Skip to: Main content | Subnavigation |
Department of Human Services Department of Human Services CountyLink: Take a Tour
  County Reports/Results     DHS Program Resources     DHS Systems & IT Updates     Fiscal Reporting & Accounting      Manuals     Policy Inquiries     TrainLink       Performance Management    


Ramey County
Minnesota Child and Family Service Review
Program Improvement Plan
December 1, 2011- December 31, 2012

I. General Information

 
County/Tribal Agency:

Ramsey

Address: 160 E Kellogg Blvd

Telephone Number:

 
Primary Person Responsible for PIP:

Tarita Tyson

E-mail Address: tarita.tyson@co.ramsey.mn.us

Telephone Number: 651-266-4243

 
DHS Quality Assurance Contact:

Shari Kottke, Steve Johnson

E-mail Address: shari.l.kottke@state.mn.us steve.h.johnson@state.mn.us

Telephone Number: 651-431-4706 (Shari) 651-230-2532 (Steve)

To be completed by DHS:

Date Draft PIP Submitted by County/Tribe: 11/23/11

Date PIP Approved: 1/5/12

Due Dates for Quarterly Reports:

Quarter 1: April 15, 2012 (for Jan. 1 – Mar 31)

Quarter 2: July 15, 2012 (for Apr 1 – Jun 1))

Quarter 3: October 15, 2012 (for Jul 1 – Sept 30)

Quarter 4: January 15, 2013 (for Oct 1 – Dec 31)

Date PIP Progress Reviews Received/Occurred:

4/30/12 (extended)

7/13/12

PIP Completion Date:


II. MnCFSR PIP Recommendations (as indicated in the MnCFSR report)


PIP RECOMMENDATIONS
 
Safety:

Conduct timely face-to-face contacts with children in response to child maltreatment reports (MnCFSR Item 1).

Comprehensively assess and address risk and safety for all children on an ongoing basis (MnCFSR Item 4).

Develop strategies to reduce emergency placements made for reasons other than immediate safety (MnCFSR Items 3 and 5).

Reduce the rate of children re-entering foster care (MnCRSR Item 5).

Permanency:

Identify and address barriers to placement stability, focusing on children/youth in care for more than 12 months (MnCFSR Item 6 and Permanency Composite 4).

Develop and implement a systematic and systemic approach to permanency planning, and identify and address barriers to timely achievement of permanency (MnCFSR Items 7, 8, 9, 10 and 15, and National Standards, Permanency Composites 2 and 3).

Assess availability and access to resources that support and address barriers to comprehensive relative searches being conducted early and ongoing, ensuring placement with kin is fully explored and utilized (MnCFSR Items 12, 13, 14, 15, 16).

Ensure that frequent, quality parent/child visitations are based on children’ needs and reduce barriers to maintain parent/child relationships (MnCFSR Items 13 and 16).

Well-being:

Assess and address caseworker training needs related to engaging children and their parents in case planning activities, and developing effective case plans (MnCFSR Item 18).

Assess and address barriers to early identification and involvement of fathers in child welfare cases (MnCFSR Items 17, 18 and 20).

Evaluate agency policies and expectations related to offering and completing Children’s Mental Health Screening Tools and ensure adequate interventions occur specific to identified mental and behavioral health needs of children (MnCFSR Items 17 and 23).

Conduct face-to-face visits with children and parents at a frequency sufficient for conducting ongoing assessments of risk, safety, overall needs and case planning, and ensuring caseworker visits with children in foster care each and every month they are in placement (MnCFSR Items 4, 17, 18, 19 and 20).

Systemic:

Access technical assistance and provide training regarding permanency statute, policies and best practice (MnCFSR Items 7, 8, 9 and 10 (Case Review)

Strengthen and support role of supervision (Supervisor and Social Worker Resources).

Develop and implement a quality assurance program for gathering and analyzing data and results in the implementation of practice and/or system changes (Quality Assurance System)


SAFETY
Goal 1: Conduct timely face-to-face contacts with children in response to child maltreatment reports

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 1(Timeliness of response)

Child Welfare Data Dashboard

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 1: 100% cases rated as a Strength

2011 Screening within 24 hours: 99.7 % (1196/1199)

2011 Child Welfare Data Dashboard:

Q1

Q2

Q3

SCE

83.3%

(30/36)

92.3%

(48/52)

80.4%

(41/51)

NSCE-INV

84.7%

(72/85)

83.5%

(66/79)

87.4%

(97/111)

FA

86.6%

(240/277)

86.3%

(352/408)

83.7%

(190/227)

Use the MN CW Data Dashboard as the method of measurement.

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

90% of children and families seen within statutory timeframes

PIP Updates

Q4, ‘11

Q1, ‘12

Q2, ‘12

Q3, ‘12

Q4, ‘12

SCE

81.6%

(62/76)

100%

(39/39)

GOAL MET

NSCE-Inv

76.6%

(49/64)

95.9%

(93/97)

GOAL MET

NSCE-FA

86.6%

(232/268)

88.5%

(285/322)

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Intake Manager and Supervisors run "Time to Initial Contact with Victim" reports each month and review. Managers/supervisors identify any patterns or themes; develop a strategy, implement, monitor, and re-evaluate (Intake Managers and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Managers and Supervisors continue providing oversight to staff in regards to timeliness to initial contact. Supervisors continue to meet weekly and bi-weekly with staff.

Supervisors check timeliness to contact on all cases during supervision with staff. Staff are also required to inform supervisors when there are challenges that impede their timeliness to contact efforts. The Service Quality Assurance (SQA) tool is also being utilized to track and monitor “timeliness to contact” during supervision with staff.

Additional Training and a TIP Sheet covering how to accurately code (Initial Contact) Assessment/Investigation-Adult Interview or Child Observation/Interview into SSIS was provided to CP Intake Staff in Q1 as well.

Q2: We have discovered that “best practice” in achieving the “demonstration goal of completion” of “timeliness to initial contact” ensuring that timeliness to contact is met, is to keep it the focal point of discussion with staff. Thus, the Child Protection Intake Manager and Child Protection Supervisors, continue providing a high level of oversight to staff in regards to timeliness to initial contact. Supervisors run timeliness to contact reports (weekly). This has allowed us to catch and rectify coding errors (staff incorrectly entering client contact versus child observation/adult interview).

The Service Quality Assurance (SQA) tool is also being utilized to track and monitor “timeliness to contact” during supervision with staff.

Given the turnover of staff, we have also discovered that “best practice” is to provide individual and ongoing, quarterly trainings during unit meetings. Thus, there have also been additional trainings on CW-TCM Eligibility Screens and additional training and a TIP Sheets covering how to accurately code (Initial Contact) Assessment/Investigation-Adult Interview or Child Observation/Interview into SSIS.

