1. Collaboration Works National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Model Courts Laboratories for Systems Change

2. Hon. Stephen M. Rubin Pima County Juvenile Court Tucson, Arizona Past President National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Pennsylvania Roundtable Summit

3. History of the Model Courts Project RESOURCE GUIDELINES CincinnatiASFAOJJDP

4. RESOURCE GUIDELINES and ADOPTION AND PERMANENCY GUIDELINES

5. Best Practices Timely Permanency for the Child –Oversight and Authority of Judge –One Family-One Judge Substantive and Timely Hearings –Front-Loading Effective Case Load Management –Time-Certain Calendaring –No Continuance Policy –Distribution of Orders After Hearings –Data Collection and Analysis

6. Best Practices Cont’d. Access to Competent Representation –Child –Parent –Agency Centrally Located and Accessible Court Facility –Child-Friendly –Secure –Access to Resources

7. Best Practices Cont’d. State and National Interface –ASFA –Pew Commission Recommendations –Child and Family Service Reviews –Program Improvement Plans –Court Improvement Projects –State Action Plans

8. Fundamentals of Implementing System Reform Strategic Planning –Critical Analysis and Feedback –Training Development and Implementation –Technical Assistance –Research –Evaluation

9. Family Violence Department Juvenile and Family Law Department Alcohol and Other Drugs Division National Center for Juvenile Justice National Collaborations –National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare –National Center for State Courts –American Bar Association Center for Children and the Law –~ among many others National Council of Juvenile And Family Court Judges

10. Current Model Courts Alexandria, Virginia Austin, Texas Baltimore, Maryland Buffalo, New York Charlotte, North Carolina Chicago, Illinois Colorado Statewide Concord, New Hampshire Dallas, Georgia Des Moines, Iowa El Paso, Texas Hattiesburg, Mississippi Honolulu, Hawaii Indianapolis, Indiana Lake Charles, Louisiana Las Vegas, Nevada Livingston County, Michigan Los Angeles, California Louisville, Kentucky Miami, Florida Nashville, Tennessee Newark, New Jersey New Orleans, Louisiana New York City, New York New York, Statewide Omaha, Nebraska Portland, Oregon San Jose California Seattle, Washington Toledo, Ohio Washington, D.C. Senior Model Courts Cincinnati, Ohio Reno, Nevada Salt Lake City, Utah Tucson, Arizona

11. Systems Change Programs and Initiatives Filling best practice needs –Front-Loading –Reasonable Efforts –Timely Permanency –Well-Being Program and Initiative Development Components –Lead Judge –Multidisciplinary Collaborative Team –Model Court Liaison

12. Child Health Front-Loading, Reasonable Efforts, Timely Permanency, Well-Being Early Intervention Services –Miami, Des Moines, Omaha, Honolulu, Tucson Mental Health –Cincinnati, San Jose, Tucson Publications: –“Questions Every Judge and Lawyer Should As About Infants and Toddlers in the Child Welfare System” Technical Assistance Brief –Juvenile and Family Court Journal, Spring 2004 – Infants and Toddlers in Court

13. Child Health Cont. Front-Loading, Reasonable Efforts, Timely Permanency, Well-Being Needs of Older Youth –Alexandria, Chicago, Honolulu, New Orleans, New York, Tucson Publications –“The Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 and the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program,” Technical Assistance Brief Dually-Involved Youth

14. Visitation and Education Front-Loading, Reasonable Efforts, Timely Permanency, Well-Being Visitation Protocols and Guidelines –Des Moines, Los Angeles, Portland, Georgia Education Initiatives Chicago, Los Angeles, Newark, Portland, San Jose, Tucson Publications: –“Asking the Right Questions: A Judicial Checklist to Ensure that the Educational Needs of Children and Youth in Foster Care are Being Addressed,” Technical Assistance Brief –“Improving Educational Outcomes for Youth in Foster Care: Perspectives from Judges and Program Specialists,” Technical Assistance Brief –Juvenile and Family Court Journal, Summer 2003 “Judicial Oversight of Parental Visitation in Family Reunification Cases”

15. Substance Abuse Front-Loading, Reasonable Efforts, Timely Permanency, Well-Being Substance Abusing Parents –Cleveland, Los Angeles, Portland, San Jose, Tucson Meth Action Planning –San Jose, Tucson Foster Youth Abusing Drugs –Los Angeles

16. Substance Abuse Cont. Publications –“Development of the Miami-Dade County Dependency Drug Court,” Technical Assistance Brief –Juvenile and Family Court Journal, Summer 2006 “Reclaiming Futures: A Model for Judicial Leadership in Community Responses to Juvenile Substance Abuse” –Juvenile and Family Court Journal, Summer 2005 “Judicial Perspectives on Family Drug Treatment Courts” –Juvenile and Family Court Journal, Fall 2004 “Treating Substance Abusing Parents: A Study of the Pima County Family Drug Court Approach

