structured decision making child welfare and the law spring 2006

16
Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Upload: elmer-walker

Post on 12-Jan-2016

218 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Structured Decision Making

Child Welfare and the Law

Spring 2006

Page 2: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Goal of Structured Decision Making“Better Protection of Children”

• Benefits– Improve assessments of CPS family situations

to better ascertain the protection needs of children

– Provides simple and objective tools for workers– Reliability and consistency– Research based– Allows for prioritization– Provide data for improvement of services

Page 3: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

System Goals

• Reduce rate of subsequent abuse/neglect reports

• Reduce the severity of subsequent abuse/neglect reports

• Reduce the rate of foster care placement

• Reduce the length of stay in foster care

Page 4: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Components to Structured Decision Making

• Response Priority• Safety Assessment• Risk Assessment• Family Needs and Strengths

Assessment• Case Planning and Management• Case Reassessment• Workforce Based Resource Allocation• Role of Management Information System

Page 5: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Response Priority

• All maltreatment reports assigned for investigation

• At time is received

• Tells you how quickly to respond

• Levels 1,2 or 3

Page 6: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Safety Assessment (now)

• All maltreatment reports assigned for investigation that involve a family caregiver

• Process applied at first face to face meeting (prior to allowing child to remain in household)

• Removal and return of child to family• ID factors that threaten immediate harm to

child• ID need for safety plan

Page 7: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Risk Assessment (future)

• All maltreatment reports assigned for investigation that involve a family caregiver

• Prior to assessment disposition (its used to decide disposition)

• Determine risk level of future maltreatment

• Close or Open case for ongoing service

• Guides contact standards

Page 8: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Family Assessment of Needs and Strengths

• All cases open for ongoing service

• Within 30 days of case assigned to ongoing workers

• Determine areas of family needs and strength that can be utilized in case planning

Page 9: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Alternative Response

• Assisting families to keep kids safe

• Meet specific criteria

• Option Statement/Agreement

• Voluntary

Page 10: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Risk/Needs Reassessment

• Risk (when children are in home)

• Needs (all ongoing cases)

• First review within 90 days of first treatment plan. Then quarterly afterward or anytime significant change occurs

• Measure progress, adjust service level, case closure

Page 11: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Reunification Assessment

• All CPS cases with at least one child in placement and goal of returning home

• First review within 90 days of first treatment plan, then quarterly.

• Prior to court hearings and whenever return home considered.

• Help decide eligibility to return home, or if new permanency plan needed

Page 12: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Assessing Diverse Families

Child Welfare and the Law

Spring 2006

Page 13: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Suspicion and Culture

• Culture and Poverty

• Under and Over reporting

Page 14: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

False Positives• Sleeping Arrangements• Flexible boundaries (household compositions)• Small size of children• Appearance and hygiene• Clothing• Responses to authorities• Lack of cooperation• Unfamiliar disciplinary methods• Unfamiliar medical interventions• Unfamiliar practices• Care of Newborns• Linguistic Misunderstanding

Page 15: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

False Negatives and the use of Culture as a Justification

• Failure to recognize a given practice as maltreatment because of cultural differences.

• Culture as a mask or smokescreen

Page 16: Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006

Culture and Abuse

• Some families may have to abandon certain practices that were tolerated in their countries of origin

• Should be taken into consideration when assessing the family’s overall stability and most appropriate intervention.