During weekly/bi-weekly supervision, share report with social workers. Continue to clarify expectations of timely contacts and seeking supervision when unable to make contacts for strategizing. Additional resources may include: Utilizing Work Force Solutions, MAXIS, school records, Neighbors, BCA system, etc., that will aid in locating the family or individuals pertinent in the investigation/assessment.

Staff also report to supervisors and/or manager, exceptions for not meeting timeliness to contact, such as police investigations, when staff are asked by police not to have contact.

(Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Supervisors are continuing to run “Timeliness to Initial Contact” Reports (during weekly/bi-weekly staff supervision) and require an explanation from staff when these timelines are not met. Staff continue to inform their supervisors when they are experiencing challenges in meeting their timelines. Also, staff are requesting to consult on cases prior to the initial contact timeliness expiring to explore additional strategies.

Q2: During Q 2, The Child Protection Intake Manager presented copies of the MN DHS Child Welfare Dashboard to “all” Child protection staff during unit meetings” and discussed the importance of meeting timeliness to initial contact timelines; in ensuring the safety of children and fulfilling one of their primary functions of their duties and responsibilities. Departmental protocol was also discussed: Staff are required to inform supervisors when there are challenges that impede their timeliness to contact efforts (before timelines expire); to discuss other ways in which the family may be contacted, if law enforcement has prohibited contact and other “approved” exceptions for not meeting initial contact timelines. In the event that a timeline to initial contact is not met, Intake Supervisors must notify the Intake Manager with the “impeding” reasons why the timeline was not met. The Intake Manager reviews the notification and determines if the impeding factors meet with exception or not. The notification that a timeliness to contact was not achieved is then forwarded by the Intake Manager to the Director of the Children and Family Services Division.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: SSIS General Reports, Timeliness to Initial Contact Report, on a monthly basis.

Role of the Supervisor: Run SSIS General Reports, on a monthly basis, share with Program Manager and staff, determine barriers to compliance with statutory timelines, identify strategies, implement, and re-evaluate on a routine and frequent basis.


SAFETY
Goal 2: Comprehensively assess and address risk and safety for all children on an ongoing basis.

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 4 (Risk assessment and safety management)

MnCFSR Item 19 (Worker visits with child)

MnCFSR Item 20 (Worker visits with parents)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 4: 71.4 % of cases rated as Strength

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

80% of cases rate a strength

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Effective use of tools to inform case planning:

Use of the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool in conjunction with Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing and addressing safety and risk, for all children on an ongoing basis. Supervisors will ensure tools are being used consistently and Safety Plans are developed based on either the 5 Factors (CFA) or Conditionally Safe/Unsafe (SDM) during supervision or as case circumstances warrant. (Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)

CFA Model:

A key component of CFA is determining if a “safety threat” is present and developing either an In-Home Safety Plan or an Out-of- Home Safety Plan. A safety threat is based on five (5) factors: severity, imminence, vulnerability, out-of-control, and observable specific behaviors (All five safety threat factors must be present to constitute a safety threat).

All

Ongoing

Q1: Staff continue utilizing both the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool and the Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing child safety and risk in both CP Intake (Assessment/Investigation) and CP Program (On-going Services).

The SQA tool is utilized on a monthly basis to conduct audits. Each supervisor audits 2 cases per Social Worker each month. The audits include a review of CFA as well as SDM tools to determine the safety of children (safety threats and safety assessment) as well as the domains to determine the focus of the case plan.

As of April 2012, supervisors have begun providing supervision to staff reviewing their caseloads three times per month. The Case Management Supervision tool was developed and implemented in April 2012.

Q2: Staff continue to utilize both the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool and the Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing child safety and risk in both CP Intake (Assessment/Investigation) and CP Program (On-going Services).

The SQA tool is utilized on a monthly basis to conduct audits. Each supervisor audits 2 cases per Social Worker each month. The audits include a review of CFA as well as SDM tools to determine the safety of children (safety threats and safety assessment).

A key component of the Comprehensive Family Assessment is determining if a “safety threat” is present and developing either an In-Home Safety Plan (that addresses “protective capacity” within the home, ensuring the child’s/children’s safety) or an Out-of- Home Safety Plan. The SDM Tools in conjunction with the information gathered in the CFA domains determine the focus of the case plan.

Intake Staff: Traditional Investigation and Family Assessment Case Management and Program Staff attended a mandatory Ramsey County training on the new Out of Home Placement Plan and the revised SDM Family Strengths and Needs Tools. The training was provided by Michele Bennett, Management Analyst (SSIS Specialist). The training was provided to our staff on June 27, 2012 and on July 10, 2012. Ramsey County Child Protection Services would also like to receive the DHS/SDM Tools training as well.

Frequency of Social Worker visits with children:

Managers and Supervisors will utilize SQA to monitor frequency of social worker visits with children and families and utilize in supervision with workers. Level of risk will determine frequency of face to face contacts with families. Supervision of program social workers will increase to three time per month in March 2012 and four times per month in September 2012. Supervisors will continue with monthly unit meeting that address group clinical case consultation as well. (Managers and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Increased face to face contact with families will assist in ensuring the safety of children.

Supervisors continue to utilize the SQA tool to monitor the frequency of monthly face to face contacts with clients.

Supervisors also utilize the Case Management Supervision tool to track and monitor the frequency of face to face visits with children and families.

Supervisors are conducting monthly audits of all case management cases (Child Protection, Permanent Connections, and Children’s Mental health). The frequency of supervision occurs three times monthly.

CW-TCM reports are distributed monthly that show the number of face to face contacts achieved/attempted. This has increased accountability and performance interventions for staff.

Q2: The level of risk continues to determine frequency of face to face contacts with families.

High risk cases presenting with a “safety threat” in which an in-home safety plan” has been developed are required to receive weekly Child Protection Social Worker visits in both Child Protection Intake and Child Protection Program.

Supervisors continue to utilize supervision and the SQA tool to monitor the frequency of monthly face to face contacts with clients.

Q2: The Frequency of Supervision for Social Workers by the Case Management Supervisors has increased to 3 times per month. This requirement has been monitored and verified. Additionally the frequency of Social Worker visits with children (to include documentation of contacts) has increased. In 2011 our monthly Case Worker visits with children was 48.9%, during the first Quarter of 2012 our monthly Case Worker visits with children increased to 78.5%.

We continue to monitor our CW-TCM reports on a monthly basis that reflect on a individual basis the Social Worker contacts with each child on their caseload.

