Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare: (1) Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/State to Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and Families.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare: (1) Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/State to Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and Families."— Presentation transcript:

1 Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare: (1) Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/State to Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and Families AND (2) Creating and Implementing a Resource and Capacity Development Plan National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (NRCOI) National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data and Technology (NRCCWDT) A Service of the Children’s Bureau/Training and Technical Assistance Network Administration for Children and Families U. S. Department of Health and Human Services April 28, 2008

2 22 Two Main Goals of This Service Array Process: 1. To assess a jurisdiction’s service array: Does the jurisdiction’s service array have the capacity to achieve positive outcomes for children and families? Four elements of the jurisdiction’s service array capacity are assessed: Child welfare practice. Child welfare leadership and culture. Current services. Needed new services. 2.To create and implement a Resource and Capacity Development Plan to enhance the jurisdiction’s capacity to serve children and families through an appropriate and flexible child and family service array that will achieve positive outcomes. 2

3 33 This Service Array Process Is DESIGNED to: Engage the state’s leaders as active stakeholders in the development and provision of outcomes-based services for children and families in the child welfare system (state leaders include: agency leadership, community leadership, funding resources, providers, multiple stakeholders). Enhance relationships across the various child- and family- serving systems. Clarify for leaders (state leadership, community leadership, funding sources, providers, and other supports for families) the importance of their participation in improving the child welfare system which will also benefit them and their work. Enhance working relationships across the various child- and family-serving systems. 3

4 44 This Service Array Process Is DESIGNED to (continued): Assist internal and external community stakeholders in formulating the core values and principles that need to guide the work of the child welfare system. Address practice at both the casework and system levels. Provide a mechanism through which a jurisdiction at the local level can continually assess and enhance its capacity to address the individualized needs of children, youth, and families. Build the state’s/tribe’s/stakeholders’ capacity at the system level to assess and enhance the service array on an on-going basis. Incorporate information from already existing needs assessments previously conducted and build on existing planning processes. 4

5 55 The REQUIREMENTS for this Service Array Process are: Built on the fact that jurisdictions must meet the individualized needs of children, youth, and families in the child welfare system. Predicated on the establishment of a child welfare practice model that is based on the practice principles of the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR): family-centered, community-based, individualized services, and enhanced parental capacity. 5

6 6 The REQUIREMENTS for this Service Array Process are (continued): Data driven so that jurisdictions and states can assess and improve performance utilizing outcome measurements in the CFSR. Collaborative in nature and necessitates the building, strengthening, and maintaining of a Stakeholder Collaborative in the jurisdiction as well as community partnerships in the delivery of services. Built on the recognition that state, tribal, and community stakeholders, along with the state and/or local child welfare program, hold ownership of the outcomes for children and families and consequently share responsibility for ensuring that services and resources are available for families when they are needed.

7 77 Engaging in This Process Requires the PUBLIC CHILD WELARE AGENCY to Consider: Pursuing additional funding from various sources if needed, including general revenues and grants. Reapportioning/redirecting existing funding. Changing contracts for services to provide vendor flexibility needed to individualize services and streamline procedures used by caseworkers to secure contracts and expedite individualized services. More fully engaging private service providers not only in service provision but in the assessment of child and family needs and the joint development of service plans. Changing elements of the current service array to improve access to and the quality of the services. 7

8 8 Engaging in This Process Requires the STATE AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS to Consider: Changing service models so that services are adapted to fit the unique needs of children and families, rather than maintaining a “one size fits all” service array for children and their families. Re-thinking resource allocations to give some level of priority to goods and services that can meet individualized child welfare service plans, strengthen the likelihood of positive outcomes, and increase the likelihood that family members will be more productive members of the community. Building on/incorporating already existing community needs assessments and service development processes. Enhancing provider participation in the family needs assessment and the child and family service plan development process

9 99 HISTORY of the Service Array Process at NRCOI: NRCOI T/TA on service array initiated about the same time as the first round of the CFSRs. Structured process developed and utilized to varying degrees in Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Each state/jurisdiction modified the process to meet its own needs, no two jurisdictions did the process the same way. Focus was on catalog of services. 9

