Creating Danger Statements & Safety Goals UC Davis Webinar December 15, 2010 Heather Meitner & John Vogel Massachusetts Action Learning Group John: Intro to connect this dialogue to the previous Webinar on Safety Mapping

Making the connections: Safety Mapping and Danger/Safety Statements Safety Mapping makes it easier for us all ‘think our way though’ complexity, ambiguity and contradiction in this work. Safety Mapping makes it easier for us to use common language across multiple lines – families, providers, workers, supervisors, managers. Safety Mapping promotes ‘shared understanding’ described by the Danger/Safety Statements Danger/Safety Statements help build agreement about the next steps for enhancing safety for children. Summarize here.

Facilitative Process of Safety Mapping OPEN Facilitative Behaviors to gather information Check for understanding NARROW Strategic and Critical Thinking to organize information Check for agreement CLOSE Collaborative Attitude to select the best approach and reach agreement What are the worries? Reveal Patterns of past worries, Search for details, elicit multiple perspectives and stories, Hear the voices of children, Collaborate to describe CPS threshold, Rely on Shared Definitions, Sort out understanding of Danger and Complicating Factors, Utilize SDM Tools, Describe behavior= IMPACT Develop shared agreement about the nature and severity of the problem Agreement about an agency Danger Statement Understanding of the Risk Level What works well? Reveal Patterns of past success using exception questions, Appreciative inquiry to tell story when things worked well, Search for details, Elicit multiple perspectives and stories, Hear the voice of children, Use SDM Tools to identify Protective Capacities, Describe behaviors=IMPACT Develop Safety Goals Specify Acts of Protection Describe Supporting Strengths What needs to happen? Who can be part of the network? What might network members do to support change?; What resources are available to help promote change?; Are changes needed in “what people do” or “what they think” or both? Clear expectations of the actions that network members will take. Safety Plan/Service Plan Reunification Plan, Implementation Plan

Danger Statements Simple behavioral statements of the caregiver actions, the harm that it has caused, and the resulting worries CPS has about the future. They are statements created in very clear behavioral terms that contains: Caregiver Actions Impact on the Child Future Concerns (DETAILS, NOT JUDGMENT, USING FAMILY’S OWN LANGUAGE) Who is worried About what past harm/potential caregivers actions Past & potential harm to the child John: We are picking up where we left off with the last webinar when taking about Safety Mapping in detail. Today we will break the process down into several clear steps w/ practical examples…

Writing Danger Statements: Danger statements have three components: - “CPS is worried that…” (or worker is worried that) - Behavior of parents (past & what parents might do) - Possible impact on the child (what we are worried may happen to the child) Example: Child Protection Services, the doctor at the hospital and Adam’s mom, Tanya, are worried that Adam’s Dad, Matt, will hit Adam like he did last week and leave him with bruises or even more serious injuries. John: Two things to emphasize: the usefulness for the jurisdiction in coming to these (they help us get clear about what we are worried about) but also the power of putting these on the table with the parents/family. I think this is really where SoS begins to look radically different then regular practice – when the worker puts the danger statement on the table with the parents. Formula: We are worried that ___________________ ________________ possible behavior of parents possible impact on child

‘Safety’ Organized Practice Safety Statements: Actions of protection that caregivers have already taken Safety Goals: Actions of protection that need to be taken going forward (the ‘what’) Safety Plans: How those goals need to be met, who will do what (the ‘how’) Heather: I love that this practice constantly reminds us to identify what we need to see to close the case. Protects us from what I call ‘case work drift’. Identifying the signs of safety that mitigate danger is paramount in this work. It is so easy to become mired in the complicating factors that we lose focus on the simplicity of this practice.

Safety Statements Caregiver Actions Concise statements that clearly describe the past/current actions of protection of the child already taken by the caregivers. They are statements created in very clear behavioral terms that contain: Caregiver Actions Impact on the Child (How it mitigated the danger or risk) Heather: Safety statements are an acknowledgement of actions of protection that have already been taking place at the time of mapping. This acknowledges if the parents have demonstrated the capacity to act protectively – so we can build on it. Safety goals are what we need to see change/happen going forward.