Crisis plans focusing on identified risks will be developed in Children’s Mental Health cases within 30 days of the first meeting with families and reviewed every six months. Supervisors will review files with staff to ensure completion. (CMH Manager and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Children’s Mental Health Initial Response staff, who are the first to see new clients in Children’s Mental Health Case Management complete an initial crisis plan at the first meeting with the family. A more comprehensive crisis plan is completed during the first 90 days of working with the family. The crisis plan is then reviewed/updated by the ongoing case manager every six months. Lastly, supervisors continue to review files with staff to ensure compliance/completion.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Use SQA tool to monitor compliance. Monitor the use of the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool in conjunction with SDM Tools in assessing and addressing safety and risk during weekly/bi- weekly during supervision and case consultation.
Role of the Supervisor: Supervisors will monitor the need for ongoing training in the utilization of the Comprehensive Family Assessment in conjunction with SDM Tools in assessing safety and risk in the use of In-Home Safety Plans versus Out-of Home Safety Plans during weekly/bi-weekly during staff supervision and case consultation.


SAFETY
Goal 3: Develop strategies to reduce emergency placements made for reasons other than immediate safety. Reduce the number of children re-entering placement within 12 months of a previous discharge.

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 3 (Placement prevention)

MnCFSR Item 5 (Foster care re-entry)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

2009: 39.9% of children were in care for less than 8 days

2010: 39.9% of children were in care for less than 8 days

Item 3: 100%

Item 5: 85.7%

Federal Permanency Composite C1.4 31.3%

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

Reduction by 50% of Child Welfare shelter placements

Reduce re-entry rate to 20%

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Continue examination of patterns/themes specific to the children in out of home care less than 8 days for 2011.

Continue FGDM pilot as "Child Protection Support Services" for police, to assist in identifying alternative placements with relatives and kin by assisting police in hospital shelter physicals and transporting to shelter placements. In 2012, a new provider will be providing all after hours Child Protection Response Services. We are currently working on expanding the Child Protection Support Services to daytime hours (CP Operator, CPAT, and Child Protection Support Services).

In the event of parent and child conflicts, we are working to utilize our Children’s Mental Health Crisis Response Team to assist in de-escalating and stabilizing the situation, developing a Crisis Plan and working with the family to identify services for ongoing interventions and support. (Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)

Q2

Ongoing

Q1: Child Protection Support Services continue to collaborate with police —in our efforts to impact children placed in out of home care for less than 8 days and identify relative/kin alternatives.

CPS has also successfully expanded a collaborative with the St. Paul Police to include a daytime response work with School Resources Officers (SRO’s), beginning April 13, 2012. The expansion with the St. Paul Police, SRO’s and St. Paul Public Schools is aimed at a further reduction in children placed in out of home care for less than 8 days.

CP responds to the SROs within the school setting (within 30 minutes) and assessing the allegation, along with engaging the child/family prior to the placement, supports efforts to bolster relative/kin placement alternatives.

Q1: Children’s Mental Health Children’s Crisis Response (CCR) Team continues preventative work with families via de-escalation/stabilization strategies issues to avoid out of home care for the child when appropriate.

Q2: Child Protection staff continue to work with the Children’s Mental Health Children’s Crisis Response (CCR) Team to prevent/avoid out-of-home care of children when appropriate, by engaging and working with families via de-escalation/stabilization strategies in situations resulting from parent/child conflicts and other mental health related issues. During Q 2 Child Protection Staff have also utilized Adult Mental Health Crisis with the same purpose of reducing the number of children placed in out of home care for less than 8 days (by identifying appropriate services/resources).

Q2: The After-hours “Child Protection Support Services to Law Enforcement” as well as our “Daytime School Resource Officer Response Pilot Project” has continued-- in our efforts to reduce the number of children placed in out of home care for less than 8 days, by identifying appropriate relative/kin alternatives. While we feel that in most cases, police are appropriate in their out-of-home placement decisions, we are equally challenged, in that the premise for which the partnership was founded (to work collaboratively with the police in identifying an alternative solution: CP Staff engaging the family, the use of CMH Crisis Team and/or Adult Crisis and the identification of other family/kin to assist in preventing out-of-home care of children) has not been totally achieved. We also feel that while police do make an effort and have utilized extended family and kinship networks; often times the decision for out of home care or the use of extended family/kin has been made prior to our arrival. This has resulted in our after-hours staff as well as our daytime Senior Child Protection Staff being utilized to transport children to the hospital for the shelter physicals and to the shelter placements. While we continue to monitor these placement numbers, we are concerned about the possible “unintended consequences” (increased placements) related to being viewed and utilized as a transport, both pre and post the police decision to place children out of the home. We recognize that more children are placed during the daytime hours, with some children being placed from the school settings. We had intended to play an instrumental role in assisting School Resource Officers in assessing the situation and in identifying alternatives to placement when appropriate. However, our efforts have not have not yielded the desired outcomes, at this point. A meeting with Law Enforcement will be scheduled over the summer to address concerns related to the “Daytime School Resource Officer Response Pilot Project”.

Continue the use of developing family safety plans to manage safety within the family network.


Intake/Program Social Worker will utilize the CFA Comprehensive Assessment tool that aligns with the Minnesota Strengths and Needs Assessment to inform decision making.

Continue ongoing training with Lorrie Lutz to maximize staff understanding, skills and use of In-Home Safety Plans (Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Utilization of In-Home Safety Plans to increase the parent’s “protective capacity” within the home by implementing services or utilizing the family network when appropriate.

On 4/11/2012 – 4/13/2012 a site visit occurred with Social Service Consultant, Lorrie Lutz. CP continues its training efforts to create both In Home and Out of Home Safety Plans.

Q2: This work continues. Due to the absence of a Program Manager during the second quarter of 2012, the full utilization and implementation of this process did not occur. We have now hired a new Manager and we expect to offer a more thorough response during Q3.

Q1: The use of the Comprehensive Family Assessment tool and Minnesota Strengths and Needs Assessment tools are an ongoing practice standard and required on all cases to inform decisions.

CP initiated efforts to restructure staffing and assignment of duties to increase the compliance rate with relative placements.

Q2: The CFA Tool continues to be utilized on all cases in the CP Case Management Service area.

Q1: Ongoing training with Lori Lutz to maximize staff understanding, skills and the use of In-Home Safety Plans. During Q1, Lori Lutz also provided a Comprehensive Family Assessment Training to new Contracted Service Providers (to inform them of the model and ongoing assessment practices and how to report their interactions with clients in behavioral/functional terms).

Supervisors continue efforts to monitor the appropriate use of the CFA tools.


   
Q2: Previous and ongoing trainings with Lorrie Lutz (4/11-4/13 and 6/11-6/13) on the CFA Tool and SDM Tools during Q 2 has also allowed staff in their continuous assessment of the safety of children to increase their critical analysis of cases and to begin to move away from a practice of “out of home placement/out of home safety plans” as an “absolute” means of ensuring the safety of children; to one that assesses (critical analysis) the safety threat, the parental/caregivers protective capacity, and/or the use of other family members/kin and services that can ensure the safety of children within the home.