17. Model Court Strategic Planning Other initiatives –Alternative Dispute Resolution –Expedited Appeals –Family Violence Initiatives –Foster Care Recruitment –Statewide Outreach –Specialized Dockets Truancy, Therapeutic Justice

18. Pima County, Arizona Model Court Established in 1996 14 years of system reforms

19. MODEL DEPENDENCY COURT – 1996 One of the first ten courts in the country Implementing the NCJFCJ “Resource Guidelines for Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings” Expedite cases and services to achieve early permanency Reforms enacted into law and implemented statewide Ongoing collaboration to continue to improve outcomes

20. Six Foundational Principles Leadership Timely Decision-Making Accountability Due Process Problem-Solving Culture Monitoring Systems Effectiveness/Court Performance

21. DEPENDENCY: STATISTICS AND TRENDS 1,694 Cases Pending 3,043 Children In 2008, 1,076 new petitions were filed Dependency petitions 36% between 2000 and 2009

22. Dependency Petitions 2000 - 2009

23. DEPENDENCY: STATISTICS AND TRENDS January 2008 – December 2008 40% returned to parent 31% adopted 8% placed in permanent guardianship

24. DEPENDENCY: STATISTICS AND TRENDS January 2008 – December 2008

25. Case Closure * 2009 Data is Current as of 11/13/09

26. All Adoptions in Pima County *2009 Data is Current to November 13, 2009

27. Court Improvement Project (CIP) Dependency Unit positions: Three part-time Pre-Hearing Conference Facilitators Three Data Specialists (extract & enter data from minute entries, run reports, analyze data) Two Intake Specialists (immediate communication with CPS upon child’s removal; set Preliminary Protective Hearings and Pre-Hearing Conferences 5-7 days after removal; assign attorneys for children and parents) One Dependency Specialist: arranges CLE Brown Bag trainings, liaison with CPS, attorneys, AG’s office

28. Court Improvement Project (CIP) Cont’d. JOLTSaz: CIP funds a full-time I.T. programmer All Dependency Unit staff work hand-in-hand with I.T. as the dependency module of new statewide data system is designed and implemented

29. Goals and Objectives Model Court requires the setting of measurable goals The Model Court Working Committee establishes the goals each year Some goals are not achieved in the year they are originally set

30. 1997 - 1998 Formation of a multi-disciplinary inter-agency work group Implementation of the “one-judge/one-family” system Implementation of the Preliminary Protective Hearing and Pre-Hearing Conference Implementation of a new calendar system Attorney training Mediation program Mandatory settlement conference

31. 1998 - 1999 Full implementation of the mediation program Full implementation and evaluation of Data Collection & Management System Multi-disciplinary training Collaborate with agency to enhance services –Expand availability of visitation services –Increased urinalysis testing –Facilitate quicker substance abuse evaluations –Develop a Resource Information Center for parents in dependency cases at the Juvenile Court –Provide calendar to all parents

32. 1999 - 2000 Develop a better collaborative case management process for dually referred/adjudicated minors to ensure safe placement and timely delivery of appropriate services Collaborate with CPS and behavioral health services to enhance the timely assessment of and delivery of appropriate service to substance abusing parents Continue collaboration with CPS: –Expand visitation resources –Implement Family Group Conferencing (funding and training) –Implement parent calendar program

33. 1999 – 2000 cont’d Collaborate with CPS and behavioral health providers to develop and implement processes for early, comprehensive assessment of children brought into care Continue work with NCJFCJ and NCJJ to evaluate impact of Model Court reforms on the goal of early, safe permanency for children: –Collect relevant data –Develop relevant reports in Data Collection and Management System –Utilize outside evaluator

34. 1999 – 2000 cont’d. Collaborate with criminal bench, county attorney, law enforcement, adult probation and parole to facilitate delivery of services to child victims of physical and sexual abuse and their families Celebrate children and families by holding special events to recognize and honor those who work with them and for them Beginning in January 2000, use our new juvenile court facility to enhance dependency court proceedings and services

35. 2000 - 2001 Implementation of Family Drug Court Pilot Program Improve collaboration through development of Community Advisory Committee to enhance delivery of services to children and families Improve dependency data collection systems to streamline case management and monitor ASFA compliance

