IMPROVING THE LIVES OF CHILDREN IN LONG-TERM FOSTER CARE: THE ROLE OF TEXAS’ COURTS & LEGAL SYSTEM

Texas Appleseed Charge

To examine how long-term life outcomes for PMC children growing up in foster care can be improved.Judicial system, no previous reviewPermanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC)Must prevent children from aging out with no support system

Data Sources Qualitative

15 jurisdictions, covering 65% of foster children in PMC

Nearly 150 interviews Quantitative

DFPS data from 2005-2008

Children who Age Out Experience

Low education levels Poverty Unemployment Homelessness High incidence of health care issues Increased justice system involvement High rates of early pregnancy High rates of post-traumatic stress disorder

Challenges Facing Former Foster Care Children Without a high school diploma or GED: 24.4%

Completed higher education: 5.7%

Employed: 48%

Household incomes below the poverty line: 33.2%

One or more mental health disorders: 54%

Without health insurance: 33%

Ever arrested: 57.2%, since age 18: 38.7%

Homeless at some point in adult life: 22.2%

Rate of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome: twice the rate of U.S. combat

veterans

According to the ChapinHall study (Mark E. Courtney et al, Midwest Evaluation of Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at Age 23 and 24, ChapinHall at the University of Chicago (2010)

The Path to Permanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC) Once a child is removed from the home DFPS is

appointed temporary managing conservator (TMC) by the court

DFPS provides “placement” while services are provided to the family

Within 12-18 months court must dismiss suit or declare DFPS permanent managing conservator (PMC)

PMC can be with or without termination of parental rights (TPR)

Permanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC)

DFPS becomes child’s permanent legal guardian

Permanency Plan Placement Review Hearings

Children and Youth Entering and Exiting PMC

Percentage of Children Entering PMC in FY 2008, by Age

12%

32%

18%

12%

9%

16%

<11 to 34 to 67 to 910 to 1213 to 17

0%

27%

20%

13%

9%

11%

21%

<11 to 34 to 67 to 910 to 1213 to 1718 to 21

Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Age at End of Year

Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Length of Time to Exit

37%

31%

13%

19%

<1 year1 year to <2 years2 years to <3 years3 years or longer

Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Outcome

64%

19%

2% 7%

7%

AdoptionAged OutOtherRelativesReunification

Length of Time to Exit Care by Exit Type for Children Who Exited in FY 2008

Adoption Relative Care Reunification Age Out0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

<1 year1-2 years2-3 years>3 years

Finding A Permanent Home

Percentage of Children Exiting PMC Through Adoption in FY 2008 by Age at Adoption

36%

27%

16%

11%

9%

1%

0 - 364 days1 - 3 yrs4 - 6 yrs7 - 9 yrs10 - 12 yrs13 - 17 yrs18 - 21 yrs

Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008, Based on Length of Time to Exit

< 1 yr 1-2 yrs 2-3 yrs >3 yrs0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008, Based on Exit Type

Adoption Aged Out Relatives Reunification Other0

2

4

6

8

10

12

3.8

10.0

3.8

6.3

8.7

Exit Type

Num

ber o

f Pla

cem

ents

Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008 By Exit Type and Jurisdiction

Bexar

Brazos

Centex

Cen. T

XDalla

s

El Paso

Harris

N. Panhandle

NE TX

Permian Basi

n

Rio GrandeSE

TX

Tarra

ntTa

ylorTra

vis0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

AdoptionAging Out

Race/Ethnicity and Disproportionality

Ethnicity of Children in PMC in FY 2008, Compared to Ethnicity of Texas' Total Child Population

African American Hispanic White Other0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Children in PMC in 2008All Children in Texas in 2008

Percentage of Children Entering and Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Ethnicity

African American

Hispanic

White

Other

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Exiting PMCEntering PMC

Percentage of Children Exiting Foster Care in FY 2008, by Race and Exit Type

African American Hispanic White Other0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

OtherReunificationAged OutAdopted

Physical and Mental Disabilities

Percentage of Children Identified as Having a Physical or Psychological Problem in FY 2008, by Age

< 1 1 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10 to 12

13 to 17

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Without Physical/Psychological Prob-lemsWith Physical/Psycho-logical Problems

Jurisdictional Data

The jurisdictional data demonstrates that there is great diversity in outcomes for children in different jurisdictions. These variations are attributable to a wide range of variables including availability of resources, utilization of available resources, judicial philosophy, judicial experience, judicial leadership, demographics and regional values.