Q2: This work continues. Due to the absence of a Program Manager during the second quarter of 2012, the full utilization and implementation of this process did not occur in CP Program. We have now hired a new Program Manager and we expect to offer a more thorough response in Q3.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monitor Shelter Placements daily. Monitor Child Protection Support Services quarterly. Monitor the utilization of In-Home Safety Plans versus Out-of Home Safety Plans weekly/bi- weekly during supervision and case consultation.

Role of the Supervisor: Managers and Supervisors will monitor types of shelter placements daily. Manager will review/monitor Child Protection Support Services quarterly. Supervisors will monitor the need for ongoing training in the utilization of In-Home Safety Plans versus Out-of Home Safety Plans weekly/bi-weekly during staff supervision.


PERMANENCY
Goal 1: Identify and address barriers to placement stability, focusing on children and youth in care for more than 12 months.

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 6 (Placement stability)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 6: 64.3% of cases rated as Strength

Fed Measure C4.2 (Stability for children in care 12-24 months- Nat’l Standard is 65.4%h):

2009: 50%

2010: 53.3%

Fed Measure C4.3 (Stability for children in care 24+months- Nat’l Standard is 41.8%h):

2009: 26%

2010: 28%

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

75% of children in care for 12 months or more have stability in their placement (As measured by Charting and Analysis Reports C4.2 and C4.3)

Changes in placement are based on the best interest of the child and clearly documented. (Case file reviews)

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

       
Engage family to share family/kin names and locations utilizing kinship resources. Review kinship service efforts at all Permanency Review Team meetings.

Develop a tracking system to capture how often relatives are used, the success of relative placement, and if system changes need to occur in how we engage families to share relatives information; how we engage relatives to provide care for children; and how we support placements with services/licensing supports.

Assess training needed surrounding engagement of families to provide kinship resources, utilize all staff and unit meetings to strengthen social worker practices.

(Intake/Program/Family Support Manager and Supervisors)

Q1,2

Ongoing

Q1: Enhancing engagement of and work with families is ongoing and part of the Comprehensive Family Assessment training.

Q2: This effort continues. We have observed an increase in our relative and kin placement over the past 24 months.

May 2010 – 33.9% of children were placed with relatives/kin.

May 2011 – 34.6 % of children were placed with relatives/kin.

May 2012 – 41.3 % of children were placed with relatives/kin.

Q1: Kinship Searches/Studies continue to occur in CP Intake (on placement cases) during the initial contact with the family. When Kinship information is not obtained during the initial contact with the family, it is obtained during the Court Hearing by the Kinship Worker. The Kinship Staff attends all Court Hearings and engages families for kinship information. When families refuse to provide kinship information, the Kinship Staff then makes a request to the Court that this information be court ordered.

CP continues emphasize on best practices surrounding relative/kin as resource options with staff in case consultations, unit meetings and formal/informal supervision. A collaborative with DHS is underway to offer additional permanency resource training with a focus on the eight placement factors.

A designated position specifically for Emergency Relative/Kin Placements is being developed, our goal is to implement in Q2. CP revised the referral form for foster care placement to inform on status of kinship search and follow-up are completed by Placing Worker.

Q2: During Q 2, a position was created specifically to support Emergency Relative/Kinship Placement Licensing and to streamline the licensing process.

Our Child Welfare/Kinship Search Unit was trained and piloted the Lexus Nexus Kinship Search Tool. Fifteen (15) cases, in which a child had been in out of home placement for 15 months or more, were used in the pilot. Based upon the information offered above, we do have a system to monitor the utilization of relatives and kin for placement of children in foster care. Additionally we have created a practice change to increase accountability with Social Workers to consider placement with relatives. Staff must explain why they have ruled out placing with relatives and/or kin before a non relative provider option can be obtained.

We are also in the midst of offering Motivations Interviewing as a means to engage more effectively with parents to provide names of relatives and kin for consideration. We are currently in the process of sending out a Request for Quotes (RFQ),. We have done some research on who can provide Child Protective Services with the type of “child welfare” focused Motivational Interviewing Training that will meet our specific training needs and hope to provide the 2-day training module, followed by a 1-day training modulein 2012 or start to roll-out first quarter 2013. This training will not only be provided in CPS—it will be offered throughout our Children and Family Services Division, including: Children’s Mental Health, Delinquency and some of our Family Support units.

We will continue to consider options for adding vital support to relatives and kin to stabilize placements.

Q1: CP continues emphasize on best practices surrounding relative/kin as resource options with staff in case consultations, unit meetings and formal/informal supervision. A collaborative with DHS is underway to offer additional permanency resource training with a focus on the eight placement factors.

A designated position specifically for Emergency Relative/Kin Placements is being developed, our goal is to implement in Q2. CP revised the referral form for foster care placement to inform on status of kinship search and follow-up are completed by Placing Worker.

Q2: Relative/kin liaison hired and in process of licensing training.

Review information gathered regarding children’s needs and tools utilized by Program social workers when requesting foster placement. Determine need for additional information, changes in tools or decision making processes for placement occurs.

(Program/Family Support Manager and Supervisors)

Q1, 2

 
Q1: Supervisors review of referral process with the Placing Worker. Another requirement is that both Placing Worker and Licensing Worker review the children’s needs and the home studies. Lastly, with the addition of a kinship specific position for emergency placement, reviews of internal foster care referral forms/processes are underway.

Q2: We have added a new emergency kinship liaison position that has the sole responsibility of licensing relative/kin. Lastly, internal foster care referral forms/processes have been modified to accommodate the new position.

Review processes in place to support foster parents including frequency of social worker visits with time specifically identified to assess and address any foster parent needs.

Strengthen alternative responses to remove barriers in an effort to preserve child’s placement and prevent disruptions.

Develop a process to immediately address a threatened disruption to increase stability of placements. (Program/Family Support Manager and Supervisors)

Q2, 3

Ongoing

Q2: Collaborate with CP Program and identify a plan to accommodate an initial placement meeting with every child placed in foster care.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Track practice changes, monitor Charting and Analysis, internal quality assurance mechanisms.

Role of the Manager/Supervisors: Review processes being utilized, determine policy/practice changes needed to improve performance, assign tasks, implement changes, monitor results and evaluate outcomes.


PERMANENCY
Goal 2: Develop and implement a systematic and systemic approach to permanency planning, and identify and address barriers to timely achievement of permanency (MnCFSR Items 7, 8, 9, 10 and 15, and National Standards, Permanency Composites 2 and 3).

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 7 (Permanency goal for child)

MnCFSR Item 8 (Timeliness of reunification or transfer of custody)

MnCFSR Item 9 (Timeliness of adoption)

MnCFSR Item 10 (Long Term Foster Care)

MnCFSR Item 15 Relative Placement

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 7: 71.4% of cases rated a strength

Item 8: 83.3% of cases rated a strength

Item 9: 33.3% of cases rated a strength

Item 10: 50% of cases rated a strength

Item 15 60% of cases rated a strength

Fed Measures:

C2.1 23.6% (standard is 36.6%)

C2.4 3 % (standard is 10.9%)

C2.5 27.3% (standard is 53.7%)

C3.1 28.2% (standard is 29.1%)

C3.2 84.5% (standard is 98.0%)

C3.3 48.8% (standard is less than 37.5%)

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

80% of children have established permanency goals.

