presenters: jackie crow shoe, mn dhs child safety and permanency division
DESCRIPTION
Presenters: Jackie Crow Shoe, MN DHS Child Safety and Permanency Division Deb Moses, DHS/Chemical Health Division Carole Johnson, Minnesota Judicial Branch Kari Earle, National Center for Substance Abuse and Child Welfare. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Defining Collaborative Outcomes for Working with Families
Minnesota's Experience with the NCSACW Program of In-Depth Technical
Assistance
Presenters: Jackie Crow Shoe, MN DHS Child Safety and Permanency Division Deb Moses, DHS/Chemical Health Division Carole Johnson, Minnesota Judicial Branch Kari Earle, National Center for Substance Abuse and Child Welfare
Presentation Objectives
Developing a collaboration between government agencies
Developing practical products to meet community needs
Integrating AOD services into existing systems
Sharing lessons learned from parents
Children’s Justice Initiative
A collaborative project between MN DHS and MN Judicial Branch to improve the processing and outcomes of child protection cases
Mission: To ensure that, in a fair and timely manner, abused and neglected children involved in the juvenile protection court system have safe, stable, permanent families.
Key Features
Seen “through the eyes of a child”
Role of judge in managing case
Importance of Permanency
Timelines as a priority
Integrated statewide
CJI-AOD Project Under the umbrella of the Minnesota’s
Children’s Justice Initiative NCSACW In-Depth Technical Assistance Project Team
– State Advisory Committee– Core Team
• courts, child safety, chemical health, county, parents, community provider
– Pilot Counties• Mentor Counties - Itasca, Stearns• Ten Phase I Counties
Tribal engagement and involvement
CJI-AOD Project Seen as a priority
because of the nature of addiction and recovery related to child safety, well being and permanency needs
“Five Clocks” highlight challenge of competing timelines
The Mission of CJI-AOD
To ensure that, in a fair and timely manner, abused and neglected children involved in juvenile protection court have safe, stable, permanent families by improving parental and family recovery from alcohol or other
drug problems.
Minnesota’s Context Total Population over 5 million; Child Population 1.3 million
State Supervised; County Administered Child Welfare System
Primarily locally funded
Governed by Reporting of Maltreatment to Minors Act 626.556
18-19,000 reports per year are accepted for a CP response
– Almost half of all reports are made by school personnel and law enforcement
Regardless of response path
Disproportionately involves poor, single mothers and their children and families
of color
MN CPS objectives:
– respond proportionately to the severity of the safety concern
– enhance family engagement
– promote early intervention and prevention
– broaden community involvement
Differential Response System
– 57.5% received family assessment ; 42.5% an investigation
– Substantiation rate is 56% of all investigations
Consolidated Chemical Dependency Treatment Fund
– 28,000 public pay clients
– State funded – County Administered with a 15% match
– Free market treatment system
Majority of child maltreatment being addressed is for neglect (65%)
Families who neglected more likely to experience multiple
family issues, including alcohol and other drug issues and
poverty.
Approximately 1/3 of all families receive services.
AOD concerns are seen in over half of families needing
services.
Only 11% of all CP interventions result in a Juvenile Protection
Court Intervention of placement out of the home.
MN Differential Response Continuum
Family Assessment Response for less serious cases
– No determination of maltreatment
– Comprehensive– Strength-based community-
focused– Enhances Family Stability– Focus is on safety through
engagement
Investigation Response for
substantial child endangerment cases– Did maltreatment
occur?– Are Child
Protective Services Needed?
Incident based with a focus on fact finding
Forensic in nature; coordinated with law enforcement
May be perceived as intrusive and adversarial by family
The Five Clocks
MFIP
Child welfare system
Recovery process
Child development
Agency and staff timelines
Clock Three: The Recovery Process
Often takes longer than substance abuse treatment funding allows.
Good outcomes are contingent on adequate length of treatment. This may be incompatible with child welfare deadlines.
The recovery timetable can be summarized as “one day at a time, for the rest of your life.”
CJI-AOD: The Why and How Now, more than ever, system collaboration is
needed to improve outcomes for children
Achieving Better Outcomes– Important for personal growth, healthy emotional
development, and positive sustained relationships of family members
– Can reduce future child safety concerns– Can reduce treatment recidivism– Can reduce broader community consequences
related to capacity, resources and cost
STEP 1: Using the 10-Element Framework to Set
Priorities and Objectives
Earlier engagement of parents in assessment, treatment and recovery
Improved practice through cross-system collaboration
Increased flexibility in individualized planning and treatment services
Improved training on overlap impact of AOD and Child Welfare concerns
STEP 2: Establishing Shared Values and Principles
- Accountability: agencies cooperate and collaborate in order to establish the best outcomes
- Partnerships: actively involve families and communities in decision-making and solution building
- Service Delivery: assure fair and equitable access to early and effective interventions along the continuum of care
- System Resources: dedicate staff and resources to assist with implementation of project recommendations
Cross-System Practice Focus
Acknowledge deficits but focus on identifying family competence and seek to re-create the circumstances that allow competence to flourish.