10 10 HISTORY of the Service Array Process (continued): Purposes of the process in the past: –Prepare for the CFSR, the Statewide Assessment, and/or in developing a PIP around the Service Array. –Create a Service Directory. –Meet the CAPTA grant requirement to conduct an annual inventory of services. –Define the array of services needed in creating a System of Care when a specific population has been targeted. –Assist in designing or implementing an agency strategic plan. 10

11 11 HISTORY of the Service Array Process (continued): Purposes of the process in the past (continued): –Improve the service array in a state, tribe, region, county, city, etc. –Initiate better collaboration in a jurisdiction to better serve children and families. 11

12 12 Current Status of the Service Array Process The service array process has been revised, given “lessons learned.” One objective is to ensure that the process complements and builds on the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR). One aspect in the revisions is a greater utilization of data

13 13 The CFSR and the Service Array Item 35: The State has in place an array of services that assess the strengths and needs of children and families and determine other service needs, address the needs of families in addition to individual children in order to create a safe home environment, enable children to remain safe with their parents when reasonable, and help children in foster and adoptive placement achieve permanency. Item 36: The services in item 35 are accessible to families and children in all political jurisdictions covered in the State’s Child and Family Services Plan. Item 37: The services in item 35 can be individualized to meet the unique needs of children and families served by the agency. 13

14 14

15 15

16 16 A Seven-Step Process 1. Creation of the State Service Array Steering Committee. 2. Creation of the Community Service Array Steering Committee AND the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. 3. The Assessment Process (Four Assessments) and Writing the Consolidated Assessment Report. 4. Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. 5. Consolidation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. 6. Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. 7. Implementation of the Plan and Monitoring Progress. 16

17 17 Step 1: Creation of the State Service Array Steering Committee Selection of a Point Person/Coordinator. Initial Membership: –Child Welfare Leadership Team –Child Welfare Program Staff –Contract Management Staff –Financial Staff –Data and Technology Staff –QA/CQI Staff 17

18 18 Step 1: Creation of the State Steering Committee (continued) Develop a work plan and timeline to implement the service array process in the state, including: –The selection/recruitment of a pilot jurisdiction to begin the process. –Technical assistance for pilot jurisdiction. –Train the trainer for rest of the state. Study existing needs assessments or other documents relevant to child and family welfare. Create a Child and Family Snapshot template for utilization by jurisdictions with assistance from NRCCWDT. 18

19 19 Step 1: Creation of the State Steering Committee (continued) Expand Steering Committee to incorporate key leaders from the courts, the tribes, child abuse prevention, family support and early childhood services, as well as the juvenile justice, education, domestic violence, health, mental health, and substance abuse systems at the state level, representatives of the business, faith, and labor communities and, importantly, birth parents, family caregivers, and youth. Reach consensus on state-wide philosophy, values, and principles of child welfare system through facilitation and training provided by NRCOI (see next slide). 19

20 20 Step 1: Creation of the State Steering Committee (continued) Tailored training: selection of training needed from this list of mini- modules: 1. Service array case scenario. 2. What is child welfare? 3. What is the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR)? 4. Lessons learned about the child and family service array from the first round of CFSRs. 5. The CFSR practice principles. 6. Child welfare practice models. 7. Definitions/examples of practices versus services. 8. Strengths-/needs-based practice. 9. Evidence-based practice. 10. Prevention in child welfare.

21 21 Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative Creation of Community-Level Steering Committee in the pilot jurisdiction: –Multidisciplinary Membership. –Appointment of Point Person/Coordinator. Completion of a Work Plan in conjunction with the State-Level Steering Committee that will lead the jurisdiction through the service array process. 21

22 22 Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative (continued) Work Plan Entails: –Reviewing state-wide philosophy, values, and principles of the child welfare system –Tailored training: selection of training needed from this list of mini-modules: 1. Service array case scenario. 2. What is child welfare? 3. What is the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR)? 4. Lessons learned about the child and family service array from the first round of CFSRs. 22

23 23 Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative (continued) Tailored training: selection of training needed from this list of mini-modules (continued): 5.The CFSR practice principles. 6.Child welfare practice models. 7.Definitions/examples of practices versus services. 8.Strengths-/needs-based practice. 9.Evidence-based practice. 10.Prevention in child welfare.