Writing Safety Statements Safety statements have two components: - Behavior of parents (what parents have done) Impact on the child (how actions kept child safe from danger) Example: Adam’s mom, Tanya, called her mother for help when Adam’s Dad, Matt, threatened to hit Adam last month and Matt went for a walk to cool down. Adam was protected from physical harm. Heather:

Well-Formed Safety Goals Every case needs to have clear, well-formed goals that allows us as CPS to feel like there is sufficient safety to leave a child at home during future work or to close the case. Too often we don’t operationalize this end point but still ask clients to engage in services. Even if the services get done, it can still leave us feeling no more reassured that the dangers have been addressed. Heather: ‘Well formed’ means it comes from the solution-focused literature and basically means goals framed as much as possible about what will happen as opposed to what won’t happen. Have you ever had that dreadful experience in court when the opposing counsel says, “Your honor, my client has done everything on their service plan & STILL CPS will not return the child home to my client!” Ensuring that the goals are operationalized will avoid this dilemma!

Safety Goals Agency safety goals identify what CPS would need to see happening in the family to satisfy everyone that the child protection concerns have been addressed and the children will be safe in care of the parents/caregivers. Goals statements need to: Directly relate to the danger statements Be specific and describe what we are expecting the parents to do differently, rather than what we are expecting to see stop, to address the concerns Be collaboratively made – or if they can’t be, they should include choices whenever possible Be written in straightforward, measurable language Heather: Families always benefit when we framed our expectations in terms of what they can do as opposed to what they ‘should not do’. I once had a mom ask me, “Your service plan says ‘Mother will refrain from drinking alcohol.’ What am I supposed to do when I am not drinking??” It is vital to constantly check our use of language to insure that the family understands. Understanding is the first step towards building agreement about the goals. Without agreement, there will be little investment in actually implementing the plan to reach the goals.

Suggested formula for Safety Goals: ______ will need to work with CPS and a safety network (of family, friends and professionals) to develop a safety plan that will show everyone that: - (Descriptions of behaviors to address concerns) CPS will need to see this safety plan in place and working for a period of at least ____ months so that everyone is confident that the safety plan will keep working once CPS withdraw. Example: Matt will work with CPS and his safety network (of family, friends and professionals) to develop a plan that will show everyone that he will always discipline Adam in ways that do not injure him (such as: using time outs, taking away Adam’s game boy and giving incentives such as earning a toy). CPS will need to see this safety plan in place and working for a period of 6 months so that everyone is confident that the safety plan will keep working once CPS withdraws. Heather: When drafting Safety Goals we must ask ourselves the following types of questions: How will we know that Matt will discipline Adam in ways that don’t involve hitting and smacking? What ways can he discipline him instead (try to avoid the ‘not’ in the goal statement (dead man’s goals) and stay with ‘what’ will be happening instead)? What kind of discipline does Matt need to use? Are the descriptions behavioral enough? Can we directly observe & measure the outcome?

Safety Mapping Safety goals (agency and family) Safety Statements What are we worried about? What’s working well? Danger: Safety: Safety Statements Harm/Danger Statements Complicating Factors: Strengths: John: The mapping itself is intended to be a dynamic process based in inquiry but when the mapping is complete, you should have the information required to make these statements… Questions for Follow up/What needs to happen next? Safety goals (agency and family)

Signs of Safety Assessment and Planning What’s Working Well? What Needs to Happen? What are we Worried About? Past Harm Agency Safety Goals Safety Statements Statements about safety goals (agency and family) Future Danger Family Safety Goals Harm/Danger Statements John: …and this is how it looks on the three column map (remember, it’s the same map!) Next Steps Complicating Factors) Enhancing a Safety Network, Safety Planning How does SDM risk level inform next steps? Safety Scale: On a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means everyone knows the children are safe enough for the child protection authorities to close the case and zero means things are so bad for the children they can’t live at home, where do we rate this situation? (If different judgments place different people’s number on the continuum). 10