75% of children acheive timely permanence

75% of children have an ongoing, comprehensive relative search completed. Relative placements will meet or exceed state average.

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Dissemination of updated Permanency Review Team (PRT) policy/protocols to supervisors and staff in December 1, 2011, with full implementation to begin January 2012. (Program Manager)

Developed/implementing a grid that tracks:

• Date PRT occurred

• Permanency recommendation

• Permanency outcomes with date achieved

Continue to run reports of out of home placement (current episodes) to assure that children are receiving a Permanency Review timely and that permanency petitions are filed timely.

Q1

Ongoing

Q1: New Permanency Review Team protocol distributed and implemented. A Tracking Grid was developed/implemented identifying the Permanency Review Team results.

Q1: PRT monitors length of out of home placement that results in notification to move forward with a PRT consultation and subsequent permanency petition to be filed.

A Senior Program Evaluator runs a report each month on children in out of home placement who need to be staffed for the Permanency Review Team for the following month. Mr. Malkis, provides three spreadsheets each month, which include: children under 8 who would have been in placement for 4 months in the following month; children 8 and over who would have been in placement for 6 months in the following month; and children of any age who will have had over 14 months total days out of home in the past 19 months.

Collaborate with the County Attorney’s office to ensure timely submission of information to draft a Child in Need of Protection or Services (CHIPS) petition occurs and to ensure timely notification to all parties and to avoid court delays. Evaluate during CJI monthly meetings.

All

Ongoing

Q1: Ramsey County CP has not addressed this issue. CP expects to implement this in Q2 or Q3.

Q2: We have initiated efforts with our CJI Team to address this issue. Various methods are being considered and we hope to have a solid plan in place by Q3.

Program and Permanent Connections Unit (PCU) staff have met jointly for strategy sessions and to meet the need for cross trainings. Strategies regarding seamless transition of cases from Program to PCU for the families and ensuring no delays occur are a priority to develop and implement.

Permanent Connections Unit Supervisor, Adoption Opportunity Grant (AOG) Project Coordinator and Family Support Services Manager will compare and contrast existing practice to Concurrent Planning Model being developed within the AOG team identifying critical change points and current barriers to full collaborative work across units.

Based on findings PCU Supervisor and unit members will redesign case transfer checklist and process. Checklist and process will be disseminated to Child Protection Program Units. (Child Family Services Manager—Tami Baker Olson, PCU Supervisor--Laura Phillips)

Continue with Concurrent Permanency Planning (CPP) implementation and continue Technical Assistance with National Resource Center.

Develop and implement strategy to increase the collaboration and use of PCU unit liaisons with CP units in concurrent permanency planning for prospective children under state guardianship and state wards (Tarita Tyson/ Tami Baker Olson/ Cheryl Barnes/ Carolyn Smith/ Linda Benson/Laura Phillips)

Q1

Q1, 2

All

Ongoing

Q1: Checklist was developed/ implemented for case transfers to PCU.

A collaborative Pilot project was developed and implemented involving 4 staff members from Child Protection (CP) Program and 4 from the Permanent Connections (PC) units.  Role descriptions and protocols for both case managers were developed.  The roles were finalized and currently the practice is being fully implemented. * Due to this collaborative practice model, we are no longer using PC unit liaisons.  Instead, we are assigning secondary workers from the PC’s unit  to the CP case once a TPR petition is filed by our county attorney’s office.

Q2: The collaborative pilot is complete and Practice changes have been implemented, to include the assignment of a secondary worker once a TPR has been filed.

CPP Training on 3/7/12 and 3/8/12.

Resource Family Symposium on 3/7/12.

Pilot of dual workers completed, Secondary Assignments full implemented 4/1/12.

Conduct "Permanency roundtables" for older youth in LTFC on an annual basis.

To address barriers to permanency, continue meeting with Casey Family Services Consultant to develop a comprehensive framework for continued use of permanency roundtables and implementing roundtable action plans.

Develop and monitor individualized permanent plan for youth. (PCU Supervisor--Laura Phillips and Family Support Manager—Tami Baker-Olson)

Permanency Review Team will include permanency discussion to assist in complicated case staffing in achieving permanency and permanent connections for youth.

Q 4

All

Ongoing

Ongoing

Q1: Permanency roundtables: Dates have been confirmed and a collaborative process with DHS identified to select cases for participation. We have committed to reviewing 20 youth pulled from PCU/Program units.

Q2: Cases have been identified in conjunction with DHS. Stakeholder training to occur on 7/11, Casey Roundtables scheduled for the week of August 11th.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monitor implementation of protocols, use of tools, implementation of CPP and pre-determined measurement intervals utilizing appropriate data measures, follow up with implementation of Permanency Round Table Action Plans.

Role of the Manager/Supervisor: Supervisors will guide development, monitor completion and implementation of tools in supervision with workers. Implementation of CPP and monitoring of effectiveness and fidelity to the model. Supervisors will share information and data with Manager and evaluate effectiveness, make necessary changes and monitor results.


PERMANENCY
Goal 3: Assess availability and access to resources that support and address barriers to comprehensive relative searches being conducted early and ongoing, ensuring placement with kin is fully explored and utilized.

Assess the availability and access to resources that support and address barriers to frequent quality parent/child and sibling visitation

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 12 (Placement with siblings)

MnCFSR Item 13 (Visits between Parents/Child)

MnCFSR Item 14 (Preservation of Connections)

MnCFSR Item15 (Relative Placement)

MnCFSR Item 16 (Relationship of Child in care with Parents)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

MnCFSR Item 12 80%

MnCFSR Item 13 66.7%

MnCFSR Item 14 78.6%

MnCFSR Item15 60.0%

MnCFSR Item 16 66.7%

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

MnCFSR Item 12 90%

MnCFSR Item 13 75%

MnCFSR Item 14 85%

MnCFSR Item15 75%

MnCFSR Item 16 75%

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Improve social worker skills to engage with families in sharing family/kin information when children enter care and while they are in placement. (Intake Manager and Supervisors)

Working with the courts to ensure that kinship studies are court ordered routinely, so the Division can complete searches when families are not able/willing to share this information. (Program manager and Supervisors)

Assessing current tools for conducting relative searches to see if improvement in technology would assist in capturing larger volume of relatives.

Continue with current CFA implementation/practice of intentional visitation in parent/child and sibling/sibling visitation.

Ongoing clinical supervision with Lori Lutz, consultant will continue through 2012 to maintain fidelity of the CFA practice model in service delivery.