24 24 Step 2: CREATION OF THE COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative (continued) Work Plan Entails: –Reviewing existing needs assessments conducted in the jurisdiction. –Preparing and reviewing the Child and Family Snapshot. –Recruiting and retaining a wide range of traditional and non-traditional stakeholders for the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. –Planning on how to involve birth parents, family caregivers, and youth. 24

25 25 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Rationale for the Community Stakeholder Collaborative: –No one individual knows all the services and supports in a jurisdiction: collective pooling of knowledge. –No one agency by itself can ensure child safety, permanency, and well-being. –Creating a constituency for child welfare. –Creating more effective community partnerships so services can be coordinated and integrated. 25

26 26 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Forming/Convening the Community Stakeholders Collaborative: –An existing group or creating a new one. ALWAYS build on existing groups if possible. –Size of the group. –Ideally, the collaborative has some authority and legitimization to change or influence the service array in the jurisdiction. –Participants need to understand the time and work commitment involved. –Good old fashion community organizing is needed to recruit and retain the members. 26

27 27 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Types of stakeholders needed: –Public and private sector providers of child welfare services. –Birth parents, family caregivers (resource, foster, kinship care, and adoptive families), and youth, who have experience with the child welfare system. –Court, legal, and law enforcement officials, including staff of the Administrative Office of the Court (AOC) and the Court Improvement Program (CIP), and CASA volunteers. 27

28 28 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Types of stakeholders needed (continued): –Tribal representatives. –Mental health, substance abuse, and domestic violence services providers. –Educators, health care providers, home visiting program staff. –Child abuse prevention advocates and staff. –Other key providers (e.g., housing, food resources, transportation, recreation.). 28

29 29 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Types of stakeholders needed (continued): –Elected officials and administrators, including legislators and legislative staff. –Representatives of the business, faith, labor, and media communities. –Other public sector employees, community-based organizations, and representatives of entities such as the United Way and local foundations.

30 30 Step 2: Creation of the Community Steering Committee and THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATIVE (continued) Work Plan includes: –Scheduling Meetings of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative:  1 st Meeting—Full Day –Engagement, training, and beginning  2 nd Meeting—Full Day –Reporting out strength and weaknesses in capacities  3 rd Meeting—Full Day –Finalization of Capacity and Resource Development Plan  Quarterly Meetings After 3 rd Meeting –Monitoring Implementation 30

31 31 Step 3: The Assessment Process 1 st Meeting of the Stakeholder Collaborative—Agenda: –Welcome all participants and facilitate introductions. –Overview of service array process and where it fits into the larger picture of child welfare in the jurisdiction. –Review and discussion of the Child and Family Snapshot. –Interactive exercise with group. –Tailored training: selection of training needed from this list of mini- modules: (1) service array case scenario; (2) what is child welfare; (3) what is the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR); (4) lessons learned about the child and family service array from the first round of CFSRs; (5) the CFSR practice principles; (6) child welfare practice models; (7) definitions/examples of practices versus services; (8) strengths-/needs-based practice; (9) evidence-based practice; and (10) prevention in child welfare. 31

32 32 Step 3: The Assessment Process (continued) Agenda at 1 st Meeting (continued): The Community Steering Committee will present: –The role and responsibilities of the Community Steering Committee and the Community Stakeholder Collaborative, including time and work commitments. –The community’s philosophy, values, and principles of child welfare. –The synthesized information on past needs assessments and reports on child welfare and the plan to incorporate this information into the service array process in order to prevent duplicative efforts. –The outcome measurements, data indicators, and performance goals of the community. –The work plan to the stakeholders, including full disclosure of the time and effort that will be needed. –The capacities the jurisdiction needs to flexibly meet the needs of children, youth and families in the jurisdiction’s child welfare system, drawn from the CFSR. –A review of assessment process (with an example in the large group) before splitting into five (5) work groups. 32