36. 2001 - 2002 “Back to Basics:” Look at where we have come from and recognize past accomplishments. From there, build on what we have and work from the bottom up to strengthen what is in place Continue to assess and enhance data collection and reporting to increase reliability, improve access, expand reporting capabilities and stress the importance of good data to funding and accountability Continue to review, monitor and evaluate the Family Drug Court Pilot Project and the Court Assisted Treatment Services (CATS) Project

37. 2002 - 2003 Develop a written protocol, approved by the bench and the stakeholders, to improve the quality and reduce the quantity of disclosure, in order to focus court hearings on the well-being of children Improve data collection and retrieval to monitor ASFA compliance Seek out and apply for funding sources to sustain the Family Drug Court

38. 2003 - 2004 Restructure the Dependency Court calendar to accommodate the increased number of petitions to ensure compliance with Arizona statutory time frames and promote efficient scheduling of hearings Improve the quality and quantity of parent-child visitation Increase the use of alternative dispute resolution

39. 2005 - 2006 Develop and implement cross-systems strategies for addressing the impact of methamphetamine abuse on children and families –Identify and collect data on methamphetamine use as a factor in dependency cases –Identify services currently available for methamphetamine abusers, evidence-based best practices, and gaps in available services –Convene a public forum/training with other community organizations on the local impact of methamphetamine abuse, data collected, services currently available and evidence-based best practices

40. 2005 – 2006 cont’d. Develop and implement strategies to achieve permanency for children in care more than two years –Develop a report identifying this group of children by age, gender, placement, current plan, prior plans, barriers to permanency, relatives, parental involvement, assigned judge or other relevant factors –Identify and review current strategies, compare with strategies successfully utilized in other jurisdictions, and brainstorm new strategies

41. 2005-2006 cont’d. Involve parents, extended family and other community and natural support persons in the development, expedited implementation and ongoing monitoring of case plans for parents and children –Modify the Pre-Hearing Conference to incorporate and build on the results of the CPS Team Decision-Making process and the Child and Family Team process –Utilize the same core group of family and other constituents (whether developed through TDM, CFT, ART or the PHC) to develop, implement and monitor case plans for parents and children –In cooperation with the DMC/JDAI Initiative, develop a matrix of child/family-centered ADR/decision-making processes; train stakeholders

42. 2006-2007 Educational Committee- Improve educational outcomes for dependent children –Education Summit –Organize a stakeholder’s forum. Goal is to collaborate with schools to improve educational outcomes for court- involved youth –Career Day –Early Childhood Education –Work on Resource Guide for daycare option –Endless Dreams –Create a video on educational needs of foster children. –Alternatives to suspension and expulsion –Education consultants –DMC/JDAI –Model Delinquency Court

43. 2006 – 2007 cont’d. Adult Substance Abuse Committee- Increase the successful provision of timely and effective substance abuse services to parents. –Adult Network Sub-committee –Immediate Engagement Sub-Committee –Sustainability –Community Involvement

44. 2006 -2007 cont’d. Children’s Voice Committee- Provide better and more effective ways for the child’s voice to be heard in all aspects of dependency proceedings.

45. 2007 - 2008 Reactivated Cases Subcommittee : Charged with collecting data on reactivated dependency cases and implement changes that may reduce the number of cases that result in reactivated petitions by –Refining data collection, analyzing data, compare with national statistics, and develop a profile of reactivated cases –Enhance the current “Adult Recovery Team” pilot on Judge Wagener’s caseload, adding a Community Recovery Staffing to ensure continued support to families beyond the dependency process –Develop, conduct and disseminate the results of a survey of parents whose cases have reactivated, as well as parents on closed dependency cases

46. 2007 – 2008 cont’d. Data Collaborative Subcommittee : Charged with reviewing, developing, analyzing, and sharing data across multi-systems to improve the outcomes of dependent children and their families and make recommendations to facilitate system change by comparing, reconciling and correcting data across agency databases ( including race, name, John Doe, DOB, placement) Family Law Workgroup Subcommittee : Charged with developing and implementing a system for identification of issues and cases common to juvenile, family and probate courts, so that appropriate orders can be entered regarding paternity, child support, custody and parenting.

47. 2007 – 2008 cont’d. Permanency Subcommittee: Charged with identifying and characterizing the number of dependent children who have no permanent plan after two years or more in out-of-home care. Committee will implement a pilot program for permanency collaborative reviews. Children’s Voice Subcommittee: This committee will develop better and more effective ways for the child’s voice to be heard in all aspects of dependency proceedings.

48. 2008 - 2009 Courts Catalyzing Change : Charged with identifying, analyzing and improving race data and making recommendations to improve any disproportionality found. Passport to Adulthood : Charged with assisting judges and agencies in their efforts to focus on all areas of an adolescent’s life to ensure that needs are met, resources are garnered and young adults are prepared to leave foster care.