Supervisors will ensure that primary workers are present at a minimum of one visitation per month and will ensure vendors, case aides, and relevant family team members are trained and using IVP to record behavior changes for families. (Program Manager and CP Supervisors)

All

Q 3

All

Ongoing

Q1: Changed the language on Court Orders to include language requiring cooperation with Kinship Studies.

Q2: When Kinship information is not obtained during the initial contact with the family, it is obtained during the Court Hearing by the Kinship Worker. The Kinship Staff attends all Court Hearings and engage with families for kinship information. When families refuse to provide kinship information, the Kinship Staff then makes a request to the Court that this information be court ordered.

During Q 2 our Child Welfare/Kinship Search Unit was trained and piloted the Lexus Nexus Kinship Search Tool. Fifteen (15) cases, in which a child had been in out of home placement for 15 months or more, were used in the pilot.

Q2: “Intentional Visitation” training was provided to all Child Protection Case Aides on 6/13 by Lorrie Lutz. During Q 3, additional intentional visitation training will be provided to both Intake and Program Child Protection Social Workers. During Q 3, as part of our CFA Practice Model sustainability plan, we will also develop and implement a train the trainer model for both current and new staff.

Q1: Site visit by Lorrie Lutz occurred 4/2012 to discuss ongoing fidelity of the CFA Practice Model.

Q2: This effort continues.

Q1: This item has been accomplished. It is our expectation to implement this in Q2, or Q3.

Q2: This will be implemented in Q3.


Utilizing Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) to work with family networks in assisting in the identification of family and/or kin interested in providing permanency for children and family will be engaged in the case planning process

Family Group Decision Making will continue to be offered to families in Intake, at the Emergency Protective Custody Hearing (EPC), and prior to being staffed by the Permanency Review Team. As of 1/2/12, Family Group Decision Making services will be provided by Ramsey County staff in an effort to maximize these resources to families. Supervisors will ensure staff receives appropriate training and support to maintain fidelity of the FGDM model of practice.

Social workers and/or FGDM facilitators will be trained to enter data into SSIS and ensure proper documentation exists to track use of this strategy. Supervisors will track usage of FGDM by families and at which stage conferences are convened through SSIS tools. (Intake Manager and FGDM Supervisor)

All

Ongoing

Q1: Family Group Decision Making is offered to Families during CP Intake (when children are placed in out of home care), at EPC and when the case is referred to CP Program for services.

During Q1, FGDM Services are no longer being contracted through Lifetrack Resources and are currently being provided by newly hired Ramsey County FGDM Staff.

Q2: We continue to have success with our internal FGDM facilitation. YTD we have received 69 Referrals for FGDM.

In looking at the continuum in which Family Group Decision Making is offered to families—we find that this strength-based resource is utilized in Child Protection Intake; to strengthen and support reunification; and most often in Child Protection Program prior to a case being staffed at the Permanency Review Team. FGDM is a resource offered to families in other areas of Children and Family Services. FGDM is viewed as a resource that can be used to support families by engaging and utilizing natural resources with the family system--such as extended family/kin and others who play a role in the child’s/family’s life--to help in supporting the child/children and their families to ensure the safety and well-being of children, and to maintain children within their own family systems--avoiding the need for CPS and possible out of home placements.

Q1: All FGDM Staff and the FGDM Supervisor have been trained by DHS in the facilitation of FGDM Conferences and Case Planning. In the first quarter a new FGDM and Kinship Tracking Forms was created and is being completed by CP Intake Supervisors on all placement cases. These tracking forms collect demographic data as well as if FGDM was offered, when it was offered (at Intake, EPC or Program) and if a FGDM Conference or Case Planning occurred, when it occurred and if a plan was accomplished. The Kinship Tracking Form asks if the tracking form (RCW 3118) was completed in CP Intake. FGDM and Kinship tracking information is reviewed monthly by the service area Director and Managers.

The Youth and Transition Coordinator conducts conferences and tracks all referrals.

Q2: We have completed 25 FGDM Conferences thus far (this year) with 17 scheduled to be completed in the coming weeks.

YTC stats 1/1/12-6/1/12

4-White

3-African American

1-Hispanic

1-American Indian

Q2: The FGDM Supervisor also tracks and reports data on how many FGDM Conferences or Case Plans were provided each month. This information is cross referenced with the FGDM and Kinship Tracking and Referral Form.

The Youth and Transition Coordinator conducts “youth” conferences and tracks all referrals

     
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: SQA, supervision regarding plans are effective and meet children’s needs to remain connected to the important people in their lives. Use of FGDM will be tracked and monitored.

Role of the Supervisor: Ensure training is provided to develop/enhance worker skills/knowledge and have policy/protocol information available, will assess effectiveness of tools and determine any necessary changes, will provide supervision to guide practice.


WELL-BEING
Goal 1: Assess and adresss case worker training needs related to engaging age approriate children and their parents in case planning activities

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 18 (Case planning)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 18: 42.9% of cases rated as Strength

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

60% of children and their parents are enaged in the case plan development

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Strengthen and enhance family engagement skills of social workers through ongoing supervision and use of CFA tools and utilize DAP format in documentation in SSIS.

Increase utilization of FGDM models to engage family members in the case planning process. Train internal staff to act in the facilitation role and ensure fidelity to the model.

(Program Managers and Supervisors)

   
Q1: This action step has been accomplished although we continue to work on family engagement efforts to include enhanced cultural awareness and understanding.


Q1: We have created a policy that requires all staff to offer FGDM to all families who have at least one child in out of home placement. We have developed a form that requires the parent/legal guardian to sign indicating that they were offered FGDM and select whether or not they are interested in participating in a conference. We have moved the facilitation of FGDM to internal staff with the expectation that this will increase our ability to have conferences completed in a timely manner.

     
Note: Additional information on our ongoing FGDM efforts are listed in the previous section on “Permanency”.

Q2: We continue to strengthen and enhance our staff’s family engagement skills through on-going supervision, use of the CFA tool/trainings, anti-racism and cultural awareness trainings and appropriate use of interpreter training.

Child Protection Intake Staff received DHS training, on the appropriate use of interpreters and the responsibility of staff in appropriately engaging, addressing and meeting the language/communication needs of families. Child Protection Intake Staff also received training from the Karen Organization of Minnesota (KOM) on the Karen culture and subsequently, provided a presentation on Child Protection Services to KOM and members of the Karen community.