Collaboration between the “systems” and the family increases the likelihood of finding solutions.
Choices made by the family are more likely to be implemented than choices made without their collaboration.
Success is a result of respectful interactions which recognize family competence, family choice and are demonstrated by: – Respect and honesty – Fairness and equity – Solution-focused mutual accountability – Clear and transparent communication– Active mobilization of resources to remove
barriers– Celebration of successes, however small
STEP 3: Review and Research
– Statewide best practice inquiry– Eleven parent focus groups conducted across
the State, including Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Reservation and MN Indian Women’s Resource Center
– NCSACW database search– Internet research on evidence-based
practices
Step 4: Analyze Emergent Themes
Suggested Engagement Strategies Family and Community Needs Cultural and Regional Dynamics Service Delivery Issues
– Communication and Information Sharing– Exit/Transition– Other Barriers and Challenges
Lessons Learned from Parents: Highlights
Use an approach that is collaborative, culturally competent, family-centered and strengths-based
The intervention was warranted at the time of occurrence in their lives – however services and/or the way they were delivered alienated the parent from wanting, believing and in some cases succeeding in making improvements with limited permanency time frames.
The encounters with each of the systems discouraged the parents from admitting their need for recovery or seeking the services needed for their families to become healthy.
Parents found themselves working through a seemingly endless, confusing and often conflicting stream of rules, requirements and paperwork.
Parents continually questioned how a system that is designed to help families justifies separating the family for the purposes of treatment and recovery.
Fathers expressed:– the need for reparation of the father-child relationship– inclusion in the intervention and recovery process– acknowledgement from professionals that they are
important in the lives of their children.
Step 5: Product Development
1. Best Practice Tool Kit : 20 specific strategies identified to achieve improved outcomes for Minnesota’s families
2. Training Plan: Rolling out the tool kit at the county level
3. Sustainability Plan: Recommendations to State Policy Leaders
4. Evaluation Plan: Measuring success
5. Parent Partner Model: includes a Parent Partner Handbook and Research Summary
Samples of the Best Practice Strategies in the “Tool Kit”
Parent Mentors/Recovery Specialists
Parent mentors - work as a guide for parents working to enter and maintain recovery, they can help educate the family on child welfare concerns.
Recovery Specialists - facilitate immediate access to services by assisting the parent/family in navigating and removing barriers as it relates to treatment and recovery
Shared Family Care designed to prevent out of home placement, allowing the entire
family to be placed in a supervised setting while parent works on recovery
Family Dependency Treatment Court Court based system combining criminal and juvenile protection
matters to quickly identify and assess parental AOD issues with frequent court supervision.
Motivational Interviewing training and client-centered, directive method for
enhancing self-motivation to change by exploring and resolving ambivalence thus better engaging the parent in the treatment and recovery process.
Wellbriety - Culture of Healing culturally specific training that applies the traditions of
the American Indian culture to the healing and recovery from AOD issues.
Father specific case planning includes engagement and retention of fathers in
services and case planning needs. Individualized AOD Services for Children
– Developmentally appropriate interventions to address individual needs, based on comprehensive assessment
Next Steps: Implementation
Training Plan Implementation– Cross Systems Training Plan– October Kick off Conference– Implement best practice strategies at the local level
with state technical assistance• Direct support and assistance to Mentor and Phase I Teams
Sustainability Plan– Improve communication and data sharing – Support best practices– Develop performance measurements and follow for trends to
Implement Evaluation Plan
– Provides framework and sets out strategies for the systemic collection of information both regionally and statewide
– Is MN reaching intended outcomes and implementation goals with respect to families with co-occurring issues related to chemical health and child welfare?
– Developed in collaboration with the NCSACW, DHS-SSIS and Policy Coordinator, planning and programs supervisor, chemical health, Courts and a community stakeholder
– Design Information technology supports (SACWIS) to document and support services while providing ongoing feedback about outcomes
– State guidance on continual practice and system improvements
Closing Thoughts on Successful Project Collaboration
Be Patient– Not every step is a success
Celebrate– Any and all progress should be acknowledged
Engage– Enlist the energy and wisdom of all
Be Consistent– Use a parallel process based on mutually agreed upon
principles– Nurture all relationships with compassion and honesty to build
trust and confidence
Further InformationChildren’s Justice Initiativehttp://www.courts.state.mn.us/page/?pageID=197&subSite=childrensJustice
Shared Values and Principals documentSummary of Parent Partner Focus GroupsResearch Report on Parent Mentor/Leader Models
CJI-AOD Project Members:
Jackie Crow Shoe, Social Service Program ConsultantDHS-Child Safety and Permanency Division (651)431-4676 [email protected]
Carole Johnson, CJI Project SpecialistSupreme Court Administrators Office(651)296-2269 [email protected]
Deborah Moses, Operations ManagerDHS-Chemical Health Division(651)431-3251 [email protected]
Kari Earle, Director, Technical Assistance ProgramsNational Center for Substance Abuse and Child Welfare(775) 843-9756 [email protected]