Number of Children in PMC in FY 2008, by Texas Court Jurisdiction

2882

296 382 419

1545

350

3767

240 171 323665

206

1015

116

839

Jurisdiction

Num

ber o

f Chi

ldre

n

Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Jurisdiction and Exit Type

Bexar

Brazos (

CC)

Centex (

CC)

Cen. TX (C

C)Dalla

s

El Paso

Harris

N. Panhandle (C

C)

NE TX (CC)

Permian Basi

n (CC)

Rio Grande (C

C)

SE TX (C

C)

Tarra

ntTa

ylorTra

vis0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

AdoptionAging Out

Major Findings

Positive Forces Texas Family Code tracks best practices Concerned, Active, and Informed Leadership

CourtsDFPSCASA

Strong interdisciplinary Teams Under constant improvement

Most Jurisdictions: Believed they were doing a good job, or a

very good job Stakeholders had respect for each other Are concerned and care about the children But – the outcomes for their children is poor

Poor Outcomes from: A lack of urgency to find permanent homes for these children

A lack of accountability and preparedness for these children’s

well-being

A lack of clear roles for the legal participants

A sense that the children themselves do not need to be heard or

that their presence in the courtroom would be harmful to them

A void in the courtroom of individuals who really know the child

A lack of communication among stake holders

Recommendations

1 Pilot18 Recommendations

Benchmark Permanency Hearing Pilot

Background70% of children who enter PMC leave foster care within 2 yearsMajority who remain leave at 18 with no permanent home or

support network Goals/Objectives

Ensure focus on permanencyUse timelines and review criteria to encourage on

accountabilityMore closely ensure permanency plan is realistic and

achievableClarify stakeholder roles in PMC stageChange lax perceptions of the process

Benchmark Permanency Hearing Pilot

Scheduling Order Hearing – 45 days

Permanency Implementation Hearing – 90 days

Permanency Progress Hearing (currently entitled

Placement Review Hearings) – as often as necessary, but no longer than every four (4) months

Benchmark Review Hearing – 2 years

Permanency Progress Hearings every four (4) months, every third Permanency Progress Hearing replaced by Benchmark Review Hearing

Judges must recognize their critical role in the PMC process Court duties:

Protect child’s best interest

Require adherence to the law

Hold individual stakeholders accountable

“Proactive, Well-Informed Overseer”

Children and youth must be in court

Importance to JudgeFacilitate collaborationEncourages

accountabilityValuable information

directly from child

Importance for ChildExpress her opinionFeels valuedGives sense of some

controlMakes the process

“real”Realize people are

looking at her future

Placement Review Hearings should take place as often as necessary, but at a minimum should occur every four (4) months.

Casey Family Programs finds promising practice to be every 3 months.

Six months “forever” in the life of a child

Stakeholders wait until last minute to act

Helps avoid losses in progress due to turnover

In every PMC case there should be an advocate for the youth.  The advocate can be a CASA volunteer who is appointed as the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) or as a friend of the court or another GAL

Guardian ad Litem = ensure the child’s best interests are served

Attorneys ad litem must be appointed or retained when adversarial legal issues arise and there is a conflict amongst stakeholders

Conflicts can arise between: AAL (child’s wants) GAL (child’s needs) DFPS (parent)

Attorneys must be prepared to hold the judges accountable by appealing decisions when necessary

Every child should have a volunteer Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) and CASA must be allowed to present before the court

Currently serve in most TMC cases

In the past, removed from PMC cases due to lack of resources

Seeking to ensure volunteers stay on case once child reaches PMC

A child had been diagnosed with cerebral palsy and could not walk, CASA discovered the child did not have cerebral palsy and now the child can walk.

A child had a brother in CPS care, but CPS could not locate the brother. CASA located the brother and now the siblings are reunited.

Notice of placement review hearings must be provided in accordance Texas Family Code

Entitled to notice: DFPS Foster parents Pre-adoptive parents Relatives of the child providing

care Director of group home/institution

where child resides

Each possessory conservator/guardian

AAL GAL Volunteer advocate Any other person or agency

named by court as having an interest in the child

Docket schedules must be composed efficiently so that children and stakeholders can attend

“Easy” cases earlier in the day allowing 20 minutes

“Complex” cases in the afternoon allowing 30-60 minutes

Easy adoptions first thing in the morning

Ensure all have two hour window where case will be heard

Judicial training is essential

The Supreme Court of Texas’ Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth, and Families is developing a bench book that should be available at the end of the year

Benchbooks or Bench Cards should be studied and utilized

Video instruction on how complete hearings should look

Implicit bias and undoing racism education How to speak to children Trauma-based care Transition planning

Quantitative data should be used to help judges gauge their improvement in getting children in permanent and safe homes as quickly as possible

Child Protection Case Management System (CPCMS) is provided for free through the Office of Court Administration. It incorporates 19 of the 31 performance measures developed by the Department of Justice, National Center for State Courts and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. However, most courts cannot afford the technical support for maintenance.

Conclusion Tx has all the elements

needed for true change Committed

stakeholdersStrong StatuteJudicial leadershipWilling partners

Time to make the changes:Change perceptions of

children in PMC Change perceptions of

court procedures Implement

recommendations