Q2: We also worked with or CFA Trainer, Lorrie Lutz and our CFA Cultural Consultant, Sam Grant in reviewing the CFA Tools (CFA Narrative/Safety Assessment and the CFA Functional Assessment) in our more deliberate efforts to both identify cultural impacts (in the assessment of safety and family dynamics) and provide additional training to staff-- in the development of skills that will support them in eliciting culturally significance information and in their conceptualizing or critical analysis of this information. CFA Tools have been revised to ask staff to provide information in each assessment domain on the significance of cultural (implications and/or considerations). Sam Grant, our CFA Cultural Consultant, provided the Child Protection Managers and Supervisors with an overview of the revised CFA Tools on 6/27. Sam Grant will provide training to Child Protection Staff on the revised CFA Tools on 7/11/12.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monitor use of FGDM through SSIS. Ensure fidelity to the FGDM model through supervision with FGDM Supervisor and Intake Manager.

Role of the Supervisor: Ensure staff are trained and supported to maintain fidelity to the model, clarify expectations of use of FGDM strategy to social workers, guide practice and monitor results.


WELL-BEING
Goal 2: Assess and adresses barriers to early identification and involvement of father in child welfare cases

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 17 (Assessing needs and providing services)

MnCFSR Item 18 (Case planning)

MnCFSR Item 20 (Worker visits with parents)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 17: 42.9% of cases rated as Strength

Item 18: 42.9% of cases rated as Strength

Item 20: 50% of cases rated as Strength

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

90% of fathers are identified and engaged; and, if not, reasons will be documented

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Consistently review policy and procedures regarding engagement of father’s in individual and unit supervision.

Review forms to ensure sections include fathers’ information.

During Permanency Review Team meetings, ensure fathers are offered and engaged in services regarding their child. If there are a lack of, or limited efforts made, develop a plan to address existing barriers leading to a lack of engagement.

Supervisors continue to monitor level of father engagement in all aspects of services from the initial investigation/assessment through program services through routine supervision and SQA.

Connect with Minnesota Family and Father’s network (MFFN) and partner with them to share research, train staff and strengthen our work with fathers.

(Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)

Q1

Q1

Ongoing

Q1: Created a Case Management Supervision form that includes questions about father engagement.

See above.

Q1: Fathers paternity status, engagement as well as case planning for fathers are included in the Permanency Review Team consultation.

Q1: See above.

Q2: During Q 1 of 2011, paternal family/kin were added to our Kinship Search Form.

Q1: This action step has not been completed. We expect to cover this in Q2, or Q3.

Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Provide supervision and ensure father information is gathered in all cases, assess competency of social workers engagement skills. Ensure fathers are listed on plans, documents, and court documents.

Role of the Supervisor: Review forms and make necessary changes, guide practice and ensure workers have the training/support to approach families regarding engaging non-resident fathers and engage fathers. Partner with MFFN to collaborate on training efforts.


WELL-BEING
Goal 3: Evaluate agency policies and expectations related to offering and completing Children’s Mental Health Screening Tools and ensure adequate interventions occur specific to identified mental and behavioral health needs of children

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 17 (Need/Services of child)

MnCFSR Item 23 (Mental health of child)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 17: 42.9% of cases rated as Strength

Item 23: 47.6% of cases rated as Strength

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

75% of children needs are assessed and appropriately addressed.

75% of eligible children have had a mental health screen offered and receive appropriate services. All CMHST’s will be entered into SSIS.

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Supervisors will share with social workers the statutory responsibility to complete the Children’s Mental Health Screening Tool (CMHST) within 30 days of case management opening.

(Intake/Program/Family Support Manager and Supervisors)

Intake Manager has also invited the Project Assist/Children’s Crisis Response Supervisor to meet with Intake staff and also discuss the importance of the screens and how to further engage parents/guardians in agreeing to have the screens completed on their children or children they are caring for.

Children’s Mental Health Manager and Project Assist Supervisor will review screen numbers, resulting diagnostic assessment numbers, and staff training needs quarterly with Child Protection Intake and Program Managers. This review will ensure that all new clients in CP are offered a screen and subsequently at one year intervals in CP Program. A similar review will be done with Corrections to ensure that screens are being offered at disposition and with every new offense.

All

Ongoing

Q1: Supervisors will continue monitoring the completion of the Child well-being tool through CW-TCM reports and SQA. Supervisors audit all cases at case closing to ensure that the Children’s Mental Health Screen has been offered to the family. Children’s Mental Health Screens are also tracked by SQA.

Intake Manager and Supervisors continue to discuss the importance of engaging families in increasing the number of children completing Children Mental Health Screens. Intake Manager also reviews with Children’s Mental Health Manager the number of screens being completed in Intake quarterly.

Q1 - Children’s Mental Health Manager and Project Assist Supervisor reviewed screen numbers, resulting diagnostic numbers and staff training needs with Child Protection Intake and Program Managers. A review of Corrections numbers has also occurred

-Project Assist Supervisor trained workers at CP all staff meeting regarding how to talk to families about screens and the importance of this service for clients and our department.

-CP intake and program managers followed up with a written expectation to staff after this meeting

-CP intake and program managers added CMH screens on the supervisor’s checklist for review with staff monthly.

-CP intake and program managers review with supervisors monthly.

Q2: Child Protection Managers and Children’s Mental Health Manager continue to work together to address low numbers of Mental Health Screen completions in Child Protection. Child Protection Managers continue to discuss, with Child Protection Supervisors and Social Workers, the importance of engaging families regarding the importance of early intervention and increased positive outcomes for children--as it relates to the completion of Mental Health Screening. While Mental Health Screens are being offered to all families in Child Protection, the refusal rates by parents continue to be less than desired. This is an area in need of improvement. On 7/11/12, during an All Staff Meeting, the CP Managers addressed the importance of completing Mental Health Screens in Child Protection and how doing so, could potentially increase positive outcomes for children. We have also invited the Project Assist Supervisor (Carolyn Larson) to provide another presentation to all Child Protection Staff, in our ongoing efforts to increase Mental Health Screens in Child Protection.

       
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Manager will monitor the number of SSIS CMHST report on a quarterly basis and share with Supervisors.

Role of the Supervisor: Supervisors will guide practice and ensure appropriate referrals for follow up occur through supervision with workers.


WELL-BEING
Goal 4: Conduct face to face visits with children and parents at a frequency sufficient for conducting ongoing assessment of risk, safety, overall needs and case planning and to ensure the case workers visits with children in foster care every month they are in placement.

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Item 19 (Worker visits with child)

MnCFSR Item 20 (Worker visits with parents)

Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Item 19: 66.7% of cases rated as Strength

Item 20: 50% of cases rated as Strength

Caseworker Visits with Children in Placement

FFY 2010

36% (273/759)

Quarter 2, 2011

49.5% (389/786)

Quarter 3, 2011

49.4% (398/805)

Use the MN CW Data Dashboard as the method of measurement.

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

70% of parents will have face to face contact minimally oncillter 4, 2012e per month.

90% of all children in placement receive a caseworker visit each and every month.

Quarter 4, 2011

48.9% (399/799)

Quarter 1, 2012 *computation change in this quarter

78.5% (4541/5787)

Quarter 2, 2012

Quarter 3, 2012

Quarter 4, 2012

Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

Frequency and quality of social worker visits with children and parents.