33 33 Step 3: The Assessment Process (continued) Agenda at 1 st Meeting (continued): Establish Work Groups –Work Group 1: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Safety Outcomes 1 and 2. –Work Group 2: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Permanency Outcome 1. –Work Group 3: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Permanency Outcome 2. –Work Group 4: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Well-Being Outcome 1. –Work Group 5: Assess the capacity of the jurisdiction on Well-Being Outcomes 2 and 3. 33

34 34 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Capacities/Outcomes Work Group #1: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: Make certain that children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect? (Safety Outcome 1) Provide that children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate? (Safety Outcome 2) 34

35 35 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #2: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: Make sure that children have permanency and stability in their living situations? (Permanency Outcome 1) 35

36 36 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #3: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: Provide that continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children? (Permanency Outcome 2)

37 37 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #4: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: Make sure that families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children’s needs? (Well-Being Outcome 1)

38 38 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Capacities/Outcomes (continued) Work Group #5: Does this jurisdiction currently have the capacity to flexibly meet the needs of children and families by individualizing services to: Provide that children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs? (Well-Being Outcome 2) Make sure that children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs? (Well-Being Outcome 3)

39 39 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Work Group Roles Roles in the Work Groups: –Chair/Co-Chair of Work Groups  Facilitating the meetings -Recorders in Work Groups  Provide notes of Work Group Meetings  Assist in producing typed documents 39

40 40 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Four Assessments Four Assessments: –First Assessment: Assessment of Current Practices in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. –Second Assessment: Assessment of Current Leadership and Systemic Culture in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. –Third Assessment: Assessment of Current Services in the Jurisdiction as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. –Fourth Assessment: Assessment of Any Needed Non- Existing Services in the Jurisdictions as They Relate to the Capacity Being Assessed. 40

41 41 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #1 Assessment of Practice. –2 Key Questions: 1.Does the jurisdiction have an explicit child welfare practice model? If so, how does this practice model help or hinder the jurisdiction’s ability to meet the capacity being assessed? If there is no explicit practice model, how does this hinder the jurisdiction’s ability to meet this capacity? 41

42 42 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #1 (continued) Assessment of Practice 2.What are the current practices utilized to achieve this capacity? Practices that may be identified include ones such as family group conferencing, wrap-around services, case management, concurrent planning, flexible funds, multi-disciplinary teams, and alternative response systems, etc. 42

43 43 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #1 (continued) Each practice will be assessed considering the following for the respective capacity: –Does it promote individualized service planning? –Does it promote provider participation in needs assessment and individualized service planning? –Does it promote caseworker flexibility to do “whatever it takes”? –Does it allow for ample communication and coordination between agencies? –Does it involve case supervision using specific unit/worker data to supervise to achieve better results/outcomes? 43

44 44 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #1 (continued) Each practice will be assessed considered the following (continued): –Do workers receive proper training and ongoing supervision to hone skills on the practice? –Does the current caseload support effective utilization of the practice? –Does it include after-hours professional response? –Does it empower families to make better decisions and enhance parental capacity? –Do contract practices with third-party vendors ensure flexibility to meet the needs of children? 44

45 45 Step 3: The Assessment Practice— Assessment #1 (continued) Drawing Conclusions on Practice: Preparation of a report that summarizes what was learned about practice in the jurisdiction in relation to the capacity assessed: –Practice strengths. –Practice challenges. 45

46 46 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #2 Assessment of Leadership and Culture. –The following will be assessed by the work groups in regards to the respective capacities:  The commitment of leadership in the community to a systems of care mentality to providing services.  The ability of the jurisdiction to collaborate across agencies to provide effective and efficient services resulting in successful outcomes. 46

47 47 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #2 (continued) Assessment of Leadership and Culture –The following will be assessed (continued):  Assess the ability of the child- and family-serving agencies in the jurisdiction to function as learning organizations.  The empowerment of private providers to do “whatever it takes” to achieve positive outcomes.  The current accountability structures in which the community holds agencies and agency leaders accountable for performance outcomes.  The empowerment of front-line service workers to establish multidisciplinary treatment teams to address multi-need children, youth, and families. 47

