1. CPS and Child Abuse Prevention: Protecting Budget and Advocating Legislative Proposals Madeline McClure, LCSW, Executive Director Diana Martinez, JD, Director of Public Policy TexProtects The Texas Association for the Protection of Children www.texprotects.org madeline@texprotects.org // diana@texprotects.org madeline@texprotects.orgdiana@texprotects.org

2. I.Incidents of Abuse II.CPS and Prevention Cut Highlights III.Impact of CPS cuts ◦ Family and Substitute Care ◦ CPS Staff Issues IV.Impact of Prevention Cuts V.Advocacy Primer 2

3. 3

4. Child abuse and neglect incidence continue to climb annually in Texas. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 4th National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, only 50% of actual CA/N cases are investigated by CPS 2010 Data Child Population6,584,709 Alleged Victims 288,080 Confirmed 66,897 Removed 16,347 4

5. 103,000 COWBOY STADIUM 82,080 COWBOY STADIUM 288,080 Alleged Child Abuse Victims To put the number of actual reports of child abuse in perspective, consider the maximum capacity crowd that attended the Super Bowl recently at Cowboys Stadium. Think of that stadium filled to the brim 2 3/4 times over. Now imagine them all filled with Texas children. That is the real number of children being seriously neglected, physically or sexually abused by their own parents or other family members in 2010 alone. 5

6. 6

7. 2010 E 2011 Budgeted Agency RequestedHB 1/ SB1 Change from 2010- 11 Change from request Total TDFPS Agency $2,740,323,71 5 $3,116,310,229$2,486,625,005-$253.7 mil. -9.3% -$629.7 mil -20% Total CPS $2,250,506,44 9 $2,560,421,857$2,084,483,193$166,023,256 -7.4% Statewide Intake $36,933,583$43,320,279$36,402,389-$531,194 -1.4% Prevention $88,109,457$99,807,000$48,247,099-$51,559,901 -58.5% CPS Direct Delivery Staff $837,809,055$920,311,139 $789,636,570 -$48,172,485 -5.7% 7

8. 8

9. 2010 E 2011 Budgeted Agency RequestedHB 1/ SB1 Change from 2010-11 Change from request Relative Caregiver Payments (Kinship Care) $14,527,726$17,938,859$0-$14,527,726 -100% Relative Day care (child care) $18,291,284$18,961,608$7,322,150 -$10,969,134 -60% Protective Day Care (bio family) $36,512,724$43,555,950 $28,112,032 -$8,400,692 -23% Adoption Subsidy/ PCA Payments $349,542,694$423,255,878$340,777,143 -$8,765,551 -2.5% Foster Care Payments $760,796,146$885,978,502$704,075,972 -$56,720,174 -7.5% 9

10.  HB1/SB1 eliminates kinship-support caregiver program and reduces childcare funding =Slashed financial supports for relatives who take abused kin into home.  HB1/SB1 cuts protective day care for FBSS cases +  HB1/SB1 project FBSS caseworkers’ caseload to increase 25% = less support for Family Preservation  All the above = less children with family and relatives and More kids in foster care  HB1/SB1 eliminates kinship-support caregiver program and reduces childcare funding =Slashed financial supports for relatives who take abused kin into home.  HB1/SB1 cuts protective day care for FBSS cases +  HB1/SB1 project FBSS caseworkers’ caseload to increase 25% = less support for Family Preservation  All the above = less children with family and relatives and More kids in foster care

11.  Texas Children Adopted 20102004 4,8032,512 90% increase!  HB1/SB1 eliminates adoption subsidy payments for new families = Less adopted children and more children languishing in foster care  Texas Children Adopted 20102004 4,8032,512 90% increase!  HB1/SB1 eliminates adoption subsidy payments for new families = Less adopted children and more children languishing in foster care

12. 12 Family Preservation Kinship CareAdoptionFoster Care $1,092$3,277$2,722$8,924 GR / $21,766 All Funds While we cut our family preservation supports, kinship care supports and adoption subsidies, we will have no choice but to increase child placements in foster care, at a cost 2.7-8x higher expense to the state GR. * Calculations by CPPP, Jane Burstain

14.  Cuts to: Family Preservation Kinship Care Adoption Assistance Foster Care Will result in: Kids being removed with no place to go Kids not being removed because there’s no place to go 14

15. 15

16. Total DFPS FTE’s -823.6 Total CPS FTE -749.5 90% of the Total DFPS Cuts -406 CPS caseworkers 112 laid off- Remaining are left vacant: 294  -66 Units  = 3 Texas Regions 16

17. 17 InvestigatorFBSSCVS FY 054217.537 FY 06352045 FY 0722.121.143.6 FY 0822.120.739.1 FY 0920.71928.2 FY 10 E FY 11 E2319.227.8 FY 12 FY 1324.82429.1 CWLA Recommended12 15

