key Component 9: Continuing interdisciplinary education


• More cross-training

• More cross-training on the limitations of each person’s

position(s)

• Collaboration and communication: meetings

• More transparency between different agencies between

the teams. Training from one agency to the next, such as the

treatment providers training CW staff and vice versa.

• Talking about starting implementation of trauma informed

practice within our own specialties as a cross-training.


Drug Courts That Provided Formal Training for

ALL New Team Members

Had 54% Greater Reductions in Recidivism

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

All new teammembers have formal training

N=30

All team membersNOT formally trained

N=17

40%

26%


Drug Courts That Received Training

Prior to Implementation Had Almost

3.5 Times Higher Cost Savings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Team trained BEFORE implementationN=12

Team members NOT trained beforeimplementation

N=5

27%

8%

Pe

rce

nt

incr

eas

e in

co

st s

avin

gs

Oversight/Executive

Committee

Director Level

Quarterly


Steering

Committee

Management Level




FDC Team

Front-line staff

Weekly


Membership

Meets

Primary Functions:


Information Flow

Oversight|Executive

Committee


Frequency

Implement Funding & Sustainability

Strategies#9

Key Component 9: Continuing interdisciplinary education


Sustainability planning must address financial needs as well as support

from a broad range of stakeholders. FDCs must have access to the full

range of funding, staffing, and community resources required to sustain

its innovative approaches over the long term. FDCs need a governance

structure that ensures ongoing commitment from policy makers,

managers, community partners, and operational staff members.

Budget and Sustainability – Barriers and Challenges

• Need for ongoing champions; challenge with turnover of judges

• Some FDTCs operate as “projects” or “boutique courts” (on top or on the side)

• Inherent limitations on scale and scope in some FDC models

• No standardized cost analysis of total program cost or cost savings

• Lack of sufficient data on program effectiveness

• Resource problems worsened by State and local fiscal crises

Implement Funding and Sustainability Strategies

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%


Responses (n = 19)

Funding and Sustainability Efforts

The FDC has a community outreach and

education plan to further sustainability

efforts

The FDC's partners are able and willing to

share information about their budget and

staffing

Somewhat

AgreeAgree

Responses (n = 19)

Disagree

Don’t

Know:

5.3 %

Don’t

Know:

10.5 %

Sustainability Results

73.2 %

of the major services and activities provided as part of

the grant were sustained

53.3 % sustainedspecific components or a scaled down or modified version of their program

model

33.3 %

sustained their project in its current form or model

beyond their grant period

11.1% were not able

to sustain any of their program

Of the 44 regional partnerships whose

grants were not extended:

Redirection of Resources Already Here

Substance

Abuse

TANF

Domestic

Violence

Hospitals

Schools

Police

Medicaid

Housing

Mental

Health

Courts

Families

FDCs

Pilots, Demos and

Grant-funded Projects

The “Real”

Resources

in the

Community

Successful Financing StrategiesWidening the definition of available or

potential resourcesConnecting with other related grants or initiatives

Changing the business as usual practices

to incorporate RPG innovationsIncorporating RPG efforts within their own agency

Integrating with other child welfare

systems improvements

Transitioning services and staff to other partner

organizations

Negotiating third party payments for

what the grant had initiated

Joining with larger health care reform and care

coordination efforts

Institutionalizing RPG practices into

existing systems of careThird-party billing, Medi-caid

Redirecting existing, currently funded resources to adopt new case management and client

engagement strategies

Effective leaders sell the results of collaboration to other leaders

Demand the data to make the sale

Outcome-

focused

Garner Community Support

FDCs collaborate with community‐based organizations to

support the multiple needs of parents, children, and

families during FDC participation and to provide ongoing

support for continued success after family members have

completed their FDC services.

#8


To develop marketing documents, consider these elements in building your case:

• Prevalence of the problem

• Outcomes

• Case savings

• Intergenerational impact

• Early intervention and developmental effects on children

Making the Case in the Community

• How does parental substance use and child maltreatment effect other, high-priority issues?

• Are we clear on the benefits of your FDC?

• Have we done an inventory of potential funders? Have we begun a dialogue with those funders?

• Have we packaged the strongest possible case for our FDC? Do we use both stories and numbers to make the case?

• Have we documented how we’ve already changed the system and changed the rules?

• Who’s going to tell our story: who’s singing our song?

Making the Case in the Community

• What type of strategies have been developed to recruit broad community participation in addressing the needs of participant families?

• Do participant families have an active role in planning, developing, implementing, and monitoring services?

• Do you include community stakeholders in planning and program development?

• Have you conducted a needs-assessment of FDC participants?

• How do you identify and link families with support services they need?

