We would like to thank those community collaborators who attended our Casper Mini PIP meeting on December 9, 2009. As promised, here are the issues the Casper DFS Child Protective Services Unit and Juvenile Services Unit have identified as areas needing attention based on data. As part of our Mini PIP process, we would like to solicit your input on how those services might be improved in your community and what you and/or your organization might be able to do to assist the local office in achieving those goals within your areas. They are:
Child Protective Services:
1. Improve services in the home to prevent placement
2. Children are stable in placement
Juvenile Services:
1. Reduce foster care re-entries
2. PACT/YES case plan on all cases
Please feel free to enter your thoughts or suggestions! Thank you for assisting us in our Mini Program Improvement Plan process!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good Evening...
ReplyDeleteIn order to post to this "blog" you will need to have a profile. What seems to be the easiest is to simply create a google account which is very easy to do then you may post your comments to this blog. We are hesitant to not at least have this simple layer of security to avoid it being a wide open, public blog. Thank you for working with us...
Thank You
Wyoming Citizen Review Panel
A simple Google Account may be set up at:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/accounts/
With respect to improving services in the home to prevent [out of home] placement, DFS Policy 5.2 identifies placement procedures.
ReplyDeleteEven after protective custdy is taken, the Department of Family Services still has a duty to "Arrange for care and supervision of the child in the most appropriate and least restrictive setting necessary to meet the child's needs. . ." but after protective custody has been taken, the DFS is constrained by statute: "[p]rior to approving placement with the child's noncustodial birth parent or extended family, the department shall determine whether anyone living in the home has been convicted of a crime involving serious harm to children or has a substantiated case listed on the central registry . . . ." Wyo. Stat. Ann. 14-3-208(a)(iii). Requesting law enforcement run a Triple I background check (as has been done in some of my cases)may speed the process. Or, the law allows: ". . . . Unless the child's shelter care is authorized by court order or required for one (1) of the reasons in subsection (a) of this section, the child shall be released to the care of his parent, guardian, custodian or other responsible adult upon that person's written promise to present the child before the court upon request." Wyo. Stat. Ann. 14-3-406(b). The standard for keeping a child out of the home who has been adjudicated as neglected states: ". . . Before placing a child outside of the home, the court shall find by clear and convincing evidence that to return the child to the child's home would not be in the best interest of the child despite efforts that have been made." Wyo. Stat. Ann. 14-3-429(a)(iv). That same subsection requires the court to "ensure that reasonable efforts were made by the department of family services to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child from the child's home or to make it possible for the child to return to the child's home." Wyo. Stat. Ann. 14-3-429(a).
DFS has policies in place for prevention of removal of children: 1) Prevention Track (DFS Policy 3.4); 2) Assessment Track (DFS Policy 3.5); and Investigation Track (DFS Policy 3.6). On the Assessment Track, DFS identifies risk factors that might indicate the need for services to prevent A/N, even without allegations of A/N. Preventative services are to be offered by the Department. Gathering statistical data would seem like the logical first step in trying to keep children in their homes and to prevent the removal of children from their homes.
Similarly, the Assessment Track is appropriate when criminal charges appear unlikely, the children do not appear to be in imminent danger, and/or it is unlikely that the children will need to be removed from the home (and the report of abuse or neglect does not allege a child fatality, major injury or sexual abuse). Services may still be offered to the family and if declined, documented. Refusal of services may be indicative of increased risk due to the refusal.
The Investigation track is for cases where criminal charges appear likley, the children appear to be in imminent danger, or it is likely the children will need to be removed from the home (including allegations involving a child fatality, major injury or sexual abuse). Removal of the child may be necessary. However, the options in DFS Policy 5.2(B)(c) should be considered as an alternative to foster care.
The policies appear to be in place to improve services prior to removing children from the home. However, the documentation of those efforts and early attempts at providing preventative services may not be receiving much focus due to the case loads carried by workers, or because the family refuses services, among other reasons. A greater emphasis on prevention could have a positive effect on later cases accepted for the Investigation Track.
John:
ReplyDeleteI have a basic understanding of the point. In addition, well documented prevention efforts provide important information for later interventions.
Of course, I am also concerned that case workers have a choice of services providers, including public and private providers. Children and families should be given access to providers who have specialized training and experience. We need the full provider community engaged to help solve these problems.