Safety Planning: The Key Domains These are the dangers that the safety plan needs to address. DANGER STATEMENTS Example: “CPS is worried that Grandpa will touch Katie and Toni’s private parts and ask them to touch his private parts.” The harm that professionals (and family members) are worried might/will happen to the children if nothing changes in the family. Example: “Mom and Dad will work with CPS and a safety network (of family, friends and professionals) to develop a safety plan that will show everyone that Katie and Tani will never be alone with Grandpa and that there will always be a safe adult present.” GOALS are the WHAT of future safety – WHAT the family will be doing differently to address the dangers. SAFETY GOALS Statements of WHAT everyone would need to see the family doing in their care of the children to be confident that the dangers had been addressed and the children are safe. Example: “Rule 1: The most important rule is that Katie and Tani will never be alone with Grandpa. There will always be another safe adult with Katie and Tani when Grandpa comes to visit or when the family goes to visit Grandpa”. “Rule 3: When our family all get together, one of the family men like Dad or Uncle Roni will stay with Grandpa all of the time so that Grandpa isn’t alone with any of the children.” The SAFETY PLAN is the HOW of future safety – HOW the family will achieve the safety goals. John: Sonja Parker has done a nice job summarizing the key domains of the SoS practice in this slide. Each process flows into the next and it is critical that we connect the dots (how safety plan mitigates future harm) every step of the way. SAFETY PLAN Detailed descriptions of HOW the family will achieve these safety goals. The safety plan needs to describe the day to day behaviors of the parents/caregivers and day to day arrangements within the family that will show everyone that the children will always be safe in relation to the dangers. Remember: Safety planning is a journey not a product!

Harm, danger and IMMINENT DANGER OF SERIOUS HARM, and RISK What has already happened that is SERIOUS harm What has already happened that is below the threshold for SERIOUS Danger SERIOUS harm that we worry about happening in the IMMEDIATE future We are worried that things will happen that are below the threshold for SERIOUS and/or IMMEDIATE SDM SAFETY ASSESSMENT Heather: TIME RISK LEVEL: How worried are we?

Safety Goal (the ‘what’) Dead man’s goals Mr. Smith will not hurt Billy No one in the family will hurt Billy Action goals Mr. Smith will physically contact Billy only in ways that won’t hurt Billy. Family members will work together to keep Billy safe. Heather: What I try to teach people here is to avoid the ‘dead mans goals’ the goals that are more about an absence then a presence, but it’s hard to write some goals that way! You might discuss the differences here.

Sample Danger Statements Domestic violence, teenager witnessed: CPS is worried that Susan may continue to drink to access, that during these times she and John will continue to get into physical fights, and that Sam may try to put himself in the middle of an altercation and become hurt, or that he may become so distracted from home that he does not finish school. John/Heather alternating:

Sample Danger Statements Physical abuse after drinking: CPS is worried that David may get drunk again, may hit Peter again, and that Peter could become serious injured as a result.

Sample Danger Statements Injured infant case Because of the bleeding in the brain baby Chelsea suffered while in mom and dad’s care in October and because no one knows how the injuries happened, CPS and Doctors at the hospital are worried that if nothing changes Chelsea could be seriously injured again, could suffer permanent brain damage or even die.

Sample Danger Statements Theft with child present: CPS is worried that Lisa may try to steal again with her child, that she may continue to become arrested and may serve jail time forcing Rebecca to grow up without her mom present.

Sample Danger Statements Grandparent who could ‘not continue” with placement for adolescent. Child had to be placed in a residential program and, one year later, grandfather said he was ready to consider reunification efforts: CPS, the program and therapist are worried that Lesley will come to live with grandpa again, that grandpa will become overwhelmed if she gets in trouble again, that grandpa will ask for her to be removed again, and, a as a result of all of this, Lesley will be even more angry, even more hurt and may have to live in residential programs forever.

Summary Signs of Safety practice leads child welfare beyond a model of service provision and into a model of rigorous safety planning with children & families. Safety Mapping requires the participation of all parties to articulate clear danger & safety statements, identify measurable safety goals, & a network of supportive people to implement the safety plan. John/Heather

Questions & Discussion