48 48 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #2 (continued) Drawing Conclusions on Leadership and Culture: –Preparation of a report that summarizes what was learned about leadership and culture in the jurisdiction in relation to the capacity assessed:  Leadership and culture strengths.  Leadership and culture challenges. 48

49 49 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #3 Assessment of Current Services: –The work groups discuss and decide what services that currently exist which can be used to achieve the respective capacity. –Utilize the Child and Family Services, Supports, and Practices Tool Kit. 49

50 50 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #3 (continued) Once the existing services are identified, then the services are assessed on the following dimensions: –Availability/Accessibility of the Service. –Quality of the Service.  Community-based, family-centered, individualized services, and enhanced parental capacity? –Cultural Responsiveness of the Service. –Effectiveness of the Service. –Quantity of the Service. –Importance of the Service. 50

51 51 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #3 (continued) Drawing Conclusions on Current Services: –Preparation of a report that records the ratings of current existing services in the jurisdiction in relation to the capacity assessed. –The report should include any qualitative comments relating to the current services. 51

52 52 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #3 (continued) 52 Classify existing services into categories: Staff / Volunteer Issues Funding Issues Better Coordination / Collaboration with Other Stakeholders Quality Improvement Needed More Diversified Services Law / Policy Change Other _______ Strong Services Needed Community Ed. Not Meeting Enough Need Advocacy / Service Barriers Service Duplication / Shifting Resources Non-Existing Services

53 53 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #4 The work groups identify any currently unavailable services that would enhance the capacity of the jurisdiction to address the individualized needs of children and families (utilize the Child and Family Services, Supports, and Practices Tool Kit). The work group must then identify why these services would be beneficial to enhancing the capacity being assessed. 53

54 54 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Assessment #4 (continued) Drawing Conclusions about Needed Services: –Preparation of a report that summarizes what was learned about needed new services in the jurisdiction. –Important information to include:  Why the service is able to address a specific need to improve the capacity?  How and why would new service improve outcomes?  Would the new service be compatible with the CFSR practice principles? 54

55 55 Step 3: The Assessment Process—Producing Reports on Assessments, Consolidation into One Assessment Report The work groups will produce four (4) reports for each capacity being assessed for the Stakeholder Collaborative and the Community Steering Committee: –Assessment of Practice. –Assessment of Leadership and Culture. –Assessment of Current Services. –Assessment of Needed New Services. Four reports are consolidated into one Assessment Report. See Tool Kit for suggested formats/templates. 55

56 56 Step 3: The Assessment Process— Between the 1 st and 2 nd Meetings Five (5) work groups will meet and complete the four (4) assessments and the written reports. Technical assistance if necessary. Five (5) work groups will prepare to present findings at the 2 nd Meeting. 56

57 57 Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan 2 nd Meeting held 2 months after 1 st Meeting (1/2 day meeting). Work groups present assessment of respective capacities: –Discussion, feedback, and recommendations. –Opportunity for entire Stakeholder Collaborative to provide input to the work groups. 57

58 58 Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (continued) Work groups then charged with creating a Resource and Capacity Development Plan for their respective capacities. The development of goals to enhance the capacity of the community to meet the individualized needs of children and families. 58

59 59 Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (continued) The composite Resource and Capacity Development Plan entails: –Reforming current practices to enhance the capacities. –Improving systemic culture to enhance the capacities. –Enhancing current services that are important to building the jurisdiction’s capacities. –Establishing utilization estimates for new services that have been identified as needed to enhance the capacities. –Incorporating a continuous quality improvement process which evaluates the effects of changes on outcomes for children and families. 59