• Do you keep the community aware of your efforts and outcomes?

• Which policy leaders and stakeholders agree that funding is a priority in the midst of all the competing options for use of scarce resources?

Garnering Community Support

Note: Difference is significant as a trend at p<.15

Drug Courts That Had Formal Partnerships

with Community Organizations Had

More Than Twice the Savings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Drug court has formal partnerships in communityN=15

Drug court doees NOT have formal partnershipsN=5

35%

15%

Evaluate Shared Outcomes

to Ensure AccountabilityFDCs must demonstrate that they have achieved desired results as defined

across partner agencies by agreeing on goals and establishing performance

measures with their partners to ensure joint accountability. FDCs develop and

measure outcomes and use evaluation results to guide their work. FDCs must

continually evaluate their outcomes and modify their programs accordingly to

ensure continued success.

#10

Key Component 8: Monitoring and Evaluation

Oversight/Executive

Committee

Director Level

Quarterly


Steering

Committee

Management Level




FDC Team

Front-line staff

Weekly

Staff cases; ensuring client

success


Primary Functions:

Meets

Membership

Information Flow

The Community

Collaboration =

Shared results =

Accountability =

Trust that PromotesSustainability

Evaluate for Shared Outcomes and Accountability

The FDC has an ongoing plan for

evaluation

Somewhat

Agree Agree

Responses (n = 19)

Disagree

Don’t Know:

15.79 %


• Communication and clear goal setting.

• More involvement from outside parties.


Program reviews their own statsN=20

Program does NOT review statsN=15

37%

16%

Pe

rce

nt

incr

eas

e in

co

st s

avin

gs

Drug Courts Where Review of The Data

and Stats Has Led to Modifications in Drug

Court Operations had a 131% Increase in

Cost Savings


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Used evaluation to make modifications toprogram

N=18

Did NOT use evaluation to make modificationsN=13

36%

18%

Pe

rce

nt

incr

eas

e in

co

st s

avin

gs

#2 Drug Courts Where the Results of

Program Evaluations Have Led to

Modifications in Drug Court Operations

Had a 100% Increase in Cost Savings

Five Diagnostic Questions about Collaboration

1. Do we agree on the mission?

2. Do we agree on how we are going to measure whether we are achieving the mission—do we have a way of tracking progress (i.e. data dashboard)

3. When front-line staff raise issues about barriers they run into—do we ignore it or go to work as a team to reduce or remove the barriers?

4. Do we share enough information across agencies to be able to use our results to get more resources for what is working?

5. Do we have an agenda for scaling up—or are we stuck in projectitis?

Q&A and Discussion

Building on

our Success

Resources

FDC Guidelines

http://www.cffutures.org/files/publications/FDC-Guidelines.pdf

To download a copy today visit our website:

Family Drug Court Learning Academy

Join Us!2016

Community of Practice Discussion Series

Spring Discussion Blocks Summer Discussion Blocks

Launches in April! Register Now. Space Limited!

Dive into deeper learning!

Connect with other

FDC practitioners

to explore challenges and

share solutions

For more information, visit:

www.cffutures.org

Launches in July!

1

http://www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/files/SAFERR.pdf

Resource: Screening and Assessment for

Family Engagement, Retention, and

Recovery (SAFERR)

To download a copy, please visit:

FDC Discipline Specific Orientation Materials

Child Welfare | AOD Treatment | Judges | Attorneys

Please visit: www.cffutures.org/fdc/

Resources

FAMILY DRUG COURTPEER LEARNING COURT

PROGRAM

King County, WA

Baltimore City, MDJackson County, MO

Chatham County, GA

Pima County, AZ

Wapello County, IA

Miami-Dade, FL

Jefferson County, AL

Dunklin County, MO

CONTACT US FOR MORE INFORMATION:

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

• FDC Peer Learning Court

• FDC Podcasts

• Leadership Resources

• FDC Video features

• Webinar registration information

FDC Learning

Academy BlogLeading Change

www.familydrugcourts.blogspot.com

2016

1. Understanding Substance Abuse and Facilitating Recovery: A Guide for Child Welfare Workers

2. Understanding Child Welfare and the Dependency Court: A Guide for Substance Abuse Treatment Professionals

3. Understanding Substance Use Disorders, Treatment and Family Recovery: A Guide for Legal Professionals

Please visit: http://www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/

NCSACW Online Tutorials

Resources

Family Drug Court Online Tutorial

FDC 101 – will cover basic knowledge of the FDC model and operations

Contact Information

Phil Breitenbucher, MSW FDC TTA Program DirectorChildren and Family Futures(714) [email protected]

children and family futures › files › aadcp_fdc best practices pt. 2... · children and family...

Documents