Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CMHW Outcome-based Standards for Rights and Dignity General Provider Requirements Outcome-based Standards The Six Outcomes Quality Assurance Reviews.
Advertisements

Benchmark: Improved Maternal and Newborn Health Construct: Prenatal care Parental use of alcohol, tobacco, or illicit drugs Preconception care Inter-birth.
Statewide Children’s Wraparound Initiative COSA Conference Presenters: Erinn Kelley-Siel Mary Lou Johnson Larry Sullivan.
MHSA Full Service Partnership (FSP) For YOUTH (Ages 0-15) and TAY (Transition-Age Youth) (Ages 16-25) Santa Clara County Mental Health Board System Planning.
Research Insights from the Family Home Program: An Adaptation of the Teaching-Family Model at Boys Town Daniel L. Daly and Ronald W. Thompson EUSARF 2014/
Family Services Division THE FAMILY CENTERED PRACTICE MODEL.
Community Based Care in Florida and the IV-E Waiver.
1 North Dakota Children and Family Services Review Paul Ronningen, Division Director Don Snyder, Permanency Unit Manager.
“It’s All About the Data” The Interface of Evaluation, Program Development, and Partnership to Address Substance Abuse and Reduce Child Abuse and Neglect.
STRENGTHENING FAMILIES National Briefing, 2012.
Building a System of Care in Child Welfare: North Carolina
Caregiver Support. Child Intervention Intake Statistics  Calgary and Area 2013:  The Region received 14,100 reports about a child or youth who may be.
Children’s Mental Health System Change Initiative COSA Conference March 10, 2006 Bill Bouska Matthew Pearl Office of Mental Health & Addiction Services.
VISITATION 1. Competencies  SW Ability to complete visitation plans that underscore the importance of arranging and maintaining immediate, frequent,
FOSTER CARE: MODULE #3 The Foster Care Process. FOSTER PARENTING  They are licensed and receive specialized training.  Work collaboratively as a member.
Youth Empowerment Services (YES) A Medicaid Waiver Program for Children with Severe Emotional Disturbances Clinical Eligibility Determination Texas Department.
8/24/ Service Coordination: A Recipe for Success Shared philosophy among providers Shared philosophy among providers Collaborative policy and funding.
Lynn H. Kosanovich, HFA Regional Director Introduction to the Model.
Adair County System of Care Overcoming Obstacles to Helping Others.
10/ Introduction to the MA Department of Children and Families’ Integrated Casework Practice Model (ICPM) Fall 2009.
Expanding the Population Served by System of Care March 4, 2013 Vicki Effland, PhD Shannon Van Deman, MBA.
Preventing Family Crisis Finding the Assistance that your Family Needs.
Hamilton County Mental Health and Recovery Services Board Provider Meeting Transforming the Hamilton County System of Care and Community for Transitional.
ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH Children’s Behavioral Health.
The Iowa Pediatric Integrated Health Home Program (PIHH) is for children and youth, 0 to 18 years old, who are Medicaid eligible and have a Severe Emotional.
Service/Support Array, Provider Network, Natural Helpers and Financing Track 1- Early Developmental Stages Michelle Zabel University of Maryland Carrie.
Introduction to the Family-Centered Medical Home Massachusetts Home Visiting Initiative A Department of Public Health led state agency collaborative
Chase Bolds, M.Ed, Part C Coordinator, Babies Can’t Wait program Georgia’s Family Outcomes Indicator # 4 A Systems Approach Presentation to OSEP ECO/NECTAC.
Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY14 1 st and 2 nd Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children,
Ingham Healthy Families. History: Why Healthy Families America? Michigan Home Visiting Initiative Exploration & Planning Tool (Fall 2013)  Ingham County.
NYS HCBS Waiver. Services Process: NYS OMH solicited input from both children’s mental health services providers and families across NYS Sample of providers.
Healthy Families America Overview. Healthy Families America Developed in 1992 by Prevent Child Abuse America Evidence-based home visiting model 400 Affiliated.