60 60 Step 4: Creation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan— Between 2 nd and 3 rd Meetings Five (5) work groups meet to complete the development of their strategies for the Resource and Capacity Development Plan: 1. Goals of the Strategy. 2. Action Steps of the Strategy. 3. Tasks to Complete in the Strategy. 4. Timeframes for the Completion of the Strategy. 5. Intended Effects (specifically focusing on data) of the Strategy. 6. Continuous Quality Improvement Process Utilizing Data for the Strategy. 7. Persons/Groups Responsible for the Strategy. Technical assistance if necessary. Prepare to present strategies to the Stakeholder Collaborative at the 3 rd Meeting. 60

61 61 Step 5: Consolidation of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan 3 rd Meeting held approximately 2 months after 2 nd Meeting. Each work group presents strategies for enhancing the group’s respective capacities. Discrepancies are resolved and needed integrations are finalized in the Resource and Capacity Development Plan. 61

62 62 Step 6: Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan The Resource and Capacity Development Plan is reviewed by the State Steering Committee and the Community Steering Committee. An implementation plan of selected priorities is created and agreed to by the two steering committees. 62

63 63 Step 6: Adoption of the Resource and Capacity Development Plan (continued) For recommendations and priorities regarding services, changes required to implement the plan (for example, utilization estimates, costs, financing strategies, contracting methodologies, policies, procedures, etc.) are identified and pursued. At the first quarterly implementation meeting (within 3 months of 3 rd Meeting) the priorities and implementation plans are presented and the support and participation of the Community Stakeholder Members are enlisted. 63

64 64 Step 7: Implementation of the Plan and Monitoring Progress Continual monitoring and evaluation of the priorities and the implementation plan and its effects on child welfare outcomes. Continual evaluation of funding strategies to support the priorities and implementation plan. Implementation work groups can be used to assist in prioritized initiatives. Barriers are addressed and successes are celebrated. 64

65 65 Typical Timeline for the Full Process State contacts CB Regional Office, NRC, forms State Steering Committee, recruits Local Steering Committee, completes work plan. Creation of the Local Steering Committee AND creation of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative in the pilot jurisdiction, Steering Committee develops work plan. First meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. Second Meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. Months 1 and 2. Months 2 and 3. Beginning of Month 4. Beginning of Month 6.

66 66 Typical Timeline for the Full Process (continued) Third Meeting of the Community Stakeholder Collaborative. First Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Second Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Third Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Fourth Quarterly Meeting of the Collaborative. Beginning of Month 8. Beginning of Month 11. Beginning of Month 14. Beginning of Month 17. Beginning of Month 20.

67 67 Creating Regional and State Assessments and Resource and Capacity Development Plans from County/Jurisdictional Assessments and Plans Some States are beginning to experiment in developing regional and state assessments and plans after completion of county/jurisdictional assessments and plans. For example, in Maryland, the Eastern Shore counties have all completed the assessments and plans and are now looking at region-wide trends and needs, with the goal of working with the region’s legislators (local and state) to increase resources. Maryland is also planning on the completion of the process in all 24 jurisdictions and then looking at state-wide trends and needs.

68 68 Adaptation of the Process There may be jurisdictions that do not want or need to assess all the child welfare capacities listed in the accompanying document. –For example, a jurisdiction that has undergone the CFSR can decide to adapt this service array process as part of its Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to assess only those non-conforming outcomes/capacities and to create and implement a Resource and Capacity Development Plan to improve capacities in those areas. –For example, a jurisdiction that has identified the need to build capacities to support its efforts to impact portions of its system, such as reducing children in residential care, can choose to assess select capacities. 68

69 69 What Does the Process Cost? No exact dollar figure can be provided. Varies according to scope and scale of the process chosen by the jurisdiction and the state. Requires extensive staff time on the part of jurisdictional and state child welfare agency to coordinate the implementation. Possible specific costs: –Facilitators, technical assistance, food for day- long meetings, copying of written reports, staff time. 69

70 70 Discussion Time: Questions? Discussion? Decisions? 70

71 71 Contact Information Steven Preister, Associate Director, National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement DC Office: 6824 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC , telephone/voice: fax (same, call first).


Download ppt "Enhancing the Service Array in Child Welfare: (1) Assessing the Capacity of a Jurisdiction/State to Meet the Individualized Needs of Children and Families."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google