Supervisors will monitor social worker visits with children and parents to ensure risk and safety is assessed and addressed throughout the life of the case. The policy will be reviewed and clarified with all social workers in a Division meeting in the first quarter of 2012 and reinforced by Supervisors. (Policy is: High risk=4 visits/month, Moderate risk=2 visits/month, Low risk=1 visit/month or as circumstances dictate more frequently).

(Managers and Supervisors)

All

Ongoing

Q2: Level of risk continues to determine frequency of face to face contacts with families.

High risk cases presenting with a “safety threat” in which an in-home safety plan/case plan” has been developed are required to receive weekly Child Protection Social Worker visits in both Child Protection Intake and Child Protection Program.

Supervisors continue to utilize supervision and the SQA tools to monitor the frequency of monthly face to face contacts with clients.

Q2: This work continues. Due to the absence of a Program Manager during the second quarter of 2012, the full utilization and implementation of this process did not occur. We have now hired a new Manager and we expect to offer a more thorough response during Q3.

       
       
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monthly review of SSIS reports “Monthly Contact with Children in Continuous Placement” and “Case List” which compiles SDM tool completion dates and risk levels; review of SQA data and internal quality assurance case note review for determining quality of visits.

Role of the Supervisor: Clarify expectations, guide practice, monitor outcomes.


SYSTEMIC FACTOR
 
Goal 1: Access technical assistance and provide training regarding permanency statute, policies and best practice.

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Systemic Factor: Case Review

 
Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

System wide need for training identified during MnCFSR

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

Steps are implemented, evaluation completed last quarter 2012

 
Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

 
Training regarding updated policy and procedure for permanency is in the final phase of approval. Implementation is expected in first quarter 2012.

Monitor and assess policy effectiveness in addressing the training and systemic needs by gathering data and tracking of completed PRTs timelines; PRT recommendations; permanency outcome and date achieved to determine if additional changes and/or training are needed.

Evaluate results last quarter of 2012 to determine if additional training or changes are needed. Utilize DHS in meeting training needs if identified as an issue.

Q1

All

Q4

Ongoing

Q1: Data from PRT is currently being reviewed to determine if the new PRT policy is giving us the results that we intended. Will continue to assess and should be able to adjust (if needed during Q2.

Q2: This work continues. Due to the absence of a Program Manager during the second quarter of 2012, the full utilization and implementation of this process did not occur. We have now hired a new Manager and we expect to offer a more thorough response during Q3.

 
         
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monitor implementation plan and evaluate last quarter 2012 to determine impact on permanency.

 
Role of the Supervisor: Set direction, guide practice, gather and track information, assess and evaluate results.

 

SYSTEMIC FACTOR
 
Goal 2: Strengthen and support the role of supervisers within Ramsey County

Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:

MnCFSR Systemic Factor: Supervisor and Social Worker Resources

 
Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Considerable variation in casework practice in Ramsey county noted in casework and stakeholder interviews.

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

Completion of action steps

 
Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

 
Developing weekly supervision with tools for supervisors to utilize in supervision with staff.

Determine if additional supervision training is needed outside of the CFA training through the end of 2012. (Managers)

Implementing increased supervision throughout 2012 to reach weekly scheduled supervision with staff to improve consistency across program units and assist in stronger case planning, monitoring of task completion and adherence to timelines. (Intake/Program/Family Support Managers and Supervisors)

Assess Manager and Supervisor knowledge/skills in utilizing SSIS and provide training (internal and DHS) to strengthen supervision abilities to us data to inform decision making.

Q1: Three times/month, Q4: Four times/month

Q1

 
Q1 - Comprehensive Family Assessment Supervisory Tools to be utilized during staff supervision have been created. Increased utilization and ongoing training in the effective utilization is ongoing. Lori Lutz will provide training on the use of these tools in April (Q2).

Q1: Completed. New CP Case Management Supervision tool is currently being utilized.

Q1: We are still assessing the item.

Q2: Assessment of need continues.

Q1: Supervision of all staff three times per month is currently implemented.

Q1: This item remains under review. If need exists training will occur during Q2.

Q2: Tarita Tyson, Community and Compliance Liaison has contacted Nan Beaman at DHS to determine the training date. The training will occur in Q3.

 
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Supervisors will complete tools and share with Manager

 
Role of the Supervisor: Utilize supervision tool, set direction and guide practice, monitor outcomes

 

SYSTEMIC FACTOR
 
Goal 3: Develop an internal process for the ongoing evaluation of child welfare practices and systems, leading to program improvements.

Applicable Items or Systemic Factors:

Quality Assurance

 
Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):

Demonstration of Goal Completion:

When Ramsey County CFSR reviews meet or exceed audit standards

 
Action Steps

(include persons responsible)

Qtr Due

Date Completed

Quarterly Update

(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)

 
Establish and maintain a process that yields valid data:

 
SQA to monitor and evaluate completion of case objectives. SQA has measurable supervision criteria for Intake, Family Assessment and Program. Supervisors and Managers trainings continue and supervisors are auditing cases on a monthly basis.

Program Manager to implement quarterly internal case reviews utilizing the CFSR in home and out of home tools track results and share with DHS on a quarterly basis. (Compliance Liaison)

All

Q3

Ongoing

Ongoing

Q1: Work related to this item continues. Monthly audits of 2 cases per month continue.

Q2: Child Protection Traditional Investigation (TI) Supervisors were trained on the electronic version of the Service Quality Assurance Tool, which was scheduled for implemented in the two Child Protection Traditional Investigation Units during Q 2. Due to two (2) Family Assessment Case Manager (FACM/One Family One Worker) Supervisor vacancies and the TI Supervisors providing the temporary coverage of both FACM Units, the scheduled implementation of SQA in TI has been postponed until the two FACM Supervisor vacancies are filled.

Q2: This work continues. Due to the absence of a Program Manager during the second quarter of 2012, we delayed full implementation of SQA, however we expect to resume implementation during our 3rd or 4th quarter at the latest.

DHS and Ramsey County Children and Family Services have agreed that the utilization of the Service Quality Assurance (SQA) tool will be used monthly to track compliance.

 
Use the data to effectively implement practice and system change:

 
Evaluate results of internal CFSR reviews for additional supervisor/staff training needs or practice changes.

Q3

Ongoing

   
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: Monitor SQA results, internal CFSR instruments results, complete manual

 
Role of the Supervisor: Review practice, use information to inform and guide supervision with workers, evaluate practice and inform decision making.

 


  Rate/Report this page   Report/Rate this page

© 2014 Minnesota Department of Human Services Online
Minnesota.gov is led by MN.IT Services
Updated: 8/15/13 9:41 AM | Text-Only Link | Accessibility | Terms/Policy | Contact DHS | Top of Page |