Promoting good practice in tackling poverty and disadvantage INSET materials for primary schools.
A System of Care for Children’s Mental Health: Expanding the Research Base Using the System of Care Practice Review (SOCPR) to Facilitate System Transformation.
Early Childhood Mental Health Consultation Early interventions with very young children (birth to 6 years of age) at risk of experiencing serious emotional.
Youth Mental Health and Addiction Needs: One Community’s Answer Terry Johnson, MSW Senior Director of Services Senior Director of Services Deborah Ellison,
1 CMHI NEW COMMUNITIES TRAINING LATER DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES Marie Morilus-Black, LCSW-R Child and Youth Director District of Columbia Mental Health Authority.
Connecticut Department of Children and Families Agency Overview.
Children’s Mental Health Reform Overview: North Sound Mental Health Administration Prepared by Julie de Losada, M.S./CMHS
GEORGIA CRISIS RESPONSE SYSTEM- DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES Charles Ringling DBHDD Region 5 Coordinator/ RC Team Leader.
Innovation in Monroe County Jody Levison-Johnson Director Child & Family Service Quality & System Development Coordinated Care Services, Inc. Technical.
204: Assessing Safety in Out-of-Home Care Updates.
A Systems Approach to Improving Substance Abuse Treatment for Latino Youth: Latino Caucus of the APHA Annual Meeting November 6, 2006 URBAN LEAGUE OF GREATER.
1 Quality Counts: Helping Improve Outcomes for Pennsylvania’s Children & Families September 22, 2008.
Cathy Worthem, MSW Joyce Washburn, MPA BFSS, May 2011 Phoenix, AZ.
A compassionate team based approach... to care for families who have complicated needs.
Children’s Mental Health & Family Services Collaboratives ~ Minnesota’s Vision ~
Child/Youth Care Management 2015 training. WELCOME!
Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY15 1 st and 2 nd Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children,
NCADS Child Maltreatment 2000 Data about child abuse and neglect known to child protective Services (CPS) agencies in the United States in 2000.
Early Intervention Program & Early Family Support Services: Analyzing Program Outcomes with the Omaha System of Documentation Presented to: Minnesota Omaha.
Moving on Mental Health - MCYS System Transformation What does it mean for Lanark, Leeds and Grenville Community Presentation.
King County Wraparound March 22, 2011 Connie Kragt, Parent Partner Candace Hunsucker, Coach/Program Manager.
System of Care-Overview Principles and Values. Coordinated System of Care Team An initiative of Governor Bobby Jindal Office of Juvenile Justice Department.
1 DHS Board Meeting Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Overview Mark Washington Division of Family and Children Services August 18, 2010.
Georgia DFCS Outcome- Based Permanency Initiative A Proposal to Introduce Performance- Based Contracting and Partner for CFSR Success.
Developed by: July 15,  Mission: To connect family strengthening networks across California to promote quality practice, peer learning and mutual.
Comprehensive Youth Services Assessment and Plan February 21, 2014.
Strategic Planning  Hire staff  Build a collaborative decision- making body  Discuss vision, mission, goals, objectives, actions and outcomes  Create.
Child and Family Services Reviews Onsite Review Instrument.
1 Child and Family Teaming (CFT) Module 1 Developing an Effective Child and Family Team.
Zero Suicide in Texas (ZEST) Zero Suicide in Texas (ZEST) Collaborative Call: May 2016 DSHS: DSHS: Jenna Heise TIEMH: TIEMH: Molly Lopez Erica Shapiro.
Care Coordination for Children, Young Adults, and Their Families
Performance Outcomes System
Commit to Agency Mission and Values
RAPID RESPONSE program
Tuolumne County Adult Child and Family Services
MHSA Full Service Partnership (FSP) For YOUTH (Ages 0-15) and TAY (Transition-Age Youth) (Ages 16-25) Santa Clara County Mental Health Board System Planning.
Overview of Data from the Statewide FGDM Evaluation
Presentation transcript:

Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Selected Logic Model Outcomes in the System of Care CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth & Families Data and Evaluation Unit April 2015

History of Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) Family Care Community Partnerships (FCCP) was established in 2009 by DCYF to promote activities at the community level The partnerships are designed to strengthen and support families whose children are at risk of: 1.Abuse and/or neglect 2.Who have a Serious Emotional Disturbance (SED), and/or 3.Who are involved with the RI Training School. 2

FCCPP Serves Four Geographic Regions in Rhode Island 1.East Bay 2.Northern RI 3.Urban Core 4.Washington Kent 3

FCCP Values and Principles 1.Child-centered, youth-guided and family-driven 2.Individualized and strength based 3.Cultural and linguistic competence 4.Trauma informed 5.Community based 6.Collaborative 7.Wraparound 4

Characteristics of Active Families in FCCP, CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters 5

Figure 1: Percentage of Families Active in the FCCP by FCCP,, by CY13 3 rd and 4 th quarters – CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters The FCCPs had 1058 families active during the CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters (active defined as opened at least 1 day or greater during the quarter. The total number of children served by the FCCP during these 2 quarters was Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS). During CY14 1 st and 2 nd Quarters 1249 Families were served families were served during the last two quarters of CY13. 6

7 Figure 2: Hispanic Origin of Primary Child in FCCP, by CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS). Eleven percent of the 1058 active families had missing data.

8 Figure 3: Race of Primary Child in FCCP,, CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters Data Source: Rhode Island Family Information Systems (RIFIS).

9 Figure 4: Median Age of Primary Child in FCCP by FCCP, by CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters Data Source: RIFIS.

10 Figure 5: Primary Language of the Primary Child in FCCP,, by CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters Data Source: RIFIS.

Data Source: RIFIS. Data was taken from FCCP Intake 1A completed in the reported Quarters. The numbers are not mutually exclusive because the end user can check all that apply. Families can still access FCCP if one of their children is open to Probation. Figure 6: Percent of FCCP Families Active in FCCP by Eligibility Criteria by CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarter 11

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning Indicator: Establish baseline for child and family strengths and functioning and increase in child and family strengths and functioning from baseline. Data Source: North Carolina Family Assessment Scale (NCFAS) 12

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning Serious Problem (-3) Moderate Problem (-2) Mild Problem (-1) Baseline/ Adequate (0) Mild Strength (+1) Clear Strength (+2) Environment Intake Transition Parental Capabilities Intake Transition Family Interactions Intake Transition Family Safety Intake Transition Child Well-Being Intake Transition Social/Community Life Intake Transition Self-Sufficiency Intake Transition Family Health Intake Transition Table 1: Percent of ratings in each NCFAS domain at intake and discharge (N=210) Data: RIFIS. Two hundred ten families were pulled from all 1058 families active in the last 2 quarters of CY14. From a system level, from intake to baseline, clear and mild strengths increased across each domain while serious and mild problems decreased across all domains. 13

Logic Model Outcome 2a: Increase child and family strengths and functioning (cont.) Figure 7: Percent of Families Showing Change in NCFAS Ratings, (N=210) Data Source: RIFIS. While a majority of the families did not experience any change from intake to transition, over Two thirds of the families maintained positive scores from baseline to transition (63.4% to 76.2%). Significant positive changes were found in all domains, (20.4% to 32.2%). A small number of families Experienced negative changes in each domain area, (3.4% to 7.7%). 14

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. Indicator: Child and family assessments are completed within a determined number of days of referral for services as defined by clinical standards for emergency and non emergency cases. Data Source: NCFAS, Ages and Stages, Ohio Scales, Crisis Plan, Functional Assessments and Strengths Need Cultural Discovery (SNCD) 15

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. Figure 8: Percent of FCCP families that completed NCFAS, at intake and transition, by CY13 3 rd and 4 th quarters – CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) Data: RIFIS. Data based on children/families who were open for more than 45 days and closed during the reporting period. 16 Goal: 75%

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. Table 2: Percentage of Completed Assessments for Families Open to an Agency for more than 45 days by CY13 3 rd and 4 th quarters – CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) CY13 1 st and 2 nd Quarters CY13 3 rd and 4 th Quarters CY14 1 st and 2 nd Quarters CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters Goal Ages and Stages Baseline (N=399) 13.5% (N=393) 5.9% (N=424) 21.7% (N=344) 9.0% 50% Ohio Scales Baseline – Parent (N=775) 17.5% (N=642) 15.6% (N=751) 17.4% (N=570) 11.1% 50% 17 Data Source: RIFIS. Calculation is determined from the agency open date and includes children/youth that are age appropriate to the assessment.