18. 18

20. For those children entering the CPS system, we do not provide them with a caseworker that will see their case through: Turnover for caseworkers have started trending up since the bottom of the recession: We are back up into the 30% plus turnover rate for new workers and investigative workers. 20

21. High turnover is what decimates the functioning of the CPS system. And it hurts children in state conservatorship: Several studies, such as this, found that with each hand-off of a caseworker, a child’s chance of reaching permanency in one year drops off dramatically. 1 2 6-7 The Child Welfare Training Institute: : http://www.cwti.org/RR/impact%20DVD%20intro.pdf (1990)Katz, L., “Effective Permanency Planning for children in foster care”. Social Work, 35, 220-226. Study in Washington and Idaho showed that when caseloads were reduced to no more than 10 children per worker, permanency for children was accomplished in a timely manner. United States General Accounting Office. 2003. Child Welfare: HHS Could Play a Greater Role in Helping Child Welfare Agencies Recruit and Retain Staff: “Some of the caseworkers we interviewed handle double the number of cases recommended and spend between 50-80% of their time completing paperwork, thereby limiting their time to assist children and families” 21

22.  Less Investigators / Higher turnover = More cases: administratively closed + screened out + rated lower priority = slower response time = More kids left in harms way Less CVS workers mean children languishing in system longer = more expense and higher risk of state becoming permanent “parent” of children: Poor outcomes Less FBSS workers mean more children removed with no place to go and less children remaining with FOO. 22

23. 23

24. The Graduate College of Social Work University of Houston analysis of the costs of child abuse concluded that Texas spent $6,279,204,373 in 2007 on direct and indirect costs dealing with the after-affects of child abuse and neglect. (2009) Cache Seitz Steinberg, Ph.D. Kelli Connell-Carrick, Ph.D. Patrick Leung, Ph. D. Joe Papick, MSW Katherine Barillas, MSW, ABD (August, 2009). REPORT TO THE INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR BUILDING HEALTHY FAMILIES AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES: Evaluation Elements 1-6 Final Report. (2007) TDFPS Costs projected for 08-09: LAR budget for CPS costs including foster/ adopt costs. Excludes other DFPS functions (APS, CCL, PEI). Total PEI costs 2007 LAR Prevention budget for 08-09 24

25. *US Dept. HHS, Administration for Children & Families, Child Maltreatment 2007; retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/ http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/ US Dept. HHS, Administration for Children & Families, Child Maltreatment 2008; retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm08/ http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm08/ But we invest less in prevention than any other state in the nation: In Texas only 5 of every 1,000 children receive prevention services compared to a national average of 44 of every 1,000 children. 25

26. ProgramBudgeted 2011 HB 1SB 1% Cut STAR Program$21,000,862$13,699,728 -34.8% CYD Program$7,847,599$5,039,300 -35.8% Texas Families (TFTS) $4,121,878$2,610,039 -36.7% Child Abuse Prevention Grants $1,813,365$1,640,667 -9.5% Other At-Risk Prevention $8,955,911$0$2,290,576-100% (HB1) -74.4% (SB1) Overall: PEI Overall PEI$45,883,574$24,123,550$26,414,125 26

27.  Prevention and early intervention strategy  Offer parenting support interventions in the home for families with young children plus risk assessment, information, guidance.  Services delivered by professionals or trained community workers.  Monthly Visits for generally a 2-3 year period  Common Outcomes: ◦ Improved pregnancy outcomes ◦ Improved parenting practices ◦ Safe home environments ◦ Improved child health and development ◦ Improved School readiness ◦ Enhanced Family economic self-sufficiency

28.  Home-Based Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY)  Relief Nursery  Healthy Families  Parents as Teachers (PAT)  Avance  Family Connections  Triple P  Nurse Family Partnership

29. NFP Legislation  SB 156 (80-R) currently serving 2,000 TX Families  $17.8 million for FY 2010-11  Proposed budget cut of 50% to $8.9 mil. 2012-13  1,000 currently served pregnant or post- partum mothers, babies and families will abruptly end services if cuts go forward. NFP Legislation  SB 156 (80-R) currently serving 2,000 TX Families  $17.8 million for FY 2010-11  Proposed budget cut of 50% to $8.9 mil. 2012-13  1,000 currently served pregnant or post- partum mothers, babies and families will abruptly end services if cuts go forward. 29

30. Program Goals  Improve pregnancy outcomes  Improve child health and development  Improve parents’ economic self-sufficiency Key Program Components  First-time, low income mothers paired with specially trained nurses  Evidence-based: 3 RCT over 3 Decades  Nurse home visits client during pregnancy to child age 2 30

31. 1.Increase Families Economic Self-Sufficiency  20% reduction in months on welfare  32% fewer subsequent pregnancies  83% increase in Mom’s labor force participation by the child’s fourth birthday  46% increase in father’s presence in household 2.Improves child’s health and development:  Reduces child abuse and neglect by 48%  56% decrease in child’s Emergency room visits 3.NFP improves mother’s pre-natal health  79% reduction in preterm delivery for high-risk pregnancies. 31