49. 2008 – 2009 cont’d. Senior Model Court : Charged with developing and implementing – in collaboration with NCJFCJ, a process to mentor other court jurisdictions; embracing proven best practices beginning with stakeholder collaboration and including the principles in the Resource Guidelines. Severance Trial and Calendar: Charged with developing a protocol for timely completion of severance trials and permanency hearings for children three and under.

50. 2008 – 2009 cont’d. Community Outreach: Charged with launching proactive, formal and collaborative efforts toward educating the larger Tucson community on dependency issues, the role of Model Court stakeholders, Model Court initiatives and best practices, the effects of child abuse and neglect, and the role the community and individuals can play in prevention and support.

53. Family Drug Court works! A total of 418 parents have joined FDC 159 parents have graduated There have been 25 drug-free babies born to FDC parents 90% have had their children returned to them 249 children went home

54. Education Committee HISTORY Original focus: Model Dependency Court subcommittee exploring ways to improve educational outcomes of children in foster care. Original goals: Develop an awareness of educational issues of youth in foster care. Put education on the radar screens in the courts and in CPS. Improve information sharing between school districts and CPS.

55. ORIGINAL ACTIONS TAKEN Collaborated with Casey Family Programs and Teen Child to sponsor a “brown bag” seminar on the special educational needs of minors in foster care - for judges, attorneys, court personnel and Child Protective Services. Core group meetings with Casey and Teen Child regarding the development of an education advocacy manual and initial goals for a Pima County committee. Education Committee

56. CURRENT GOALS: MODEL DEPENDENCY COURT Expand education consultants: recruitment and training. Early Childhood Education Subcommittee: quality childcare and coordination of care. Initiate workgroup to develop and implement strategies for alternatives to suspension and expulsion. Launch on-line version of Endless Dreams curriculum. Support development of the PCJCC Community Advisory Board volunteer tutoring program. Hold an education summit. Education Committee

57. UMBRELLA COMMITTEE Current committee has over 100 members Membership includes school districts, Pima County Superintendent of Schools Office, Pima Community College, County Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, Foster Care providers, group care facilities’ representatives, contract attorneys, Child Protective Services, the CASA program, AZ Attorney General’s Office, Juvenile Probation Dept., Juvenile Detention representatives and a Judicial Officer. Meets 4-5 times a year. Education Committee

58. Collaborative Permanency Review Pilot Program Two Judges Extensive examination of Data Judges review all children in care over two years Child and Family Team meets just prior to the hearing Parties all come to court to intensively explore permanency options.

59. PERMANENCY CHECKLIST There are More People Who Love and Care for the Child Than We Know About Have all the relationships been discovered? Have all the relatives been identified? Have all the important persons been identified? Has the child been asked about people important to him or her? Are relationships and connections being maintained? Are we all in a team? Has everyone been invited to the CFT? Are we looking for solutions to the barriers? Housing Subsidy? In-Home Services Program?

60. PERMANENCY CHECKLIST There Are More People Who Will Love and Care for the Child When a Relationship is Formed Are we still inviting people to be in the team? Are we letting other people know about the child? Are we allowing new relationships to form? Have we made referrals for home studies? Are we letting the older teenager take the lead?

61. BROWN BAG TOPICS Infant Mental Health The Kinship Home-study Process Bonding and Attachment Issues for Court-Involved Children Family Visiting: Planning visitation to meet the needs of children and families Special Immigrant Juvenile Visas and Immigrant Impacts of Juvenile Court Dispositions Foster Child Panel: What do I expect from the court process? Family Law Issues in Dependency Cases Children and Psychotropic Drugs

62. Brown Bag Topics cont’d. Basic Information about the Trans-gendered Community SSI/SSDI and Foster children Education Advocacy and Resources for Court-Involved Youth Interactive interviewing of kids The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children Crimes against Children Syndrome: Battered Baby Syndrome and Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy Shaken Baby Syndrome CASA – Court Appointed Special Advocate Program

63. Adoption Day

64. What Can You Do? –RESOURCE GUIDELINES and ADOPTION AND PERMANENCY GUIDELINES –Regular, multidisciplinary collaborative meetings –Gather data, identify areas for improvement, set goals: CFSR, PIP, State Action Plan, CIP 5-Year Strategic Plan SMART Goals* –Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-Bound Adapted from Jutkins, Ray (1999). Power Direct Marketing: How to Make it Work for You. Kingbooks

65. Thank you! For More Information Contact Hon. Stephen M. Rubin Pima County Juvenile Court Center stephen.rubin@pcjcc.pima.gov National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges www.ncjfcj.org