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. (Cont.) Table 3: Average Number of days for NCFAS completion, CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) Data Source: RIFIS. The FCCP standards for completing a baseline NCFAS is 45 days. Calculation is determined from the agency open date. CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters Goal Average number of days to complete NCFAS baseline 19.5Within 45 days 18

Logic Model Outcome 4: Complete a timely and comprehensive assessment for SOC services. (Cont.) Table 4: Completed SNCD, CY14 3 rd and 4 th quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) East Bay Northern RI Urban Core Washington Kent StateGoal SNCD All families Number of Families active 45 days or greater Data Source: RIFIS. A completed SNCD is marked final and approved by the supervisor. Child/Youth are those that were open to an agency for 45 days or greater AND those who were open to an agency for 45 days or greater and closed. Child/Youth who closed with the following reasons were omitted: Family declined service, FCCP declined service and Unable to contact family. Calculation is determined from the agency open date. 19

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to strengths and needs of family Indicator: Children/family members will receive services within a determined number of days of being referred as defined by clinical standards for emergency and nonemergency cases. Data Source: RIFIS and DCYF Record Reviews 20

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to strengths and needs of family Figure 9: Median length of time (hours) to first face to face contact with family by response Priority, CY 14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) Data: RIFIS. 21

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to strengths and needs of family Indicator: Children/family engage in family team meetings at frequency as defined by practice standards Data Source: RIFIS 22

Logic Model Outcome 5: Initiate referred services, timely, tailored, quality, and appropriately matched to strengths and needs of family East Bay Northern RI Urban Core Washington Kent StateGoal Number of Team Meetings Monthly Child/Youth open to FCCP 45 days or greater All Children open more than 45 days Number of meetings per family Average length of time in Agency (days)* Data Source: RIFIS Consumer Assessment Responses by Program. *Child/Youth are 1)open to agency for more than 45 days and 2)open for more than 45 Days and closed (did not include families whose close reason was unable to contact, family declined services or FCCP denied family. Some of the children/youth included in these numbers may have been closed prior to the time a team meeting is occurring. * Data based on number of closed cases during the reported quarters. Close reasons not included were unable to contact, family declined services or FCCP denied family. Table 5:Number of FCCP Team Meetings, by FCCP region, CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) 23

Logic Model Outcome 6: Provide culturally competent services Indicator: Staff provides services in the primary language of the child/family member. Data Source: RIFIS 24

Logic Model Outcome 6: Provide culturally competent services CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (N=1058) Goal Staff provides services in the primary language of the child/family member 98.1%100% Data: RIFIS Table 6: Services provided in primary language to child/family (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters)

Logic Model Outcome 10: Increase the percentage of children who remain safely in their homes receiving community-based services despite their risk for out-of-home placement/removal. Indicator: Increased percentage of children/youth who are able to remain safely in their home receiving community-based services. Data Source: RIFIS and RICHIST 26

Logic Model Outcome 10: Increase the percentage of children who remain safely in their homes receiving community-based services despite their risk for out of home placement/removal Table 7: Close Reasons for DCYF referred Children/Families, CY14 1 st and 2 nd Quarters (Goal review: July 2015 for CY15 1 st and 2 nd quarters) Data: RIFIS. Children/Families are those that were referred by DCYF and were closed during the first six months of CY14. *The family Met partial/most/all goals in any of the 4 phases of Wrap. CY13 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (N=575) CY14 1 st and 2 nd Quarters (N=676) CY14 3 rd and 4 th Quarters (N=584) Goal Team agrees wrap goals met* 44.8%44.4%45.5%75.0% Child opened to DCYF 6.2%7.1%6.3%5.0 %

Next Steps 1.Ongoing program evaluation 2.Continuous quality improvement 3.Fidelity to Wraparound practices 4.Reassess targets for outcome measures 5.Building community involvement in the regional and statewide FCAB’s 28