32. 4.Increase in Child’s School Readiness:  50% reduction in language delays of child age 21 months;  67% reduction in behavioral/intellectual problems at age six 5.Reduction in Criminal Activity  60% fewer arrests of the mother; 72% fewer convictions of the mother  59% reduction in child arrests at age 15 32

33.  Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation analysis (2011): ◦ Government saves an average of $9,056 per family served by the first child’s 5 th birthday. ◦ Texas state government saves $3,270 ◦ Federal government saves $5,786  RAND Corporation analysis (2005): ◦ Net return of over $34K per family served by child age 15 vs. total family cost of just over $7K ◦ Five-fold ROI 33

34. 34

35. 35

36.  During the 81 st Legislative Session:  7,443 bills were filed  1,461 bills (19.6%) passed  All this occurred in 140 days  Legislators Respond To:  Active members of their districts  Organizations that are engaged and understand the process.  Organized efforts -3 calls, letters, faxes on 1 issue. 36

37. 1. Identify 2. Interest 3. Inform 4. Investment Need to move through steps 1-4 in order 37

38.  Identify your legislators.  Who represents your interests?  Know at least your 2 elected state officials: Representative and Senator Go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us Under “Who Represents Me”  Identify with your legislator.  Learn about your representative’s political affiliation and interests.  An example of a way to do this is to volunteer for their political campaign or attend an event they will be at. 38

39.  Interest legislators with a story 3Write to your legislators:  # abused kids in their county Get information from the DFPS Data Book: http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/documents/abo ut/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2010/5 CPS.pdf http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/documents/abo ut/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2010/5 CPS.pdf  Tell a personal story / concern from the news.  Legislators don’t want to be seen as anti- children.  Remember they were elected to serve their community and most of them are very in tune with trying to serve their district. 39

40.  Inform your legislator.  Developed a focused message.  Be a resource.  Be informed yourself.  Never overstate problem or solution. 40

41.  Investment is commonly referred to as the “ask”. It is getting your legislator to commit to help by:  File a bill, co-sponsor a bill or support a bill that will help the cause.  Champion / support funding for your major issues.  Fight against legislation that will hurt your cause.  Raise awareness of the issue.  Connect you to individuals that can help your cause. 41

42.  Setting up a meeting  Preparing for the big day  Meeting with your legislator 42

43.  Ask to speak to the person who schedule’s for the legislator.  State your name, the organization you belong to and let them know are a constituent (you live in the legislator’s district or your organization is located in the legislator’s district).  Topic you want to discuss  Ask for 20 minutes  If booked, ask for a 5 minute meeting - If not, ask if you can schedule meeting with the person who handles the issue - policy analyst or chief of staff  Follow-up with an email request 43

44.  Make sure you know where you are going.  Parking (San Jacinto and 12 th )  Meeting room (3N.4, Court of Criminal Appeals)  Location of legislator’s office that you will be visiting Information on the Texas Senate, Texas House of Representative websites – Capitol Office  Bring your materials.  Wear comfortable shoes.  Business causal dress to business dress.  Wear a blue ribbon. 44

45.  Thank them for the meeting.  Acknowledge the commitment they have made.  State common connection if you have one.  Tell them who you are (a volunteer (briefly describe organization) / a CPS worker / a concerned citizen). and why this is important to you.  Get to the Point Quickly: Your Advocacy Agenda  Keep your message simple (3 issues)  Listen well (verbal and non-verbal)  Never be disagreeable.  Ask for support (investment)  Please fill out your review form after the meeting has occurred. 45

46.  In politics there are no permanent enemies; an enemy today may be an ally tomorrow.  The bottom line is that the Texas Capitol revolves around relationships. 46

47. You don’t get to choose how you are going to die. Or when. You can only decide how you’re going to live. Now. ~ Joan Baez You must do the thing that you think you cannot do.~ Eleanor Roosevelt 47

48. Join TexProtects – We need each voice E-mail Amanda Langford Director of Membership and Development Amanda@texprotects.org We are dedicated to providing you: Concise legislative summaries Advocacy Action Alerts Sample letters for legislators Talking points Legislator contact information The opportunity to shape 2011 legislation 48

49.  Q & A  A recording of this webinar will be available for download.  Madeline McClure, madeline@texprotects.orgmadeline@texprotects.org  Diana Martinez, diana@texprotects.orgdiana@texprotects.org

50. Use of this Presentation TexProtects encourages you to reproduce and distribute these slides. If you reproduce these slides, please give appropriate credit to TexProtects or The Child Protection Roundtable and/or appropriate cited authority. The data presented here may become outdated. For the most recent information, please contact TexProtects. TexProtects The Texas Association for the Protection of Children Madeline McClure, madeline@texprotects.orgmadeline@texprotects.org 50